Sansa, the Mountain Clans, the “Ivy Special Ops Team,” and an Avalanche

[Mourning Star]

4 hours ago, GMantis said:

Sansa's characterization has advanced past the state of her fifth chapter in the first book when it was the last time this claim would have made sense. Since then, all her hopes and all her desires have been associated to one degree or another with her identity as a Stark and with the North. Even in Winds of Winter, when she's trying to immerse herself into the role of Alayne Stone, she still can't help associating happy memories with her family and home.  And it's pretty disingenuous to mention her forced marriage with Tyrion (which she got through by reminding herself that she was a Stark) when speaking of her choices. Sansa has made her choice very clear - she's a Stark of Winterfell.

Clearly we disagree.

Given the chance to tell the truth she didn’t, and as a direct result her wolf died. You can try to write that off as meaningless if you want but I think it’s silly to ignore the obvious.

Sansa was born a Stark. Nobody is denying that. Like Cat was born a Tully. But it seems like you are the one stuck at the beginning of the story, a lot has happened since they left Winterfell.

And her arms aren’t a wolf with a fish in it’s mouth!

4 hours ago, GMantis said:

Also, I don't think that Sansa's actions in the first book fit at all with the Tully words "Family, Duty, Honor".

Honestly and Loyalty aren’t really her strong suits lol

4 hours ago, GMantis said:

If Sansa's inadvertent betrayal, which had no effect on her father's fate, means that she's no longer a Stark, how does Tyrion outright murdering his father doesn't mean that he's no longer a Lannister?

No effect on her fathers fate? Really?

Even if that were true, you think a betrayal that didn’t end up having material impact isn’t meaningful? Isn't still a betrayal? Honestly that’s absolutely wild.

"If I did, my word would be as hollow as an empty suit of armor. My life is not so precious to me as that."

"Pity." The eunuch stood. "And your daughter's life, my lord? How precious is that?"

[Phylum of Alexandria]

19 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

Given the chance to tell the truth she didn’t, and as a direct result her wolf died. You can try to write that off as meaningless if you want but I think it’s silly to ignore the obvious.

Sansa certainly made some grave mistakes in Book 1, but even by the end of that book, we see a very different Sansa. Her final chapter even starts out in its descriptive language as sort of a rebirth. And when she sees Joffrey after that, she sees him with new eyes. Her loss of innocence and naivety is arguably one of the framing thematic conceits of AGOT, but her growth from that point onward is even more significant.

[GMantis]

6 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

Clearly we disagree.

Given the chance to tell the truth she didn’t, and as a direct result her wolf died. You can try to write that off as meaningless if you want but I think it’s silly to ignore the obvious.

Sansa was born a Stark. Nobody is denying that. Like Cat was born a Tully. But it seems like you are the one stuck at the beginning of the story, a lot has happened since they left Winterfell.

And her arms aren’t a wolf with a fish in it’s mouth!

Honestly and Loyalty aren’t really her strong suits lol

Sorry, but this is just the equivalent of saying "No, you!". Simply throwing back my statement at me doesn't work. I made no reference to what Sansa was at WInterfell and I deliberately made the dividing line her fifth chapter in the first book. All the choices which according to you sealed her fate (except the marriage, but I don't think anyone would call that a choice) were within that time span. However, as I pointed out it was since then that her identity as Stark has been made more than clear.  Since Winterfell has been mentioned, consider Sansa's reaction to being sent back to Winterfell in AGOT:

Quote

They were going to take it all away; the tournaments and the court and her prince, everything, they were going to send her back to the bleak grey walls of Winterfell and lock her up forever.

Now contrast it to scene in her last chapter of ASOS, where she builds a snow model of Winterfell:

Quote

She could feel the snow on her lashes, taste it on her lips. It was the taste of WInterfell. The taste of innocence. The taste of dreams.

And this is one of many similar quotes that I could easily find. You're really going to tell me that the first quote is somehow more meaningful to her current outlook than the second one (and the many like it)?

 

6 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

No effect on her fathers fate? Really?

Even if that were true, you think a betrayal that didn’t end up having material impact isn’t meaningful? Isn't still a betrayal? Honestly that’s absolutely wild.

"If I did, my word would be as hollow as an empty suit of armor. My life is not so precious to me as that."

"Pity." The eunuch stood. "And your daughter's life, my lord? How precious is that?"

