GRRM's Original Outline "What has changed?"

[BlackLightning]

On 3/6/2021 at 8:20 AM, Rose of Red Lake said:

I dont think the news will make it that far. GRRM said cliffhangers from Book 5 will be resolved quickly in Winds. If he is resurrected quickly, they wont even realize he died.

Wait what's your definition of quickly?

Quickly as in Jon is being resurrected in either the first or second Wall POV chapter? Or quickly as in Jon will be resurrected by the time the book gets to its halfway point.

[Bowen 747]

Sansa is not an end-game character.  She will bite the dust before the end of the last book.  Jon will no longer have a prominent role in the plot.  Aegon has taken his place.

[Back in Black-Snow]

On 3/3/2021 at 1:42 PM, Egged said:

The thing is the later makes her of low interest for marriage to the king if true.

Do you care to expound on that?

Thank you.

[YeniAy_Ottoman]

On 3/5/2021 at 9:44 PM, Rose of Red Lake said:

Also, since GRRM says that this is a series of books where the main heroine can be raped I think LF will try an attempted assault.

When he said it? I miss this, can you send me a source?

On 3/5/2021 at 9:44 PM, Rose of Red Lake said:

(YES Sansa is in a leadership arc believe it or not). You will probably disagree since I detect some Arya/Sansa jealousy, which is always the way this goes. Any advancement in Sansa's plot is seen as taking away from Arya's.

I was going to discuss this with you, but when I read this over and over, I gave up. Wow! Okay! I'm the jealous one, so badly jealous of Sansa, yes ... Wow! Impossible to discuss with a Sansa stan!  Bye!

_________

On 3/5/2021 at 9:54 PM, BlackLightning said:

You said that Sansa's problem is that she doesn't know who to trust. I disagree: Sansa's problem is that:

1. she doesn't know when to speak and when to be silent
2. and when she speaks, she doesn't know whether to tell the truth or tell a lie

There are also problems you mentioned. I also agree that Ned and Sansa have similar points. She is fathers's daugther. Ned did not know very well who to trust. Sansa shows that if she trusts someone like LF, she still hasn't learned who to trust at the end of the day.

On 3/7/2021 at 12:34 PM, Castellan said:

I liked the OP, I have not seen detail about his outline before.

If Sansa's fate was to stick to her husband and child once the Starks were in rebellion, having essentially lost her soul or at least her northern identity when Lady died, maybe she will do this now at a later point in the plot, i.e. we do not know how far she has started to identify with Littlefinger's outlook and aims, but perhaps this is the side she goes over to. Before, she was very much a hostage on her guard and wanting her family, now she seems to be growing up in Littlefinger's captivity and losing that outlook.

Part of the earlier plot continues in the way she told Cersei of Ned's plans to flee and, obviously, bitterly regretted it.

Thank you.

There are still some unclear points in my head about Sansa's arc, I need to think more about it, but Sansa had similar to her aunt Lysa in some ways, and on the other hand, she had some points similar to Cersei. I wonder if Sansa will ever evolve into Cersei 2 at some point. Not exactly the same, of course, but in some ways ...

Things like the Sansa's wrong memory are important. Martin hinted that it was about her psychology. Many people attribute the experiences of her father after his death, but the erroneous memory did not start with Sandor, it started with Mycah ... The story that started with a lie continues with a lie, and I think this "lie" issue affects not only her life but also her personality. So when I look at it this way, I always think that Sansa's story ends in a negative way. Still, not sure of course.

I am of the opinion that LF and Cersei will have an influence on the shaping of Sansa. The biggest problem for Sansa is that she is too much under the influence of LF and LF is not a character you want to be influenced by.

Sansa will surely leave her identity behind Aleyna and return to being Sansa after a point ... But there is a thought that she may not forget Aleyna completely because of this memory problem. This is one of the side effects of being under the influence of LF ... We are now correct or not, I guess we will see in the future.

Quote

When asked whether Sandor Clegane and Sansa Stark will meet again, George R. R. Martin coyly responded, “Why, the Hound is dead, and Sansa may be dead as well. There’s only Alayne Stone.” 

Quote

In regards to the conversation about the dire wolves and the Starks the point was made (I forget by whom) that Lady was dead and Sansa still alive to which I replied that Sansa wasn't really much of a Stark anymore. IIRC (this is a little hazy), at this point GRRM kind of leaned back in his chair, smiled and said something to the effect of "A very astute observation." (Note: I was hoping someone else would bring this up as I didn't want to do any hornblowing... since Terra brought it up, but didn't recall the wording I felt the need. If anyone remembers his words differently I'll gladly recant.)

