What would be your red line for the Stark characters?

[Tyrion1991]

3 minutes ago, CamiloRP said:

But that's not the story, we have good people in the Lannister side as well as bad people in the Stark side, never has GRRM framed an entire side as completely evil. And he only portrays war as necessary when it's really fucking necessary. The Starks are mostly good and the Lannisters are mostly bad, yet once we get in their heads we start to empathize with them. And a big part of the books is portraying soldiers in general as evil (not the men, but the soldier).

 

 

Completely evil is a very low bar. I wouldn’t say the Empire from Star Wars was completely evil.

For example, if you wanted a morally grey version of the story:

1) No twincest. Cersei just has an affair with somebody.

2) No Joffrey. Just a Tommen style kid.

3) Tywin is less messed up towards Tyrion.

Now there’s still problems with this. I think people would still see a corrupt family that needs to be knocked down a peg. But the Starks crusade to get revenge for Neds death would be on less sure ground. They aren’t fighting an incest monster. 

Also with the North:

1) Make the North ethnically diverse. Not a monolithic block who all worship the Starks. It’s very difficult to criticise the Stark cause when the people are behind them.

2) Play on the religious conflict element. They shouldn’t be playing nice with Andal, Seven Worshippers.

3) Have tension between the Riverland Lords and the Starks whose army is living off their land. 

You can still have good and bad people on both sides. Though I think it’s still very skewed towards the Starks. The issue is the factions themselves.

The anti war point is actually undermined by George making the Starks out to be the good guys. It allows a way to rationalise the Starks violence. To conclude that this must be a just war.

[butterweedstrover]

6 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

 

Sansa - If she helps kill Sweetrobin. Being annoying is a shallow and pathetic reason to murder somebody. A cousin and a small child to boot. It would be self serving, ignorant and again, she could dress that up as her putting the boy out of his misery and  all the usual lip service humility that people buy into; but it would be her lying to herself. 

 

 

The Athenian state had Socrates executed for being a sophist.  

And by being a sophist I mean going to the agora and questioning people's beliefs and those of random strangers. 

People were annoyed by him and thought him to be a sophist since he would not hold one position besides "I know that I know nothing." 

He was offered a way out if he pleaded guilty to the charge, but he stood his ground. He lost the trial and died. 

I think we can give Sansa a pass for killing Sweetrobin. 

[Hodor the Articulate]

Am I the only one that wants Rickon to be a feral cannibal? He'd shoot up to #1 Stark for me if that happens.

[Tyrion1991]

11 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

The Athenian state had Socrates executed for being a sophist.  

And by being a sophist I mean going to the agora and questioning people's beliefs and those of random strangers. 

People were annoyed by him and thought him to be a sophist since he would not hold one position besides "I know that I know nothing." 

He was offered a way out if he pleaded guilty to the charge, but he stood his ground. He lost the trial and died. 

I think we can give Sansa a pass for killing Sweetrobin. 

 

Pretty sure that’s not a proud moment in Greek history. 

[kissdbyfire]

6 minutes ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Am I the only one that wants Rickon to be a feral cannibal? He'd shoot up to #1 Stark for me if that happens.

Well, there’s that bit from Hibberd’s book “Fire Cannot Kill a Dragon” or some such title where Martin tells how the Ds wanted to cut Rickon from the abomination and Martin told them not to b/c “he had great plans for him” (paraphrasing). So you may get your wish!

 

[CamiloRP]

5 minutes ago, Tyrion1991 said:

Completely evil is a very low bar. I wouldn’t say the Empire from Star Wars was completely evil.

For example, if you wanted a morally grey version of the story:

1) No twincest. Cersei just has an affair with somebody.

2) No Joffrey. Just a Tommen style kid.

3) Tywin is less messed up towards Tyrion.

Now there’s still problems with this. I think people would still see a corrupt family that needs to be knocked down a peg. But the Starks crusade to get revenge for Neds death would be on less sure ground. They aren’t fighting an incest monster. 

Also with the North:

1) Make the North ethnically diverse. Not a monolithic block who all worship the Starks. It’s very difficult to criticise the Stark cause when the people are behind them.

2) Play on the religious conflict element. They shouldn’t be playing nice with Andal, Seven Worshippers.

3) Have tension between the Riverland Lords and the Starks whose army is living off their land. 

You can still have good and bad people on both sides. Though I think it’s still very skewed towards the Starks. The issue is the factions themselves.

