Who will end Sansa's life?

[spauldo17]

22 minutes ago, Greywater-Watch said:

I disagree. She learns well her role as Alayne, being careful not to blow her camouflage. Something she would not have been able to do before LF's turtoring (when she always blurted out what came to her mind). She finds out about Lyn Corbray's relation to LF, which requires some intelligence. She learns to control herself and follows LF's plans to seduce Harry the Heir very cleverly. The Sansa from KL-time would never have been able to do this (after the first bad encounter with Harry the Heir). She attentively follows conversations (like the one with LF planning to buy as much food as possible for the Vale speculating for higher prices in the coming winter). Such conversations she would not have followed before.

 

13 minutes ago, Risto said:

 

Sansa, as Martin has said, is becoming a player. He literally compared her wits with one of the most intelligent players in the Game of Thrones. Sansa's set of skills may not be "cool" to you, but they will be of utter importance for her family. As I have said before, she is positioned to deal with one of the greatest villains of the story, she has the key of the untouched Vale armies and the food in their granaries, when it has been made a point, time after time, that both men and food will be needed soon enough. Arya will become a killer, Bran is becoming quite the deity and Sansa is becoming a player in the Game. Each set of skills is different and each is needed to deal with what is coming in the future.

You say that you think Sansa can be redeemed if she becomes a politician. Well, that is not even a question, as we have seen GRRM plainly speaking about that. It was GRRM who spoke of "pawn to player" transformation, who put her in the position where she can help her family. Show Sansa is nothing more than a version of Sansa's future. We simply can not ignore GRRM's clear opinion about Sansa and her growing process.

Sansa is learning how to observe people and not reveal much. She is learning how the lords and ladies of Westeros operate, she is learning the importance of keeping things to yourself. She is learning how to use people and move the pawns across the board as she may please. She is intelligent enough (per GRRM, she is just as clever as LF) and she can help her family when the time comes. It is a speculation based on what author said to us and where her POV has been leading us.

She was left to take care of Eyrie when LF went away. That is the role of Lady of the castle. She did run Eyrie and made all the preparations for the household to move to the Moon's Gates. Furthermore, she has been observing how LF operates among the Lords Declarant and how he buys their loyalty. It has been written, very clearly. 

I think I'm beginning to agree with the idea that Sansa may be becoming a player in her own right, as much as it pains me to admit it.  I see your examples, and I think you may be right.  It does illustrate the different types of power as well, be it physical power or manipulative.

 

15 minutes ago, Risto said:

Well, who does have Ned's morals? Arya, who is becoming assassin? Bran, who has been mindraping Hodor? Sansa did make a mistake, no one denies that, but to say that she has done that intentionally, fully being aware of how her father would end, that is plainly false and can not be proven by what has been written in the text.

Robb was NEVER a hero of the story. Not only that he is not a POV character, he is a secondary character at best. Ned was never a HERO of the saga, as this is a cross-generational saga about children growing up and Ned, like Cersei or Jaime, is part of the old generation. His story was coming to en end, because we always knew that the center stage has always been reserved for other members of his family. To see the pieces of foreshadowing Martin left like breadcrumbs all over ACOK and ASOS prior to Red wedding is to understand that RW and Robb's story were coming to an end. 

What? Robb was declared King and that is not entitlement? Jon behaving like he was better than anyone at NW wasn't entitlement? Dany's speeches of dragon blood and 10 000 titles ARE NOT entitlement? Bran warging Hodor as he pleases and even being occasionally rude to Reeds is not entitlement? I am sorry, but given that most of our heroes belong to very rich, noble houses, representing 1% of population, entitlement is what comes with birth. Actually, Sansa, like all Stark children and Daenerys, have come a long way from that. She has been time after time, speaking about her, not her claim or something else. She doesn't feel like she should have anything, all she wants is a happy life with the man who loves her for who she is. That most certainly isn't entitlement.

 

I would say that Jon, Robb, and Bran have all displayed Ned's morals admirably.  Bran "mindraping" Hodor was an unfortunate necessity.  Whether or not Sansa knew the inevitable consequences of her actions (most likely she did not) she still took a plan her father had, that she knew was a secret, and told Cersei. 

Robb was absolutely a hero of the story.  For almost an entire book he was the main protagonist from the Stark side.  The entire North rallied behind him and he was going to go to war with the Lannisters. I don't know what more you want from the guy, just because he died doesn't mean he wasn't a hero of the story.  As an aside, having a POV does not a hero make.  Besides your logic is flawed, you're saying that Ned wasn't a hero because he was of the "old guard" like Jaime and Cersei, but both Jaime and Cersei have factored heavily into the story line.  Both of them are "Heroes (read: major players)" in their own right.

