Sexism in Catelyn bashing

[Lord Mord]

dp,

my main reason for disliking her is actually pretty damn petty. i would have MUCH rather read the vast majority of her POV's from robb's POV.

other than that, i don't really care for her because of how she dealt with jon; which has been beaten to death.

edited to remove the last point because i rendered it pointless by editing prior to posting and have now lost all train of thought.

Understood. For my own part, a single act by one person against another person has to be pretty damn heinous before I decide that person's unlikeable.

At the risk of weakening my argument, I nevetheless want to provide an example. A sometime-friend of mine (at the time, she was a friend) was directing a show I was in. Part of this show involved the use of a silver tea service, which was her own property and which had been broken during the first rehearsal where it was used -- it had fallen to the stage and the handle popped off. Another friend, an elderly though spirited lady, had shown up on a set construction day to help out. P, the director, told the elderly lady, B, that she could help by polishing the silver, but to leave the teapot because it had to be repaired with KrazyGlue. B started to point out that you actually want to use what I believe is called "liquid silver," to repair damaged silver, because KrazyGlue is meant to bond things which are porous together, and is pretty much useless for everything else. P's response was a pretty sharp, just a decibel or two shy of shrill, cry of, "Don't tell me what to use!"

An unguarded response under some duress (the show was a little behind in its set-work), lashing out at somebody who didn't in the least deserve it. It frustrated me about her, about P, that is, because I was there to overhear it and it confirmed what I already knew -- that she sometimes has no regard for people's feelings or opinions.

But ultimately -- so, what? Does she not put on good shows? Usually, she does. Is she not a pleasant person to work with most of the time? She is. Does she not have cares outside her theatre (she runs one of her own, more or less)? She has, and she is patient and generous with these.

Now, I have since had other problems with P, which have further strained our relationship. But on that one incident, I can hardly condemn her -- not even very much for the moment itself, and certainly not in the context of her whole character.

[Padraig]

Following the "Immortalized" link in "The Latest News" I stumbled on this page:

http://books.thehathorlegacy.info/whats-wi...rr-martin-fans/

It's a feminist page criticizing us (westeros.org) for all the Brienne hate (which they also consider fruit of the rampant sexism which thrives in the male-dominated world of fantasy/sci-fi/comics/gaming/whatever).

Though I'm not a great Catelyn fan myself, I really like Brienne (even in Feast!), but many of the comments on this page seemed unjust and feminism-prejudiced to me (especially judging the whole board by a couple of jerks who wish certain characters were raped...).

Hmmm. Interesting link.

There is some apt things said there. I do think the problems identified there are more than just a "couple of jerks" but i'm not a fan of mass bannings at the same time. That works on some more personal sites.

But its definitely a viewpoint that should be borne in mind the next time I read "misogynistic remarks". One can ignore them too easily sometimes. In fact, its not a viewpoint I come across very often and I do think its well argued, even if I don't agree with their conclusions.

[Shewoman]

It is hard for me to understand why Catelyn catches so much flack when Ned and Robb make far more disastrous decisions and aren't despised for them. I think it's because (and I know I've already said this) Catelyn is an unusual character for fantasy literature. Most women in fantasy, in my experience, are royal or magical (although this may be hidden for awhile). They may be wise old crones or warrior maidens. One seldom comes across a normal (not royal or magical) middle-aged woman in fantasy, and Cat is approaching middle age in her culture. Although she and Ned obviously love each other, she is not part of any romantic subplot; she isn't presented sexually. She's a mom. We don't get a lot of that in fantasy and I think that throws people. I don't recall Jung having a "mom" archetype (although there is the anima). Furthermore, as her losses progress, her POVs become painful to read. I think that's good, to remind us of the costs of war. But it isn't fun.

[Jenna]

I liked Catelyn. I think she was a very developed and believable character. Her antipathy toward Jonn (her husband's bastard) is very thematic and keeps her from being a flat character. I think she was a strong female presence, both as a noblewoman and as a mother.

Of course, turning her into an undead monster kinda changed all that. Still trying to decide what I think.

[Prince of the North]

PotN,

"Indifference and avoidance" seems like soft-pedaling it to me. Before that line in Bran's sickroom she had never so much as addressed him by name. That sounds like something requiring dedication and effort to do to someone who you've lived with and eaten meals at the same table with for more than a decade.

