Cersei's thoughts about Joffrey's betrothal to Sansa

[Nevets]

9 hours ago, OtherFromAnotherMother said:

I think you are missing the point @Nevets is trying to make. Steven, please correct me if I am wrong.

I believe he is saying that if the author wanted the reader to believe any of the assertions you are making here the author would have written something about it. There were plenty of opportunities for George to put it in a coversation or Cersei's POV.

Yet, he did not.

 

Thank you.  That is precisely the point I have been trying to make.   Unsuccessfully, it appears.  These are not real people.  The story is 100% in George's hands.  If George wants somebody to say something, he will have them do so.  That he didn't suggests that he didn't consider it worth mentioning and there is nothing to this theory

 

11 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Again, for someone who claims absence of evidence is not proof, you sure like to site a lot of absence of evidence.

Actually I said that absence of evidence is actually evidence of absence  (essentially proof) in this case, because there have been ample opportunities to provide evidence. Thus, its absence is significant.

[John Suburbs]

20 hours ago, OtherFromAnotherMother said:

I think you are missing the point @Nevets is trying to make. Steven, please correct me if I am wrong.

I believe he is saying that if the author wanted the reader to believe any of the assertions you are making here the author would have written something about it. There were plenty of opportunities for George to put it in a coversation or Cersei's POV.

Yet, he did not.

 

 

11 hours ago, Nevets said:

Thank you.  That is precisely the point I have been trying to make.   Unsuccessfully, it appears.  These are not real people.  The story is 100% in George's hands.  If George wants somebody to say something, he will have them do so.  That he didn't suggests that he didn't consider it worth mentioning and there is nothing to this theory

 

He has written about it. He's created a completely unfeasible situation in which Joffrey and Sansa -- literally, two of the most valuable children in the world -- are allowed to go riding off all on their own into strange country despite strict orders not to leave the column, and then there are no repercussions for the man who is supposed to shadow Joffrey at all times and protect him from all harm. 

Assuming that why I am suggesting is true, then of course Martin does not want you to believe any of this yet. There are still two books to go and he will reveal the truth in a time and place of his choosing. You could have said the same thing about the Arryn murder at the end of Clash. Here we had a situation where Martin not only did not write the truth for you to read plain as day, he actively led you to the wrong conclusion at multiple points -- right up to where Pycelle tells Tyrion point blank: "She (Cersie) wanted him dead."

So, sorry, but this idea that Martin has revealed all truths in the story by now and the rest will fall along all the predictable lines that we see now is patently false.

11 hours ago, Nevets said:

Actually I said that absence of evidence is actually evidence of absence  (essentially proof) in this case, because there have been ample opportunities to provide evidence. Thus, its absence is significant.

Lol, I see, so your absence of evidence is proof but everyone else's is not.

[Lord Lannister]

I think the story would've been far more interesting if Joffrey and Cersei treated Sansa decently after the rebellion and she was fully on board with them, reluctantly or not.

[Springwatch]

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

He has written about it. He's created a completely unfeasible situation in which Joffrey and Sansa -- literally, two of the most valuable children in the world -- are allowed to go riding off all on their own into strange country despite strict orders not to leave the column, and then there are no repercussions for the man who is supposed to shadow Joffrey at all times and protect him from all harm.

But when you find a completely unfeasible situation, you have to consider it in the context of all the other completely unfeasible situations in the books - and there are lots! Examples:

• Would any parents allow their children to raise wolf cubs as pets? Even children as young as Rickon? Would the children be forbidden from asking for any adult help in the training the wolves?
• Would Bran be allowed to climb the crumbling towers of Winterfell? After the fall, would he be as fit and healthy and pain free as he appears to be? (not forgetting the paralysis!)
• Would Arya be allowed to trash her immensely valuable clothing the way she does? Would she be allowed to snub the company of the royal family in favour of a butcher's boy?

And so on. What are we supposed to do with scenes like these? Up to a point you can rationalise them, but it's always a stretch. But eventually you have to accept that realism comes way down the list of what the author considers important in these books. Drama, comedy, mystery, witty dialogue, imagery, word games and foreshadowing are all important. Realism just isn't.

Sansa's day out with Joffrey isn't that realistic, but it's that way for a reason, and there are lots of possibilities apart from a convoluted murder plot.

