From Pawn to Player: Rethinking Sansa XI

[Lord Bronn Stokeworth]

I think it's in part that Bran is more magical and thus less subtle in his rejection of the South and growing closer to the North. Unfortunately, subtlety is key to understanding Sansa's story.

[brashcandy]

They seemed to see these future prospects as unfair and sad, yet except for the last one, Sansa has always wanted to get married and start a family, and because she really wants that, I think the guys couldn’t relate to her that well. I hope I am sort of making sense here..! They brought up Brienne & Arya (maybe Dany) and how they are cool characters who break the standards set for them by the society they live in, yet Sansa not only accepts these notions but embraces them happily (they mentioned how maybe she was like this because Septa Mordane and her parents has sort only let her expect this from life), thus they cannot relate to Sansa at the start and how she “embraces her identity as a girl so full-heartedly…”

You see this is where I think their analysis falls down, because while they do seem to generally understand Sansa, they are missing a lot of the nuance in her characterization. Although she is traditionally feminine and longs for things associated with that, Sansa doesn't simply accept what it is that society prescribes to her. Of course, the big glaring example here is the marriage to Tyrion and a woman's duties in a marriage. Sansa rejects Septa Mordane's teachings that all men are beautiful, and stands on her own evaluation of Tyrion. It is this independent refusal to subject herself to Tyrion's desire that weakens his authority over her, and strengthens her resolve to escape.

They failed to mention how in a way Sansa is going to save herself, and is already at least at present not waiting to be rescued but may very well take matters into her own hands and decide what she wants for herself: not her parents or the Lannisters or Petyr.

& of course they didn’t realize that Sansa is indeed a daughter of the north. They said that she lost in part the connection due to Lady’s death, yet as we’ve discussed before Sansa has been growing closer to the Old Gods and the north with every books.

That's correct and again it's down to the missing nuance. When I listened to the podcast, one thing they stressed over and again was Sansa's passivity. However, we know that whilst she has to remain fairly quiet and subdued throughout that KL experience, she is active when it counts (saving Dontos, going to the godswood after receiving the note), and had she not remained committed to escaping the Lannisters, LF's plans would have come to nothing. Also, there is very little passivity in Sansa's interaction with Sandor.

[Queen Sansa Stark]

I think it's in part that Bran is more magical and thus less subtle in his rejection of the South and growing closer to the North. Unfortunately, subtlety is key to understanding Sansa's story.

I agree. If there is one word to describe Sansa's growth and her arc in general then subtle is perfect for her. Her character development, her strength, her rebellion to claim her autonomy, her talents that would make her an effective player are so subtle it can be easily overlooked. No wonder so many people fail to understand Sansa as a character and her purpose to the plot of the story in general. Sansa really is far more complex and multi-layered then people give her credit for.

[Kittykatknits]

You see this is where I think their analysis falls down, because while they do seem to generally understand Sansa, they are missing a lot of the nuance in her characterization. Although she is traditionally feminine and longs for things associated with that, Sansa doesn't simply accept what it is that society prescribes to her. Of course, the big glaring example here is the marriage to Tyrion and a woman's duties in a marriage. Sansa rejects Septa Mordane's teachings that all men are beautiful, and stands on her own evaluation of Tyrion. It is this independent refusal to subject herself to Tyrion's desire that weakens his authority over her, and strengthens her resolve to escape.

It seems that they, like many readers, picked up that Sansa wants traditional things, marriage and a family. I think the fact she wants them on her terms is what is often overlooked. That's breaking the standards for women just as much as Brienne's decision to use a sword. Sansa may want marriage and family but she is also demanding love and wants to pick her own partner. She has completely rejected the idea of marriage as duty, which is one of the most basic underpinning of Westeros culture.

[Elba the Intoner]

You see this is where I think their analysis falls down, because while they do seem to generally understand Sansa, they are missing a lot of the nuance in her characterization. Although she is traditionally feminine and longs for things associated with that, Sansa doesn't simply accept what it is that society prescribes to her. Of course, the big glaring example here is the marriage to Tyrion and a woman's duties in a marriage. Sansa rejects Septa Mordane's teachings that all men are beautiful, and stands on her own evaluation of Tyrion. It is this independent refusal to subject herself to Tyrion's desire that weakens his authority over her, and strengthens her resolve to escape.

That's correct and again it's down to the missing nuance. When I listened to the podcast, one thing they stressed over and again was Sansa's passivity. However, we know that whilst she has to remain fairly quiet and subdued throughout that KL experience, she is active when it counts (saving Dontos, going to the godswood after receiving the note), and had she not remained committed to escaping the Lannisters, LF's plans would have come to nothing. Also, there is very little passivity in Sansa's interaction with Sandor.

I agree with all of this. But what I also want to stress, and it has been touched on but I really want to emphasize, is this idea that being girly or liking girly things is so negative, and that you can't be strong, or "feminist" if you are so girly. That's what I have trouble with. Why can't someone be very feminine and strong and feminist by pushing back against the patriarchal norms at the same time?

ETA I also want to clarify that this is what I meant by my identifying with Sansa. She is the most real to me because of her femininity, besides the fact that she so far is the least associated with any cool magic or warging.

[Milady of York]

Lea, thanks for resuming all the points for us!

There are some points I'd like to comment, s'il vous plait:

- He talks about how if you open yourself to the story, it's a disturbing experience to be in the head of an 11-yo who has been abused the way Sansa has. "I don't know exactly why, but it is hard to open yourself up to the story of an 11 or 12-yo girl that gets so abused and whose head is stuffed full of all this girl stuff. Especially when you have Arya as the cool counterpart, the next thing that makes Sansa unpopular I guess, because Arya is just so much more interesting and exciting. But if you warm up to her and her storyline Sansa is really something."

I think I might know why it is hard: because few of us know or would like to know what is going in an abused girl's head. To understand Sansa, you have to make an effort to see her situation through her eyes as per the text, and it is neither easy nor comfortable. Who would like to know what a girl is thinking when she is being beaten daily and is so helpless she cannot fight back, when she is about to be raped and cannot do anything but close her eyes and tremble? I do not think anyone would. On the other part, you have this girl that fights back, has adventures, interacts with cool characters, and of course it will be exciting by comparison, as odious as it is.

- Sean T Collins agrees that Sansa's chapters "take you of the action-based flow of the narrative".

