Game of Thrones Thread

[nc0gnet0]

No I am saying that is what I think people are thinking. I've explained why there has always been two Jamie's. If you want to explain what you mean by growth then by all means do so.

However, my point is Jamie has always been an honorable guy outside of his shit with Cersei. So what makes you think there would have been a difference in his behavior? This is the same guy that risked his honor to kill the Mad King before the show started so that same Jamie would have treated Brienne the same. The only time he's really ever been a ****** is due to Cersei.

So I don't see growth. All I see is that later on in the books and movies, the reader/watcher sees Jamie more and more away from Cersei so we see that he's a decent dude without her influence which has always been the case. My point is his character did not change so much as the situation he was in did (ie spending more time away from Cersei).

* Pushes a 10-year-old boy out the window of tower, because the boy caught him having sex with, I repeat, his sister
*Makes fun of Jon Snow, who is about to join the Night’s Watch and is already pretty depressed
*Comforts Cersei, who is worried about the whole incest thing being discovered, by telling her he’s willing to kill a bunch of people
*Has Ned’s guards killed, and stabs Jory Cassel through the eye
*Taunts Catelyn Stark over the death of her husband, Ned.
*Murders his cousin, Alton Lannister, and a guard, Torrhen Karstark, during an attempt to escape from captivity
*Taunts Catelyn again, this time over Ned’s apparent infidelity.
*Urges Brienne to kill a farmer who noticed them travelling through the Riverlands
*Rapes Cersei alongside Joffrey’s corpse in the Great Sept of Baelor

Care to try again?

 

[nc0gnet0]

You mean the same aunt that Sansa could have easily said LF killed to be free of him but then instead lied and backed him up on the basis that she knew what LF wanted but didn't know what the Vale lords wanted.

Further, he never forced her to marry Ramsey. He made his case for why she should and she ended up making the decision herself because that is what LF does. He doesn't really force people to do anything. He plants the seed in their head and then eventually they make the choice themselves.



1) She clearly manipulated the Vale lords to keep LF in power because she knew what LF wanted. Otherwise, she would have told the truth about her aunt. She is not some honest and forthright girl. That shit is what got her father killed.

2)She's learned from LF that the truth is not always worth telling and she clearly proved that when she lied about what happened to her aunt and then was subsequently able to benefit from that lie by having LF come to her and Snow's rescue. If she had told the truth about LF, Snow would have ended up dead because the Vale lords were not going to come to their aid when they had remained neutral.

3)That lie/manipulation was necessary to ensure she had an ally albeit a shady one controlling the Vale army.

4)Likewise, she wasn't forced to marry Ramsey. She listened to LF arguments and thought they made sense with one or both of them unaware of his cruelty. That was a calculation she made that simply backfired for a time but it was one she made just the same after hearing his advice.

5)No different than when LF told her he could help her escape KL and she initially refused him and he didn't force her. He just planted the seed and waited to see if it would bare fruit.

I have broken this apart because there is so many different points to discuss........

1) This was as much about self preservation as it was anything. It was Sansa that her Aunt was pushing out the window. Because LF and Sansa kissed. Sure she kissed LF, and at the time was not completely wise to his game, he did after all just save her from certain death in KL, she might have felt she owed him one. Had she choose to tell the truth, her Aunt will still be dead, LF would have been killed and never been able to exert influence over Lord Robin, and the Vale might have just as easily come to WF aid much sooner, no one can say.

2) I'm not quite sure what point your trying to make here, A does not equal B as she had no foreknowledge of the events to come, nor if even Jon Snow was still alive. Furthermore, if not for blind luck, she would have been dead if not for Brienne's intervention during her escape, so your summation is rubbish. She could have died many times over easily at the hands of Ramsay, or trying to escape Ramsay, a fact your totally dismissing, and LF had no control over any of the events that unfolded at WF

3) That lie was almost the death of her, are you trying to prove Sansa is a survivor, despite LF? If so your doing a pretty good job

4) Yes, she made that choice, because at the time her trust in LF was still there, but he was using her, not teaching her, for his own purposes.