The anti war point is actually undermined by George making the Starks out to be the good guys. It allows a way to rationalise the Starks violence. To conclude that this must be a just war.

But what you wrote in the OP is GRRM making the smallfolk Jon kills naturaly evil just cause. That would never happen.

That would be a completely different book tho, I think ASOIAF makes a good job of portraying completely different people in the same side, we get our "good" characters and they fight against the "evil" characters, but then we see the motives behind those evil characters and come to understand them, and we see the good characters do bad things.

As the war is presented we see North men do as much bad things as the kings men do. We also know that the war is for no purpose, Robb can sue for peace, get his sisters back and that'll be the end of it, but he needs to keep going, because that's the nature of revenge and war. The Stark violence is rationalized at first, but by ASOS it's heavily critiqued, it's part of the story's subversion. A story in which everyone starts a bad guy and ends the same would be lame, the think GRRM does is have you think the characters are doing good things, but when you think of it you realize they don't. 

The problem is the people often don't realize it. It's the same problem Breaking Bad had. Every one WW faced against was worse than him, so we justified his actions, but the show didn't, and by the end it was pretty clear he was a villain, but some people didn't realize it.

 

Look at the things you point out:

1) The incest. It was a loving relationship at first, between two consenting adults that actually cared for eachother, it wasn't bad.

2) Joffrey was a psycho but he wasn't in charge, and when he dies little changes.

3) Tywin is bigoted against dwarves, that makes sense in that world. More if you consider how much Tyrion sullied his house's honor and killed his love (in his eyes) Robb is awful to Tyrion, and the only thing he does to him is help Bran ride a horse again.

 

1) There are people who dislike them, Dustins, Boltons and Rysewells. Ethnic diversity in The Noth wouldn't work with the worldbuilding.

2) Why not? Cat worships the seven, and they're part of a kingdom that follows the seven, it'd make little sense for them to "not place nice" with them. That ould make Ned's fostering in The Vale impossible, as well as his friendship with Robert and his marriage to Cat.

3) The Riverland smallfolk thinks the northeners are as bad as the Lannisters and we get many moments in which that and the nontheners abuse of the Riverlands are brought up. The Lords are a bit annoyed, but the Northeners are mostly helping them protect their lands from an invasion.

 

 

[CamiloRP]

7 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Well, there’s that bit from Hibberd’s book “Fire Cannot Kill a Dragon” or some such title where Martin tells how the Ds wanted to cut Rickon from the abomination and Martin told them not to b/c “he had great plans for him” (paraphrasing). So you may get your wish!

 

I'm calling it. Drogon gets eaten alive by Rickon.

[the Other Wolf]

2 hours ago, Shierak Qiya said:

  D&E tales, WoIaF, Rogue Prince. 

These are not part of ASOIAF books.

 

2 hours ago, Shierak Qiya said:

that only means the story is partly seen through their perspective. 

The books (1-5) that should be discussed here are mostly written around the Starks. Chapter 1= Starks. Last chapter = ?. I think Starks.

I get that the Targs have the most pages in the overall saga. 

I think you would agree the Starks do play a Major role that 1991 can not stand.

[Nevets]

Arya - If she goes all in with the Faceless Men or starts killing innocents, then I'm booting her off my favorites list.  Fortunately I don't see that happening.   Yes, she is on a dark path, but I'm confident something will cause her to veer off before the end.

Sansa - I have trouble seeing her crossing red lines.  She's too nice.  If she turns into LF 2.0 and ceases to care about others on her way upwards,  I will be seriously worried.   But I don't see that happening, or lasting long if it does. 

I think the likelihood of her murdering Sweetrobin is essentially nil.  It's not really in her nature. 

Jon and Bran I can imagine going bad, but I'm not sure exactly how.  I can see an UnJon being a problem though.

[Lollygag]

My red line is becoming boring and poorly written characters.

All of the Stark kids are playing with some dark elements but I don't want some dull-ass plastic cartoon hero types. I also don't want all of the Starks to fall on the good side team because it undermines the theme of the whole series and I don't expect this at all. I admit I'm frustrated with superfans who go all-in with one family (playing the Game of Thrones - heh), but it's just as off to respond with all of this hate stuff (which is also falling into the Game of Thrones btw). There's a reason chapter titles aren't numbered and are first name only with no family name.

Jon - his repressed anger is severe. Also his inferiority complex and ambition. So far he's kept it in check but after the stabbing, the time in Ghost (becoming more wolf than man), kill the boy let the man be born, and how Kings of Winter are hard men for hard times, I expect Jon to be a character who is trying to do the right thing throughout the series, but I expect he will make readers very uncomfortable in the process and struggle navigating what he should do against his personal demons.

