Did Catelyn abuse Jon for his whole life? - Part 2

[the trees have eyes]

I never said it was wrong of her to send him to the wall. That was just a statement (not accusation) about how she had instigated that Jon be sent to the wall, and it was said in regards to the irony of how she went so out of her way to separate Jon from her family, when in the end; it was Jon who was willing to behave according to her family's words- Family, duty, honor; in that order. Jon was willing to betray his duty and honor at the NW in order to go save Arya.

Poor Catelyn. For plot reasons GRRM needs to get Jon from Winterfell into the NW. For plot reasons he chose to get Tyrion Lannister taken prisoner and precipitate the Lannister Stark conflict. For plot reasons he needs to get Jaime out of Riverrun's dungeon and back to KL. For all these things he uses Catelyn as his instrument - and gives her very plausible and human reasons for effecting these things. And then a large part of fandom sh*t all over her head and give us threads about Catelyn Stark being the worst person in Westeros, single-handedly responsible for the destruction of Houses Stark and Tully, and a child abuser to boot. :stunned:

[lostinwesteros]

Did she? Absolutely!

There are many forms of abuse, and from what I've seen, the covert, "under the radar" kind of verbal or emotional abuse is one of the worst. The abuse need not include shouting, yelling, or name calling, and emotional abuse quite often comes from what is not spoken. It's often the subtle manner towards someone, especially a child and especially when it connotes not belonging, that is the most devastating. Just think how transparent most people are when saying one thing but intending another, for example. We always know how we're really regarded, don't we?

[King Brandon Ice Eyes]

Yet, much as I respect and sympathise with Catelyn, she's not a character I can ever really warm to (I can warm to Dany, Jaime, and Tyrion, despite the fact that they're all much worse people than Catelyn). Do other posters feel that way?

No. I enjoy Tyrion and Jaime, but Catelyn is consistently sympathetic to me throughout the books in a way these two characters aren't. Dany gains a lot of sympathy at times but I just can't support her Targaryen cause so I can say I don't actually like her.

Back to Catelyn, her worst and only "fault" that bothered me so far is being a little harsh to poor Edmure who is a character I'm very fond of. Her relationship with Jon is unfair but to both of them, like some have said. The whole situation was unfair and I don't even blame Ned because in his clumsy way he wanted to do the right thing even if he created a situation that could have destroyed his marriage. He took the responsibility and acted as a good father to Jon at least. So it's a very complex situation and when you throw in the whole mystery of Jon's parentage I think I simply can understand the feelings of all the people involved: Cat, Jon and Ned. It's not a situation that makes me take a side and stick to it unlike many others in the books. And I certainly don't dislike any of these characters for this thing.

[Theda Baratheon]

She's not even Jon's step-mother. Stop assuming a woman should just love a child even though that child isn't hers, because she's a woman.

[The Great Walrus]

She's not even Jon's step-mother. Stop assuming a woman should just love a child even though that child isn't hers, because she's a woman.

Theda,I thank you for being a reasonable voice in this debate.

[Jasta11]

She's not even Jon's step-mother. Stop assuming a woman should just love a child even though that child isn't hers, because she's a woman.

Very much this.

[Lady Blue Rose]

Poor Catelyn. For plot reasons GRRM needs to get Jon from Winterfell into the NW. For plot reasons he chose to get Tyrion Lannister taken prisoner and precipitate the Lannister Stark conflict. For plot reasons he needs to get Jaime out of Riverrun's dungeon and back to KL. For all these things he uses Catelyn as his instrument - and gives her very plausible and human reasons for effecting these things. And then a large part of fandom sh*t all over her head and give us threads about Catelyn Stark being the worst person in Westeros, single-handedly responsible for the destruction of Houses Stark and Tully, and a child abuser to boot. :stunned:

Hahahaah!! I guess yes, Cat is a victim of GRRM... I'm sure if she had been a real person, in the real world, she would have made better choices. LOL Aren't all characters, their personality and actions created for plot reason?

Cat is nowhere near the worst person in Westeros, that would be Gregor Clegance or Tywin. She is however a very, very polarizing character. Most of her actions, as you said, are tough calls, choices made when she feels she's in impossible situations. Since actions define a person, depending on what the reader sees as what should have been the correct choice, people are bound to either admire/identify with her or reject/dislike her actions.

[TheMysteriousOne]

I don't think that Catelyn abused Jon, nor do I believe that she had any obligation whatsoever to be a mother to Jon.

However, it would have been nice if Catelyn treated him like her own.

