Why is Sansa so antagonistic towards Daenerys?

[Angel Eyes]

A thing or two I didn't like about Sansa's antagonism towards Daenerys:

1. I wouldn't try and piss off someone in command of dragons who could turn you (and your home) into a pile of ash if she felt like it.
2. Did Sansa honestly think the Northern armies could hold their own against the Army of the Dead without dragonglass and dragons? A single giant was able to bust open Winterfell, what did she think more than one undead giant could do? Until Daenerys agreed to give Jon permission to mine dragonglass, the North had nothing to fight the undead with, apart from Jon and Brienne's Valyrian Steel swords.
3. Is Northern independence so important?

I blame D&D for this by stoking up pointless drama.

[Lord Varys]

No reason. Nonsensical writing. Stop treating the show caricatures as if they were written to be living, breathing characters with an agenda. They are not. In fact, they never were. They were written to show off 'the talents of the actors'.

[Angel Eyes]

10 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

No reason. Nonsensical writing. Stop treating the show caricatures as if they were written to be living, breathing characters with an agenda. They are not. In fact, they never were. They were written to show off 'the talents of the actors'.

What makes the talent of an actor?

[Lord Varys]

1 minute ago, Angel Eyes said:

What makes the talent of an actor?

For those stupid guys? Basically to have them do what they are good at - or rather: what they like. They like to model character roles not on, you know, the characters from the work they are adapting but on the personalities of the actors who play those roles.

Their 'concept' of Cersei is basically very much 'Lena Headey' and her personality/what they like from her (she had just done a very motherly role with her Sarah Connor in 'The Sarah Connor Chronicles' prior to the GoT. Or take Littlefinger - Gillen played Petyr rather fine in season 1 when they still didn't know it would be Gillen and what he could do when they wrote the scripts. From season 2 onwards he became this open, transparent, clichéd creep - when in fact Gillen could have easily played the sympathetic and insidious villain George invented.

With Cersei there is no remnant of the original personality left - fiery, passionate, angry, insidious Cersei - because the pilot was reshot and when they were making the other season 1 episode they already knew who the main cast cast actors from the pilot were, and what they could do.

This all conincides with their utterly ridiculous concept of 'emoting' (expressing inner feelings/emotions, and even thoughts and plot) by means of facial expression. As the series progresses the show has less and less dialogue, especially not group dialogue, which is very weird for a show based on GRRM's ASoIaF - which is rather famous for its great dialogue, both in thought and actual speech.

If you want to understand how they 'took on the story' then you have to ask yourself 'What did they think would look cool on screen?' Once they had that, they came up with 'ways' how to do it.

[Mystical]

Just chalk it up to Sansa being pissed about everything. After all Sophie seems to have been directed to emote 'pissy' in a lot of her scenes in early S8. And funnily enough, Sansa being pissed actually makes sense (at least to me) as I would be royally pissed off too if I were in her shoes. Too bad Sansa wasn't given dialogue to explain why.

But who needs that when you can let the actors face tell the story? /s

[Angel Eyes]

11 hours ago, Mystical said:

Just chalk it up to Sansa being pissed about everything. After all Sophie seems to have been directed to emote 'pissy' in a lot of her scenes in early S8. And funnily enough, Sansa being pissed actually makes sense (at least to me) as I would be royally pissed off too if I were in her shoes. Too bad Sansa wasn't given dialogue to explain why.

But who needs that when you can let the actors face tell the story? /s

And I would have thought D&D learned their lesson with that regarding the focus on Theon in Sansa's storyline in Season 5 and the backlash from that. You can let an actor's face tell a story, but D&D are far from Sergio Leone in their skill with that.

[Darryk]

Because of bad writing? The only way they could think to create tension was have antipathy between two powerful women in the series. Because cat fight!

[Rose of Red Lake]

Eh it wasn't explained very well but she didn't trust Dany, neither did Cersei, and they were both proved right. No one cared when Cersei and Margaery went at it, people only cared that Dany didn't get to crowd surf across Northern troops like she did in Slaver's Bay. 

[Raksha 2014]

Both ladies could have used better approaches to each other:

1.  Daenerys enters Winterfell like a queen reclaiming her kingdom.  Dany believes she is reclaiming her kingdom; and that the people of the North, including Jon's siblings, will be thrilled to see her.

