How Can Anyone Like Samwell Tarly?

[D-A-C]

Hi guys.

I am currently re-reading the books and am in the middle of SoS and have had to create this post out of frustration at re-reading Sam's POV chapters. Unlike every single character so far I can find absolutely nothing redeeming about the guy and so am both venting my frustration, but also genuinely curious how this character can be liked at all?

I know this topic has probably been raised many times before over the years but nevertheless I just wanted to raise a few things:

1. Sam Tarly The Failure - Sam seems to get an awful lot of sympathy because of the abuse he has taken from his father. But is it completely one sided? My reading of it is that it isn't like Tywin and Tyrion's relationship for example where the father completely overlooks his son's talents because of blind thinly-veiled distain for his very existence, but it's actually a complete failure on Sam's part to try and live up to any sort of standards of behaviour expected of the Lord of a House.

People seem to get the wrong end of the stick IMO. They blame Randyll for abusing Sam and psychologically 'breaking him' so he now believes he is a craven as a fibre of his very being, but, at least to my reading this is simply the wrong way round. Sam was like that before he was abused by his father as is evident by the sheer amount of failure his father endured trying to make him into a proper heir. Clearly even as a small boy Sam displayed the traits even those who profess to admire him often find frustrating, that is, his woe-is-me, I can't do anything, I don't won't to try crybaby attitude.

Also, and at least this has been pointed out, letting Sam be his heir would have been the worse course of action for Randyll, as again, all we have to do is look at House Lannister to see the effect even one poor ruler can have on a House. Tytos arguably nearly ruined House Lannister, and if not for Tywin taking the lead even before his father past the House would have arguably been overthrown or at the very least ruined for generations. Can you imagine what would have happened if Sam was Lord of Horn Hill?

Now you could argue Sam would be a kind and gentle ruler to his people, but those are in fact some of the worst traits someone in that social structure can have as they allow rebellion and discord within their realms as they are seen as pushovers both internally and externally and so inadvertantly risk the lives of and hurt the people they are charged to protect,

Finally, it is often said Sam could have simply been made a maester to remove him from succession and actually make him useful (although the Night's Watch is useful as the series proves) but Sam complains about this very thing when Jon brings it up. So nothing it seems will make him happy.

2. Sam The Privileged - Sam has a background that 99.9% of his Night Watch brothers could barely even imagine, they are a group of criminals and low class nobodies exiled to the end of the earth. But Sam, despite his own exile, carries with him an inherent sense of privilege that often occures with those in the upper echelons of society. That is the subtext of him and Jon both becoming friends. It isn't the lovable loser and the hero in waiting becoming firm friends, it is the two boys of privilege grouping together, and then bending others to their will, as befits their class. Even at the wall it seems class matters.

A really deep reading will probably provide alot more instances, but lets examine a couple of examples of his upperclass background having an unfair impact on events.

There is the fact he gets Chett removed as aid to the Maester and moved to the kennels as a result of both Jon's suggestion and because of Sam's soft privileged background making him 'better' at that job. How is that fair? That is clearly two rich boys sticking it to Chett and doing him an unjustified wrong turn. What, does the world revolve around Sam's needs? Why can't Sam learn to be useful in other ways, why can't Chett be given an oppurtunity to learn to advance himself in the world? Of course this is muted by Chett being presented as a nasty person, but he is nasty in part because of responding to slights and unfairness. I am not justifying his actions and emotions by any means, but it isn't random or without cause.

Next their is the downright criminal death of Small Paul who Sam get's killed by a Wight Walker. He is so out of shape, he is so unwilling to do right by his brothers that he simply falls on the ground and refuses to go further. Paul is then forced to carry Sam who is no small man, even though Paul has had just as much a difficult time as everyone else, if not moreso as he probably actively tried to fight during the Battle, whereas Sam sat in a tent and wrote some notes. You could argue they could have left Sam, but that just shows you how selfless both those characters are. Could you imagine Sam going back for someone on that march? He even complains and cries when (Grenn I think) tries to get him up and like a spoiled child says that means they are not friends as thats not what friends do, when he is trying to save his life! This allows Paul and Grenn to be caught by a Walker. And to add insult to injury Paul's death leads to an opening for Sam to luckily kill the Walker thanks to Obsidian, but SAM gets all the credit even though it was Paul who caused the whole scenario to unfold. otherwise Sam would have simply died in the snow or been killed by a passing Walker.

