Catelyn

[Valmy]

She is smart but she has lack of something that Varys and LF have.

Well yeah they are the masters. But I do not get how she is false. I never got the idea Catelyn Tully was supposed to be a smarter than your average bear...er...trout.

[Lady Blackfish]

Everything else has been irrational; she urged Ned to go south, her enmity caused Jon to be isolated, she went south after which she got manipulated by LF, which was when i also believe Ned was forced to trust LF more because of her trust in LF, she put Tyrion in chains which caused Jaime to kill Ned's men which riled up everyone and was about the time Tywin started to make his move. everything that lead to Ned's death could have been averted if she was just a bit smarter, she believed LF because he was her friend back when they were kids, she didn't question why the Lannisters would send a common catspaw armed with a distinguishable blade, nor why. And thats just the first book. I don't mean to be cruel and i understand her love for her children, but the way she is presented and the way she handles things shows that she is not even close to a player in the game of thrones. She is smart but she has lack of something that Varys and LF have.

.........

There is nothing irrational about urging Ned to go south, going south herself, trusting her childhood friend who was willing to die out of love for her, etc, simply because they were in a chain of events that ended up with negative consequences. "Irrational" is not equivalent to "producing a bad result". And Catelyn Tully has never thought of herself as a game player, nor has Martin ever attempted to characterize her as a Varys or a LF. Why on earth do you hold her to that standard?

BTW, if Ned had been a bit smarter I bet his death could've been averted too.

[nevermore]

uhh, ok maybe that was a big standard. Anyway my point is, that she isn't far sighted, nuff said. And she burnt the LF letter she got, that' how much she gave a thought of LF for over 10 years. Also why did she urge Ned down? also after that i recall she said everything had changed when Bran fell (irrational?) also why did she go south? if she wanted to inform Ned she could have sent bird or even the knight she went with.and like you said she always led the chain of negative events, her actions are always a step behind, if she had done nothing things would've worked better overall.

PS: she did try to play the game of thrones which is why i mention LF and Varys, she urged Ned south and tried to learn dark secrets that was better left alone.

[evanesco75]

Several points here.

First, Cat pulled off a couple of master strokes in aid of her son, the KITN. She won him the Twins, for one. I regard those chapters as being particularly enlightening in terms of Catelyn's shrewdness and practicality. Robb fucked it up, not her.

She also advised Robb vehemently against sending Theon back to the Iron Islands. And she couldn't have been more right.

Second, I view the entire contrast of her emotions as a loving parent/daughter/wife vs. her role as the Lady of WF and mother of the King as an extraordinary demonstration of her complex, intelligent character (and role). She's flawed, sure. I don't think most readers hold her up to a perfect holy standard either. She's human. But she has grace, dignity and integrity and for me, that amounts to much.

Third (I know it's getting rather tedious at this point!) hindsight=20/20 applies here. We know the consequences of her decisions (never mind she wasn't omnipotent since there were several players involved throughout) but she didn't. Doing the best you can at the time isn't incompetence.

Last, I don't feel she's been portrayed as above-average or special. Her horrible, grisly fate (and the heartbreak leading up to it) doesn't suggest favouritism. It's just that her code/family motto and philosophy revolve around the ideas of family/duty/honour. She believes in (and tries to live up to) what she's been taught, always.

If anything, Tyrion's the character getting above-average treatment.

[nevermore]

Several points here.

First, Cat pulled off a couple of master strokes in aid of her son, the KITN. She won him the Twins, for one. I regard those chapters as being particularly enlightening in terms of Catelyn's shrewdness and practicality. Robb fucked it up, not her.

She also advised Robb vehemently against sending Theon back to the Iron Islands. And she couldn't have been more right.

Second, I view the entire contrast of her emotions as a loving parent/daughter/wife vs. her role as the Lady of WF and mother of the King as an extraordinary demonstration of her complex, intelligent character (and role). She's flawed, sure. I don't think most readers hold her up to a perfect holy standard either. She's human. But she has grace, dignity and integrity and for me, that amounts to much.

