Book vs. Show characterisation of SanSan: A TV Critic's Analysis

[Miodrag]

As I understand it, the weather caused major problems in shooting the whole tourney sequence, and they ended up cobbling together what we saw in the episode. I don't see any reason to doubt it; they've never felt the need to "justify" any of the other changes they've made like that.

Weather problems do affect outdoor shootings, but I can't remember any other instance in the history of film and TV that weather conditions lead to a change like this one. How come weather didn't prevent Aidan Gillen from filming that scene, but it did prevent Rory? Had the script said Sandor is delivering the story, then Sandor would've deliver it, no matter the weather. GoT is not the first show ever that has to deal with weather conditions, which is why find it hard to believe weather conditions alter scripts.

And they did do it again in the second season, when they also gave Sandor's lines to Petyr. No weather conditions there, I'm afraid.

As for their excuses, there isn't a similar example of giving one character's essential lines to another character, so I guess that's the reason they didn't use justifications like that one more often. But, truth be told, they use all kind of nonsensical justifications all the time, and those were discussed in lengths in other threads.

[Woman of War]

Thank you for your analysis, Newstar.

The deleted scene where Sansa refuses to sing for Sandor "I don't know any songs. Not anymore." was actually one of her strongest.

I believe that it may be exactly the reduction of Sansa's character on SanSan that prevents not only posters here in these forums but as well readers who choose to focus on that interaction from seeing Sansa herself within the story. Sansa and Sandor have their very own respective stories where they both are catalyst to each other. Maybe Sandor has done that job of a cruel and yet wise awaking process to Sansa already, maybe Sansa will yet have to play the target for his redeeming heroism to come. And maybe some kind of sacrifice from Sandor's side will break some dark spell that lies on Sansa by reminding her of the child she has once been.

But I do not think that the author ever intended a "together" for them, they have a role to play in each others' development and that role is limited.

..........That some people can ship SanSan after the Blackwater scene, where he shoves a 12-year-old down on a bed and threatens her at knifepoint, and that some people seem to ship SanSan because of the Blackwater scene, creeps me out to no end. The romanticization of abuse and violence, etc. etc. If they had filmed it as in the books and if the bulk of the TV viewership had been horrified and outraged as a result, it might have been a bit of a reality check to the shippers. (Of course, the worst part is that there would have been people who shipped it regardless. We live in a world where Twilight has a guy cutting his girlfriend's brakes and it's framed as a romantic gesture.)

Hmm, maybe that's another reason why TV SanSan was toned down...the possible romantic subtext linked to abusive behaviours and violence (it's all very "He hit me and it felt like a kiss"), the Sandor/Sansa relationship in the books hitting abusive tropes (the woman enduring the man's abuse to "tame" him, e.g.). Of course, the deleted scene in 2x03 hit all those points--Sandor yelling at Sansa, getting in her face, trapping her against a wall, etc. etc.--so maybe there isn't any sort of higher, more enlightened awareness at play.

Yes, this is the bitter taste of women who suffer the abuse, who want to be the only one able to reform, to redeem HIM, flattering themselves that they have the magical gift to tame the beast - and in the end they fill the emergency wards after having "fallen down the stairs", if not ending in the morgue.

When I was a kind of social worker those cases did not let me sleep at night: the women who understood, who wanted to help their abusive partner before they were willing to help themselves, to the bitter end.

Linking knife at throat with a promising love relationship is a fairy tale that never works.

If only those interested in the character Sansa could simply allow her to be the girl she is, not flashy, not spectacular, without pressing the fantasies for her character into a storybook abusive relationship to come.

[Miodrag]

Re: Sandor being violent toward Sansa

Do you really think Sansa was ever in danger because of Sandor? Or is it, maybe, the way he tries to deal with all the confusing emotions he feels exploding inside him? He invites her to go with him, he comes in her chamber to save her from KL, and she refuses, and he, deeply hurt because of that refusal (for which she may have a reason, but he doesn't know it) responds with an empty threat she has no single consequence from - is that violent?! Is that inappropriate to film? What, audience is going to freak out if Sandor - while crying! - holds a knife at Sansa's face, but actually never hurts her at all? The same audience that didn't freak out when three grown men almost raped Sansa?

We're talking of the show that made Dany's wedding night way uglier than in the book! And they rejected SanSan ultimate scene because it could be ugly, or creepy, or violent?!

