Sansa and the Savage Giant

[Springwatch]

7 hours ago, Elaena Targaryen said:

I don't think anyone believes 'Sansa was that deciding factor in the fall of the Starks'. She did however give Cersei useful details - "it was a close thing"

Cersei believes Sansa's information had more value than what you suggest.

Quote

 "So this Lord Slynt, he was part of it, was he? Tell me, whose fine notion was it to grant him Harrenhal and name him to the council?"

"Littlefinger made the arrangements. We needed Slynt's gold cloaks. Eddard Stark was plotting with Renly and he'd written to Lord Stannis, offering him the throne. We might have lost all. Even so, it was a close thing. If Sansa hadn't come to me and told me all her father's plans . . ."

Tyrion was surprised. "Truly? His own daughter?"

So suddenly we all have faith in the testimony of Cersei the liar? Count me out. Even Tyrion was surprised (a cue to the reader, perhaps?).

Quote

... No one had given Cersei such a lovely gift since Sansa Stark had run to her to divulge Lord Eddard’s plans. ... [Cersei]

I have read pages and pages of thoughtful prose arguing that Sansa can't distinguish between truth and lies. If this is possible for Sansa, it must also be considered for Cersei, who, let's face it, is getting crazier and crazier with every chapter.

And we should consider it - because whatever goes on inside Cersei's head, it does not change the facts as stated in my earlier post:

Sansa could not make it easier for Cersei to secure the escape routes, because it was already so easy.

Quote

SSM ...

Here we may part company. SSM's are not canon, as I see it. If it's not in the books it's not there. If the author wants a guilty Sansa, he must write it. So far, he has not written it.

Quote

 

I do think that people would be more understanding of this situation if Sansa were more explicit or blunt with herself when she shows guilt but that is just not her style. Sansa does not wear her heart on her sleeve even in her private thoughts, that's Arya, but she still feels remorse and she has paid for it.

Yes. Sansa seems to avoid thinking about the past. She doesn't know the significance of her actions in KL, so her 'guilt' is unresolved and could be used against her. She needs to come to terms with her past, acknowledge her mistakes and bad behaviour, and learn from them. She needs to show justice to herself.

Quote

I do still wish she would have listened to her father -  "I want you back in Winterfell for your own safety. Three of my men were cut down like dogs not a league from where we sit"

Not good enough, Ned! He had given the royal family the highest mark of his trust and approval - he betrothed Sansa to Joffrey. Sansa was only following her father's lead in trusting the Lannisters. Ned needed to be much more explicit if he wanted her to understand that her beloved father had been 100% wrong.

(I'm not really a Sansa apologist - which is a terrible label anyway - it's just that Sansa's bad points are expertly dealt with by many posters, and keeping up the balance is a job that constantly needs doing. )

[Ygrain]

GoT Sansa was a sheltered, pampered girl with an ego overblown by her beauty, her lady skills and her betrothal to the crown prince. That made her more than just a tad naïve, entitled, and selfish. And she was twelve, FFS. She should have known better and obeyed her father, sure. But no experience of her life could have prepared her for the horrors people do to each other, or that Lord Paramount and his family themselves could ever be in physical danger. She learned the hard way. Her family did pay for her mistakes, as well, but at that time, she completely lacked the capacity to foresee the extent of consequences that might be in store for them. She never believed her father was really in danger, she thought she would make everything alright by simply pleading for mercy. She didn't try to comfort Jeyne becaue she couldn't imagine that Vayon Poole, who didn't even carry a sword, might be harmed.  

Silly and selfish for sure, but she shouldn't be blamed as if she acted in full knowledge what her action would, or even might, bring to other people.

[The Sleeper]

I believe the vision has been fulfilled. It fits perfectly with what happened only without proportion and context as with all the visions.

As for the counterargument that the event wasn't significant enough I beg to differ. Every single one of the ghost's visions reffered to the fall of a lord or a king and not always directly and all of them came to pass within Clash or Storm. The event described in the vision precipitated Lysa's fall and quite possibly the beginning of the end for Robert. Moreover it set the tone fos Sansa's entire arc, her longings, her relationship with Robert and LF's seduction.

One of the things that gets dismissed is that in that scene Sansa treated Robert not as the lord of the household she was part of, but as her younger cousin. Which is not at all congruent with Alayne's backstory. And not only is she not punished for it, she is taken in for a private audience with Lysa. All these were witnessed by the entire household.

