Discussing Sansa XXV: Who let the dogs out...

[Mladen]

Just now, tugela said:

They would have considered taking a maid out of wedlock to be rape (but even that was OK under most circumstances, especially if the male had higher social rank than the female). Inside wedlock it would not be rape.

As pointed out earlier, you should not let modern sensibilities cloud your opinion, as things would have been viewed very differently in medieval times.

Using your modern definitions, all highborn marriages of that era would be rape because of how marriage was conducted in those days, which is clearly ridiculous.

Except for the fact that is not how the marriages worked. There was a matchmaking process, than introduction, Catelyn goes into detail how much she knew Brandon. The medieval marriages vary in terms of how much choice did the bride and the groom had, but the fact is that most of the husbands were not rapists and most women were ready to have the intercourse. That is why, even according medieval terms, Ramsay raped Sansa. 

2 minutes ago, Tianzi said:

They wouldn't have to be with Jon. Jon would present his army as he did, weak and all, and Ramsay would be lured out. the Vale forces could have sneaked from behind, cutting the Bolton forces from Winterfell, or something. Or just joining the battle earlier, before Jon's forces were shattered and he himself almost killed. There would be a lot more Jon could do with the knowledge of those forces that he could without.

And no, this wouldn't give Rickon good chances. But it would give him a slightly better chances.

And with trust issues I'm generous. I prefer to think it was because she was traumatized and irrational than she just risked Jon's life and sacrificed his army for some kind of her own ambitions.

But, she wasn't the one who sacrificed Jon's army. It was Jon. Jon, who didn't listen to her, put himself in danger by being played like a fiddle, which made his men run to their commander. 

Sneaked from behind? Come on, even this was pushing the logic. Can you imagine that Ramsay doesn't know about the army that is roaming near battlefield. Again, Vale forces could have worked only in deus ex machina fashion.

2 minutes ago, Frejac said:

As I, and several others, keep pointing out, Jon knowing about the Vale does not mean that Ramsay would know about the Vale.  Jon knowing about the Vale does not mean that he would clump his army together with the Vale and charge the walls of Winterfell.  What Jon knowing about the Vale means is that the two armies can come up with a coordinated strategy.

A strategy that would most likely look exactly like this episode--smaller Stark army draws Ramsay out, Vale crushes Ramsay--except with significantly fewer Stark casualties.

If Ramsay didn't know that Littlefinger was in the North after all this time, there's no reason to believe he would know about them if the armies were to coordinate in this manner.  No reason to believe the Vale still couldn't take him by surprise.

Ramsay knew exactly how many men Jon has and in what condition they were. Vale army would have to be synced and that had to be done nearby, which means their position would have to been discovered. Same like Rohirrim in LOTR.

[Mladen]

4 minutes ago, Tianzi said:

Well, look at it like she did him a favor in his dying hour and acted like a true Lady Bolton.

Wait? Starks are not cruel? What was Jon doing to Ramsay? Patting him on the back?

[SerMixalot]

13 hours ago, Forlong the Fat said:

 

sorry ignore the quote, accidental button pushing I guess

 

Sansa knew for weeks if not months that the Vale Army was a possibility if not a reality, yet she didn't share that info with Jon, while he planned the attack against WF, which she was the motivating force for, yeah she aint evil! HAHAHA

[Ethan_Kanin]

2 minutes ago, Risto said:

Wait? Starks are not cruel? What was Jon doing to Ramsay? Patting him on the back?

That was the Targaryen blood in him! But joking aside, that was two soldiers fighting in a batlle. I highly doubt that Jon will look favorably on Sansa letting a PoW be ripped apart by starving dogs.

[Mladen]

Just now, Ethan_Kanin said:

That was the Targaryen blood in him! But joking aside, that was two soldiers fighting in a batlle. I highly doubt that Jon will look favorably on Sansa letting a PoW be ripped apart by starving dogs.

Ummm, he told her where to find him. Plus, all Inside the Episode videos agree that Jon stopped beating Ramsay because he wanted Sansa to have the pleasure.