The Dany-bashers have usually seemed the most sexist to me, in that the sole female contender for the throne is constantly called a stupid whore, needs to die, etc, etc, etc.

OiL,

I definitely see where you are coming from and maybe I could have expressed myself better. Maybe I should have used words like "resentment" or "coldness" or whatever but I still contend that Catelyn wasn't actively hostile toward Jon until King Robert's visit put everything in motion. I mean, all indications are that, under duress, she tolerated him pretty well. Perhaps the best evidence I can come up with to bolster this assertion is the fact that Jon seems to have had pretty "regular" relationships with his "siblings". Sure, some were maybe better than others (i.e. Sansa) but, it seems to me, that if Catelyn had wanted to she could have prevented Jon from even interecting with the other children, but she didn't. Now, some might say she probably tried but Ned didn't allow it. Well, all I can say is we have no indication of it from Martin.

Also, I don't remember ever getting any indication of "overt" hostility from Catelyn toward Jon even in his own POV (at least, from before King Robert's visit). I guess I would just expect to have at least a small mention of it were it happening. In fact, I don't remember Jon even thinking anything particularly negative about Catelyn even after she uttered those fateful words: "It should have been you, Jon!", did he? Maybe Martin meant that to be another glimpse into his character? I sort of have always taken my cue from that and thought, hey, if Jon didn't get particularly bent out of shape about it then I wouldn't either. After all, Catelyn was lashing out at everyone at the time, not just singling him out (even though I think she said practically the most horrible thing to him imaginable). For the record, I've always commended Jon greatly for braving Catelyn's wrath to say his goodbyes to his little brother. That took some big brass ones, right there!

Again, I think many people take a real disliking to Catelyn for what she said to Jon in Bran's sickroom and then condemn everything else she does from then on. The important thing to remember here is that the condemnation of Catelyn's actions can only be justified with the benefit of "20/20 hindsight" - something Catelyn never had!

[Prince of the North]

Nightflyer,

Bingo. Also, one negative impression early on will lead them to retroactively reassess everything that came before, and will prejudice re-reads of those same early bits, until it all fits "neatly," into this bizarre woman-that-never-was.

It's strange. GRRM deliberately sets about to shape characters who are not easily judged, beyond that they all have serious flaws, and yet one of the moments which is specifically designed around setting Catelyn apart from the ultra-good-mother-Earth stereotype, her scene with Jon, ends up the catalyst for poisoning all the rest of his work regarding her in the minds of some, until they are blinded with their impotent rage for her. And of course, once that has happened, once the book's been finished once, it's impossible to say to such newly-blinded persons, "Okay, now go back and reread the books, and skip that bit. It didn't happen. Do you come to the same conclusion?" because the poison has already seeped in to every pore.

Let me come at this problem another way. We claim that Catelyn is neither an unredeemable bitch, nor is she the very milk of human kindness. I suppose, to be fair, there is a very short range of emotional response to Catelyn overall, which goes from slight like at one end, to neutrality, to slight dislike at the other end, any one point on which could be achieved by a fair-minded, patient reader.

And this is all that the "Catelyn-defenders" have been claiming this whole time. Contrast this to the virulent rants which employ about a dozen synonyms for the word "evil," and almost no source text to back up any single point, let alone the overall description, and I have to wonder what could possibly have so spun up the anti-Cat hysteria. Such a wonderment would not be fair to lay on the rest of us -- "I wonder how you can possibly be so uncontrollably level-headed and balanced in your assessment of Catelyn?" is more than a little ridiculous.

TM,

Well said and thank you! It's as if you took my thoughts and wrote them much more eloquently than I ever could It's a true testament to Martin's skill in rendering Catelyn (among others) that she engenders this much passionate discussion, no?

[Prince of the North]

Well, it’s interesting. We get a single interaction described between Cat and Jon, and it’s such an emotionally trying time, it’s hard to judge what other reactions have been like in the past. If all we can do is speculate, we’d best make sure that every point we have is backed by quotations and evidence for each claim...