I think you need to work on your definition of entitlement. Entitlement is the belief that one is inherently deserving or owed privileges or special treatment.  None of the things you named have anything to do with that.   Being declared king does not make one entitled, Robb saw a need for a king and an opportunity and his countrymen named him king, he didn't act like it was his by right, nor did he act as if everyone should just name him king because he said so,  Entitlement would be joffrey, who felt that being king was his right, and he didn't need to earn it.  Jon didn't behave as if he thought himself better than everyone, he behaved according to his morals he was taught by Ned, this is also not "entitlement."  Entitlement would have been if he got there and he expected everyone to name him Lord Commander right away and got upset when they didn't, but that didn't happen.  Dany may be entitled but I never made any arguments about her, so your point on her is moot.  Bran is also not entitled, as I said before he wargs into Hodor out of necessity, and only when it was extremely necessary.  He didn't want to do it because he knew it wasn't right.  Also, being "occasionally rude" is in no way "entitlement"  it's just rudeness.    It seems as if you're just naming behaviors you've seen from other heroes that you disagree with, and then calling it entitlement.  

[spauldo17]

29 minutes ago, Ashes Of Westeros said:

I respect your sympathy to other characters, but I have disagree with your definition of improvment. Becoming a ruthless assassin isn't improvement, it's development in a certain way, but it doesn't make one a better person. BR affected Westeros because he was a commander and HotK for many years, he used to be a figure of power. Though his magic abilities helped him in it, his role in Westeros history after disapearing beyond the Wall is still arguable.

In the beginning of AGOT Sansa trusted Cersei and was head over hills in love with Joffrey despite all the warning signs. After a bitter experience Sansa learned not to trust them. First Sansa tried to confront Joff and told Robb would bring her his head, what got her beaten, so she learned to keep her thoughts to herself and seem unsuspicious. Nobody found out about her meetings with Dontos and plotting the escape, despite being watched all the time. In the Vale Sansa played the role so even people who met her as Sansa didn't recognize her, which is kind of skinchanging. If this is not learning, than I don't know what is.

You're right, perhaps "improvement" wasn't the proper word to use.  Development would be better suited for this.  And as I just said, on the point of whether or not Sansa may be developing in her own way to further the story in the future, I concede.  I think y'all are right on that front, though I still think she's useless right now.

I also feel like I need to add that I agree with you all only in the event that Sansa becomes what you all say she will become.  I concede that I do see the process and the potential for it to happen, but as of this moment she's still a zero sum character. If she becomes what you say, then I am wrong, and I will welcome it because that's the most engaging of her possible story-line outcomes.

[a black swan]

23 minutes ago, Ashes Of Westeros said:

In the Vale Sansa played the role so even people who met her as Sansa didn't recognize her, which is kind of skinchanging. If this is not learning, than I don't know what is.

The amount of over-praising every little thing this character does with her superfans never ceases to surprise me. 

Anyway, to answer the OP's question. I think she will follow the fate of her direwolf and die for someone else's crime at the hands of another Stark. 

 

[Ashes Of Westeros]

4 minutes ago, DutchArya said:

The amount of over-praising every little thing this character does with her superfans never ceases to surprise me. 

Anyway, to answer the OP's question. I think she will follow the fate of her direwolf and die for someone else's crime at the hands of another Stark. 

 

Good for you, at least you have some amusement while reading ASOIAF is a multi-dimensional work, that is why we have so many interpretations, sympathies and antipathies and we change our minds as we analyze and re-read things. This is the reason why this board exists.

[spauldo17]

7 minutes ago, Ashes Of Westeros said:

Good for you, at least you have some amusement while reading ASOIAF is a multi-dimensional work, that is why we have so many interpretations, sympathies and antipathies and we change our minds as we analyze and re-read things. This is the reason why this board exists.

I do have to agree with dutcharya on this one though, saying that Sansa's pretending not to be herself is akin to "skin changing" is quite the stretch

[The Ned's Little Girl]

 

1 hour ago, spauldo17 said:

The only way I will concede the point about Sansa, and this is something I believe you mentioned or perhaps it was another poster, is if she takes these "lessons" she has learned, becomes a stone-cold heartless politician, and starts manipulating people as if Cersei were her hero.

I'm going to argue that one shouldn't necessarily take Cersei's or Littlefinger's definitions of power and exercising power as the only possible ways that power can be applied. Of course Cersei "You win or you die" Lannister is going to maintain that her particular skill set (malice and paranoia) are what's needed to wield power. I mean, she would say that, wouldn't she? Same with Littlefinger; naturally he's going to define power and "The Game" as being whatever benefits him and utilizes his specific talents.

