Jump to content

Archived

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

teemo

[BOOK SPOILERS] Cat and Jon Snow

Recommended Posts

So ... what you're saying is that I'm being "silly" for castigating behavior that you justify in the context of small children doing it all the time. Children who make such declarations inevitably recant them past the heat of the moment, or when the implications of that wish are explained to them in full.

An adult who has had a complete mental breakdown and is in a black depression is no more responsible for their words than a child is (and not small children, just, dude; teens wants their parents dead all the time :P) That's what I'm saying. When rationality is gone, only irrational things come out.

So, yes, you're being silly with your line of argument.

Look, here is how Catelyn is described, again:

Lady Stark was there beside his bed. She had been there, day and night, for close on a fortnight. Not for a moment had she left Bran's side. She had her meals brought to her there, and chamber pots as well, and a small hard bed to sleep on, though it was said she had scarcely slept at all. She fed him herself, the honey and water and herb mixture that sustained life. Not once did she leave the room. So Jon had stayed away.

Lady Stark looked over. For a moment she did not seem to recognize him. Finally she blinked. "What are you doing here?" she asked in a voice strangely flat and emotionless.

Her face did not change. Her long auburn hair was dull and tangled. She looked as though she had aged twenty years

This is not "acting like a small child." Small children do not do this. This is a complete and utter mental breakdown.

Here's how she describes this period:

Catelyn nodded and sat up in bed. It all seemed like a nightmare to her now, everything since Bran's fall, a terrible dream of blood and grief

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, its either another juxtaposition that makes these HBO shows so great (see "The Wire"), showing her "believed" downfall to her lack of piety, or its setting something up that we don't know about that yet.

I thought it was odd, much like the Talisa scenes, but I also think the Talisa scenes are again juxtaposing Robb's duties versus his feelings. Besides, all of these characters will be in some state of death within the next two TV months, so no big deal IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the way to do it is by revealing that she constantly prayed for Jon Snow to die as a kid and didn't follow on her promise to get him legitimised and be a mother to him? But because she feels bad about it now, it makes her more sympathetic than if all you know about their relationship is that she gave Jon a mean look and wanted him to be allowed to join the NW? Really?

Besides, catering to irrational Jon fanboys shouldn't be a priority at all for the show.

You should love the show, Jon's a fool for the most part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one absolutely loved this scene. Im sick and tired of hearing complaints about deviations from the book. The books have an unpredictability that sets them apart from most contemporary fantasy, and so does the series and im glad for that. This scene is a perfect example. I was moved by Cat's confession and the Queens probing questions. It was one of those moments that told a story unknowen to the POV chapters of the novel. I for one would have lost interest completely in this show if every step it took was preordained and predictable. Great job HBO. As a huge fan of the books, I love what you are doing with the series.

Well said. I sometimes feel like people view reaction to deviations as some kind of loyalty test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said. I sometimes feel like people view reaction to deviations as some kind of loyalty test.

It's an automatic reaction, if you're very familiar with a book, to think "well, that never happend" when you see it adapted. On the basis of the description given, it doesn't sound like a bad scene to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an automatic reaction, if you're very familiar with a book, to think "well, that never happend" when you see it adapted. On the basis of the description given, it doesn't sound like a bad scene to me.

The scene confirmed that 1) Catelyn was generally mean to Jon, and couldn't bring herself to treat him like a son even though her husband did, 2) she felt some guilt over that, and 3) that she is getting more and more emotionally distraught over what is happening to her children. I don't see any of that as inconsistent with her character in the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This does not make sense at all. Comparing their marriage to a modern western marriage is impossible...

Ned showing up with a bastard son was a wound on her pride as a highborn woman and as a wife.

And yet people here keep saying that 'her caring for Jon Snow like a mother' would be something impossible in the Westerosi society

You can't bring up the laws and customs of their society to claim that Cat has to suck it up and then turn around and say that Ned and Robb are totally free to ignore them where Jon is concerned. It is highly hypocritical.

The very same laws that prevent Cat leaving Ned over his infidelity also decree that bastards have no inheritance rights, that Night's Watch is for life and that flaunting one's bastard by raising him alongside legitimate children is a huge insult to one's wife and her family.

Make no mistake, the situation between Jon and Cat is completely on Ned. And most other wives would have reacted even worse.

Not to mention Ned himself, if the situation was reversed. Can you imagine him raising Cat's bastard alongside his own children, playing father to the boy?! And yet he is supposed to be one of the best men out there, so....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, again I don't have a problem with her monologue, as I think it somewhat adds more depth to her character(in the show), although it is a book deviation. I have to say I wished they left out that she wanted Ned to make him a true Stark, because when you think about it that REALLY doesn't make any sense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see it as destroying the plausibility at all. In the books, she did express some guilt over her treatment of Jon, so this seems completely consistent to me given the emotional stress she's currently under with her own children. I personally think her emotional torment about what has happened to her family since Bran fell is a critical part of her character, so the scene advanced that prior to the RW.

