Also, is it just me or was there a twinge of regret in Theon?
I think Theon kinda knows he's completely lost but is still in denial..he really is such an utterly utterly tragic figure yet it is almost impossible to feel any sympathy for him
True enough, with the proviso that the Stark children were never meant to be playing "the Game"
Are you saying Robb was never meant to follow his father and be Lord Of Winterfell? Otherwise his parents' disdain for politics has left him woefully unprepared. He really is a puppy. He is every bit as pitiful as his father and will rightly suffer similarly for it.
I think she will let him free. I said the other week on here how the Starks would somehow let Jamie Lannister go. They aren't ruthless enough, and no doubt, Jamie Lannister knows this.
Felt sorry for Sansa and good to see which side Shae seems to be on. Strange reaction from the hound, was he being nice to Sansa or not?
Very strange. He saves her life last week, without orders from the King (but an unaddressed suggestion from Tyrion) and this week he says he can save her in the future from Joffrey?!? Huh? Who does he take orders from? And how can anyone stop Joffrey from doing just whatever he chooses to whomever he chooses?
.....Also, is it just me or was there a twinge of regret in Theon?
I think it was uncertainty, which has been at the core of his nature since episode 1. He has no identity. He was never a Stark, nor does he yet believe he is a Greyjoy. He thinks he must do what he's doing (the brutality) to gain the respect of his family and his men.
Have to say I think Jamie's fantastic. I like his warped sense of honour, his self-awareness, his humour... I think he's made for this Westeros world. Was very concerned Cat was going to kill him at the end; I enjoyed him calling her out on her harsh treatment of Jon Snow, which initially turned me off her character back in season one. I'm worried at how much I like the Lannisters, really. If they do away with Joffrey, which Tyrion seemed to be hinting at this episode, I wouldn't mind them "winning" at all. I could watch Jamie, Tyrion, Cersei and Tywin all day and not get bored. Much more charismatic than the Starks/Jon Snow.
My exception to that lack of charisma would be Arya, where Maisie Williams is still holding her own with Charles Dance brilliantly for such a young actress. These are the best scenes on the show.
Also if the Starks end up freeing Jamie Lannister it will be a huge mistake, imo. He is the type of character who will want revenge for being tied up to a post, kicked around and spat upon. The expression "It'll come back to bite them on their ass" springs to mind.
Also if the Starks end up freeing Jamie Lannister it will be a huge mistake, imo. He is the type of character who will want revenge for being tied up to a post, kicked around and spat upon. The expression "It'll come back to bite them on their ass" springs to mind.
It would be a catastrophic mistake to release Jaime. He should have been executed already. In this episode we saw Robb's army were very nearly mutinous in their wish to kill him. If Catelyn is stupid enough to put her own needs (her children) before Robb's military interests then I think Robb's own army will act against the incompetent Starks long before Jaime ever could.
It would be a catastrophic mistake to release Jaime. He should have been executed already. In this episode we saw Robb's army were very nearly mutinous in their wish to kill him. If Catelyn is stupid enough to put her own needs (her children) before Robb's military interests then I think Robb's own army will act against the incompetent Starks long before Jaime ever could.
I'm surprised the Starks didn't kill him straight away and then gave the impression he was still alive. Risky move, yes, but getting rid of such an important cog in the Lannister machinery trumps other options.
I'm surprised the Starks didn't kill him straight away and then gave the impression he was still alive. Risky move, yes, but getting rid of such an important cog in the Lannister machinery trumps other options.
I wouldn't have bothered with subterfuge. I would have sent Jaime's head to Tywin pronto. His death would be very fair exchange for those of Ned, Sansa and (as far as the Starks know) Arya.
Are you saying Robb was never meant to follow his father and be Lord Of Winterfell?
No, he was destined to be Lord of Winterfell but there would have been no "Game". The "Game of Thrones" only exists because of the death of Robert Baratheon.
Robb would have followed his father as Lord of Winterfell and carried on ruling in the North and would have had little or no involvement in the politics of the land because the Starks weren't players of the "Game".
They held the North against the Wildlings for the Crown (Mad King Aerys) and weren't concerned with the politiking which went on around the crown.
Lord Rickard Stark (Ned's father) sent his son off to be fostered with Jon Arryn (the Hand of the King whose murder started off series one) and that's when he became best friends with Robert Baratheon. Ned's elder brother Brandon would have taken over as Lord of Winterfell and Robert was betrothed to Lyanna Stark.
There's a vast swathe of back story which isn't included in the TV show which explains why the Starks weren't prepared or ever expected to participate in the "Game of Thrones".