[Synteis]

She is not his mother and he does not expect her to be one to him. There is no emotional neglect because there is no responsibility on her to nurture and love him for her to neglect... she is a distraught mother in the teeth of despair and grief.

I disagree and think that she did have a burden of care towards Jon, at the very least as Lady of Winterfell. As Lady of Winterfell part of her role was to care for those who lived there as Jon does. As several people have pointed out, she treats everyone else at WInterfell better than she treats Jon from the little we can see of it. Plus, whether it was her responsibility or not, I think that there are suggestions that Jon was emotionally neglected (which I'm happy to elaborate on in another post) especially because his companions, the Stark children, are so clearly loved by both their parents. When he was young, how could he have understood why he wasn't? But I also think that, thirteen years is a very long time to be "in the teeth of despair and grief" and there are no signs that she's ever been able (or has even tried) to calm that anger. I'm not sure how bad of a person that makes her but it certainly doesn't make her a good person.

All the quote shows is that Jon knew that Catelyn Stark did not welcome him in winterfell. Catelyn had almost nothing to do with Jon, he was free to learn his sums with Maester Luwin or train at arms or for command with Ser Rodrik or Ned and all this alongside Robb. we know this because it is in the books. where does this refusal by Catelyn to have anything to do with him become abuse and control? That just isn't the situation Jon grew up in. He turned out just fine too. He will not remember Catelyn Stark with fondness, that's for sure, but I'd wager he would be far less bothered than some posters make out.

When we meet Jon, he's almost fourteen, and in Westeros, now an adult in many senses. Sums and training at arms is a lot to be provided with. But what about when he was a child, when he was three or five. There's no wet nurse that he speaks of with fondness so who was providing him with things other than sums and training? Children need to be touched and in a lot of ways loved in order to develop properly. Not doing so constitutes as neglect in my mind. While we see Ned providing Jon with teachers (and a wet nurse when he was younger) as well as some form of guidance based on their interactions together, he also seems to hold himself back a lot with him, probably to not upset Cat. I don't see any reason why this would have been different when he was a young child. Finally, someone turning out just fine has nothing to with the extent to which he was (if he was) emotionally neglected and/or abused. That statement is insulting, in my mind, to people who have been through emotional abuse and/or neglect.

She's not even Jon's step-mother. Stop assuming a woman should just love a child even though that child isn't hers, because she's a woman.

I don't think that people are assuming that because she's a women she should love a child that isn't hers and I certainly am not. I don't think people's objections over her relationship with Jon have anything to do with gender, though I can't of course know. But as Lady of Winterfell, one of her responsibilities is for the welfare of her people, especially those in Winterfell proper. Most of the people on these boards aren't demanding that she love him like her own just that she wasn't so active in her clear resentment of him

[butterbumps!]

Thank you for your answer! I can see what you are saying.

I guess it comes down to the reader's personal interpretation of the dynamic between Cat and Jon. For me it goes more into the negative territory than neutral. The issue resonates more for me because the 'someone else's life' is a child. I always hold children to be innocent and deserving of respect, concern and care no matter the situation or how hard it is for the adults.

And with regard to Cat, if it was just indifference I guess I would be fine with it. But the things that irk me is the absence of what I consider basic decency when it comes to Jon. Her not calling him by his name or acknowledging him in the 14 yrs he spend there and making it known that she did not want him in WF. As someone who is stuck in WF by no choice of his own it must be hard to grow up knowing that the lady of the house did not want him there.

I appreciate your perspective, and I do agree that when we come to a degree of consensus about the specific sort of treatment Cat gave Jon, then it comes down to an issue of the way we, as readers, interpret the definition of abuse. I do still disagree that her behavior outside of the "it should have been you" line falls under abuse, but certainly it does make me conflicted and uncomfortable.

I want to make a case for 2 things: that Cat's actions would have been different had she thought Jon was affected by them, and secondly, a case for the idea that Martin took pains in crafting the situation such that Cat's behavior toward Jon is not to be seen as grounds for a character condemnation (not that you are saying this, but given some of the posts, I think the point should be raised). (I posted these basic thoughts in the Jon reread thread, but it seems apropos to put them here as well.)

I think one important issue to consider is the fact that Jon never let Catelyn see whether her treatment had an emotional effect on him. We don't see whether Cat's words cut him (outside of that line), or evidence that he found her unreasonable in context, or evidence he felt any sort of duress induced by her treatment. I'm not saying that these feelings definitively did not exist in Jon, but what is definite is the fact that whether he felt this or not, he never showed these feelings to anyone, even in his youth it seems.