5) She really didn't have any other choice at the time now did she? Given the choice of certain death, or a chance to live, most will choose the latter.

You seem to trying to sum things up by saying the ends, justify the means, and had other choices been made, the Vale would have never been able to come to Jon's aid. That is pure speculation on your part.

 

[nc0gnet0]

That's not really true at all. He's told her stuff that wasn't necessary. Further he has still been instructing her even after he knew she distrusts him as he advised her again about fighting every battle simultaneously. His instruction is not dependent on her trust or respect because he's obsessed with her or more precisely the idea of her.

He is living out his Catelyn Stark fantasy with Sansa. That will ultimately be his downfall. If he had remained as objective and cutthroat as he usually is with everyone else then Jon Snow would be dead and Sansa would probably be Queen of the North after his Vale armies routed Ramsey in the aftermath of the Battle of the Bastards.

It is precisely because of his obsession with Sansa that he's telling her things he would not otherwise reveal and he's doing things the would not otherwise have done.

He is telling her stuff to get her to rebel against Jon's leadership, in which he never saw coming (he thought she would be ruler of WF), create more chaos, in which he can continue to climb the ladder. He is not offering her pearls of wisdom, rather whispering in her ear to get her to try to claim WF for herself.

Your not grasping the importance of the Lone wolf vs the pact they keep bringing up are you?

 

[remydat]

* Pushes a 10-year-old boy out the window of tower, because the boy caught him having sex with, I repeat, his sister
*Makes fun of Jon Snow, who is about to join the Night’s Watch and is already pretty depressed
*Comforts Cersei, who is worried about the whole incest thing being discovered, by telling her he’s willing to kill a bunch of people
*Has Ned’s guards killed, and stabs Jory Cassel through the eye
*Taunts Catelyn Stark over the death of her husband, Ned. Too soon man;
*Murders his cousin, Alton Lannister, and a guard, Torrhen Karstark, during an attempt to escape from captivit
*Taunts Catelyn again, this time over Ned’s apparent infidelity. Not too soon, but still kind of insensitive
*Urges Brienne to kill a farmer who noticed them travelling through the Riverlands
*Rapes Cersei alongside Joffrey’s corpse in the Great Sept of Baelor

Care to try again?

The bold are all related to his relationship with Cersei. Even when he kills his cousin Alton, he later on in an argument with Cersei talks about how he murdered people to get back to her which was a reference to Alton. He did not kill his cousin out of some malice. He did so because he was trying to get back to Cersei which again is my point. His douchebaggery is generally related to Cersei.

So we are left with the Jon Snow thing and the farmer thing. I'll give you the Snow thing but don't remember the farmer thing but was that also during the time he was trying to make it back to his Cersei?

 

[remydat]

I have broken this apart because there is so many different points to discuss........

1) This was as much about self preservation as it was anything. It was Sansa that her Aunt was pushing out the window. Because LF and Sansa kissed. Sure she kissed LF, and at the time was not completely wise to his game, he did after all just save her from certain death in KL, she might have felt she owed him one. Had she choose to tell the truth, her Aunt will still be dead, LF would have been killed and never been able to exert influence over Lord Robin, and the Vale might have just as easily come to WF aid much sooner, no one can say.

2) I'm not quite sure what point your trying to make here, A does not equal B as she had no foreknowledge of the events to come, nor if even Jon Snow was still alive. Furthermore, if not for blind luck, she would have been dead if not for Brienne's intervention during her escape, so your summation is rubbish. She could have died many times over easily at the hands of Ramsay, or trying to escape Ramsay, a fact your totally dismissing, and LF had no control over any of the events that unfolded at WF

3) That lie was almost the death of her, are you trying to prove Sansa is a survivor, despite LF? If so your doing a pretty good job

4) Yes, she made that choice, because at the time her trust in LF was still there, but he was using her, not teaching her, for his own purposes.

5) She really didn't have any other choice at the time now did she? Given the choice of certain death, or a chance to live, most will choose the latter.

You seem to trying to sum things up by saying the ends, justify the means, and had other choices been made, the Vale would have never been able to come to Jon's aid. That is pure speculation on your part.