This was a defining chapter for Sansa in every respect, who is one of the major six characters, so it very much merits a vision.

[Elaena Targaryen]

3 hours ago, Springwatch said:

So suddenly we all have faith in the testimony of Cersei the liar? Count me out. Even Tyrion was surprised (a cue to the reader, perhaps?).

I think we should believe Cersei here because she was very candid with Tyrion in this conversation. It was from when Tyrion first arrived in KL to be Hand in their fathers place. Cersei truly did want help at this point and she likely felt Tywin sending Tyrion was a form of chastisement and it unbalanced her. She even admits to having Lancel give Robert strongwine during the boar hunt in this conversation. 

Quote

 

I have read pages and pages of thoughtful prose arguing that Sansa can't distinguish between truth and lies. If this is possible for Sansa, it must also be considered for Cersei, who, let's face it, is getting crazier and crazier with every chapter.

And we should consider it - because whatever goes on inside Cersei's head, it does not change the facts as stated in my earlier post:

Sansa could not make it easier for Cersei to secure the escape routes, because it was already so easy.

 

Yes, what you said in your earlier post was a logical conclusion but I'm not sure it quite fits at that particular time.

When Sansa went to Cersei Robert was still alive, albeit dying. Cersei was not in full power, had very little time and was facing threats on several fronts, she was also unsure who she could trust. She also had Renly to worry about, someone told her Ned was plotting with Renly and sending letters to Stannis. Cersei could have never pulled this off without Littlefinger who would have easily sided with someone else, the same goes for Slynt who LF secured. In this time frame Cersei may not have even reached a point to consider securing the Stark girls until Sansa showed up since she was likely too panicked.

Quote

Here we may part company. SSM's are not canon, as I see it. If it's not in the books it's not there.

Feel free to dismiss the SSM lots of people do. Some only at their convenience, it's acceptable to support Sansa being a warg (that's not directed at you Springwatch)

But it is in the books and you dismissed it because it came from Cersei and who else could confirm it? We know Sansa went to Cersei instead of the king, poured her heart out and was sent to the holdfast under guard then in a few hours the fighting started. If the author puts it in the books several times and confirms it in correspondence I will accept it, but that's me.

Quote

If the author wants a guilty Sansa, he must write it. So far, he has not written it.

I do think Sansa has shown guilt, just in a different way. It's all the hatred she shows towards the Lannisters and how upset she is that she trusted them and they betrayed her trust. It's subtle compared to how others might feel or think but for Sansa it's extreme. She might have been vain, snobbish, selfish, or whatever but she was not hateful and cruel. Sansa knows she misplaced her trust and that's all the remorse we will get because she avoids being direct even with herself.

Quote

Yes. Sansa seems to avoid thinking about the past. She doesn't know the significance of her actions in KL, so her 'guilt' is unresolved and could be used against her. She needs to come to terms with her past, acknowledge her mistakes and bad behaviour, and learn from them. She needs to show justice to herself.

Yes, I think that is the problem and why she is such a divisive character. Even I want more from her concerning this but I don't think it will happen. I was encouraged that she even shows guilt a few times over Lysa. I suspect the balm may have to come from something more current like taking out Littlefinger, slaying the lies. 

Most people don't believe Sansa connected the dots on who killed Jon Arryn but she has. This is what she heard Lysa say -

   ..."No need for tears ... but that's not what you said in King's Landing. You told me to put the tears in   Jon's wine, and I did. For Robert, and for us! And I wrote Catelyn and told her the Lannisters had killed  my lord husband, just as you said. That was so clever ...

And this is what Sansa thinks later -

    ...She was mad and dangerous. She murdered her own lord husband...

Sansa is still allied with and trusting of LF at this point but when she finally becomes disenchanted with him it may just open a floodgate of thought and action.

Quote

Not good enough, Ned! He had given the royal family the highest mark of his trust and approval - he betrothed Sansa to Joffrey. Sansa was only following her father's lead in trusting the Lannisters. Ned needed to be much more explicit if he wanted her to understand that her beloved father had been 100% wrong.

Well I do think it was good enough but I'm more like Arya in how she wears her heart on her sleeve, Arya mostly understood what it meant that her father was attacked and trusted his judgement.

