Discussing Sansa XXXII: Game of Faces

[Infeth]

10 minutes ago, darmody said:

See, if you have an incompetent commander and go behind his back, even if you're right to do so in the sense that you end up winning the battle (though maybe you wouldn't have had to risk losing your entire army to do so), that's betrayal. 

I'd betray him thousands of time if it means I did not betray his interests, his men, his House and win the war.

[darmody]

26 minutes ago, Pandean said:

Question:

 

Considering how Jon did ignore her input before the BoB, what makes you think he would have listened if she did mention the Vale might be coming? Consider

--Sansa didn't know if the Vale would come or not

--If they holed out too long Ramsay would've went inside and made them starve them out which would've been disasterous

--Sansa wrote to the Vale but it never shows if they got a response or anything like that

--Jon was ignoring Sansa's advice 

--Sansa apparently felt ignored and hopeless enough to take things into her own hands

 

What if, due to the frustration of Jon ignoring Sansa's pleas and advice when it came to the battle, Sansa made the next logical route and took it into her own hands? It would make sense and is not a betrayal and more of taking action and agency. How is she supposed to do something if Jon and the others talk over her and won't take her seriously? Fuck, Jon and Davos listened to Lyanna Mormont more than her.

 

(On another note about Lyanna: I wish she would have more development other than "tough badass 10 year old". Too much and it just seems token-ish or whatever. And her comment about knitting by the fire......I'm pretty sure the people fighting the AoD will need warm clothing as well as fighters. Just saying).

Jon didn't ignore her, he disagreed with her. And her advice was vague and not very concrete, like "we need more men" or "don't do what Ramsey wants." If she had said, "I've been in communication with Littlefinger, who's in the North with our cousin's army," do you think Jon might have listened?

You're telling me why Sansa had to take things into her own hands, but you know taking things into your own hands in this manner would be tantamount to treason in real life. Which would be fine, if the show wants to take Sansa that way. But then they have to show the consequences.

The consequences would be Sansa living afterwards as the lady who betrayed her army for its own good. The sort of lady Arya would be justified suspecting. Instead, they have Arya suspicious because Sansa was mean to her when they were kids and likes pretty dresses. The show pretends like what Sansa did was not only no big deal, but from the perspective of the people she betrayed actually admirable. Which is ridiculous. 

[Pandean]

3 minutes ago, Infeth said:

I'm not good enough in english to argue about this, it requires a very specific vocabulary! x) But I'll try...

The arrows could obviously reach only one side of the melee, which killed a lot of men on the periphery, then the army itself does her job of killing. Of course there were spread corpses in the melee too, but Ramsay started a move which has been naturaly increased. We are talking about thousands of men, you should read some historical accounts about battles of the WW2, all those corpses accumulating were much more impressive than we could think.

And ofc the tactic itself wouldn't work in real life, this is TV, but the corpses presence in this battle was very realistic.

Actually, the tactic was used by Hannibal in the Battle of Cannae.

 

Basically, the Roman army heavily outnumbered Hannibal's and formed their infantry in a deeper formation than usual in an effort to break Hannibal's center early but instead the formation managed to make their forces take up the same amount of space as Hannibal's despite Hannibal's being outnumber by the Romans.

Hannibal gradually expanded his army's center line until it became straight with bits of the group gradually breaking off to form a cresent. The cavalry collided into each other and got into a close flank fight in which no quarter was given thus the dead piled up (among them horses) and the Roman forces were squeezed together to the point where they formed such a pit that a lot of them were trampled and suffocated.

Hannibal kept slowly closing it and thus trapped the Romans between their dead and Hannibal's own men. 

By that time it was just slaughter.

[Infeth]

4 minutes ago, darmody said:

do you think Jon might have listened?

His brain would have turn off at "with Littlefinger".

[darmody]

12 minutes ago, Infeth said:

I'd betray him thousands of time if it means I did not betray his interests, his men, his House and win the war.

You mean the men who died in battle? Or Jon, who very nearly died in battle?

Because if Jon's incompetence, partly. But also because of the delicate plan they had to come up with on account of being grossly outnumbered. 