From Cat's own POV (Cat II, aGoT), she outlines very precisely her feelings about Jon, Ned, holding a grudge and her strong feelings of sadness and rejection. Though she admits not bringing herself to love Jon and sublimating her negative feelings from Ned to the boy, it is very clear that she doesn't actually wish Jon harm. In fact, one of her reasons for thinking the NW is a good solution is the fact that he will find acceptance and affection from Uncle Benjen, who will take Jon as a son. Cat doesn't like the fact that she hold a grudge toward Jon, but neither does she want him harmed or miserable in any way.

I strongly believe that had Jon let it be shown that Cat's treatment caused him duress or misery, she may have modified her behavior. She is definitely not sadistic or harboring any specific malice toward him. I think Jon's non-reaction to the treatment played a large role in perpetuating the dynamic; I think this reveals more about Jon's character as fairly stoic and introverted rather than grounds for a condemnation of Cat, or even as a source of blame on her.

The other point I find very important for consideration is the issue of Martin's task wrt building the Stark dynamic, and the way he handles crafting the situation (copy/ pasting from the reread): With the character of Cat, Martin manifested a facet of the adversity Jon would face, but it seems he also doesn't want us to categorically write her off as a bad or deeply flawed person just because of this. I think the craft of this is really interesting. Martin has to balance several competing elements as plants the Stark family dynamic: Jon as being very much a part of a family who mutually love each other, yet also somehow painfully aware of his status as a bastard, which means that someone must be there to offer this friction. Yet, even for the person who provides this friction over Jon's status, Martin is balancing a few more pieces: we're given thorough explanation for her feelings, and her overall portrayal has a sympathetic tone, which simultaneously plants this Jon adversity conflict, but also somewhat mitigates our "ire" toward her (generally speaking).

So I strongly believe that Martin sought to create friction for Jon through the character of Cat, but also did not want us to see her character negatively because of this. I personally think of the Jon-Cat dynamic as a no-win situation for anyone, and while it makes me uncomfortable for multiple reasons, I think "abuse" is too far a term for what Martin intended, given the pains he'd taken to make her position as sympathetic as possible, as well as the fact that Jon never exhibits duress from their interactions.

[Stannis ftw]

Stannis ftw, on 17 April 2013 - 12:08 AM, said:

Do you think she didnt hold a grudge against Jon? Or do you think she did but it is justifiable?

She did hold a grudge. I think it is justifiable. Is that straight enough for you?

Yep, this is clear answer. And since you are answering my question its clear you are talking about specifically grudge against Jon. Its just fascinating that a modern, presumably rational person thinks that holding a grudge against a small child is justifiable.

When Tyrion is blamed of killing his mother, in my mind there was no way a modern rational person would agree with that warped reasoning. Apparently I was wrong and everything is just a matter of perspective.

[The Wolves]

I don't think Catelyn in any way abused Jon, she just directed anger and resentment towards him when he didn't deserve it.

And I don't like Catelyn at all so no I don't want her playing mommy to Jon she would be horrible at it. Catelyn is best being a mommy to HER children

[Anath]

I want to make a case for 2 things: that Cat's actions would have been different had she thought Jon was affected by them,

I beg to disagree. Cat's entire purpose is to make sure that Jon is very aware that he's less important, less privileged, less, less, less than his half-siblings, so he wouldn't threaten their inheritance. And that by definition is making her actions meant to affect him.

Cat is not a kind person at heart. She certainly isn't vicious and she's capable of empathy but I don't think she's capable of warmth to anyone but her family, Jon is excluded.

The line about Benjen loving Jon and so Jon would be better off with him is meant to soothe her conscience, nothing more. She never cared how Jon felt when he lived with them but now she's becoming so caring? And coincidentally, just when it suits her. I don't believe that for a moment. She's just trying to excuse herself in her own eyes because she certainly doesn't like the fact that she acts and feels the way she does.

[Jasta11]

I beg to disagree. Cat's entire purpose is to make sure that Jon is very aware that he's less important, less privileged, less, less, less than his half-siblings, so he wouldn't threaten their inheritance. And that by definition is making her actions meant to affect him.

Cat is not a kind person at heart. She certainly isn't vicious and she's capable of empathy but I don't think she's capable of warmth to anyone but her family, Jon is excluded.

The line about Benjen loving Jon and so Jon would be better off with him is meant to soothe her conscience, nothing more. She never cared how Jon felt when he lived with them but now she's becoming so caring? And coincidentally, just when it suits her. I don't believe that for a moment. She's just trying to excuse herself in her own eyes because she certainly doesn't like the fact that she acts and feels the way she does.