[Ser Pounce FTW]

Re: Sandor being violent toward Sansa

Do you really think Sansa was ever in danger because of Sandor? Or is it, maybe, the way he tries to deal with all the confusing emotions he feels exploding inside him?

Does it really matter why or does the reason excuse the violence?

What, audience is going to freak out if Sandor - while crying! - holds a knife at Sansa's face, but actually never hurts her at all? The same audience that didn't freak out when three grown men almost raped Sansa?

We're talking of the show that made Dany's wedding night way uglier than in the book! And they rejected SanSan ultimate scene because it could be ugly, or creepy, or violent?!

Ah, the tears makes the knife ok, you are right. As for the rape scene, there was a great deal of outrage about the filming of it here in America. Finally, the consummation of Dany and Drogo is STILL being discussed because of it's controversial nature. It is one of the most divisive scenes of the series but more importantly, Dany is an adult and so is Emilia. That makes a world of difference for allowing such a contoversial scene to be filmed.

[Woman of War]

Do you really think Sansa was ever in danger because of Sandor? Or is it, maybe, the way he tries to deal with all the confusing emotions he feels exploding inside him? He invites her to go with him, he comes in her chamber to save her from KL, and she refuses, and he, deeply hurt because of that refusal (for which she may have a reason, but he doesn't know it) responds with an empty threat she has no single consequence from - is that violent?! Is that inappropriate to film? What, audience is going to freak out if Sandor - while crying! - holds a knife at Sansa's face, but actually never hurts her at all? The same audience that didn't freak out when three grown men almost raped Sansa?

No, the audience would not freak out because of the knife at Sansa's throat, there indeed worse things have happened. And if Sansa had been presented as clever girl who managed to play Sandor by fake emotionality in order to get away alive the situation could have been presented too. But then Sansa would have been Margaery and not Sansa. It is precisely that linking of abuse and romanticizing that leaves the bad aftertaste.

But the audience would have compunctions with any tendency that tries to describe that interaction as positive, as caring or worst of all as beginning love story between a middle aged guy and a child.

Children have been threatened and maimed by HBO but selling an act of abusive violence as budding love story would be see as blatantly embellishing violence against a woman or child, not only within the mindset of the protagonists but implementing this idea on a meta level as well. Imagine the shitstorm against advocating child abuse if this scene gets romanticized!

[Miodrag]

@Ser Pounce FTW

@Woman of War

So, am I right to conclude that you picked up nothing other but violence from that scene in the books? Like, the most important thing, the only thing that matters in the end, is that Sandor was physically abusive toward Sansa?

[Ser Pounce FTW]

@Ser Pounce FTW

@Woman of War

So, am I right to conclude that you picked up nothing other but violence from that scene in the books? Like, the most important thing, the only thing that matters in the end, is that Sandor was physically abusive toward Sansa?

No you are not right. Are you ignoring the other posts in this thread?

To ignore the negatives of the scene in favor of focusing on it's positive aspects - Sansa manages to get control of the situation and show Sandor compassion - is dangerous and no televsion network would dream of touching that with a 10 foot pole. And as Newstar mentioned, the constant, violent grabbing and forcing Sansa to stop and listen to him wouldn't go over well either.

It would appear that you are one of those who chooses to do just that.

ETA:

Also, why isn't the essay posted in this thread? Seems strange to post it in one place and then have this thread. :dunno:

[Woman of War]

@ miodrag

No, I do not only pick up violence from Sandor's side.

I pick up a twisted infatuation with the girl, I pick up Sandor's helplessness.

But what I most of all pick p that Sandor himself knows that his infatuation is the worst that can happen to Sansa even when he tries to help her. He is aware that he will inevitably be the one who "loves what he destroys and destroys the things he loves". This may he of sad romanticism in Sting's song "Moon Over Bourbon Street", but it is the direct way into domestic violence in RL. Sandor refrains from killing or raping Sansa because at least he finally is aware of the danger he presents to Sansa, contrary to those countless wife beating husbands. In the end I would want peace on the Quiet Isle for the interestingly twisted character Sandor but maybe there will be "the sacrifice" for him to come, sadly.

[Miodrag]

Does it really matter why or does the reason excuse the violence?