...So read from that what you will. I think it’s hard to deny her general attitude towards Jon was resentment, rather than neutrality. Some can see this scene as an obvious justification for her attitude: Jon stands as constant reminder of her husband’s infidelity, and of his love for another woman, as Ned would never send Jon away for her sake or reveal the identity of the mother. Some will see this as evidence of punishing Jon for a crime he never committed, and crucify her for that.

I see this as evidence of the richness of her character. She acknowledges that Ned should see to his bastard’s needs, but weighed against that is the reminder of what Jon represents.

In any event, I hope I’ve demonstrated it’s possible to criticize Catelyn without being sexist. Honestly, I think the reason she gets so much flack is the same reason Enguerrand, Kal, DanteGabriel, et al will attack Jaime constantly: because there’s enough depth to the characters that they attract fans and critics alike. The reason there’s not that many threads calling Cersei’s character into question is no one will stand to defend her. Cat and Jaime both have critics and foes who engage constantly. You can’t have a war without a side to fight against.

Anyways, that’s my two cents on the subject.

I'll see your 2 cents and raise you two more Well said, I just wanted to say that!

[Lady Blackfish]

I think it’s hard to deny her general attitude towards Jon was resentment, rather than neutrality.

I agree about the assessment of her attitude, but I do think the most textually supported interpretation (and interpretation, extrapolation, etc, is required if one were to answer the question, since it's not explicitly stated) of her actions towards Jon over the years (and not just one incident) is that she tried to remain a non-factor in his life.

This becomes a matter of discussion because people claim that Catelyn probably acted cruelly to Jon all the time, as a habit. This is curious, and I think this along with other points that have been made, are within the context of this thread's original intention, which is to look at the overall trends regarding opinions of the character and not single out any individual for having a dissenting opinion.

You are right that it is possible for an individual to dislike Catelyn for reasons having nothing to do with sexism. However it is the proportion of hostility toward the character from readers overall that is being looked at, and the qualitative nature of the objections, and patterns therein. I have gotten along fine with people on the board and elsewhere who don't care for the character, but when textual predispositions jar with outrageous assertions I think it's fair game to discuss on a public discussion forum whose primary focus is a piece of literature. If any one person feels their dislike of the character has nothing to do with sexism, by all means, carry on. The intention isn't to proselytize, but I've found that I'm not the only one who thinks something stinks in Denmark when it comes to the proportion of Catelyn hatred overall.

ETA: I do agree that depth of characterization is correlated to heated opinions, that is a very good point that you make. I am still not satisfied however that sexism doesn't ever come into play with regards to Catelyn, based on some of the assertions made that just seem to jar with the most parsimonious and probable textual interpretations.

I'd also add that IMO the majority of the sexist attitudes some readers seem to espouse cannot be divorced from the setting of the novel, a male dominated society, which was the author's own choice to use. (It still seems something foul is afoot though since the same goes for other women in the novel ... but maybe I'll save it for another post.) There are, though, some churlish attitudes I've read that go beyond this.

[Piper]

Lady Blackfish,

To say it simply, yes. I agree.

On her pattern of action, we have insufficient proof to say how she treated Jon in general. I'd agree that she probably kept her distance from Jon, because it seems that her resentment stems from her veiwing Jon as a constant reminder of things she didn't wish to be reminded of, and in that case the best thing to do would be to keep that reminder out of sight, out of mind. I agree that its unfair to assume she treated him with constant antagonism.

As for the general tone about Cat on this board, I'm gonna say DG summed it up pretty well with post 77 of this thread, and the ensuing discussion only reinforces that, while some may draw to reasonable conclusions, you have to look at some posts and wonder as to the motivation, because logic certainly isn't it.

About

I'd also add that IMO the majority of the sexist attitudes some readers seem to espouse cannot be divorced from the setting of the novel, a male dominated society, which was the author's own choice to use. (It still seems something foul is afoot though since the same goes for other women in the novel ... but maybe I'll save it for another post.) There are, though, some churlish attitudes I've read that go beyond this.

It's certainly facinating to consider how much the setting affects people's veiws. If you'd like to start the thread on that one, I'll certainly check it out.

Prince of the North,

Thank you for your praise.

[SFDanny]

I realize no one comes to the novels as blank slates. We all bring our baggage with us as we read them, but when I read through some of the responses in this thread and see the hatred directed toward a fictional character all I can do is shake my head and say "O my god!"