The problem isn't that power-players define power by whatever their own skill sets are; that's inevitable. The problem develops when the skill sets employed are divisive, antagonistic and chaotic.

In my view, the intertwining of Cersei's, Littlefinger's and Sansa's stories is Martin's most overt meditation on power, the nature and exercise thereof. That's why Sansa exists.

 

6 minutes ago, spauldo17 said:

I think I'm beginning to agree with the idea that Sansa may be becoming a player in her own right, as much as it pains me to admit it.  I see your examples, and I think you may be right.  It does illustrate the different types of power as well, be it physical power or manipulative.

Perhaps that may be Martin's point with Sansa: to show that wielding and maintaining power in a society doesn't require the type of thinking illustrated by Cersei and Littlefinger (who are both clearly insane). By contrast, Sansa (who thought, "When I am queen, I'll make them love me") could be, in the future, an exemplar of a different style of power-exercising: more beneficent, less antagonistic.

Perhaps. It's hard to say just yet, as I don't think her story is anywhere near done.

 

[Blue-Eyed Wolf]

45 minutes ago, Greywater-Watch said:

She learns to control herself and follows LF's plans to seduce Harry the Heir very cleverly. The Sansa from KL-time would never have been able to do this (after the first bad encounter with Harry the Heir). She attentively follows conversations (like the one with LF planning to buy as much food as possible for the Vale speculating for higher prices in the coming winter). Such conversations she would not have followed before.

This.  From the whole Lord's Declarant meeting which was 100% a demonstration in political maneuvering for her.  She picked up on Lyn Corbray working for Petyr.

Spoiler

Then later instinctively goaded Corbray into revealing he's actually Petyr's enemy.  That and the grain price fixing could come up as valuable information later.  

 

34 minutes ago, Ashes Of Westeros said:

In the beginning of AGOT Sansa trusted Cersei and was head over hills in love with Joffrey despite all the warning signs. After a bitter experience Sansa learned not to trust them. First Sansa tried to confront Joff and told Robb would bring her his head, what got her beaten, so she learned to keep her thoughts to herself and seem unsuspicious. Nobody found out about her meetings with Dontos and plotting the escape, despite being watched all the time. In the Vale Sansa played the role so even people who met her as Sansa didn't recognize her, which is kind of skinchanging. If this is not learning, than I don't know what is.

She has a poker face when it comes to Petyr.  She never reveals any of her true thoughts to him. I think it's playing the game, but it's also a mark of how much more she fears him than anyone else.  She's very vigilant about what he won't like to hear.  He's demonstrated repeatedly he can get away with murder and even be rewarded from it.  He's made veiled threats about "more blood on her hands."  You're right that even with Joffrey she would insult him to his face and even tell off the Hound when he was being mean.  She's learned from the Lords Declarant if you come at Petyr directly, you will fail.  All the times he's baited her with mentioning Catelyn and his past relationship, she's never engaged with him on that subject.  Sansa would normally take these opportunities to create intimacy with people, but she doesn't with him.  Yet, she could use this to seduce him and manipulate him, but she won't do that either.  She has strong convictions about what she wants for herself, so this is outright rejection of Cersei's advice.  Her option is to play the "dutiful" daughter and flatter him intellectually instead of sexually.  This is both smart and sticking to her guns.

1 hour ago, spauldo17 said:

If anywhere in Sansa's chapters it said she was "honing political skills" and "running an entire fucking castle" or anything of the sort I could agree with you.  But it doesn't, it just has her quietly pitying herself and being manipulated. 

Well, she has been acting in more the lady of the castle role.  She's put in charge of preparations for the Lord's Declarant meeting (which was a big lesson in political maneuvering, which she correctly guessed a big secret about Lyn Corbray) , she's the one the servants come to to handle SR, and the events coming up in TWOW are her idea.  I don't think we can accurately judge yet how well she can implement Petyr's lessons in court intrigues, because she hasn't been in a court yet since learning those things.  In TWOW she's going to be interacting with other political players in a court-like setting.  She's been in isolated imprisonment from KL to the Eyrie.  It's purposefully written to have long stretches of boredom and frustration punctuated by moments of fear, because that's what imprisonment is and what it feels like for Sansa.  She has the symptoms of depression and anxiety that comes with it.  She has so many moments where she has the right idea about something, but backtracks in self-doubt.  That's not really weakness, but very common with intimate partner violence and mental abuse.  Yet, she has strong unwavering convictions about what she wants for herself.  She has to do uncomfortable things to survive, but balances it with re-affirming her identity, if only privately.  It's only until she descends to the Gates of the Moon that she starts feeling really alive again.  Her Stark thoughts, memories, and identity are alive and well on the inside.  I'm not trying to convince you to like Sansa, I'm just saying what I love and what I find so inspiring.  She is just a regular person playing the hand she is dealt.  So much of her story reminds me of the Shawshank Redemption, where the characters find small ways to resist and find happiness while appearing to comply with the rules.  She finds nuggets of good things in a bad situation.  Even after her nightmare of a surprise forced marriage, she can't help herself but dance at the reception to make herself feel better and affirm her identity.  