Problem is, I do not see that ASOIAF has been written as an action-based series. There are so many POVs where "nothing happens", slow chapters full of dreams, daily happenings and character's thoughts are common, and all are usually dubbed as boring by many, when in reality they are as important as the rollicking action that takes place in others. Both the slow ones and the action ones are means to an end: to tell you the full tale. The biggest river in the world is formed of and needs the waters of both small rivers and huge navigable affluents. I take this statement by Collins as an entirely subjective evaluation on his part, and as a sign that his preferences are inclined towards the action-packed portion of the narrative, whilst a more introspective reader might as well love the more placid and slow-moving portion of the narrative. That said, anyone saying that Sansa's arc "takes you off... the flow of the narrative" because it is mostly introspective could as well call into question whether or not, say, Victarion's "takes you off... the flow of the narrative" because there is no character development there and the action comes from the outside. Whatever you answer to that is a matter of tastes, methinks.

- STC quote: "When you go into ASOIAF, I know that I went in because I was told it was an epic fantasy that simply was more adult in tone [...]. Because I went in [ASOIAF] with that set of preconceptions, a storyline like Sansa's, that doesn't fit in the epic-fantasy narrative about, you know, Ned, and those conflicting forces, it can feel like an interruption of what you're really there to see. It's only as time goes by, and you read more of the books, or you think more about what you've read, and you realise how intent Martin is on deconstructing and critiquing the ideas behind the genre and the ideas behind the society quantical (?) by the genre, that you realise how important Sansa is, the way Sansa's personal journey reflects the journey that a lot of us take as readers, as we learn about Westeros. She has been trained since she was a very little girl, a certain way that the world is supposed to work, these gallant knights and princes and these beautiful shy princesses, and courtly romance and songs and pageantries. She didn't choose that curriculum, that was given to her by Ned and Catelyn, and her Septa and Maester and so on. Her growth as a person is a sort of a journey of disillusionment. I think that's true for us as well, we learn about Westeros, we learn a lot of things were not as they seem,they're not all that they're cracked up to be, there's obviously a lot of ugliness going on, a lot of the history we're coming to learn is apparently just as unreliable as Sansa's songs. And that turns out to be a very important message".

I agree. Whether we like it or not, many of us have been Sansas when young. Many of us have travelled the road to maturity shedding a lot of naive ideas along the road, and few of us want to remember it, much less read it in a fantasy series we picked up purely for enjoyment.

- STC talks about "strong female characters". He says people tend to use that to mean a character who is strong physically or emotionally, not strongly written. He says Sansa is a stronger female character than, for example, Lara Croft.

I agree with this as well. Sansa Stark is a surprisingly strong person, and that is why I love her. It is her best quality. She has the kind of strength that will allow her not only to survive, but also not to become an embittered woman. In fact, I am convinced it is due to her sheer internal strength that she is not more traumatised, I say this because in my graduate practice I noticed that when it comes to traumatised children, it is often -but not always- the more emotionally strong, meaning emotional intelligence here, who are the ones with higher hopes of responding positively to treatment, and they are also the ones who empathise the most with others who have gone through trauma and some even feel the need to help others in similar situations later in life, same as when Sansa said that she wanted to make people love her and rule through love and compassion, because she knows what’s it like to be mistreated, helpless and unloved.

- Stefan talks about how Sansa does really well with Joffrey. She learned fast how to behave around him, with no one to teach her, she internalised all the rules of courtly politics, she knows when to speak and what to say, she manages to bullshit Littlefinger, she built a wall around her that no one is able to break, and that is really something.

- Stefan says that one thing to her advantage is that she can take abuse and work with it, and not do something rash. He gives the example of Joff forcing her to look at Ned's head and her saying that Joff could make her look but not see. Stefan thinks that it takes a lot of strenght to be able to handle that kind of thing, and says it is also a quality of Jaime's.

Oh, dear old Intuition, how underestimated you are! Some people are so intuitive they notice the slightest shades of human emotion and behaviour, then they behave accordingly. This particular scene was when I’d have to bow to her. Watching her beloved father's head... just makes me sad. And no, I do not agree with the Jaime comparison. He is a grown man, a warrior, someone who has been seeing and handling things like that for ages, even since he was a squire; his ability has been building up and growing by years already. Sansa’s is innate.

- Stefan thinks that at the end of AFFC she still has no agency at all. When LF says he wants her to marry HtH "there's nothing she can do about it but nod".

Because she really cannot do anything, but that does not mean she will not. Give time a chance, the Vale's arc is not over yet, it has just begun.

- Stefan thinks that she doesn't have a lot of ambition and that could be an obstacle for her in the future if she is on the way to big things. He also thinks she doesn't have as strong ties to the North as some other characters. "She's not a child of the North as the others are [...] She's more a child of the Riverlands and the South, and I can't really see her doing anything with the power she might accomplish to get".

And who says that ambition in the sense of power-lust is a prerequisite for doing big things when given the chance, I may ask? There are people who've achieved great things because they wanted to help or because of other motivations not related to ambition, and there are the cases of people who never wanted to rule or weren't expected to, yet turned out to be good rulers because they had the skills. Skills, not ambition, is what is required for big things, in my opinion.

- Stefan says that even after all the abuse Sansa endures, she maintains a good heart, and she helps people even when she's not under any obligation to, like Sweetrobin and Margaery.

It reminds me of an old parable I once read: A sage met two boys who were growing up with a poor couple, the mother was the breadwinner till she died, the father was an alcoholic brute. They went through many hardships for years, then one day the sage encountered casually the eldest born and he had turned out a good man, working in a trade and with a family of his own. The surprised sage asked how it had happened, and the man replied: "With a father like mine, I had no choice but to turn out like this". Some days later, he found he younger born, and he was the exact copy of his father, an alcoholic himself and an abuser. The sage asked the same of him, and the man's reply was:"With a father like mine, I had no choice but to turn out like this". Sansa has kept her good heart and her compassion despite her sufferings, not because of them.

- STC muses about how she doesn't really obsess about revenge or has shadenfreude. She doesn't sit around listing the name of the people who have wronged her. She wasn't thrilled about Lysa being killed, despite the fact that Lysa was about to kill her. She doesn't give in to hateful, vengeful feelings in which you take pleasure in the suffering of people who have wronged you. He says that is almost unique in the books, and you can't say the same about Jon, Dany, Arya, Cat, Brienne, etc. He says that's a good quality in a ruler, especially in Westeros where people are obsessive about revenge for wrongs done generations ago.