This last question and answer had been asked another time, and I remember he showed a positive reaction this time too, but now I can't find it. 

In fact, the only thing Sansa made openly to regret was a matter of trusting the Lannisters. I did not see any obvious signs of regret in other matters, and even though Cersei mentioned twice that Sansa had told her some of her father's plans, Sansa only mentioned this once, on the day of the events. Of course I may have overlooked it or I have forgotten completely. Did she have a scene where Sansa clearly regretted this? Except that she voiced the mistake of trusting the Lannisters.

On 3/7/2021 at 2:33 PM, Springwatch said:

My pet bugbear. Ned didn't plan to flee, he was staying; Sansa didn't know Ned's plans; Ned's plans changed in the middle of the night; LF and Cersei knew basically everything; nothing Sansa could say would make a jot of difference; the time scale was impossibly short anyway.

 

Sansa didn't know all of Ned's plans, but ahe knew enough to keep Cersei moving quickly and accurately. GRRM had said that.

Quote

The way I see it, it is not a case of all or nothing. No single person is to blame for Ned's downfall. Sansa played a role, certainly, but it would be unfair to put all the blame on her. But it would also be unfair to exonerate her. She was not privy to all of Ned's plans regarding Stannis, the gold cloaks, etc... but she knew more than just that her father planned to spirit her and Arya away from King's Landing. She knew when they were to leave, on what ship, how many men would be in their escort, who would have the command, where Arya was that morning, etc... all of which was useful to Cersei in planning and timing her move... - 1999, SSM

 

[Egged]

6 hours ago, Travis said:

Do you care to expound on that?

Thank you.

If she distances herself from her family ever more so, she would in return likely have lowered influence on the North, making her a less interesting candidate for marriage to the king, assuming the north is still very loyal to the Starks. I think if Aegon's bride would be chosen for two reasons: bridge a rift caused over the past events with one of the kingdoms, and gain popular support under a similar light as Aegon himself, by marrying a woman beloved by the people.

Margaery is a more obvious candidate, especially if absolved of all supposed sins and all the blame is thrown on Cersei.

[BlackLightning]

On 3/10/2021 at 2:50 PM, YeniAy_Ottoman said:

Things like the Sansa's wrong memory are important. Martin hinted that it was about her psychology. Many people attribute the experiences of her father after his death, but the erroneous memory did not start with Sandor, it started with Mycah ... The story that started with a lie continues with a lie, and I think this "lie" issue affects not only her life but also her personality. So when I look at it this way, I always think that Sansa's story ends in a negative way. Still, not sure of course.

I am of the opinion that LF and Cersei will have an influence on the shaping of Sansa. The biggest problem for Sansa is that she is too much under the influence of LF and LF is not a character you want to be influenced by.

Sansa will surely leave her identity behind Aleyna and return to being Sansa after a point ... But there is a thought that she may not forget Aleyna completely because of this memory problem. This is one of the side effects of being under the influence of LF ... We are now correct or not, I guess we will see in the future.

GRRM has gone on the record to say that the "Unkiss" incident (Sansa's false memory of the Hound kissing her) was foreshadowing future misremembrances or amnesia.

He didn't say that it would be Sansa nor has Sansa been the only one to forget crucial information, overlook something that shouldn't have been or develop false memories.

It's happened to Cersei, Arya, Tyrion, Bran but Sansa is the main one.

Maybe this is going somewhere.

However, Sansa is the main one.

[sifth]

11 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

GRRM has gone on the record to say that the "Unkiss" incident (Sansa's false memory of the Hound kissing her) was foreshadowing future misremembrances or amnesia.

He didn't say that it would be Sansa nor has Sansa been the only one to forget crucial information, overlook something that shouldn't have been or develop false memories.

It's happened to Cersei, Arya, Tyrion, Bran but Sansa is the main one.

Maybe this is going somewhere.

However, Sansa is the main one.

I always just felt it was a means of making the characters feel more human. People misremember stuff all the time, but that's how I viewed it.

[Springwatch]

On 3/10/2021 at 7:50 PM, YeniAy_Ottoman said:

Sansa didn't know all of Ned's plans, but ahe knew enough to keep Cersei moving quickly and accurately. GRRM had said that.