[Ethan_Kanin]

Just now, Risto said:

Ummm, he told her where to find him. Plus, all Inside the Episode videos agree that Jon stopped beating Ramsay because he wanted Sansa to have the pleasure.

Yes and that shows how little D&D actually understand the characters in their own show. When I saw him looking at Sansa and stopping I thought it was because he realized that beating someone to death would not be something an honourable Stark would do. That would have fit his character. Him basically giving Sansa someone to torture is not something that Jon "wants-to-be-Ned-Stark" Snow would ever do.

[Tianzi]

4 minutes ago, Risto said:

But, she wasn't the one who sacrificed Jon's army. It was Jon. Jon, who didn't listen to her, put himself in danger by being played like a fiddle, which made his men run to their commander. 

Sneaked from behind? Come on, even this was pushing the logic. Can you imagine that Ramsay doesn't know about the army that is roaming near battlefield. Again, Vale forces could have worked only in deus ex machina fashion.

Jon was played like a fiddle alright, but he received an incomplete information from her.

I don't know the exact battle topography, but the Vale army was close enough to arrive before the end of the battle. Had Jon known, he could make plans for the battle a little later, the Vale army would intervene a little earlier in the battle, less losses, less risks. Holding out this information is indefensible.

7 minutes ago, Risto said:

Wait? Starks are not cruel? What was Jon doing to Ramsay? Patting him on the back?

Nobody says Starks are not cruel, but fighting is one thing and torturing prisoners is another. And feeding uncomfortable in-laws to dogs was an established way of communication between the members of House Bolton. I'm actually completely fine with Sansa dealing with Ramsay the Bolton way, he should be proud of his wife.

[Survivor92]

Can't believe people are seriously honeypotting Sansa withholding information about the Vale army, with the excuse that otherwise they couldn't have flanked the Boltons like they did at the last moment. No shit, that is just horrible plot contrivance by D&D.

The way the battle is portrayed, if Jon had actually listened to Sansa and not let himself be provoked by Ramsay, the Vale army would've arrived too soon! If he had just walked back to his line after Rickon died, the Vale army would've arrived somewhere during the cavalry clash. It's absolutely inexcusable that Sansa didn't tell him. They should've planned the whole thing! Keep Sansa, Ghost and a handful of riders behind to watch the battle and signal the Vale army at the right moment. That's how you start making the whole setup make a tiny bit of sense and it could still be a secret kept between Jon and Sansa because they weren't sure if the Vale army would show up.

The lengths people go to in defending this show....

[Mladen]

1 minute ago, Survivor92 said:

Can't believe people are seriously honeypotting Sansa withholding information about the Vale army, with the excuse that otherwise they couldn't have flanked the Boltons like they did at the last moment. No shit, that is just horrible plot contrivance by D&D.

Of course it is a plot contrivance. But it is a canon of the show. Plain and simple.

It is not about defending the show, it is just arguing about things related to what happened inside the show.

3 minutes ago, Tianzi said:

Jon was played like a fiddle alright, but he received an incomplete information from her.

I don't know the exact battle topography, but the Vale army was close enough to arrive before the end of the battle. Had Jon known, he could make plans for the battle a little later, the Vale army would intervene a little earlier in the battle, less losses, less risks. Holding out this information is indefensible. 

Honestly, I understand why she was keeping her mouth shut until she has sent the letter to LF promising him a reward (we all know what LF wants). However I would agree that there was no point of keeping her mouth shut, unless of course she really wasn't sure that army would come. Which is not the best argument.

But here is a thing... Let we assume that Vale army is beside Jon's. Would Ramsay be playing his games? Yes, he would. Would Jon fall for it? Yes, he would. Would he lose temper and lead his men into death? Oh, yeah.

Here is a thing. Sansa did something wrong, but we can't say that her mistake costed more lives when in fact the battle went wrong when Jon lost his temper.