Given what she's endured, nobody could blame her if she'd been reciting: "King Joffrey, Queen Cersei, Ser Ilyn, Ser Boros, Ser Meryn, Ser Arys, Lady Olenna, Lord Baelish, Lord Frey, all the Freys, Lord Tywin, Ser Gregor..." every night. But who appreciates what takes not to become a vengeful person? Those who want her to exact a sweet revenge on everyone that has wronged the Starks forget some important points: a- revenge gives nothing but a momentary emotion, a rush of adrenaline, afterwards you feel empty, because killing them will not bring loved ones back to life, b- it could do her harm emotionally, c- it is justice, not revenge, what she craves for. The Stark way of exacting justice, as per Neddie, is try them-sentence them-execute them yourself. d- revenge sparks a spiral of even more revenge. e- there are other ways for her: make LF's plans fail, unite her family and get them to live in Winterfell again. The latter is my favourite kind, for sometimes survival when they want you destroyed and corrupted is the best "revenge": it drives your enemies mad.

[KittensRuleBeetsDrool]

It seems that they, like many readers, picked up that Sansa wants traditional things, marriage and a family. I think the fact she wants them on her terms is what is often overlooked. That's breaking the standards for women just as much as Brienne's decision to use a sword. Sansa may want marriage and family but she is also demanding love and wants to pick her own partner. She has completely rejected the idea of marriage as duty, which is one of the most basic underpinning of Westeros culture.

So many thoughts and feels and thank you so much LadyLea for transcribing that podcast! Since I have limited time at the 'puter today I want to mull over this idea because it always seemed so very important to me in understanding Sansa - or rather it has become important to me since reading these threads.

The fangirl in me wants to see Sansa as Queen. However, I do not know that is what Sansa wants. She has always wanted to be loved for herself - even when she was in love with Joffrey, it was in the context of him loving her back and them having a happy family. By the end of ASOS she is despairing of ever being loved for herself, not just her claim; and repeats throughout AFFC, "nobody will marry me for love."

I see Sansa as wanting "power to" rather than "power over" in the words of Starhawk. Sansa wants the power to control her own destiny and marry whom she pleases. She doesn't want a claim, she doesn't want to be pawed at by creepy men, she doesn't want to have to stand by while others make plans for her, use and abuse her for their own ends. She wants a home and husband and children and a Godswood. For the record, I think she'd make a great Queen, or Queen Regent, but I don't know if that is what she wants.

This is one reason why I'm so eager to see Rickon come back (find him, Davos!) not just because Sansa would get a brother back, he'd be lord of Winterfell and she wouldn't have that claim, and so any suitors who want to get Winterfell through her will go away. (I recall even as far back as CoK Theon wanted to marry her to try to keep Winterfell...I also seem to recall he always hoped to marry her because she was a Stark...Sansa's had a lifetime of being drooled over by one opportunist or another...) It's one of the reasons I ship San/San, as I see Sandor as one of the few men in her life who values her for who she is; he is utterly unconcerned with trying to gain Winterfell through her. He loves her (if one can call it that, because he is so damaged) for herself.

And I agree that it is the idea of marriage as duty that is really daring of her to question. As Kittykatknits says, Westerosi (noble) marriage is all about duty. It could turn out well (Ned and Cat) or not (Cersei and Robert). And I think the true deconstruction (as opposed to defiance) of this idea is in the characters of Cersei and to a lesser extent Lysa. Cersei is a cruel woman and incompetent regent; but she is a truly tragic figure, a victim of the arranged marriage and double standard patriarchal traditions (I mean, Robert wasn't made to take a Walk of Shame - though I bet Stannis wished he could have made him after Robert, er, "broke in" Stannis' marriage bed). Cersei was probably never what one would call a sweet girl, but I can see how she was young and hopeful and eager and romantic when she was in love with Rhaegar. And Rhaegar got himself killed and his family killed or exiled because he couldn't be faithful to his own wife (although Aerys the Mad didn't help). Finally, Lysa Arryn was so unhappy in her own arranged marriage that she poisoned her husband on the orders of the man she carried a torch for.

Three unhappy arranged marriages, and ker-flush goes Westeros down the toilet. That is one brutal deconstruction of the idea of the arranged marriage and women's subordination.

As for Brienne, she does go against the traditional women's role but she is one more deconstruction of the idea of knighthood. She is an ugly woman who doesn't look the part of a fairy-tale knight (being neither handsome nor male) but she really and truly tries to embody the ideals of knighthood more than most of the men around her. In a gender inversion, she wants nothing more than to chastely serve her beloved Renly in exchange for his kindness and a place on his Rainbow Guard. Here, Brienne is the knight and Renly the maiden. This does not end well, in a way that Brienne had nothing to do with.

ETA to credit the right person for transcribing! :)

[brashcandy]

So many thoughts and feels and thank you so much Brash for transcribing that podcast!

Thanks actually belong with Lady Lea :) But she knows how grateful we all are for the effort.

[Kittykatknits]

First, Lady Lea, thank you for taking the time to listen to the podcast and take these notes for us. It would be awhile until I could listen to it and there is some great discussion material here.

I agree that it was very frustrating at first to listen to them talk about why they (well, Stefan) hated Sansa in the beginning, but it was also kind of funny. It really is sort of a typical reaction of a fantasy reader, I mean, I never thought Sansa (or Catelyn) interrupted the action or disrupted the pace, because I wasn't reading the books for the battles and descriptions of swords and magical artifacts. I was always more interested in the characters and political intrigues (I have to admit that I often skip battle scenes. I never really understand them anyway. I read the Blackwater some three times before giving up on understanding what was really going on with the ships)..

Personally, descriptions of battles, fights, and duels make my eyes glaze over. The BBW looked pretty on TV but reading it is pure torture for me. I haven't read fantasy, other than this series, in over a decade as I got tired of the typical orphan boy with a great destiny who has a wizard and a Super Awesome Ninja Warrior Princess as sidekicks. It's repetitive and downright dull. I enjoy this series because of the characters. The plot, for me, exists to move character development forward.

I don't get the GoT hatred for Sansa either. Look at what she is actually doing. She's not cruel or vidictive or mean. She's naive and idealistic at times but her core personality traits are there from the very beginning.

