How Can Anyone Like Samwell Tarly?

[The Marquis de Leech]

The arguments in favour of Sam all relate to his abusive father. Even if Sam's father had been noble and kind Ned Stark he would still be a useless craven. Randyll Tarly's (non-defensible) acts were not the cause of Sam's character defects, but the result.

Except that cowardice is not genetic. Sam is a product of bad parenting.

[Nihlus]

I liked when he got one of his "brothers" killed because he was a spoiled wimp.

[William_Tell]

And it is impressive as it is a very avant-garde way of thinking for a person brought up in a "medieval" mindset world.

Actually no, it isn't. In the real world middle ages scholars cared about such things, or we wouldn't ha inherited the massive quantity of documents we have. Archives and libraries were prized and prestigious institutions.

I'm also under the impression that in Westeros,however brutal this world might be, things are not very different, or the Citadel wouldn't have such a reputation

EDIT: Sorry I didn't see your whole post. You're obviously right about the fact that Sam's approach is more modern. Although I am often surprisedto notice how some medieval historians sometimes display true examples of critical thinking here and there

[Ahai Ahoy]

Also, it's Sam who suggests systematic archive study and analysis as a methodology for historical research. That's pretty darn impressive.

Systematic archive study = read books. Of course they should read the archives. This is not rocket science. It happens to be something Sam enjoys doing. If he didn't like reading you'd better believe the Lord of Ham wouldn't have suggested this. Like helping Gilly and the babe, and John in the election, it seems Sam will only do the things that please him personally.

[Ahai Ahoy]

Except that cowardice is not genetic. Sam is a product of bad parenting.

Every indication from the text is that Sam's personality is natural. Look at his brother who had the same upbringing.

[Anath]

Is this thread for real? The only character I cannot remember having a number of fans is Gregor-freaking-Clegane but I might be mistaken even about him. Out of all the rotten characters in the book, it's so incredible that people can like Sam?

[The Marquis de Leech]

Actually no, it isn't. In the real world middle ages scholars cared about such things, or we wouldn't ha inherited the massive quantity of documents we have. Archives and libraries were prized and prestigious institutions.

I'm also under the impression that in Westeros,however brutal this world might be, things are not very different, or the Citadel wouldn't have such a reputation

In fact, real-life medieval people arguably had a greater reverence for this sort of thing than we do today, if only because of the prevailing mindset that things were better in the past. They revered ancient works, authorities, and thinkers.

[ShadowCat Rivers]

Actually no, it isn't. In the real world middle ages scholars cared about such things, or we wouldn't ha inherited the massive quantity of documents we have. Archives and libraries were prized and prestigious institutions.

I'm also under the impression that in Westeros,however brutal this world might be, things are not very different, or the Citadel wouldn't have such a reputation

Well, I am under the impression that most archives of that sort (eg accounts) were preserved by burocratic inertia and chance, but what we know about medieval era changes every decade so my knowledge might be outdated.

[Lord Freypie]

I'd say Sam isn't perfect and has a few annoying self-pity issues (but is very far to be the only one PoV in this case), but it's hardly a reason not to like him.

In a serie full of monsters, characters indulging themselves in commiting criminal or extremely stupid acts, characters with huge entitlement issues, blinded by honor or desire of revenge types, etc... Sam comprehensible issues hardly qualify as the worst.

[William_Tell]

Well, I am under the impression that most archives of that sort (eg accounts) were preserved by burocratic inertia and chance, but what we know about medieval era changes every decade so my knowledge might be outdated.

Yes, you are right, that is how modern days archives are formed, but some degree of awareness on the importance of preservation has always been present.

I was actually stressing the point for more.. personal reasons. The point of my final year dissertation at university was showing how the archives of a particular XIV century monastery were organized, I got a bit carried away by that

[The Marquis de Leech]

Every indication from the text is that Sam's personality is natural. Look at his brother who had the same upbringing.

Personalities differ in terms of introversion v. extroversion (Sam is an introvert, Randyll likely an extrovert), intuition-based thought processes v. sensory-based thought processes (Sam is intuitive, Randyll is sensing), and so on, but Sam's quivering cowardice is what his father made him. Randyll couldn't understand that his child might have different ways of thinking from himself, responded with abuse, and the situation escalated from there.

[ShadowCat Rivers]

Systematic archive study = read books. Of course they should read the archives. This is not rocket science. It happens to be something Sam enjoys doing. If he didn't like reading you'd better believe the Lord of Ham wouldn't have suggested this. Like helping Gilly and the babe, and John in the election, it seems Sam will only do the things that please him personally.

Archival research is much more than that.

And Sam also does his duties that don't please him at all.

[apovsic]

Guys, guys, this thread is a joke? Right? RIGHT?

[William_Tell]

Personalities differ in terms of introversion v. extroversion (Sam is an introvert, Randyll likely an extrovert), intuition-based thought processes v. sensory-based thought processes (Sam is intuitive, Randyll is sensing), and so on, but Sam's quivering cowardice is what his father made him. Randyll couldn't understand that his child might have different ways of thinking from himself, responded with abuse, and the situation escalated from there.

I wholly agree. Abuse is the cause of the problem not a response to it

[AlpenglowMemories]

Every indication from the text is that Sam's personality is natural. Look at his brother who had the same upbringing.

