Game of Thrones Thread

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
62,649
Liked Posts:
40,132
You didn't provide a video of Sansa saying anything about Waldas baby to Ramsay.........so still waiting for the manipulation you speak of.......Not saying it didn't happen, but I have no recollection of any such interaction, and I can't find it. Sansa talking to Theon was always to find an ally to help escape, not to form any sort of manipulation to exert or capture any kind of power from within, so both of your examples so far fail the litmus test.

Holy Shit dude, it's post 4166.

[video=youtube;EqSGIceHh8k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqSGIceHh8k[/video]

She flat out calls Ramsey a bastard and says Walda's son will have a better claim to the throne. When Ramsey says he's been naturalized as a son, Sansa says he was naturalized by a bastard as well. It's clear she is manipulating him and the end result is Ramsey kills Roose, Walda and kid. Again what do you think her reasons are for this conversation?

Finally, you keep moving goalposts. This was the comment you tried to criticize Turner for.

She tries to take command and begins to manipulate the people who are keeping her prisoner

1. The scene above is clearly her trying to manipulate Ramsey
2. Her relationship with Theon is clearly trying to manipulate him into helping her escape.

Whether you agree with the above or not, it is completely absurd to pretend that people can't view the above 2 things as manipulation so you lol at Turner for saying this is dumb. She is well within her rights to consider those scenes as attempts by Sansa to manipulate things. You have no factual basis to claim otherwise as you have provided no definitive evidence to the contrary. All you are doing is disagreeing and acting like your opinion is more important than Turner's. I don't know where you get this idea you know more than Turner.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
62,649
Liked Posts:
40,132
You do understand that you can learn from people that are not teachers? Sansa learned from Cersi, does that make her a teacher? No it's just you with this bizarre infatuation with LF as teacher, mentor, roll model.

I notice you completely ignored that the showrunner stated it quite clearly.

Benioff also provided some thoughts on why Sansa chose to go along with Littelfinger’s scheme. “Sansa started as such a naive innocent,” he said. “She’s been traumatized by what she’s seen and she spent almost a couple years in shell shock. At a certain point she’s either going to die or survive and become stronger. She’s chosen the latter option and she’s learned from an incredibly devious teacher in Littlefinger. The interesting thing about Littlefinger is he seems to have no almost no weaknesses aside from his affection for Sansa. He’s been obsessed with her since that early episode at the joust.”

http://ew.com/article/2015/04/26/gam...say-interview/

I am not sure what makes it bizarre to have a view that agrees with the showrunner. I also said nothing about role model. I said she learned the game from him which the showrunner confirmed 2 years ago. Maybe get up to speed on the show bro.

Remy is stuck in the broader definition of the term that if you learn something, anything from anyone, they are your teacher. By that definition, we are all teachers, as we are also all students. Some of us here choose to define the more traditional meaning of the term which implies a teacher is teaching you something with your personal growth in mind, and to that LF fails the definition. While it is true he presents himself to Sansa as a mentor a teacher, this in itself is nothing more than another one of his manipulations for his own personal gain, and not to help Sansa any any way. The one biggest thing Sansa learned from LF, is not to trust LF, as he will do nothing unless it advances his personal agenda.

Nope I'm stuck in what the showrunner confirmed two years ago. It's amazing how you argument is basically, "I know more than the showrunner and Turner so please believe me." At this point you must be George Martin or you should go write for the show since you know more than everyone else.
 

nc0gnet0

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Nov 27, 2014
Posts:
19,495
Liked Posts:
4,763
Nor did I. Little Finger will now try and turn his attention on Ayra and maybe try to play Arya against Sansa. LF will probably try and make his way to Cersei when his plans with the Starks fail.

that comment was directed at you so your reply confuses me........as for your probably I cannot comment without spoiler tags......
 

number51

Señor Member
Donator
Joined:
Aug 25, 2012
Posts:
17,310
Liked Posts:
11,347
Location:
Funk & Wagnalls' porch
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
Remy is stuck in the broader definition of the term that if you learn something, anything from anyone, they are your teacher. By that definition, we are all teachers, as we are also all students. Some of us here choose to define the more traditional meaning of the term which implies a teacher is teaching you something with your personal growth in mind, and to that LF fails the definition. While it is true he presents himself to Sansa as a mentor a teacher, this in itself is nothing more than another one of his manipulations for his own personal gain, and not to help Sansa any any way. The one biggest thing Sansa learned from LF, is not to trust LF, as he will do nothing unless it advances his personal agenda.

Nice!

Yeah, at one time LF was still trying to act like a teacher, and briefly Sansa might have bought into it, but he never was. That is all over with, Sansa is done with his shit and LF knows it.

An effective contrast is Arya who has had actual teachers, and it looks like she's graduated. That sparring match with Brienne was great.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
62,649
Liked Posts:
40,132
[video=youtube;MtYhmD2TZs0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtYhmD2TZs0[/video]

If this doesn't settle the debate then you guys are delusional. As I said it's not a binary thing. George Martin himself explains LF's feelings on Sansa is not binary. She's the daughter he never had, she's young Cat, and she's a piece to be used. This is exactly been my point. He's teaching and manipulating her because his feelings for her are complicated.

Trying to paint it as she's merely a tool to be used and all he is doing is telling her things to use her completely misses the complicated nature of LF's feelings towards her hence why the showrunner can say that he's her teacher and also his weakness. You can't simply separate it into teacher or manipulator and say it has to be one or the other because LF doesn't have such a neat box that Sansa fits into. The part of him that sees Sansa as a daughter/lover wants to teach her while the part of him that sees her as a pawn in his game wants to manipulate her. So what we end up with is LF doing both as I've said all along.

