Sansa Stark

[Alayne's Shadow.]

I think Asha, Arya, and Brienne get lumped together when they should not be. They aren't the same.

On the subject of aspirations I would say it's Arianne and Asha who aim the highest. They both want to rule in their own right. Sansa want to be a queen consort. A queen consort is subject to her king.

Brienne was fine with ruling. Politics and warrior aren't mutually exclusive for men so it doesn't have to be for women.

It makes less sense for Aray to be interested in politics than Sansa. She was the last in line to inherit. Sansa makes more sense to want to marry a king since she is the first daughter. Arya at best would just marry some lord.

I almost agree with you, however, we do have to keep in mind that both Asha and Arianne are very special cases in Westeros. Asha's the only living heir of Balon Geryjoy, and in some way, that gave her a strong claim, and that's why she tries to claim the Seastone chair. Arianne is in every way the ruler of Dorne, but she seems willing to be Aegon's consort.. The whole 'rule by right' in Westeros is a very sketchy deal for women. They both have more reason for their direct claims.

Sansa was fourth in line to claim Winterfell and the North. She could hardly except to rule in her own right, unless something tragic happened in her family (Which It did). After that, she does wonder about her role as the heiress of Robb. So, for a woman in her position as to say, ambitioning to be Queen was the best option, because It was the Highest Honor she could ever hope to achieve. It'a not like she expected tragedy to occur in the Stark Family. Arya even more, since she's fifth in line.

[DormeDwayne]

I almost agree with you, however, we do have to keep in mind that both Asha and Arianne are very special cases in Westeros. Asha's the only living heir of Balon Geryjoy, and in some way, that gave her a strong claim, and that's why she tries to claim the Seastone chair. Arianne is in every way the ruler of Dorne, but she seems willing to be Aegon's consort.. The whole 'rule by right' in Westeros is a very sketchy deal for women. They both have more reason for their direct claims.

Sansa was fourth in line to claim Winterfell and the North. She could hardly except to rule in her own right, unless something tragic happened in her family (Which It did). After that, she does wonder about her role as the heiress of Robb. So, for a woman in her position as to say, ambitioning to be Queen was the best option, because It was the Highest Honor she could ever hope to achieve. It'a not like she expected tragedy to occur in the Stark Family. Arya even more, since she's fifth in line.

:agree: Exactly. She was as ambitious as it's sensible to be in Westeros, IMO. The queen consort is a very high position; Sansa has no way of becoming queen regnant, but as queen consort she can influence politics considerably. And if the king happens to die she becomes even more influential, she might even become regent. Even if he doesn't die, however, she influences the politics of her eldest son who becomes king afterwards. I don't see how being queen consort is unambitious. It's much more ambitious than becoming a knight, even a knight of the Kingsuard, even though for a girl it's much more conventional.

That's why I can't agree Sansa lacks drive or ambition. I don't see how playing with the cards you've been dealt is unambitious, wheres throwing a tantrum until you're dealt a different set of card is ambitious and shows spirit. To me, Sansa's desire to become queen consort instead of the High Septon, Lord Commander of the Night's Watch, a warrior queen, a knight or a maester only shows she's sensible and well-aware of her strengths and weaknesses. Why would that be inferior to becoming something unconventional you're ill-equipped to be? IMO it's superior.

[aceluby]

:agree: Exactly. She was as ambitious as it's sensible to be in Westeros, IMO. The queen consort is a very high position; Sansa has no way of becoming queen regnant, but as queen consort she can influence politics considerably. And if the king happens to die she becomes even more influential, she might even become regent. Even if he doesn't die, however, she influences the politics of her eldest son who becomes king afterwards. I don't see how being queen consort is unambitious. It's much more ambitious than becoming a knight, even a knight of the Kingsuard, even though for a girl it's much more conventional.

That's why I can't agree Sansa lacks drive or ambition. I don't see how playing with the cards you've been dealt is unambitious, wheres throwing a tantrum until you're dealt a different set of card is ambitious and shows spirit. To me, Sansa's desire to become queen consort instead of the High Septon, Lord Commander of the Night's Watch, a warrior queen, a knight or a maester only shows she's sensible and well-aware of her strengths and weaknesses. Why would that be inferior to becoming something unconventional you're ill-equipped to be? IMO it's superior.