[Tagganaro]

1 hour ago, Lord Lannister said:

I think the story would've been far more interesting if Joffrey and Cersei treated Sansa decently after the rebellion and she was fully on board with them, reluctantly or not.

Hypothetically speaking, I wonder how different Joffrey would have treated Sansa if the incident with Arya and "Lion's Tooth" never happened.  Up until that point he treated Sansa relatively well, but then that happens and I think GRRM even includes a line towards the end about Joffrey having like revulsion in his eyes towards Sansa.  We know Joff is an insecure little shit, I'm not sure he ever forgave Sansa for that incident and the shame/embarrasment it caused him.  

Not sure that it really matters...in the end the Lannisters and Stark initial conflict was gonna happen, but I even wonder if Joffrey had liked Sansa a little bit more maybe he allows Ned to go to the Wall, etc.  We see that Joffrey is at least capable of somewhat guarding his psycopathic tendencies in front of Marg Tyrell, I just wonder if it would be remotely possible for the same thing to have happened with Sansa.

[Ylath's Snout]

26 minutes ago, Tagganaro said:

Hypothetically speaking, I wonder how different Joffrey would have treated Sansa if the incident with Arya and "Lion's Tooth" never happened. 

Well for one thing both Nymeria and Lady would be in King's Landing. So when the fighting starts things might spiral away in all sorts of directions.

[Springwatch]

35 minutes ago, Tagganaro said:

Hypothetically speaking, I wonder how different Joffrey would have treated Sansa if the incident with Arya and "Lion's Tooth" never happened.  Up until that point he treated Sansa relatively well, but then that happens and I think GRRM even includes a line towards the end about Joffrey having like revulsion in his eyes towards Sansa.  We know Joff is an insecure little shit, I'm not sure he ever forgave Sansa for that incident and the shame/embarrasment it caused him.  

You're right: Cersei more or less says this to Sansa later on, so either Cersei is showing a bit of empathy for Joff, or Joff directly told her so.

35 minutes ago, Tagganaro said:

Not sure that it really matters...in the end the Lannisters and Stark initial conflict was gonna happen, but I even wonder if Joffrey had liked Sansa a little bit more maybe he allows Ned to go to the Wall, etc.  We see that Joffrey is at least capable of somewhat guarding his psycopathic tendencies in front of Marg Tyrell, I just wonder if it would be remotely possible for the same thing to have happened with Sansa.

I think Joff did like Sansa; it just didn't translate into good treatment. He loves her and he hates her; he can't let her go.

Cersei too. I think Cersei knew about the beatings and didn't approve, but she thought that a woman's life is naturally hard and unfair, and also that most women are losers and crack under the pressure. Only the strong win through. Cersei had more time for Sansa after the beatings started and Sansa (more or less) withstood it.

[OtherFromAnotherMother]

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

He has written about it. He's created a completely unfeasible situation in which Joffrey and Sansa -- literally, two of the most valuable children in the world -- are allowed to go riding off all on their own into strange country despite strict orders not to leave the column, and then there are no repercussions for the man who is supposed to shadow Joffrey at all times and protect him from all harm. 

It is not an unfeasible situation. If it was, the author would have written something about it. If he wanted the reader to question the date he would have written something which indicates how odd the situation was. 

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Assuming that why I am suggesting is true, then of course Martin does not want you to believe any of this yet. There are still two books to go and he will reveal the truth in a time and place of his choosing. You could have said the same thing about the Arryn murder at the end of Clash.

The Arryn murder mystery is a terrible example of evidence to the point you are trying to make. I often read you using the Arryn murder as an example of how George could be waiting for a big reveal in later books. You don't seem to realize that the Arryn murder was meant to be a big mystery/reveal. George wanted the reader to believe X, then pull the rug out to reveal Y. He wrote thousands of words about the Arryn murder. Ned's move to KL was to figure out the mystery. The author wrote dialogue, inner thoughts, and actions leading the reader to believe X. He was then able to have a big reveal and shock the reader, because he had set it up already. Nothing like that is happening here with this theory you put forward. Jon Arryn's murder was meant to be a mystery, this is not.

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Here we had a situation where Martin not only did not write the truth for you to read plain as day, he actively led you to the wrong conclusion at multiple points -- right up to where Pycelle tells Tyrion point blank: "She (Cersie) wanted him dead."