I also disagree with the notion that Sansa isn't there for the plot but as a stand-in for the reader or just to make a point about injustices and gender inequality and the society, etc. (Some people say that her POV is only there to provide a glimpse into KL/The Eyre). I think she is very much about plot and character development. Her story in intertwined with Ned's, Cat's, Tyrion's, the Tyrells', Cersei's, Sandor's... they all make decisions at some point and change the course of their stolylines because of her, and she has developed and learned so much since AGOT..

This one had me :bang: more than any other point I think. It's a simplification of Sansa's character and does disservice to Martin's skill as a writer in my opinion. The only POV that I think can be called merely a stand-in for the reader is Areo Hotah. Sansa is just as developed a character and has had a huge impact on the storyline so far with more to come. She's got two (and possibly three) dreams and prophecies that concern her character which should be a big hint that she's important. Martin is playing the long game with Sansa. That's not the same thing as playing no game with her, if that makes sense.

All evidence point to the fact that she is going to be the one to take down LF, the very man who set the Wot5K in to motion. Evidence shows that he caused the death of her father, her forced marriage to Tyrion, and indirectly led to the death of her mother and older brother. He's caused massive amounts of chaos in the realm and great harm to the Lannisters as well. If Sansa is responsible for his downfall, the impact of that will be huge.

Beyond that, Sansa has consistently showed empathy and compassion for others. She is very good at flattery and courtesy. Sansa is not about vengeance or revenge, she does not hold grudges. This mix of character traits is unique in the entire cast of characters we have met so far. I firmly believe that this is not random chance. Westeros is a place that has been torn apart by war with more of it one the way. We are seeing families dividing against themselves (Lannnisters), a thirst for vengeance (The North Remembers), and the game of thrones continuing. If Westeros is ever to heal, someone is going to need to help that to happen. Who better than Sansa?

I liked the bit about strong female characters. I think Sansa is one. She's both strongly written and and strong emotionally. I also thought it was interesting how they remarked on Sansa re: vengeful thoughts. The only times I remember seeing anything like it in her chapters was when she told Joff that Robb would give her his head, and when she tore SR's doll and put the head on a spike - both instances she was defending the Starks and Winterfell. I think this pretty much proves that she definitely has a very strong connection to the North.

I found their comments about female agency and Sansa to be a nice affirmation of some of the discussion that has taken place in this thread. I know that some of us have been involved in discussions elsewhere where this particular viewpoint or interpretation of ASOIAF has been denied. Or, in more extreme cases, we are accused of reading and understanding the text wrong. In it's worst form, there are the comments that Sansa is merely a sweet, little girl which ignores the more complex and much more powerful portions of her storyline. Then, there is the interpretation that Sansa's role is to become a player in the game, which I also think is a misreading of what is going on with her character. I am not saying that does not exist, but that it is agency, of which her abilities as a player is a part of.

I also believe that the strongest characters as well as the strongest written characters are all women. I'm, thinking specifically of Sansa, Cat, and Dany here. I really do believe Martin has put in some strong feminist messages here, even if I also think that sometimes his execution isn't 100%.

[KittensRuleBeetsDrool]

Thanks actually belong with Lady Lea :) But she knows how grateful we all are for the effort.

Duly noted and corrected - sorry, Lady Lea! And this is such interesting information to digest.

[Lord Bronn Stokeworth]

Thanks actually belong with Lady Lea :) But she knows how grateful we all are for the effort.

QFT: Thanks for listening Lady Lea, especially since I rarely have the attention span to listen to podcasts.

[brashcandy]

I found their comments about female agency and Sansa to be a nice affirmation of some of the discussion that has taken place in this thread. I know that some of us have been involved in discussions elsewhere where this particular viewpoint or interpretation of ASOIAF has been denied. Or, in more extreme cases, we are accused of reading and understanding the text wrong. In it's worst form, there are the comments that Sansa is merely a sweet, little girl which ignores the more complex and much more powerful portions of her storyline. Then, there is the interpretation that Sansa's role is to become a player in the game, which I also think is a misreading of what is going on with her character. I am not saying that does not exist, but that it is agency, of which her abilities as a player is a part of.

Ughhhh yes. Perhaps now the message will get through given that it isn't coming from those who frequent this thread? :rolleyes: I mean, Sansa survives in King's Landing, but survival and just making do is not the theme of her narrative. She's so much more powerful and resourceful than she is given credit for, and it's the agency she strives towards that makes her a complex character and not another Jeyne Poole.

- He talks about how if you open yourself to the story, it's a disturbing experience to be in the head of an 11-yo who has been abused the way Sansa has. "I don't know exactly why, but it is hard to open yourself up to the story of an 11 or 12-yo girl that gets so abused and whose head is stuffed full of all this girl stuff. Especially when you have Arya as the cool counterpart, the next thing that makes Sansa unpopular I guess, because Arya is just so much more interesting and exciting. But if you warm up to her and her storyline Sansa is really something."

I think I might know why it is hard: because few of us know or would like to know what is going in an abused girl's head. To understand Sansa, you have to make an effort to see her situation through her eyes as per the text, and it is neither easy nor comfortable. Who would like to know what a girl is thinking when she is being beaten daily and is so helpless she cannot fight back, when she is about to be raped and cannot do anything but close her eyes and tremble? I do not think anyone would. On the other part, you have this girl that fights back, has adventures, interacts with cool characters, and of course it will be exciting by comparison, as odious as it is.

What I found perplexing about their talk of difficulty in seeing through an abused girl's eyes, is that all the Stark children who have POVs - Bran, Arya, and Sansa - confront the reader with the kind of horror and indignity they experience in their respective locations. I personally find it most difficult to be in Bran's headspace, since he's mourning the loss of his mobility, and that's such a permanent, devastating injury to the kind of happy little boy he once was with dreams of being a knight. Anyways, I think if you're going to successfully read any POV character in ASOIAF, reducing them to their suffering and misery isn't going to get you very far. We have to see through the characters' eyes, yes, but that entails seeing how they negotiate with that world and not simply how the world batters and bruises them.

