Jump to content

Archived

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

fauxkaren

[Book Spoilers] Where is Catelyn Stark and what has HBO done with her?

Recommended Posts

I actually gasped when Cat said she wanted go home to Winterfell. It was quite out of character and I hope D&D make it up to her in Renly's camp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HBO-Joffrey agrees with you.

Now, once Arya becomes a ninja and kills a man with a coin, I'd have suggested trading all the hostages for her. :ninja:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are adorable! Oh, and about useless girls, dudebro...

"I should have traded Sansa for the Kingslayer when you first urged it," Robb said as they walked the galley. "If I'd offered to wed her to the Knight of Flowers, the Tyrells might have been ours instead of Joffrey's. I should have thought of that."

Also factcheck. Jaime is not the heir to Casterly Rock. He is in fact eligible to inherit. OTOH, Sansa was the heir to Winterfell.

You are adorable! Oh, and about useless girls, dudebro...

"I should have traded Sansa for the Kingslayer when you first urged it," Robb said as they walked the galley. "If I'd offered to wed her to the Knight of Flowers, the Tyrells might have been ours instead of Joffrey's. I should have thought of that."

Also factcheck. Jaime is not the heir to Casterly Rock. He is in fact eligible to inherit. OTOH, Sansa was the heir to Winterfell.

Robb second guessing his original actions is normal, especially when the events turned out the way they did. But trading the Kingslayer for two useless girls would have been a worse mistake. Although the ends remained the same, the choice was still the right one. He may have lost the war earlier, actually on the field, as opposed to being backstabbed his own sworn men. Also, Jaime was heir, and Tywin could easily make him heir again, especially with the king being his grandson. Tywin always wanted Jaime to be heir. Tyrion's not next in life, Kevan would be. But none the less, Jaime is the only REAL son of Tywin, atleast in Tywin's eyes. To gain him back in exchange for two useless girls would have only benefited the Lannisters. Robb was a child, his decision perhaps didn't work out the way he had hoped, and of course doubts are a normal part of life, especially for a boy new to all this. None the less, his choices were just, and Catelyn's wouldn't have benefited the Starks in the slightest. None of her suggestions were half-way decent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robb second guessing his original actions is normal, especially when the events turned out the way they did. But trading the Kingslayer for two useless girls would have been a worse mistake. Although the ends remained the same, the choice was still the right one. He may have lost the war earlier, actually on the field, as opposed to being backstabbed his own sworn men. Also, Jaime was heir, and Tywin could easily make him heir again, especially with the king being his grandson. Tywin always wanted Jaime to be heir. Tyrion's not next in life, Kevan would be. But none the less, Jaime is the only REAL son of Tywin, atleast in Tywin's eyes. To gain him back in exchange for two useless girls would have only benefited the Lannisters. Robb was a child, his decision perhaps didn't work out the way he had hoped, and of course doubts are a normal part of life, especially for a boy new to all this. None the less, his choices were just, and Catelyn's wouldn't have benefited the Starks in the slightest. None of her suggestions were half-way decent.

Robb second guessing his original actions is normal, especially when the events turned out the way they did. But trading the Kingslayer for two useless girls would have been a worse mistake. Although the ends remained the same, the choice was still the right one. He may have lost the war earlier, actually on the field, as opposed to being backstabbed his own sworn men. Also, Jaime was heir, and Tywin could easily make him heir again, especially with the king being his grandson. Tywin always wanted Jaime to be heir. Tyrion's not next in life, Kevan would be. But none the less, Jaime is the only REAL son of Tywin, atleast in Tywin's eyes. To gain him back in exchange for two useless girls would have only benefited the Lannisters. Robb was a child, his decision perhaps didn't work out the way he had hoped, and of course doubts are a normal part of life, especially for a boy new to all this. None the less, his choices were just, and Catelyn's wouldn't have benefited the Starks in the slightest. None of her suggestions were half-way decent.