Exactly. Thank you for making my point. Characters discussed it. It was meant to be a whodunnit. No one is discussing or thinking about the date between Joffrey and Sansa. The author does not want the reader to think any mystery is going on here.

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

So, sorry, but this idea that Martin has revealed all truths in the story by now and the rest will fall along all the predictable lines that we see now is patently false.

Who said George has revealed all the truths on the story? Of course there will be more. Many mysteries that were meant to be mysteries will be revealed. This one will not, however. There is nothing to be revealed here.

[Lord Lannister]

2 hours ago, Tagganaro said:

Hypothetically speaking, I wonder how different Joffrey would have treated Sansa if the incident with Arya and "Lion's Tooth" never happened.  Up until that point he treated Sansa relatively well, but then that happens and I think GRRM even includes a line towards the end about Joffrey having like revulsion in his eyes towards Sansa.  We know Joff is an insecure little shit, I'm not sure he ever forgave Sansa for that incident and the shame/embarrasment it caused him.  

Not sure that it really matters...in the end the Lannisters and Stark initial conflict was gonna happen, but I even wonder if Joffrey had liked Sansa a little bit more maybe he allows Ned to go to the Wall, etc.  We see that Joffrey is at least capable of somewhat guarding his psycopathic tendencies in front of Marg Tyrell, I just wonder if it would be remotely possible for the same thing to have happened with Sansa.

Oh I meant more Sansa stays loyal to the crown after her family rebels, thinking it best for the realm and wanting to live her fiction of being a queen. Though she'd quietly try to influence things to be more lenient towards her family. Even if they thought she was a traitor. She showed some of this in betraying Ned to Cersei but they threw it in her face, quite literally and that was that.

[Nevets]

2 hours ago, OtherFromAnotherMother said:

It is not an unfeasible situation. If it was, the author would have written something about it. If he wanted the reader to question the date he would have written something which indicates how odd the situation was. 

The Arryn murder mystery is a terrible example of evidence to the point you are trying to make. I often read you using the Arryn murder as an example of how George could be waiting for a big reveal in later books. You don't seem to realize that the Arryn murder was meant to be a big mystery/reveal. George wanted the reader to believe X, then pull the rug out to reveal Y. He wrote thousands of words about the Arryn murder. Ned's move to KL was to figure out the mystery. The author wrote dialogue, inner thoughts, and actions leading the reader to believe X. He was then able to have a big reveal and shock the reader, because he had set it up already. Nothing like that is happening here with this theory you put forward. Jon Arryn's murder was meant to be a mystery, this is not.

Exactly. Thank you for making my point. Characters discussed it. It was meant to be a whodunnit. No one is discussing or thinking about the date between Joffrey and Sansa. The author does not want the reader to think any mystery is going on here.

Who said George has revealed all the truths on the story? Of course there will be more. Many mysteries that were meant to be mysteries will be revealed. This one will not, however. There is nothing to be revealed here.

Thank you. I was beginning to feel a bit lonely.  You put the objections even better than I could!

I would like to point out something I noticed about the riding trip.  Joffrey suggests they go riding after Sandor and Cersei are no longer around.   It's quite possible that Cersei expected them to hang around the camp, and would have stopped them from riding had she known. In which case, he is playing hooky.  As for the ride itself, I think that was an attempt to impress and ingratiate himself with Sansa, his betrothed and future wife.  And up until they ran into Arya, it was working quite well.

Another thing:  Cersei has consistently chafed at not being given authority or having much power.  I think she would jump at the chance to bend the ear of 2 high councilors on subject near and dear to her (if any), or at least suggest some appointments, as well as see how those who have received her patronage are doing.  Not to mention the usual births, deaths, marriages, financial and other scandals, and whatnot that have been going on.  Plus, each side can find out what the other is aware of, which should smooth things for the meeting with Robert.  Plenty for her to discuss with Barristan and Renly.

[Big P]

Robert and Ned shook hands on the deal.  Catelyn gave it the stamp of approval.  Cersei had little to say.  There were better matches in my opinion.  Arrianne and Margery are older but better connected than Sansa.  Tyrell > Martell > Stark.

[Nevets]

1 minute ago, The Pink Letter said:

Robert and Ned shook hands on the deal.  Catelyn gave it the stamp of approval.  Cersei had little to say.  There were better matches in my opinion.  Arrianne and Margery are older but better connected than Sansa.  Tyrell > Martell > Stark.

