Cat and Jon, part whatever

[mormont]

Ignoring a child can be extremely damaging. I don't know how anyone can claim otherwise. It's another form of mental and emotional abuse - if Ned had ignored Catelyn in the same way, I'm sure you'd all be raving about how it was unfair and cruel.

But Ned and Cat had a relationship: Cat and Jon did not. Yes, a caregiver ignoring a child harms that child: but Cat wasn't Jon's caregiver, nor did anyone expect her to be. Most of my neighbours ignore my kids, though they live in close proximity - doesn't seem to be doing them any harm. ;)

There are acres of difference between Cat ignoring Jon and, say, Ned ignoring Jon (just as there are acres of difference between Cat telling Robb that Jon can't inherit, and Cat doing the same thing out of petty spite over a child's game). I'll accept that Jon was harmed by Cat ignoring him when I see some proof that anyone - even Jon - expected her to nurture and care for him.

[Gingerly Grumkin]

I just find it baffling that someone could keep that kind of attitude up for 14 years against child who did no wrong. I also find it pretty worrying that people seem to think it's okay to excuse that kind of behaviour.

:D . We are not excusing her behavior, we are rationalizing it. For 14 years this child grows more accustomed to a Stark Lordling lifestyle. Every year is worse then the previous, Ned remains silent, Robb remains brotherly, Arya remains sisterly, etc, etc

[Fragile Bird]

Ok 400 posts. Time to close the thread. :devil:

[deleted01]

Why? Is it a moral stain to not automatically love a child, any child, regardless of how it came to end up in your home?

Again, putting words into my mouth. I never said 'automatically', and I never said 'love'. I said that I find it baffling that she even had the strength to keep it up. I believe she did it as a slight to Ned, but if the kid is perfectly nice, and your children love him as if they were full siblings, wouldn't that soften your heart just a bit, after so many years? I'm not saying that she should have automatically loved Jon simply because Ned commanded her to STFU about him living there. I'm just saying that wouldn't she have gotten used to it, to Jon being there, mingling with her children, her husband and her servants?

I don't think that Catelyn is a saint but in this case I think her coldness towards Jon is more than outweighed by the affection he gets from other people in his life. Jon is less disturbed and conflicted by his upbringing than Theon. I'm mystified as to why the Jon-Catelyn relationship is seen as so key. I don't think anybody in the book expects Catelyn to play the mother in Jon's life.

I think the affection he gets from other people is irrelevant - I'm not a huge Jon fan, but I feel that he's fairly treated by pretty much everyone else (who matters, anyway), except for Catelyn. I know that living in a household with someone who doesn't like you and makes it quite clear that you're not welcome can be awful.

And I never said I expected Catelyn to be Jons' mother - I simply said, once again, that I would have expected her to soften a bit towards him being there. And I don't agree with the idea of taking my feelings out on an innocent child.

But Ned and Cat had a relationship: Cat and Jon did not. Yes, a caregiver ignoring a child harms that child: but Cat wasn't Jon's caregiver, nor did anyone expect her to be. Most of my neighbours ignore my kids, though they live in close proximity - doesn't seem to be doing them any harm. ;)

There are acres of difference between Cat ignoring Jon and, say, Ned ignoring Jon (just as there are acres of difference between Cat telling Robb that Jon can't inherit, and Cat doing the same thing out of petty spite over a child's game). I'll accept that Jon was harmed by Cat ignoring him when I see some proof that anyone - even Jon - expected her to nurture and care for him.

I think neighbours are a bit different to living in the same rooms and having to associate with each other on a day-to-day basis. It appears that Jon trained and learned with Robb, so I can assume that they were together a good majority of the time, which is why I say that Catelyn would have probably seen Jon as often as she saw Robb. I think Jon can still be affected by Catelyns' ignoring of him, despite nobody expecting her to nurture and care for him. Living with such tension all the time is not easy or healthy, for anyone, let alone a kid.

:D . We are not excusing her behavior, we are rationalizing it. For 14 years this child grows more accustomed to a Stark Lordling lifestyle. Every year is worse then the previous, Ned remains silent, Robb remains brotherly, Arya remains sisterly, etc, etc

While part of that is true, I don't think it's fair to say that Jon was living a Stark 'lordling' lifestyle - he was always conscious of his status as a bastard, always aware that he would never truly fit in, no matter how much Robb or Arya loved and accepted him.