And in response to your "Tywin got the last laugh" Shenanigans. That's only because the character you're defending was guilty of releasing the Kingslayer for nothing. For promises from a man who broke his vows. Rather he actually intended to send the girls back or not, doesn't really matter because Catelyn, unlike us, is not able to hear a point of view character's thoughts. She literally stabbed her son in the back when she released the Kingslayer, and if she had gone back to Winterfell, that wouldn't have happened. The Red wedding may have occured, but how many other events were changed by her releasing the Kingslayer? Karstark being beheaded? His men abandoning Robb and heading home? All she did was screw Robb over, and force his hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of her suggestions were half-way decent.

Naturally, that is why HBO gave her suggestions to Robb, Maester Luwin, and other characters. Because they weren't halfway decent. And her place is at home with her babies.

#whataboutcat

And Robb was, naturally, correct to realize that girls are useless and incorrect to realize that they are valuable. And my opinion is invalidated by my sex organs. And you aren't sexist...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the OP is exaggerating with the whole "women are only good at making babies" strawman, but she raises some good points, and boy, this thread is depressingly hypocritical...

GRRM DOES show that she is politically shrewd and competent. She knows what the Freys want and thus is able to treat with them and make the deal that allows Robb to cross the Twins. She is the one who comes up with the idea to treat with Renly. Yes, this plan doesn't work out... AND IT ENDS IN RENLY'S DEATH. It was still a good plan, but Renly and Stannis did not listen to her reason. If Robb had listented to Catelyn and not sent Theon (WHO WAS THEIR HOSTAGE) to Pyke, it's possible that Winterfell would never have been sacked. Catelyn was wise to see that the Freys would not be happy at the Red Wedding which is why she advised Robb to eat right away in order to establish guest rite. How was she supposed to be able to see that Walder Frey would go against that sacred tradition and murder guests in his own home.

Catelyn is mean to a fan favorite right off the bat, but Jaime also pushes a child out a tower window right of the bat and somehow readers are able to forgive him and Jaime is one of the most popular characters in the book. Please try to tell me that there is not some degree of sexism involved in that. Female characters are held to higher (and more unreasonable standards) than their male counterparts.

Maester Lusin, a maester and a man who has known Bran and Rickon since BIRTH is at Winterfell with the boys. How is that not adequate childcare?? Rickon and Bran were miles and miles and miles away from the fighting. Robb was trying to stage a rebellion. I'm sorry if I just don't understand how it is not obvious to everyone that Robb is the one wh needs Cat most.

Personally, I do not find Cat unlikable. She is my favorite character and I find her to be imminently likable and sympathetic with a compelling and unique story to boot. The reasons that many people come up with to hate her do have their root causes in sexism. They judge her based on her not being a good enough mother whereas you hardly see characters hated for being awful fathers (OF WHICH THERE ARE PLENTY IN THIS SERIES). Part of the reason people dislike her treatment of Jon is because she wasn't a mother to him even though she had NO social obligation to be a mother figure to him, but that expectation is put on her because she is a woman and amother. They ascribe her actions as irrational when she does act on emotions (like when she frees Jaime) and declare her to be stupid and a hysterical woman even though they are a lot of male characters who also act on their emotions (Robb marrying Jeyne, Tyrion killing Shae and Tywin, Jaime pushing Bran out a window).

FUCK YES, everything about this post is 100% true. Thank you.

[edit] Catelyn is also not as good as you make her out. I am not a Cat-hater like most everybody else here, but she was downright cruel to Jon and later becomes obsessed with vengeance at the expense of her humanity.

"Downright cruel"? For fuck's sake, are Jon fanbois such pansies? She was mostly cold and distant his entire life, which was pretty much expected, and then she said ONE mean thing to him during a moment of sheer grief. Jon got over it pretty quickly, why can't you idiots do the same? Gah, sorry but this whole "Catelyn is soooo cruel" BS is pissing me off. Joffrey, the Boltons, Tywin, the Cleganes, Cersei,

It was a good idea to try and treat with Renly, but she doesn't know how to do it.

And what, pray tell, would you have done differently?

, advised Ned to trust Littlefinger[...]

How was Robb supposed to know that his childhood friend, who must have been nearly as dear as a brother to him, would betray him so terribly and "kill" his brothers?

HAHAHAHA there we have it folks, the blatant double-standard, just a few lines apart. Awesome.

