Jump to content

Discussing Sansa XXXV: Queens of Ice and Fire


Recommended Posts

Sansa gave up a lot to get the North Back, whether she knew what she was doing or not and Jon bent the knee and gave all of that away to a Despot who is obsessed with everyone submitting to her. One cannot blame Sansa for acting this way to Dany and to Jon for that matter.

Theon is more of a brother to her at this point, nothing romance there.

Very obvious they are keeping her and the hound apart when there is so much history with them Season one and Two. More is coming, dramatic moment, He will save her again in this battle or the one to come in King's Landing. One or the Other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Dragonglass Order said:

Am I the only one who thought there was something romantic between Sansa and Theon? At first, the tearful reunion I interpreted as a brother/sister thing, but then they're smiling at each other in the middle of a musical montage showing a bunch of other couples. It seemed like there was something going on there - and it would explain why they had a more emotional reunion than anyone in episode 1 (not that I don't think the other reunions *should* have been more emotional).

I didn't see that as a romantic sequence at all. I saw that sequence with that specific song playing as a nod to who dies. That song is about a girl dancing with ghosts of people she loved. Ghosts of people she loved. I think it was a direct nod that someone in each of the "couples" they showed while that song was playing is going to next next episode. If you notice the song ends and then they show Dany and Jon. Of course, I'm jaded and probably reading too much into it.

The one couple I struggle with is Gilley, Little Sam, and Sam in bed. If I'm right and at least one person from each couple dies I am thinking it's Gilley in the crypts protecting lil Sam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Jon bending the knee to her was the dumbest thing this show ever did. He didn’t have to. He wouldn’t do it simply because he is honor bound to serve his people as he agreed to do when he accepted the title of KITN.

Jon is all about honor. Anyone who has watched this show or read the books knows that Jon would sooner cut his own dick off than break a vow. Just think back to the scene at Kings Landing when he wouldn’t lie to Cersei with all that was at stake.  Having him relinquish his title and the north to Dany for... reasons, is just stupid and not in keeping with the continuity of his personality at all. At least that’s how I see it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

Jon is all about honor. Anyone who has watched this show or read the books knows that Jon would sooner cut his own dick off than break a vow. 

He'd never break a vow ...

Except when he attempted to desert the Wall and reach Robb. When he slept with Ygritte. Arguably when he aided Stannis. Arguably when he planned an attack on Bolton.

I don't disagree that Jon is all about honor - but doing the honorable things vs blindly keeping vows are two different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2019 at 9:51 PM, SansaJonRule said:

Yep, set up for further conflict. If Jon and Sansa continue to swear fealty to Dany, the rest of the northerners could say, forget you Starks, you're not representing out interests and choose another leader who will fight for northern independence.

Really?  A lord's duty first and foremost is to ensure the safety of his subjects.  When John went south to search for dragon glass and answer the call of a new contender for the iron throne he was upholding his duties perfectly.  Instead when he returned, everyone treated him like an outcast.  It could better be argued that he would be negligent in his duties and not representing the best interests of the North if he refused to bend the knee since you gotta know that they are all going to need the protection of Danny's dragons if Winterfell is going to have any hope of surving the Night King and the night to come

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2019 at 12:13 PM, Tianzi said:

Sansa seems to remember most of what happened in the KL very well (as everyone else apparently lost their brains, she's the only person who remembers Cersei isn't to be trusted), and even with the different relationship with the Hound than in the books, he still was the first person to show her friendship in KL, and she still was the first person to bring humanity from him in the show. So it's still jarring.

Oh, I don't think she forgot. I think she filed it under the "let's not talk or be reminiscent of this unless I have to" part of her brain. So she isn't going to go looking for Sandor Clegane to remember herself as the girl she doesn't want to be ever again. So if he doesn't look for her, they aren't meeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, ForgottenKnight said:

Anyone else think Tyrion gets the throne with Sansa as his queen?

 

Interesting idea, but I doubt it.  Tyrion is not liked by the people (either in the North or in the South); there's that terrible prejudice against dwarves, and Lannisters are not very popular now (people fear Cersei, they don't love her).  Neither Tyrion nor Sansa have any hereditary on the Iron Throne; and I don't think they'll be the ones who will sweep in on dragons or with a gazillion troops to save King's Landing from Cersei and/or Euron.  If Tyrion is the only surviving Lannister, will he have enough Lannister troops left to hold King's Landing?  

Sansa does not want to return to the south, especially not to King's Landing.  She wouldn't mind being Queen in the North, and might end up that way if Jon dies; though if Winterfell burns, I'm not sure it will be reparable and I don't know what would be her power base.  

Also, I very much doubt that Sansa wants to resume her marriage to Tyrion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

19 hours ago, dbunting said:

The one couple I struggle with is Gilley, Little Sam, and Sam in bed. If I'm right and at least one person from each couple dies I am thinking it's Gilley in the crypts protecting lil Sam.

I agree, Lil Sam was promised to the NK by Craster, so I think that he will be targeted by the WW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Joshua Lizard said:

Really?  A lord's duty first and foremost is to ensure the safety of his subjects.  When John went south to search for dragon glass and answer the call of a new contender for the iron throne he was upholding his duties perfectly.  Instead when he returned, everyone treated him like an outcast.  It could better be argued that he would be negligent in his duties and not representing the best interests of the North if he refused to bend the knee since you gotta know that they are all going to need the protection of Danny's dragons if Winterfell is going to have any hope of surving the Night King and the night to come

I agree with you. I'm saying the other northern lords won't necessarily see it that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I think that independence of the Nord it's a false issue. Sansa and the lords of the north have not seen a WW or a wight, they are ignorant.
But Dany was beyond the wall she saw them, she fought with them and lost one dragon. All those who have seen and fought with the AoTD and/or with White Walkers and they are still alive, are aware that they may lose the fight. And if Winterfell will fall, the North will still exist after the battle?
Only death and destruction will be left in Nord, burnt bodies, ashes and new wights for AoDT. That will be the independence of the Nord.
Of course, in the end, the living will win (I'm sure of that), but this will happen in South, the north will be repopulated, rebuilt, but there will be no more the Nord or the South, not even those seven kingdoms or the Iron Throne. Only one, tattered Kingdom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, loverofcats said:


I think that independence of the Nord it's a false issue. Sansa and the lords of the north have not seen a WW or a wight, they are ignorant.
But Dany was beyond the wall she saw them, she fought with them and lost one dragon. All those who have seen and fought with the AoTD and/or with White Walkers and they are still alive, are aware that they may lose the fight. And if Winterfell will fall, the North will still exist after the battle?
Only death and destruction will be left in Nord, burnt bodies, ashes and new wights for AoDT. That will be the independence of the Nord.
Of course, in the end, the living will win (I'm sure of that), but this will happen in South, the north will be repopulated, rebuilt, but there will be no more the Nord or the South, not even those seven kingdoms or the Iron Throne. Only one, tattered Kingdom.

Martin once said that the story is a cross-generational saga about children growing up and changing the world. Even the TV show addressed that with Dany's "wheel speech". The issue I am having with having a Targaryen King/Queen on Iron Throne, or having united Kingdom at all is that it brings us right where we started. There is no progress, just another cycle of bad leaders being swapped with good ones, and system not changing.

But, and for the time being, I shall limit the debate to Sansa, can we imagine a Stark girl rebuilding Winterfell, reorganizing the North and doing that in a "people's princess" way. House Stark has gone, its male line is broken, but there must always be Stark in Winterfell. And there will be. Sansa creating a new Kingdom, bearing the name of the old one, but different, with wildlings and Northmen living in harmony, helping each other. It may not be a perfect world, but I assume it will be a better one. 

So, I don't think that Northern independence is a false issue. It is a "what after" issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, this is the way I see the "changing of the world". The only one kingdom may represent "breaking the wheel". No more sovereign lords, or guardiens of the realm. Of course, Winterfell will be rebuilt and, if she will survive, Sansa can be further the Lady of Winterfell. But I can't help to ask myself how many people will be left in Nord, after the passing of the army of the death. In my opinion very few or none, except  those who will run to south. Like Tormund said between the Wall and Winterfell  no one has left alive.

I didn't said that the Seven Kingdom will be reunite again. They will not exist anymore  in the administrative territorial organization. There will be no more internal borders. There will be no Dorne, no Westerlands, no Riverrlands... Otherwise we'll go back 300  years before conquest. Practically nothing will change. Maybe Westeros will have a new form of leadership, a council or a leader who will be  elected by nobles at a certain number of years. Who knows? Maybe I went too far but in my opinion this will be the real change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Risto said:

Martin once said that the story is a cross-generational saga about children growing up and changing the world. Even the TV show addressed that with Dany's "wheel speech". The issue I am having with having a Targaryen King/Queen on Iron Throne, or having united Kingdom at all is that it brings us right where we started. There is no progress, just another cycle of bad leaders being swapped with good ones, and system not changing.

But, and for the time being, I shall limit the debate to Sansa, can we imagine a Stark girl rebuilding Winterfell, reorganizing the North and doing that in a "people's princess" way. House Stark has gone, its male line is broken, but there must always be Stark in Winterfell. And there will be. Sansa creating a new Kingdom, bearing the name of the old one, but different, with wildlings and Northmen living in harmony, helping each other. It may not be a perfect world, but I assume it will be a better one. 

So, I don't think that Northern independence is a false issue. It is a "what after" issue.

Well, this is the way I see the "changing of the world". The only one kingdom may represent "breaking the wheel". No more sovereign lords, or guardiens of the realm. Of course, Winterfell will be rebuilt and, if she will survive, Sansa can be further the Lady of Winterfell. But I can't help to ask myself how many people will be left in Nord, after the passing of the army of the death. In my opinion very few or none, except  those who will run to south. Like Tormund said between the Wall and Winterfell  no one has left alive.

I didn't said that the Seven Kingdom will be reunite again. They will not exist anymore  in the administrative territorial organization. There will be no more internal borders. There will be no Dorne, no Westerlands, no Riverrlands... Otherwise we'll go back 300  years before conquest. Practically nothing will change. Maybe Westeros will have a new form of leadership, a council or a leader who will be  elected by nobles at a certain number of years. Who knows? Maybe I went too far but in my opinion this will be the real change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, loverofcats said:

Well, this is the way I see the "changing of the world". The only one kingdom may represent "breaking the wheel". No more sovereign lords, or guardiens of the realm. Of course, Winterfell will be rebuilt and, if she will survive, Sansa can be further the Lady of Winterfell. But I can't help to ask myself how many people will be left in Nord, after the passing of the army of the death. In my opinion very few or none, except  those who will run to south. Like Tormund said between the Wall and Winterfell  no one has left alive.

We'll see. Martin didn't have Sansa rebuild Winterfell out of snow just for fun. It was a very powerful message in terms of foreshadowing and I can bet that after Long Night, after Cersei and Night King are defeated, Sansa will return to Winterfell and eventually rebuild it. Winter will pass, spring will come, people will inhabit North.

25 minutes ago, loverofcats said:

I didn't said that the Seven Kingdom will be reunite again. They will not exist anymore  in the administrative territorial organization. There will be no more internal borders. There will be no Dorne, no Westerlands, no Riverrlands... Otherwise we'll go back 300  years before conquest. Practically nothing will change. Maybe Westeros will have a new form of leadership, a council or a leader who will be  elected by nobles at a certain number of years. Who knows? Maybe I went too far but in my opinion this will be the real change.

A kingdom without internal borders is what we had with Targaryens. I am more inclined to believe there will be some new Kingdoms, with Great Council presiding after it. Dany's dream - getting Iron Throne and continuing like nothing happened, with her having the ultimate power and be a just ruler, is something I doubt we'll get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Risto said:

We'll see. Martin didn't have Sansa rebuild Winterfell out of snow just for fun. It was a very powerful message in terms of foreshadowing and I can bet that after Long Night, after Cersei and Night King are defeated, Sansa will return to Winterfell and eventually rebuild it. Winter will pass, spring will come, people will inhabit North.

A kingdom without internal borders is what we had with Targaryens. I am more inclined to believe there will be some new Kingdoms, with Great Council presiding after it. Dany's dream - getting Iron Throne and continuing like nothing happened, with her having the ultimate power and be a just ruler, is something I doubt we'll get.

I remember that scene. And then Robin Arryn came and destroyed a part of the  construction. I hope it's not a foreshadowing too. LOL I love Sansa too.

Not quite the same.  I think that this is no longer her dream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, loverofcats said:

Well, this is the way I see the "changing of the world". The only one kingdom may represent "breaking the wheel". No more sovereign lords, or guardiens of the realm.

That's not what 'breaking the wheel' means to Dany. If you take her wheel break speech and put it into context by looking at Dany's actions, it's clear she wants to be an absolute monarch with everyone submissive to her. Which means the wheel doesn't get broken, it means Dany and Dany alone becomes the wheel. 'On and on it spins, crushing those beneath them.' But that's exactly what Dany planned to do by invading Westeros. That's what conquering is. That's what she proved with the survivors from the loot train attack. Submit or die, including powerful Lords.

I love Sansa asking 'what happens after it's all done' and 'what happens after Dany takes the IT'. I still have no idea what Dany's plans are for Westeros aside from her wanting to be an absolute monarch. What does she plan to change for the common folk? What institutional changes is she planning? What constitutional changes? Does she have a grand plan for the economy, education, equality, religion...anything? It seems to me that just like in Essos, she simply wants a throne to sit on. She has no plans for anything ever. Just a long list of titles and meaningless platitudes like 'breaking the wheel'.

D&D don't seem to understand that if one wants to change the current system, these are all issues that need addressing. And there should be discussions happening on screen, especially Miss 'the throne is mine' should tell the viewer what she actually wants to change/implement. This would be a great way for Dany to endear herself to people btw. Dany could win the hearts of women by making it clear she plans to change the patriarchy, maybe not completely but more rights for women. She could probably win some of the common folk by implementing education for the people.

'Breaking the Wheel' has been a completely empty phrase so far that seems to have no meaning other than absolute monarchy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...