Is There Anything On The Show That You Think Is Better Than The Books?

[Jon's Queen Consort]

9 hours ago, Cron said:

But the sympathy I feel for Cat is b/c of what happened to her.  Something bad DID happen to Cat:   Her husband came home with an illegitimate child, LIED and claimed it was his, and kept that child in the household for well over a decade, living the lie day after day, undoubtedly subjecting Cat to untold embarrassment and humiliation on a daily basis.

That is absolutely nothing. Ned was forced to marry her and while Jon had Stark blood she was living there just because Ned was kind to her. She owned everything she had to Ned when on the other hand Jon was a member of the Stark family. Her only power at WF came from the fact that she was a baby making machine.

9 hours ago, Cron said:

See what I mean?

No. I don't believe that anything happened to her. It was just her fact that her pride and egoism were hurt and nothing more.

[JonSnow4President]

3 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

That is absolutely nothing. Ned was forced to marry her and while Jon had Stark blood she was living there just because Ned was kind to her. She owned everything she had to Ned when on the other hand Jon was a member of the Stark family. Her only power at WF came from the fact that she was a baby making machine.

No. I don't believe that anything happened to her. It was just her fact that her pride and egoism were hurt and nothing more.

I don't identify as particularly feminist (even removing all the negative connotations of the word.  But holy hell, how can you read the books or watch the show and come away with that impression?  I don't think a MRA would think that.

[Meera of Tarth]

I just wanted to point out that a feminist just wants women to have the same opportunities and rights than men already have: same income at work, no discrimination, etc that still exists today. So, technically, a person is either a feminist or a sexist. 

Probably not the best word to describe its goal, and consequently, it causes confusion: like thinking it means women should be better than men or something like this.

[Ashes Of Westeros]

5 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

That is absolutely nothing. Ned was forced to marry her and while Jon had Stark blood she was living there just because Ned was kind to her. She owned everything she had to Ned when on the other hand Jon was a member of the Stark family. Her only power at WF came from the fact that she was a baby making machine.

Ned decided to marry Cat out of sense of duty or to keep aliance with Riverland. Nobody dragged him I guess. Cat was born as a first daughter of Lord Paramount of Trident, so she would be fine anyway, even if she never married. I understand, you don't like her character. Ok. But why so hateful? Not saying that calling somebody, even a fictional character a baby making machine is just disturbing. Yep.

[Cron]

19 hours ago, Ashes Of Westeros said:

I agree with what you said. Most of ASOIAF characters are in the grey zone, they do good and bad things and bad things happen to them sometimes even if they didn't deserve them. If they do bad things mostly we see the motives behind this. Of course, it is personal choice how you deal with the situation, but still most characters have their reasons behind their bad action, not just pure evilness. There are characters who just enjoy see people suffer, f.e. Joff, Ramsay, The Mountain, but they are few.

So we sympathize characters in onesituation and hate them in another. I dislike Cat's treatment of Jon, but I sympathize to what happened to her: her husband died, one son was crippled, the other one was killed in front of her eyes and even a rest in peace was taken from her. I hate most things what Cersei did, but I feel sorry for her being married to abusive husband, seeing her son dying etc

In more superficial fiction it is much easear to like or dislike a character as a whole, because they are less complex.

Yeah, characters in a lot of stories are "one-dimensional," whereas in ASOIAF nearly all are "multi-dimensional."  It's a huge part of what makes it so great.

[Cron]

17 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

That is absolutely nothing. Ned was forced to marry her and while Jon had Stark blood she was living there just because Ned was kind to her. She owned everything she had to Ned when on the other hand Jon was a member of the Stark family. Her only power at WF came from the fact that she was a baby making machine.

No. I don't believe that anything happened to her. It was just her fact that her pride and egoism were hurt and nothing more.

I believe I have a VERY different view of Ned and Cat's marriage than what you describe.  I believe Ned and Cat were truly, deeply in love with each other, and we see that over and over and over.

And I don't understand how you can not "believe anything happened to" Cat,   My friend, things DID happen to her  I ran down the list.  Ned LIED to her (bad enough in and of itself), about a VERY important matter, allowing her to wrongly believe for the rest of their lives that he had been unfaithful to her AND brought home the illegitimate child to live with them and remind her and everyone else of his "infidelity" every day for the rest of their time together

Those are "things," that "happened" to Cat,and while none of it justifies or excuses how she treated Jon (as I've already stressed multiple times, and which I agree completely with you about), I honestly don't understand how you can say you don't believe anything happened to her.