[triton333]

If Sansa had not even thought of getting more men (and no one would have expected her to or be surprised that she hadn't ; no one else thought of it), then that would hardly be treason or betrayal. But apparently it's treason and betrayal that she did think of it, and actually did it, and saved the day and won a battle that would otherwise have been lost, just because she didn't tell Jon first????????

[darmody]

1 minute ago, Infeth said:

His brain would have turn off at "with Littlefinger".

Even so, Sansa doesn't get to deny him the chance to hear "Littlefinger." Not without betraying Jon by denying him vital intelligence. 

[Pandean]

4 minutes ago, darmody said:

Jon didn't ignore her, he disagreed with her. And her advice was vague and not very concrete, like "we need more men" or "don't do what Ramsey wants." If she had said, "I've been in communication with Littlefinger, who's in the North with our cousin's army," do you think Jon might have listened?

You're telling me why Sansa had to take things into her own hands, but you know taking things into your own hands in this manner would be tantamount to treason in real life. Which would be fine, if the show wants to take Sansa that way. But then they have to show the consequences.

The consequences would be Sansa living afterwards as the lady who betrayed her army for its own good. The sort of lady Arya would be justified suspecting. Instead, they have Arya suspicious because Sansa was mean to her when they were kids and likes pretty dresses. The show pretends like what Sansa did was not only no big deal, but from the perspective of the people she betrayed actually admirable. Which is ridiculous. 

He did ignore her, though. He completely wrote off Sansa's advice about how Ramsay worked, thinking he could trick him, wrote off the Bolton forces, and didn't listen to Sansa when she did give advice.

If what Sansa did was treason, it wasn't treated like it. Sansa's treason is the only reason why Jon is still alive.

If it's treason to save your King and your army when none of them will listen to you, then I would commit it a thousand times. It's better than them being dead. 

I don't think it's hard to consider that Jon didn't care for what Sansa said. He doesn't usually listen to her. Every time she's given her thoughts so far he's written her off.

There was no scenario shown where he would have believed in her. He already had decided they were going to attack despite what she said.

There are no easy answers there. Jon was right--they won the battle because of Sansa, not because of him. They almost lost it because of him.

And again, the act in the show was not treated like treason, thus in the showverse it is not considered treason. Similar to how Robb, Catelyn, and Maester Luwin did not consider Sansa's letter back in Season 1 treason.

I don't see what there is left to debate about, I guess. We have an answer from the show. It isn't ambigious. 

[Pandean]

Also, someone remind me how the BotB has anything to do with the discussion of the current episode

Because I feel like this thread went from discussing Sansa in the episode to arguing over all the old arguments about Sansa. Which is honestly tiresome to go over and over again with.

Here, new topic:

I think one of the reasons the Game of Faces scene shook Sansa so bad (though she did keep herself composed) was because she might have been reminded of Ramsay. Considering he skinned people for fun, liked to play "games" similarly to the way Arya was asking, and the unpredictable hostility of Arya and her actions (coming at Sansa with a unsheathed dagger talking about peeling Sansa's face off and then just giving it to her in a light mood) all definitely would remind her of Ramsay.

I wonder if that will be a wall in their relationship, now. The faces thing is a potent reminder of flaying.

[Infeth]

*Ygrid voice* I am Jon Snow, I have seen White Walkers, I have seen wildlings, I have seen worse than Ramsey Bolton!

[darmody]

1 minute ago, triton333 said:

If Sansa had not even thought of getting more men (and no one would have expected her to or be surprised that she hadn't ; no one else thought of it), then that would hardly be treason or betrayal. But apparently it's treason and betrayal that she did think of it, and actually did it, and saved the day and won a battle that would otherwise have been lost, just because she didn't tell Jon first????????

Sansa didn't come up with the idea of getting more men. They all knew they were short. And she didn't go seeking out the Vale. Littlefinger came to her, as you'll recall. She kept that in her pocket for personal reasons. 

Yes, it's treason "just" because she didn't tell Jon first. I'm not sure why people don't seem to know what a big, giant, gaping deal that is. Jon was in charge of the army. You know, the people who have to go out and kill and be killed. Sansa deliberately denied Jon vital intelligence. And I mean "vital" because they lost thousands of men on the battlefield. 