[Slurms McKenzie]

Hmm lot of arguing here in this thread......

What we need to do here, is get everyone around a table, and put together a solution package, perhaps over tea and biscuits? :)

[OnionAhaiReborn]

Ignoring Jon would have been swell. Catelyn didn't actually do that. How do we know this? From Jon's POV, where he thinks about the looks Catelyn used to give him, how she stared daggers at him, looked like she begrudged him every bite of food, and despised it when he bested Robb at anything. That a child felt her dislike-to-loathing-to-whatever-you-want-to-call-it, is emotionally damaging. Children pick up on the feeling of adults, and feeling unwanted and unliked-to-loathed-to-etc, is something Jon picked up on, and was affected by. He was made to feel unwelcome in his home.

[Lummel]

...I don't understand the comment about grinding teeth.

It is because of the dehumanising argument.

If Catelyn was dehumanising Jon and this was effective and influential we would expect to see a dehumanised Jon snow, grinding his teeth, full of hate - a second Gregor Cleglane. We don't see that.

I don't see any sign in Jon's character that he has had any negative effects from Catelyn treatment of him. Don't forget Catelyn is irrelevent to his bastard status. That is going to effect him whereever he goes and whatever he does in Westeros.

[Gingerly Grumkin]

Ignoring Jon would have been swell. Catelyn didn't actually do that. How do we know this? From Jon's POV, where he thinks about the looks Catelyn used to give him, how she stared daggers at him, looked like she begrudged him every bite of food, and despised it when he bested Robb at anything. That a child felt her dislike-to-loathing-to-whatever-you-want-to-call-it, is emotionally damaging. Children pick up on the feeling of adults, and feeling unwanted and unliked-to-loathed-to-etc, is something Jon picked up on, and was affected by. He was made to feel unwelcome in his home.

This is true. She hated him from first sight. When Jon grew up as a Stark it threatened Cat's kid's inheritance. Cat has always been a politician more then a Mother, Sister, Niece, Daughter and Wife. She will certainly be more of a politician then a Stepmother. Her treatment of Jon was wrong, but she was looking after the North.

And once again for good luck, Family Duty Honor

[mormont]

Ok 400 posts. Time to close the thread. :devil:

No idea what you mean. :P

Again, putting words into my mouth. I never said 'automatically', and I never said 'love'. I said that I find it baffling that she even had the strength to keep it up.

Well, I guess that depends on what exactly you think Cat did... I don't see that it would take much 'keeping up' if all she did was maintain an emotional distance. On the other hand, if you imagine her daily routine included a round or two of evil glowering followed by an hour of wishing he were dead and spitting in his milk, yeah, that would probably get a bit tiring. ;)

Joking aside, you have a fair point here, which is that whatever the extent of Cat's feelings it's unrealistic to think they were maintained at the constant intensity that some people seem to imagine. It's likely that what Cat felt was more of a smoldering resentment than an active hatred.

I think neighbours are a bit different to living in the same rooms and having to associate with each other on a day-to-day basis.

True, and my example was deliberately chosen to contrast with the closer and more intimate expectations that people have. My point was to show that there is a spectrum, and I think Cat's responsibility to care for Jon was more towards the 'neighbour' end: they happened to live in the same place and they of course had loved ones in common, but they weren't, in Westerosi terms, family.

It appears that Jon trained and learned with Robb, so I can assume that they were together a good majority of the time, which is why I say that Catelyn would have probably seen Jon as often as she saw Robb. I think Jon can still be affected by Catelyns' ignoring of him, despite nobody expecting her to nurture and care for him. Living with such tension all the time is not easy or healthy, for anyone, let alone a kid.

I think it must have been, at least, a constant reminder of Jon's status as a bastard - something he seems to have had few other reminders of, on the whole. But while that would be unpleasant, I wouldn't go so far as to call it 'harmful'. I think emotional distance is only 'harmful' where it's expected that there will be emotional closeness, or where emotional closeness is lacking altogether from the child's life: neither of which apply to the Cat/Jon situation.