No effect. Ned had already sealed his fate by informing Cersei that he knew of the incest and by relying on Littlefinger to obtain the gold cloaks. Cersei would never have allowed him to assume the regency and since Ned had no intention to swear fealty to Joffrey, the clash in the throne room was inevitable. At most you could argue that Sansa going to Cersei made her a hostage but if she hadn't gone she would have simply been captured in the tower when it would be assaulted after Ned's arrest. Cersei could hardly thrown the Hand of the King in the black cells, while allowing his family to leave.

As for whether the betrayal was meaningful, I would agree that it having no material impact would not make it any less of a betrayal. What would however very much count would be the intention in carrying out the betrayal. Sansa didn't go to Cersei with the intention of betraying her father. She had no idea that doing so would endanger him in any way. It's why I called it an inadvertent betrayal. It was a tragic mistake by a poorly informed, naive girl who put her trust in the wrong person.

[Mourning Star]

4 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Sansa certainly made some grave mistakes in Book 1, but even by the end of that book, we see a very different Sansa. Her final chapter even starts out in its descriptive language as sort of a rebirth. And when she sees Joffrey after that, she sees him with new eyes. Her loss of innocence and naivety is arguably one of the framing thematic conceits of AGOT, but her growth from that point onward is even more significant.

I know this is a popular take on Sansa, that she has/is grown up since the start. And to a certain extent I agree, she’s not the same character as when the story started… but I’m not sure if the growth has been in the direction of redemption or just an evolution of the same behavior.

Or another way, is her rebirth a new chance or falling further down the rabbit hole.

Honestly, I think it could still be written either way. Although I am inclined to believe that she was not originally meant to be redeemed.

What exactly do you point to when you think of examples from the text of her growth?

Her moment saving Dontos was perhaps her most noble deed, but even that backfired.

Keeping people in the Red Keep calm is nice, except she probably should have been doing the opposite and encouraging panic! 

Caring for Robert Arryn would be sweet as well, except for the poison and plot to marry his heir.

I’m just not convinced the “growth” isn’t into someone who resembles Cersei/Littlefinger more than Ned.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

1 minute ago, Mourning Star said:

What exactly do you point to when you think of examples from the text of her growth?

 

First off, in AGOT and later in ACOK, it's her compassion for Sandor Clegane. At first blush The Hound was a monstrous distortion of everything Sansa had assumed about gallant knights, yet Sansa eventually comes to think of him as being braver and truer than most of the actual knights she encounters. Her reaching out and touching him as he sobbed in Book One was an incredible act of bravery and moral goodness, and this act had an observable impact on Sandor's behavior going forward. The Hound helped to clue the little bird to the cruel ways of the world, but Sansa's determined fealty to a higher ideal was the initial spark that kick-started Sandor's journey to try to be something better.

Going forward, Sansa tries to assert her agency whenever she can, and takes some real risks for the safety of others, but it's simply an unfortunate (but realistic) fact that she is a prisoner, and her agency is severely limited. Her act to save Dontos was truly heroic, even if the consequences ultimately ended up working against her. GRRM does this kind of stuff all the time, as his heroism is existentialist in character: the choices you make define who you are, and being heroic almost necessarily means doing the right thing for others even when the consequences don't work out for you. Ned was heroic trying to save children even though it was politically disastrous, Brienne was heroic fighting the Brave Companions even though her life has been hell ever since. 

With Littlefinger, there is more of a challenge there, since she needs to learn more about the game of thrones to be a competent leader, but she risks polluting her ideals with ambition, realpolitik, and harm to innocents like Sweetrobin. The extent to which Sansa actually knows about the poisoning is unclear. If it turns out she knows about it, surely that's a turn for the worse for her. Even there though, it would be a dark path for her to pull away from. GRRM's protagonists often make serious mistakes, and often have serious moral quandries that they stumble from. 

Still, while she has a bit more agency than she did in King's Landing, she is still in most respects a prisoner in the Vale. Part of her knows that Petyr is an unsavory and dangerous presence, yet for now she needs to cling to him to survive the situation she's in. This is an aspect of Sansa's chapters that most readers find frustrating, and with good reason, but I give GRRM kudos for doing justice to abusive circumstances like that, where women and children do not have the freedom to be as sassy and openly heroic as we readers would like them to be. Hopefully, though, we can eventually get to the point where Sansa has the power and authority to act on her own, though her moral quandaries likely won't get any easier with such responsibility. GRRM is nothing if not hard on his heroes.