How much better connected can you be than being Hand of the King?  Ned is the second most powerful man in the Kingdom. And given how much of an absentee king Robert is, he might be the most powerful (in theory, at least).  Plus they are good friends and close allies.

[John Suburbs]

On ‎6‎/‎7‎/‎2018 at 12:36 PM, Springwatch said:

But when you find a completely unfeasible situation, you have to consider it in the context of all the other completely unfeasible situations in the books - and there are lots! Examples:

• Would any parents allow their children to raise wolf cubs as pets? Even children as young as Rickon? Would the children be forbidden from asking for any adult help in the training the wolves?
• Would Bran be allowed to climb the crumbling towers of Winterfell? After the fall, would he be as fit and healthy and pain free as he appears to be? (not forgetting the paralysis!)
• Would Arya be allowed to trash her immensely valuable clothing the way she does? Would she be allowed to snub the company of the royal family in favour of a butcher's boy?

And so on. What are we supposed to do with scenes like these? Up to a point you can rationalise them, but it's always a stretch. But eventually you have to accept that realism comes way down the list of what the author considers important in these books. Drama, comedy, mystery, witty dialogue, imagery, word games and foreshadowing are all important. Realism just isn't.

Sansa's day out with Joffrey isn't that realistic, but it's that way for a reason, and there are lots of possibilities apart from a convoluted murder plot.

1) If they were the sigils of your house and there just happened to be a perfect match between the male and female wolves with your own children and the parents were deep believers in signs and gifts from the gods, yes. And you forget to mention the stern warning that Ned gives:

Quote

"You must train them well. You must train them. The kennelmaster will have nothing to do with these monsters. I promise you that. And the gods help you if you neglect them, or brutalize them, or train them badly. These are not dogs to beg for treats and slink off at a kick. A direwolf will rip a man's arm off his shoulder as easily as a dog will kill a rat. Are you sure you want this?"

And once it becomes plainly evident how important the wolves are to the children's safety, even the occasional savaging is overlooked.

2) Bran is not allowed to climb the crumbling towers. They do everything in their power to get him to stop short of chaining him to his bed, but he is willful. Bran is numb and paralyzed from the legs down, not unusual with spinal injuries.

3) Arya is not allowed to do any of this. She is punished regularly for her behavior. What would you have them do, cut off her hands?

All of this is vastly different from a sworn shield willfully abrogating his sworn duty to protect the prince. At the very least he should have been dismissed the way Blount was after he handed Tommen over to Tyrion's men.

I think you are underestimating the cleverness of the author. Pity. I can't fathom why anyone would read an author whom they consider to be so hackneyed and unrealistic.

 

[John Suburbs]

22 hours ago, OtherFromAnotherMother said:

It is not an unfeasible situation. If it was, the author would have written something about it. If he wanted the reader to question the date he would have written something which indicates how odd the situation was. 

The Arryn murder mystery is a terrible example of evidence to the point you are trying to make. I often read you using the Arryn murder as an example of how George could be waiting for a big reveal in later books. You don't seem to realize that the Arryn murder was meant to be a big mystery/reveal. George wanted the reader to believe X, then pull the rug out to reveal Y. He wrote thousands of words about the Arryn murder. Ned's move to KL was to figure out the mystery. The author wrote dialogue, inner thoughts, and actions leading the reader to believe X. He was then able to have a big reveal and shock the reader, because he had set it up already. Nothing like that is happening here with this theory you put forward. Jon Arryn's murder was meant to be a mystery, this is not.

Exactly. Thank you for making my point. Characters discussed it. It was meant to be a whodunnit. No one is discussing or thinking about the date between Joffrey and Sansa. The author does not want the reader to think any mystery is going on here.

Who said George has revealed all the truths on the story? Of course there will be more. Many mysteries that were meant to be mysteries will be revealed. This one will not, however. There is nothing to be revealed here.

If I'm right, this is one small part of a huge mystery that has occupied the story since the beginning: who sent the Catspaw to murder Bran? We know (or, at least, I am certain) that it was Joffrey. The question is, why? The musings of Tyrion, Jaime and Cersei are wholly unsatisfactory, which is why I think he was put up to it by Littlefinger. I won't get into all the details here, but suffice it to say that when Bran didn't die, he tried for Sansa. Nobody is talking about it because in isolation it is over and done with. But people are still talking about Bran and the catspaw. All of this is meant to be a mystery and there are still two full novels for all of this to come out. Just sit tight, keep an open mind and you just may get your truth.