Finally we have Sam enforcing his privileged social attitudes on the entire Night's Watch via his rigging of the election in favour of his friend and fellow son of a Noble Jon Snow (even a bastard is better than a commoner). Sam even goes so far as to then complain when his friend is tough on him by sending him away, so clearly he thought it would be useful to have his friend in power, and that it would make his life cushier still. I am a little vague on the exact details and intricacies of this part as I am only at SoS on my re-read, but the general point still stands. It is another example of how Sam oozes privilege even if it is unintended, he can't help but act his class instincts.

What underlines all these problems I have mentioned is that those Sam comes into conflict with and wrongs, Chett, Small Paul, Allister, Slynt and others who are marginalised voices due to their poor backgrounds, roughness as characters and in some cases relatively 'evil' deeds. So as a result his own actions are overlooked.

3. Buuuuttttt, I, I, I, I'm sssscccccarrrred - I just wanted to conclude with a final non-character point, IMO Sam is the most tiring POV character to read in the whole series, as being inside his head means we have to endure every other line be that 'I am a craven', 'I can't', 'I don't want to', 'please no', 'why me?' crybaby bull crap that is an absolute pain to read. There really isn't much I can say as it's a personal preference, but I do hope others feel the same way, that the style in which is chapters are written is a pain, and worse still, even as he advances as a character, this doesn't seem to dissipate but just goes on and on and on.

As I said at the start, I know I am not inventing the wheel with this discussion, and I am sure there have been threads long before this one complaining about or even just discussing Samwell Tarly. But I do hope that maybe some of my thoughts, if not necessarily completely original, are at least a positive contribution to discussing a 'main' character.

Also, third point aside (which was a little vent of frustration) I do home some of my points raise something interesting that GRRM presents throughout the series, both overtly and covertly, that class and privilege matter and that even in characters were it maybe isn't so obvious like Jon and Sam, it is still very much there.

So does anyone else really dislike Sam and his chapters the way that I do? If so why? And if you like him, which is fine, how do you defend him rather than by simply saying 'oh he's the lovable big nerd with a good heart' or 'he killed a walker once, goooooo Sam!' which you sometime read when discussing him.

[WSmith84]

Sam didn't like the idea of becoming a Maester when Jon suggested it because, when Sam suggested this idea to his father, his father chained him to a dungeon wall for several days. Maybe, just maybe, that might have caused some psychological scarring no?

Also, Sam replaced Chett because Sam could read and write, two things Chett could not do.

Sam 'rigged' the election because he thought that Janos Slynt would be a terrible Lord Commander (probably accurately). He got Mallister and Pyke to vote for Jon only after trying to get one of them to vote for the other. Jon was a compromise candidate.

Randyll Tarly's idea of 'teaching' Sam included making him wear his mother's clothes, making him sleep in chainmail, bathing him in auroch's blood and trying to teach him to swim by throwing Sam in a pond. What a great guy.

[D-A-C]

Sam didn't like the idea of becoming a Maester when Jon suggested it because, when Sam suggested this idea to his father, his father chained him to a dungeon wall for several days. Maybe, just maybe, that might have caused some psychological scarring no?

Also, Sam replaced Chett because Sam could read and write, two things Chett could not do.

Sam 'rigged' the election because he thought that Janos Slynt would be a terrible Lord Commander (probably accurately). He got Mallister and Pyke to vote for Jon only after trying to get one of them to vote for the other. Jon was a compromise candidate.

Randyll Tarly's idea of 'teaching' Sam included making him wear his mother's clothes, making him sleep in chainmail, bathing him in auroch's blood and trying to teach him to swim by throwing Sam in a pond. What a great guy.

All valid points, let me respond:

1. Okay, I can live with the Maester part by the time he meets Jon. It still doesn't change much, it is a small change to my point.