The game always exists cadiva, the game put Robert on the throne in the first place and even if he hadn't died then Dany would still be planning to take Westeros and the walkers would still be coming for the wall.
Winter is coming and Robb never had a chance of a nice quiet rule.
The game always exists cadiva, the game put Robert on the throne in the first place and even if he hadn't died then Dany would still be planning to take Westeros and the walkers would still be coming for the wall.
Winter is coming and Robb never had a chance of a nice quiet rule.
Yes, the Game exists, but the Starks were never players (as I've edited my previous post to elaborate on) and the "Game of Thrones" is an entirely different thing to the Game of Politics itself, which is clearly distinguished in the books imho.
Plus, as GM hasn't finished the books, there's so much missing atm from what happened to lead up to the Rebellion so I think it's a bit too simple to say that's why Robert ended up with the throne. It wasn't politics which put him there
but what happened with Lyanna Stark, the Tower of Joy, Rhaegar and all the rest
which GM still hasn't revealed.
I would agree Winter is coming and Robb would never have had a quiet life, but fighting the Wildlings beyond the Wall is something the Starks were trained for, not for the politics of King's Landing or for fighting war against the other Houses. That's the difference imho and it's a difference the books make quite plain.
No, he was destined to be Lord of Winterfell but there would have been no "Game". The "Game" only exists because of the death of Robert Baratheon.
Robb would have followed his father as Lord of Winterfell and carried on ruling in the North and would have had little or no involvement in the politics of the land because the Starks weren't players of the "Game".
Sorry, but this is mistaken. The Game began in earnest for all the Starks, when a very much alive King Robert made Ned the Hand of the King. But the Game always did exist, however much the Starks foolishly chose to ignore it.
A wiser Lord than Ned would have prepared all his children for all political eventualities, however much they resented the necessity.
It's all much of a muchness with the Starks all round inadequacy and incompetence (other than in the tactical military field)
Oh cadiva I don't want to get into it, the books I mean but anyone could have ended up king when Aerys was killed, Jamie could have taken it and a lot of people wanted Ned, Ned chose to support Robert, gameplayer + 1.
The whole north hangs on the Starks, don't tell me that they are not gameplayers, they may not want to be but they have never had a choice.
OT I was reading another blog about the episode and someone said that they had no interest in the romance between Robb and Dr Quinn Medicine Woman.
Sorry, but this is mistaken. The Game began in earnest for all the Starks, when a very much alive King Robert made Ned the Hand of the King. But the Game always did exist, however much the Starks foolishly chose to ignore it.
A wiser Lord than Ned would have prepared all his children for all political eventualities, however much they resented the necessity.
It's all much of a muchness with the Starks all round inadequacy and incompetence (other than in the tactical military field)
I'm not mistaken but I'm not getting into an argument about it with you as it's futile as I have no desire or intention to make you change your mind, you are entitled to think what you like about the Starks with regards to the information presented you by the TV series.
Oh cadiva I don't want to get into it, the books I mean but anyone could have ended up king when Aerys was killed, Jamie could have taken it and a lot of people wanted Ned, Ned chose to support Robert, gameplayer + 1.
The whole north hangs on the Starks, don't tell me that they are not gameplayers, they may not want to be but they have never had a choice.
We shall have to agree to disagree then on our book interpretation given the reasons I put before, that George RR Martin hasn't actually revealed all of what occurred at that time to make any sort of statement about who could or couldn't have taken the throne or the reasons behind why Robert did end up with it
As for the second part, yes I've agreed with you regarding the North, but that is very different to the Game of Thrones, which is the point I was making and which I think GRRM makes in the books also.
Well I think the support of the North has always been the making or breaking of king Cadiva.
Just because people make decisions wearing fur and drinking elk blood rather than wearing silk and sipping wine doesn't make them any less politicians.
But as you say lets agree to disagree, I like your posts too much to fall out with you.
Comments
I think Theon kinda knows he's completely lost but is still in denial..he really is such an utterly utterly tragic figure yet it is almost impossible to feel any sympathy for him
ooh arr by jingo..what happens there from here should be rather interesting...............................
Are you saying Robb was never meant to follow his father and be Lord Of Winterfell? Otherwise his parents' disdain for politics has left him woefully unprepared. He really is a puppy. He is every bit as pitiful as his father and will rightly suffer similarly for it.
Yes, I agree.
Very strange. He saves her life last week, without orders from the King (but an unaddressed suggestion from Tyrion) and this week he says he can save her in the future from Joffrey?!? Huh? Who does he take orders from? And how can anyone stop Joffrey from doing just whatever he chooses to whomever he chooses?