Either that or she's just a highborn girl and wants her life to end up like the songs she's heard her entire life... After Ned dies the prospect of being queen sickens her and she's happy to give that up to Marg. I'd even go so far as to say she has no idea what her strengths and weaknesses even are, much less how to use them to get what she wants, which BTW, is to go home to WF and has been since AGOT.

[juanml82]

Sansa, by the start of AGOT, knows she'll have to marry some lord for political gain and be his trophy wife. There is the slight chance she ends up ruling in his place, but she doesn't seem to consider that a possibility and wasn't educated for that.

Marrying a gorgeous Crown Prince who is about her age is her absolutely best prospect, and she is right in desiring to become the queen. Where she is wrong, and it's actually Ned and Cat's fault, is that she is completely delusional about how the world works and how to judge people.

[ARYa_Nym]

I almost agree with you, however, we do have to keep in mind that both Asha and Arianne are very special cases in Westeros. Asha's the only living heir of Balon Geryjoy, and in some way, that gave her a strong claim, and that's why she tries to claim the Seastone chair. Arianne is in every way the ruler of Dorne, but she seems willing to be Aegon's consort.. The whole 'rule by right' in Westeros is a very sketchy deal for women. They both have more reason for their direct claims.

Sansa was fourth in line to claim Winterfell and the North. She could hardly except to rule in her own right, unless something tragic happened in her family (Which It did). After that, she does wonder about her role as the heiress of Robb. So, for a woman in her position as to say, ambitioning to be Queen was the best option, because It was the Highest Honor she could ever hope to achieve. It'a not like she expected tragedy to occur in the Stark Family. Arya even more, since she's fifth in line.

Well it was mentioned more than once that Sansa aspires for a high position whereas Brienne and Asha do not. Asha wants to rule and comparatively she could actually have more power in her position had her uncles not ruined her chances. GRRM did make a comparison to Empress Maud in an interview once that sounded a lot like Asha's situation.

Arianne is speculation. While I do think Arianne and Aegon is likely it's not clear how that will go down. It could be because she thinks Quentyn/Dany will have Dorne so the logical step is to marry Aegon.

The amount of power a queen consort has depends on how much her king allows her. Most of the queens did not have a huge amount of influence. Visenya/Rhaenys/Alysanne/Myriah all had that much power because of those particular kings. Naerys on the other hand had very little because of the king she had. Rhaella is even worse.

Arianne would have more power ruling Dorne. Aegon for example seems like he wants to be in control. She would have to defer to him whereas if she ruled Dorne she wouldn't have to do that.

Asha wanted to be in a similar position so she is actually the one who aimed the highest.

[DormeDwayne]

Either that or she's just a highborn girl and wants her life to end up like the songs she's heard her entire life... After Ned dies the prospect of being queen sickens her and she's happy to give that up to Marg. I'd even go so far as to say she has no idea what her strengths and weaknesses even are, much less how to use them to get what she wants, which BTW, is to go home to WF and has been since AGOT.

Agreed. Which is hardly surprising given her age and sheltered upbringing. All I meant to say is that her desire to be queen, rather than the High Septon does not automatically mean she's unambitious; to the contrary, it might be the sign of great ambitiousness. Whether it is with Sansa, I'm not really sure. I'm inclined to think that it was (until she drops it, as you mention), but I'm not nearly sure enough to argue about it with anyone. I was just pointing out it's strange to say she is unambitious because she only wanted to be queen consort and bear lots of princes.

As for her strengths and weaknesses, I think she is well aware of how well she does in the womanly arts, since everybody is always telling her that *and* she had Arya to compare to. She keeps repeating how "courtesy is a lady's armour," which means she is well aware her courtesy is a strength even the Hound and Tyrion admit serves her well. She knows or is learning she is pretty and men want to believe her, which betrays great self-awareness for a 13 year old girl. She's aware her claim to Winterfell is precious when she admits to herself nobody will ever marry her for love. She knows (now) that nearly everyone is a better politician than her. And so on, and so forth. I'd say that's quite an impressive list for a girl of 13. Do you remember yourself at 13? :)

And if we consider her aspirations - to return home, be safe, be a child again... I can't see them as failures. I actually see them as evidence she has matured and become wiser. I understand, however, that this is a highly subjective matter that depends on your value system, so I don't expect many people to agree with me on this front; my views are quite unorthodox when it comes to this.