The plausibility destroying part is her intention to ask Ned to get Jon legitimised and accepted as trueborn Stark. It's something which no noblewoman in Cat's position in a Westeros type society would ever even consider seriously when she has plenty of children of her own. It's just completely against the customs and mentality of this kind of society.

The scene confirmed that 1) Catelyn was generally mean to Jon, and couldn't bring herself to treat him like a son even though her husband did, 2) she felt some guilt over that, and 3) that she is getting more and more emotionally distraught over what is happening to her children. I don't see any of that as inconsistent with her character in the book.

What about all the other things which it confirmed which are inconsistent? Like those I listed here - http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/84359-book-spoilers-cat-and-jon-snow/page__st__100#entry4291199

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't bring up the laws and customs of their society to claim that Cat has to suck it up and then turn around and say that Ned and Robb are totally free to ignore them where Jon is concerned. It is highly hypocritical.

Well, one difference is that Ned and Robb were the head of the house, and they set the rules. Catelyn doesn't. I suppose that's unfair in some sense, but it's reality. And if Catelyn's reactions were truly all justified by Ned's behavior, then she'd never have felt the slightest twinge of conscience at how she treated Jon. Yet, she did.

The very same laws that prevent Cat leaving Ned over his infidelity also decree that bastards have no inheritance rights, that Night's Watch is for life and that flaunting one's bastard by raising him alongside legitimate children is a huge insult to one's wife and her family.

Then the insult would have been given by Ned, not Jon. Just because you've been provoked doesn't excuse your actions.

Make no mistake, the situation between Jon and Cat is completely on Ned. And most other wives would have reacted even worse.

And some husbands in Westeros may have given those wives the back of their hand.

Not to mention Ned himself, if the situation was reversed. Can you imagine him raising Cat's bastard alongside his own children, playing father to the boy?! And yet he is supposed to be one of the best men out there, so....

There is not gender equality in Westeros. A lady having bastards would not be viewed the same as a lord having them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scene confirmed that 1) Catelyn was generally mean to Jon,

She was not mean to him in the books. Martin says she was never abusive. So, right there, inconsistency

and couldn't bring herself to treat him like a son even though her husband did

She never felt guilt for this because she never had cause to think she should treat him as a son. Incosistent.

2) she felt some guilt over that,

Inconsistent, per above.

Have you re-read the series recently? I ask because some months back, in discussing Ygritte, you admitted it had been a long while. It seems to me you would probably see the inconsistencies if you had a clear recollection of the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, one difference is that Ned and Robb were the head of the house, and they set the rules. Catelyn doesn't. I suppose that's unfair in some sense, but it's reality. And if Catelyn's reactions were truly all justified by Ned's behavior, then she'd never have felt the slightest twinge of conscience at how she treated Jon. Yet, she did.

Catelyn is the eldest daughter of Hoster Tully, one of the Lords Paramount. She's a great person in her own right, and would expect to be treated with the respect due to the daughter of a Lord Paramount.

It's not part of the social contract among the nobles of Westeros that a husband will remain faithful to his wife. It's certainly part of the social contract that he won't publicly disrespect her. That's why bastards get fostered with other families.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not read all 8(is it more than 8 now?) pages of the topic. I know from some reviews from non book readers that some really liked the scene and at least one review thought it was the strongest in the episode. I liked it, and I don't think it undermines Catelyn's character as she mentions in the end that she couldn't bring herself to love the boy anyway and she betrayed the promise she made to the Gods, so she's now showing any soft spots for Jon.

I think show Catelyn is different than book Catelyn in that she's less coldly political, and more of strong but emotional mother figure, but I don't mind that at all, its just a slightly different interpretation of the character. I think the scene serves as an introduction to an overall season arc for Catelyn of loss, pain and tragedy. She thinks she lost her sons, she is losing her son, she will lose her father, she will find out her daughter has been married to Tyrion Lannister, and she will see her son losing the trust of his bannermen because of her actions. I think this will all end after the Red Wedding, with the final scene for the season being the reveal of UnCat, being the personification of the loss and tragedy Catelyn has gone through, and its expression in pure anger and vengeance. The scene is almost disturbing knowing what will happen to Cat - almost marking her as cursed by the Gods, and for that reason I really liked it.

As a final thought, I personally don't care if show Cat is 'inconsistent' with the books, because I don't judge the show's quality by its faithfulness to the books, nor do I think it has an obligation to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

, one difference is that Ned and Robb were the head of the house, and they set the rules.

Catelyn doesn't. I suppose that's unfair in some sense, but it's reality.

Except that they don't. Their society has a set of rules which they break at their own peril. And to detriment of their family. Also, unfair in "some sense"? Try unfair in every sense.

if Catelyn's reactions were truly all justified by Ned's behavior, then she'd never have felt the slightest twinge of conscience at how she treated Jon. Yet, she did.

Because she is a good woman, who is normally rather compassionate for her society and class. Ned also has twinges of conscience re: Cersei's kids even though the situation is not of his making.

There is not gender equality in Westeros. A lady having bastards would not be viewed the same as a lord having them.