Cersei's coup was triggered by the death of King Robert. If she'd waited (and why would she do that?), Ned would have taken control.

If you think Sansa changed anything, work out what it was she said and post it here. GRRM vaguely suggested troop dispositions (irrc) - start with that if you like.

If you ask me, GRRM was trolling to draw attention to the scene. Or he's such a careless writer, he doesn't know what he's written. I doubt that second one.

ETA

I know this is off-topic for your OP. There is a better thread for it, but I'm out of time to find it tonight.

 

[Nathan Stark]

@YeniAy_Ottoman, @Springwatch

Cersei's coup was going to occur, regardless of Sansa's actions. That does not mean Sansa did not contribute to Cersei's plans when she told Cersei about her fathers plans. It was useful information for Cersei in that it made the coup much less bloody on the Lannister side.

It still doesn't mean Sansa is solely responsible. People often misinterpret George's quote to mean they have permission to blame Sansa for every little thing that went wrong for Ned. When what he really meant was that there is plenty of blame to go around for Ned's downfall. Sansa played a small part. Ned played a larger part through his own desision making, and Littlefinger played the greatest role of all. This is why I think Sansa is destined to kill Littlefinger herself, as justice for her father and Jeyne Poole.

To bring this back around to the original discussion, Sansa's role in the original pitch letter was to betray her family. She did that here, though here her actions were those of a poorly informed child. You have to screw up to move up. Sansa's role in the series as it exists is much better and more meaningful than George's original conception was. 

[Rose of Red Lake]

On 3/9/2021 at 2:18 PM, Bowen 747 said:

Sansa is not an end-game character.  She will bite the dust before the end of the last book.  Jon will no longer have a prominent role in the plot.  Aegon has taken his place.

Framing this post and putting it near my morning coffee so I can start the morning with a laugh.

 

[YeniAy_Ottoman]

On 3/12/2021 at 6:27 AM, BlackLightning said:

GRRM has gone on the record to say that the "Unkiss" incident (Sansa's false memory of the Hound kissing her) was foreshadowing future misremembrances or amnesia.

He didn't say that it would be Sansa nor has Sansa been the only one to forget crucial information, overlook something that shouldn't have been or develop false memories.

It's happened to Cersei, Arya, Tyrion, Bran but Sansa is the main one.

Maybe this is going somewhere.

However, Sansa is the main one.

Every person sometimes experiences some memory loss or misrepresentation, something that happens to everyone. It happened to me, I'm sure it happened to you. Little things ... when very sad things happen, they can happen. Or there is no specific reason, as the past stay behind, the two similar memories intertwine. The real problem is to continue to produce false memories and begin to cling firmly to their own lies. There is such a thing in Sansa. She told a lie about Mycah, and then that lie became "truth" for her. Then she continued with Sandor after the KL events ... It is obvious that it will go somewhere, GRRM announced that he did this on purpose but of course he did not want to say much. I think he likes to play with the psychology of his characters. He force them hard.

@Springwatch like said Nathan... 

Sansa's carrying of information has nothing to do with Cersei's attempt to kill Robert. Cersei was trying to kill Robert before, Ned triggered it.

There is no need to make GRRM's explanations "pointless", the man knows much better the story he wrote. If he was a statement that contradicts the information he wrote in the books, I would agree with you, but it does not. 

 

As it says in the quote ... No single person is to blame for Ned's downfall. Sansa played a role, certainly, but it would be unfair to put all the blame on her. But it would also be unfair to exonerate her.

[Rose of Red Lake]

6 hours ago, YeniAy_Ottoman said:

The real problem is to continue to produce false memories and begin to cling firmly to their own lies. There is such a thing in Sansa. She told a lie about Mycah, and then that lie became "truth" for her. Then she continued with Sandor after the KL events ... It is obvious that it will go somewhere, GRRM announced that he did this on purpose but of course he did not want to say much. I think he likes to play with the psychology of his characters. He force them hard.

At the Trident, she didn't "lie" about Mycha, she chose to not pick a side. She was in an impossible position where her father was asking her to testify against her betrothed/future husband. Arya physically assaults her for it, which is another reason why she rewrites the events in her head. The pattern seems to be that she rewrites a violent situation into something more palatable. Sansa doesn't want unpleasantness. She wants to smooth things over in front of the grown ups (who are the ones who are really at fault here).