But I do have a child like Sansa and no it's not good enough but he misread her defiance as a childish whim not realizing just how serious she was. Constant, obedient children need things plainly stated as if they were adults and they will follow the path. It's ironic that the openness she needs from her father here is also considered one of her flaws. It all comes back to disillusionment and slaying the lies which is her arc that will have a payoff, I hope.

[Springwatch]

Quote

The way I see it, it is not a case of all or nothing. No single person is to blame for Ned's downfall. Sansa played a role, certainly, but it would be unfair to put all the blame on her. But it would also be unfair to exonerate her. She was not privy to all of Ned's plans regarding Stannis, the gold cloaks, etc... but she knew more than just that her father planned to spirit her and Arya away from King's Landing. She knew when they were to leave, on what ship, how many men would be in their escort, who would have the command, where Arya was that morning, etc... all of which was useful to Cersei in planning and timing her move.

I don't mind other people taking SSM's as canon - every reader makes their own choice. I don't, because it feels unfair to the typical reader by making it possible to misread the book due to lack of internet research. Unfair to the author himself, too - having to be spontaneously entertaining, accurate, intriguing and un-spoilery, all at once and on any and every topic in the book. No wonder he messes up sometimes.

[RANT]

Having now read the SSM, I thoroughly despise it.   So, we're to believe that Ned - who consistently had no time or interest in explaining things to Sansa - suddenly gives her a load of practical details she is not interested in and hasn't asked for. And how, oh george, how is this 'useful to Cersei in planning and timing her move'. How, exactly, did it change her plans?

• The escort: she might have waited until the escort left for the docks, depleting Ned's forces. She didn't, so the size of the escort and its commander are irrelevant.
• Arya's whereabouts: not a secret; could be found out by asking her, or following her. Doesn't change Cersei's plans.
• The ship and the departure time: irrelevant as it happened. Cersei struck immediately the king died, before Ned could claim the regency. If Robert had lived a few days longer, she would have had a problem.

On top of that, we have to believe Ned's travel plan hadn't already leaked. If you want to keep a secret, don't tell your pre-teen daughters, their tutor, the breakfast staff, your steward, your guards and Syrio Forrell. Unbelievable.

[/RANT]

Ironically, the one thing Cersei did do differently was to put guards in Stark uniforms on the Wind Witch. The one thing that tipped Arya off.

[Winter's Cold]

5 hours ago, Springwatch said:

On top of that, we have to believe Ned's travel plan hadn't already leaked. If you want to keep a secret, don't tell your pre-teen daughters, their tutor, the breakfast staff, your steward, your guards and Syrio Forrell. Unbelievable.

Or perhaps just don't tell Sansa as she is the one who ran to Cersei and told her everything.

[HallowedMarcus]

On 18/07/2017 at 4:01 PM, Ygrain said:

And did Sansa somehow plan on this happening to her sister?

 

On 18/07/2017 at 5:00 PM, Lollygag said:

So Arya could be at Winterfell when Theon, the Ironborn, and Reek attacked and betrayed Robb? The Ironborn who are notorious rapists and murderers, Reek, plus two little girls? Yeah, too bad Arya was spared from that bright, possible "future".

   No, Sansa did not plan but made it happen when he let Cersei Lannister know about the ship.

 

   King's Landing is on the East side of Westeros. The ship would go up and probably pass through some towns where they might have discovered 'news' about the Ironborn. The ship would probably stop at Gulltown and or Old Anchor. She could have stopped/gone to the Vale or way up to White Harbor by the Manderly.

[HallowedMarcus]

On 18/07/2017 at 5:14 PM, Springwatch said:

Cersei has all the spies, watchers and guards she could possibly need to prevent the Starks leaving by land or sea.

   Arya Stark approached the ship and they thought she was a boy. Araya noted the people there were different ones and therefore a trap. If Cersei did not know exactly what ship she would have gone in as a 'boy' and there inside revealed who she was to the captain or someone else. She walked days in King's Landing and no one noticed who she was but Yoren from the Night Watch. Cersei had spies all over King's Landing but they never noted her presence.

   To hell with Sansa.