[Silverin]

About the various female roles, I just found a gem on tumblr:

Xena

I cannot understand however people who seem to totally miss the Sansa chapter, that was compeletly centered around her building WF from snow, and pretend like it never happened because they want to see her as a willles brainless "antiStark" puppet.

That chapter clearly shows just how much she is longing to be back.

And I am sure she will have roles to play, not just as a bystander. Not saying she will be political mastermind. No, even I don't think so. But a character doesn't have to be genius to contribute to the story, and affect the surrondings.

[ugashep]

Wow, this thread has really grown since I last looked at it. I have to agree with Newstar in that it does seem that a lot of people project their hopes for Sansa rather than honestly taking a look at what is likely based on her past behavior. I don't hate Sansa or anything, she is a young girl who had a very romanticized view of life and lived a sheltered existence for many years only to be slapped in the face with cold hard reality of the most unpleasant sort. It is a credit to her that she is still alive considering what she has been through but I don't see any evidence that she is going to become some great player in the continent's political scene, based on what we know about Sansa from her POV's she just does not have the aptitude for it, maybe Rickon does and will warg into her and make her a player but I think that's as likely as her doing anything on her on. The Gods made Sansa a pawn and she'll probably die a pawn, as for the "controversy" my money is on her sleeping with LF, him calling her Cat during sex and her rationalizing being okay with that. Maybe I'm wrong, I'd be glad to see her avenge the Starks and become a player but it will come out of nowhere if that happens.

[E-Ro]

Wow, this thread has really grown since I last looked at it. I have to agree with Newstar in that it does seem that a lot of people project their hopes for Sansa rather than honestly taking a look at what is likely based on her past behavior. I don't hate Sansa or anything, she is a young girl who had a very romanticized view of life and lived a sheltered existence for many years only to be slapped in the face with cold hard reality of the most unpleasant sort. It is a credit to her that she is still alive considering what she has been through but I don't see any evidence that she is going to become some great player in the continent's political scene, based on what we know about Sansa from her POV's she just does not have the aptitude for it, maybe Rickon does and will warg into her and make her a player but I think that's as likely as her doing anything on her on. The Gods made Sansa a pawn and she'll probably die a pawn, as for the "controversy" my money is on her sleeping with LF, him calling her Cat during sex and her rationalizing being okay with that. Maybe I'm wrong, I'd be glad to see her avenge the Starks and become a player but it will come out of nowhere if that happens.

perhaps you didn't realize this, but newstar, with whom you say you agree, hasn't actually presented one single, solitary argument in support of the idea that Sansa is useless. She has strawmanned the opposing view into ridiculous positions, and has been railing against these arguments no one is making by using personal experience, sexist typifications, and insulting the opposition.

[Dr. Pepper]

Wow, this thread has really grown since I last looked at it. I have to agree with Newstar in that it does seem that a lot of people project their hopes for Sansa rather than honestly taking a look at what is likely based on her past behavior. I don't hate Sansa or anything, she is a young girl who had a very romanticized view of life and lived a sheltered existence for many years only to be slapped in the face with cold hard reality of the most unpleasant sort. It is a credit to her that she is still alive considering what she has been through but I don't see any evidence that she is going to become some great player in the continent's political scene, based on what we know about Sansa from her POV's she just does not have the aptitude for it, maybe Rickon does and will warg into her and make her a player but I think that's as likely as her doing anything on her on. The Gods made Sansa a pawn and she'll probably die a pawn, as for the "controversy" my money is on her sleeping with LF, him calling her Cat during sex and her rationalizing being okay with that. Maybe I'm wrong, I'd be glad to see her avenge the Starks and become a player but it will come out of nowhere if that happens.

So basically, what you are saying is that you were unable to discover evidence wrt Sansa's aptitude so you decided to read the evidence presented in this and other threads with both eyes shut while mumbling to yourself "i can't see it so it's not true" over and over, only stopping to glance at Newstar's posts where she was pretty much the only one to talk about 'master player'? Then you decided that this means that Rickon will possess the aptitude to do what Sansa cannot despite no proof one way or another because, you know, last time we saw him he was a toddler and he's been offscreen since? I mean, I can see how you came to that conclusion by only reading the posts written by a the misogynist who has an illogical and limited view of the series and the world and who strawman's arguments, takes everything out of context, makes shit up, and uses bad faith tactics. Makes complete sense.