[Terrorthatflapsinthenight9]

Sansa is hardly comparable to Cersei and Littlefinger in terms of personality and story, and it's been made clear many times that she remained a Stark at heart and truly loves her family and isn't indifferent or disdainful of other people.

And keeping bringing her young girl actions in AGOT is hardly relevant to the person she is today or will be in the future, or to her situation. 

The only one who could ever bring that situation up again in the story is Arya, and I very strongly doubt that she'll made a whole case of this once she finally returns to the North and reunite with Sansa.

 

[Mourning Star]

3 minutes ago, GMantis said:

Sorry, but this is just the equivalent of saying "No, you!". Simply throwing back my statement at me doesn't work. I made no reference to what Sansa was at WInterfell and I deliberately made the dividing line her fifth chapter in the first book. All the choices which according to you sealed her fate (except the marriage, but I don't think anyone would call that a choice) were within that time span. However, as I pointed out it was since then that her identity as Stark has been made more than clear.  Since Winterfell has been mentioned, consider Sansa's reaction to being sent back to Winterfell in AGOT:

I hear what you are saying… but I don’t think I see this meaning or playing out the same way.

3 minutes ago, GMantis said:

Now contrast it to scene in her last chapter of ASOS, where she builds a snow model of Winterfell:

The thing about innocent dreams is that they don’t last… and if you compare it to the reality of the past we see that she is realizing what she’s lost.

Im not sure this means she will suddenly become a good moral person who tells the truth and is loyal and honorable.

In fact, especially given the fate of her snow castle, it seems to me the opposite.

3 minutes ago, GMantis said:

And this is one of many similar quotes that I could easily find. You're really going to tell me that the first quote is somehow more meaningful to her current outlook than the second one (and the many like it)?

I don’t think her feeling sorry for herself is an indication of moral redemption, no. As I’ve said, she might take a full turn and learn from her mistakes, I just am not at all sure I see that indicated in the text.

3 minutes ago, GMantis said:

No effect. Ned had already sealed his fate by informing Cersei that he knew of the incest and by relying on Littlefinger to obtain the gold cloaks. Cersei would never have allowed him to assume the regency and since Ned had no intention to swear fealty to Joffrey, the clash in the throne room was inevitable. At most you could argue that Sansa going to Cersei made her a hostage but if she hadn't gone she would have simply been captured in the tower when it would be assaulted after Ned's arrest. Cersei could hardly thrown the Hand of the King in the black cells, while allowing his family to leave.

I think you are objectively wrong but it’s not worth bickering over hypotheticals. Events were already in motion, but Sansa’s actions weren’t without effect. 

3 minutes ago, GMantis said:

As for whether the betrayal was meaningful, I would agree that it having no material impact would not make it any less of a betrayal. What would however very much count would be the intention in carrying out the betrayal. Sansa didn't go to Cersei with the intention of betraying her father. She had no idea that doing so would endanger him in any way. It's why I called it an inadvertent betrayal. It was a tragic mistake by a poorly informed, naive girl who put her trust in the wrong person.

A betrayal for selfish reasons and not even considering the impact on others (even her own family) is not any better.

And, at its core this is arguably her biggest flaw, she is self absorbed. 

I’m sure there are other examples, but what comes to my mind is when she does try to risk herself to save Dontos, an admirable action, it backfires.

Now one reading of this would be as growth. But, I’m not sure that’s the whole picture. It seems to me it might be more of a backfired attempt at growth.

At the end of the day we can only hope to find out eventually!

[Mourning Star]

27 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

First off, in AGOT and later in ACOK, it's her compassion for Sandor Clegane.

You mean after he saves her from the mob?

27 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

At first blush The Hound was a monstrous distortion of everything Sansa had assumed about gallant knights, yet Sansa eventually comes to think of him as being braver and truer than most of the actual knights she encounters.

He’s a child murderer… if there is literally one thing that differentiates the Ned’s of the world from the Cersei’s it’s killing children.

27 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Her reaching out and touching him as he sobbed in Book One was an incredible act of bravery and moral goodness, and this act had an observable impact on Sandor's behavior going forward.
 

I guess I have a higher bar for moral goodness and bravery.

I think this reads as wildly misplaced affection because he helped her personally.

27 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

The Hound helped to clue the little bird to the cruel ways of the world, but Sansa's determined fealty to a higher ideal was the initial spark that kick-started Sandor's journey to try to be something better.