'Why' always matters. The pure existence of a reason doesn't automatically justify anything, because the reason can be wrong, or insufficient, or whatever. And in the matters of violence, reasons should especially be analyzed harshly. But, the reason - or the lack of one - is never to be disregarded. That is the basic principle of holism, applied in practice.

No you are not right. Are you ignoring the other posts in this thread?

It would appear that you are one of those who chooses to do just that.

No, I don't ignore anything. I just think that the audience should be treated just like readership was treated. Readers picked a lot from that scene, not just the violence, because Martin addressed their intelligence and ability to analyze and see beyond face value. Is it too much to expect the same from an HBO adaptation? You know, a TV that produced one Tony Soprano, who shows a lot of his affections through violence. A TV that produced one Omar Little, who robs people with a shotgun, but is following a strict moral code nevertheless. Why would GoT viewers see nothing but violence in SanSan scene, if it was done as in the books? Especially if they developed their relationship as skillfully as Martin did.

[Ser Pounce FTW]

'Why' always matters. The pure existence of a reason doesn't automatically justify anything, because the reason can be wrong, or insufficient, or whatever. And in the matters of violence, reasons should especially be analyzed harshly.

And what is the right reason for a violent act or attitude? So we can, you know, anazlyze it harshly.

[Cruella]

Seriously?

If a man acted towards me the way Sandor acted towards Sansa, I'd be convinced I am about to get raped. Luckily, he was snapped out of his violent impulses by sentimental song, but it could probably go either way, and what he's done - threatening a young girl with knife, making sexual overtures towards her, going to kiss her by force - is pretty unforgivable in my book.

But I guess this kind of behavior in your opinion could be justified?

[Miodrag]

@ miodrag

No, I do not only pick up violence from Sandor's side.

I pick up a twisted infatuation with the girl, I pick up Sandor's helplessness.

But what I most of all pick p that Sandor himself knows that his infatuation is the worst that can happen to Sansa even when he tries to help her. He is aware that he will inevitably be the one who "loves what he destroys and destroys the things he loves". This may he of sad romanticism in Sting's song "Moon Over Bourbon Street", but it is the direct way into domestic violence in RL. Sandor refrains from killing or raping Sansa because at least he finally is aware of the danger he presents to Sansa, contrary to those countless wife beating husbands. In the end I would want peace on the Quiet Isle for the interestingly twisted character Sandor but maybe there will be "the sacrifice" for him to come, sadly.

Have to say I understand Sandor completely differently. He is not the type who ends up beating his wife regularly. He has an extraordinary talent for violence, and yet, he uses that talent only when needed, e.g. when ordered, or when fighting for his life, or when he has to cross the river and he has no money. He talks roughly, but he rarely acts roughly, despite his enormous prowess for combat. He resembles none of the wife-beaters in real life I know of: they're always easy to inflict violence on weaker ones, while Sandor is never easy with that, and he always avoids inflicting violence on those who are weaker than he is. He's not a saint, far from it, but he does value other people and their needs. Just look at how he deals with Arya. Even she stops wishing for his death after a while. Will he end up with Sansa or not, only Martin knows. As I said, I'm not even sure their relationship is about 'being together' any more. But, there is a story and a history between them, which is best felt in the inn, at the end of ASOS, when he finds out Sansa did escape King's Landing after all - he is sad it wasn't he she escaped with, but he's glad she escaped after all. Whatever woman he ends up with, I can't picture him abusing her.

[Miodrag]

And what is the right reason for a violent act or attitude? So we can, you know, anazlyze it harshly.

Oh, you think there can be no right reason for violence? Like, no situation justifies violent action and/or attitude? I mean, your right to be as sensitive as you want, but I find that view of yours somewhat strange.

[PatrickStormborn]

Very interesting read, but I always enjoy your reviews and posts even when I don't completely agree with them. (ETA: I have to say, I hope you post more of these reviews. I'd love to read more of your thoughts on the way Catelyn was completely butchered by the show from the very first episode.)