 

2 hours ago, spauldo17 said:

Lastly, knowing GRRM's writing style I don't think the fact that she has been around for 5 books means much of anything.  If he slightly burns his morning toast he may kill Sansa on a whim.   I wil just say: Remember Robb.  No GoT fan in their right mind would have said that Robb's arc was done when he died, yet GRRM killed him off. Same thing can happen with almost any other character

I respectfully disagree with this assessment of his writing style.  I have never felt like he's ever killed anyone off on a whim or kept someone alive just to fill pages.  Actually, even though Robb is dead, I wouldn't even say his story is actually done because we still feel his influence in the plot currently and probably in the future.  (Robb's Will?).  His death was vitally important to advancing the plot and even then it was not actually a surprise since we see Martin was setting it up for a long time. He is a very careful meticulous writer that does a shit ton of set up and it will mean something even if we can't see it now.  If Sansa dies, even if it were in a shocking way, we will still be able to look back and say "oh yeah, he was setting that up the whole time."  Nothing is ever pulled out of his ass.                

[spauldo17]

16 minutes ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

 

I'm going to argue that one shouldn't necessarily take Cersei's or Littlefinger's definitions of power and exercising power as the only possible ways that power can be applied. Of course Cersei "You win or you die" Lannister is going to maintain that her particular skill set (malice and paranoia) are what's needed to wield power. I mean, she would say that, wouldn't she? Same with Littlefinger; naturally he's going to define power and "The Game" as being whatever benefits him and utilizes his specific talents.

The problem isn't that power-players define power by whatever their own skill sets are; that's inevitable. The problem develops when the skill sets employed are divisive, antagonistic and chaotic.

In my view, the intertwining of Cersei's, Littlefinger's and Sansa's stories is Martin's most overt meditation on power, the nature and exercise thereof. That's why Sansa exists.

 

Perhaps that may be Martin's point with Sansa: to show that wielding and maintaining power in a society doesn't require the type of thinking illustrated by Cersei and Littlefinger (who are both clearly insane). By contrast, Sansa (who thought, "When I am queen, I'll make them love me") could be, in the future, an exemplar of a different style of power-exercising: more beneficent, less antagonistic.

Perhaps. It's hard to say just yet, as I don't think her story is anywhere near done.

 

Although, if Sansa is learning how to wield political power she is learning at the school of LittleFinger. She also watched Cersei flawlessly manipulate people and may have learned from that.  So it's likely that she will emulate those behaviors.  The way I have come to see it (or have been convinced to see it during this thread) is that she will be become exactly like LF and Cersei but she will use it to the benefit of House Stark, she will essentially out-LF Petyr, and she will out-cersei cersei.

[spauldo17]

5 minutes ago, Blue-Eyed Wolf said:

This.  From the whole Lord's Declarant meeting which was 100% a demonstration in political maneuvering for her.  She picked up on Lyn Corbray working for Petyr.

  Reveal hidden contents

Then later instinctively goaded Corbray into revealing he's actually Petyr's enemy.  That and the grain price fixing could come up as valuable information later.  

 

 

Well, she has been acting in more the lady of the castle role.  She's put in charge of preparations for the Lord's Declarant meeting (which was a big lesson in political maneuvering, which she correctly guessed a big secret about Lyn Corbray) , she's the one the servants come to to handle SR, and the events coming up in TWOW are her idea.  I don't think we can accurately judge yet how well she can implement Petyr's lessons in court intrigues, because she hasn't been in a court yet since learning those things.  In TWOW she's going to be interacting with other political players in a court-like setting.  She's been in isolated imprisonment from KL to the Eyrie.  It's purposefully written to have long stretches of boredom and frustration punctuated by moments of fear, because that's what imprisonment is and what it feels like for Sansa.  She has the symptoms of depression and anxiety that comes with it.  She has so many moments where she has the right idea about something, but backtracks in self-doubt.  That's not really weakness, but very common with intimate partner violence and mental abuse.  Yet, she has strong unwavering convictions about what she wants for herself.  She has to do uncomfortable things to survive, but balances it with re-affirming her identity, if only privately.  It's only until she descends to the Gates of the Moon that she starts feeling really alive again.  Her Stark thoughts, memories, and identity are alive and well on the inside.  I'm not trying to convince you to like Sansa, I'm just saying what I love and what I find so inspiring.  She is just a regular person playing the hand she is dealt.  So much of her story reminds me of the Shawshank Redemption, where the characters find small ways to resist and find happiness while appearing to comply with the rules.  She finds nuggets of good things in a bad situation.  Even after her nightmare of a surprise forced marriage, she can't help herself but dance at the reception to make herself feel better and affirm her identity.  