Sansa - has a pattern of going with the ends justify the means. Think she'll be focused on the right goals, but her means have been learned from Ned (as in don't do this), Cersei, LF, Marg.

Arya - she's in a very dark place and it may or may not turn out ok.

Bran - his curiosity is all. He can't stop himself from climbing - he falls. He gets bad vibes from what BR is selling (BR comes off as a victim himself) but his curiosity overrides his questions. He knows Hodor is being traumatized but can't help himself. Some pretty awful things have been done in history when curiosity comes before people.

Rickon - super dark stuff surrounding him. See nothing good here beyond Osha's influence.

The older three kids have a hard split from the younger three in terms of upbringing. When everything falls apart, we see Robb, Jon and Sansa moving into their adult roles. They're further from their instincts and take longer to warg. At the beginning of the story, Bran is only just beginning to get Ned's lessons, something the older three have had more time with. Arya is kept out of this. Rickon was too young and Ned was only beginning to notice he needed help keeping his emotions in check. The younger three kids who never started on their adult roles all took to warging much faster and more naturally.

The older three are going to rely on the tradition of their upbringing more and this will be a moral anchor. But they won't see as well outside the box. Bran, Arya and Rickon are more free-spirited but lack the moral anchor the older ones had the opportunity to learn. But they also won't be bound by the learned rules of Westeros and may be the link to really putting things together.

Weirdly, seems like all of the Stark kids are set up to have big problems with identity issues. Jon/Ghost confusion which is already happening. Also learning his parents. Sansa is method-acting as Alayne and had to act the whole time she was captive in KL to save her life. Arya is going through the FM thing which is an evil thing to do to a developing child. Same with exposing Bran to all of the stuff in the trees at his age. Rickon is so tied to Shaggy at 3/4- that's so not healthy.

[Lollygag]

4 hours ago, CamiloRP said:

Have you been reading this books?

At least at the time of the following post, he hasn't.

Quote

So far I can keep reading because there’s enough characters, plot lines and all the Starks are weak with no real power. I am essentially ignoring their existence. Once that changes though and they all become major players I think it will be very difficult for me to carry on with the series. Frankly I skipped most of Jon, Arya and Brans chapters, skim reading them at best. I truly don’t care about them at all. In the case of Jon, even the authors best efforts to paint him in a positive light only increase my disdain and contempt for him.

 

Adding - also based on the earlier characterization of Dany, I'm not sure how much processing happened there either.

9 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

Contrast this to Dany:

- She’s not humble 

- She’s hot blooded 

- She wants power and her birthright

Dany has massive self-esteem issues from Viserys. Reread her last chapter in ADWD. The whole fire-and-blood-dragons-plant-no-trees thing comes from her bashing herself for not ruling well.

Hot-blooded. Sure, sometimes like most people. But a lot of times, she's just a girl, docile, wanting comfort.

She wants the house with the red door. She wanted Drago and a family. She feels obligated to go for power and birthright because she has dragons and is the last one left. Also has a deep, unprocessed guilt over Viserys and very complex feelings towards him.

 

[Rose of Red Lake]

I know my moral line. If they abuse power to commit mass murder and think its for "the best."  I'm not too worried about that though because they dont have much power. Second worst is if they enable and excuse someone else doing it. I think Jon is going to annoy me the most after resurrection because his flaws are going to be heightened. So not only will he probably be impulsive, arrogant, and cruel he might also be an easily fooled sycophant.

[Tyrion1991]

1 hour ago, Lollygag said:

At least at the time of the following post, he hasn't.

 

Adding - also based on the earlier characterization of Dany, I'm not sure how much processing happened there either.

Dany has massive self-esteem issues from Viserys. Reread her last chapter in ADWD. The whole fire-and-blood-dragons-plant-no-trees thing comes from her bashing herself for not ruling well.

Hot-blooded. Sure, sometimes like most people. But a lot of times, she's just a girl, docile, wanting comfort.

She wants the house with the red door. She wanted Drago and a family. She feels obligated to go for power and birthright because she has dragons and is the last one left. Also has a deep, unprocessed guilt over Viserys and very complex feelings towards him.

 

 

Should I keep reading the series in general having already read to Dance. The series hasn’t been finished. There’s a limit to how long you can make a title. 