[Caro99]

You see this is where I think their analysis falls down, because while they do seem to generally understand Sansa, they are missing a lot of the nuance in her characterization. Although she is traditionally feminine and longs for things associated with that, Sansa doesn't simply accept what it is that society prescribes to her. Of course, the big glaring example here is the marriage to Tyrion and a woman's duties in a marriage. Sansa rejects Septa Mordane's teachings that all men are beautiful, and stands on her own evaluation of Tyrion. It is this independent refusal to subject herself to Tyrion's desire that weakens his authority over her, and strengthens her resolve to escape

You're right Brash! when they were talking that it wasn't fair to blame sansa for wanting a husband and kids because that's all she'd ever been taught as a little girl, i didn't remember that she indeed dismissed what Septa Mordane told her about all men being beautiful when she married tyrion. Of course she doesn't accept what others tell her to do, as we see with the dontos affair and her interactions with sandor, and maybe even with her plea of help to Lord Royce, as you said below:

When I listened to the podcast, one thing they stressed over and again was Sansa's passivity. However, we know that whilst she has to remain fairly quiet and subdued throughout that KL experience, she is active when it counts (saving Dontos, going to the godswood after receiving the note), and had she not remained committed to escaping the Lannisters, LF's plans would have come to nothing. Also, there is very little passivity in Sansa's interaction with Sandor.

I think that the key thing to remember about Sansa is what Kittykat reminded us of:

It seems that they, like many readers, picked up that Sansa wants traditional things, marriage and a family. I think the fact she wants them on her terms is what is often overlooked. That's breaking the standards for women

[Newstar]

For the record, I think she'd make a great Queen, or Queen Regent, but I don't know if that is what she wants.

That's what would make her a great Queen, though: that she doesn't particularly want it (as opposed to all those grasping for power, like Margaery, Cersei, etc. etc.).

I see Sansa as wanting "power to" rather than "power over" in the words of Starhawk. Sansa wants the power to control her own destiny and marry whom she pleases. She doesn't want a claim, she doesn't want to be pawed at by creepy men, she doesn't want to have to stand by while others make plans for her, use and abuse her for their own ends.

I don't know. Maybe, sure, in a perfect world, but Sansa knows very well by this point that she doesn't live in a perfect world and doesn't and may never have the power to dictate how she wishes to live. I doubt she's even allowed herself to think about what she wants in a general "This is the way I want to live" sense for a while, since it's been so long since it mattered to anyone around her (and the last time she dared to "want" something--rejecting marriage to Sweetrobin--Lysa attacked her). I really doubt Sansa as of the end of AFFC is thinking much beyond getting through the day, at least at this stage. Even her attempt at deflecting Petyr's talk of a marriage contract while thinking that she doesn't want to be married seems halfhearted, as if she knows she's already lost. Besides, it's been pretty much ages since anyone took her "No" for an answer, and she's endured it up until this point, so I can't blame her for not dwelling on goals she might have in some magical shangri-la where she gets her way and her desires actually have any bearing on what happens to her. Leaving that aside, though, as for the specific items mentioned in the list:

She wants a home and husband and children and a Godswood.

I really don't know about any of this, except maybe the home part. Her idyllic view of domestic bliss with Willas Tyrell predated all her hellish experiences in ASOS and AFFC, after all, which seem to have substantially altered her opinions on the matter. She thinks straight-up at the end of AFFC that she doesn't want to be married, not now and maybe not ever. I wouldn't be surprised if caring for Sweetrobin has cured her of any romantic notions she ever had about motherhood; the last AFFC chapter shows a clinical approach to Sweetrobin, laced with irritation and syrupy fake charm (as opposed to Maester Colemon's genuine concern for him). As for the godswood, she seems to put less and less stock in the gods as the books progress, and given what her prayers have got her up to this point, I can't say I blame her. Sansa's also en route to becoming a political power player, and the major ones we know of (Varys, Littlefinger, and Tyrion) have very, very little use for the gods or religion in general.

On another note, I thought it was interesting that the podcast discussion seemed to assume that Sansa is without vengeful feelings or schadenfreude. Well, yes and no. Sansa has no interest in active revenge, except for the moment in AGOT when she contemplates shoving Joffrey to his death. However Sansa passively wishes bad things to happen to her enemies: she wishes some hero would strike off Janos Slynt's head (mission accomplished!), she hopes Joffrey will break his neck in ASOS (shortly before he actually dies), she prays that Joffrey's courage will fail him in ACOK, she suggests that Harrenhal be given to Lord Frey, etc. She is also thrilled when bad things happen to her enemies: Joffrey dying, for one. So I can't agree with the idea that Sansa is lacking in schadenfreude-type feelings, or that she's nothing but compassionate towards her enemies, because girlfriend isn't. Some might even say that Sansa is quite hypocritical in this respect, because she wants bad things to happen to her enemies, but she doesn't want to be the one to do those things. She's thrilled that Joffrey dies, but she's horrified at being involved in his murder. This isn't to blame Sansa; you'd have to be Mother Theresa to endure what she's endured with no ill feelings towards those who've tormented her. Still, she's no angel of forgiveness.

Sansa's rejection of any active revenge plans is interesting, though. It might be a reflection of her gentle temperament (just as Arya's violent revenge is a function of her wild temperament), or of her lack of agency to date in the story (why formulate revenge plans if you're never going to get a chance to carry them out?), but it is an interesting contrast to several other characters who are obsessed with revenge and consumed by past wrongs. Since pursuing revenge in this series seems to be a one-way route to Hell, that probably bodes well for her.

[Queen Cersei I]

"I don't know exactly why, but it is hard to open yourself up to the story of an 11 or 12-yo girl that gets so abused and whose head is stuffed full of all this girl stuff.

This quote irritates me more than I can say. The trivialization of Sansa (and her thoughts and concerns) because they are dubbed-- god forbid!-- conventionally feminine. "It's hard to relate to her... her mind is stuffed with 'girl stuff." This both trivializes "conventionally feminine" thoughts/ individuals and assumes that any sort of feminine thoughts/ occupations/ sensibilities are of limited interest-- only interesting to girls who share Sansa's outlook, if that. Guys and "cool" girls like Arya will naturally be board by Sansa's girly stuffed mind. And by extension, the "neutral," universal outlook is assumed to be male.

In the Second Sex, Simone de Beauvoir pointed out that “women’s writing” and “women’s perspective” is always something trivialized, something “other.” The universal human perspective is always automatically assumed to be male.

Can anyone picture someone denigrating Jon Snow as a character “whose head is stuffed full of all this guy stuff?” Or arguing that he is harder to “get into” or “relate to” because his “head is stuffed full of all this boyish stuff?” I sure can’t. Because generally “guy stuff”—fighting with weapons, going to war, male sexuality—are considered things of “universal interest”, are considered “neutral, normal, interesting to everyone”—just as the universal perspective is inevitably assumed to be male. Jon’s interests and pastimes are every bit as “male” as Sansa’s are “female.” And yet I’ve never heard it suggested that this makes him any less relevant or less relatable. I’ve heard it constantly suggested for Sansa.