Also, if she had told the truth, she would have incriminated Arya because she's the one who really attacked the prince. Sansa was put in a rock and a hard place. When she tells Arya that Mycha attacked Joffrey, she was in the mode where "Joff can do no wrong." She paid for that. I expect when she finds out the Hound killed her father's household guard, effectively helping LF betray her father, is when things will come crashing down. The mismemory is probably leading to her breaking ties with the South altogether, like a second Joffrey realization. To a certain point, her imaginative house of cards isn't sustainable. But Arya's blunt rage isn't either. The two sisters are on parallel paths.

And while this can be harmful - Sansa being able to do "deep acting" can be an asset. Learning how to hide your identity and tell stories about events is a skill that Arya is just now learning how to do.

[Springwatch]

On 3/14/2021 at 9:28 AM, YeniAy_Ottoman said:

Every person sometimes experiences some memory loss or misrepresentation, something that happens to everyone. It happened to me, I'm sure it happened to you. Little things ... when very sad things happen, they can happen. Or there is no specific reason, as the past stay behind, the two similar memories intertwine. The real problem is to continue to produce false memories and begin to cling firmly to their own lies. There is such a thing in Sansa. She told a lie about Mycah, and then that lie became "truth" for her. Then she continued with Sandor after the KL events ... It is obvious that it will go somewhere, GRRM announced that he did this on purpose but of course he did not want to say much. I think he likes to play with the psychology of his characters. He force them hard.

The only psychology he's playing with is ours, I think.

No doubt GRRM has a gift for characterisation - something you touched on in another thread: the amazing job he did rehabilitating Jaime in the opinion of the readership. Jaime went from stock villain to fan favourite - even though he feels no remorse for his past evil deeds, and continues to build on the winnings. GRRM achieves this by giving Jaime a wonderfully agreeable character - he's funny, he's brave, he's witty and cynical. He has a great back story. He has hope for the future. Result: readers find it easy to overlook, even forgive and forget his past. The readers' sympathies have been manipulated - it's a play on our psychology.

Sansa's kind of the opposite. She's introduced in a very unsympathetic way via the conflict with Arya (obviously a very engaging, attractive character), and then aligned with the Lannisters (obviously villainous). She's not given any 'hero' qualities like courage, humour, or loving poor people. The readers recognise the tropes, and form iron-hard expectations of her arc - but GRRM is playing with our psycholgy, and in my honest opinion, AGOT Sansa is innocent of almost everything she gets accused of.

The arc isn't a descent into madness either. Saying Mycah attacked the prince (the 'official' version of the story, no doubt) was aimed at hurting Arya - they were quarrelling constantly at that time. It's not memory loss. Later on, she recalls the correct version.

The things that really are going somewhere, imho, are:

1. That mesmeric charm Cersei and Joff held over Sansa, which absolutely did disturb her thinking. Hopefully next time she'll be handing it out instead of falling victim.

2. The Hound, the unKiss. Stories and songs.

3. Illyn Payne, the King's Justice, Death on legs.

4. Falling and flying - it's a theme she shares with Bran. Why's it there at all?

This is high fantasy, so I'm mostly expecting the payoff to be magical rather than psychological.

[Springwatch]

On 3/13/2021 at 11:37 PM, Nathan Stark said:

@YeniAy_Ottoman, @Springwatch

Cersei's coup was going to occur, regardless of Sansa's actions. That does not mean Sansa did not contribute to Cersei's plans when she told Cersei about her fathers plans. It was useful information for Cersei in that it made the coup much less bloody on the Lannister side.

But don't you see? Trusting this SSM forces you to make statements that you would reject as totally foolish in any other context.

1. It's Ned's handful of second-raters led by Fat Tom against the combined forces of red and gold cloaks, led by Lannister commanders and the Hound. Whatever Ned orders is like re-ordering the deck chairs on the Titanic.
2. He deployed his troops in an entirely predictable manner (protect the Tower).
3. He specifically does not want Sansa hearing about man stuff like troop deployments (e.g. Beric's mission)
4. Sansa is profoundly not interested
5. and so on, and so on.

On 3/14/2021 at 9:28 AM, YeniAy_Ottoman said:

@Springwatch like said Nathan... 

No. This is factually wrong. George's quote is factually wrong. There is no possible route for Sansa to influence the fall of Ned.