I have for my sins read their silly chapters. I was exaggerating. If I reread the novels I would skim past them since they’re boring and there’s nothing I care about there. I did not initially despise them because I took George at his word and I didn’t think he was going to throw Dany under the bus to make them look good. That it became increasingly obvious that he was using a double standard and the show removes any lingering doubts here.

Those are the main reasons people cite when they criticise Daenerys. Stuff like she gives herself loads of titles and calls herself the Dragon, Jon would never do that ergo; Jon is a good person. My point is that they’re basically comparing them to the Starks and George has written the story in such a way to make the reader criticise these things. So it’s not surprising and the fact he gave Dany those traits is to provoke precisely this reaction. From the very first chapter. He isn’t making a balanced or nuanced comparison between two extremes of ice and fire. It’s pretty clear which way the wind is blowing.

 

[Dragomir]

2 hours ago, Lollygag said:

My red line is becoming boring and poorly written characters.

All of the Stark kids are playing with some dark elements but I don't want some dull-ass plastic cartoon hero types. I also don't want all of the Starks to fall on the good side team because it undermines the theme of the whole series and I don't expect this at all. I admit I'm frustrated with superfans who go all-in with one family (playing the Game of Thrones - heh), but it's just as off to respond with all of this hate stuff (which is also falling into the Game of Thrones btw). There's a reason chapter titles aren't numbered and are first name only with no family name.

Jon - his repressed anger is severe. Also his inferiority complex and ambition. So far he's kept it in check but after the stabbing, the time in Ghost (becoming more wolf than man), kill the boy let the man be born, and how Kings of Winter are hard men for hard times, I expect Jon to be a character who is trying to do the right thing throughout the series, but I expect he will make readers very uncomfortable in the process and struggle navigating what he should do against his personal demons.

Sansa - has a pattern of going with the ends justify the means. Think she'll be focused on the right goals, but her means have been learned from Ned (as in don't do this), Cersei, LF, Marg.

Arya - she's in a very dark place and it may or may not turn out ok.

Bran - his curiosity is all. He can't stop himself from climbing - he falls. He gets bad vibes from what BR is selling (BR comes off as a victim himself) but his curiosity overrides his questions. He knows Hodor is being traumatized but can't help himself. Some pretty awful things have been done in history when curiosity comes before people.

Rickon - super dark stuff surrounding him. See nothing good here beyond Osha's influence.

The older three kids have a hard split from the younger three in terms of upbringing. When everything falls apart, we see Robb, Jon and Sansa moving into their adult roles. They're further from their instincts and take longer to warg. At the beginning of the story, Bran is only just beginning to get Ned's lessons, something the older three have had more time with. Arya is kept out of this. Rickon was too young and Ned was only beginning to notice he needed help keeping his emotions in check. The younger three kids who never started on their adult roles all took to warging much faster and more naturally.

The older three are going to rely on the tradition of their upbringing more and this will be a moral anchor. But they won't see as well outside the box. Bran, Arya and Rickon are more free-spirited but lack the moral anchor the older ones had the opportunity to learn. But they also won't be bound by the learned rules of Westeros and may be the link to really putting things together.

Weirdly, seems like all of the Stark kids are set up to have big problems with identity issues. Jon/Ghost confusion which is already happening. Also learning his parents. Sansa is method-acting as Alayne and had to act the whole time she was captive in KL to save her life. Arya is going through the FM thing which is an evil thing to do to a developing child. Same with exposing Bran to all of the stuff in the trees at his age. Rickon is so tied to Shaggy at 3/4- that's so not healthy.

I agree with this

[Damon_Tor]

11 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

Bran - Id say he’s already crossed that line when he warged Hodor like a piece of meat. He can tell himself whatever junk he wants, Bran is a freak and a monster. I don’t think George himself thought this would be a red line for many people. So I am guessing it’s going to get a lot worse with this guy.

Arya - If Arya, upon learning her warg joy rides where she’s enjoying hunting and eating innocent peasants; does not cut it out immediately. It’s sick and twisted but right now she has the excuse of ignorance. If she continues with it then, well, she’s a monster. Even if George is playing down how bad this actually is.

I agree, Bran has crossed the line, and I also consider warging Hodor to be the moment he became irredemable. Not when he warged him the first time, as it was in a panic and he didn't really know what it would be like, but when he decided to take Hodor's body out for a joyride spelunking in the caves. The author notes the terror Hodor is in during this process, terror Bran is aware of, but doesn't care. This is SO cut and dry: Hodor is the absolute picture of innocence and loyalty, who carried Bran across countless miles, and he is repaid by utter betrayal. And Bran does it because he's bored.