People claim this is “feminism”—praising of women like Arya, whose interests are all conventionally masculine, whilst denigrating conventionally feminine interests. Yet I’d say this is just about every bit as sexist as the old world sexism—condemning girls with conventionally masculine interests, while inordinately praising those with feminine interests. Honestly, I don’t see why one “type” of girl should be praised, the other denigrated. It’s ridiculous. And while some may see it as great that tomboyish girls are no longer ridiculed and their “girly” counterparts are now object of condescending indulgence, I’d say that things are as bad as ever. The fact that there is still a “right” way to be a female really simply speaks of how men—and other women, and society in general—still feel that women need to be told the “right” way to be female—and live up to a certain number of standards in order to be cool/ acceptable/ correct.

Furthermore, the denigration of conventionally female interests, though it may seem like feminism, actually strikes me as a sort of thinly disguised sexism. Conventionally male interests are cool, right, relevant, and awesome. Conventionally female interests are silly, ridiculous, “unrelateable" not relevant to life or the human experience. Conventionally male pastimes and viewpoints are praised; and women are told they must like up to them. Meanwhile conventionally feminine interests and sensibilities are rejected as automatically, unquestionably inferior.

In the end, this is not feminism. This is actually a sneaky sort of sexism, in and of itself. The idea that Sansa is less relatable because she’s a “girly girl” is an idea that reeks of the old belief that I noted earlier—that the universal human perspective is automatically male.

[brashcandy]

I don't know about any of this. Maybe, sure, in a perfect world, but Sansa knows very well by this point that she doesn't live in a perfect world. I doubt she's even allowed herself to think about what she wants in a grand sense for a while, since it's been so long since it mattered to anyone around her (and the last time she dared to "want" something--rejecting marriage to Sweetrobin--Lysa attacked her). I really doubt Sansa as of the end of AFFC is thinking much beyond getting through the day, at least at this stage.

Not quite so. We might be a bit disturbed by her seeming affinity with LF, but when she talks of having larger concerns, I'd say she's very much concerned with more than just day to day survival. What I found interesting about Sansa's thoughts towards the end of AFFC were just how much they were not focused on herself. She has a moment of feeling bereaved due to Sandor's absence, but then talks of that day being done. We see her instead quite interested in Mya and Lothor's potential romance. Obviously, there's the argument to be made that the reason Sansa is so interested in this is because of her own latent (is it still fair to call this latent?) attraction to Sandor Clegane, but regardless, what we see before she meets up with LF in the final chapter is someone who's beginning to hope again and engage with the world again.

Even her attempt at deflecting Petyr's talk of a marriage contract while thinking that she doesn't want to be married seems halfhearted, as if she knows she's already lost. Besides, it's been pretty much ages since anyone took her "No" for an answer, and she's endured it up until this point, so I can't blame her for not dwelling on goals she might have in some magical shangri-la where she gets her way and her desires actually have any bearing on what happens to her.

Hmmm, well this may come down to different emphases, but I didn't think her deflection was half hearted at all, not if you consider just how much Sansa despised being married to Tyrion. That she would even mention him here speaks to the force behind her refusal, even if she manages to keep her tone measured and careful. That's the thing about Sansa and what we've been discussing concerning subtlety. What can seem to be a half hearted response is often not so, and I'm thinking here of when she woke up after the dream in the Fingers to only talk of missing Lady, and then we get a much fuller depiction of her own desires once she's in the Vale or when she told Tyrion what if she never wanted to sleep with him, and then proceeded to never sleep with him throughout the marriage.

On another note, I thought it was interesting that the podcast discussion seemed to assume that Sansa is without vengeful feelings or schadenfreude. Well, yes and no. Sansa has no interest in active revenge, except for the moment in AGOT when she contemplates shoving Joffrey to his death. However Sansa passively wishes bad things to happen to her enemies: she wishes some hero would strike off Janos Slynt's head (mission accomplished!), she hopes Joffrey will break his neck in ACOK, she prays that Joffrey's courage will fail him in ACOK, she suggests that Harrenhal be given to Lord Frey, etc. She is also thrilled when bad things happen to her enemies: Joffrey dying, for one. So I can't agree with the idea that Sansa is lacking in schadenfreude-type feelings, or that she's compassionate towards her enemies, because girlfriend isn't. Some might even say that Sansa is quite hypocritical in this respect, because she wants bad things to happen to her enemies, but she doesn't want to be the one to do it. She's thrilled that Joffrey dies, but she's horrified at being involved in his murder. "Clean hands," as Littlefinger might say. This isn't to blame Sansa; you'd have to be Mother Theresa to endure what she's endured with no ill feelings towards those who've tormented her.

Again, I have to disagree here. Not thinking of swinging the sword yourself has nothing to do with some avoidance of getting one's hands dirty or being hypocritical. After all, Arya herself had no plan in place for how she would deliver vengeance to her enemies, just a hope and a prayer, and we know that words are wind. Sansa might make off handed comments about the fate of an enemy, but I think the overall point made in the podcast was that she's not dwelling on those fates. And concerning her reaction to Joff's death, I'd characterise it as bitter satisfaction.

[Newstar]

We might be a bit disturbed by her seeming affinity with LF, but when she talks of having larger concerns, I'd say she's very much concerned with more than just day to day survival. What I found interesting about Sansa's thoughts towards the end of AFFC were just how much they were not focused on herself. She has a moment of feeling bereaved due to Sandor's absence, but then talks of that day being done. We see her instead quite interested in Mya and Lothor's potential romance. Obviously, there's the argument to be made that the reason Sansa is so interested in this is because of her own latent (is it still fair to call this latent?) attraction to Sandor Clegane, but regardless, what we see before she meets up with LF in the final chapter is someone who's beginning to hope again and engage with the world again.

She's not thinking about more than getting through the day in the sense of thinking about what she wants in general, though. She won't even allow herself to dream about what she wants, which is sad. The minute she starts thinking about the Hound, she slams down on the thought, thinking that Sansa was done, etc. etc. When she thinks for just a second that it would be "so sweet" to see Jon Snow again, she instantly harshly reminds herself that "Alayne" has no brothers, and that's the end of that. If she can't even allow herself to daydream for anything longer than a moment about a remembered kiss or about her much-missed half-brother (cousin?), how can she possibly get to the point of thinking about how she would live her life if she got to decide how she wanted to live her life?

