The Cat-Jon-Ned Debacle (long)

[Minsc]

This is honestly, why I have never understood Cat's protest of naming Jon the heir to Winterfell and KITN. At some point, Cat being the intelligent and politically savvy person that she is, should have understood that Jon was not a threat. Or, is it the culmination of 15 years of fear and anxiety that when the moment comes that she should embrace Jon as at least a strategic part of her "family" she simply can not let go of old prejudices?

Why would Jon be a good decision? Moreover, she more mentioned that she feared Jon's children competing with Robb's children as a bigger threat.

[Jory Cassel]

Why Theon doesn't have even an hint of a claim to Winterfell or the North? Moreover, it is obvious that Ned doesn't hold any emotional attachment to Theon that might damage his relationship with her children.

I did not really consider this to its full extent when making the comparison, my bad.

[butterbumps!]

This makes a lot of sense. I do wonder however, do you, or anyone for that matter, think that there may have come a time where Cat relaxed in regards to this aspect of the Jon situation?

I need to step away for a while, but wanted to give a brief answer in the meantime (anyone else is welcome to elaborate). The issue wrt Cat not wanting Jon named as Robb's heir wasn't about Jon himself; her concern is Jon's children, and whether they would attempt to usurp the claim of any sons Robb (or other siblings) may have. So she accepts the fact that Robb trusts Jon, but clarifies that her concern is about future heirs, whom Robb does not have the benefit of knowing the way he does Jon. So I'm not sure if this indicates that Cat's distrust grows across time. I'd rather thought the opposite actually-- she thinks of Jon while she prays in the sept after Renly, and reflects on the odd way men behave about their bastards, wondering about Jon's mother and generally, letting go of the negative feelings she's been keeping now that Ned's dead.

[The Wolves]

This makes a lot of sense. I do wonder however, do you, or anyone for that matter, think that there may have come a time where Cat relaxed in regards to this aspect of the Jon situation? His strong emotional bond with Robb and Arya, with definite potential for developing strong bonds with Sansa, Bran and Rickon, to me, makes it seem as though Cat should have or should have about to have been relaxing wrt this particular aspect of the situation. Yet her fear only seems to grow stronger (naming Jon the heir).

Essentially, it would continue to be troublesome if Jon only had a strong connection with Robb. Potentially, something irreconcilable occurs between the two and Jon seeks revenge by claiming his right to Winterfell. However, that he developed strong with relationships with his other half-siblings, Arya in particular,would make this less of a problem. By forming these relationships with his other siblings, even if a situation were to occur between him and Robb, he seems less likely to retaliate against Winterfell as a whole since he would have to destroy all of these relationships as opposed to only destroying the one with Robb.

This is honestly, why I have never understood Cat's protest of naming Jon the heir to Winterfell and KITN. At some point, Cat being the intelligent and politically savvy person that she is, should have understood that Jon was not a threat. Or, is it the culmination of 15 years of fear and anxiety that when the moment comes that she should embrace Jon as at least a strategic part of her "family" she simply can not let go of old prejudices?

Good question and I really can't answer it but I think that it was more than the possibility that Jon could upsurb Robb with Catelyn. I think she was dishonored with him bringing Jon to Winterfell and the fact she didn't know who his mother was.

I bet it was difficult for Catelyn to except Ned having a bastard cause he seemed so honorable and doesn't seem the type to have bastards. I bet 15yrs and 5 Kids later and she doesn't know the woman who Ned dishonored her with is another cause of resentment.

[David Selig]

I'll give you the Night's Watch oath, but at least Robb had attempted to take steps to rectify that. As for Jon's bastard status, there's that whole issue of, uh, Robb, you know, legitimizing him.

Legitimising doesn't make people suddenly forget that he was born a bastard. There is still a significant prejudice which remains and is a problem.

Ask the northern lords whom they'd prefer: A legitimized Jon, Ned's actual son with whom they have already had interactions and dealings and who shares their culture and religion, or some Vale cousin whom they've never met, and has probably never set foot in the North, much less Winterfell. If any of them picked the Vale cousin, I'd eat my shoe.

Ask the Riverlords who they would prefer - a Northern oathbreaking bastard whose existence and legitimisation is an insult to the Tullys or the Vale cousin?

Anyway, Harrion Karstark probably would've chosen the guy more remotely related to his father's killer. Lady Dustin too would pick someone else instead of Ned's son.

[James March x2]

The only thing he mentions is the fact that she told his siblings of his legal status and gave him to looks. I don't think it's fair to make vague speculations about additional abuses, as the stares alone easily explain Robb's reaction here.

Let me disagree with your line of thought.