 

             

I disagree that her become a "lady of the castle" and planning events is her learning how to wield political power.  Being "lady of the castle" essentially equates to the modern day House-wife, planning events and functions and ensuring the castle runs properly.  Until she makes an actual political, manipulative move I can't see her as anything but the victim who loves being the victim

 

7 minutes ago, Blue-Eyed Wolf said:

 

 

I respectfully disagree with this assessment of his writing style.  I have never felt like he's ever killed anyone off on a whim or kept someone alive just to fill pages.  Actually, even though Robb is dead, I wouldn't even say his story is actually done because we still feel his influence in the plot currently and probably in the future.  (Robb's Will?).  His death was vitally important to advancing the plot and even then it was not actually a surprise since we see Martin was setting it up for a long time. He is a very careful meticulous writer that does a shit ton of set up and it will mean something even if we can't see it now.  If Sansa dies, even if it were in a shocking way, we will still be able to look back and say "oh yeah, he was setting that up the whole time."  Nothing is ever pulled out of his ass.                

And yes of course you're right.  I suppose I was using hyperbole to prove a point and hyperbole has no place in an actual discussion, my bad. I agree he is very careful in his writing and doesn't kill on a whim.  Though I still don't think we can use the "she's been around this long" argument to say that she's safe. Many will probably die in the next book, and they will also have been around for a while

[Blue-Eyed Wolf]

8 minutes ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

I'm going to argue that one shouldn't necessarily take Cersei's or Littlefinger's definitions of power and exercising power as the only possible ways that power can be applied. Of course Cersei "You win or you die" Lannister is going to maintain that her particular skill set (malice and paranoia) are what's needed to wield power. I mean, she would say that, wouldn't she? Same with Littlefinger; naturally he's going to define power and "The Game" as being whatever benefits him and utilizes his specific talents

I like this a lot.  What does this say about fans who may say they hate the villains, but sometimes subconsciously approve of ruthlessness or manipulation as being "badass?"  Even Sansa commented on Petyr's boldness and fearlessness.  This is a violent, ruthless world and it does seem like the cruel and manipulative win most of the time, but that's only in the short term.  Despite all Robert's faults, he did have a way of turning his enemies into friends, which helped him win the war.  Emotional intelligence and winning people to your side with likability does have political power that yields results and maybe even more lasting value than the other two philosophies.     

[The Ned's Little Girl]

1 minute ago, spauldo17 said:

Although, if Sansa is learning how to wield political power she is learning at the school of LittleFinger. She also watched Cersei flawlessly manipulate people and may have learned from that.  So it's likely that she will emulate those behaviors.  The way I have come to see it (or have been convinced to see it during this thread) is that she will be become exactly like LF and Cersei but she will use it to the benefit of House Stark.

Well, I have to respectfully disagree. I think Sansa looks on Cersei as someone to NOT emulate. That's the meaning I take from Sansa's "I'll make them love me" quote.

She really doesn't trust Littlefinger either. She's learning how he operates, but that's not a guarantee that she will decide to operate the same way. She might - it's too early to tell. But the signs I see say differently. Blue-Eyed Wolf covered this admirably just above.

That's why I think Littlefinger offering Sansa the marriage to Harry The Heir is actually a huge blunder for him. He has no realization that Sansa isn't the same girl that she was back in Kings Landing when she was so in love with Joffrey. He thinks he's manipulating her by giving her what she wants - that's how he operates - but he's dead wrong.

[The Ned's Little Girl]

9 minutes ago, spauldo17 said:

I disagree that her become a "lady of the castle" and planning events is her learning how to wield political power.  Being "lady of the castle" essentially equates to the modern day House-wife, planning events and functions and ensuring the castle runs properly.

Again, with respect I disagree.