But trading the Kingslayer for two useless girls would have been a worse mistake.

It was already established that they are not useless. Politically, Sansa is worth more than Jaime. Even Tywin knew that.

And in response to your "Tywin got the last laugh" Shenanigans. That's only because the character you're defending was guilty of releasing the Kingslayer for nothing.

How so? She didn't release him for nothing.

The Red wedding may have occured, but how many other events were changed by her releasing the Kingslayer? Karstark being beheaded? His men abandoning Robb and heading home? All she did was screw Robb over, and force his hand.

Er, what? You're really blaming the Karkstark's treasonous folly, and Robb's heavy-handed justice of it, on Catelyn? Haha, this thread is awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the books, both Robb and Cat make mistakes.

Cat mistakenly frees Jamie which is disastrous for Robb's position.

Robb marries Jayne westerling setting up the red wedding.

Both do things that are good.

Cat warns Robb about the greyjoys and the frey but he does not listen.

Robb wins every battle he fights.

Cat is seen as a good wife to Ned.

Robb is seen as an honorable man.

They are like most characters in the books, some great traits, major victories, but tempered with faults and flaws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cat's seizing of Tyrion was one of the single dumbest, rash, and poorly thought out actions taken by any character in the books, and directly lead to the slaughter of scores of innocents. Releasing Jaime enabled the Red Wedding, the betrayal of the Boltons, and made Sansa's life practically worthless outside of her claim- had it ever been discovered that Bran and or Rickon was alive, Sansa's life would have been thrown away.

Now, I don't dislike Cat nearly as much as some people do around the internet, but I've never seen the character that Alexia described in the original post. Cat was certainly an expert in the politics of Westerosi nobility, and the scene where she first meets Jeyne and is analyzing the size and shape of her hips, sizing up her asset as the future mother of heirs for the North showed her pragmatism. But the fact remains that she made some truly terrible decisions- if anything, I thought season 1 made her more sympathetic to the viewers. Her opposition to sending Theon as an envoy remained, and I'm sure her objection to Robb ignoring Grey Wind's instincts will also remain. I think the original post was a massive overreaction and felt like a shoddy attempt stemming from some sort of oppressed victim-identity trying to label the show sexist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I partially agree with you and partially disagree with you.

Book Catelyn was one of my favorite characters in the series ("was" because, whatever one thinks of Lady Stoneheart, she's not nearly the same character as Catelyn when she lived), and I think the show has done her a disservice . Do I think it's sexism? I'm not sure. They diminished Littlefinger this episode for Cersei's benefit. I'm not ready to call sexism in this circumstance, as there remain some very reasonable alternative explanations for each move. I will say that, in the absence of Catelyn, the story lacks a really admirable female lead. Daenerys has annoyed me as an angry, unbelievable trope, and while I like Cersei because I have a "cheer for the villain" tendency, I'll never make the argument that she's particularly admirable. Tragic, perhaps, but she hasn't dealt with her tragedies nearly so admirably as Catelyn has.

However, I think you're painting an extreme, partial painting of the characters to try and make your point.

Robb wasn't a hack child in over his head, like Joffrey was. We have to remember he was a 15-year old in the books. He had listened to his mother a few prudent times, Catelyn herself noted happiness at his learning and development at times, and he fared better than one may have expected of him for quite awhile. He was making the powerful and capable Tywin look the fool prior to the Greyjoy, Bolton, and Frey debacles, strategically and militarily. But indeed, for all of his good qualities, you righly mention some flaws. Some combination of his age and his heart brought about his failing. He was too trusting of some wrong people, and he made a bull-headed move with Jeyne Westerling. I wouldn't say he was simply in over his head, though, or white-wash his redeeming qualities--of which there were many. Like Ned, and as I'll soon say, like Catelyn, he was a good (and in his case, more surprisingly good given the age), capable individual with a tragic flaw or two which so happened, in his unfortunate circumstances, to destroy him.