Are you claiming that the things I've now said (twice) happened to her didn't happen to her?  Or that no reasonable person would be upset about those things?  Cuz in my opnion, LOTS of reasonable people would be upset about them (even though, once again, I want to stress that I am not claiming they justify or excuse how she treated Jon. cuz they don't.  But just cuz a person reacts poorly to something bad that happeend to them does not mean that nothing bad happened to them in the first place.)

Finally, as I've mentioned elsewhere:  My personal view is that Ned should have told Cat the truth (I probably would have whispered it in her ear late at night, while asking her not to react or respond, and asking her to never speak of it).  Ned made a promise to Lyanna, but he made a promise to Cat too (marriage vows),  I believe his lies were violations of his marriage vows, and perhaps just as importantly, if not more so, I believe Lyanna would have understood and approved of Ned telling Cat.   Those are my opinions.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

21 hours ago, JonSnow4President said:

I don't identify as particularly feminist (even removing all the negative connotations of the word.  But holy hell, how can you read the books or watch the show and come away with that impression?  I don't think a MRA would think that.

Obviously you haven't understood what I mean. Cat's power at WF comes from the fact that she has given birth to the heirs. Without them ans since she has no blood connection with the Starks she has no power. If Ned had no trueborn children, Cat wouldn't had been the Lady of the House in her own right and she couldn't had her Tully relatives as the heirs. On the other hand if Ned had no trueborn children Jon would had been the Lord of WF and Warden of the North and Cat would had end with nothing. The best thing that she could hoped for if she had no childen would had been to be a regent for Jon if Ned had died when Jon was younger than 16 years old or allowed to stay at WF. He had the Stark blood, Cat hadn't. It has nothing to do with feminism.

I don't think a MRA would think that.

This seems a bit sexist.

6 hours ago, Cron said:

I believe I have a VERY different view of Ned and Cat's marriage than what you describe.  I believe Ned and Cat were truly, deeply in love with each other, and we see that over and over and over.

That was in the end. In the beginning he was forced to marry her in order to win Hoster's alliance. 

6 hours ago, Cron said:

And I don't understand how you can not "believe anything happened to" Cat,   My friend, things DID happen to her  I ran down the list.  Ned LIED to her (bad enough in and of itself), about a VERY important matter, allowing her to wrongly believe for the rest of their lives that he had been unfaithful to her AND brought home the illegitimate child to live with them and remind her and everyone else of his "infidelity" every day for the rest of their time together

Sorry but an adult's wounded pride is nothing compared with a child's chronic emotional abuse. 

6 hours ago, Cron said:

My personal view is that Ned should have told Cat the truth

He knew that even after all those years he couldn't trust her. He even thinks about it during his time at the Black Cells.

6 hours ago, Cron said:

but he made a promise to Cat too (marriage vows)

They had nothing to do with endangering his nephew. He had vowed to love, care and protect her and he had kept those vows.

[JonSnow4President]

2 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Obviously you haven't understood what I mean. Cat's power at WF comes from the fact that she has given birth to the heirs. Without them ans since she has no blood connection with the Starks she has no power. If Ned had no trueborn children, Cat wouldn't had been the Lady of the House in her own right and she couldn't had her Tully relatives as the heirs. On the other hand if Ned had no trueborn children Jon would had been the Lord of WF and Warden of the North and Cat would had end with nothing. The best thing that she could hoped for if she had no childen would had been to be a regent for Jon if Ned had died when Jon was younger than 16 years old or allowed to stay at WF. He had the Stark blood, Cat hadn't. It has nothing to do with feminism.

This seems a bit sexist.

When you state she has no power besides being a baby making machine, that's sexist.  Apparently it's not what you meant. "She has no power outside her relationship with Ned" =/= "Her only power at WF came from the fact that she was a baby making machine"

2 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

That was in the end. In the beginning he was forced to marry her in order to win Hoster's alliance. 

Sorry but an adult's wounded pride is nothing compared with a child's chronic emotional abuse. 

He knew that even after all those years he couldn't trust her. He even thinks about it during his time at the Black Cells.

They had nothing to do with endangering his nephew. He had vowed to love, care and protect her and he had kept those vows.

Cat actually isn't that hung up on the personal insult/cheating aspect of Jon. (Explicitly stated in the books, show is less clear)  It is specifically the political danger he represents to her Tully-looking children, with her being practically a foreigner, paired with Jon's ultra-Stark looks.  It endangers the legitimacy of her children's claim to Winterfell, even if they are the legitimate claimants by law. While occasional emotional abuse (I'm only going with what we have evidence of, and don't consider her ignoring him to be emotional abuse)

[Jon's Queen Consort]

1 hour ago, JonSnow4President said:

When you state she has no power besides being a baby making machine, that's sexist.  Apparently it's not what you meant. "She has no power outside her relationship with Ned" =/= "Her only power at WF came from the fact that she was a baby making machine"

Then it's my mistake.