@Newstar

As for Sansa being 'lousy TV', I have to strongly disagree with that as well. Theoretically, the recent history of TV dramas proved characters can be interesting and useful for narrative and dramatic purposes even if they aren't charismatic. Spouses and kids of protagonists are usually not charismatic, but if they're written and acted craftily, they can add so much to the story. Look, for example, at Skyler White, Walt's wife from "Breaking Bad" - she really isn't charismatic as a character, and she was always in the shadow of her husband, but she was interesting and she's precious for the story, and in the current season her character does pay off big time. Or look at Dr. Melfi, Tony's psychiatrist from "The Sopranos". She's totaly anti-charismatic, just like a psychiatrist is supposed to be, but she was never boring, and she was possibly the most revolutionary character in TV ever (I mean, a female psychiatrist who treats a mafia boss! only David Chase could come up with something like that) which practically enabled "The Sopranos" - I can imagine that show without Tony's kids, or without any of his associates, but I can't imagine "The Sopranos" without Melfi. To conclude, charismatic doesn't equal interesting. In fact, both Melfi and Skyler are infinitely more interesting and deep and rewarding and better TV than any number of 'charismatic' characters from some cliched shows like 'Lost' or 'Prison Break'.

Great point. I'd add Betty Draper to this list too (although I can only speak for the first three seasons of Mad Men - I'm still only halfway through season 4). She spends the first three seasons in the shadow of Don (but with her own independent narrative), suffering from quite severe depression and isolation. And yet she's one of the most interesting characters on TV, and her story is easily the highlight of the first three seasons (well, for me at least!).

I think the character of Betty can actually be compared quite easily to Sansa; both are traditionally feminine and internal characters, and both rely on some form of courtesy as a method of survival.

Of course, Sansa's survival was basically butchered in season 2. We still got Joffrey having her beaten at court, yes... But instead of a follow-up scene where we see her reaction and discussion with Tyrion, or a scene where she meets Dontos and begins plotting her escape (showing that she is fighting back against Joffrey), we get a scene where Joffrey abuses two sex-workers, meaning that the scene where Joffrey abuses Sansa becomes about Joffrey.

But, really, I just hate the argument that some things "won't work on TV". ASOIAF is not made for TV, and that's part of why it's so fantastic. D&D should be pushing the limitations of TV to fit ASOIAF, rather than weakening ASOIAF to comply with the limitations of TV. Dontos is a good example. Rather than starting Sansa's plotting with him in season 2, they're leaving it until season 4 so there is an immediate pay-off. On one hand I can understand this... But it just cheapens the story and shows that D&D aren't willing to take risks. Dontos is very important to Sansa's story, and not simply because he helps her escape. And honestly, I don't understand why any showrunners would ever get rid of a character like Dontos. He acted as an outlet for Sansa so that we could understand more about her character. But they did the same thing with Jon and Ghost by separating them in season 3, even though Ghost would have been a perfect outlet to express Jon's conflict of interests... I think they just don't understand a good opportunity when they see one - the House of the Undying is an even stronger example of this; it would have been the perfect time to show a few crucial flashbacks, but now it's too late.

ETA #2:

The problem is that there are probably about 30 major characters in play in GOT at any one time, and of those, there are about 12 "most important" characters. There are probably three "top" characters, just as in ASOIAF (being Jon, Dany and Tyrion), but Sansa is not one of them. Her love life is of necessity going to take a backseat, except where it serves the plot.

The main characters are Daenerys, Jon and Tyrion, but also Sansa, Arya and Bran (and obviously Ned in season 1 and Catelyn in seasons 1-3).

Other characters are obviously very important (the Lannister twins, Stannis and Melisandre, for example), but none are as important as the POV characters from AGoT.

[Miodrag]

But, really, I just hate the argument that some things "won't work on TV". ASOIAF is not made for TV, and that's part of why it's so fantastic. D&D should be pushing the limitations of TV to fit ASOIAF, rather than weakening ASOIAF to comply with the limitations of TV.

I can only salute you for this.

[Ser Pounce FTW]

Oh, you think there can be no right reason for violence? Like, no situation justifies violent action and/or attitude? I mean, your right to be as sensitive as you want, but I find that view of yours somewhat strange.

I have yet to find the right reason for a 40 year man to threaten a 14 year old girl with death, hold a knife to her throat, throw her on a bed and straddle her and make demands of her using violence a threat if she does not comply. I find it strange that you are ignoring this and find it being "sensitive."

[Woman of War]

Just like any other character Sandor is not simply dark, in his twisted pseudo morality he is a hugely interesting literary invention and I see no need to "blackwash" him.