Book Catelyn, to me, was very much as you describe her. She gave some very sound advice. She balanced these with what were unequal familial duties for a Westerosi woman. But I don't think she was meant to be perfection weighed down by a brutish warhawk of a son. Like Robb, she made her 'trust mistake,' but hers was with Littlefinger and resulted in a fiasco with Tyrion. And while I even agree with you that her advice to trade Jaime for Sansa/Arya was good, doing so as she did was an incredible risk motivated out of what was, in her unfortunate circumstances, a tragic flaw in concern for her family. Like Robb, she made her mistakes. In the end, it results in a very strong, understandable character operating in a world made for the plotting of the Lannisters rather than the heart of the Starks.

Robb and Catelyn were two sides of the same coin more so than I've seen anyone willing to admit. I thought they were both likable, capable characters with good qualities which in their circumstances and in a cruel world resulted instead in tragedy, and for my part, of the two I did prefer Catelyn. Catelyn has my vote for the single most realistically strong character in the series, along with all of the nuance such a realistic character in such an extreme world entails. While the HBO series is somewhat disappointing me in their portrayal of Catelyn, Michelle Fairley is still doing a wonderful enough job that I still really enjoy her--even in this somewhat neutered, so to speak, form. Due to the difficulty of an adapation, I'm unconvinced as yet to assert utter sexism for the change (for similar things like the Littlefinger-Cersei parallel mentioned above), though I do see some sliver of it in that Catelyn retained all of her emotional and motherly power while losing some of her more intellectual qualities; however, Robb has been portrayed very similarly and emotionally, so I'm unwilling to make too much of that. It's also a little quick to judge, in my book. Her advice against sending Theon remained, her treatment with the Freys remained, Renly is yet to come. She hasn't lost out on too much (and everyone loses something of their character simply due to the difference in mediums of storytelling), to this point, and I think one has to give Robb a very unfair analysis to make the opposite argument.

I don't like the change any more than I do the change to Littlefinger in the episode (Catelyn and Littlefinger probably being my favorite characters in the series), but I can in both cases understand them. Right now, I think too harsh of a condemnation of the (still rather minor) changes is reactionary and misrepresenting parts of the novel, and it's misrepresenting the intentions of the adapters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree with the OP's argument that Catelyn's political acumen has been diminished in this scene, I do think that pumping up Robb is necessary.

In the books, Robb is much less mature and frankly...a little dim. This is ok in the book, because we're seeing everything through Catelyn's eyes. But in the show, we're not. We have to care when the Scarlet Reception happens, and we're not going to be inside Catelyn's head when it happens. We have to care about Robb Stark, we have to root for him to win - we have to invest the same feelings we had towards Eddard Stark, so that when the Scarlet Reception happens, it hits just like the Sept of Baelor scene in Episode 9.

So I like the change to Robb. It really annoyed me on re-reading Game of Thrones how often Robb Stark waves around his sword while everyone looks at him like he's a moron, how he needs to be walked through what happened with the attempted assassination, how he sits wringing his hands and needs his mommy to work him through the strategy of his first battle. In the show, he's 3 years older - if he acts the same way as a 17 year old that his 14-year old equivalent did, no one would sympathize with him at all. The character changed - he's more sure of himself when he's dealing with Greatjon Umber, he has a battleplan ready, and he knows something about politics.

At the same time, it pisses me off that they've given Catelyn the short-shrift, which they did since the pilot, when they completely reversed her position on Ned taking the Hand. (Although I think they did recover in her tent scenes with Robb in Episodes 9+10 when she was advising Robb without rolling over him)

I do think it was possible for them to have made more of a balance - give Catelyn some of the points while still giving Robb credit for a political strategy, you could have Robb tell her "I need you to go to Renly," and she could rejoin "I'm supposed to bring back his 100,000 swords, am I?" and Robb responds "between the two of us, I think we can force a peace," it's more of a conversation of equals. I do have more hope for when she's off on her own negotiating with Renly in what I think is going to be episodes 3+4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also finding this thread depressing as i do all the Cat threads. Some reasders like Greatjon_Umber twist the text and their logic to diminish and simplify an extremely complex and nuanced character. Don't sweat it Alexia. You've read to greater depth but you'll never convince people incapable of changing their emotional reaction and bias even in the facr of the author's text.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree with you, they are making Catelyn's character worse in favor of Robb, and also to the detriments of some of the themes of the story, I just really like TV show Robb and he was one of the characters in the book that I also would have liked if I had to know him more in the books. I understand where you are coming from but I am enjoying immensely the Robb scenes and the rebel somewhat smarter Robb. Also when they change the story a little while the story they change remains good, I don't mind as it seems somewhat fresh. I can mind it if I think the result is quite worse story than a far closer adaptation.