1 hour ago, JonSnow4President said:

don't consider her ignoring him to be emotional abuse

She wasn't just ignoring him. Jon has said that when he was younger she was making him cry and that he felt like she was counting his bites.

[lakin1013]

9 hours ago, Cron said:

Finally, as I've mentioned elsewhere:  My personal view is that Ned should have told Cat the truth (I probably would have whispered it in her ear late at night, while asking her not to react or respond, and asking her to never speak of it).  Ned made a promise to Lyanna, but he made a promise to Cat too (marriage vows),  I believe his lies were violations of his marriage vows, and perhaps just as importantly, if not more so, I believe Lyanna would have understood and approved of Ned telling Cat.   Those are my opinions.

I reflect on Ned not telling Cat often.  Sometimes I view his stubborn honor and promise to Lyanna as the reason and other times, since I do believe that Ned and Cat loved each other, I have a hard time wondering why he did not tell her.  Yet, we do have hints from the book that Cat would favor her own children first (Robb's will, for one example) and Jon would always be an interloper.  Maybe, even tho Ned loved her, he knew that about her, and in a way, saved her from herself.  Is there a thread somewhere about Ned telling/not telling Cat.  I would be interested to see what others say.

[JonSnow4President]

1 minute ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Then it's my mistake.

She wasn't just ignoring him. Jon has said that when he was younger she was making him cry and that he felt like she was counting his bites.

My middle brother had a several year stretch where he thought my parents never listened to him, and treated him differently than my younger brother or me.  If one of us got in a fight, they would spend a great amount of time listening to his side of the story, but when they didn't agree with him, it suddenly turned into them not listening. They spent more time with him than either of us, because he needed it.  They in no way treated him unfavorably compared to the other two.  

Only going with the concrete evidence of what we have, Catelyn had a limited number of abusive moments and was otherwise distant to a child that was not hers.   It doesn't affect that what she did do in those instances was awful. But humanizing those moments is a great fear for her children and their political viability.  The amount of jealousy driving those actions is insignificant compared to that fear.

[Cron]

On 10/1/2016 at 8:32 AM, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Obviously you haven't understood what I mean. Cat's power at WF comes from the fact that she has given birth to the heirs. Without them ans since she has no blood connection with the Starks she has no power. If Ned had no trueborn children, Cat wouldn't had been the Lady of the House in her own right and she couldn't had her Tully relatives as the heirs. On the other hand if Ned had no trueborn children Jon would had been the Lord of WF and Warden of the North and Cat would had end with nothing. The best thing that she could hoped for if she had no childen would had been to be a regent for Jon if Ned had died when Jon was younger than 16 years old or allowed to stay at WF. He had the Stark blood, Cat hadn't. It has nothing to do with feminism.

This seems a bit sexist.

That was in the end. In the beginning he was forced to marry her in order to win Hoster's alliance. 

Sorry but an adult's wounded pride is nothing compared with a child's chronic emotional abuse. 

He knew that even after all those years he couldn't trust her. He even thinks about it during his time at the Black Cells.

They had nothing to do with endangering his nephew. He had vowed to love, care and protect her and he had kept those vows.

(Your first two comments were not directed to me, so I do not address them)

You Say:  "That was in the end. In the beginning he was forced to marry her in order to win Hoster's alliance."

I Reply:  Uh, what?? Who "forced" Ned to marry Cat?  This is news to me.  To my knowledge, Ned himself was Lord of Winterfell when he married Cat.   Wasn't the decision his?

You Say:  "Sorry but an adult's wounded pride is nothing compared with a child's chronic emotional abuse."

I Reply:  My friend, I've been through this a few times now.  I really don't know how else to say it.  What Cat suffered is separate and distinct from what Jon suffered.  It's possible for us to compare them, but it is ALSO possible to view them in isolation, and the fact that Jon may have suffered more DOES NOT mean that Cat did not suffer at all.  That simplty does NOT logically follow.  Cat's suffering was not magically eradicated from history merely b/c Jon also suffered, or even b/c Jon's suffering may have been more than Cat's.

  You say:  "He knew that even after all those years he couldn't trust her. He even thinks about it during his time at the Black Cells."

I Reply:  This is interesting.  I'll have to try to remember to take note of that next time I re-read (it's been about 5 years for me)  If Ned flat out says the reason he never told Cat is b/c he simply didn't trust her, I would find that interesting. (Not saying I dont believe you, by the way, it's just that different people have different interpretations of things, and you did not use a direct quote here, which is fine of course.)