Remember Tyrion's thoughts about Sansa's performance at Joffrey's wedding, how skilled she was a putting people at their ease, interacting, smoothing over differences? I mean, she had Kevan Lannister, of all people, beaming at her!

Tyrion thinks about what an asset as Queen she would have been. "Planning events and functions" is a truly essential part of public life. Those events and functions are where the effective power of the court is displayed and celebrated. Keeping people well-disposed and comfortable with the court is integral to the maintenance and viability of the court in the first place.

Setting people at ease is the necessary first step in diplomacy, for instance. There's not a lot of negotiating going to be done if the negotiators feel like they're not welcomed guests at the table.

That's what the Queen does and the Lady of the Castle does the same on a smaller scale. But it's that kind of thing that is really only noticed in its absence. And running a castle, like running a household, takes much more skill than is generally acknowledged. I speak from experience (not about a castle, though).

 

[Blue-Eyed Wolf]

14 minutes ago, spauldo17 said:

I disagree that her become a "lady of the castle" and planning events is her learning how to wield political power.  Being "lady of the castle" essentially equates to the modern day House-wife, planning events and functions and ensuring the castle runs properly.  Until she makes an actual political, manipulative move I can't see her as anything but the victim who loves being the victim

I think we've seen at these kinds social events, there's a good deal of political statements being made.  Joffrey's wedding was extravagant to send a message that the Lannisters have won the war and established their supremacy.  Much thought is placed into the food being served, the placement of seating, the setting, the clothing.  You got all that in the Lords Declarant meeting.  It's purposefully not in the throne room so Petyr doesn't send a message that he's trying to usurp power.  The food is simple, but tasteful to show humility and respect in the face of the lords and lady of the Vale.  Even Alayne's dress has to be appropriate, no Arryn or Tully colors.  This is also true in real life.  Think of White House state dinners or the the non-verbal communication of dress in Princess Diana or Queen Elizabeth.  A noble lady of a house is not just a housewife, she's in charge of making politcal statements in the social sphere to advance her family's interests. Interestingly though and warrants it's own conversation I think, Catelyn has very practical knowledge of politics from being close to her father and is an astute observer of people. Yet she doesn't seem to pass this knowledge on to her daughters.  The septa's education is more about making Sansa into a perfect obedient wife and mother, rather than a political partner and counselor to her husband.  I can't help but think that Cat's practical knowledge might have helped Sansa earlier.       

[PCK]

Sansa's arc is about one thing, realizing that life isn't a fairy tale. There is no handsome and just prince or big and magical castle awaiting her.

[Chebyshov]

1 hour ago, spauldo17 said:

 Until she makes an actual political, manipulative move I can't see her as anything but the victim who loves being the victim.

Honestly, this is the best distillation of the Sansa Discourse I've seen yet.

Burning her mattress was all about loving her lack of agency, totally . Charming victim-blaming, though.

Also how the hell do you define "manipulative" and "political"? Remember when she charmed Renly and Barry on the Kingsroad, or convinced Joff into not murdering people? And that was just in the first book because the girl has always had a finely sharpened intuition and an ability to use her empathy and understanding to move people.

[Morgana Lannister]

5 hours ago, Greywater-Watch said:

I disagree. She learns well her role as Alayne, being careful not to blow her camouflage. Something she would not have been able to do before LF's turtoring (when she always blurted out what came to her mind). She finds out about Lyn Corbray's relation to LF, which requires some intelligence. She learns to control herself and follows LF's plans to seduce Harry the Heir very cleverly. The Sansa from KL-time would never have been able to do this (after the first bad encounter with Harry the Heir). She attentively follows conversations (like the one with LF planning to buy as much food as possible for the Vale speculating for higher prices in the coming winter). Such conversations she would not have followed before.