I’m not at all convinced Sandor is done being the Hound. He certainly didn’t start becoming a better person suddenly after leaving Sansa.

27 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Going forward, Sansa tries to assert her agency whenever she can, and takes some real risks for the safety of others, but it's simply an unfortunate (but realistic) fact that she is a prisoner, and her agency is severely limited. Her act to save Dontos was truly heroic, even if the consequences ultimately ended up working against her.

I agree she doesn’t have many oportunities and saving Dontos was a great example of mercy never being wrong, regardless of the consequences. However, the question is wether this is the lesson she learned, or if instead she takes it as a lesson against trust and mercy.

27 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

GRRM does this kind of stuff all the time, as his heroism is existentialist in character: the choices you make define who you are, and being heroic almost necessarily means doing the right thing for others even when the consequences don't work out for you.

Yes! But the good does not outway the bad either. A single example does not correct previous behavior, and the question is what lesson did she learn.

27 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Ned was heroic trying to save children even though it was politically disastrous, Brienne was heroic fighting the Brave Companions even though her life has been hell ever since.

So will Sansa risk herself to save Robert? I think that’s her next big crossroads…

27 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

With Littlefinger, there is more of a challenge there, since she needs to learn more about the game of thrones to be a competent leader, but she risks polluting her ideals with ambition, realpolitik, and harm to innocents like Sweetrobin. The extent to which Sansa actually knows about the poisoning is unclear. If it turns out she knows about it, surely that's a turn for the worse for her. Even there though, it would be a dark path for her to pull away from. GRRM's protagonists often make serious mistakes, and often have serious moral quandries that they stumble from. 

Imperfect characters are such a great part of the story! But this cuts both ways… and the sympathetic helpless girl is not assured redemption.

27 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Still, while she has a bit more agency than she did in King's Landing, she is still in most respects a prisoner in the Vale. Part of her knows that Petyr is an unsavory and dangerous presence, yet for now she needs to cling to him to survive the situation she's in. This is an aspect of Sansa's chapters that most readers find frustrating, and with good reason, but I give GRRM kudos for doing justice to abusive circumstances like that, where women and children do not have the freedom to be as sassy and openly heroic as we readers would like them to be. Hopefully, though, we can eventually get to the point where Sansa has the power and authority to act on her own, though her moral quandaries likely won't get any easier with such responsibility. GRRM is nothing if not hard on his heroes.

Arya and Sansa were in basically the same situation, they are just very different characters. Neither should get a pass. We are defined by our choices.

I do think Sansa could break either way, and honestly I’m not sure which would be more interesting. But until she does show more agency and decide, it’s hard to characterize her as having really grown.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

3 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

You mean after he saves her from the mob?

To be clear, I was focusing on her initial act of compassion, which takes place on the night of the tourney feast. It's well before Sandor does anything for Sansa. I mean, he does walk her home, but he also insults and threatens her, so from her perspective it's not really great protection. Yet she reaches out and offers compassion to this angry, dangerous man. Why? She feels his anguish, and reaches out. And tells him that Ser Gregor, while anointed and dubbed, was "no true knight."

But she does continue to work her magic on Sandor. Her saving of Dontos almost certainly had an impact on Sandor, who also took the effort and risk to go along with her lie. Yes, Sandor is a dark gray character, and his road to redemption has been slow and rocky. But of course, now that the Gravedigger has been allowed to heal and reflect, I do agree that his redemption won't be easy. If he is to prove himself as a hero as GRRM sees it, then he will need to give his all in some truly awful circumstances, and that has yet to happen. But I think it will. I'm personally more confident in Sandor's redemptive arc than I am in Jaime's. With Jaime, there are indicators that he hasn't learned the right lessons. Sandor's story is simpler, so maybe it just lends itself more to a correction, while Jaime's is more complicated, and thus murkier. I don't think GRRM makes light of Sandor's murder of Micah, but he does make it clear that he did it under the impression that the boy attacked the crown prince. He is a child murderer, and it is a sin that he has to bear, but it's not as repellant as Jaime dropping Bran from a window because he spied on secret incest.

I agree we'll have to see how it pans out with Sansa, and until then just agree to disagree. I will say that Arya and Sansa differ in that Arya has gone down as unquestionably, and incredibly, dark path. Whereas I would say that Sansa is closer to where Bran is: stumbling down a dark tunnel, possibly about to take a huge tumble down a pit without knowing it. Arya has gone far, far down a moral rabbit hole, and yet I think she will eventually redeem herself, if not completely.