I think it was uncertainty, which has been at the core of his nature since episode 1. He has no identity. He was never a Stark, nor does he yet believe he is a Greyjoy. He thinks he must do what he's doing (the brutality) to gain the respect of his family and his men.
Completely agree
I don't think he would come back at them though, I think he would probably have too much else to do.
*dreams of Jamie kicking Joffrey to death*
It would be a catastrophic mistake to release Jaime. He should have been executed already. In this episode we saw Robb's army were very nearly mutinous in their wish to kill him. If Catelyn is stupid enough to put her own needs (her children) before Robb's military interests then I think Robb's own army will act against the incompetent Starks long before Jaime ever could.
I'm surprised the Starks didn't kill him straight away and then gave the impression he was still alive. Risky move, yes, but getting rid of such an important cog in the Lannister machinery trumps other options.
I feel better about him being killed now.
I wouldn't have bothered with subterfuge. I would have sent Jaime's head to Tywin pronto. His death would be very fair exchange for those of Ned, Sansa and (as far as the Starks know) Arya.
No, he was destined to be Lord of Winterfell but there would have been no "Game". The "Game of Thrones" only exists because of the death of Robert Baratheon.
Robb would have followed his father as Lord of Winterfell and carried on ruling in the North and would have had little or no involvement in the politics of the land because the Starks weren't players of the "Game".
They held the North against the Wildlings for the Crown (Mad King Aerys) and weren't concerned with the politiking which went on around the crown.
Lord Rickard Stark (Ned's father) sent his son off to be fostered with Jon Arryn (the Hand of the King whose murder started off series one) and that's when he became best friends with Robert Baratheon. Ned's elder brother Brandon would have taken over as Lord of Winterfell and Robert was betrothed to Lyanna Stark.
There's a vast swathe of back story which isn't included in the TV show which explains why the Starks weren't prepared or ever expected to participate in the "Game of Thrones".
Winter is coming and Robb never had a chance of a nice quiet rule.
Yes, the Game exists, but the Starks were never players (as I've edited my previous post to elaborate on) and the "Game of Thrones" is an entirely different thing to the Game of Politics itself, which is clearly distinguished in the books imho.
Plus, as GM hasn't finished the books, there's so much missing atm from what happened to lead up to the Rebellion so I think it's a bit too simple to say that's why Robert ended up with the throne. It wasn't politics which put him there
I would agree Winter is coming and Robb would never have had a quiet life, but fighting the Wildlings beyond the Wall is something the Starks were trained for, not for the politics of King's Landing or for fighting war against the other Houses. That's the difference imho and it's a difference the books make quite plain.
Sorry, but this is mistaken. The Game began in earnest for all the Starks, when a very much alive King Robert made Ned the Hand of the King. But the Game always did exist, however much the Starks foolishly chose to ignore it.
A wiser Lord than Ned would have prepared all his children for all political eventualities, however much they resented the necessity.
It's all much of a muchness with the Starks all round inadequacy and incompetence (other than in the tactical military field)
The whole north hangs on the Starks, don't tell me that they are not gameplayers, they may not want to be but they have never had a choice.
OT I was reading another blog about the episode and someone said that they had no interest in the romance between Robb and Dr Quinn Medicine Woman.
I laughed at that so much.
That was me, at the Guardian blog. Glad you enjoyed the comment, and I am taking a bow.:)
Someone has just said that to keep in character with the actress Ygritte should have said to Jon, you know bugger all luv.
Perfect.
ETA I loved it More Tears, take a bow, a lordship and one of the Freys as your wife. The comments on that are brilliant.
I'm not mistaken but I'm not getting into an argument about it with you as it's futile as I have no desire or intention to make you change your mind, you are entitled to think what you like about the Starks with regards to the information presented you by the TV series.
We shall have to agree to disagree then on our book interpretation given the reasons I put before, that George RR Martin hasn't actually revealed all of what occurred at that time to make any sort of statement about who could or couldn't have taken the throne or the reasons behind why Robert did end up with it
As for the second part, yes I've agreed with you regarding the North, but that is very different to the Game of Thrones, which is the point I was making and which I think GRRM makes in the books also.
Just because people make decisions wearing fur and drinking elk blood rather than wearing silk and sipping wine doesn't make them any less politicians.
But as you say lets agree to disagree, I like your posts too much to fall out with you.
Oh that is just evil.
Bad Finchy.
I like Finchy and his smirks in GOT. He seems to enjoy seeing Theon beat up peasants.