Quote

Sansa's carrying of information has nothing to do with Cersei's attempt to kill Robert. Cersei was trying to kill Robert before, Ned triggered it.

I'm talking about the actual death of Robert, not the wounding.

Quote

There is no need to make GRRM's explanations "pointless", the man knows much better the story he wrote. If he was a statement that contradicts the information he wrote in the books, I would agree with you, but it does not. 

There is every need, and he has contradicted the books.

But we've had this conversation before! We don't have to spend any more time on this, I can just link back into the old thread and form a complete loop:

155955-sansas-betrayal-consequences-partly-overestimated

[Rose of Red Lake]

36 minutes ago, Springwatch said:

But we've had this conversation before! We don't have to spend any more time on this, I can just link back into the old thread and form a complete loop:

I hadn't read this post - it's interesting. So he feels that sometimes readers know the story better than him?? That's not a good sign to instill confidence that he knows what he's doing! I wanted to make a thread on this for a while titled "Is GRRM a confusing writer?" because it seems like what he intends to show isn't coming across very clearly. And that line from him seems to fit your argument. He wants to show something but readers have pointed out that it isn't really there. 

 

There was another statement about the whole thing that was posted on reddit but the interview link is lost: "Sansa was the least sympathetic of the Starks in the first book; she has become more sympathetic, partly because she comes to accept responsibility for her part in her father's death." I also question this because ...

1) are readers really finding her more sympathetic ? Seems like she's still one of the top hated characters along with Cat

2) are readers finding her MORE sympathetic because "she's accepting responsibility???" how does he know that? And why would that be a reason to find her sympathetic? Maybe they're finding her sympathetic because she's being beaten by Joffrey's guards???

3) as you state, how does the text show her responsibility for his death, George?

4) how can she accept responsibility for it, if she didn't really know her actions caused whatever he wanted to show? (she doesn't know half of what happened behind the scenes). What he calls "accepting responsibility" to me looks more like she's mad at herself for being too trusting of Joffrey and Cersei. 

[YeniAy_Ottoman]

@Springwatch I do not think that the information written in the books with the GRRM's explanation contradicts, everything is very clear to me. There is also no point or benefit in rejecting a uncontradictory explanation and believing in something the opposite. If you look at the complete explanation of GRRM, in SSM; It speaks very clearly about the mistakes that Ned made himself, I did not include all of them in the quote, but I did not need it, because in the sentence mentioned about Sansa, in fact, "all the blame is not Sansa, there are other factors." There was an explanation.

There was more than one reason why an event occurred. There is more than one reason for what happened to Ned, and what Sansa telling Cersei the information he knew is just one of them.

There is no point in denying something very obvious so stubbornly. It is very unnecessary. No character is faultless, but why Dany and Sansa stans try to make their characters' mistakes and wrongs seem right, it's ridiculous. Moreover, it causes very tiring and boring discussions for the rest of the fandom. Jon has mistakes, Arya has mistakes, Tyrion and the other characters have mistakes. Naturally, Sansa also has its mistakes. Let's accept this fact, we will all be happy, be sure.

 

[Nathan Stark]

4 hours ago, Springwatch said:

But don't you see? Trusting this SSM forces you to make statements that you would reject as totally foolish in any other context.

1. It's Ned's handful of second-raters led by Fat Tom against the combined forces of red and gold cloaks, led by Lannister commanders and the Hound. Whatever Ned orders is like re-ordering the deck chairs on the Titanic.
2. He deployed his troops in an entirely predictable manner (protect the Tower).
3. He specifically does not want Sansa hearing about man stuff like troop deployments (e.g. Beric's mission)
4. Sansa is profoundly not interested
5. and so on, and so on.

1. It's swords and spears at really close quarters. Even Ned's second raters could do damage to the Lannisters if they had some preparation. Take Syrio Forel vs. Meryn Trant as an example of how a third rater like Trant can defeat a superb warrior like Forel with the proper preparation like armor, steel weaponry, etc.

2. True.

3. Sansa was literally in the room when Ned sent Beric on the mission.

4. She's interested enough to have an opinion on who Ned should have sent to face Gregor Clegane instead of Beric, i.e. Loras Tyrell.