Which might have happened anyway, because Jon is an incompetent commander. But it happened at least in part because they were so outnumbered. Sansa doesn't have the prerogative to keep that from Jon. He was in a "need to know" position.

[Infeth]

3 minutes ago, Pandean said:

I think one of the reasons the Game of Faces scene shook Sansa so bad (though she did keep herself composed) was because she might have been reminded of Ramsay. Considering he skinned people for fun, liked to play "games" similarly to the way Arya was asking, and the unpredictable hostility of Arya and her actions (coming at Sansa with a unsheathed dagger talking about peeling Sansa's face off and then just giving it to her in a light mood) all definitely would remind her of Ramsay.

Oh I didn't think about it, this is a very good interpretation! 

[Raksha 2014]

38 minutes ago, Pandean said:

Question:

 

Considering how Jon did ignore her input before the BoB, what makes you think he would have listened if she did mention the Vale might be coming? Consider

--Sansa didn't know if the Vale would come or not

--If they holed out too long Ramsay would've went inside and made them starve them out which would've been disasterous

--Sansa wrote to the Vale but it never shows if they got a response or anything like that

--Jon was ignoring Sansa's advice 

--Sansa apparently felt ignored and hopeless enough to take things into her own hands

 

What if, due to the frustration of Jon ignoring Sansa's pleas and advice when it came to the battle, Sansa made the next logical route and took it into her own hands? It would make sense and is not a betrayal and more of taking action and agency. How is she supposed to do something if Jon and the others talk over her and won't take her seriously? Fuck, Jon and Davos listened to Lyanna Mormont more than her.

 

(On another note about Lyanna: I wish she would have more development other than "tough badass 10 year old". Too much and it just seems token-ish or whatever. And her comment about knitting by the fire......I'm pretty sure the people fighting the AoD will need warm clothing as well as fighters. Just saying).

 

Yes, I've said it before that Sansa is much more valuable as an experienced seamstress (she can sew cloaks) than as a possible warrior.  She could organize older ladies and lame/crippled males to start making gloves and other warm winter wear for the warriors; in this climate, if they don't have warm clothing, they'll be much more likely to get frostbite and pneumonia.  I don't expect little Lady Lyanna to understand that; she's a smart kid, but she's still a child and wouldn't necessarily see all the aspects of the big picture of war.  Lyanna judges others by her own experience and attitudes; which is natural; but any general or military leader must understand the importance of supplies - food and clothing - particularly in the cold climate of the North in Winter.

 

[Pandean]

4 minutes ago, Infeth said:

Oh I didn't think about it, this is a very good interpretation! 

It was pretty much the first thing I thought when Sansa found the faces. Other than "Wait Arya's faces are in a messenger bag under the bed? Okay." But yeah, it would make total sense that Arya is seen as even more of a threat in Sansa's head if she's equated in any way with Ramsay. And the volatile and hostile way Arya has been acting does remind me of Ramsay a bit, add in the faces, and no wonder poor Sansa looked terrified.

It's enough to deal with without being reminded of that psychopath.

In other news, I REALLY want to know Arya's reaction about Sansa feeding Ramsay to his hounds. I think she'd approve.

[darmody]

7 minutes ago, Pandean said:

He did ignore her, though. He completely wrote off Sansa's advice about how Ramsay worked, thinking he could trick him, wrote off the Bolton forces, and didn't listen to Sansa when she did give advice.

You're confusing the dramatic meaning of a scene for its real world significance. That's the way the show wants it, because they apparently can't write meaningful dialogue anymore. But the way their conversation went, Jon was being dismissive of Sansa's concerns, then he finally broke down and was like, "Fine, what do you want to tell me?"

Then Sansa responds like, "Um, I dunno. Don't do what Ramsey wants." That's her expert opinion, culled from her vast knowledge of Ramsey's personality, based upon observing him from the tower she was locked in all day. What is Jon supposed to do with that advice, exactly?