Third (I know it's getting rather tedious at this point!) hindsight=20/20 applies here. We know the consequences of her decisions (never mind she wasn't omnipotent since there were several players involved throughout) but she didn't. Doing the best you can at the time isn't incompetence.

Last, I don't feel she's been portrayed as above-average or special. Her horrible, grisly fate (and the heartbreak leading up to it) doesn't suggest favouritism. It's just that her code/family motto and philosophy revolve around the ideas of family/duty/honour. She believes in (and tries to live up to) what she's been taught, always.

If anything, Tyrion's the character getting above-average treatment.

uhh above average meant she was a cut above every other Ladies who had low cunning like Cersei. She did have some master strokes and helped Robb in many ways (this is why i said presented as being clever) and then she does stupid things like freeing the Kingslayer and believing LF. I mean it doesn't fit, I maybe alone here but it feels every act of good forsight is lined with bad decisions albeit unknowingly.

[Lady Blackfish]

And she burnt the LF letter she got, that' how much she gave a thought of LF for over 10 years.

So? That means that she ought to expect that her old childhood friend is really out to betray her and embroil her family in a civil war and possibly kill her husband and get all pervy on her daughter and whatnot? She burnt Littlefinger's letter and put him behind her because she was moving on with her life with another man, that in no way means she ought to have expected that Littlefinger would lie to her, much less turn into a psycho.

Also why did she urge Ned down?

She wanted him to accept being Hand for the benefit of her family, it's an honor and prestige. You may not find it sympathetic, but that doesn't make it irrational.

also after that i recall she said everything had changed when Bran fell (irrational?)

Are you sure you know the meaning of the word "irrational"? Everything changed because their son was now lying on death's door, the family needed to be together for support and Robert would surely understand Ned needing to stay for at least a period of time.

also why did she go south? if she wanted to inform Ned she could have sent bird or even the knight she went with.and like you said she always led the chain of negative events, her actions are always a step behind, if she had done nothing things would've worked better overall.

Sure, she could have, but that doesn't make her chosen action irrational. Think of why it went wrong: because Varys found her out and reported her to Littlefinger, and because she ran into Tyrion in the inn as an utmost coincidental happenstance. These things are not fair to expect her to predict. Other characters enjoy this level of authorial fiat in their favor, but Martin adds just enough bad luck to make Cat tragic. And that's all she is, she may not be a Littlefinger or a Varys but she is overall rational and only guilty of not being able to predict the future with perfect precision.

Plus, going south herself means she could present her hands as evidence of the assassination attempt.

[nevermore]

So? That means that she ought to expect that her old childhood friend is really out to betray her and embroil her family in a civil war and possibly kill her husband and get all pervy on her daughter and whatnot? She burnt Littlefinger's letter and put him behind her because she was moving on with her life with another man, that in no way means she ought to have expected that Littlefinger would lie to her, much less turn into a psycho.

She wanted him to accept being Hand for the benefit of her family, it's an honor and prestige. You may not find it sympathetic, but that doesn't make it irrational.

Are you sure you know the meaning of the word "irrational"? Everything changed because their son was now lying on death's door, the family needed to be together for support and Robert would surely understand Ned needing to stay for at least a period of time.

Sure, she could have, but that doesn't make her chosen action irrational. Think of why it went wrong: because Varys found her out and reported her to Littlefinger, and because she ran into Tyrion in the inn as an utmost coincidental happenstance. These things are not fair to expect her to predict. Other characters enjoy this level of authorial fiat in their favor, but Martin adds just enough bad luck to make Cat tragic. And that's all she is, she may not be a Littlefinger or a Varys but she is perfectly rational and only guilty of not being able to predict the future with perfect precision.

Plus, going south herself means she could present her hands as evidence of the assassination attempt.