[ugashep]

perhaps you didn't realize this, but newstar, with whom you say you agree, hasn't actually presented one single, solitary argument in support of the idea that Sansa is useless. She has strawmanned the opposing view into ridiculous positions, and has been railing against these arguments no one is making by using personal experience, sexist typifications, and insulting the opposition.

I haven't read every word of every post, last time I looked at this thread it had like 2 pages, the flavor I get from what I have read though is that people are debating whether or not Sansa will move from pawn to player for the umpteenth time. I tend to side with those who think she will remain a pawn but that's just my opinion, you are entitled to yours. Sorry if my opinion conflicts with your hopes and dreams for her.

[ugashep]

So basically, what you are saying is that you were unable to discover evidence wrt Sansa's aptitude so you decided to read the evidence presented in this and other threads with both eyes shut while mumbling to yourself "i can't see it so it's not true" over and over, only stopping to glance at Newstar's posts where she was pretty much the only one to talk about 'master player'? Then you decided that this means that Rickon will possess the aptitude to do what Sansa cannot despite no proof one way or another because, you know, last time we saw him he was a toddler and he's been offscreen since? I mean, I can see how you came to that conclusion by only reading the posts written by a the misogynist who has an illogical and limited view of the series and the world and who strawman's arguments, takes everything out of context, makes shit up, and uses bad faith tactics. Makes complete sense.

The Rickon thing was a JOKE, we have no idea what goes on in his head, so we have no idea if he has any political aptitude, there is no evidence of it, and I don't really see any evidence Sansa has any either, that's what I'm saying.

[juanml82]

Wow, this thread has really grown since I last looked at it. I have to agree with Newstar in that it does seem that a lot of people project their hopes for Sansa rather than honestly taking a look at what is likely based on her past behavior. I don't hate Sansa or anything, she is a young girl who had a very romanticized view of life and lived a sheltered existence for many years only to be slapped in the face with cold hard reality of the most unpleasant sort. It is a credit to her that she is still alive considering what she has been through but I don't see any evidence that she is going to become some great player in the continent's political scene, based on what we know about Sansa from her POV's she just does not have the aptitude for it, maybe Rickon does and will warg into her and make her a player but I think that's as likely as her doing anything on her on. The Gods made Sansa a pawn and she'll probably die a pawn, as for the "controversy" my money is on her sleeping with LF, him calling her Cat during sex and her rationalizing being okay with that. Maybe I'm wrong, I'd be glad to see her avenge the Starks and become a player but it will come out of nowhere if that happens.

The issue is, she's not a real person. She's a character in a story and, even more, she is one of the main characters of said story. So it's not about "what's likely based on her past behavior". It's about "what's likely based on her arc". The Gods didn't make her a pawn, GRRM wrote her as a pawn to begin with - the question is whether he intends her story to be about a character with diminishing agency as the story develops to the point the character never raises in the world, never resolves a conflict and remains a bystander for the entire story. And that doesn't sound like an attractive literary arc.

So it's very likely that the author is up to something with this particular character and, even superficially, we can note these points about her and her arc:

• She is the trope of the maiden in distress, hoping for a True Knight to save her

GRRM loves to mess with tropes and stereotypes, and he's likely messing with the above trope.

As the other surviving Stark children and Danny, she is in an apprenticeship of sorts. LF has been teaching her since he explained her why he had Dontos killed. Ned and her are the only Starks to actually understand what the phrase "Game of Thrones" mean.

The apprenticeship is about political intrigue

The character is advancing in her quest to grow a brain, but still has a long way to go. Her personal growth in undeniable

She was given a Chekov hairnet

She's the subject of a prophecy which might have not been fulfilled yet

She's in the middle of a tricky political situation which might unleash the armies of the Vale

It doesn't point as her character remaining a bystander who does nothing in the next two books.