[Mourning Star]

18 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

To be clear, I was focusing on her initial act of compassion, which takes place on the night of the tourney feast. It's well before Sandor does anything for Sansa. I mean, he does walk her home, but he also insults and threatens her, so from her perspective it's not really great protection. Yet she reaches out and offers compassion to this angry, dangerous man. Why? She feels his anguish, and reaches out. And tells him that Ser Gregor, while anointed and dubbed, was "no true knight."

Do you think that it’s genuine compassion that drives Sansa here?

Dont get me wrong, I love this interaction… but I’m not sure it was admirable for either of them.

Both have wild misunderstandings of what it means to be a “true knight”. Sandor so focused on the literal practical part, the oils and the words, the steel and the killing. While Sansa is all focused on the songs and courtesy.

Both extremes seem to miss the most important part, the “honor”, what Ned exemplified despite the lack of spurs.

I think it’s no coincidence that Sandor betrays Joff, even though he was his sworn shield, and Mycah is listed by Ned right next to Jaime killing Aerys and these other high crimes which spark the story.

He was thinking of the boy Mycah, of Jon Arryn's sudden death, of Bran's fall, of old mad Aerys Targaryen dying on the floor of his throne room while his life's blood dried on a gilded blade.

18 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

But she does continue to work her magic on Sandor. Her saving of Dontos almost certainly had an impact on Sandor, who also took the effort and risk to go along with her lie. Yes, Sandor is a dark gray character, and his road to redemption has been slow and rocky. But of course, now that the Gravedigger has been allowed to heal and reflect, I do agree that his redemption won't be easy. If he is to prove himself as a hero as GRRM sees it, then he will need to give his all in some truly awful circumstances, and that has yet to happen. But I think it will. I'm personally more confident in Sandor's redemptive arc than I am in Jaime's. With Jaime, there are indicators that he hasn't learned the right lessons. Sandor's story is simpler, so maybe it just lends itself more to a correction, while Jaime's is more complicated, and thus murkier. I don't think GRRM makes light of Sandor's murder of Micah, but he does make it clear that he did it under the impression that the boy attacked the crown prince. He is a child murderer, and it is a sin that he has to bear, but it's not as repellant as Jaime dropping Bran from a window because he spied on secret incest.

I find this hard to swallow, not about Jaime but about Sandor. The boy was no threat, and just doing your job is pretty well understood to be an unacceptable excuse for murder.

18 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

I agree we'll have to see how it pans out with Sansa, and until then just agree to disagree. I will say that Arya and Sansa differ in that Arya has gone down as unquestionably, and incredibly, dark path. Whereas I would say that Sansa is closer to where Bran is: stumbling down a dark tunnel, possibly about to take a huge tumble down a pit without knowing it. Arya has gone far, far down a moral rabbit hole, and yet I think she will eventually redeem herself, if not completely.

I think I largely agree with you here, maybe leaning towards different predictions about the future, but generally a similar understanding of the story.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

12 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

Do you think that it’s genuine compassion that drives Sansa here?

Dont get me wrong, I love this interaction… but I’m not sure it was admirable for either of them.

Absolutely. I don't know what else it could be.

This is the point where Sansa begins to move away from her silly songs. She in fact condemns the anointed knight, who was dubbed by Prince Rhaegar, and says that he did not act according to what a true knight should be. Of course, cynical Sandor would say at this point that there's no such thing as a true knight. But that's where he is wrong, and where Sansa is right. The truth lies somewhere in between their initial extreme opposite views: regardless of one's official status, a true knight is someone who acts heroically, according to the values of what a knight should be. Sansa was wrong to expect reality to conform to the ideals of the songs, but Sandor was wrong to give up entirely on ideals.

He shows a moment of anguish and she reaches out to this ugly, angry man and consoles him. What could that be but simple compassion? And the next day (I think) she cheers on Sandor in the tourney, both before and after he saves Loras. Sansa gave him a small moment of humanity, and he followed it up with his first true act of gallantry.

As for killing Mycah, I'm not trying to make it like it's something that's excusable. Just something that he can eventually own up to and try to atone for. He's been mostly offscreen since ASOS, but his time on the Quiet Isle seems like it was a real time of transformation, reflection, and healing that he desperately needed. Now, going forward, would be his chance for atonement.