2. I anticpated that response. Chett not being able to read or write isn't valid in my eyes because A. Sam being able to is because of privilege, which I am objecting to B. Somebody could have taught Chett and thus he would have advanced as a person because he maybe would have been nicer person if someone had been treating him with some dignity for once. Clearly he faced prejudice because of his looks his whole life, we even get that in POV chapters from characters.

3. 'Sam thought' ... that isn't valid for rigging an election. Lots of people think one candidate will be better than another in elections, that doesn't give them the right to rig the election in that person's favour.

4. My point about Sam's childhood training is it is often interpreted the wrong way round. They site the abuse he recieved as why he is the way he is, but in actually fact he had to of been that way from the start in order to have recieved that kind of treatment. My reading wasn't that he has a few flaws and his father overreacted, but rather that he was so inebt, so terrible, that his father was driven to extreme lengths in order to try to get him to act like a Lord needed to.

We may view it as terrible, but how at no point did any of that sink in? The guy is as stubborn as a mule, and very frustrating mentally and we witness that over and over again. I gotta be honest, as awful as some of his actions were I feel sympathy with the father aswell. Plus, he spent years and years attempting to build Sam up, and Sam just wouldn't do anything of use for an heir.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

Victim blaming? Not good. Not good at all.

[Lady Darry]

2. I anticpated that response. Chett not being able to read or write isn't valid in my eyes because A. Sam being able to is because of privilege, which I am objecting to B. Somebody could have taught Chett and thus he would have advanced as a person because he maybe would have been nicer person if someone had been treating him with some dignity for once. Clearly he faced prejudice because of his looks his whole life, we even get that in POV chapters from characters.

Yes, Sam had a privileged upbringing. But it is easier to give a job to someone who can do the job, then to educate Chett. Someone would have to teach Chett to read and write. So someone would have to take an extra time out of their regular job in NW to teach him. If you have two contenders for a job, and one person meets the criteria and the other person would require extra training, then you give a job to Sam. Aemon is blind, so he can't teach Chett. So who would? Mormont? Jon? Sam? Sam would have to teach a guy to do a job he should be doing. It is one think to give NW members an opportunity, and other is to waste talent, time, resources. It is like giving Chett a job of master at arms and ordering Throne to educate him. It is one thing to give NW members an opportunity, but you have to take an advantage of those with actual knowledge and experience. Because otherwise you are discriminating those with knowledge, because then you have a criteria that it is more important to be unprivileged, then to have knowledge.

[Lady Darry]

Victim blaming? Not good. Not good at all.

:agree:

[D-A-C]

Victim blaming? Not good. Not good at all.

What an awesome response you really cut to the heart of my argument, blaming the victim. That's why I wrote that post, I just love a good ol game of blame the victim.

Yes, Sam had a privileged upbringing. But it is easier to give a job to someone who can do the job, then to educate a new guy. Someone would have to teach Chett to read and write. So someone would have to take an extra time out of their regular job in NW to teach him. If you have two contenders for a job, and one person meets the criteria and the other person would require extra training, then you give a job to Sam. Aemon is blind, so he can't teach Chett. So who would? Mormont? Jon? Sam? Sam would have to teach a guy to do a job he should be doing. It is one think to give NW members an opportunity, and other is to waste talent, time, resources. It is like giving Chett a job of master at arms and ordering Throne to educate him. It is one thing to give NW members an opportunity, but you have to take an advantage of those with actual knowledge and experience. Because otherwise you are discriminating those with knowledge, because then you have a criteria that it is more important to be unprivileged, then to have a knowledge.

He had been assisting Aemon for 4 years . He seemed to be managing otherwise why would he have lasted that long?

If it hadn't been an issue before then, why was it suddenly when Sam needed a cushy job to suit him?

Also, its a part of a puzzle. By focusing in on that point like it's my sole argument your blurring the big picture. It's piece of a bigger picture that the guy is privileged, and is molly coddled by those from priveleged backgrounds themselves ... Jon, Mormont, Aemon.