So why does she save Brienne when she has no interest in doing so, assuming she is completely uncapable of warmth towards anyone other than her family? Why does she worry a few times about the commoner's plight in war, when Edmure is pretty much the only other noble to do so?

[butterbumps!]

I beg to disagree. Cat's entire purpose is to make sure that Jon is very aware that he's less important, less privileged, less, less, less than his half-siblings, so he wouldn't threaten their inheritance. And that by definition is making her actions meant to affect him.

This is not entirely incorrect. I said that Cat's role wrt her dynamic with Jon is to be the one who reminds him that he is a bastard. You know what, though? According to the entire world, Jon is, in fact, a bastard. She didn't, however, make Jon feel worthless as a human. There is a fine line between letting someone know their status versus actually being malicious.

Cat is not a kind person at heart. She certainly isn't vicious and she's capable of empathy but I don't think she's capable of warmth to anyone but her family, Jon is excluded.

No offense, but this comment completely discredits your position on this matter, revealing a huge bias that's framing your argument rather than analyzing the evidence in question. This is completely unsupported by the text. I only have to point out her interactions with Brienne to counter this.

The line about Benjen loving Jon and so Jon would be better off with him is meant to soothe her conscience, nothing more. She never cared how Jon felt when he lived with them but now she's becoming so caring? And coincidentally, just when it suits her. I don't believe that for a moment. She's just trying to excuse herself in her own eyes because she certainly doesn't like the fact that she acts and feels the way she does.

Look, Cat did not care about Jon, but neither did she actively wish him harm. From her own POV she admits that she feels simultaneously cold toward him while also ashamed of feeling cold toward a child. She recognizes that she sublimates her feelings for Ned toward Jon, and feels guilt over this. She is personally very conflicted between assuaging her own feelings of rejection, feeling coldness toward Jon, and feeling regret that she feels this coldness. This is not a woman with an agenda to cause Jon harm. You can disagree all you want, but what is actually supported in the text is the fact that she truly doesn't wish Jon malice or to harm him. She doesn't, nor does Jon believe she's out to harm him.

I strongly believe that had Jon shown duress over her actions that something would have had to give. It would seem that the situation never got to a breaking point, which I think is extremely important for consideration, and likely a purposeful writing sleight of hand on Martin's part. We don't know if Jon ever felt duress, but we do know he never showed it. Therefore, we have no idea what would have happened if things reached a boil and Jon showed his feelings on the matter. From Cat's POV's and the smattering of thoughts she has toward Jon, it seems that his lack of reaction played a significant part in the continuing of this dynamic because she truly does not harbor feelings of malice toward him.

[The Wolves]

I beg to disagree. Cat's entire purpose is to make sure that Jon is very aware that he's less important, less privileged, less, less, less than his half-siblings, so he wouldn't threaten their inheritance. And that by definition is making her actions meant to affect him.

Cat is not a kind person at heart. She certainly isn't vicious and she's capable of empathy but I don't think she's capable of warmth to anyone but her family, Jon is excluded.

The line about Benjen loving Jon and so Jon would be better off with him is meant to soothe her conscience, nothing more. She never cared how Jon felt when he lived with them but now she's becoming so caring? And coincidentally, just when it suits her. I don't believe that for a moment. She's just trying to excuse herself in her own eyes because she certainly doesn't like the fact that she acts and feels the way she does.

I disagree that Catelyn isn't a kind hearted person at heart she's very kind just that her love and care is more for her family. Catelyn is a good person but she is more warm and caring towards her own and I don't fault her for it many people are like that.

But I can also see where it isn't in her to care or love Jon, that's not who she is. Catelyn is not one to mommy a child that isn't hers' she lacks that kind of maternal instinct and many women are like that and some are the complete opposite and would mommy every child they see. Catelyn not loving Jon is not something I fault her for but the resentment and anger when he have done NOTHING to her and hers is where I have major issues towards Catelyn.

[Anath]

This is not entirely incorrect. I said that Cat's role wrt her dynamic with Jon is to be the one who reminds him that he is a bastard. You know what, though? According to the entire world, Jon is, in fact, a bastard. She didn't, however, make Jon feel worthless as a human. There is a fine line between letting someone know their status versus actually being malicious.

You said she'd have acted differently had she known that her actions affected him. I never mentioned anything about maliciousness. Only actions. She meant to show him that he's a bastard and she did. So, you now say she didn't actually expect he'd take her behavior to heart?