1. Not sure your point. It was still manipulation which is what we were arguing. Yes people manipulate others for self preservation. And? LF would claim most of his manipulations are for the very same reason but the point still stands. She manipulated them.

2. The point is she lied and manipulated because she understood it was better to have LF as an ally when she knew his motives than it was to tell the truth with the loyalties of the Vale lords uncertain. She doesn't need foreknowledge of exactly what would happen. All she needed to do was make the cold hard calculation of which outcome is best for her. It's not rocket science for her to conclude it's better to deal with the devil you know than the devil you don't even if you can't predict the future.

3. No I am trying to prove she lied and manipulated people when it suited her just like LF. You are trying to now justify her doing so but that doesn't change the fact she did which you original statement was that she doesn't manipulate. That is objectively false. There is no way to argument her lying for LF was not a manipulation.

4. I never said this specific act was LF teaching her. I disputed your claim that he forced her. This again is objectively false. He made a suggesting and persuaded her but the decision was all hers in the end.

5. What certain death are you referring to? She had plenty of choices as I don't recall the decision ever being marry Ramsey or die. That's absurd.

You seem to be confused. I am not saying every single interaction between her and LF was him teaching her. I am saying he certainly imparted his knowledge on her even as he was also manipulating her because those two things are not mutually exclusive. I can manipulate someone while still teaching them things along the way. Not sure why this is hard to fathom.

 

[number51]

Yes people generally want something in return when they teach just as today's teachers want a salary and pension.

No one in Westeros thinks LF is a teacher. One person on planet Earth thinks LF is a teacher. The fact that he wants things in return for his advise does not make him a professional. You would love to get paid by the word for your opinions, that does not make you a published author. LF would love to have Sansa's ear again, he should start learning to deal with disappointment.

BTW your hero LF should stay away from Bran, LF is playing checkers, Bran is playing nukes.

 

[nc0gnet0]

See but this is the point I am making. You are saying he doesn't need much redemption but then what is the growth you are seeing from him? Again my point is there has always been two Jamie's. The Jamie that exists independent of his sister and the Jamie that is in love with his sister. The former Jamie was always there as we saw him kill the mad king at great personal risk to his reputation. The latter Jamie has always been there as we saw him try and kill Bran and sit silently as Cersei has become a monster, as one son became a monster, and as the other son committed suicide rather than spend another day with Cersei.

Maybe it's semantics but I consider personal growth to be when a character actually grows from being say immature or selfish/evil to be a more mature or good person. I don't see that with Jamie. He's always had good in him and he still remains a character whose ultimate goodness is overruled by his incestuous love of his sister. That has yet to change over the course of the TV show. Maybe I just misinterpreted it but people were making it sound like he was some evil character that became good. I'm saying he's the same guy. The more time he is depicted away from his sister, the more people just see that he's just a good dude with a shitty fucking family.

You see some of this I agree with and some of this I couldn't disagree more with. For sake of argument, I will grant you that Jamie away from Cersie and jamie with Cersie are two different people ( I think that is the point your trying to make). But you don't except the redemption arc argument because you think it should apply to both good and bad Jamie's and too that I say it depends on how far along in the arc he is. I will grant you for true complete redemption he needs to rid himself of her, and I believe that will happen sooner than you think.

But dwelling on the Jamie while not in Cerise's presence, there has been a redemption arc, or at least a glimpse to see it was possible. He was still an arrogant little twat in the beginning, regardless of if he was with Cersie or not. So, he has improved morally, and that is not to say he never had any morals to begin with.

 

[remydat]

He is telling her stuff to get her to rebel against Jon's leadership, in which he never saw coming (he thought she would be ruler of WF), create more chaos, in which he can continue to climb the ladder. He is not offering her pearls of wisdom, rather whispering in her ear to get her to try to claim WF for herself.

Your not grasping the importance of the Lone wolf vs the pact they keep bringing up are you?

Again, do you not grasp the fact you can manipulate and teach someone at the same time.

Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: Loras knew his mare was in heat. Quite crafty, really.
Sansa Stark: Ser Loras would never do that. There is no honor in tricks.
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: No honor, but quite a bit of gold.

Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: So many men, they risk so little. They spend their whole lives avoiding danger, and then they die. I'd risk everything to get what I want.
Sansa Stark: And what do you want?
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: [pauses] Everything.
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: A man with no motive is a man no one suspects. Always keep your foes confused.

Sansa Stark: [referring to Dontos] Why did you kill him?
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: Because he was a drunk and a fool, and I don't trust drunk fools.
Sansa Stark: He saved me.
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: Saved you? My lady, he followed my orders. Every one of them. And he did it all for gold. Money buys a man's silence for a time. A bolt in the heart buys it forever.
Sansa Stark: He was helping me because I saved his life.
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: Yes, and he gave you a priceless necklace that once belonged to his grandmother. The last legacy of House Hollard.
[Petyr crushes one of the necklaces stones]
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: I had it made a few weeks ago. What did I once tell you about the capital?
Sansa Stark: "We're all liars here."
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: Come, my lady. I know you've had a difficult day, but you're safe now. I promise you that. You're safe with me, sailing home.

Sansa Stark: What do you want?
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: I thought you knew what I wanted.
Sansa Stark: I was wrong.
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: No. You weren't. Every time I'm faced with a decision I close my eyes and see the same picture. Whenever I consider an action I ask myself, 'will this help make this picture a reality? Pull it out of my mind and into the world?' And I only act if the answer is "yes". A picture of me on the Iron Throne... and you by my side.
[leans in to kiss her; she raises a hand and stops him]
Sansa Stark: It's a pretty picture.
[walks away]

Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: I've publicly declared for House Stark for all to hear.
Sansa Stark: You've declared for other houses before, Lord Baelish. It's never stopped you from serving yourself.

“Don’t fight in the North or the South. Fight every battle everywhere, always, in your mind. Everyone is your enemy, everyone is your friend. Every possible series of events is happening all at once. Live that way and nothing will surprise you. Everything that happens will be something that you’ve seen before.”

These are all examples of LF explaining to Sansa how the game is played even as he is trying to manipulate her. You are setting up some binary world where it has to be either or when that goes against the premise of the show. The premise of the show is that most of these characters are more than just one thing. LF is both an asshole manipulator but also a teacher when it comes to Sansa. Sansa is both a love interest and a potential rival who will be his end. These characters are all more than just a single thing so not sure why you think that by virtue of his manipulating her, LF couldn't have also been teaching her at the same time. In most of the scenes above, he didn't have to explain to her his motivations for doing things or do so honestly. Yet he did.

I suspect she wouldn't be worthy of his obsession in his mind if she weren't also capable of eventually seeing through his manipulations as first and foremost, his love for both Catelyn and Sansa is predicated on them being unattainable in my view which is why he never loved Lyssa.

 

[nc0gnet0]

The bold are all related to his relationship with Cersei. Even when he kills his cousin Alton, he later on in an argument with Cersei talks about how he murdered people to get back to her which was a reference to Alton. He did not kill his cousin out of some malice. He did so because he was trying to get back to Cersei which again is my point. His douchebaggery is generally related to Cersei.

So we are left with the Jon Snow thing and the farmer thing. I'll give you the Snow thing but don't remember the farmer thing but was that also during the time he was trying to make it back to his Cersei?

No, the fight with Ned stark had nothing to do with Cesie, rather Tyrion.

And while you can surmise that a lot on the list had something to do with Cersie, the manner and complete lack of any remorse in the matters you cannot, so sorry not buying it. Aka pushing Brann out the window to proteck Cersie is one thing, complete lack of remorse another.

 

[remydat]

No one in Westeros thinks LF is a teacher. One person on planet Earth thinks LF is a teacher. The fact that he wants things in return for his advise does not make him a professional. You would love to get paid by the word for your opinions, that does not make you a published author. LF would love to have Sansa's ear again, he should start learning to deal with disappointment.

BTW your hero LF should stay away from Bran, LF is playing checkers, Bran is playing nukes.