Ah, but then Jon does fall for Ramsey's trap, because he knows nothing. Then he attempts suicide. Sansa seems vindicated, but if you really think about it, she didn't give Jon any actual advice. She's only vindicated dramatically, because "I told you so." Jon wanted to do something to Ramsey, and the exact same thing ends up being done to him by Ramsey. Sansa predicted it. Not in any detail, but merely in a "he's smart, you're dumb, so don't be so dumb" way. Which has exactly zero to do with actual strategy. It's high school gossip-level stuff, just like her scenes with Arya this year. 

Every human being on earth knows better than not to attack an entire army by yourself. We don't need experts on Ramsey Bolton who aren't actually experts on Ramsey Bolton to tell us not to do that ahead of time. 

[Pandean]

2 minutes ago, Raksha 2014 said:

 

Yes, I've said it before that Sansa is much more valuable as an experienced seamstress (she can sew cloaks) than as a possible warrior.  She could organize older ladies and lame/crippled males to start making gloves and other warm winter wear for the warriors; in this climate, if they don't have warm clothing, they'll be much more likely to get frostbite and pneumonia.  I don't expect little Lady Lyanna to understand that; she's a smart kid, but she's still a child and wouldn't necessarily see all the aspects of the big picture of war.  Lyanna judges others by her own experience and attitudes; which is natural; but any general or military leader must understand the importance of supplies - food and clothing - particularly in the cold climate of the North in Winter.

 

Yeah, Lady Lyanna is still a child (isn't she 10 or 11) and while she's smart, she is still a kid and like all kids their personal opinions do tend to magnify into everything. (Like when you're a kid and you won't touch the purple jump rope because purple is such a girly color but x10000000. Seriously when I was a kid I was so against the colors pink and purple for being girly I refused anything in them. Ironically my favorite color is lavender or petaldust grey now.) So she does get a pass.

But sewing/cooking/building/etc. all does take precedent in Winter due to it being, y'know, Winter.

I actually love how Sansa's seamstress stuff is focused on. I think it's really unique. Also I sew as well (nothing as good omg I mainly mend things) so I'm always like "fuck yeah sewing!"

[darmody]

18 minutes ago, Pandean said:

There was no scenario shown where he would have believed in her. He already had decided they were going to attack despite what she said.

That's speculation based on no evidence. Jon's answer to Sansa's complaints, to which he actually did listen (not going along with her advice, vague as it was, is not the sane as ignoring her), was that they had no time to get more men. They had sent out for help as far as Riverrun. There was no one left to go to in the North. Or so he thought. 

He didn't know Vale forces were right around the corner. That information was hidden from him, because Sansa is a liar. Supposedly for his own good, though not necessarily for the good of the thousands of Northmen and Wildkings who perished on the field of Battle. 

[darmody]

43 minutes ago, Infeth said:

I'd betray him thousands of time if it means I did not betray his interests, his men, his House and win the war.

Good for you. Now let's see how long you'd be in a position of responsibility afterwards. I was going to say if you lived in feudal times, but this is one of those instances where things don't change.

[darmody]

48 minutes ago, triton333 said:

I can't see any aspect on which a lack of trust could have motivated her. 

What, she didn't tell Jon because she trusted him too much?

[darmody]

48 minutes ago, Infeth said:

I'm not good enough in english to argue about this, it requires a very specific vocabulary! x) But I'll try...

The arrows could obviously reach only one side of the melee, which killed a lot of men on the periphery, then the army itself does her job of killing. Of course there were spread corpses in the melee too, but Ramsay started a move which has been naturaly increased. We are talking about thousands of men, you should read some historical accounts about battles of the WW2, all those corpses accumulating were much more impressive than we could think.

And ofc the tactic itself wouldn't work in real life, this is TV, but the corpses presence in this battle was very realistic.

Thousands of men is not enough. We're talking a pile of corpses above men's heads. I don't remember how tall exactly, but over ten feet certainly. It was ridiculous. Not even close to possible. 

Not only that, but it's in  line for no reason. Not a straight line, exactly. But a line which could conveniently serve as a barrier so Ramsey could pen them in with a horseshoe shaped shield wall. 

There's nothing like that in WWII. Nothing in the annals of military history, I'd bet.