So I think the result of these changes is still good television and it is something different. I still have the books for the superior Catelyn characterization so I don't mind it if the TV show makes Robb better, smarter at her expense. Of course I understand not everyone will agree and that is understandable for several people to be against these changes as I do think that book Catelyn is a better character. (And some might also not like the change of Robb's character while I enjoy them). Note that tv show Catelyn character is not a bad character even with the changes.

Also book Catelyn is right to not be at Winterfell and be at Robb's side. She pretty much shows to be a rather intelligent in politics and intelligent in general. The sexism themes are also important in her story as a woman who wants correctly peace at important points, gives valid advice is not listened to, wants to trade her daughters for Jaime and says how girls are not important in Westeros society. She is sort of a Casandra figure though she is also does make mistakes as well and like most GRRM characters she has her flaws and is not perfect. Her treatment of Jon Snow for example. As for how GRRM has written her, he has written her to be a sympathetic and tragic figure with a flaw that readers will probably not like but forgive, considering how most other characters have much more important flaws. And then as Uncat she is an antagonistic and tragic figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wondered how long it would take someone to use my gender as a basis to attack my opinions. Congrats on being the first, dudebro. :lol:

Sorry to derail the original topic but since the OP keeps bringing sexism back into the topic, I guess it's ok for me to pick some nits on this as it is one of my pet peeves.

"Male" and "female" are sex categories, while "masculine" and "feminine" are gender categories.

So unless you meant to refer only to your gender (which is ok if you're not sure, it is the internet afterall) then you should refer to your sex when you start calling someone for perceived sexism because you are female in real life - it doesn't help your position.

And yes I'm female in real life as well. I generally dislike defensive feminist arguments especially in reference to opinions about fiction such as this since there's zero way to validate your argument based on your own personal feminism vs. the author's intent and the culture of a fantasy based society. Unfortunately that's the tone of the books and the show follows suit.

It would be better to leave off the continued defensive remarks towards the other poster even though he claimed you were crying sexist because you're a woman - which he wouldn't know unless he lives with you and knows you intimately. Irksome I know, but that sort of stance never wins over an argument on a forum IMO. :)

But to try lamely to put the topic back on its tracks, I don't think its a sexist issue at all and the show has made many of the female characters even stronger (and thus more likable and someone female viewers can identify with). Catelyn hasn't been stripped of anything crucial by changing her character personality a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me the issue here isn't book integrity or the cost-benefit analysis of every single one of Cat's decisions and opinions. It's about one of the major themes of all the asoiaf books, perhaps THE major theme: peace is always better than war.

GRRM was a

objector during the Vietnam war. In asoiaf, none of the wars are righteous, and both sides always lose. In the war of five kings, robert's rebellion, even the blackfyre rebellion and dany's conquests in the east, no character is portrayed on the good side, and no one is on the bad side (I include Dany, because, though GRRM is clear that liberating the slaves is a good thing, her actions have horrific repercussions all the same). The point that GRRM makes, over and over again, is that all wars are terrible and they should be avoided at all costs. The small folk suffer, the kings suffer, their mother and fathers suffer, their siblings suffer. War is not glorious knights fighting in shining armor as Bran and Sansa and Arya and Brienne and Renly etc etc want to believe. War is bodies rotting on the side of the road, women raped, children cut open, corpses hanging from trees. GRRM is extremely explicit in his descriptions of the horrors of war. GRRM, in no way, portrays Robb as a glorified king going to avenge his father because that is the righteous thing to do, just as he doesn't portray Joffrey defending his throne as the glorified, righteous king.