Dickon wasn't bathed in blood, chained in a dungeon, threatened with death. Sam's low self-worth stems from not being the child his deplorable father wanted him to be. Sam is naturally sensitive and bookwormy; Randyl wanted a fighter. Sam is so cowardly because he spent his childhood being abused by an evil parent who would shame and humiliate him at every opportunity. With a healthier upbringing, Sam could enjoy reading, dancing and tending animals without being afraid to look someone in the eye. The gentleness is Sam's natural personality, the insecurity and anxiety is the aftermath of a tormenting parent.

[D-A-C]

Whether you like Sam or not, I find it hilarious that most of us who dislike him as a character, either because of who he is as a person or because his POV's are a pain to read, actually provide reasons for why we dislike him.

Reading the responses in favour of Sam most refer to the fact that Sam had a harsh upbringing at Horn Hill and use that to justify his faults. I don't think anyone pro-Sam has accounted for the fact we actually witness him get someone killed due to his inherent weakness as was the case with Small Paul, and that is the key issue for those of us who understand why his father behaved as he did, these were inherent flaws within Sam from no age, not the product of abuse.

He would have been a terrible ruler, especially as has repeatedly pointed out, due to the martial nature of the House. A soft lord who was kind and read books wasn't going to protect the people he would be charged with protecting in that region, and if any rebellions, wars, rebellious Houses or even outlaws had kicked off, Sam is not the person you'd want in charge, and I don't see how anyone could argue against that from anything we have read about him.

Also what is with all the nasty little personal digs at people who dislike Sam?

Whereby because we dislike a literary character for various reasons and can at least understand why Randyll Tarly had to instill Sam with a sense of martialness because of the context of the House and time, suddenly we shouldn't ever have children of our own in real life in 2015 and in one ridiculous post by an obvious nutjob, reflects somehow that we hate gay people?

If you like Sam, enjoy his chapters, and want to point out the brave things he may or may not have done, and counter the flaws some of us see in the character both narratively and in the context of him as a person, thats great, but if you want to add that this somehow bars us from raising children in 2015 in the real world do me, the original OP, a favour and don't bother responding, because you aren't contributing to a discussion of a literary character, you are taking cheap digs at people with nothing to back it up.

Again, disliking Sam for whatever reason, and even going so far as to support is father, is not in any shape, form or fashion relatable to real world child abuse and those of you who think it is are adding nothing to the topic and so I would kindly ask you to not respond.

[The Marquis de Leech]

He would have been a terrible ruler, especially as has repeatedly pointed out, due to the martial nature of the House. A soft lord who was kind and read books wasn't going to protect the people he would be charged with protecting in that region, and if any rebellions, wars, rebellious Houses or even outlaws had kicked off, Sam is not the person you'd want in charge, and I don't see how anyone could argue against that from anything we have read about him.

Easy. It's called delegation. Get Dickon to deal with battles and stuff. Sam can get on with logistics (which is what actually wins wars) and justice.

[LordStoneheart]

Also what is with all the nasty little personal digs at people who dislike Sam?

Because those people are making light of and/or excusing child abuse. Doesn't matter if this is a secondary world or not.

Wow, Sam suggests to read through the old library at the wall, in case the books contain info about the Others. That's so damn smart and impressive!

Who else is at the Wall doing this? ShadowCat provided a quote that shows how useful his intuition can be and the main hero at the Wall having a dismissive attitude towards it. Sam and Jon had simliar noble childhoods, so why is it that Samwell can see the usefulness of the work he's suggesting but Jon shrugs it off? If it's so obvious, I think you're implying, why hasn't it been done yet? And from a meta-perspective, just why do you think GRRM says that he relates to Samwell (and Tyrion) the most, and has given Samwell the role of scholar in the novels? Certaintly not to encourage fanboys on forums that Samwell isn't meant to be clever.

[D-A-C]

Easy. It's called delegation. Get Dickon to deal with battles and stuff. Sam can get on with logistics (which is what actually wins wars) and justice.

That's a complete oversimplification of things:

1. The point is a Sam being so soft in the first place causes trouble as was the case with Tytos Lannister. So there is precident for one soft ruler potentially ruining a House.

2. What's longterm to stop Dickon in that situation thinking he deserves to rule? Especially if he gathers the soldiers and military men around him.

3. Your assuming an attitude from Sam that he never displays, that is, when trouble occurs he steps up immediately and starts planning. Thr problem with Sam, as has been noted, is that even characters sympathetic to him often have to practically force him to act on something he is even capable of doing.

Obviously there is a bit of chicken and egg situation there, as people can argue without the tough upbringing he would be so messed up, but there is a case to be made, as I suggest that he was as stubborn and pigheaded as he is now even at a young age.

4. In general, delegation without any kind of ability of your own leads to discord and strife, just look at how people said Tywin was the real King while he was hand and how he was responsible for all the good and peace in the realm. If Sam isn't seen to be leadership material that in and of itself causes potential upheaval and rebellion, as people start to ask what does the guy actually do?

Like it or not, those who defend Sam, seem to overlook how important it was back then for a Lord to be tough. A Lord had to lead battles, even if they hung back, they still had to call in the banners and ride out to battle. Can anyone honestly say Sam would do that? He would have hid in his castle, and it would have damaged those he would have been in charge of and encouraged his enemies.

A Lord has responsibilities, and Sam just wasn't Lord material full stop, anyone who thinks Sam would have been a good one isn't understanding the context of the time at all.

[D-A-C]

Because those people are making light of and/or excusing child abuse. Doesn't matter if this is a secondary world or not.

So how you respond to people attempting to reason or even just flat out excusing the actions of a literary character is to snipe nastily at them and make assumptions about their personal nature and character?

Well, it doesn't take the lens of a reading of book to let me know what that says about you as a person.