You are not making much sene. LF teaching Sansa how to play the game is a fairly popular theory among fans.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3nrffi

How can anyone watch this and claim he's not teaching her. And I am not saying him wanting things makes him a professional. I am saying his wanting things doesn't negate the fact he is a teacher because all teachers want things for their teaching as most teachers are compensated. So you claiming that just because he wants something in return means he's not a teacher makes no sense.

And Bran is not playing nukes. Bran has knowledge of the past and future. This would be like saying if we are playing poker and I an reading your tells but you have X-Ray vision and know the cards in my hand, that someone you are a better player. No you aren't. You are not relying on some poker skill to win. You are relying on an unfair advantage.

Bran isn't some brilliant player of the game. He's got a cheat code because he can see the past and future. That hardly diminishes what LF does.

 

[ZOMBIE@CTESPN]

But he isn't teaching her the game as a mentor. He is doing it to advance his scheme.

 

[nc0gnet0]

1. Not sure your point. It was still manipulation which is what we were arguing. Yes people manipulate others for self preservation. And? LF would claim most of his manipulations are for the very same reason but the point still stands. She manipulated them.

2. The point is she lied and manipulated because she understood it was better to have LF as an ally when she knew his motives than it was to tell the truth with the loyalties of the Vale lords uncertain. She doesn't need foreknowledge of exactly what would happen. All she needed to do was make the cold hard calculation of which outcome is best for her. It's not rocket science for her to conclude it's better to deal with the devil you know than the devil you don't even if you can't predict the future.

3. No I am trying to prove she lied and manipulated people when it suited her just like LF. You are trying to now justify her doing so but that doesn't change the fact she did which you original statement was that she doesn't manipulate. That is objectively false. There is no way to argument her lying for LF was not a manipulation.

4. I never said this specific act was LF teaching her. I disputed your claim that he forced her. This again is objectively false. He made a suggesting and persuaded her but the decision was all hers in the end.

5. What certain death are you referring to? She had plenty of choices as I don't recall the decision ever being marry Ramsey or die. That's absurd.

You seem to be confused. I am not saying every single interaction between her and LF was him teaching her. I am saying he certainly imparted his knowledge on her even as he was also manipulating her because those two things are not mutually exclusive. I can manipulate someone while still teaching them things along the way. Not sure why this is hard to fathom.

go back and re-read, 5 had nothing to do with Ramsay, it was when she opted to leave KL with LF, not sure what your even talking about........

As for the rest of your argument, once again your trying to take it into the remy-zone, with your normal splitting hairs out of context by virtue of a definition. In this case the short version is, Sansa lied, all lies are manipulations, ergo Sansa manipulated the Vale Lords. Straw man. Again. Stop already.

Sansa had no ulterior motives for her lie except for self preservation in the moment, and maybe because she felt beholding to LF, who, after all did intervene and stop her certain death. Anything else other than that is just pure BS. This is quite unlike LF who's lies are crafted to set up a chain of events to create chaos.

 

[remydat]

You see some of this I agree with and some of this I couldn't disagree more with. For sake of argument, I will grant you that Jamie away from Cersie and jamie with Cersie are two different people ( I think that is the point your trying to make). But you don't except the redemption arc argument because you think it should apply to both good and bad Jamie's and too that I say it depends on how far along in the arc he is. I will grant you for true complete redemption he needs to rid himself of her, and I believe that will happen sooner than you think.

But dwelling on the Jamie while not in Cerise's presence, there has been a redemption arc, or at least a glimpse to see it was possible. He was still an arrogant little twat in the beginning, regardless of if he was with Cersie or not. So, he has improved morally, and that is not to say he never had any morals to begin with.

No it's more that I don't think it's a question of growth. It's a question of the more time he is shown without Cersei as a motivation, the better he looks. So all that has changed over the seasons is that he's been shown interacting with more people than just Cersei. At the start of the show he was portrayed a certain way to get the audience to view him as a villain but that was never the sum total of who he was in that moment. He's always been capable of both good and evil. Again I asked this earlier but explain to me using an example how you think he has grown?

No, the fight with Ned stark had nothing to do with Cesie, rather Tyrion.