Ned being there would not have helped the situation, would've made it easier for Cat but wouldn't do anything and he couldn't start his new job by being late, the hand is very powerful position and seeing as how active Robert was in his role as king he would've let the country rot for a month or 2 waiting for Ned. She didn't wish for him to accept the role of hand for prestige and honour, she done it so he can go south and investigate the death of Jon Aryn, effectively putting his hand in pit of vipers. Think of why she suspected Tyrion in the first place, because she trusted LF, never expected her to see all the way his role in all 4 books but i expected a bit of caution on her part. You're right she is unlucky, but only because she rolled the dice, not because she was walking about and got hit by lightning.

[evanesco75]

uhh above average meant she was a cut above every other Ladies who had low cunning like Cersei. She did have some master strokes and helped Robb in many ways (this is why i said presented as being clever) and then she does stupid things like freeing the Kingslayer and believing LF. I mean it doesn't fit, I maybe alone here but it feels every act of good forsight is lined with bad decisions albeit unknowingly.

If we're talking about women who are presented as being a cut above, I submit Dany.

As far as Cat goes, the fact that she is politically aware and attuned doesn't preclude emotion. Again, context is key. She trusted LF because she grew up with him. They had real history. And she freed Jaime when she had just been told that Bran and Rickon were dead. Yes, she was emotional, she wanted to save the children she had left. That's real and human and that's how GRRM always portrayed her. So I think it fits just fine.

Where does it say that a person who's generally smart and practical and has made some correct (in hindsight) decisions won't ever make a few other decisions that are motivated by stress or emotion or that, in hindsight, are wrong?

[Lady Blackfish]

Ned being there would not have helped the situation, would've made it easier for Cat but wouldn't do anything and he couldn't start his new job by being late, the hand is very powerful position and seeing as how active Robert was in his role as king he would've let the country rot for a month or 2 waiting for Ned.

Robert could've found someone else. It might be inconvenient, but it's not impossible, and it ought to have been something he was prepared for in case Ned refused.

She didn't wish for him to accept the role of hand for prestige and honour

AGOT, Catelyn II:

"Pride is everything to a king, my lord. Robert came all this way to see you, to bring you these great honors, you cannot throw them back in his face."

"Honors?" Ned laughed bitterly.

"In his eyes, yes," she said.

"And in yours?"

"And in mine," she blazed, angry now.

This is before she even knows that Jon Arryn was murdered. The note about the murder only galvanizes her.

However, investigating a crime in no way commits her to either a self-assessment or an authorial label of "game player". It was an injustice, as was the crime against her son Bran, and yes she is motivated to address those injustices. That doesn't mean she wants to play the game in any significant sense (accumulate power, manipulate people, plan elaborate schemes, etc). The game of thrones is essentially about power and Catelyn is not overly interested in power at all. Her motivation is first the pursuit of justice and later conservation of her family.

[Nukelavee]

interesting point a bit back - about "what if jon had simply held a small stronghold for the starks?"

here's teh thing - Ned has presented Jon as "his" bastard (whether or not he is). the only way Jon could be removed from any possibility of becoming "the" Stark, would be to kill him.

just by being Ned's offspring, he is always a potential contender. it's actually impossible for Catlyn to eliminate that chance (which might explain why she tries so hard to remove the easy roads to that end. it would explain it regarding a lot of people, but, hey, i'm not teh author, so...i can't really say what she reasons unless George tells me).

i think trusting LF, at any point, was a mistake. a huge one, as it turns out, but she couldn't have known that. i'm just saying.........a kid who challenges teh betrothed of his crush to a duel? i'd always be a bit questioning where his motivations were concerned.

grabbing tyrion was a terrible mistake, based on no real evidence at all, just heresay and a need for vengance. still, understandable.

the "unforgivable" mistake? letting Robb be crowned king. doing that meant the Starks and Tully's were now rebels against the rightful king, Stannis (or Joff, depending on what you know). It made Ned's chances slimmer, and it made ALL the Starks targets.

emotionally, the North rising makes sense, but, rationally, it was a terrible call.