You say:  "They had nothing to do with endangering his nephew. He had vowed to love, care and protect her and he had kept those vows."

I reply:  Have you considered the possibility that if Ned had told Cat, he might have increased Jon's safety, rather than "endangering" it?

 

[Cron]

23 hours ago, lakin1013 said:

I reflect on Ned not telling Cat often.  Sometimes I view his stubborn honor and promise to Lyanna as the reason and other times, since I do believe that Ned and Cat loved each other, I have a hard time wondering why he did not tell her.  Yet, we do have hints from the book that Cat would favor her own children first (Robb's will, for one example) and Jon would always be an interloper.  Maybe, even tho Ned loved her, he knew that about her, and in a way, saved her from herself.  Is there a thread somewhere about Ned telling/not telling Cat.  I would be interested to see what others say.

Good stuff.

Personally, I would have told Cat if I was Ned, but I've got to admit I can't be positive how that would have turned out, either.  It might have been better for Jon, or maybe not. We'll never know.

Dunno if there's a thread on this subject.  It wouldn't surprise me, though, there seems to be a thread on nearly everything. HAR!!

[Jon's Queen Consort]

1 hour ago, Cron said:

I Reply:  Uh, what?? Who "forced" Ned to marry Cat?  This is news to me.  To my knowledge, Ned himself was Lord of Winterfell when he married Cat.   Wasn't the decision his?

No. He was preety much forced to do it in order to gain Hoster's alliance. Just like how JonA. was forced to marry Lysa.

1 hour ago, Cron said:

You Say:  "Sorry but an adult's wounded pride is nothing compared with a child's chronic emotional abuse."

I Reply:  My friend, I've been through this a few times now.  I really don't know how else to say it.  What Cat suffered is separate and distinct from what Jon suffered.  It's possible for us to compare them, but it is ALSO possible to view them in isolation, and the fact that Jon may have suffered more DOES NOT mean that Cat did not suffer at all.  That simplty does NOT logically follow.  Cat's suffering was not magically eradicated from history merely b/c Jon also suffered, or even b/c Jon's suffering may have been more than Cat's.

I am not saying that Cat hadn't been hurt; I am saying that she was an adult and for me when it is an adult it isn't so important. However what made it worse was the fact that instead of blaming the man who *betrayed* her she turned her hate to an innocent child. She did asked Ned and when he told her to never do that again she turned her hate to Jon. That is hypocritical and even evil.

1 hour ago, Cron said:

I Reply:  This is interesting.  I'll have to try to remember to take note of that next time I re-read (it's been about 5 years for me)  If Ned flat out says the reason he never told Cat is b/c he simply didn't trust her, I would find that interesting. (Not saying I dont believe you, by the way, it's just that different people have different interpretations of things, and you did not use a direct quote here, which is fine of course.)

[snip]

I reply: Have you considered the possibility that if Ned had told Cat, he might have increased Jon's safety, rather than "endangering" it?

Quote

And when you have it, what then? Some secrets are safer kept hidden. Some secrets are too dangerous to share, even with those you love and trust.

Quote

Ned thought, If it came to that, the life of some child I did not know, against Robb and Sansa and Arya and Bran and Rickon, what would I do? Even more so, what would Catelyn do, if it were Jon's life, against the children of her body? He did not know. He prayed he never would. 

I have thought about it and I have dismissed it. 

If Cat knew she would had betrayed Ned and had given Jon to the Lannisters in order to get at least one of her daughters back.

On 1/10/2016 at 8:22 PM, JonSnow4President said:

My middle brother had a several year stretch where he thought my parents never listened to him, and treated him differently than my younger brother or me.  If one of us got in a fight, they would spend a great amount of time listening to his side of the story, but when they didn't agree with him, it suddenly turned into them not listening. They spent more time with him than either of us, because he needed it.  They in no way treated him unfavorably compared to the other two.  

Only going with the concrete evidence of what we have, Catelyn had a limited number of abusive moments and was otherwise distant to a child that was not hers.   It doesn't affect that what she did do in those instances was awful. But humanizing those moments is a great fear for her children and their political viability.  The amount of jealousy driving those actions is insignificant compared to that fear.

Concrete evidence from which side? Why we shouldn't trust Jon but we should trust Cat?

[JonSnow4President]

2 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Concrete evidence from which side? Why we shouldn't trust Jon but we should trust Cat?

Concrete is something like "It should have been you." Clearly a deplorable action.  

Concrete is not Jon thinking she cheered internally for every lump she took.  If you have a kid and are cheering for him when he scores a goal every time he beats the neighbor kid 1v1, are you abusing the other kid?  Aside from making it clear he is not a trueborn Stark, there is no evidence she ever does anything but be cold to Jon outside of Bran's chamber.  