And while you can surmise that a lot on the list had something to do with Cersie, the manner and complete lack of any remorse in the matters you cannot, so sorry not buying it. Aka pushing Brann out the window to proteck Cersie is one thing, complete lack of remorse another.

So I guess where you said I Cersei and his family earlier. Cersei is obviously the primary factor but I also allowed that it's his family in general.

Not buying what exactly, I don't think remorse is required in this instance. His judgment is clouded when it comes to Cersei and his family. Why would he have remorse when ultimately he thinks he did something for Cersei or his family? I already said he's a ****** in that regard.

However what does that have to do with how he behaves with Brienne when his family is not involved? That's the point. This is not growth. He can be a decent dude when his family and Cersei is not the focal point of his decisions or motivations.

 

[nc0gnet0]

But he isn't teaching her the game as a mentor. He is doing it to advance his scheme.

Well, it is obvious that Sansa is learning somethings from LF, as she did Cersie. In a broad stroke I guess that makes them a teacher, but to present it in such a way that they are doing it for Sansa's benefit is not only a stretch, but an out right fallacy. Definitely not the normal teacher/student relationship by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[ZOMBIE@CTESPN]

My bro just told me script to 5 has been released......I'm impatiently waiting fir the video

 

[remydat]

go back and re-read, 5 had nothing to do with Ramsay, it was when she opted to leave KL with LF, not sure what your even talking about........

As for the rest of your argument, once again your trying to take it into the remy-zone, with your normal splitting hairs out of context by virtue of a definition. In this case the short version is, Sansa lied, all lies are manipulations, ergo Sansa manipulated the Vale Lords. Straw man. Again. Stop already.

Sansa had no ulterior motives for her lie except for self preservation in the moment, and maybe because she felt beholding to LF, who, after all did intervene and stop her certain death. Anything else other than that is just pure BS. This is quite unlike LF who's lies are crafted to set up a chain of events to create chaos.

The point here was that he doesn't force her to do anything. He waits for her to arrive at her own decision which she did with leaving KL and which she did with Ramsey. Again your claim was she was forced and that is false.

And no it is not splitting hairs. The purpose of her lie was to get the Vale Lords to arrive at a conclusion she wanted them to reach ie to spare LF. That by definition is a manipulation.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/manipulate

It's like you guys want the definitions of words to change to suit your narrative. She lied and manipulated the Vale lords quite skillfully to the point of fake crying and shit to get an outcome she wanted. How you can watch the below and pretend this is not a skillful manipulation is beyond me.

[video=youtube;cPpTgkBuzCg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPpTgkBuzCg[/video]

 

[nc0gnet0]

Again, do you not grasp the fact you can manipulate and teach someone at the same time.

Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: Loras knew his mare was in heat. Quite crafty, really.
Sansa Stark: Ser Loras would never do that. There is no honor in tricks.
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: No honor, but quite a bit of gold.

Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: So many men, they risk so little. They spend their whole lives avoiding danger, and then they die. I'd risk everything to get what I want.
Sansa Stark: And what do you want?
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: [pauses] Everything.
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: A man with no motive is a man no one suspects. Always keep your foes confused.

Sansa Stark: [referring to Dontos] Why did you kill him?
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: Because he was a drunk and a fool, and I don't trust drunk fools.
Sansa Stark: He saved me.
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: Saved you? My lady, he followed my orders. Every one of them. And he did it all for gold. Money buys a man's silence for a time. A bolt in the heart buys it forever.
Sansa Stark: He was helping me because I saved his life.
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: Yes, and he gave you a priceless necklace that once belonged to his grandmother. The last legacy of House Hollard.
[Petyr crushes one of the necklaces stones]
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: I had it made a few weeks ago. What did I once tell you about the capital?
Sansa Stark: "We're all liars here."
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: Come, my lady. I know you've had a difficult day, but you're safe now. I promise you that. You're safe with me, sailing home.