[The Fattest Leech]

17 minutes ago, Tianzi said:

They wouldn't have to be with Jon. Jon would present his army as he did, weak and all, and Ramsay would be lured out. the Vale forces could have sneaked from behind, cutting the Bolton forces from Winterfell, or something. Or just joining the battle earlier, before Jon's forces were shattered and he himself almost killed. There would be a lot more Jon could do with the knowledge of those forces that he could without.

And no, this wouldn't give Rickon good chances. But it would give him a slightly better chances.

And with trust issues I'm generous. I prefer to think it was because she was traumatized and irrational than she just risked Jon's life and sacrificed his army for some kind of her own ambitions.

Agree with this one. This is very similar to an alternative that I made earlier. If Jon had known about the Vale then strategy would have changed. They could have presented Jon's army in the front (all party), and had the Vale surprise in the back, or even flanking in on two sides (all business). Jon could even have delayed by not showing up on time, or trying for another parlay first. This would have increased, maybe not omitted, Rickon's chance at survival. Point is, there are many other strategy options to what we saw and to having Sansa willingly betray the only two people she knows are left of her family. Sansa is a Stark traitor like the rest of the north

In general, I do have a feeling that Jon arranged to have Ramsay in with the hounds at Sansa's request. Now, how the dogs were so well behaved until action demanded a throat ripping... tv magic ?

Speaking of dogs and to round Sansa out, I have a feeling the Hound will show up next episode while she and LF are in the godswood and the Hound will cut Petyr down, at Sansa's request... because to hell with Sandor trying to recoup himself. Sansa apparently has learned from LF how to kill people without getting her own paws dirty. Never wield the knife yourself, I guess???

[OldGimletEye]

44 minutes ago, Risto said:

Here is a thing. It is not like Sansa pushed Jon into battle, saying to him "fight tonight, fight tonight" She has been asking, over and over, to wait, to gather more men, to be cautious, to plan things more thoroughly. Even when he got out on the battlefield, entire thing was about who was gonna enrage whom. That is why Sansa's warning was crucial and that is why Jon should have listened to her. As I have said previously, this was Cat and Robb all over again. 

And her specific advice was really what here? Make a strategic withdraw? Get more troops from source X?
No not really.
She gripes about him not having enough men (well that and talks about Ramsay. She does have a bit of point here).. But, she knows there are more men, but doesn't tell him.
The fact of the matter is at the war counsel, Jon and Co. do talk about largely taking a defensive posture. I don't think they can get more cautious. It's not like Jon is attempting to pull off a Cannae here. The only more cautious thing Jon could have done is to retreat and avoid a battle. Sansa certainly good have made that sugggestion (but that suggestion would have been nonsense since there was evidently friendly forces in the area. Like realistically probably can't be more than 20 or 30 miles from the battlefield. Soldiers can only march so fast).

44 minutes ago, Risto said:

 

The problem is that Sansa felt sided once again. She was there, but no one took her seriously. More power and voice had Mel who wasn't part of the war council. I think that initially she didn't want to be indebted to LF, but she then realized they have no choice. Which was logical. But then when she promised LF a reward, the plot itself makes quite the leap in the reasoning why she didn't tell him. People here speak about ambition, betrayal etc. and yet none can be seen on screen. But, at the end of the day, Jon screwed up royally. And not once, but twice. She warned him, she told him about Ramsay and he didn't listen. Again, just like Robb and Cat.

I am sure if she said, "Hey guys, I know where there are thousands of fresh troops", I am sure everyone would have dropped what they where doing and would have listened to her.
But really she is mad because somebody didn't say,"Hey Sansa what's your view on avoiding a double encirclement?" Is that why she didn't mention the Vale Troops?
Okay, maybe Jon should have asked her about what she knows about Ramsay. But still, it doesn't really excuse her not telling anything about the Vale Army.
I get what D & D are trying to do here. I'm all for seeing Sansa come into her own and showing that she too can play the game and be shrewd. But, the way D & D did things here. Just ugh.