So where does Cat come into this? Robb sees himself as the righteous hero, and Cat is THE ONLY PERSON to tell him that war isn't like that. Cat questions how eager he is to jump to violence when she shows him the dagger in the godswood. She questions his decision to go to war, urging peace after he is declared king in the north. When Edmure asks her about revenge she says that it will not bring Ned back to her, because it's true. The war will not bring anyone back to life. It only brings more death.

So when Cat hugs Robb and says "we will kill them all" I'm upset. Yeah, the line sounds awesome, it makes us want to root for them, but THAT IS EXACTLY THE REASON GRRM PORTRAYS WAR AS HE DOES. He wants us to take a step back and say, "wait, why does that sound awesome? they're talking about killing people." Just as GRRM makes the reader question stereotypes about "true knights" with Sansa's arc, he makes the reader question stereotypes about the value of violence win Robb's arc. Robb's story is about peace. Because it's not Robb's story: it's Catelyn's.

When HBO takes the character of Robb, whose theme is an example of how revenge is always wrong even if the intentions are good, and turns him into some glorified, honorable, sympathetic character, I look at the screen and say WHAT ARE YOU DOING?

Because we're not supposed to sympathize with Robb. GRRM doesn't want us to sympathize with characters that encourage violence. That's why Catelyn's POV is Catelyn's. GRRM is forcing the reader to question our eagerness to go to war and kill our enemies, because it's never the best solution. Cat suggests diplomacy. Cat suggests peace. Cat denies revenge because she understands that, in the end, it's worthless. And no one listens to her. Just like HBO isn't listening to her. That's why Robb's arc is tragic. The Red Wedding IS TRAGIC already. We don't have to change the fundamental message of the story to manipulate the viewer's feelings.

I don't care about this because "oh no it's not exactly like the books the sky is falling". I care about this because fictional narratives matter. The way we present them in our media matters. The values that our shows and books encourage MATTERS. We absorb the ideals that entertainment gives us. We have violence in our own world: children are murdered, women are raped, families suffer, war happens over and over again. Should we glorify these horrors too? I'm definitely not saying that anyone here is a killer or a rapist or anything of the sort, but if your first reaction to a line like "we will kill them all" is "THAT'S AWESOME!" maybe you should take a minure to ask yourself why you have that reaction? I mean, if we never decide that violence is the worst option, as a society, it's gonna keep being the go to option. Of course, one tv show or one book series isn't going to change our culture. But if one EXTREMELY POPULAR franchise decides to say, "no, we're gonna show war in a different way. an accurate way," and it works (like it worked in the books), it's a step in the right direction. Baby steps, guys.

GRRM was opposed to war in the real world, just as he's opposed to war in fiction. When HBO changes the narrative to make Robb the Good Guy ™ and his war The Good Fight ™ they're being unfaithful to the underlying point of GRRM's story. When you title an episode as The North Remembers (a phrase that doesn't even become relevant for about two books) you're taking the theme of vengeance, applying it to a situation where it really shouldn't be applied, and saying "come on guys root for these characters because they're gonna go kill the Bad Guys !" Remember when Ned died? Yeah that JUST HAPPENED. They're trying really hard this season to be show the antagonists as morally grey rather than EVIL (which I really appreciate and am really happy with), but it just might be more effective if you didn't have to put The Lannisters, Baby Killers and WHORES!! up against: The Starks, Paragons of Honor and Justice Here To Save The Day.

Maybe as the season progresses we will see Cat acting more like Cat, and Robb as less of a glorified king, but, based on the 11 episodes we've already seen, I'm not sure that's the direction this is going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post Nymeria Star-Eyes. Yeah the TV show doesn't correctly portray some rather important themes of the books. It is still ASOIAF but a little dumber and simpler and less complex I guess. I still enjoy it though.

When HBO takes the character of Robb, whose theme is an example of how revenge is always wrong even if the intentions are good, and turns him into some glorified, honorable, sympathetic character, I look at the screen and say WHAT ARE YOU DOING?