Both Jon and Theon have had a difficult living inside the Stark family, that is clearly outlined by their twisted feelings, thoughts and behaviour later on.

Both have been nested into a family which was nearly ideal, the one every child would dream of, but at the same time have been excluded from it. There has always been a strong line dividing these two children from the rest of the family.

Theon Greyjoy came from an experience of a family which has been even harsher to him, except for his mother who we are told was full of love, therefore when he learned to appreciated Ned Stark he earned a good paternal figure he was unconsciously missing out the whole time. He has not been affected so much from Catenlyn since he had in his heart his true mother. He does respect so much Ned Stark that he forgets soon enough the rules of the Ironborn and believes that his natural father would have been proud of him just like Ned. That is what will trigger his insanity moment later on.

Jon Snow, on the contrary, has lived his whole life growing up without a maternal figure, a mother who would show him the love each and every child desires to get at least once.. Ned Stark did treat him well, but Ned Stark is a paternal figure, rigid and devoted to loyalty.. he can not substitute the role of a woman caring for her child. That is why Catelyn Tully love was so much needed for him to grow up like we would judge any child of the 21 century deserves.

I agree with those who claim that the way in which Catelyn behaves and the thoughts she does have in her PoV do suggest that her feelings in respect to the boy are much harsher and cold than she does let anybody see, and that it is for this reason she has always had so great difficulty into forcing herself to be a good mother to Jon. She simply couldn't, from the bottom of her heart give him what he felt for her own children.

I've been raised in a numerous family, and I can't help rather than believing that it is impossible that Catelyn has never been in direct contact with jon, has never been in position to punish him for child fights or mistakes he did or fantasies he had.. My mother certainly did not hate me like Catelyn did with Jon, yet I was for her the symbol of a trickery and - most importantly - a hateful male. No child grows fear in respect to a person if that person never raised his hand or voice on the child himself, and I know it perfectly well since my parents did use the force to me often. I can sympathize 100% with Jon situation and understand how difficult it has been for him. I'm really surprised that he didn't grow cold and empty and full of anger himself, for what he lived. He is so a kind guy that he found himself giving him all to the same principles his father believed where important, to gain at least his love.

I'm not here to blame Catelyn for the way in which she treated Jon, I confirm I believe she couldn't do any better and she really did her best to avoid letting the worse of her falling on the head of the child, yet I can't stay here and see a whitewashing that denies everything that was hinted so far just for the sake of forgiving her. Even good people do commit errors, people do not always behave for the best without being cruel, and no one is perfect.

/snip

Great post, my congratulations.. :bowdown:

[Le Dragone]

How is Jon more of a Stark than the Vale cousin Cat wanted to be named heir (who BTW would've surely adopted the Stark name if he had inherit the North)?

One of them is Ned Stark's son and Robb's brother and the other is not.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Legitimising doesn't make people suddenly forget that he was born a bastard. There is still a significant prejudice which remains.

I seem to remember a fairly sizable faction that wanted to legitimize Lord Hornwood's bastard and install him over Hornwood's trueborn Tallhart nephew. Between a legitimized bastard who's Ned's son and a Vale cousin who's a nobody, they're going to choose Jon. There's a reason Robb treats Catelyn's Vale pick as desperately grasping at straws, because that's what it is.

Ask the Riverlords who they would prefer - some Northern oathbreaking bastard whose existence is an insult to the Tully or the Vale cousin?

Robb's plan — granted he never got to implement it, but still, a plan — involved compensating the Watch for Jon's release so that he could leave the Wall honorably. And given that Robb was the Riverlands's sworn king, whatever he said, went. The riverlords witnessed his decision the same as the northern ones.

Anyway, Harrion Karstark probably would've chosen the guy more remotely related to his father's killer. Lady Dustin too would pick someone else instead of Ned's son.

Considering that we don't know squat about what Harrion Karstark is thinking or even what Lady Dustin's real motives are, I'd be cautious about using them to justify this position. But that's me.

But we do know to whom Alys Karstark ran and it sure as shit wasn't some nobody in the Vale.

[Minsc]

And given that Robb was the Riverlands's sworn king, whatever he said, went.

Isn't the same true for the Northerners if Robb decides on a Vale cousin.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Isn't the same true for the Northerners if Robb decides on a Vale cousin.

Sure. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't have a preference. And Robb didn't decide on a Vale cousin now did he.

[Le Dragone]

I see some people have turned the thread from a legitimate defense/analysis of Catelyn to the usual 'X can do no wrong' threads.

[The Wolves]

That is why Catelyn Tully love was so much needed for him to grow up like we would judge any child of the 21 century deserves.