[Mourning Star]

11 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

He shows a moment of anguish and she reaches out to this ugly, angry man and consoles him. What could that be but simple compassion? And the next day (I think) she cheers on Sandor in the tourney, both before and after he saves Loras. Sansa gave him a small moment of humanity, and he followed it up with his first true act of gallantry.

I hear you… I think this is the most favorable lens to view these characters though, and one can easily assign other motives to both. Especially Sandor fighting Gregor.

11 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

As for killing Mycah, I'm not trying to make it like it's something that's excusable. Just something that he can eventually own up to and try to atone for. He's been mostly offscreen since ASOS, but his time on the Quiet Isle seems like it was a real time of transformation, reflection, and healing that he desperately needed. Now, going forward, would be his chance for atonement.

Maybe… it’s funny right, Sandor might never pick up a sword again, accept a life of peace and atonement and basically be done. But, this seems wildly unlikely to me.

You can take the helm from the hound but does he really change his nature?

I tend to think the best he can hope for is a noble death. And I expect it will be a violent one, for a violent man, and maybe that will be the mercy he deserves.

I do wonder what the Burned Men would make of him! Haha

[Phylum of Alexandria]

1 minute ago, Mourning Star said:

You can take the helm from the hound but does he really change his nature?

 

I don't think GRRM would say that the helmet makes the man, but the man chooses to wear the helmet, or not.

Right now, it is Lem who is embracing the legacy of the Hound, and the path that such an action represents. I worry more about him than about Sandor, who has finally tapped into his deep vulnerability. 

I don't know if you read Blue Eyed Wolf's theory about the Vale. It's actually what kick-started this topic post about the special ops team:

https://sweeticeandfiresunray.com/2017/07/13/their-gallantry-is-yet-to-be-demonstrated-shadrich-morgarth-and-byron/

It's crazy, but it's much better argued than I first thought it would be. And I would in fact love it if Sandor turned up in this fashion, though like you I think he would die a violent death in the service of something greater than himself.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

2 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

I hear you… I think this is the most favorable lens to view these characters though, and one can easily assign other motives to both. Especially Sandor fighting Gregor.

I am just wondering what you were thinking here when mentioning Sandor's motives fighting Gregor.

We all know that Sandor hates Gregor, and he constantly has talked about how he will kill his brother. To the extent that a huge part of the fandom used to #GetHype with the promise of a CleganeBowl.

But the thing is, we already had CleganeBowl early in the story, and it was that altercation at the tourney. Sandor had the perfect opportunity to try to kill Gregor there. It would be in the context of saving Loras from his brother's unsportsmanlike wrath upon losing. It would be shocking, for sure, but he would still be the hero of the day. But...in fact, this is how Sandor fended off Ser Gregor:

"Thrice Ned saw Ser Gregor aim savage blows at the hound's-head helmet, yet not once did Sandor send a cut at his brother's unprotected face." —AGOT

To me, this is the first indication that Sandor is trying to be a different, better person. Despite pitting himself against the brother he had wanted to kill his entire life, he decided he could be a bigger man than the so-called Mountain.

[Mourning Star]

56 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

I am just wondering what you were thinking here when mentioning Sandor's motives fighting Gregor.

We all know that Sandor hates Gregor, and he constantly has talked about how he will kill his brother. To the extent that a huge part of the fandom used to #GetHype with the promise of a CleganeBowl.

But the thing is, we already had CleganeBowl early in the story, and it was that altercation at the tourney. Sandor had the perfect opportunity to try to kill Gregor there. It would be in the context of saving Loras from his brother's unsportsmanlike wrath upon losing. It would be shocking, for sure, but he would still be the hero of the day. But...in fact, this is how Sandor fended off Ser Gregor:

"Thrice Ned saw Ser Gregor aim savage blows at the hound's-head helmet, yet not once did Sandor send a cut at his brother's unprotected face." —AGOT

To me, this is the first indication that Sandor is trying to be a different, better person. Despite pitting himself against the brother he had wanted to kill his entire life, he decided he could be a bigger man than the so-called Mountain.

It’s a great point… 

I tend to think Sandor’s hate of Gregor extends to anything and everything. Despises knights because Gregor was knighted, and keeps his cool when Gregor is all temper and fury.

I love how appealing and despicable I find Sandor, at the same time!