Game of Thrones begins....

[Martinus]

I certainly agree it makes sense, I was just saying I was dissapointed as I thought we were going to see the emergence of Sansa as a player, rather than a playee.

I think that that is exactly what we will see.  Sansa needs a pretty strong motive to become a manipulator and so a player, and now she has it.  I'd have been disappointed if the writers had just said, "okay, enough episodes have passed, let's write Sansa as a player now."

Sansa had more motivation to become a player be seeking vengeance on the Boltons and take her rightful place  (as far as she knows) as the last remaining heir of Winterfell.  No need to make her a pawn again.

Being a player means you need to have something to play with. It's hard to do so when you get dealt a really shitty hand.

[Martinus]

Again, to say Sansa had a choice not to go to Winterfell is quite speculative. First of all, she did not make the decision fully consciously - she was manipulated by Littlefinger into making it. Secondly, her decision was based on lack of full facts (she had no reason to think Ramsay was a psycho). Thirdly, we do not know even whether Littlefinger would have respected her refusal.

Sansa knew that Bolton killed her brother...  I have no idea what you mean by "fully conscious".  She was certainly fully awake    She also had all her faculties. The scene when she made the decision to retract her objection to the marriage and enter Winterfell  is the point in the show when the writers decided to turn her back into a pawn.  They need to wrap up the show and so it is a simple way of dealing with her character.  But it is still disappointing.

Given how differently the story line is in the books (think of the position "Reek" is in now in the books) it will be interesting to see whether she is more empowered there.

I haven't read the last book, so my analysis of her situation is fully based on what happened on the show. Could it be that your critique is coloured by the differences compared to the book (and, consequently, your natural resentment for such deviations)? Because to me (without having the knowledge of a book reader regarding the alternative storyline with Reek/False Arya) Sansa's behaviour and storyline both make sense.

[The Minsky Moment]

The better criticism is that the plotting of the TV show works against her character arc as it was developing.  But within the confines of the scenario the teleplay writers have scripted, the character's actions make sense and fit with what came before.

[crazy canuck]

Again, to say Sansa had a choice not to go to Winterfell is quite speculative. First of all, she did not make the decision fully consciously - she was manipulated by Littlefinger into making it. Secondly, her decision was based on lack of full facts (she had no reason to think Ramsay was a psycho). Thirdly, we do not know even whether Littlefinger would have respected her refusal.

Sansa knew that Bolton killed her brother...  I have no idea what you mean by "fully conscious".  She was certainly fully awake    She also had all her faculties. The scene when she made the decision to retract her objection to the marriage and enter Winterfell  is the point in the show when the writers decided to turn her back into a pawn.  They need to wrap up the show and so it is a simple way of dealing with her character.  But it is still disappointing.

Given how differently the story line is in the books (think of the position "Reek" is in now in the books) it will be interesting to see whether she is more empowered there.

I haven't read the last book, so my analysis of her situation is fully based on what happened on the show. Could it be that your critique is coloured by the differences compared to the book (and, consequently, your natural resentment for such deviations)? Because to me (without having the knowledge of a book reader regarding the alternative storyline with Reek/False Arya) Sansa's behaviour and storyline both make sense.

My critique is based on the show.  As I have already pointed out in the show:

She knows the Boltons killed her brother;
That the Boltons replaced her family as Wardens of the North through an alliance with the Lannisters;
She hates both the Boltons and the Lannisters;
Her family is very popular in the North;
She is, as far as she knows, the last living Stark;


It would have been fairly easy for the show to write in a rising of the loyal North to cause of Sansa Stark.


My reference to the Books is to show that there is an example of how the story could have gone in a very different direction.

[crazy canuck]

The better criticism is that the plotting of the TV show works against her character arc as it was developing.  But within the confines of the scenario the teleplay writers have scripted, the character's actions make sense and fit with what came before.

If one ignores:

She knows the Boltons killed her brother;
That the Boltons replaced her family as Wardens of the North through an alliance with the Lannisters;
She hates both the Boltons and the Lannisters;
Her family is very popular in the North;
She is, as far as she knows, the last living Stark;

[Martinus]

The better criticism is that the plotting of the TV show works against her character arc as it was developing.  But within the confines of the scenario the teleplay writers have scripted, the character's actions make sense and fit with what came before.

Yeah but then the very defining feature of GoT has always been subverting the conventional tropes.