[nevermore]

Doomsday

real, human and irrational. she is letting her judgement affect her feelings. just my point, even when Jaime finds out Lancel slept with Cersei he doesn't hate Lancel. Catelyn hates Jon for being Ned's bastard. Also Dany is fine, she makes mistakes but Catelyn has 20-30 years on her. Anyway, her character just doesn't settle for me, actually i find her the least real out of all them, maybe i'm being irrational :P but my opinion of her won't change. Her actions don't make as much sense as others, how can she not see Brienne as not being loyal after the way she was around Renly. Also in her POV Cat looked like she understood her, obviously she is half-mad now. But even with evidence supporting Tyrion's claim she believed him a liar than LF manipulating her.

[Errant Bard]

It's interesting to note that the attacks on Catelyn saying or implying she should not have trusted Littlefinger come from the same direction as those who say she should have blindly trusted Jon to never betray her children.

[Lady Blackfish]

the "unforgivable" mistake? letting Robb be crowned king. doing that meant the Starks and Tully's were now rebels against the rightful king, Stannis (or Joff, depending on what you know). It made Ned's chances slimmer, and it made ALL the Starks targets.

Catelyn was the only one in that entire room who was against this, who wanted to sue for peace and go home. And you're pinning it on her?

Un.freaking.believable.

[nevermore]

't's interesting to note that the attacks on Catelyn saying or implying she should not have trusted Littlefinger come from the same direction as those who say she should have blindly trusted Jon to never betray her children.'

thats because we know both characters and what they are capable of so that gives the distinction that characters can be forgiven for not having birdseye view of these 2 but, Ned saw Jon for what he was. Robb saw Jon for what he was. too many people can see Jon and know he is trust worthy. only ones who have doubted are evil guy Slynt and Allister, + Catelyn. Also you ruin your own point by highlighting that she ironically trusted LF when she completely distrusted Jon. hence lack of judgement.

'Catelyn was the only one in that entire room who was against this, who wanted to sue for peace and go home. And you're pinning it on her?'

agreed here, she was at her best when she was with Robb, it's when she was in other situation where she failed.

[rockxwl]

I don't think allowing Robb to be crowned King in the North was an "unforgivable" mistake. For one, I'd say that she would have had no effect on the decision whatsoever no matter how hard she objected. In fact, Catelyn's only HUGE mistake was going behind her King's back and freeing Jaime - allowing her motherly instincts to blind her to the fact that Jaime was a political prisoner and Robb's war, in the end (and harsh as it may be), is more important than the lives of two girls. But even foregetting this mistake, there need not be one huge mistake to push a person from "good" to "bad." Catelyn made many smaller mistakes and they added up and contributed to the disastrous fate of much of her family and their war.

[Lady Blackfish]

Also you ruin your own point by highlighting that she ironically trusted LF when she completely distrusted Jon. hence lack of judgement.

Irony does not make something poor judgment, it merely makes it ironic.

Her trust of Littlefinger was unfortunate, but reasonable enough. Her lack of trust of Jon is probably somewhat unfair, but not totally baseless either. And being a good judge of character isn't the same thing as being a perfect judge of character either. People's problem with Catelyn is that she opposes authorial favorite Tyrion and Gary Stu Jon Snow. If they were non-characters I don't think she would appear any more irrational than anyone else in the story.

And anyway, as was pointed out in in past pages of the discussion, Jon does not need to be untrustworthy for problems to happen in future generations:

AGOT Cat II:

And in time the boy would take the oath as well. He would father no sons who might someday contest with Catelyn’s own grandchildren for Winterfell.

ASOS Cat :

I know you trust Jon. But can you trust his sons? Or their sons?

[rockxwl]

agreed here, she was at her best when she was with Robb, it's when she was in other situation where she failed.

And even then she makes a number of mistakes and struggles to make up for them and do the right things - as evidenced by her constantly conflicted internal arguments during her POV chapters. While she tries hard to do right by Robb, it is clear that doing so does not come natural to her.

[Valmy]

thats because we know both characters and what they are capable of so that gives the distinction that characters can be forgiven for not having birdseye view of these 2 but, Ned saw Jon for what he was. Robb saw Jon for what he was. too many people can see Jon and know he is trust worthy. only ones who have doubted are evil guy Slynt and Allister, + Catelyn. Also you ruin your own point by highlighting that she ironically trusted LF when she completely distrusted Jon. hence lack of judgement.