 

[OtherFromAnotherMother]

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

Nobody is talking about it because in isolation it is over and done with.

Or maybe it's because the author doesn't have anything else to reveal.

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

But people are still talking about Bran and the catspaw.

By "still talking" I'm assuming you mean Feast and Dance. Where are people still talking about the catspaw in Feast and Dance?

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

All of this is meant to be a mystery 

I disagree. Not everything in the books is a mystery or conspiracy. There is already much and more which happened as a result of Sansa and Joff's date.

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

Just sit tight, keep an open mind and you just may get your truth.

I have an open mind. But I also understand what (and what not) the author is trying to tell the reader.

[Springwatch]

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

I think you are underestimating the cleverness of the author. Pity. I can't fathom why anyone would read an author whom they consider to be so hackneyed and unrealistic.

LOL, it's you that's underestimating the cleverness of the author - that's why you're doing so much work for him, helping him out, suspending disbelief, reaching and stretching to cover up the plot holes.

He doesn't need your help. We're in a story, a tale told round the campfire, as if by a master storyteller like old Nan. If reality bends a bit to make a better story, so be it.

It's my humble opinion that Joff's day out with Sansa is all foreshadowing.

[John Suburbs]

52 minutes ago, OtherFromAnotherMother said:

Or maybe it's because the author doesn't have anything else to reveal.

Maybe, but maybe not. How about we keep all options on the table until the series is complete? Is that not logical?

53 minutes ago, OtherFromAnotherMother said:

By "still talking" I'm assuming you mean Feast and Dance. Where are people still talking about the catspaw in Feast and Dance?

Where are people still talking about Jon Snow's mother? That mystery has had barely a mention since Ned lost his head.

55 minutes ago, OtherFromAnotherMother said:

I disagree. Not everything in the books is a mystery or conspiracy. There is already much and more which happened as a result of Sansa and Joff's date.

Very unusual situations are very mysterious for a careful writer who researches his topics to the degree that Martin does. Much and more has happened, but much and more may still lie hidden.

57 minutes ago, OtherFromAnotherMother said:

I have an open mind. But I also understand what (and what not) the author is trying to tell the reader.

Do you now? Do you have warging abilities we should know about?

[John Suburbs]

24 minutes ago, Springwatch said:

LOL, it's you that's underestimating the cleverness of the author - that's why you're doing so much work for him, helping him out, suspending disbelief, reaching and stretching to cover up the plot holes.

He doesn't need your help. We're in a story, a tale told round the campfire, as if by a master storyteller like old Nan. If reality bends a bit to make a better story, so be it.

It's my humble opinion that Joff's day out with Sansa is all foreshadowing.

lol, you're the one accusing him of plot holes and wholly contrived situations -- the stuff of rank amateurs -- and yet you still call him a "master storyteller." That's like saying Al Unser is an expert driver even if he doesn't know the difference between the brake and the gas.

I appreciate your humble opinion. Mine is that this was a set-up and that the story is far more layered and subtle than you give the master credit for and that by the end of the series you will see how badly you've underestimated him.

[Springwatch]

38 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

lol, you're the one accusing him of plot holes and wholly contrived situations -- the stuff of rank amateurs -- and yet you still call him a "master storyteller." That's like saying Al Unser is an expert driver even if he doesn't know the difference between the brake and the gas.

I appreciate your humble opinion. Mine is that this was a set-up and that the story is far more layered and subtle than you give the master credit for and that by the end of the series you will see how badly you've underestimated him.

Whatever. I'll enjoy it, I'm sure.

ETA

To demonstrate my respect for the author, I'll add that it looks to me like the story is saturated with meaning and metaphor. That would also be clever.

[OtherFromAnotherMother]

You said:

2 hours ago, OtherFromAnotherMother said:

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

But people are still talking about Bran and the catspaw.

By "still talking" I'm assuming you mean Feast and Dance. Where are people still talking about the catspaw in Feast and Dance?

How does bringing Jon up answer where people are talking about the catspaw in Feast and Dance?