Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

xythil

Why did they change the reason Eddard goes to kings landing?

Recommended Posts

Dumbing down the Song one notch further on account of fear of mass market.

That's a rather extreme reaction. The books are complicated. Expecting them to fit everything in is a waste of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think claiming that this has completely changed Catelyn's character is a gross exaggeration. What matters is the reason behind an action, not the action itself.

Catelyn is fiercely protective of her family and wants what's best for them in all circumstances even if she has to bitch and/or nag to get it. In the book, she thought Ned going to King's Landing was what was best for the Starks. In the show, it appears she thinks him staying is what's best for them. Either way, the woman's character remains the same- only her decision changes. She is still a strong-minded character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait to see UnCat in the show. :smileysex:

Heh. And the prize for today's Least Appropriate Emoticon goes to...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really would be changing major plot points. Littlefinger got Lysa to write that letter to Catelyn, which was (in my opinion) a large influence on Ned going South to begin with, and what led him to investigate Jon's death which led to the downfall of Stark, etc. By not showing the importance the letter had leading to the decision to leave, will the payoff be as good when it's revealed that Littlefinger was behind it all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to go with "Yes." It wasn't the letter that made me say, "Oh that mother f---er!" when I read that stuff at the end of ASoS. He and Lysa still started it all, with Arryn's death, which led to Ned coming to KL since Robert needed a Hand, and on and on. The letter is a footnote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has it got anything to do with the fact that there were so many writers for the TV series?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that would have nothing at all to do with it. David & Dan laid everything out for the show (based on GRRM's writing and the needs of a TV show with a set run time and budget), everyone else followed their plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm going to go with "Yes." It wasn't the letter that made me say, "Oh that mother f---er!" when I read that stuff at the end of ASoS. He and Lysa still started it all, with Arryn's death, which led to Ned coming to KL since Robert needed a Hand, and on and on. The letter is a footnote.

I don't know. I didn't see the letter as a footnote at all. Until the letter, Ned and Cat thought he had simply died of a sudden illness, not poisoned by the Queen. It could be argued that New was always going to accept the appointment of the Hand, as he would have likely considered it his duty, but arguments could also be made that Ned still had a duty to Winterfell (as Robb was not old enough really) and the information that the Hand was supposedly poisoned by the Queen is stronger than that duty. In my opinion Ned could have found some way to get out of the appointment, but after "learning" the Hand had been murdered decided (with Cat's urging) to investigate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's actually what I'm dreading, the idea that Cat's character is only about fiercely protective maternalism. Martin already makes it hard to notice her other aspects because her biggest plot contributions relate to that trait, why make things even more reductive? Especially because it's not like it would've taken more effort or time to do things the way it was in the book on this point, it would've only meant a few different lines in just the same number of scenes.

For my part I never considered the letter a mere footnote, it was a rather big deal, wasn't it? I mean, it's how Littlefinger accomplished what he did, it places him at the very start of the chain of events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really would be changing major plot points. Littlefinger got Lysa to write that letter to Catelyn, which was (in my opinion) a large influence on Ned going South to begin with, and what led him to investigate Jon's death which led to the downfall of Stark, etc. By not showing the importance the letter had leading to the decision to leave, will the payoff be as good when it's revealed that Littlefinger was behind it all?

I'm confused. If anything, the letter may be more important now. If Catelyn isn't encouraging him to go south then he needs other reasons to do so. Where is it suggested that the letter isn't important???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter is what makes Ned accept Robert's offer. Before that, his decision is 'I'll refuse him', and I don't see him giving in to Cat's demands to make their daughter the next Queen. We should keep in mind that Ned despised both Cersei and Jaime, and did not like Lord Tywin either. He would have had little reason to go south. He would have told Robert that he had more pressing concerns here in the North (Mance Rayder being the most important), and would have counseled Robert to make Stannis his next Hand.

Robert would not have been pleased, but he would have understood Ned's decision (we know that he himself had little and less interest in the matter of 'ruling').

It is really this suspicion that Jon Arryn might have been murdered which makes him accept the offer. If Jon Arryn had been murdered by the Lannisters, they might intend to murder Robert as well. And Ned could not allow that to happen, or allow Tywin and his brood to get away with another murder.

Before the letter Cat has no doubts/bad feelings towards the Lannisters in my opinion. Ned has issues with Jaime, but Cat does not care much about Aerys or the fact that Jaime sat on the Iron Throne. She even cautions Ned to treat Cersei the way she deserves as their rightful Queen.