I totally agree with this; most of her development is in fact seen in the new chapter from TWOW though but yes, figuring out Lyn's possible double-spying as it were; also she keeps appearing in the company of Myranda Royce who, although a minor character, LF's is nervous about (warned Sansa against her) who is portrayed for now as a possible manipulator.  She is also learning with her but more details will follow.  The fact that she knows LF is hoarding food is going to come into play in the next book.  As it is her engagement to Harry and the fact that Sweet Robin likes her...   One of the two is going to be on LF's list soon and my wager is that she "will act" (although not alone) to prevent this, even if not too enamored (not just romantically but as people go) with either.  She knows he killed Lysa and Jon Arryn, beside Dontos etc.  Once she has stronger allies she is going to break that chain with LF.  Could be Jon, could be Brienne/Pod/Jaime team even, could even turn out that the Mad Mouse is an ally not a foe... (pure speculation of course but this post is all about speculation), could even be Sandor (another one who is going to have a bigger role to play yet)...  Also in the new chapter she vaguely thinks about Tyrion and not negatively.  If the shit hits the fan and there is a chance she can communicate with him later on (still huge speculation though) - and I am sure he is going to stop playing the sellsword and do something more important soon in terms of his own political alliances - there could be a powerful alliance there.  My bet also is that she will end up revealing her true identity to Myranda, who probably knows or suspects anyway and that Myranda will facilitate Sansa's "secret for a time" communication with whoever turns out to be her main next ally, all whilst LF is in KL or something.  The released chapter from TWOW is the main step towards showing progress and learning on her part.  The video that Risto posted indeed seems to back it and that was George himself.  Love her or load her, I also believe (but haven't got the source at hand right now) that the author has now added her to the 5 main characters.  It is true that he intended for her to just marry a Baratheon/Lannister blah and have kids with Joffrey and then she would have been expendable but he completely changed the story line, just like he was going to make Tyrion fall in love with Arya and Jon also...  Now, originally she was meant to marry Joffrey and be a mother to hey a Stark/Lannister dynasty.  I could be day dreaming here but I think this is still going to happen but with a more proficient player than Joff.

Ned's death was totally crucial to the plot as was LF's manipulation to get the war started.  Robb to me was just giving us a bit of a twist and turn - for a war to be interesting both sides have to have a chance.  Tywin's army was richer, assumedly had more numbers but Robb got favour from northern banners and was good at warfare - to twist the story again he had his moments of glory and then Lannisters were on top again but now kind of fading under Cersei's rule through Tommen.  To keep us on our toes both sides have to be seen at times like the winning ones... if this makes any sense.

I totally agree with those that talk, but don't necessarily compare, that she is currently in training just like Arya and Bran.  Rickon will die  for plot reason "me thinks." he hasn't been fleshed out very much and is much in the way of more prominent characters getting the north.

Overall, but I am sure I am forgetting many points here, I believe she is definitely making it till the very end.  I have a bit of a theory on her dying at that point but uncertain about it.  Could even be that she is the big surprise and ends up on the throne or mothering a dynasty brought out of compromise whether single/married or widowed but inclined for married or widowed or else we go back to the battle for the throne again, unless of course, which I also suspect Danny does conceive a living child and Mirri was just scaremonging.   Failing that maybe the lady of a great house, be it Stark or Lannister.  It is even possible that the throne will no longer exist and the houses will rule their own kingdoms but she could be certainly the key to political peace through marriage.  So could Arya, to be honest, but I think Arya is going to be the start of the Stark/true Baratheon house.. 

A hell of a lot of speculation on my part, but as I said this thread is all about "predictions" not "certainties."  Now as for major characters deaths and their impacts, yes Jaime also has an incredible arc and I firmly believe, although don't wish, will die but his role will be done by the time is all done and dusted, Sansa I doubt it... unless her offspring or something fulfills her plot mission and she is sacrificed by the author to affect another major character.  But as I keep saying, we shall see

 

 

[Tianzi]

The original outline, whether we treat it seriously or not and whether we consider Sansa a main character or not, doesn't even suggest she will die. It says that certain 5 people make it to the end and not that certain 5 people live and the rest of the world dies.

"Killing her for a shock value because she is useless but it is a Stark death"... Oh come on. First of all, she's been in a freezer for too long for it to work. The dead Starks actually died trying to accomplish something; to be the next on that list, Sansa needs to get in the game first, so she is unlikely to be killed while she is still "useless". Besides, her wolfie has been dead for four books and she is still here, which at least indicates that her fate isn't so closely interwined with her direwolf's. Heck, some of Sansa's haters the readers like to interpret this and some other signs as Sansa not being "really a Stark"... so one less sign pointing at her as another Stark corpse to make things shocking.

I don't believe Littlefinger can let her go, I think he considers her an unreplaceable element of his dream picture in the end. Cersei is a threat mainly to herself and possibly to KL's architecture... Daenerys, IF she finally makes it to Westeros, has bigger fish to fry... Honestly, while a person can be directly killed by the most unlikely character (who bet on Robb being murdered by Roose Bolton?), there is usually a bigger conflict that makes the cause. Short term, I can only think about Sansa being offed by some Vale's drama (possibly involving Harry, Lyn Corbray, Myranda...), even by accident. It could serve as a nice perspective flip and make her character a pawn in LF's arc, using her death to make his sanity go bye-bye.

But my money is on old age, or maybe The Final Conflict Of Yet Undecided Shape at the very end.