I agree with your post but I don't think Jon needed Catelyn Tully's love at all. Catelyn even if she tried could never be Jon's mother, he actually didn't need any mother's love except his own mother. Jon turned out just fine with Ned's, his siblings, and uncles' love he needed no one to play "mommy" to him.

Sorry if I didn't explain good enough or not read your post right.

[David Selig]

I seem to remember a fairly sizable faction that wanted to legitimize Lord Hornwood's bastard and install him over Hornwood's trueborn Tallhart nephew.

What sizable faction? His foster father was the only one who pushed for this IIRC. Evidently Robb didn't agree since he never legitimized him.

Between a legitimized bastard who's Ned's son and a Vale cousin who's a nobody, they're going to choose Jon. There's a reason Robb treats Catelyn's Vale pick as desperately grasping at straws, because that's what it is.

Who are "they"?

I'd say the reason is that Robb didn't have a clue about politics and was making a decision based on emotions only. Almost all of his political decisions were disasters.

And given that Robb was the Riverlands's sworn king, whatever he said, went. The riverlords witnessed his decision the same as the northern ones.

Well, then Robb should've chosen the Vale cousin and not lose 100 men to the NW, right? If acceptance is a done deal once Robb says so...

But we do know to whom Alys Karstark ran and it sure as shit wasn't some nobody in the Vale.

Sure, because traveling 2000 miles or whatever the huge distance is to a guy she didn't know at all was a realistic option...

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

<snip>

This is getting off topic. I'll just say that your Jon hate is reaching ridiculous proportions.

Catelyn was grasping at straws tossing up the random Vale cousin, Robb saw that and he picked Jon, whom the northerners would by all basic common sense prefer to some cadet-branch offshoot they'd never met. It's not that complicated.

[Father of Hosts]

I need to step away for a while, but wanted to give a brief answer in the meantime (anyone else is welcome to elaborate). The issue wrt Cat not wanting Jon named as Robb's heir wasn't about Jon himself; her concern is Jon's children, and whether they would attempt to usurp the claim of any sons Robb (or other siblings) may have. So she accepts the fact that Robb trusts Jon, but clarifies that her concern is about future heirs, whom Robb does not have the benefit of knowing the way he does Jon. So I'm not sure if this indicates that Cat's distrust grows across time. I'd rather thought the opposite actually-- she thinks of Jon while she prays in the sept after Renly, and reflects on the odd way men behave about their bastards, wondering about Jon's mother and generally, letting go of the negative feelings she's been keeping now that Ned's dead.

Ahh ok, I see. It has been a while since I read those chapters, sorry if I made you repeat yourself.

Generally, my next line of thinking though, is Cat now projecting her years of fear over Jon to the next generation of Starks? She sees a potential problem to be sure. But it remains that it is just as likely to not be a problem. Just as Jon could have been a problem to her children and yet, he never was.There are so many aspects and problems that could or could not arise in this time and yet Cat is solely focused on the line of succession regarding Jon. It would seem to follow that the same problem could arise out of the Vale cousins, or anyone Robb named, though perhaps understandably, it seems less likely. My point being, she seems to have a natural aversion when Jon's name is raised. His name alone seems to bring a somewhat irrational response, where she sort of does some mental gymnastics to reason out her feelings on him not being named the heir.

I agree that she let got of the negative feelings towards Jon but to me it appeared she went from negative to neutral/negative combination. She lets go but she does seem to fall victim to her old feelings wrt the will. Almost as if after all these years, she is somewhat conditioned to go into defense mode when Jon is brought up.

Why would Jon be a good decision? Moreover, she more mentioned that she feared Jon's children competing with Robb's children as a bigger threat.

Apple Martini is answering that very well at the moment. Yep, I forgot that was the reasoning.

[grand old duke of stark]

Excellent analyses, especially the OP.

Ned might have been constrained by the details of whatever Lyanna made him promise. One thing that promise almost certainly did do was make him commit to keeping Jon safe and his origins obscured. Even subsidiary decisions Ned made like whether to foster him or take him along to KL might well have been predicated on whether someone might figure out Jon's identity.

Also, my graduate work was on the English middle ages. I think GRRM's depiction of Jon's upbringing as a bastard in a noble household is very accurate. The resentful wife (otherwise an excellent mother) seems typical. What is not typical is how much Jon was incorporated into the family otherwise. Generally, he was treated as one of the children and given an identical upbringing. Cat's outburst to Jon over Bran's bed is quite understandable considering her emotional despair.

[Le Dragone]

Catelyn was grasping at straws tossing up the random Vale cousin, Robb saw that and he picked Jon, whom the northerners would by all basic common sense prefer to some cadet-branch offshoot they'd never met. It's not that complicated.