[Mladen]

2 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

And her specific advice was really what here? Make a strategic withdraw? Get more troops from source X?
No not really.
She gripes about him not having enough men (well that and talks about Ramsay. She does have a bit of point here).. But, she knows there are more men, but doesn't tell him.
The fact of the matter is at the war counsel, Jon and Co. do talk about largely taking a defensive posture. I don't think they can get more cautious. It's not like Jon is attempting to pull off a Cannae here. The only more cautious thing Jon could have done is to retreat and avoiding a battle. Sansa certainly good have made that sugggestion (but that suggestion would have been nonsense since there was evidently friendly forces in the area. Like realistically probably can't be more than 20 or 30 miles from the battlefield. Soldiers can only march so fast).

Once again, Vale men are not their men. I am not sure whether she knew they were coming or not. As I said, I understood the lying at firs but after sending the letter, it lost the point.

But, here is her advice. Don't allow Ramsay to play you. And he ironically says to her "That's obvious". And then, he does exactly that. 

Exactly about defending positions. He wanted Ramsay to come to him, not the other way around. And what happened? His army had to run towards him. I know this is Sansa's thread but blaming her for the deaths of the people who went charging because of Jon's stupidity is quite rich.

7 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

I am sure if she said, "Hey guys, I know where there are thousands of fresh troops", I am sure everyone would have dropped what they where doing and would have listened to her.
But really she is mad because somebody didn't say,"Hey Sansa what's your view on avoiding a double encirclement?" Is that why she didn't mention the Vale Troops?
Okay, maybe Jon should have asked her about what she knows about Ramsay. But still, it doesn't really excuse her not telling anything about the Vale Army.
I get what D & D are trying to do here. I'm all for seeing Sansa come into her own and showing that she too can play the game and be shrewd. But, the way D & D did things here. Just ugh.

Do you think Jon actually listened to her? She told him about Ramsay and he risked his life not once but twice. Once for Rickon, once for vengeance. She told him, and he did contrary to her advice. How he wasn't killed during his three-men march on WF is beyond any logic.

Overall, Sansa made a mistake about not telling, but Jon's lack of self-restrained almost ended their cause. TWO TIMES.

[Future Null Infinity]

Episode 10 preview, it's containing literally the end of the story Jon/Sansa, she lied to him and she saved him, he said to her "we need to trust each other" and gave her a kiss on the forehead, they are cool, the end

[Frejac]

So, after giving myself some time to think things through, here is why Sansa lying bothers me so much.

When Jon makes his mistake on the battlefield and falls into the Rickon trap, his decision is entirely born out of who he is as a character.  He has always been shown to be someone who goes out of his way to protect those he cares about, even when doing so could be considered a hot-headed mistake.  This drive of his is somewhat tempered by his devotion to his duty to the Night's Watch as the story progresses, but then dies.  He's betrayed by his brothers, says his watch is over, and is then convinced by Sansa to head south to reclaim their home and rescue their brother.  Jon was always going to fall for the Rickon trap because it's who he is.  His drive to rush into battle to protect the ones he cares about is both one of his biggest strengths and one of his biggest flaws.  When he let his emotions get the better of him, it was tragic, it got many of his men killed, but from a character-driven perspective, it was entirely understandable.

Sansa's decision to lie about the Vale, on the other hand, was born out of plot and a desire to create artificial tension.  All of the reasons people are coming up with for her deciding not to tell Jon make no sense to me.  She has trust issues.  She wants to keep Jon free from Littlefinger's debt.  She wanted Jon and his army weakened and/or dead.  She didn't know for sure if Littlefinger was coming.  She's an incredible tactician, can see the future, and planned the battle to go exactly as it did because she knew it was the only way to beat Ramsay.  None of this makes sense to me.  I can understand her trust issues, and I can even understand her initial decision to refuse Littlefinger and keep his offer a secret.  What I cannot, in any way, understand is why she continued to keep him a secret after she sent the Raven.  At this point, none of the reasons I've heard for her lying to Jon make any sense because they do not reflect who Sansa is as a character.  They are plot driven excuses for her behavior rather than character driven justifications of it.