@Cron, just as a formatting tip, you can hit enter twice when quoting someone with multiple paragraphs and it will automatically separate them into separate quotes if you want to respond to each in kind (wish someone had told me earlier).  

[Darkstream]

On 01/10/2016 at 6:32 AM, Jon's Queen Consort said:

He knew that even after all those years he couldn't trust her. He even thinks about it during his time at the Black Cells.

This again? You keep using this thought by Ned to back up your desire that Ned did not trust Cat, when in fact it means quite the opposite.

 Some secrets are safer kept hidden. Some secrets are too dangerous to share, even with those you love and trust.

Notice that he says "even with those you love and trust". This means that he does trust Cat. Ned is saying that even though I do trust her, I still can't tell her this particular secret. Your go to quote to prove that Ned didn't trust Cat is the most substantial piece of evidence against this unfounded claim.

[Joy Hill]

Valyrian and Dothraki languages.

 

Dany being raped by Drogo makes me less uncomfortable than what happens in the books :  sex between a 30 year old man and a 13 year old girl with dubious consent written in a rosy manner.

[Meera of Tarth]

35 minutes ago, Joy Hill said:

Valyrian and Dothraki languages.

 

Dany being raped by Drogo makes me less uncomfortable than what happens in the books :  sex between a 30 year old man and a 13 year old girl with dubious consent written in a rosy manner.

I am not a fan of what happens in the books in her first chapters but the fact Dany is aged up in the show doesn't make me feel less unconfortable, she is miserable there and would always be, regardless of her age

being forcedor raped (even if you are married in Medieval times) is always a gross thing. period.

[Cron]

13 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

No. He was preety much forced to do it in order to gain Hoster's alliance. Just like how JonA. was forced to marry Lysa.

I am not saying that Cat hadn't been hurt; I am saying that she was an adult and for me when it is an adult it isn't so important. However what made it worse was the fact that instead of blaming the man who *betrayed* her she turned her hate to an innocent child. She did asked Ned and when he told her to never do that again she turned her hate to Jon. That is hypocritical and even evil.

I have thought about it and I have dismissed it. 

If Cat knew she would had betrayed Ned and had given Jon to the Lannisters in order to get at least one of her daughters back.

Concrete evidence from which side? Why we shouldn't trust Jon but we should trust Cat?

Far as I know, no one forced Ned to marry Cat, and no one forced Jon Arryn to marry Lysa.  They may have felt great political pressure to do it, but ultimately, far as I know, they made the decisions to do it themselves, and to me that's NOT the same thing as being forced.  Indeed, I have NO reason to believe either Ned or Jon Arryn had any hesitations about it or problems with it, either.  I'm honestly not sure where you're getting the idea that either one of them was even pressured into it at all, much less "forced."

I agree that Cat's treatment of Jon Snow was outrageous, inexcusable and indefensible, so hopefully we'ver found some common ground on that.  In fact, as I've mentioned, I so strongly disapprove that I actually believe her treatment of Jon is very inconsistent with the Cat we know from every other scene in which she appears in both the books and the show.  Frankly, I don't believe she would have done that, but of course I have to admit she DID, per GRRM.  I'm not sure what it really added, though...if I was GRRM, I would not have written it that way.

Wow, you think if Cat knew Jon wasn't Ned's son she would have betrayed Ned, and somehow given Jon to the Lannisters?  That wouldn't be my guess, but I suppose only GRRM knows for sure.  I see no reasonably possible way that Cat could ever have given Jon to the Lannisters in exchange for Sansa or Arya anyway, though.  By that time, Jon was WAY outside Cat's ability to do such a thing, I think.  My goodness, Cat was ni the south, Winterfell was held by the Boltons, plus Umbers and Karstarks had turned against Starks (meaning the north in general was a pretty hostile place for Starks), and Jon was with the Night's Watch (even further away), ranging beyond the Wall at the time. no less.  Not sure how Cat could just decide to hand Jon over to the Lannisters under such circumstances.

(Your last line was not directed to me.)

[David Selig]

On 29/09/2016 at 6:28 PM, Jon's Queen Consort said:

I don't see why someone should feel sympathy for her. Egoism, egocentricity and pride aren’t a reason why someone should abuse an innocent and defenseless person. Being a decent human being isn’t an achievement, it’s the foundation of our life. Cat emotionally abused him just because she was felt bad. IMNSHO there is absolutely no reason to feel symathy  about her.

 

That's because you are obsessed Jon fangirl for whom being mean to Jon is worse than murdering other kids.