Because we're not supposed to sympathize with Robb. GRRM doesn't want us to sympathize with characters that encourage violence

I think you are half-right. I think GRRM wants us to both sympathize with Robb who is also sort of honorable, sympathetic character and also think how he is possibly wrong, how revenge (or a fight for a north kingdom be pointless and not a sufficiently good reason for them to send people to die) might not be good, basically what you say. (This theme of how to those killed the causes of the ones sending them to die is irrelevant is also sort of repeated and empathized in Meribald's excellent speech towards Brienne) My point is that GRRM intends for readers to have two contradicting and opposite reactions. On one hand sympathize with him, on the other question his actions. So I agree with your post but there is also a sort of tragedy with Robb's story because the audience also sort of empathizes and sympathizes with him and his loss and even some of his reasons for war. So GRRM wants to show us that even good sympathetic characters when they control an army can cause tragedy and send people to die. And GRRM also tries to make us question the audience possible support to Robb's war. I think encouraging contradicting and opposite reactions is actually good writing as it encourages debate and for a reader to think about these issues and their own opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nymeria Star-Eyes, THAT IS AN EXCELLENT POST AND YOU SHOULD FEEL GOOD.

One of the reason that part of the story is told by CAT and not Robb is that she has already lived through a war. She knows what war is and she knows the cost of it. She knows the futility and pointlessness of it. Without her perspective the story becomes an entire different thing. If the story had been told from Robb's POV, we would have seen war through the eyes of a 15 year old boy who really knows nothing of the harsh realities of it. The war would have been more glorified and the focus would probably have been on justice of his cause.

By changing Catelyn, HBO is erasing that integral part of the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cat's seizing of Tyrion was one of the single dumbest, rash, and poorly thought out actions taken by any character in the books, and directly lead to the slaughter of scores of innocents.

In hindsight and with a god-POV, yes. At the time, based on her knowledge, it was actually smart and sensible.

Releasing Jaime enabled the Red Wedding, the betrayal of the Boltons

ROFL. No. Just.... no. It had zero impact on that whatsoever. Seriously. Blaming the Karstark treason on her is bad enough, but the Red Wedding? All I can say to that is, "trolololol".

, and made Sansa's life practically worthless outside of her claim- had it ever been discovered that Bran and or Rickon was alive, Sansa's life would have been thrown away.

And she was supposed to magically divine that Bran and Rickon were still alive because...? Oh right, another case of holding a character to unreasonable standards. Way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I just need to add my voice to this topic. I completely agree with the OP and the problem here, as has already been said, is two-fold.

Firstly, they're stripping away most of Catelyn's characters traits (and this is based on 11 episodes, not 10 minutes,) presumably, as people are saying, to make her more likable and that's bs and it's giving in to every criticism this fandom has ever made of her character (criticisms deeply rooted in sexism btw!). And that's problematic in itself, not just because she's my favorite and I'd like to see them getting her right in the adaptation, but also because of the already mentioned sexist nature of those criticisms. The show is telling everyone who has always hated Cat for these reasons 'Yes, you were right. Let's change everything to appease all the stupid things you've ever said because you didn't actually bother to read.'

Secondly, it's missing the whole point, as Nymeria Star-Eyes said. GRRM didn't accidentally make Catelyn the POV character for Robb's story, he wanted it told through her eyes. Robb's arc is one of a boy in over his head, Catelyn's is one of a politically savvy adviser who has good ideas and who is sidelined because of her gender and because she's the king's mother and who ends up being right in the end, though it doesn't do her any good at all. The fact that HBO is dumbing this down because it thinks its audience can't handle anything more complex than your usual Tragic Boy Hero story, though they might be right, is not to be celebrated, to be honest. If that's the story they wanted to tell, they should be adapting different books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the Red Wedding. Would Tywin Lannister have given Walder Frey and Roose Bolton the green light for that project if Jaime Lannister had remained a captive at Riverrun? The Blackfish held Riverrun and I doubt that he would have had any problems with killing Jaime as payment for the Red Wedding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One should remember that in the books she wanted to stay, to stay with her father (not really with Robb), in show, we haven't found a father weakened by sickness, so she doesn't have him to stay with, so why not return to her kids?...

And as for the show, Robb is older, you can't really have him acting as 15(?) year old boy all the time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×