Overall, Sansa seems very resigned in her last chapter in AFFC. She's resigned to living as a bastard, she's resigned to the idea that she may never reclaim her former life, she's resigned to caring for Sweetrobin (as distasteful as she finds it, and him), she's resigned to whatever Littlefinger does to her or has in mind for her, she's resigned, she's resigned, she's resigned. Her little intrigues with Lothor/Mya and her byplay with the hedge knights seem like amusements on the level of a prisoner condemned for life etching drawings on his prison walls. GRRM deliberately cut off the chapter so we don't get to see how Sansa reacts to Littlefinger's complete marriage scheme, but I don't see anything in AFFC that suggests her conduct will be anything other than glum acceptance of whatever it is he decides. If the marriage doesn't go through, it won't be because of her reluctance; I expect she'll talk herself into it as she did the Willas Tyrell marriage, just as she talks herself into every other thing Littlefinger has foisted on her.

That she would even mention him here speaks to the force behind her refusal, even if she manages to keep her tone measured and careful.

The sad thing is that her reflexive protest "I am married, you know" was a callback to a marriage to which her objections proved fruitless. If her tone is more measured and careful this time, it's because she's much more beaten down and humbled at the end of AFFC than she was at that point in ASOS.

Queen Cersei I did an awesome post (or series of posts) constructing Sansa's arc (and Cersei's) as a series of humiliations and suffering earned for showing "feminine pride," or basically for wanting what her beauty/station deserved, either more than what she was offered or more than her patriarch dictated she should have. It was amazing and also depressing, as it made me realize by the end of AFFC just how worn down Sansa is. A lot of fans praise AFFC!Sansa or Alayne for being clear-eyed, sharp, brisk, pragmatic, and perceptive in her dealings compared to her former dreamy, romantic self, and there's certainly some of that, but she just seems so...resigned and lacking in any hopes or dreams for the future. She doesn't think about the big picture in her life, because the big picture is pretty freaking depressing (regicide charges, no family, no realistic options but Littlefinger) and no one cares about what she wants, anyway. It's very sad.

Not thinking of swinging the sword yourself has nothing to do with some avoidance of getting one's hands dirty or being hypocritical After all, Arya herself had no plan in place for how she would deliver vengeance to her enemies, just a hope and a prayer, and we know that words are wind.

But Arya was determined to exact her own revenge, and took every opportunity she had. Sansa has just as much rancour towards her enemies as Arya does and is as happy to see her enemies suffer as Arya is, but she's unwilling to contemplate doing it herself. She leaves it to others, even mentally as in ACOK ("Robb will kill you all" compared to Arya snarling to the Hound "I'd like to kill you"). That does suggest a certain element of hypocrisy. I wouldn't go as far as to call it cowardice, since it seems to owe more to Sansa's nonviolent temperament, but I can see how some might.

Sansa might make off handed comments about the fate of an enemy, but I think the overall point made in the podcast was that she's not dwelling on those fates. And concerning her reaction to Joff's death, I'd characterise it as bitter satisfaction.

This was the quote paraphrasing the podcast comments:

She doesn't give in to hateful, vengeful feelings in which you take pleasure in the suffering of people who have wronged you.

She actually does give in to hateful, vengeful feelings at several points in the book (listed in my post) and she does take pleasure in the suffering of people of who've wronged her, which is schadenfreude. To me, that includes her feelings at Joffrey's death. It may be bitter satisfaction, but it's still satisfaction.

[brashcandy]

She's not thinking more about getting through the day in the sense of thinking about what she wants in a grand sense, though. She won't even allow herself to dream about what she wants, which is sad. The minute she starts thinking about the Hound, she slams down on the thought, thinking that Sansa was done, etc. etc. When she thinks for just a second that it would be "so sweet" to see Jon Snow again, she instantly harshly reminds herself that "Alayne" has no brothers, and that's the end of that. If she can't even allow herself to daydream for anything longer than a moment about a remembered kiss or about her much-missed half-brother (cousin?), how can she possibly get to the point of thinking about how she would live her life if she got to decide how she wanted to live her life?

Well, the point is that she's focused on being Alayne Stone, not Sansa Stark. She tries to put aside specific thoughts about her family and those she cares for precisely because of this necessity, but that doesn't equate to her just living day to day. As I noted, I think her preoccupation with "Sansa-esque" things, such as dancing at the feast, or what will happen with Mya and Lothor, reveals that she's not so closed off to the world as it might seem.

The sad thing is that her reflexive protest "I am married, you know" reminded me of nothing so much as her panic and horror when Cersei told her she was to marry Tyrion. If her tone is more measured and careful this time, it's because she's much more beaten down and humbled at the end of AFFC than she was at that point in ASOS.

I don't think it has anything to do with being beaten down. At the end of ASOS she was faced with the same unwanted fate of being married off - this time by her Aunt Lysa. Then, as of now, we saw her bringing up her marriage to Tyrion as a way to avoid that marriage. In the very next chapter, she resolves to go to Lysa and tell her that she doesn't want to be married and to send her away to the Gates of the Moon. I think if there's anything Sansa has learnt by this time it's that she's going to have to be a lot more cunning and indirect to get what she wants.

But Arya was determined to exact her own revenge, and took every opportunity she had.

Please clarify. How did she take every opportunity she had? When she was offered the three lives by Jaqen and used them on insignificant terrors. Or when she took advantage of what the Hound started in the Inn to attack the Tickler?

Sansa has just as much rancour towards her enemies as Arya does and is as happy to see her enemies suffer as Arya is, but she's unwilling to contemplate doing it herself.

That's simply not true. She does not have as much rancour at all. She may have just as much reason to hate them, but her mind is not centred on their demise.

She leaves it to others, even mentally as in ACOK ("Robb will kill you all" compared to Arya snarling to the Hound "I'd like to kill you"). That does suggest a certain element of hypocrisy. I wouldn't go as far as to call it cowardice, since it seems to owe more to Sansa's nonviolent temperament, but I can see how some might.

Again, you simply cannot compare these two things. Sansa has no means to kill anyone in KL, and if she was to make such a boast she would be dead in 2 seconds or horribly beaten. Arya may be naturally more brash, but she too learnt to keep her mouth shut around truly dangerous men. Sansa does not formulate revenge plots and then look for someone else to deliver on them. She makes some comments relating to what she might like to have happen to her enemies such as wishing Harrenhal on Walder Frey, but there's no sustained longing for vengeance.