[grumbler]

The better criticism is that the plotting of the TV show works against her character arc as it was developing.  But within the confines of the scenario the teleplay writers have scripted, the character's actions make sense and fit with what came before.

I'd argue that LF's betrayal of her works in that arc because she now knows that, if she wants revenge, she has to take it herself.  Her character arc has been one of slowly learning to assert herself, but still essentially passive.  She, I suspect, has now crossed a threshold and we will see a new Sansa.  She won't be a pawn any more, but will play one on TV.

[Berkut]

The better criticism is that the plotting of the TV show works against her character arc as it was developing.  But within the confines of the scenario the teleplay writers have scripted, the character's actions make sense and fit with what came before.

That is exactly my point. I am not arguing that her actions aren't believable, but that her returning to "victmhood" is a disappointing turn in her arc.

The set of things that would be believable is obviously pretty large...

[The Minsky Moment]

The better criticism is that the plotting of the TV show works against her character arc as it was developing.  But within the confines of the scenario the teleplay writers have scripted, the character's actions make sense and fit with what came before.

If one ignores:

She knows the Boltons killed her brother;
That the Boltons replaced her family as Wardens of the North through an alliance with the Lannisters;
She hates both the Boltons and the Lannisters;
Her family is very popular in the North;
She is, as far as she knows, the last living Stark;

What is she supposed to do about this?  Run around Winterfell in front of the Bolton guards waving the family banner and shout "rally to me"?

[grumbler]

The better criticism is that the plotting of the TV show works against her character arc as it was developing.  But within the confines of the scenario the teleplay writers have scripted, the character's actions make sense and fit with what came before.

If one ignores:

She knows the Boltons killed her brother;
That the Boltons replaced her family as Wardens of the North through an alliance with the Lannisters;
She hates both the Boltons and the Lannisters;
Her family is very popular in the North;
She is, as far as she knows, the last living Stark;

What is she supposed to do about this?  Run around Winterfell in front of the Bolton guards waving the family banner and shout "rally to me"?

Agree.  She was motivated to work against the Boltons and Lannisters indirectly before, but now she clearly has to take things into her own hands.  I think that this is a watershed for her, but, unlike you if I understand your argument, I think it fits her arc so far.  Her rape was the equivalent of Boromir forcing Frodo to realize that he, alone, has to carry the ring to Mount Doom.  Brienne will be her Sam.

[crazy canuck]

The better criticism is that the plotting of the TV show works against her character arc as it was developing.  But within the confines of the scenario the teleplay writers have scripted, the character's actions make sense and fit with what came before.

If one ignores:

She knows the Boltons killed her brother;
That the Boltons replaced her family as Wardens of the North through an alliance with the Lannisters;
She hates both the Boltons and the Lannisters;
Her family is very popular in the North;
She is, as far as she knows, the last living Stark;

What is she supposed to do about this?  Run around Winterfell in front of the Bolton guards waving the family banner and shout "rally to me"?

You will recall that before she was in front of Bolton guards, she was in front of Vale guards.  You will also recall that the Lords of the Vale are very sympathetic to her cause.  It would not take a great deal of imagination to take the story in a different direction.

She already underwent her transformation. No need for another transformative event.

[grumbler]

You will recall that before she was in front of Bolton guards, she was in front of Vale guards.  You will also recall that the Lords of the Vale are very sympathetic to her cause.  It would not take a great deal of imagination to take the story in a different direction.

She already underwent her transformation. No need for another transformative event.

She had no power or influence in the Vale.  If she betrayed Littlefinger, she would have lost the only person she knew who (she thought) had her own family's interests in mind.

Suppose she rats out Littlefinger and has the sympathy of the Lords of the Vale.  Then what?  She can either marry some lord of the Vale and live out her life there, or live out her life as a guest of some lord of the Vale.  Transformative event: needed.

[crazy canuck]

You will recall that before she was in front of Bolton guards, she was in front of Vale guards.  You will also recall that the Lords of the Vale are very sympathetic to her cause.  It would not take a great deal of imagination to take the story in a different direction.

She already underwent her transformation. No need for another transformative event.

She had no power or influence in the Vale.  If she betrayed Littlefinger, she would have lost the only person she knew who (she thought) had her own family's interests in mind.