But Sandor sees Sansa in exactly one role: the little bird that needs to be saved. What if she simply outgrows him, what respect would he have for a Sansa that does not need his eyeopeners anymore because she may have learned to open her eyes on her own? Romantics gone, he may easily want to fuck her bloody before he leaves her to the big wide world of independence.

Oh, you think there can be no right reason for violence? Like, no situation justifies violent action and/or attitude? I mean, your right to be as sensitive as you want, but I find that view of yours somewhat strange.

And what, exactly, justifies violent action and/or atiitude against a girl or a woman?

[brashcandy]

We have asked for this discussion to be conducted in a civil and productive manner. Using the term "shipper" is a direct attempt to invalidate an argument, and Miodrag has expressed his wish not to be labelled as such. Please stop with the name-calling nonsense and ad hominem attacks.

Also, why isn't the essay posted in this thread? Seems strange to post it in one place and then have this thread. :dunno:

The essay is a feature for the PTP, and this thread is for the comments. I don't understand the confusion.

Seriously?

If a man acted towards me the way Sandor acted towards Sansa, I'd be convinced I am about to get raped. Luckily, he was snapped out of his violent impulses by sentimental song, but it could probably go either way, and what he's done - threatening a young girl with knife, making sexual overtures towards her, going to kiss her by force - is pretty unforgivable in my book.

But I guess this kind of behavior in your opinion could be justified?

Where in the book does it say he was going to kiss her by force? He pulls Sansa toward him, and she thinks he's going to kiss her, but we have no independent evidence of that. Furthermore, the fact that he is upset when she closes her eyes directly suggests that even if he was going to kiss her, he's not interested in taking things by force or without consent. He later expresses grave regret that he did force her to sing.

[Miodrag]

Seriously?

If a man acted towards me the way Sandor acted towards Sansa, I'd be convinced I am about to get raped. Luckily, he was snapped out of his violent impulses by sentimental song, but it could probably go either way, and what he's done - threatening a young girl with knife, making sexual overtures towards her, going to kiss her by force - is pretty unforgivable in my book.

But I guess this kind of behavior in your opinion could be justified?

Well, let me tell you, a legion of women did fall for my charms not before I showed them who's the boss.

Kidding, of course, but I can't seriously answer the kind of post you provided. Do you really think I justify rape, or a threat of rape? Do you really think Martin advocates rape, or a threat of rape? I mean, it wouldn't be the first odd thing you accuse Martin of, since, as far as I can remember, on another thread you were the one calling nonsense and bullshit over the fact that Rickon was given a baby direwolf to play with. It seems you like taking Martin very literal. Your right, of course, and if you see nothing else than a rape attempt in SanSan scene at the end of ACOK, that's what you see. I, on the other hand, see a wounded person, a person who bleeds inside, who hurts because of how much and what exactly he feels for this girl who's not supposed to be connected to his universe in any way. Of course threatening a girl at knife-point is a wrong thing to do, but if you analyze ASOIAF in such a mathematical 2+2=4 way, than, honestly, I fail to see your reward in reading this saga. Martin filled his story with people doing inappropriate things, and sometimes they do those for the right reasons, and sometimes those actions even result in something good. His world is, I deeply believe, not to be taken at face value, nor to be analyzed mathematically. In some other circumstances, with some other person, Sandor's actions from this scene would be criminal indeed. But, he doesn't act like that under other circumstances, not with other persons. It doesn't automatically justifies his actions towards Sansa that night, and I don't think he feels any pride over his conduct that night, but she picked no trauma from that event, and no irreparable damage was done, and it has to count for something.

[Ser Pounce FTW]

Just like any other character Sandor is ot simply dark, in his twisted pseudo morality he is a hugely intersting literary invention and I see no need to "blackwash" him.

I suppose my posts do sound as if I am blackwashing him. I do recognize the good Sandor brings to Sansa while she was in King's Landing. He is her protector and the only one to talk to her truthfully and gives her good advice. I just refuse to ignore the other side and since the OP is down playing it, I'm focusing more on that. I also recognize the positive influence Sansa has on the Hound but she was never seen as a threat by him whereas there are many times when Sansa is terrified of Sandor. The fact that she always manages to calm him down says more about her power than his ability to control his temper and violent behavior.

ETA:

The essay is a feature for the PTP, and this thread is for the comments. I don't understand the confusion.

It is an unusual and impractical set up and the confusion is why there is no reason given for it to be posted here as well.