Reality Check:  Honey, these are for the most part, insular, provincial, cold-pressed Northerners who fear and distrust the name "Targaryen".  Some or all of them know that their king has knelt to you, and they're not pleased about it.  They're scared of your dragons.  They've never seen Unsullied or Dothraki; and they're nervous when they do see them.  For many of the denizens of Winterfell, the Dead are only a distant shadow; while the history of the Targaryen treatment of the Starks is a vivid story that's been passed down to them (and some were alive when Robert's Rebellion called Stark men out to fight and die).  

2.  Sansa voices a sudden thought (it did sound like it was spontaneous rather than an intended complaint to Daenerys) wondering what the dragons will eat.  She has been preoccupied with keeping the people of Winterfell (and presumably Wintertown and perhaps other Northern populations) fed not only now but for the rest of winter.  Sansa has vivid and horrible memories of what can happen when people are starving, i.e. the riots in King's Landing when she was almost raped and killed.  

Reality Check:  Sansa Sweetie, turn up your thermostat and show some warmth toward Daenerys, who is your guest.  You have enough self-control to wait until later, when Daenerys is feasting with you, and tell her nicely that you have some concerns about dragon nutrition, given Winterfell's limited stores, and ask her if she's brought some dragon chow along with her.

 

3.  Daenerys, hearing Sansa's words about Dany's precious reptilian babies, takes clear offense and coldly replies "Whatever they want".  

Reality Check:  There's the big mistake.  Sansa takes Dany's words as a direct threat against not only the people of Winterfell (i.e. dragons munching on the livestock needed to keep them alive) but on her own authority as the Lady of Winterfell.  I would be monumentally annoyed too.  But I'm not the Lady of Winterfell, Sansa Stark, whose forte is supposed to be political diplomacy.  

What should have happened:  Sansa should have calmed down, rethought the situation without staying on her high horse and insisting on Northern independence while a touchy Targaryen Queen and her army and Dragons are camped out nearby and Sansa's brother/the former King in the North has given said Dragon Queen sovereignty over the North.  She could have at least tried to negotiate a deal; she will make livestock available to the dragons in return for some gold from Daenerys' presumed treasury in Mereen that Sansa can use to buy stores from Essos or elsewhere - at least something like that.  And Sansa should have not said a word in favor of or rejecting the concept of Northern independence; not until the War for the Dead was over and Daenerys was off conquering the South; since there was always the chance that Daenerys would die (or that Sansa and everyone else in the North would die fighting the Dead).  Didn't Sansa learn anything from Littlefinger?

 

The relationship between Sansa and Daenerys was doomed from the moment they met.  They acted like drama queens, each underestimating the other.  It could have been written so much better...

[WolfOfWinter]

Why was Dany so antagonistic towards Cersei? Same answer as for Sansa: they had different political goals. Sansa wanted independence and Dany stood in the way of that. Dany wanted the Seven Kingdoms and Cersei stood in the way of that. The writing really isn't that complicated.

[Mystical]

Sansa and the North wanted freedom, Dany wanted to subjugate them. They were politically opposed from the onset. Sansa is rightfully pissed but I think she was projecting her anger at Jon onto Dany. It's easier to be mad at the interloper rather than family.

On 12/17/2019 at 11:13 AM, Raksha 2014 said:

And Sansa should have not said a word in favor of or rejecting the concept of Northern independence; not until the War for the Dead was over and Daenerys was off conquering the South; since there was always the chance that Daenerys would die (or that Sansa and everyone else in the North would die fighting the Dead).  Didn't Sansa learn anything from Littlefinger?

Once Dany is in the South it's too late. Sansa was literally the only one who thought 'what if we survive this?'. One possible scenario is that Dany survives the Long Night and then she conquers the Iron Throne. Once Dany sits on the throne it's too late to negotiate anything.

[SeanF]

6 hours ago, Mystical said:

Sansa and the North wanted freedom, Dany wanted to subjugate them. They were politically opposed from the onset. Sansa is rightfully pissed but I think she was projecting her anger at Jon onto Dany. It's easier to be mad at the interloper rather than family.

Once Dany is in the South it's too late. Sansa was literally the only one who thought 'what if we survive this?'. One possible scenario is that Dany survives the Long Night and then she conquers the Iron Throne. Once Dany sits on the throne it's too late to negotiate anything.