Suppose she rats out Littlefinger and has the sympathy of the Lords of the Vale.  Then what?  She can either marry some lord of the Vale and live out her life there, or live out her life as a guest of some lord of the Vale.  Transformative event: needed.

You should go back and re-watch the episode where the fate of Littlefinger is entirely in her power.  The Lords of the Vale accept what she says because of the trust and friendship the Vale had with House Stark.  The power and influence she holds is over Littlefinger.  In case you missed it, it bears repeating.  The only thing standing between the Lords making him fly and him pursuing his goals is Sansa's continuing silence as to what really occurred.  But she gives up all that leverage to become a pawn again.  It doesn't take a great deal of imagination to cut out the fake Arya part of the books and replace it with Sansa using littlefinger and his hold over the Vale to accomplish her goals.

[Berkut]

You will recall that before she was in front of Bolton guards, she was in front of Vale guards.  You will also recall that the Lords of the Vale are very sympathetic to her cause.  It would not take a great deal of imagination to take the story in a different direction.

She already underwent her transformation. No need for another transformative event.

She had no power or influence in the Vale.

I don't think that is true at all - power and influence in Westeros is mostly about relationships, family relationships, and the Stark-Arryn relationship is very well established.

If she betrayed Littlefinger, she would have lost the only person she knew who (she thought) had her own family's interests in mind.

I don't know that she needs to betray Littlefinger as much as simply decide not to go along with his "plan".

Suppose she rats out Littlefinger and has the sympathy of the Lords of the Vale.  Then what?  She can either marry some lord of the Vale and live out her life there, or live out her life as a guest of some lord of the Vale.  Transformative event: needed.

Well, I agree that not marrying Ramsey doesn't give her a lot of other options, but without some plan, marrying Ramsey doesn't give her options either.

I don't think the debate though is really about what options Sansa had or didn't have, but rather what options the writers had or didn't have.

I suspect that if you are right, and I relaly hope you are right, whatever Sansa does she could have done from a story arc perspective without the need to show her back to being a pawn first. The arc would work just fine absent this little interlude.

Another thing I find kind of annoying about the Ramsey story line is that the writers have fallen into the "perfect villain" thing with Ramsey. He always knows what is going on, he has seemingly perfect spies/information etc., etc., and no matter what anyone else does, Ramsey is always a step ahead. It is kind of lazy writing, IMO, and something Martin was mostly very good about avoiding.

[grumbler]

I don't think that is true at all - power and influence in Westeros is mostly about relationships, family relationships, and the Stark-Arryn relationship is very well established.

Insofar as I can tell, the only Stark/Arryn relationship was that Eddard was fostered by Jon.  That was a personal, not a family, relationship.  Insofar as I know, there were no marriages between the two houses, which is the basis for family relationships in Westeros.

I don't know that she needs to betray Littlefinger as much as simply decide not to go along with his "plan".

If she doesn't go along with his plan, he would be executed for murdering Lysa.

Well, I agree that not marrying Ramsey doesn't give her a lot of other options, but without some plan, marrying Ramsey doesn't give her options either.

By the time marriage to Ramsey comes up, she is in a carriage with Littlefinger, surrounded by his men, and with no allies at all.  What do you imagine his response would be to her refusal to go along with his plan?

I don't think the debate though is really about what options Sansa had or didn't have, but rather what options the writers had or didn't have.

I suspect that if you are right, and I relaly hope you are right, whatever Sansa does she could have done from a story arc perspective without the need to show her back to being a pawn first. The arc would work just fine absent this little interlude.

How?  How does she advance her story if Littlefinger either kills her or salts her away in some backwater spot, to be used if the conditions change?

Another thing I find kind of annoying about the Ramsey story line is that the writers have fallen into the "perfect villain" thing with Ramsey. He always knows what is going on, he has seemingly perfect spies/information etc., etc., and no matter what anyone else does, Ramsey is always a step ahead. It is kind of lazy writing, IMO, and something Martin was mostly very good about avoiding.

No question about that.  But Martin had the benefit of infinite time and characters at his disposal.  The writers don't.

Now, if you want to complain about the Reek betrayal bit, I won't argue with that.  It seemed like piling on.  He could just have dropped the candle in the dirt and left room for a more interesting story than the whole flaying bit (why would Ramsey have chosen that one woman, out of the hundreds in Winterfell, to flay? You are right that that was lazy writing).