[Victarion10]

100% Agree with the OP. Sam's own unwillingless to learn, his whiny attitude and his idea that he is a victim of everything makes him an awful character. You may say Randyll is a bad father but Dickon seems to be turning out well.

[LordStoneheart]

Simply put, he's one of the few wholly good characters and most readers can relate to his thirst for knowledge and books. It always surprises me how people who read fantasy novels and obsess over them enough to post on a forum hate characters like Samwell and Sansa. They're probably more like them than they think.

Also, Randyll Tarly is a piece of shit.

Victim blaming? Not good. Not good at all.

:agree: :agree:

[WSmith84]

All valid points, let me respond:

1. Okay, I can live with the Maester part by the time he meets Jon. It still doesn't change much, it is a small change to my point.

2. I anticpated that response. Chett not being able to read or write isn't valid in my eyes because A. Sam being able to is because of privilege, which I am objecting to B. Somebody could have taught Chett and thus he would have advanced as a person because he maybe would have been nicer person if someone had been treating him with some dignity for once. Clearly he faced prejudice because of his looks his whole life, we even get that in POV chapters from characters.

Yes Sam can read and write because of privilege. Just as Jon can fight, or Aemon can heal, or Alliser can bully those beneath him. The Night's Watch is low on resources and men; you think they want to waste time trying to teach somebody to read (taking up two peoples' working time) instead of simply rearranging jobs to better suit the Watch's needs? Every PoV, bar perhaps Davos, has an immense amount of privilege that allow them to do things 99.99% of the population can't.

3. 'Sam thought' ... that isn't valid for rigging an election. Lots of people think one candidate will be better than another in elections, that doesn't give them the right to rig the election in that person's favour.

Fair enough. But you framed it in your first post like Sam was doing it because he thought Janos was some dirty commoner and that Jon being commander would make Sam's life easier, even though neither of those thoughts appear in Sam's PoV.

4. My point about Sam's childhood training is it is often interpreted the wrong way round. They site the abuse he recieved as why he is the way he is, but in actually fact he had to of been that way from the start in order to have recieved that kind of treatment. My reading wasn't that he has a few flaws and his father overreacted, but rather that he was so inebt, so terrible, that his father was driven to extreme lengths in order to try to get him to act like a Lord needed to.

His father tried to teach him to swim by throwing him into a pond. This experience made Sam afraid of water. Maybe Sam was simply so inept at military matters that no matter who taught him, Sam would always fail. Or maybe a better teacher would have succeeded.

We may view it as terrible, but how at no point did any of that sink in? The guy is as stubborn as a mule, and very frustrating mentally and we witness that over and over again. I gotta be honest, as awful as some of his actions were I feel sympathy with the father aswell. Plus, he spent years and years attempting to build Sam up, and Sam just wouldn't do anything of use for an heir.

[Victarion10]

There is no victim blaming as Sam isn't a victim, only in his own mind.

[Victarion10]

Also as for the throwing him in a pond and hoping he would swim, how else do you think people learned to swim back then? There were no armbands or whatever. I first swam at the age of 14 when I was on holiday I got pushed into the deep end of the pool and in my panic I was able to swim out despite having never done it before.

[Ser Brandon Badwater]

Because he`s cuddly

[Red Typer of Dorne]

Sam is Loyal to his friends, respects others, protects the weak (in his own way), everytime his backs truely been against the wall he's come through (all be it clumsily) he's intelligent (yes he was born to privilege, but if you think can help that please remember how much choice you had in your birth). and he's one of the few people with a proper name!

[WSmith84]

I get that with him being a huge self-loathing loser who wishes he was someone else rather than bettering himself relates to you, but not all people are like that. If you put in work and effort you will achieve something regardless of how skilled you are at it. Sam is just a lazy, self-loathing person who doesn't try. If he lived in the modern era, I assume he would be one of those stay at home and claim benefits despite being fit to work people.

I caught the Daily Mail reader! Where do I collect my prize?