The grieving and overwrought Catelyn treats Jon Snow abysmally at Bran's bedside and other than that is a perfectly likable character. The vehemence of some of the comments can only come from the reader's own preconceived notions being projected onto Catelyn because there is nothing there other than a concerned mother and wife fighting to save her loved ones. Perhaps it is time for some folks to set the books down and look into the mirror for a good long while.

[The Wolf Maid]

I'd also add that IMO the majority of the sexist attitudes some readers seem to espouse cannot be divorced from the setting of the novel, a male dominated society, which was the author's own choice to use. (It still seems something foul is afoot though since the same goes for other women in the novel ... but maybe I'll save it for another post.) There are, though, some churlish attitudes I've read that go beyond this.

I agree. Some can't help but judge her actions in the context of the setting she is in. Like when she advices Robb on certain things in ways that, in the context of their world, seems inappropriate and counter-productive.

I don't like Catelyn, mostly because of certain decisions she made, which I felt were wrong, not because she was a woman making them, but because the decisions itself were wrong in my opinion.

and DG, for some strange reason, a part of the reason I dislike here because I see my mother in her, always, always meddling, but I also think Cat's such a great character, because she's very realistic in her feelings and reactions and in her own way, she is very kick-ass.

[mormont]

I liked Catelyn. I think she was a very developed and believable character. Her antipathy toward Jonn (her husband's bastard) is very thematic and keeps her from being a flat character. I think she was a strong female presence, both as a noblewoman and as a mother.

Excellent post, and I wanted to agree particularly with the part about Cat's feelings for Jon preventing her being 'flat'. If Cat was the character some of her critics seem to want her to be (warm and loving to Jon - and everyone else for that matter, always knowing the right thing to do, accepting her fate and the decisions of her menfolk calmly), she would be deathly dull.

OiL,

I definitely see where you are coming from and maybe I could have expressed myself better. Maybe I should have used words like "resentment" or "coldness" or whatever but I still contend that Catelyn wasn't actively hostile toward Jon until King Robert's visit put everything in motion.

Time to bring out the SSM again (I should bookmark this one )

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Month/1999/07/

Thus, the question I have is if Catelyn went out of her way to mistreat Jon in the past -- and which form this might have taken -- or if she rather tried to avoid and ignore him? "Mistreatment" is a loaded word. Did Catelyn beat Jon bloody? No. Did she distance herself from him? Yes. Did she verbally abuse and attack him? No. (The instance in Bran's bedroom was obviously a very special case). But I am sure she was very protective of the rights of her own children, and in that sense always drew the line sharply between bastard and trueborn where issues like seating on the high table for the king's visit were at issue.

And Jon surely knew that she would have preferred to have him elsewhere.

That's what we know about how Cat treated Jon before AGOT. And that's all we know. It supports PotN's view: I don't see how it can be read as 'active hostility'.

In fact, I don't remember Jon even thinking anything particularly negative about Catelyn even after she uttered those fateful words: "It should have been you, Jon!", did he? Maybe Martin meant that to be another glimpse into his character? I sort of have always taken my cue from that and thought, hey, if Jon didn't get particularly bent out of shape about it then I wouldn't either.

A very good point.

After all, Catelyn was lashing out at everyone at the time, not just singling him out (even though I think she said practically the most horrible thing to him imaginable).

Yup. We know that she lashes out at Luwin, for example, and that she is ashamed of how she acted in general in this period, including neglecting her duties, not saying farewell to the girls at the gate, etc. It's clear that Jon was not the only one she behaved badly to, and equally clear that she realises that her behaviour was unacceptable.

[The Wolf Maid]

In fact, I don't remember Jon even thinking anything particularly negative about Catelyn even after she uttered those fateful words: "It should have been you, Jon!", did he? Maybe Martin meant that to be another glimpse into his character? I sort of have always taken my cue from that and thought, hey, if Jon didn't get particularly bent out of shape about it then I wouldn't either.

Hm, he doesn't exactly think negatively about Catelyn, but undoubtedly he was upset with what she said (which was why it was 'a long walk' for Jon coming down Bran's room). I also remember that there are instances when Jon thinks negatively about Catelyn not making him feel welcome in the family (e.g. the way she looks at him when Jon bested Robb at swords or sums).