No offense, but this comment completely discredits your position on this matter, revealing a huge bias that's framing your argument rather than analyzing the evidence in question. This is completely unsupported by the text. I only have to point out her interactions with Brienne to counter this.

Cat's interactions with Brienne are something entirely different altogether. Cat only pities her. No warmt here. Pity.

Look, Cat did not care about Jon, but neither did she actively wish him harm.

You are the one who talks about Cat actively wishing Jon harm. You've made a strawman's agrument and are now fighting it. I say Cat never cared about Jon's wellbeing while he lived there and she didn't care about that when he got sent away. Did I write anywhere that she wished him harm?

Stop creating false arguments and then fighting them, and we might actually come to something.

[Lady Blue Rose]

Look, Cat did not care about Jon, but neither did she actively wish him harm. From her own POV she admits that she feels simultaneously cold toward him while also ashamed of feeling cold toward a child. She recognizes that she sublimates her feelings for Ned toward Jon, and feels guilt over this. She is personally very conflicted between assuaging her own feelings of rejection, feeling coldness toward Jon, and feeling regret that she feels this coldness. This is not a woman with an agenda to cause Jon harm. You can disagree all you want, but what is actually supported in the text is the fact that she truly doesn't wish Jon malice or to harm him. She doesn't, nor does Jon believe she's out to harm him.

Would you or anyone who can, please give an example/quote of a moment during which she portrays her guilt over her treatment of Jon? I never caught that but would love be directed towards it.

I strongly believe that had Jon shown duress over her actions that something would have had to give. It would seem that the situation never got to a breaking point, which I think is extremely important for consideration, and likely a purposeful writing sleight of hand on Martin's part. We don't know if Jon ever felt duress, but we do know he never showed it. Therefore, we have no idea what would have happened if things reached a boil and Jon showed his feelings on the matter. From Cat's POV's and the smattering of thoughts she has toward Jon, it seems that his lack of reaction played a significant part in the continuing of this dynamic because she truly does not harbor feelings of malice toward him.

This is just specualtion on your behalf, based on your connection to the character but there is no evidence of this or of her ever showing attentiveness to his feelings.

Jon lets us know that when she spoke harshly to him or told him he was not desired he would leave running in tears. How more do you want a child to demonstrate that your behavior is affecting him?

How is it possible that people support and think it is reasonable for Catelyn-a grown, educated, mature woman-to hold a grudge against a child for 14 years; but think that it was the kid's fault for not sitting down to explain his feelings to the adult that scares him and couldn't care less?

[Anath]

I disagree that Catelyn isn't a kind hearted person at heart she's very kind just that her love and care is more for her family. Catelyn is a good person but she is more warm and caring towards her own and I don't fault her for it many people are like that.

But I can also see where it isn't in her to care or love Jon, that's not who she is. Catelyn is not one to mommy a child that isn't hers' she lacks that kind of maternal instinct and many women are like that and some are the complete opposite and would mommy every child they see. Catelyn not loving Jon is not something I fault her for but the resentment and anger when he have done NOTHING to her and hers is where I have major issues towards Catelyn.

I do think she's warm and empathic person but I never saw her relating to anyone who isn't family. I think she lacks the capacity for that. Even her interactions with Brienne are based on pity, meaning that she takes the position of the stronger one. But yes, many people are like that.

Who in their right mind would expect Catelyn to mother Jon? He was foisted on her! My main issues with Catelyn is that she always feels cheated out of something. Always angry. Her treatment of Jon is only one aspect of it and honestly, I don't think it's even the worst of it. While she certainly would have taken him out of anything resembling equality to Robb - lessons, training, anything, - I have no doubt that he woudn't have been turned into a servant the way Falia Flowers was. And Catelyn would always expect Ned to provide for his son, unlike a certain gold-haired lioness.

Mistreatment? Yes. Abuse? That's ridiculous. She did not abuse him. No.

[Florina Laufeyson]

Heres a quick summary of what Cat thinks when it comes to Jon. (and vice versa)

Cat: "The sight of Jon hurts my heart. Ned, why did you cheat on me...?"

Jon: "Lady Catelyn isnt nice to me. But i cant let her see this. That would be weakness. I am strong. I wont let her see."

I dont think theres abuse. Jon doesnt dwell on Cat much (at all) after leaving Winterfell. Cat never wishes actual harm on Jon, like bumps said. Her outburst in Bran's room was extreme grief. But when we see her in that state of grief again (which is a lot after a certain point), she never thinks "goddamn that Jon Snow! I hope he dies!"