[jarl the climber]

GRRm mentioned in interveiw that there was a very disturbing incident when Jon and Robb were like 5 or 6 and Catelyn found a wire hanger in their closet...... :spank:

[LordBloodraven]

Cat ignored Jon for the most part, begrudged him for besting Robb, for looking like Ned, for eating too much some time, and other useless quibbles. That must have impacted on Jon's self-esteem and we see it in GOT how terrified he was of being in the same room than Cat. She was intimidating without trying and his distance to Jon reflected a lot of her own self-doubts. Does Ned love me or was it just an alliance? Why is the bastard having the same affection and upbringing than my trueborn sons? Jon was motherless (and without a mother figure) and seeing a mother dote on his children who are your half-brothers and ignoring you royally must have pinched his heart even though he knew his station and apprehended her reasons. It's not so easy to be rational and logical, as many posters from both points of view, seems to imply.

Ned was responsible for that mess. It was a promise but many paid the cost for it.

[deleted01]

Well, I guess that depends on what exactly you think Cat did... I don't see that it would take much 'keeping up' if all she did was maintain an emotional distance. On the other hand, if you imagine her daily routine included a round or two of evil glowering followed by an hour of wishing he were dead and spitting in his milk, yeah, that would probably get a bit tiring. ;)

Joking aside, you have a fair point here, which is that whatever the extent of Cat's feelings it's unrealistic to think they were maintained at the constant intensity that some people seem to imagine. It's likely that what Cat felt was more of a smoldering resentment than an active hatred.

Yeah I don't think it was an active hatred, I think it was just a feeling, a grudge, against what Ned did and what Jon represented, that she had to maintain else, what would she have left? I think it's possible that, during the earlier years, she felt that if she dropped her cold wall and looked at Jon as a person, rather than a thing that had come from Neds' infidelity, it would mean that she was almost condoning what had happened. This is my interpretation of it, of course, but I don't think she woke up every morning thinking "Ah, now how can I make Jon feel unwanted today?" :P

True, and my example was deliberately chosen to contrast with the closer and more intimate expectations that people have. My point was to show that there is a spectrum, and I think Cat's responsibility to care for Jon was more towards the 'neighbour' end: they happened to live in the same place and they of course had loved ones in common, but they weren't, in Westerosi terms, family.

I think it must have been, at least, a constant reminder of Jon's status as a bastard - something he seems to have had few other reminders of, on the whole. But while that would be unpleasant, I wouldn't go so far as to call it 'harmful'. I think emotional distance is only 'harmful' where it's expected that there will be emotional closeness, or where emotional closeness is lacking altogether from the child's life: neither of which apply to the Cat/Jon situation.

I have no arguments for these points really, as they're fair and I agree with them for the most part. I don't think she should have cared for Jon, and I appreciate your comparison, but I do think that behaving like that wasn't the best thing a person can do. My own opinion, of course, and I've never been in Catelyns' shoes, but I've been in a similar situation to Jons', so might be I'm biased ;)

I think 'harmful' might be too strong a word, but I think it would be detrimental to his life as a whole, as well as hers. I'm not saying it wasn't hard for Catelyn, but seeing as otherwise, she's a pretty nice person, it's difficult for me to understand why she didn't let it go, and see Jon as a person. I'm also surprised she didn't come to her senses, after the initial shock and hurt, and see that he was, after all, simply an innocent child, who didn't ask to be born. I'm not saying she should have done all this, just that it might have been easier, and better for everyone involved.

[The Mother of The Others]

don't worry too much about the cat / jon stuff. not every household is perfect, so this one is shown to us as a representative example, complete with its lack of love between some, to give us an idea of why people sometimes end up at the wall.

[a free shadow]

It is because of the dehumanising argument.

If Catelyn was dehumanising Jon and this was effective and influential we would expect to see a dehumanised Jon snow, grinding his teeth, full of hate - a second Gregor Cleglane. We don't see that.

I don't see any sign in Jon's character that he has had any negative effects from Catelyn treatment of him. Don't forget Catelyn is irrelevent to his bastard status. That is going to effect him whereever he goes and whatever he does in Westeros.