Catelyn doesn't mistreat Jon; she makes him feel unwelcome in the family (which is not an unnatural reaction, IMHO).

And I think there is one point Catelyn feels bad about her behaviour with Jon (the one when she was with Mya at the Vale).

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Tony,

Another friend, an elderly though spirited lady, had shown up on a set construction day to help out. P, the director, told the elderly lady, B, that she could help by polishing the silver, but to leave the teapot because it had to be repaired with KrazyGlue. B started to point out that you actually want to use what I believe is called "liquid silver," to repair damaged silver, because KrazyGlue is meant to bond things which are porous together, and is pretty much useless for everything else. P's response was a pretty sharp, just a decibel or two shy of shrill, cry of, "Don't tell me what to use!"

An unguarded response under some duress (the show was a little behind in its set-work), lashing out at somebody who didn't in the least deserve it. It frustrated me about her, about P, that is, because I was there to overhear it and it confirmed what I already knew -- that she sometimes has no regard for people's feelings or opinions.

Your example, while interesting, doesn't quite reach the level of vitriol of telling a brother who is visiting his severely injured brother that the visitor should be the person who is severely injured without any cause whatsoever other than she's grief stricken.

Let me cavate this statement by saying I don't dislike Catelyn, but I do dislike how she treated Jon. However, I recognize that her treatement of Jon was consistent with her character and the morays of the society GRRM is describing in his books.

[Shewoman]

The Catelyn-Jon situation is more Ned's fault than anyone else's. Sure, maybe he promised Lyanna to keep Jon's ancestry a secret (I think that's likely, although we don't know for sure), but doing so caused great pain to living people whom he loved. He's quite aware that the situation is unusual and difficult for Cat--and not just because Jon is apparent evidence of adultery. Their marriage is dynastic: it sealed a treaty with the Tullys, as Lysa and Jon Arryn's did--and the heir to Winterfell is supposed to carry the blood of both families. Cat is responsible for looking out for the Tully interests. That's how these things work. Ned's surprising decision to raise a bastard in the family home--a bastard who is close to Robb's age--threatens that. No, she shouldn't have said "It should have been you." But spend enough time watching one of your children apparently dying and anybody will lose it.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Shewoman,

Here's my problem. Jon comes in to say goodbye to a brother he loves and her reaction is, "How dare you show affection, love, and compassion to a mutually beloved relative who's injury you have no responsiblity for!"

Yes, Ned is largely responsible for the situation between Catelyn and Jon. However, it is completely unfair and unjustified to dump on Jon for a situation he could not control. Particularly when he's just come to say goodbye to the brother who he loves and is genuinely grief stricken over too.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Not exactly. Her reaction was "How dare you come between me and my son now, as you have come between me and your father* and your siblings* all of your life." She is lashing out at an easy target while her favourite child (imo) is dying, for all they know. Did she lash out at anyone else who went up? Did anyone else even disturb her up there? I don't think we know, and I can't say that she wouldn't have.

Did she pick the very most hurtful thing she could think of? Yes. Do I excuse her actions? No. But I don't think it's quite as anti-Jon-specifically as it's been painted. If any other target had presented itself I find it extremely likely she would have hurt them as much as possible too.

*The man who raised you; your cousins.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Aoife,

How is coming to visit an injured relative coming between the person injured and their mother? It's not like he said, "Will you get out of here so I can have a private chat with my comatose brother?"

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Because she wants Bran to herself. Full stop. End of story. *Anybody* interrupting her would be seen as coming between them, very likely. She didn't even let Winterfell staff care for Bran, did she? She did it herself, as long as it didn't require her to leave his side. Remember, it's not as though Cat is at her most rational self, here.

And yes, Cat has always seemed to harbour a low-level resentment for Jon, so that exacerbates things. However, I still read it that Jon was the target because he was there.

ETA: You might want to fix that spelling to "out of here", otherwise it looks like Jon interrupted Cat at far more than just grieving silently.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Aoife,

And yes, Cat has always seemed to harbour a low-level resentment for Jon, so that exacerbates things. However, I still read it that Jon was the target because he was there.

Accepting that as true her behavior is still incredibly nasty. Particularly in light of Jon's close relationship with Bran and his other siblings.