[Lollygag]

1 hour ago, HallowedMarcus said:

   King's Landing is on the East side of Westeros. The ship would go up and probably pass through some towns where they might have discovered 'news' about the Ironborn. The ship would probably stop at Gulltown and or Old Anchor. She could have stopped/gone to the Vale or way up to White Harbor by the Manderly.

Theon didn't attack Winterfell until ACOK, Theon III Chapter 37 and it was a spur of the moment decision against orders.

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

4 hours ago, HallowedMarcus said:

   Arya Stark approached the ship and they thought she was a boy. Araya noted the people there were different ones and therefore a trap. If Cersei did not know exactly what ship she would have gone in as a 'boy' and there inside revealed who she was to the captain or someone else. She walked days in King's Landing and no one noticed who she was but Yoren from the Night Watch. Cersei had spies all over King's Landing but they never noted her presence.

   To hell with Sansa.

You've got some seriously weird Sansa hate going on here. I mean to the point where you've fantasised a completely improbable and impossible scenario where by Arya somehow hears Theon will betray the Starks a whole book before he does and hops off the ship and is safe in the Vale or White Harbour. LMAO Er nope. 

I've been around these forums for several years now, and I'm used to coming across Sansa hate but yours Ser goes beyond the usual and into realms of irrational and deluded.  Just take a minute to examine what you are saying, you are placing the blame for Ser Gregor Clegane's actions in the Riverlands, The Bloody Mummers, Roose Bolton's betrayal, the inevitable effects of war on a country, and the inability of Arya to be reunited with her mother due to the Red Wedding on the shoulders of a 12-year-old girl who was oblivious to how her wanting to stay in KL would affect her family. And whose father had already given the Queen more than enough reason to do what she did.  Her information was only slightly helpful at best, I mean it didn't even enable Cersei to capture Arya. And despite your fanciful imaginings, it was a blessing that she never got that ship.  What Bolton would have done with her is no guess we read what he did to Jeyne! She prevented herself from having the opportunity to attempt escape. That is all. 

And don't throw that Cersei quote at me; she is talking to Tyrion who as far as she is aware does not know what Eddard Stark had discovered or told her he was going to do in the Gods Wood. And she needs an explanation as to how she was able to pre-empt his moves so successfully. Without revealing that she's been shagging their brother and the kids are all his. Sansa is in this instance a wonderfully convenient patsy. 

Should Sansa have kept quiet about Ned's intent to return her and her sister to WF, yes of course! Does her revealing the plan to Cersei warrant the level of blame for the over arcing events of the book series? Don't be so fucking absurd.  

* In fact, something has just occurred to me.  had Sansa not gone to Cersei and revealed the plan to ship herself, Arya and likely Jeyne back to WF the probable outcome for the three girls is far far worse. What would Ramsey Bolton do if he had two Stark maids and a lower level noble maid to play with? Likely outcome is Jeyne and Arya would be hunted down like dogs, tortured, raped, and mutilated for his entertainment and Sansa would be in his bed rocking and crying after being made to do "that" with the dogs. Nice.....Gosh! if only she had never gone to Cersei hey. 

 

[Ashes Of Westeros]

I have been on this forum for a while and noticed that any topic about Sansa ends up in a arguement if she's to blame for Starks' misfortunes.

Back to the original post. I'm still positive the Savage Giant is LF and not only because of his sigil.

Quote

"A shadow on the wall," Varys murmured, "yet shadows can kill. And ofttimes a very small man can cast a very large shadow."

LF is often described as a small man, but he def casts a very large shadow, he orchestrated things all over the country. 

[Springwatch]

7 hours ago, HallowedMarcus said:

   Arya Stark approached the ship and they thought she was a boy. Araya noted the people there were different ones and therefore a trap. If Cersei did not know exactly what ship she would have gone in as a 'boy' and there inside revealed who she was to the captain or someone else. She walked days in King's Landing and no one noticed who she was but Yoren from the Night Watch. Cersei had spies all over King's Landing but they never noted her presence.

   To hell with Sansa.

I don't think so. There are thousands of children in King's Landing, and too many hiding places to search. The docks are a much better option - offer rewards to the sailors, threaten them against helping a traitor, mobilise customs officers, guards, plain-clothes watchers - basically just scoop up all the children entering a ship and sort them out later.

24 minutes ago, Ashes Of Westeros said:

I have been on this forum for a while and noticed that any topic about Sansa ends up in a arguement if she's to blame for Starks' misfortunes.