This was the quote paraphrasing the podcast comments:

She actually does give in to hateful, vengeful feelings at several points in the book (listed in my post) and she does take pleasure in the suffering of people of who've wronged her, which is schadenfreude. To me, that includes her feelings at Joffrey's death. It may be bitter satisfaction, but it's still satisfaction.

Perhaps you need to rethink what it means to give in. Sansa has normal feelings of hatred towards those who have hurt her or her family, and like all of us expresses a desire to see these people pay for what they've done, but that is very different from being vengeful. And once again, I don't think she takes any great enjoyment or pleasure from the suffering of others.

[brashcandy]

Queen Cersei I did an awesome post (or series of posts) constructing Sansa's arc (and Cersei's) as a series of humiliations and suffering earned for showing "feminine pride," or basically for wanting what her beauty/station deserved, either more than what she was offered or more than her patriarch dictated she should have. It was amazing and also depressing, as it made me realize by the end of AFFC just how worn down Sansa is. A lot of fans praise AFFC!Sansa or Alayne for being clear-eyed, sharp, brisk, pragmatic, and perceptive in her dealings compared to her former dreamy, romantic self, and there's certainly some of that, but she just seems so...resigned and lacking in any hopes or dreams for the future. She doesn't think about the big picture in her life, because the big picture is pretty freaking depressing (regicide charges, no family, no realistic options but Littlefinger) and no one cares about what she wants, anyway. It's very sad.

I feel pretty strongly about this kind of evaluation of Sansa at the end of AFFC. Basically, I don't think there's anything to support it, and really doesn't do justice to the kind of enduring spirit and mental toughness which Sansa has demonstrated constantly throughout her arc.

[Newstar]

And I agree that it is the idea of marriage as duty that is really daring of her to question. As Kittykatknits says, Westerosi (noble) marriage is all about duty. It could turn out well (Ned and Cat) or not (Cersei and Robert). And I think the true deconstruction (as opposed to defiance) of this idea is in the characters of Cersei and to a lesser extent Lysa. Cersei is a cruel woman and incompetent regent; but she is a truly tragic figure, a victim of the arranged marriage and double standard patriarchal traditions (I mean, Robert wasn't made to take a Walk of Shame - though I bet Stannis wished he could have made him after Robert, er, "broke in" Stannis' marriage bed). Cersei was probably never what one would call a sweet girl, but I can see how she was young and hopeful and eager and romantic when she was in love with Rhaegar. And Rhaegar got himself killed and his family killed or exiled because he couldn't be faithful to his own wife (although Aerys the Mad didn't help). Finally, Lysa Arryn was so unhappy in her own arranged marriage that she poisoned her husband on the orders of the man she carried a torch for.

Three unhappy arranged marriages, and ker-flush goes Westeros down the toilet. That is one brutal deconstruction of the idea of the arranged marriage and women's subordination.

This is one take. However, Cersei and Lysa are women who are the prime female villains of the story to date and are written as evil and insane. GRRM does not write them as sympathetic, despite their heartwrenching backstories: he writes them as cartoonishly evil and cruel. On top of that, their villainy is specifically tied to their adulterous actions and their rejection of their (crappy) arranged marriages. The text links their rejection of their arranged marriages (their duty) to catastrophe. Lysa rejecting Jon Arryn in favour of Littlefinger led her to take actions that kickstarted the calamitous Stark/Lannister war (poison Jon Arryn, blame the Lannisters). Cersei deliberately making sure she birthed not Robert's trueborn children but Jaime's bastards caused all kinds of grief. Their choices to reject their marriages and their duties are not treated as sympathetic: rather, they are specifically linked to the characters' villainy and to disastrous consequences. (The jury's still out on Dany's rejection of the unappetizing Hizdahr in favour of Daario, but her dalliance with him is certainly tied with her neglect of Meereen and the disasters which follow.)

So rather than the message being "arranged marriages suck and women shouldn't be asked to submit to them," the message seems to be "rejecting your arranged marriage, absent extreme circumstances (a Ramsay or an Arnolf Karstark) is for villainesses and leads to utter catastrophe." Even Alys Karstark gets a pass for fleeing her impending marriage to Arnolf Karstark, since she happily sucked it up and jumped into the marriage Jon Snow arranged for her without a word of protest. There also seems to be some leeway in the story for rejecting a marriage before it's a done deal, since Olenna Redwyne didn't suffer any negative consequences for nixing an undesirable Targaryen marriage prospect. (All this seems to be far less true for adulterous men in the story, with the good old double standards being what they are and the blame falling more on the woman "luring him away" from his duty than on the man's crappy judgment, although Rhaegar didn't make out so well when he threw over Elia, to be sure.) It might be an extension in some sense of the series coming down pretty hard on oathbreakers, both within the universe (Westeros laws and customs) and from a plot/meta perspective (oathbreakers being punished or suffering greatly for it). You're not an oathbreaker if you never actually agree to say the vows, but after, well...

Speaking of Ned/Cat, I think it's also telling that the one--the very one!--example we have of a happy, long-lasting marriage between nobles in Westeros (the jury's still out on Tywin/Joanna, since we only know about that through Tywin's relatives) was a marriage out of duty, where both parties were in love with someone else when they married each other. Dany/Drogo is another example where marital bliss was achieved by the parties sucking it up and doing their duty (although the hotness of both undoubtedly helped). Edmure/Roslin also looks like it has a shot, which was also an arranged marriage to which Edmure had to be asked to submit. Non-marriage love matches have a lousy track record in Westeros by and large (Oberyn/Ellaria made out all right, but that could be chalked up to Dornish cultural differences), and the one love match between nobles that we know of, Doran/Mellario, ended in separation! The message really seems to be "Westeros nobles' only shot at any kind of lasting marital happiness lies in an arranged marriage, athough that's no guarantee of anything."

More broadly, there's also the ongoing theme in the story of romantic love being linked to disaster. So I can't see women following their hearts and flipping the bird to arranged marriages in favour of true love being viewed as a Good Thing, as the main women in this story who "followed their hearts" and rejected duty in favour of romantic love caused nothing but chaos, war, disaster, and despair (Lyanna, Cersei, Lysa, Sansa when she rejected her father's orders in favour of salvaging her relationship with Joffrey, etc.).