Do we? We know what Jon has done so far but he is still young. Ambition can grab any man. Catelyn was certainly correct to be leery of him.

Besides blasting a character for not being omniscient makes no sense outside of Dune: Messiah. Catelyn had no reason to suspect Littlefinger had some huge Machiavellan plot going on (heck even entirely paranoid people do not suspect his game because he designed it to be irrational just to throw people off).

[evanesco75]

Doomsday

real, human and irrational. she is letting her judgement affect her feelings. just my point, even when Jaime finds out Lancel slept with Cersei he doesn't hate Lancel. Catelyn hates Jon for being Ned's bastard. Also Dany is fine, she makes mistakes but Catelyn has 20-30 years on her. Anyway, her character just doesn't settle for me, actually i find her the least real out of all them, maybe i'm being irrational :P but my opinion of her won't change. Her actions don't make as much sense as others, how can she not see Brienne as not being loyal after the way she was around Renly. Also in her POV Cat looked like she understood her, obviously she is half-mad now. But even with evidence supporting Tyrion's claim she believed him a liar than LF manipulating her.

Lancel and Jon aren't comparable at all. Come on, dude. Younger cousin who fucked my sister/lover a few times vs. bastard son my husband fathered after marrying me? Really?

My point re Dany was that she's a much more apt example of a female character depicted as nearly perfect and hence, a cut above to use your words. Much more than Cat.

Re Brienne, Lady Stoneheart is clearly vastly different from Catelyn Tully Stark. She's dead, for one, rather than 'half mad'. So I don't find it fair to blame her condemnation of Brienne on the living, breathing Cat.

Of course, feel free to hate her if you're so inclined :D

[nevermore]

Irony does not make something poor judgment, it merely makes it ironic.

Her trust of Littlefinger was unfortunate, but reasonable enough. Her lack of trust of Jon is probably somewhat unfair, but not totally baseless either. And being a good judge of character isn't the same thing as being a perfect judge of character either. People's problem with Catelyn is that she opposes authorial favorite Tyrion and Gary Stu Jon Snow. If they were non-characters I don't think she would appear any more irrational than anyone else in the story.

And anyway, as was pointed out in in past pages of the discussion, Jon does not need to be untrustworthy for problems to happen in future generations:

AGOT Cat II:

And in time the boy would take the oath as well. He would father no sons who might someday contest with Catelyn’s own grandchildren for Winterfell.

ASOS Cat :

I know you trust Jon. But can you trust his sons? Or their sons?

but she clearly doesn't trust Jon never mind his sons and how can it not be baseless when all she knows about his character is that he is a bastard (obviously bastards were treated worse generally but that doesn't mean it was reasonable to treat him like that). Her trust in LF was unreasonable, when you base it on capturing a powerful lord's son it is utter stupidity. it's not like she just trusted him after a month or 2, but after a day and then there's the fact she could have bided her time. attacking the Lannisters was rash and was directly responsible for the death of loyal stark men. My personal loathing for her is the fact i associate most of the Stark downfall with her actions + Ned (would've given them up straight away but would've sent the children off via boat to free cities).

'Lancel and Jon aren't comparable at all. Come on, dude. Younger cousin who fucked my sister/lover a few times vs. bastard son my husband fathered after marrying me? Really?

My point re Dany was that she's a much more apt example of a female character depicted as nearly perfect and hence, a cut above to use your words. Much more than Cat.

Re Brienne, Lady Stoneheart is clearly vastly different from Catelyn Tully Stark. She's dead, for one, rather than 'half mad'. So I don't find it fair to blame her condemnation of Brienne on the living, breathing Cat.

Of course, feel free to hate her if you're so inclined'

i was showing how worse at controlling her emotions she is that even the kingslayer.

and you are right about dany but she is a queen, every single royalty are cut above everyone else.

and i will continue to hate her knowing i have your full consent with me :lol: