Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
shawnpmcd

Sansa -- "What of the North??"

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

She talks about AFTER the war which is probably what Jon is wondering too. Jon went south to persuade Dany to fight the dead. He didn't go south to find a new queen for the North to rule over Sansa and his people. Jon himself would want an independent North if he could give it to them but Dany needs loyal servants and a truce first apparently. 

Edited by Rose of Red Lake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kajjo said:

No, the later is angry with Baelish to have sold her to Ramsay. She was not aware of the threat from Ramsay when agreeing to marry him.

from 1:10

That's not what I'm talking about, though? I'm talking about part of the original reason  she married Ramsay was to take back Winterfell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

She talks about AFTER the war which is probably what Jon is wondering too. Jon went south to persuade Dany to fight the dead. He didn't go south to find a new queen for the North to rule over Sansa and his people. Jon himself would want an independent North if he could give it to them but Dany needs loyal servants and a truce first apparently. 

Except there is nothing left to discuss. Dany wants a Seven Kingdom which includes the North. Jon agreed with that when he kneeled. The independence is no longer on the table. Sansa and Dany should have a heavy conversations about taxation and representation and how the kingdom should work after the war, not this Northxit nonsense. Especially, when North is this close to be destroyed and will need a lot of help and support from the rest of the kingdom to rebuild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'hey your dad burned my grandfather and uncle alive and started this mess how about you throw us a freakin bone and show everyone you aren't a crazy too?'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, tws1978 said:

Except there is nothing left to discuss. Dany wants a Seven Kingdom which includes the North. Jon agreed with that when he kneeled. The independence is no longer on the table. Sansa and Dany should have a heavy conversations about taxation and representation and how the kingdom should work after the war, not this Northxit nonsense. Especially, when North is this close to be destroyed and will need a lot of help and support from the rest of the kingdom to rebuild.

Jon's word doesn't really mean anything. Just saying someone gets this kingdom is meaningless if Dany can't hold it. Dany should see the writing on the wall that the North is ready to resist her (like Dorne). Jon's new title also throws this into flux because he could grant the North their independence once the fighting is over anyway. But its still in flux since no one actually holds the throne yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, tws1978 said:

Especially, when North is this close to be destroyed and will need a lot of help and support from the rest of the kingdom to rebuild.

Ahh the beauty of family connections. While sure even if they can find Edmure to be Lord of Riverun again, the Riverlands have been a constant battle ground but that's still a family connection. More important however is the Vale. If the Vale remains untouched (no AotD, no Iron Throne fight with GC), not only would that be a good place for the surviving Northerners to stay for a while while rebuilding goes on but presumably they also would have food etc. to offer. There is a reason why the only Lord we see Sansa with is Royce from the Vale. Keeping that connection going is a smart move.

39 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Jon's word doesn't really mean anything. Just saying someone gets this kingdom is meaningless if Dany can't hold it. Dany should see the writing on the wall that the North is ready to resist her (like Dorne). Jon's new title also throws this into flux because he could grant the North their independence once the fighting is over anyway. But its still in flux since no one actually holds the throne yet.

Jon's title is a figurative one until Dany is actually sworn in as Queen of the 7K because only then can she hand out such titles and have them mean anything legally. Jon shouldn't even be included in anything politically for that very reason. But D&D don't seem to understand the world they write about.

 

As to the topic question. It seems a no brainer to me as to why Sansa is the figurehead of the North now. Jon had appointed her Regent last Season. She was in the North trying to keep it united, taking care of logistics and preparing for refugees and so on. Jon's long absence and non-communication caused the Lords to question whether they should have put her in charge instead of Jon. Granted that was spearheaded by Glover and Royce but the rumbling crowd seemed to agree with them. Jon has bend the knee so politically he is no one now, he also commands nothing because as a bastard he has no titles, lands or castles. Naturally they would let the person who was in charge last Season do the same thing this Season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Pandean said:

That's not what I'm talking about, though? I'm talking about part of the original reason  she married Ramsay was to take back Winterfell.

Yes, I know you meant that and I replied to it.

However, the scene I linked clearly shows that she was not aware of the threat. She was dumb enough for a last time to fall for Baelish' lies and Ramsay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, tws1978 said:

Except there is nothing left to discuss. Dany wants a Seven Kingdom which includes the North. Jon agreed with that when he kneeled. The independence is no longer on the table.

BLACK AND WHITE

Stop this black-and-white talk. I really can't stand it anymore.

Everything is on the table. All the time. Whatever is negotiated, can be re-negotiated. Due to deaths, due to gratitude, due to love or hate, due to sheer necessity, due to new circumstances. Whatever.  Daenerys might kill her for it, she might ignore it, she might give in. Whatever. Everything is possible.

The world is not black-white and exactly that is what we all love about Game of Thrones: Its complexity, the nuances of grey, no totally evil or perfectly good fairy-tale characters, but complex individuals with strong and weak facets.

We should behave ourselves to that standards, too. Stop the black-and-white moaning and know-it-all.

WHAT ABOUT THE NORTH

Sansa bowed to Daenerys. She accepted Jon bending his knee. At least for the moment.

Sansa also EXPLAINS that the Northerners, i.e. the common people and the Lords of the North, will never really accept southern kings and queens. With regards to Sansa herself that is not treason, just a simple clarification of how people in the North feel and how difficult this will be.

Further, as a second step, Sansa opens the bargaining. Fighting side by side should be satisfying for both sides. This is common sense, no matter whose knees were bent. Daenerys rejected the thought for now, but after the battle we will have a new situation. Daenerys knows that, too.

Both women hold their ground in this talk. Daenerys has a very good reply to Sansa's "men are manipulated". 

IN-SHOW VS WATCHERS

I see the whole show in the sense as showing us what happens in a fictive world. Of course some characters make mistakes. They do things for love, they mess up, they are stupid, not all act logically or sensibly, Again and again this happens. Without mistakes many could have survived.

It's utter nonsense to moan about a character acting below optimal. Of course they don't act perfectly. My goodness. They are normal people, making mistakes, being fearful, greedy, lustful or whatever. 

Yes, maybe it was stupid of Sansa to ask "What about the North?" I somehow even agree, the wrong moment probably. But she did it anyway. So what?

There's absolutely nothing to moan about in-show mistakes of characters. She did ask. It was a nice scene. I enjoyed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon bent the knee to save HIS people from death aka the WW invasion that is about to destroy ALL of the North and Jons great great great great grandfather Cregan Stark did the same thing when it came to Aegon and his dragons. The north accepted Cregans decsion to bend the knee the North will accept Jons why? because survival is more important than independant rule. Who cares who is king when everyone is dead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Stormking902 said:

Who cares who is king when everyone is dead?

That's the correct perspective at the moment. 

But when (and if) the Great War is won, after some years they will care quite a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Stormking902 said:

Jon bent the knee to save HIS people from death aka the WW invasion that is about to destroy ALL of the North and Jons great great great great grandfather Cregan Stark did the same thing when it came to Aegon and his dragons. The north accepted Cregans decsion to bend the knee the North will accept Jons why? because survival is more important than independant rule. Who cares who is king when everyone is dead?

The show seems to have forgotten that Jon bent the knee AFTER Daenerys already agreed to "save" the North. Apparently neither Jon nor Daenerys remember lol

Also the title thing goes both ways, the North is maybe too obsessed with it (I agree with them however) and Daenerys also should delay the knee bending / power acceptance for after the war too as they have more important things at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×