There is no bastard equality in Westeros. A lord having bastards is very different from treating them equally with his legitimate children - the latter of which is a huge insult to his wife, her family and threat to social order of Westeros as a whole, which strongly relies on orderly succession and political alliances sealed by marriage and shared blood.

And if you want Cat to grow over Westerosi social conventions to consider her a good person, then you have no room for giving Ned a pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the Cat /talisa scene has same flavor and is something similar to that of Cersei scene in season 2 where Cersei cries and indirectly admit about her incest to tyrion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Catelyn is the eldest daughter of Hoster Tully, one of the Lords Paramount. She's a great person in her own right, and would expect to be treated with the respect due to the daughter of a Lord Paramount.

It's not part of the social contract among the nobles of Westeros that a husband will remain faithful to his wife. It's certainly part of the social contract that he won't publicly disrespect her. That's why bastards get fostered with other families.

While what you are describing is the norm for that society, it certainly isn't the only example. Her own case with Jon Snow proves that. Some bastards were legitimized and raised as family on both Westeros, and our world during the period that Westeros is mimicking. I can have an understanding about what motivates a character and still see how that characters behavior was negative.

We have textual reference that Catelyn behaved poorly in her relationship with Jon Snow. In the scene that Ran linked earlier, She was emotionally distraught and lashed out at Jon. Let's give her a pass on this because of the extreme stress that she was under. Even giving her this pass, it is an acknowledgement of bad behavior.

In the same passage however, it shows that Jon Snow waited to go see Bran for a long period of time and did not do so because Catelyn was in the room. This establishes the fact that Jon has felt Catelyn's hatred of him and is uncomfortable. To have someone hate you so much that you will not go and see a loved brother who may be on his death bed shows us that this action of Catelyn's was probably not just an isolated incident. As I mentioned in another post, she never questions that action either with an apology, or a thought of apology for the rest of the series even after her time of great emotional stress has been subsided.

We also have to factor in the fact that Catelyn's children, and her husband truly loved Jon. What I would find highly implausible is that the thought of acting like a mother towards him would have never entered her head, even if it were just fleeting. The show establishes that she did in fact have times where she felt guilty and so does the books.

There has been major changes to the character of Catelyn Stark from the books to the show. I personally don't find this to be one of them. One thing that I will grant is that I could never see book Catelyn telling anyone about her conflicts, but since in the show we can not hear inner monolog, I am fine with it being articulated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She was not mean to him in the books. Martin says she was never abusive. So, right there, inconsistency

Just because she didn't beat Jon for any infraction (or at all) doesn't mean she wasn't abusive. Being neglectful in its own right is a form of abuse.

I'd go so far as to say that constantly reminding someone that they don't belong with you in a passive aggressive manner is a form of abuse in its own right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She was not mean to him in the books. Martin says she was never abusive. So, right there, inconsistency

I suppose that depends on how you define "mean" and "abusive", so this seems more semantics than anything. But clearly, Jon knew how Catelyn felt about him, and that if it was up to her, he'd be out of Winterfell. Ignoring and being cold to a child, to the point where the child knows he is not even welcome in the home in which he lives, strikes me as mean (not to mention what she said to Jon when Bran was injured), even though I wouldn't characterize that as "abusive". So I don't see the inconsistency.

She never felt guilt for this because she never had cause to think she should treat him as a son. Incosistent.

I've been around lots and lots of little kids in my life, and I'm not cold to them just because they aren't my own children. If my wife cheated on me and had a baby, I'd be pissed at her, and she'd probably be my ex-wife, but if I treated that child more poorly than I'd treat any other child, I'd feel guilty. Not the kid's fault his/her parent did wrong.

Another point. I see that scene sort of the same way I saw the scene (in the book) where she made the "it should have been you" comment to Jon. It was a statement made out of anger/worry over Bran. Catelyn is now going through something similar because her daughters are missing, she knows Robb has made a huge mistake by marrying Jeyne (whatever...), and now her two youngest sons are missing. So, she's starting to freak out, and getting religion in a big way. Her outburst regarding not loving Jon is a product of her concern over her other children, and worrying that the Gods will punish her for how she treated Jon, even though if she was not that upset, she likely wouldn't see any reason to feel much remorse. She's just starting to fall apart, and the irrationality of linking her treatment of Jon with what is happening to her other children emphasizes that.

Inconsistent, per above.

I'd point out that I was responding to David Selig's post, who said in post #138 that Catelyn felt "guilt". That was his word choice, not mine, but I didn't see an issue with it given that my comment was directed to him. Perhaps you'd prefer it be characterized as "remorse". In any event, I think our difference is that you see it as more of a bright line issue than I do. If she wasn't his mother, then she owed nothing to him. I see it as even if she does not owe him motherly affection, there is a still an underlying level of decency regarding how you should treat any child.

Have you re-read the series recently? I ask because some months back, in discussing Ygritte, you admitted it had been a long while. It seems to me you would probably see the inconsistencies if you had a clear recollection of the books.

Actually, yes. And my recollection is quite clear. We simply have different opinions as to the appropriateness of her treatment of Jon. I'd agree it wasn't abusive, but it could still trigger regret at a time of great stress and concern over her other children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×