Seriously though. Where do you think Sam gets the self-loathing from? And as for teaching a kid to swim, I imagine that most people in that setting might tell them how to move their arms and legs, get in the water and show them how it looks, get in the water with them and coach them etc. Simple techniques that work without any modern equipment. And just because you could learn to swim that way, doesn't mean everyone can or should be expected to.

[Greg B]

Now you could argue Sam would be a kind and gentle ruler to his people, but those are in fact some of the worst traits someone in that social structure can have as they allow rebellion and discord within their realms as they are seen as pushovers both internally and externally and so inadvertantly risk the lives of and hurt the people they are charged to protect,

To me, this gets to the heart of why Sam is a sympathetic character (if not always likeable) to many of us. The characteristics that would make him such an unsuitable ruler -- kindness, compassion, aversion to violence, his intellect, etc. -- are characteristics we consider virtues. It is the social structure that favors tyranny, violence, injustice and ruthlessness that we consider evil. Sam is a fish out of water. He'd be much more at home with us, the readers.

[Ser Kett]

My reading of it is that it isn't like Tywin and Tyrion's relationship for example where the father completely overlooks his son's talents because of blind thinly-veiled distain for his very existence, but it's actually a complete failure on Sam's part to try and live up to any sort of standards of behaviour expected of the Lord of a House.

So you don't feel like Randyll overlooks any of Sam's ability ? The reason for which he overlooks them are not the same as for Tyrion. In Tyrion's case, well, he's a dwarf. In Sam's case, his father wanted a soldier / commander / Lord, nothing else. He fails to see that Sam has other attributes that makes him unique. These attributes being an insatiable appetite for knowledge, a sharp mind and loyalty. Maybe these aren't what you expect of an heir, but he still could've been an awesome Maester or something along these lines.

[LordStoneheart]

So you don't feel like Randyll overlooks any of Sam's ability ? The reason for which he overlooks them are not the same as for Tyrion. In Tyrion's case, well, he's a dwarf. In Sam's case, his father wanted a soldier / commander / Lord, nothing else. He fails to see that Sam has other attributes that makes him unique. These attributes being an insatiable appetite for knowledge, a sharp mind and loyalty. Maybe these aren't what you expect of an heir, but he still could've been an awesome Maester or something along these lines.

:agree:

Some people are just not meant for certain roles. Samwell is clearly not meant to be a soldier or commander, but despite certain areas of the fandom's obsession with the hyper-masculinity of this medieval era, that does not make Samwell useless.

[Alysanne Donnelly]

4. My point about Sam's childhood training is it is often interpreted the wrong way round. They site the abuse he recieved as why he is the way he is, but in actually fact he had to of been that way from the start in order to have recieved that kind of treatment. My reading wasn't that he has a few flaws and his father overreacted, but rather that he was so inebt, so terrible, that his father was driven to extreme lengths in order to try to get him to act like a Lord needed to.

We may view it as terrible, but how at no point did any of that sink in? The guy is as stubborn as a mule, and very frustrating mentally and we witness that over and over again. I gotta be honest, as awful as some of his actions were I feel sympathy with the father aswell. Plus, he spent years and years attempting to build Sam up, and Sam just wouldn't do anything of use for an heir.

I... I'm sorry, are you saying that the abuse Randyll Tarly inflicted on Sam was justified? You can not like Sam all you want, say he was inept and terrible all you want, but that doesn't mean any of what Randyll did was right.

You're even using the fact that Sam didn't become the person his father wanted him to be after years of abuse to hate him more. The reason Sam didn't become that person wasn't because he was "stubborn" or "any use for an heir", it was because his father hurt and humiliated him. Maybe you've never had your self esteem destroyed or feel like you deserve to be punished for who you are, but let me tell you: it doesn't make you a great lord or military leader like Randyll wanted. It makes you feel worthless and drains all the courage from your body. Sam didn't deserve any of what his father did, no matter how little you think of him.

[LordStoneheart]

I... I'm sorry, are you saying that the abuse Randyll Tarly inflicted on Sam was justified?

That's surprisingly common around here. Scary, right?

But hey, in a faux-medieval society written by a man in the 90s and 2000s, anything goes.