Arya has not gone quite so far, and is not beyond redemption. I don't take issue with the warg dreams: even if she enjoys it, she's a passive observer up until now. She doesn't (IIRC) goad her wolf on and make her kill people, so those people would be dead either way. It's gross, and perhaps a bad sign of her mental fitness, but not itself immoral. What's more concerning is her willingness to act as an assassin for hire. In particular her assassination of the Insurance Salesman is troubling. Apart from the man being rude and poorly liked, Arya can find no evidence of illegal or immoral acts by the man. All she has to go in the word of her handler, who is himself a murderer, a cult leader, and a liar. And even what the Kindly Man tells her is not a crime worth death by vigilante justice.

Again, this is nowhere near as depraved as Bran's callous mistreatment of Hodor, and it doesn't put her beyond saving, but it's certainly a very dark stain on her soul.

The good news is, I don't see any ending for these characters doesn't see them in direct conflict with each other. Indeed, I suspect the entire reason the Faceless Men sought to recruit Arya was to allow them to kill the creature that used to be Bran.

[TheLastWolf]

12 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

she’s enjoying hunting and eating innocent peasants

Innocent peasants???!!!???!!! There are none left in the Riverlands. The Lannisters' dogs saw to it. Wifes and daughters raped and murdered. Sons and fathers and brothers killed in war and the Red Wedding. What little survived are in their lords' holdfasts. 

Nymeria and her pack hunt deserters and warmongering bastards (Northmen or not) 

I won't bother to reply to the rest of the Stark haters, Dany and Targ lickspittles, bigoted, biased bullshit. 

[TheLastWolf]

4 hours ago, Nevets said:

Sansa - I have trouble seeing her crossing red lines.  She's too nice

      

[Nevets]

42 minutes ago, TheLastWolf said:

      

My red lines generally involve harming others.   Sansa has yet to deliberately harm anyone,  and if she does I expect they will richly deserve it, like Littlefinger. 

[Tyrion1991]

41 minutes ago, TheLastWolf said:

Innocent peasants???!!!???!!! There are none left in the Riverlands. The Lannisters' dogs saw to it. Wifes and daughters raped and murdered. Sons and fathers and brothers killed in war and the Red Wedding. What little survived are in their lords' holdfasts. 

Nymeria and her pack hunt deserters and warmongering bastards (Northmen or not) 

I won't bother to reply to the rest of the Stark haters, Dany and Targ lickspittles, bigoted, biased bullshit. 

 

The Northern army eating all the food you mean? Drape yourself in a rebel flag as an excuse to kill and steal indeed. They got exactly what they deserved. Why should I mourn an army of rapists and thieves who prattle on about their honour and how they’re the wolves of the North? 

So wait, you’re saying Robs war had been so violent and devastating that there isn’t a single peasant for Aryas Pack to eat? Even I haven’t accused him of genocide and ethnic cleansing. Very odd defence to Arya not killing innocents with her wolf and enjoying it.

So it’s okay for her to kill her countrymen if they, as conscripts, decide to desert the army? Who made her judge jury and executioner here? Maybe Rob should have fed and paid his men instead expecting them to offer their lives up for his blood feud. Arya doesn’t have any right to hunt them down with a Direwolf for the crime of deserting her dead brother. 

The more likely explanation is either that Arya is lying to herself to justify what her precious wolf is doing. Of course they’re bad people iam killing. Or, George is sanitising it. Lord forbid one of the Direwolves harm an innocent person. Obviously the Starks can’t have that besmirching their good names. 

 

 

[SeanF]

So far, I don't think of any of the Starks have crossed a line which would see them becoming wholly unsympathetic to me.

To get to the stage of being wholly unsympathetic, for me, a character has to actively enjoy doing evil - like Ramsay, Kraznys and the Good/Great Masters, , the Bloody Mummers, etc., or else to be completely selfish, - such as Littlefinger, or Varys.

Of the big six characters, as of ADWD, Tyrion is the one who is the least sympathetic to me.  There is just so much spite and nastiness in him.  The other five, Sansa, Arya, Bran, Jon, Daenerys are varying shades of grey, wrestling with moral dilemmas, and thrown into dreadful situations.  I have a lot of sympathy for people who find themselves in dire situations, and do what they need to survive, and to protect those they care for, even if they make the wrong decisions.  I think that the author intends us to have such sympathy.