Back to the original post. I'm still positive the Savage Giant is LF and not only because of his sigil.

LF is often described as a small man, but he def casts a very large shadow, he orchestrated things all over the country. 

Oh, the OP - I forgot.

Multiple giants is the way to go, along with multiple maidens and multiple castles. But definitely LF.

[Lost Melnibonean]

34 minutes ago, Ashes Of Westeros said:

I have been on this forum for a while and noticed that any topic about Sansa ends up in a arguement if she's to blame for Starks' misfortunes.

Back to the original post. I'm still positive the Savage Giant is LF and not only because of his sigil.

LF is often described as a small man, but he def casts a very large shadow, he orchestrated things all over the country. 

Stannis threads used to be as bad until the character was killed off in the show. 

[The Sleeper]

1 hour ago, Ashes Of Westeros said:

I have been on this forum for a while and noticed that any topic about Sansa ends up in a arguement if she's to blame for Starks' misfortunes.

Back to the original post. I'm still positive the Savage Giant is LF and not only because of his sigil.

LF is often described as a small man, but he def casts a very large shadow, he orchestrated things all over the country. 

The allusion is used for Tyrion, twice of the top of my head. Once remarked by Jon in that first meal in Winterfell and once from Varys when he was buttering Tyrion up. Never has it been used in conjunction to LF.

The imagery of a savage giant is all wrong for LF. The image is primal brute force and strength. Everything that LF is not. This the guy whose power is based on subtlety and influencing others, acting through catspaws and keeping his hands clean. Immorality and depravity do not equal savagery. They are very different things.

Also the image of the Titan is also very different than that of the giant. The titan invokes unassailable superiority and in the case of the series one specific thing Braavos, as there is no corresponding mythological creature. The Braavosi are many things but savage is not one of them. If anything they are cultured, calculating and efficient.

The main reason Martin has LF's family sigil being the Titan is to remind the reader that he has connections in Braavos, which will obviously come into play. Not because his great-grandfather was a nobody from there who emigrated to Westeros, but because he spent a lot of his early career as a factor in Gulltown. Braavos is the closest port, of course he has connections. The image, however is much more memorable than a minor detail about his background.

None of this has anything to do with the vision.

 

[Ashes Of Westeros]

6 minutes ago, The Sleeper said:

The allusion is used for Tyrion, twice of the top of my head. Once remarked by Jon in that first meal in Winterfell and once from Varys when he was buttering Tyrion up. Never has it been used in conjunction to LF.

I agree. And the giant of Lannister (c) Shae. But savage? For what reason Tyrion could be described as savage?The LF's actions that lead the country into a civil war and destroyed lives of thousands could be described as savagery. But Tyrion... 

As for Sansa and Tyrion. There is a chance their ways cross again, but I don't see a reason why she would kill him.

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

Yes, the savage giant is LF. I won't make my arguments again, they are very clearly laid out with all the in text evidence in this thread. For anyone who cares to go back and read them.  I know a lot of people like to sit around wanking over how clever LF is and think he could never possibly be brought down by a silly little girl but I'm afraid to say you will be sorely disappointed when Sansa has his head removed from his body. Or perhaps, and I do rather hope so; does it herself.  

[Ygrain]

1 hour ago, The Sleeper said:

The image is primal brute force and strength

I'm afraid not. "Savage" can be used in the meaning of:

vicious, merciless, unforgiving, without restraint or pity, cruel,

depending on which dictionary you check. Add to it "giant" with a bit of symbolism, and what you get is exactly LF - a man with huge power and absolutely no regard for those who suffer due to his actions. 

I'm so looking forward to his head on the pike above the gate of Winterfell!

 

 

[The Sleeper]

2 hours ago, Ashes Of Westeros said:

I agree. And the giant of Lannister (c) Shae. But savage? For what reason Tyrion could be described as savage?The LF's actions that lead the country into a civil war and destroyed lives of thousands could be described as savagery. But Tyrion... 

As for Sansa and Tyrion. There is a chance their ways cross again, but I don't see a reason why she would kill him.

Apart from the fact that he stragles women with his bare hands? I am not talking about the vision at all; I believe this has been fulfilled. LF has never been alluded to as a giant, much less a savage one. Except in the opinion of those ascribe the vision to be the prophecy of his downfall.