[E-Ro]

I haven't read every word of every post, last time I looked at this thread it had like 2 pages, the flavor I get from what I have read though is that people are debating whether or not Sansa will move from pawn to player for the umpteenth time. I tend to side with those who think she will remain a pawn but that's just my opinion, you are entitled to yours. Sorry if my opinion conflicts with your hopes and dreams for her.

Do you understand what being a pawn or player means? "Player" simply means one able to influence events to some end, those other than newstar explained, she's already evinced that she can influence events to some desired end, and that unless you believe she's either going to be rescued entirely at the behest of someone else or will remain LF's loyal plaything, then you, by definition, would agree with the idea that she'd be a player.

[ugashep]

...It doesn't point as her character remaining a bystander who does nothing in the next two books.

I am not convinced that GRRM's story will ultimately follow a classic literary story arc. I am not an English major, but GRRM's story to me speaks to me about a lot of things that are true in life, i.e. the good guys don't always win, those who are often perceived to be heroes are actually villains and vice versa. Sadly many people do go through life, get socked in the mouth by an unfortunate set of circumstances and never really recover totally, I see that happening with Sansa, and I don't think GRRM would be afraid to show that aspect of reality through her character. Again, I don't hate Sansa at all, I see her as a tragic figure, but in the World of Ice and Fire I don't get the sense that everyone who falls must be redeemed.

[Facebookless Man]

Do you understand what being a pawn or player means? "Player" simply means one able to influence events to some end

Sorry but that's just bullshit.

By that token, everyone in the books except Sansa is "playing the game of thrones".

[James Arryn]

Do you understand what being a pawn or player means? "Player" simply means one able to influence events to some end, those other than newstar explained, she's already evinced that she can influence events to some desired end, and that unless you believe she's either going to be rescued entirely at the behest of someone else or will remain LF's loyal plaything, then you, by definition, would agree with the idea that she'd be a player.

That's not what a player is.

A player doesn't just influence events for some end. Even pawns do that. Pawns can take out other pieces.

A player is someone who demonstrates a consistent pattern of manipulating other pieces...ie, people...to achieve his or her own ends, generally as part of a larger scale design.

And then there's the whole issue of scale. Sansa's not even really at the table yet.

Do you remember Chett?

Was he player? Of any note?

[jarl the climber]

I almost agree with you, however, we do have to keep in mind that both Asha and Arianne are very special cases in Westeros. Asha's the only living heir of Balon Geryjoy, and in some way, that gave her a strong claim, and that's why she tries to claim the Seastone chair. Arianne is in every way the ruler of Dorne, but she seems willing to be Aegon's consort.. The whole 'rule by right' in Westeros is a very sketchy deal for women. They both have more reason for their direct claims.

Sansa was fourth in line to claim Winterfell and the North. She could hardly except to rule in her own right, unless something tragic happened in her family (Which It did). After that, she does wonder about her role as the heiress of Robb. So, for a woman in her position as to say, ambitioning to be Queen was the best option, because It was the Highest Honor she could ever hope to achieve. It'a not like she expected tragedy to occur in the Stark Family. Arya even more, since she's fifth in line.

When did Theon die?

[E-Ro]

Sorry but that's just bullshit.

By that token, everyone in the books except Sansa is "playing the game of thrones".

No, it isn't bullshit. In fact, if you really wanna see some bullshit, just go back and read your last post in this thread. "Playing" is about influencing people and events to an end you desire. For example, Sansa calming Joff before the riot, sensing the danger and trying to defuse it. Sansa coming up with a lie to save Dontos life is another example. Sansa warning Marg not to marry Joff because Sansa realizes that with Loras around and Joff's abusiveness that Loras will end up killing Joff and starting a Tyrell-Lannister war is another. Sansa lying to LF about how much she is buying his ploy is yet another example. people sometimes influence events unintentionally, but that does not make them a player. when you influence things to specific ends, then this is where playing comes in

[ugashep]

Do you understand what being a pawn or player means? "Player" simply means one able to influence events to some end, those other than newstar explained, she's already evinced that she can influence events to some desired end, and that unless you believe she's either going to be rescued entirely at the behest of someone else or will remain LF's loyal plaything, then you, by definition, would agree with the idea that she'd be a player.

I think "can influence events to some end" is a poor definition of a player. The Mountain certainly influenced events, as has Cersei, and even Ser Dontos but I wouldn't call any of them players.