[Morgana Lannister]

27 minutes ago, Tianzi said:

The original outline, whether we treat it seriously or not and whether we consider Sansa a main character or not, doesn't even suggest she will die. It says that certain 5 people make it to the end and not that certain 5 people live and the rest of the world dies.

"Killing her for a shock value because she is useless but it is a Stark death"... Oh come on. First of all, she's been in a freezer for too long for it to work. The dead Starks actually died trying to accomplish something; to be the next on that list, Sansa needs to get in the game first, so she is unlikely to be killed while she is still "useless". Besides, her wolfie has been dead for four books and she is still here, which at least indicates that her fate isn't so closely interwined with her direwolf's. Heck, some of Sansa's haters the readers like to interpret this and some other signs as Sansa not being "really a Stark"... so one less sign pointing at her as another Stark corpse to make things shocking.

I don't believe Littlefinger can let her go, I think he considers her an unreplaceable element of his dream picture in the end. Cersei is a threat mainly to herself and possibly to KL's architecture... Daenerys, IF she finally makes it to Westeros, has bigger fish to fry... Honestly, while a person can be directly killed by the most unlikely character (who bet on Robb being murdered by Roose Bolton?), there is usually a bigger conflict that makes the cause. Short term, I can only think about Sansa being offed by some Vale's drama (possibly involving Harry, Lyn Corbray, Myranda...), even by accident. It could serve as a nice perspective flip and make her character a pawn in LF's arc, using her death to make his sanity go bye-bye.

But my money is on old age, or maybe The Final Conflict Of Yet Undecided Shape at the very end.

As to the original outline, my believe is that the characters were named as Tyrion, Jon, Dany, Bran and Arya - not sure if he meant they would live or that they would be "end game" then added Sansa.  Of course they are not going to be the only survivors lol

A major character death,  a POV character death, even, has to serve a purpose.  To aid other plots, sure, like Ned and I suspect even Jaime but still...  Unless Sansa indeed dies taking down LF she is making it till the end of the last book at least, IMHO.

Oh, LF won't let her go but I think she will find out something where she cannot longer remain mainly passive and observant.  She will get some cavalry (figuratively or even not so figuratively speaking) and will bring him down.  If that happened her death could serve a purpose, right now it would not.  Also most characters who have died so far hadn't had a huge, long and at times tedious to read even learning experience painstakingly describe as she has.  Brienne and Jaime might be an exception to this but Ned, say, was honourable at the beginning as at the end, not huge progress for good or evil there... same goes for Joffrey, Tywin, but not Jon... he has to face difficult decisions indeed that change him, like swapping Gilly's kid, on a moral level, for instance.  

Like you, with her I am going for something really important to the ending, or a huge trauma for another huge character or yeah... old age

[Tianzi]

2 minutes ago, Morgana Lannister said:

Oh, LF won't let her go but I think she will find out something where she cannot longer remain mainly passive and observant.

I didn't express myself clearly here

Someone suggested that LF himself may off her since he ha already told her too much and she might become dangerous to him. I don't believe it. She is a too integral part of his final dream; whatever he wants, earning it without Cat 2.0 by his side would simply not have the same flavour to him. I believe that when it comes to Sansa, "unhinged" and "obsessed" overrules "pragmatic" in his character.

[Morgana Lannister]

15 minutes ago, Tianzi said:

I didn't express myself clearly here

Someone suggested that LF himself may off her since he ha already told her too much and she might become dangerous to him. I don't believe it. She is a too integral part of his final dream; whatever he wants, earning it without Cat 2.0 by his side would simply not have the same flavour to him. I believe that when it comes to Sansa, "unhinged" and "obsessed" overrules "pragmatic" in his character.

I agree.  Sorry, maybe it was me who wasn't clear.  If her death prevented him from getting decapitated maybe but even then lol I think he will try and kill a third party and even if Sansa is not a huge fan of third party in question, she will alert someone else and intervene but could be wrong...

Funnily enough I think this "unhinged obsession" well with Cat at least, with Sansa is just more creepy lol is what makes him a little grey and a little human - that sort of ambition and lack of scruples without it would have put him more into a Joffrey/Ramsay category, what makes him interesting... aside of course from his huge skills as a player that I just kind of admire (or love to hate).  I kind of suspect that George is playing us all psychologically with him; most of us want to see his downfall but might miss him as a character and it is possible to have just a tiny sympathy for him... and I think his death will make us feel just like that; kind of 90% happy 10% sad...

OMG, I have just had an after thought that has kind of shocked myself; why is he sacrifices himself for her???  I do believe his obsession runs that deep too - wow - that would certainly have a wow factor!