George's point isn't that Sansa needs to know every little detail aboit Ned's plans to have undermined him. She knew where the household gaurds were because she was part of Ned's household too. She knew which ship she and Arya were supposed to leave Kings Landing in, and we see men wearing Stark colors at the docks in Arya's final chapter, men she does not recognize. She knew where Arya and Syrio did their dancing lessons. Sansa had all sorts of knowlege of the kind that Cersei could make use of entirely because it was so intimate, and it allowed Cersei to close her net around the Starks much more easily than she would have otherwise.

Ned and Littlefinger both have much bigger roles in Ned's downfall than Sansa does, obviously. But it is ignoring the written text to say that Sansa had nothing at all to do with it. And we have George's own comments on the matter as well. You can believe he's just trolling if you really want to, but it seems clear to me that he isn't.

[Springwatch]

@YeniAy_Ottoman I won't attempt to persuade you, but I'll give a few more reasons why I think as I do, starting with a quote from Syrio:

Quote

 

"[...] When I came into his presence, he was seated, and in his lap was a fat yellow cat. He told me that one of his captains had brought the beast to him, from an island beyond the sunrise. 'Have you ever seen her like?' he asked of me.

"And to him I said, 'Each night in the alleys of Braavos I see a thousand like him,' and the Sealord laughed, and that day I was named first sword."

 

The author who is fond of writing parables like this is not going be offended by scepticism. And in fact the theme of not being fooled by appearances and first impressions runs right through the book. So GRRM identifies with the Sealord, I think. If he saw my efforts at scepticism, he would also laugh (you might agree!).

It feels actually more respectful to the author's ideas not to put blind faith anywhere. Even on him. Some comments he made support this, but I'm struggling to find quotes. He is deeply frustrated that the outline was leaked. He thinks fans can sometimes put too much importance on idle remarks. He would be happier with his remarks being studied if only he could recall some of them first. (Citations needed, I know, but it's not easy....)

 

[Springwatch]

22 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I wanted to make a thread on this for a while titled "Is GRRM a confusing writer?" because it seems like what he intends to show isn't coming across very clearly. And that line from him seems to fit your argument. He wants to show something but readers have pointed out that it isn't really there. 

This feels so very on point, I can't get it out of my head. There's a mismatch between the author's (apparent) intentions and the detail he gives in the books. He wants to show something that isn't really there. And he has done it! Sansa-threw-her-family-under-the-bus is a line I've heard a hundred times - was that his intention?

Even without the SSM, Sansa is marked out for treachery: Cersei pings in fast with 'traitor's blood', and Sansa is forced to repeat it a lot: "My father was a traitor," Sansa said at once. "And my brother and lady mother are traitors as well." That reflex she had learned quickly. and "I have the traitor's blood".

Now she's guilty of regicide as well - high treason. Another crime she didn't commit, but the rumours are going wild all over the country "she killed the king with a spell..." Even Tyrion thinks she did it.

There's something here, and it reminds of something, but I just can't bring it to mind.

[Rose of Red Lake]

3 hours ago, Springwatch said:

This feels so very on point, I can't get it out of my head. There's a mismatch between the author's (apparent) intentions and the detail he gives in the books. He wants to show something that isn't really there. 

I think this also happens with the writing for Tyrion. He talked about how he struggles to portray him. Not making him too dark or too light. I think some readers may view him as darker than he intended, which is on him.

If his reaction to Adam Feldman's take is any indication, I think he also struggled with the Meereenese peace plot. His plot in Meereen WAS overly complicated and there were so many nuances that Feldman picked up...it's just asking a lot.

Quote

And he has done it! Sansa-threw-her-family-under-the-bus is a line I've heard a hundred times - was that his intention?

They still say that about her, even when her going to Cersei about Ned's plans was omitted from the show. GRRM wrote the episode where Ned and Sansa get captured so I'm guessing he made the choice to omit it? Some book fans were angry about leaving it out, which I found very interesting.

I think what bothers me about the idea of holding her partly responsible, is that it leads into the belief that she deserves what she gets afterward. Beaten by Joffrey's guards? "Welp that's what you get for dreaming about marrying a prince and betraying your family!" It's a sick mentality readers are allowed to have. If his intention is to make her more sympathetic as she goes along, I don't think this is working out very well...

Also, if we're supposed to see it as a tragedy or something, I think the idea that a 12 year old can go through a "tragic downfall" arc in the first book before she's even had time to develop as a character, sounds silly to me. 

If he wants to show how fairytale dreams can be harmful, while still making it clear that actions have consequences, it could have been delivered better.