This is bad writing.  This makes Sansa's decision incomprehensible to me.  It makes Sansa, a character that I really liked and was rooting for at the beginning of the season, look stupid.  And I absolutely hate when a story makes it's characters look stupid because it favors plot points over believable characters.

[Quyen Thuy Tran]

24 minutes ago, Survivor92 said:

Can't believe people are seriously honeypotting Sansa withholding information about the Vale army, with the excuse that otherwise they couldn't have flanked the Boltons like they did at the last moment. No shit, that is just horrible plot contrivance by D&D.

The way the battle is portrayed, if Jon had actually listened to Sansa and not let himself be provoked by Ramsay, the Vale army would've arrived too soon! If he had just walked back to his line after Rickon died, the Vale army would've arrived somewhere during the cavalry clash. It's absolutely inexcusable that Sansa didn't tell him. They should've planned the whole thing! Keep Sansa, Ghost and a handful of riders behind to watch the battle and signal the Vale army at the right moment. That's how you start making the whole setup make a tiny bit of sense and it could still be a secret kept between Jon and Sansa because they weren't sure if the Vale army would show up.

The lengths people go to in defending this show....

The episode would be much better and much more logical if this happened:

1) Sansa told Jon about the Vale army and told him to take time as long as possible because "I don't know when will they come, please don't go into the battle until there's my signal".

2) Jon knows about the Vale army but he couldn't stand seeing Rickon being killed and went berserk. Then the battle happened exactly as it was, with Vale army came in the last minute.

this would make much more sense than Sansal withholding the information and let Jon and his supporters die in vain. 

[Future Null Infinity]

1 minute ago, Frejac said:

This is bad writing.  This makes Sansa's decision incomprehensible to me.  It makes Sansa, a character that I really liked and was rooting for at the beginning of the season, look stupid.  And I absolutely hate when a story makes it's characters look stupid because it favors plot points over believable characters.

it's not bad writing, in next episode preview, she will tell him why she lied to him and acted without consultation

[OldGimletEye]

4 minutes ago, Risto said:

Once again, Vale men are not their men. I am not sure whether she knew they were coming or not. As I said, I understood the lying at firs but after sending the letter, it lost the point.

But, here is her advice. Don't allow Ramsay to play you. And he ironically says to her "That's obvious". And then, he does exactly that. 

Exactly about defending positions. He wanted Ramsay to come to him, not the other way around. And what happened? His army had to run towards him. I know this is Sansa's thread but blaming her for the deaths of the people who went charging because of Jon's stupidity is quite rich.

The Vale forces marched all the way to the Neck to do what? Play with themselves? 
They are in the North. Sansa could have told them that. If Sansa managed to find the Vale army, I'm sure a few scouts would have been to locate them.
And, I agree Jon acts like an idiot here. No denying that. Still it doesn't excuse Sansa's decision here. 

4 minutes ago, Risto said:

 

Do you think Jon actually listened to her? She told him about Ramsay and he risked his life not once but twice. Once for Rickon, once for vengeance. She told him, and he did contrary to her advice. How he wasn't killed during his three-men march on WF is beyond any logic.

Overall, Sansa made a mistake about not telling, but Jon's lack of self-restrained almost ended their cause. TWO TIMES.

The whole episode was beyond logic.

[SerMixalot]

3 minutes ago, Future Null Infinity said:

it's not bad writing, in next episode preview, she will tell him why she lied to him and acted without consultation

I bet you a lamprey pie they don't.

[Bear Claw]

38 minutes ago, Risto said:

Wait? Starks are not cruel? What was Jon doing to Ramsay? Patting him on the back?

I agree. I don't know why so many people think the Starks can't be ruthless. They are wolves.

[Future Null Infinity]

Just now, SerMixalot said:

I bet you a lamprey pie they don't.

Man, from the preveiw, it's clear like the full moon in the sky, they will no forget or hide such thing from the veiwers, I will kill myself if they will not address this point