Sansa Stark: What do you want?
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: I thought you knew what I wanted.
Sansa Stark: I was wrong.
Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: No. You weren't. Every time I'm faced with a decision I close my eyes and see the same picture. Whenever I consider an action I ask myself, 'will this help make this picture a reality? Pull it out of my mind and into the world?' And I only act if the answer is "yes". A picture of me on the Iron Throne... and you by my side.
[leans in to kiss her; she raises a hand and stops him]
Sansa Stark: It's a pretty picture.
[walks away]

Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish: I've publicly declared for House Stark for all to hear.
Sansa Stark: You've declared for other houses before, Lord Baelish. It's never stopped you from serving yourself.

“Don’t fight in the North or the South. Fight every battle everywhere, always, in your mind. Everyone is your enemy, everyone is your friend. Every possible series of events is happening all at once. Live that way and nothing will surprise you. Everything that happens will be something that you’ve seen before.”

These are all examples of LF explaining to Sansa how the game is played even as he is trying to manipulate her. You are setting up some binary world where it has to be either or when that goes against the premise of the show. The premise of the show is that most of these characters are more than just one thing. LF is both an asshole manipulator but also a teacher when it comes to Sansa. Sansa is both a love interest and a potential rival who will be his end. These characters are all more than just a single thing so not sure why you think that by virtue of his manipulating her, LF couldn't have also been teaching her at the same time. In most of the scenes above, he didn't have to explain to her his motivations for doing things or do so honestly. Yet he did.

I suspect she wouldn't be worthy of his obsession in his mind if she weren't also capable of eventually seeing through his manipulations as first and foremost, his love for both Catelyn and Sansa is predicated on them being unattainable in my view which is why he never loved Lyssa.

You can argue he was trying to teach her, and I can argue in his own perverse way trying to persuade her to join him in his quest. Some of the things you just quoted were merely him answering questions, the one with Loras had no consequence to him, what did he care? That's nothing more than general conversation. As for why he killed Dontos, well, she witnessed that killing, he had to answer with something, telling her it was for her own good is the best argument he could have made. So while you might see the above as him trying to "Teach" Sansa, I see it more as him trying to ger her to commit to allying with him.

 

[xer0h0ur]

Lysa is batshit crazy and Petyr had been fostered with Lysa and Catelyn Tully. He loved Catelyn since childhood just as Lysa fell in love with Petyr. He almost committed to certain death wanting to fight Ned's brother Brandon to marry her. She wanted to marry Brandon and asked he spare Petyr's life so he left him with a scar to remember him by. Naval to collarbone as he described it. That was a valuable lesson for Littlefinger as he learned that he would never win as a fighter but instead had to rely on his wit.

I don't see the unattainable part you're referencing. He basically made his plays to try to get Catelyn and now he's been making his plays to try to get Sansa which clearly reminds him greatly of his lost love. Sansa isn't exactly giving him the complete cold shoulder either. A part of me thinks he has snuck far enough into her head that its still a possibility.

 

[remydat]

You can argue he was trying to teach her, and I can argue in his own perverse way trying to persuade her to join him in his quest. Some of the things you just quoted were merely him answering questions, the one with Loras had no consequence to him, what did he care? That's nothing more than general conversation. As for why he killed Dontos, well, she witnessed that killing, he had to answer with something, telling her it was for her own good is the best argument he could have made. So while you might see the above as him trying to "Teach" Sansa, I see it more as him trying to ger her to commit to allying with him.

Great that's two examples? What about all the other quotes? What about the below video where he is clearly instructing her by asking her questions about his motives.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3nrffi

He is literally talking about the killing of Joffery so that she can think through his motives and machinations as a teacher would. He's not just answering questions. He could have simply said yes he killed Joffery but he goes through the trouble of having her explain her thought process as to why she suspects him and who else she suspects. He goes through the trouble of telling her a man without a motive is a man no one suspects. He talks to her about keeping his fools confused. There is no inherent benefit to him doing so. He could have explained this without revealing this info. He reveals it because he wants her to learn because again manipulation and learning are not mutually exclusive.

 

[xer0h0ur]

My bro just told me script to 5 has been released......I'm impatiently waiting fir the video

Two unrelated hacks. One group of hackers released episode 4 while the other group of hackers stole over a terabyte of data from HBO and is holding it ransom, leaking personal information, contracts, addresses and phone numbers of GoT actors and the like.