I think it makes little difference to the average crofter or fisherman whether their ruler is called Warden or Queen.  I can see it would make a big difference to Sansa and her immediate vassals.  Northern independence seems very much a second order issue, in the face of the onslaught of the Dead.

[Rose of Red Lake]

On 12/19/2019 at 9:00 AM, SeanF said:

I think it makes little difference to the average crofter or fisherman whether their ruler is called Warden or Queen.  I can see it would make a big difference to Sansa and her immediate vassals.  Northern independence seems very much a second order issue, in the face of the onslaught of the Dead.

Like it didn't make a big difference to Dany either? She waltzed in there expecting the Northerners to grovel like the Unsullied. She still called it "Jon's war" after everything, needing to be coddled by Cersei and accidentally giving the night king a dragon before she took action. Meanwhile Sansa was preparing Winterfell so well for the attack that the Northmen said they should have named her queen but she still deferred to Jon. 

And I do think the crofters and fishermen might care about who rules them, if Dany is going to  smirk while her dragons scare them. Just because they weren't awed by her presence. 

[Rose of Red Lake]

On 12/17/2019 at 2:13 AM, Raksha 2014 said:

Both ladies could have used better approaches to each other:

1.  Daenerys enters Winterfell like a queen reclaiming her kingdom.  Dany believes she is reclaiming her kingdom; and that the people of the North, including Jon's siblings, will be thrilled to see her.

Reality Check:  Honey, these are for the most part, insular, provincial, cold-pressed Northerners who fear and distrust the name "Targaryen".  Some or all of them know that their king has knelt to you, and they're not pleased about it.  They're scared of your dragons.  They've never seen Unsullied or Dothraki; and they're nervous when they do see them.  For many of the denizens of Winterfell, the Dead are only a distant shadow; while the history of the Targaryen treatment of the Starks is a vivid story that's been passed down to them (and some were alive when Robert's Rebellion called Stark men out to fight and die).  

2.  Sansa voices a sudden thought (it did sound like it was spontaneous rather than an intended complaint to Daenerys) wondering what the dragons will eat.  She has been preoccupied with keeping the people of Winterfell (and presumably Wintertown and perhaps other Northern populations) fed not only now but for the rest of winter.  Sansa has vivid and horrible memories of what can happen when people are starving, i.e. the riots in King's Landing when she was almost raped and killed.  

Reality Check:  Sansa Sweetie, turn up your thermostat and show some warmth toward Daenerys, who is your guest.  You have enough self-control to wait until later, when Daenerys is feasting with you, and tell her nicely that you have some concerns about dragon nutrition, given Winterfell's limited stores, and ask her if she's brought some dragon chow along with her.

 

3.  Daenerys, hearing Sansa's words about Dany's precious reptilian babies, takes clear offense and coldly replies "Whatever they want".  

Reality Check:  There's the big mistake.  Sansa takes Dany's words as a direct threat against not only the people of Winterfell (i.e. dragons munching on the livestock needed to keep them alive) but on her own authority as the Lady of Winterfell.  I would be monumentally annoyed too.  But I'm not the Lady of Winterfell, Sansa Stark, whose forte is supposed to be political diplomacy.  

What should have happened:  Sansa should have calmed down, rethought the situation without staying on her high horse and insisting on Northern independence while a touchy Targaryen Queen and her army and Dragons are camped out nearby and Sansa's brother/the former King in the North has given said Dragon Queen sovereignty over the North.  She could have at least tried to negotiate a deal; she will make livestock available to the dragons in return for some gold from Daenerys' presumed treasury in Mereen that Sansa can use to buy stores from Essos or elsewhere - at least something like that.  And Sansa should have not said a word in favor of or rejecting the concept of Northern independence; not until the War for the Dead was over and Daenerys was off conquering the South; since there was always the chance that Daenerys would die (or that Sansa and everyone else in the North would die fighting the Dead).  Didn't Sansa learn anything from Littlefinger?

 

The relationship between Sansa and Daenerys was doomed from the moment they met.  They acted like drama queens, each underestimating the other.  It could have been written so much better...

I'm glad they went at it, actually. I'm glad that Dany got a taste of people who won't kiss her ass, in fact besides the Green Grace in the books, this might be the first time Dany has ever had to interact with noblewomen (Cersei, Sansa) in her entire life. I hate the idea that all women have to get along because they're women. 