Actually, it's quite obvious that the northerners would choose a nobody that no one has ever heard of and is not even from the north over Ned Stark's son who was going to be legitimized by Robb and named heir by the KitN.

[David Selig]

With Arya, Rickon and Bran presumed dead and Sansa disinherited, the Vale cousin is Robb's legal heir, with nothing major against him except that he wasn't raised in the North. But compared to Jon's issues, that's pretty minor. To think that Robb's bannermen would prefer a bastard oathbreaker (who, as far as they know, haven't distinguished himself in any way so far and they didn't really know) over him is illogical. Half of the realm's population and lords are Riverlanders for whom the heir being raised in the South would be advantage, not a flaw.

Also Robb was expected to have a child soon. If this had happened, the Vale cousin would've been even more clearly the better choice since Robb wouldn't have set a bad precedent for a king releasing his brother from the NW oath when convenient and wouldn't have insulted House Tully by legitimizing Jon unnecessarily.

But this is kind of tangential to the point of this thread, so I'll drop this discussion for nor.

[The Fallen]

` I just have a couple of observations.

One, I think that Jon represented, for Cat, the extra-marital affair. So even if Cat had softened a bit (once she had fully fallen in love with Ned) with regards to Jon, it would only take one weak moment to bring back all the hurt of the extra-marital affair. Especially since she attributes Ned's silence over who the mother is to his having loved the other woman (maybe more than Cat?). So maybe there were periods were Cat willed herself to look past what Jon represented only to be jolted right back to hating him by a moment of weakness or something like Jon besting Robb at something. There is no textual evidence for this, it's simply my view of how these situations can play out.

Secondly, it seems that if Ned hadn't been as steadfast as he was Cat would have had Jon banished elsewhere. I think Cat telling Jon that it should have been him shows us how she truly felt about him. Maybe Ned was the only thing keeping Cat from treating Jon worse?

I like Cat. I think that Ned didn't ask much of her with regards to Jon, so therefore Cat didn't give much.

[butterbumps!]

Jon Snow, on the contrary, has lived his whole life growing up without a maternal figure, a mother who would show him the love each and every child desires to get at least once.. Ned Stark did treat him well, but Ned Stark is a paternal figure, rigid and devoted to loyalty.. he can not substitute the role of a woman caring for her child. That is why Catelyn Tully love was so much needed for him to grow up like we would judge any child of the 21 century deserves.

I find this a bit tinged with expectations of gender roles and a bit too unfortunately close to the supposition that all women must be maternal to all children. It's unfair to suggest that a single parent fails at providing a rounded upbringing, or that a child is inherently lacking by not having two differently gendered parents.

I agree with those who claim that the way in which Catelyn behaves and the thoughts she does have in her PoV do suggest that her feelings in respect to the boy are much harsher and cold than she does let anybody see, and that it is for this reason she has always had so great difficulty into forcing herself to be a good mother to Jon. She simply couldn't, from the bottom of her heart give him what he felt for her own children.

Well, this is quite the fallacy then. How can you posit that Cat lies to herself in her own unbidden train of thought about harboring extra hate for Jon? We get a pretty clear picture of exactly how she views Jon, and from Jon, we get a clear view of how she treated him, and the effects it had on him. Why are you choosing to ignore this and supplant this with speculation that there is further malfeasance here?

I've been raised in a numerous family, and I can't help rather than believing that it is impossible that Catelyn has never been in direct contact with jon, has never been in position to punish him for child fights or mistakes he did or fantasies he had..

I never said that they weren't around each other-- they were, not least of which was shared mealtimes. I said that it seems likely they did not interact. And this makes sense given the way the household is structured. Their mealtimes and "family activities" weren't just the 8 of them at a kitchen table. Amongst 20-30 subjects and kids, the attentions are diffused, and I think it's quite likely there was no need for direct contact.

We also know that Ned took full responsibility for raising Jon; there's no reason to believe that Cat punished Jon rather than one of the people who were actually charged with discipline. Cat isn't his stepmother or authority figure to Jon; there's no reason to assume that she punished him when there's no evidence in the books suggesting this. As I said, Jon never mentions anything further than icy stares when he reflects on Cat's treatment. These stares were abusive and did have an effect on Jon. Yet, the absence of further abusive behavior in Jon's recollection makes it highly unlikely that further abusive occurred.

he way in which she treated Jon, I confirm I believe she couldn't do any better and she really did her best to avoid letting the worse of her falling on the head of the child, yet I can't stay here and see a whitewashing that denies everything that was hinted so far just for the sake of forgiving her. Even good people do commit errors, people do not always behave for the best without being cruel, and no one is perfect.

This is how I feel. Transferring anger from Ned to Jon and giving Jon icy stares are where I believe the problem lies.