I am not sure if I realise the whole spectrum of what "dehumanises" means. But, as I understand it, I don't think I have argued that. There is no uniform reaction to being threated like Jon was. Some people might go wild, some cave in. Jon simply held things to himself. And it seemed to be a big burden.

I do not say Catelyn made him worse person, she made him feel worse person, just because he was born. There is a quote from somwhere that "Children are like dogs. If you'll knock them around enough, they'll think they've done something to deserve it".

And Catelyn for sure was irrelevant to his bastard status in Westeros, but I think at least at his home he should have been alowed a place without pointed animosity.

[Arch-MaesterPhilip]

@Jarl the Mommy Dearest reference is brilliant.

[birdsong66]

You know, I understand the validity of the "Her problem is with Ned, not Jon" school of thought. I do. And, yes, in a perfect situation in a perfect world, Catelyn would have directed her resentments, to the cheers of everyone I guess, at Ned. Here's the catch:

How is it that Catelyn, who spends even less time with Jon than just about every single human being in a 5 mile radius, is bearing the brunt of blame for Jon's emotional scars? Would it not also follow that Jon, when reflecting on his time at Winterfell, would also, in thinking primarily of Catelyn, be accused just as easily of irrational resentments in not directing them towards Ned?

I mean, can we all at least agree that the primary cause falls squarely at Ned's feet, and his alone? We can't expect that Catelyn would direct her resentments towards Ned and applaud this as fair and righteous, without then examining why it is that Jon is not required to do the same, right? Because it seems like Jon is too easily given the hall pass on this one, IMO.

[a free shadow]

Catelyn used to give him, how she stared daggers at him, looked like she begrudged him every bite of food, and despised it when he bested Robb at anything.

That she has not called Jon by his name in all those years, says that she had control over herself around him. And we are told how she used it.

[Independent George]

I have problems with Cat which belong on another thread, but very little actually has to do with Jon. I think Cat's behavior with regard to Jon is perfectly rational.

She has no obligation to love him as one of her own, and Ned bringing him home to raise as his own is extremely unusual. In fact, the very act of raising Jon himself makes Jon an inherant threat to her own legitimate children. Because Ned is so close to Robert, there is a very real possibility of Jon being legitimzed.

Life as a noble is inherently dangerous, particularly in the north; the possibility of Robb dying young is very realistic even in peacetime. If Jon is legitimized, and Robb dies without an heir, Jon or Jon's children could be considered better claimants to Winterfell than Bran or Rickon's.

[Sansa in the North]

Hello! First post, so I'm sorry if all of this has been said too much already on the forum :)

I never really understood why everyone blames Catlyn for how she treated Jon. He was a constant reminder of her husband's infedility, a wife cannot be expected to love her husband's bastard as much as she loves her own children. I think the fault lies with Ned, though. Assuming that R+L=J, Ned should have told Catlyn. She wouldn't have resented him then, probably.

[bloodymime]

You know, I understand the validity of the "Her problem is with Ned, not Jon" school of thought. I do. And, yes, in a perfect situation in a perfect world, Catelyn would have directed her resentments, to the cheers of everyone I guess, at Ned. Here's the catch:

How is it that Catelyn, who spends even less time with Jon than just about every single human being in a 5 mile radius, is bearing the brunt of blame for Jon's emotional scars? Would it not also follow that Jon, when reflecting on his time at Winterfell, would also, in thinking primarily of Catelyn, be accused just as easily of irrational resentments in not directing them towards Ned?

I mean, can we all at least agree that the primary cause falls squarely at Ned's feet, and his alone? We can't expect that Catelyn would direct her resentments towards Ned and applaud this as fair and righteous, without then examining why it is that Jon is not required to do the same, right? Because it seems like Jon is too easily given the hall pass on this one, IMO.

People are going to put the burden on Cat for the fact that she's the elder between the two. I'd also give a pass to the 14 year old child in that situation for not resenting the parent that does care about him and does show him love, yes there's a bigger picture and I've written my own thoughts on Ned in this situation. I'm just using parent as a term to refer to the two major authority figures in Winterfell.