[SeanF]

2 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Like it didn't make a big difference to Dany either? She waltzed in there expecting the Northerners to grovel like the Unsullied. She still called it "Jon's war" after everything, needing to be coddled by Cersei and accidentally giving the night king a dragon before she took action. Meanwhile Sansa was preparing Winterfell so well for the attack that the Northmen said they should have named her queen but she still deferred to Jon. 

And I do think the crofters and fishermen might care about who rules them, if Dany is going to  smirk while her dragons scare them. Just because they weren't awed by her presence. 

To be honest, the best thing Daenerys could have done was to give the North their precious independence.  And leave the South ruled by Cersei. Then leave for Meereen.

Let Jon, Sansa , and Cersei fight the Night King between them.  And, if he wins,  what's the problem?  He's male and a native, and that's what  the inhabitants want.  They  can take  comfort from the fact that they're ruled by one of their own.

[Mystical]

On 12/19/2019 at 6:00 PM, SeanF said:

I think it makes little difference to the average crofter or fisherman whether their ruler is called Warden or Queen.  I can see it would make a big difference to Sansa and her immediate vassals.  Northern independence seems very much a second order issue, in the face of the onslaught of the Dead.

It makes a difference when it comes to taxes, religion, law and so forth. They don't know what Dany would have implemented as Queen.

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

To be honest, the best thing Daenerys could have done was to give the North their precious independence.  And leave the South ruled by Cersei. Then leave for Meereen.

She should have stayed in Meereen. Why did she leave? For the good of the people of Meereen? Nope. For the good of the people of Westeros? Nope. She uprooted the entirety of Slaver's Bay without ever implementing any sort of economic or governing structure. Ending slavery and replacing it with a different workable economy is a lifetime commitment, possibly longer considering society also needs to change their ways. Instead she up and leaves, takes all her soldiers and leaves a sellsword in charge. Yikes.

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

Let Jon, Sansa , and Cersei fight the Night King between them.  And, if he wins,  what's the problem?  He's male and a native, and that's what  the inhabitants want.  They  can take  comfort from the fact that they're ruled by one of their own.

They wouldn't have fought the NK without Dany, period. No Dany, no dragon for the NK to get his hands on and reanimate it, no hole in the wall. NK stays where he's been for thousands of years since apparently there was no other way over, around or through the wall...he's been waiting all this time for Dany and her dragons.

[SeanF]

4 hours ago, Mystical said:

It makes a difference when it comes to taxes, religion, law and so forth. They don't know what Dany would have implemented as Queen.

She should have stayed in Meereen. Why did she leave? For the good of the people of Meereen? Nope. For the good of the people of Westeros? Nope. She uprooted the entirety of Slaver's Bay without ever implementing any sort of economic or governing structure. Ending slavery and replacing it with a different workable economy is a lifetime commitment, possibly longer considering society also needs to change their ways. Instead she up and leaves, takes all her soldiers and leaves a sellsword in charge. Yikes.

They wouldn't have fought the NK without Dany, period. No Dany, no dragon for the NK to get his hands on and reanimate it, no hole in the wall. NK stays where he's been for thousands of years since apparently there was no other way over, around or through the wall...he's been waiting all this time for Dany and her dragons.

Jon was thus a fool to suggest venturing North of the Wall.  Somehow, I don't think she'd get the credit if she left him and Tormund to their fate.

[Angel Eyes]

4 hours ago, Mystical said:

It makes a difference when it comes to taxes, religion, law and so forth. They don't know what Dany would have implemented as Queen.

She should have stayed in Meereen. Why did she leave? For the good of the people of Meereen? Nope. For the good of the people of Westeros? Nope. She uprooted the entirety of Slaver's Bay without ever implementing any sort of economic or governing structure. Ending slavery and replacing it with a different workable economy is a lifetime commitment, possibly longer considering society also needs to change their ways. Instead she up and leaves, takes all her soldiers and leaves a sellsword in charge. Yikes.

They wouldn't have fought the NK without Dany, period. No Dany, no dragon for the NK to get his hands on and reanimate it, no hole in the wall. NK stays where he's been for thousands of years since apparently there was no other way over, around or through the wall...he's been waiting all this time for Dany and her dragons.

I thought the White Walkers’ original plan was to go around the Wall, or freeze enough of the sea at Eastwatch for them to cross. 

 

42 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Jon was thus a fool to suggest venturing North of the Wall.  Somehow, I don't think she'd get the credit if she left him and Tormund to their fate.