 

2 hours ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

Yes, the savage giant is LF. I won't make my arguments again, they are very clearly laid out with all the in text evidence in this thread. For anyone who cares to go back and read them.  I know a lot of people like to sit around wanking over how clever LF is and think he could never possibly be brought down by a silly little girl but I'm afraid to say you will be sorely disappointed when Sansa has his head removed from his body. Or perhaps, and I do rather hope so; does it herself.  

Hold your horses. I would very much like to see LF die horribly, and if it comes at the hands of Sansa so much for the better. I just happen to disagree that the vision points to this and like you I have said my piece.

 

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

I'm afraid not. "Savage" can be used in the meaning of:

vicious, merciless, unforgiving, without restraint or pity, cruel,

depending on which dictionary you check. Add to it "giant" with a bit of symbolism, and what you get is exactly LF - a man with huge power and absolutely no regard for those who suffer due to his actions. 

I'm so looking forward to his head on the pike above the gate of Winterfell!

 

 

You can't strip a word of each other meanings of you want to use one of them, particularly in context. Certainly LF has these qualities, but you cannot use the words "savage giant" to describe a man whose primary concern is to keep his hands clean.

LF also has very little power. What he has is influence.

This is another discussion for which I have made my arguments at length in other threads. Suffice to say that I think that his accomplishments have been vastly exaggerated, not least of all by him. If I would ascribe an adjective to LF it would have been "petty" rather than "a giant".

[Ygrain]

12 minutes ago, The Sleeper said:

 LF has never been alluded to as a giant, much less a savage one. Except in the opinion of those ascribe the vision to be the prophecy of his downfall.

So what? He is described as a small man, and we have already seen the imagery of a small man - giant shadow etc. 

12 minutes ago, The Sleeper said:

You can't strip a word of each other meanings of you want to use one of them, particularly in context. Certainly LF has these qualities, but you cannot use the words "savage giant" to describe a man whose primary concern is to keep his hands clean.

I'm not stripping anything, I'm merely using a broader context, whereas you seem to be stuck with an image of some kind of berserk troll tearing people apart or what not.

Besides, the guy who dragged two houses into a major conflict can claim clean hands only if he lacks conscience like LF does.

12 minutes ago, The Sleeper said:

LF also has very little power. What he has is influence.

Well, I'd call it power over the lives of others, but as you wish. See above.

12 minutes ago, The Sleeper said:

This is another discussion for which I have made my arguments at length in other threads. Suffice to say that I think that his accomplishments have been vastly exaggerated, not least of all by him. If I would ascribe an adjective to LF it would have been "petty" rather than "a giant".

The guy impoverished the crown, directly contributed to the deaths of several important nobles, orchestrated a bloody conflict... if that doesn't count as gigantic influence over the lives of the people of Westeros, I don't know what else might.

[The Sleeper]

9 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

So what? He is described as a small man, and we have already seen the imagery of a small man - giant shadow etc. 

What do you mean so what? You use the refference to another character and you say that it can be applied to LF just because?

 

10 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

I'm not stripping anything, I'm merely using a broader context, whereas you seem to be stuck with an image of some kind of berserk troll tearing people apart or what not.

Words invoke images. You have gone entirely into metaphor of the fans' devising with no other single refference in the book. Nowhere is LF described as or refferd to in these or similar terms. Except allegedly in the vision. But that would make it a circular argument wouldn't it? 

 

18 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

 

Well, I'd call it power over the lives of others, but as you wish. See above.

 

LF has power over the lives of his employees, because he pays them. He has the ear of some powerful people. He has money. Power is what the lords have where they can raise armies and pass judgement. Jon Arryn could have dismissed him and seize his assets, just because he felt like it. That is the difference.

 

23 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

 

The guy impoverished the crown, directly contributed to the deaths of several important nobles, orchestrated a bloody conflict... if that doesn't count as gigantic influence over the lives of the people of Westeros, I don't know what else might.

And here is the grub of the matter. LF through some matches on dry tinder. He by no means orchestrated anything. It was beyond his power. The single event that cascaded into the war of the five kings was Bran's fall and subsequent assassination attempt. He had no control or knowledge of that. He had no involvement in the military aspect of it. He had no control over the outcome.

Far from a giant LF is an opportunistic piece of shit looking after his own ass.