By the way, I'm really looking forward to how they are going to play out the Littlefinger-Cat-thing. Fairley does not look like a woman in her thirties anymore, and beside the fact that there is little flirting going on between these two in the books [i actually do believe that getting Cat (back) was never really on Littlefinger's agenda when he had Lysa write that letter - he would have taken her, surely, if she had wanted him, but he does not really try to win her (back).] but I figured they would show us their past when Littlefinger is introduced, not give us bits and pieces over the entire season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter is just an excuse to get the Starks more into the game, a plot device. You can swap it out for some other device or scene. This is the kind of thing we have to be flexible about. A letter is not important in the grand scheme of things.

I'm sure there is more to Catelyn than fierce maternalism. Jumping the gun a bit, don't you think? And speaking as a mother, I don't see anything overly simple or reductive about the maternal nature and it being a large part of Catelyn. It's a diverse thing, not a simple characteristic that only shows itself as one emotion. The presence or absence of the letter does not change Catelyn's personality one bit. The decision as far as urging Ned to go or to stay, well I already said what I thought of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if I said for sure that there is going to be nothing else to her character, I think that'd be jumping the gun, but no assumptions were made. I do think it makes it more awkward to establish her as something of a politically minded person, if not ruthlessly ambitious, later on if they didn't see the need to do it here, since it's the least subtle moment where that aspect of her personality gets air time.

I don't think maternalism itself is reductive, I think playing her in a more conventional dynamic is potentially reductive. In the books her desire to take Robert's offer was also at least in part because of what she felt she ought to do on behalf of her children. But it's a kind of maternalism that jars with our modern sensibilities, it's very much a product of the medieval setting, and that's a little more interesting to see in a mother, especially a mother we're supposed to see as good. It's one thing if a grand bitch character like Rome's Atia is ambitious for her children, but it's more unique for a "good woman" type like Catelyn, IMO. All I'm trying to say is that if the character herself matters to HBO, beyond her plot contributions, then there needs to be more considerations than "As long as she's acting protectively on behalf of her children, it's fine". Because that description goes for basically all the mothers in the books, like Cersei, Sybell Westerling, Lysa, etc. But it doesn't make them unique individual personalities.

It seems to me that people are assuming the letter has been done away with. We could still see Luwin bringing it in, right? It's just that Cat will not react to it the same way as in the book? It's not the particulars that matter to me, but I think it should be clear that Littlefinger had a nudge in bringing the Starks down south, and I'm not sure what other way would be easier to do that. It's only because Jon Arryn's death is revealed to be a murder that Ned would really have a reason to go, and what other way might that idea be planted in his head besides the letter? But like I said, I don't think we need to assume the letter won't be in the scene, unless there's something I'm failing to remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems to me that people are assuming the letter has been done away with.

Yes. There is no reason to assume this. I really find it bizare how such strange ideas get into people's mind. :) Amusinginly, one of the early props we saw from the TV show was a coded letter!

By the way, I'm really looking forward to how they are going to play out the Littlefinger-Cat-thing. Fairley does not look like a woman in her thirties anymore, and beside the fact that there is little flirting going on between these two in the books

Will Gillen is 43, so the age difference between him and Fairley is very appropriate. I imagine they'll keep in their prior relationship. It adds a nice layer to the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's actually confirmed that the letter is in the scene. At least there are reports about the actual text of the message in the scene - a text that is not told in the books. They got that one right, as far as it seems, although it's not delivered to Luwin by some unknown Littlefinger crony but being sent by raven from the Eyrie. A change I can live with, as an official letter from Lysa in their secret code might even fulfill its purpose better.

This thing starts as a plot device in the books, but if they had changed they would ruin the one big revelation in ASoS in Sansa's last chapter. And this scene is really beautifully written, so I'd be really pissed if they would mess around with this whole Jon Arryn issue. The murder mystery can only be resolved in the third season. They can show us all the clues, and act as if it was already resolved (we all believed that Pycelle/Ser Hugh had done the deed for a time), but I don't want Littlefinger or Lysa spill the beans before the Moon Door scene.

Littlefinger should be presented as funny guy with a tendency to betrayal, but not as the guy who pulls most of the strings. At least not until Joffrey's murder and Sansa's escape. Then we can start to see his real face, not before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will. Yikes...no idea where that came from. :P

That didn't actually answer the question.

<I googled Irish curses for this space, but they were too fucking wierd>

I'm gonna assume "Aidan."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×