I thought that was Tyrion’s idea.

[Mystical]

5 hours ago, SeanF said:

Jon was thus a fool to suggest venturing North of the Wall.  Somehow, I don't think she'd get the credit if she left him and Tormund to their fate.

I blame the entirety of Team Dany and that includes Jon. Tyrion for the stupid ass plan, Jon who was a freaking King at that point for wanting to lead the mission and Dany for ok-ing the mission. Mind you I don't blame Dany for going to try and save them which was the ultimate decision that got a dragon north. I actually credit her for going to save them because it would have been really bad optics, politically speaking, otherwise. It was eventually Jon who caused the dragon to die when he refused to get on Drogon. They might have gotten out of dodge otherwise without losing a dragon. It's Tyrion/Jon >>>>>>>>>> Dany. But she is the Queen, nothing actually happens unless she says so. She doesn't have to listen to Tyrion and she doesn't have to let Jon leave since he has no way of leaving (being under house arrest and having his ship taken from him) anyway.

5 hours ago, Angel Eyes said:

I thought the White Walkers’ original plan was to go around the Wall, or freeze enough of the sea at Eastwatch for them to cross. 

Logically yes. But as that was never even hinted at in the show, it's apparently not an option. The WW have been on the move since the first scene of the first episode of the show and they have been near the wall several times during the run. Neither time did they appear to be able to go around or over it. Which makes sense since the WW have been around for thousands of years and there have been several winters during that time.

What logically should have happened in the show, is for Bran (aka 3ER) to cause all of it. He was marked by the NK which means the Childrens magic is negated wherever he goes like it did with the cave. So at the very least, the magic around the part where he entered Castle Black should be gone, if not the entire wall. Then the invasion of the NK should have happened at CB. He has giants as weights, give him a mammoth or two. They can break through the metal door entrance.

But my guess is that wasn't cinematic enough for D&D. And they forgot what Bran's mark meant beyond being some kind of gps. They wanted their polar bear weight and more importantly the visual of a dragon tearing down the wall. So we ended up with Team Dany being the cause for the wall breaking down and the army of the dead invasion of Westeros. At which point Dany going north with her armies isn't some sacrifice she made and everyone should be grateful for it, it's a simple matter of cleaning up her team's mess.

[SeanF]

23 minutes ago, Mystical said:

I blame the entirety of Team Dany and that includes Jon. Tyrion for the stupid ass plan, Jon who was a freaking King at that point for wanting to lead the mission and Dany for ok-ing the mission. Mind you I don't blame Dany for going to try and save them which was the ultimate decision that got a dragon north. I actually credit her for going to save them because it would have been really bad optics, politically speaking, otherwise. It was eventually Jon who caused the dragon to die when he refused to get on Drogon. They might have gotten out of dodge otherwise without losing a dragon. It's Tyrion/Jon >>>>>>>>>> Dany. But she is the Queen, nothing actually happens unless she says so. She doesn't have to listen to Tyrion and she doesn't have to let Jon leave since he has no way of leaving (being under house arrest and having his ship taken from him) anyway.

Logically yes. But as that was never even hinted at in the show, it's apparently not an option. The WW have been on the move since the first scene of the first episode of the show and they have been near the wall several times during the run. Neither time did they appear to be able to go around or over it. Which makes sense since the WW have been around for thousands of years and there have been several winters during that time.

What logically should have happened in the show, is for Bran (aka 3ER) to cause all of it. He was marked by the NK which means the Childrens magic is negated wherever he goes like it did with the cave. So at the very least, the magic around the part where he entered Castle Black should be gone, if not the entire wall. Then the invasion of the NK should have happened at CB. He has giants as weights, give him a mammoth or two. They can break through the metal door entrance.

But my guess is that wasn't cinematic enough for D&D. And they forgot what Bran's mark meant beyond being some kind of gps. They wanted their polar bear weight and more importantly the visual of a dragon tearing down the wall. So we ended up with Team Dany being the cause for the wall breaking down and the army of the dead invasion of Westeros. At which point Dany going north with her armies isn't some sacrifice she made and everyone should be grateful for it, it's a simple matter of cleaning up her team's mess.

Didn't Sandor have a vision of the WW crossing a frozen sea?

Jon also made clear that he didn't need Dany's permission to go North. Though, she could have detained him.

TBH, the stupid Wight hunt was when the show jumped the shark for me.