So what honestly don't you guys get?
 

nc0gnet0

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Nov 27, 2014
Posts:
19,495
Liked Posts:
4,763
He is grooming her to be a formidable player in the game. It is clear he is a teacher per the showrunner and it is clear he is her weakness per the showrunners. Now you seem to want me to just completely disregard everything the showrunners said simply because you said so. That's rubbish. I'm not going to simply believe the showrunner is lying about LF being her teacher or her being his weakness imply because you say so. Present actual evidence because you are not George Martin. Your opinion is meaningless here.

More Remyzone bullshit. Grooming her for the game my ass. Why did he give her up to the Boltons in the first place? Something that had more than just a little chance of her ending up dead. So what's the point of her being groomed under those circumstances? I will answer that question for you, none. It was only a ploy to gain enough trust to get her to go along with his plan, and convince her there was some other reason for him wanting her to do it. George Martin has nothing to do with this argument, as the whole Sansa to the Boltons scenario never even happened, it was Jeyne Poole, a fake Arya. So spare me your ignorant GRRM namedrop.

Also quit with the straw man bullshit. No one said, he was a teacher/good guy. That's absurd. You literally just made up the good guy comment because you are trying to get around what the showrunner said about him being a teacher. I love how you are claiming Sansa is one of his prizes and acting like I haven't already said that is what she is. It's like you are ignoring completely my point that he is teaching and manipulating her so that she could be a worthy prize for him. To try and transform that into he is a good guy is flat out Special person.

Teachers, by most of those posting on here (except of course you) believe by definition teachers are good guys, thus my straw man argument. It's not absurd, it's a traditionally held view. Now you might want to come in and spin your remyzone bullshit, and that's fine, but you have taken things out of context and tried to school everyone here on what the definition of a teacher really is. Yawn, and more yawn. He isn't teaching her shit, except not to trust him, a lesson that she is painfully starting to learn.

Little fingers plan: send Sansa to the Boltons, conspire with Cersie to let Ramsay and Stannis fight a battle, and then he swoops in and claims the North for himself, giving him both the Vale, and the North. You don't think that is a little dangerous a scenario for Sansa if he gave a flying **** about her? Come on dude, use your head. He used Sansa to weaken the Boltons position, and give him reason to invade the North with the Vale forces, as The Boltons wedding a Stark guaranteed The Lannisters would no longer support them. All the teaching (lol) he did up to that point were to gain her trust, so he could betray her, just like he has done everyone else. he assumed the role as mentor as a ploy, nothing else.

As for the redemption arc, I said you didn't provide proof.

IIRC it is in one the D&D "inside the episode" videos, I don't have time to re-watch them all tonight, maybe later this weekend, if your so insistent, but I did clearly lay out what would be commonly accepted as a redemption arc, and I have gret confidence in how it will play out. Just as I have confidence in things being brought to light in the next few episodes that will show I was right all along, so, let me think; two hours of googling and show watching to try to prove a point, or simply just let things play out the next three weeks and wait for the "I told you so" moment........hmmmm


I provided proof of what the show-runner said that supported my argument. You made some bullshit claim that Funny how I only use that logic to suit my argument and I responded that no one provided any evidence that a show-runner said Jamie was on a redemption arc. Do you have that evidence? If the showrunner didn't explicitly say it then don't try and compare me providing evidence of what the showrunner explicitly said with you trying to tell me what you think the showrunner was trying to do in a given scene. That's disingenuous.

And no when he actually turns his back on his monster of a sister then it would be growth. That's my entire point.

And my point is that such a moment has been foreshadowed and clearly laid out for most of us, you being the exception.

We are seven seasons in and the dude is still wrapped around Cersei's finger even as she's driving their children to suicide and promising other dude's some pussy right in front of him. So he's exactly where he was in season one ie he's Cersei's toyboy and *****.

Not exactly as those things are clearly starting to take its toll on him. And for the record, I don't think Cersei has any intention on living up to her promise to Euron, nor do I think jamies believes he is a significant threat in that way. But honestly that is a moot point.

Any character actually experiencing growth would have killed that crazy ***** a long time ago or at a minimum slapped some fucking sense into her. Instead the dude continues to act like Cersei has the penis. I'm waiting for the scene where Cersei pulls out a big black dildo and fucks him in the ass because she's been doing it figuratively for the whole show. Like at what point do you think any reasonable man would have been like WTF? If I had to guess, I would say most dudes would have abandoned Cersei about 2 dead fucking children ago. The dude is the very definition of the word cuckold.

I don't really disagree with most of this, and yes, D & D are taking the whole "love is blind" thing a bit to far. I am not going to sit her and defend some of the show runners writing, but understand the condensation of multiple characters into one has altered certain story arcs.


On the third book, Jaime is going through a change, affected mainly by Brienne's positive influence and his maiming. Although he enjoys mocking Brienne for her naive perspective, he learns a lot about honor and decency from her, the woman who is the exact opposite of Cersei of all aspects. His conscience finally awakes, and opens his eyes to see the corruption, injustice and wickedness that he was indifferent to: he saves Brienne twice from gang rape, and from death at the bear pit. As a part of the change in Jaime's personality, he severs relationship with the two people who always had negative influence on him - first his father, then Cersei. He has sex with Cersei near Joffrey's body in the Great Sept (clearly presented as consensually in the novels, but poor camerawork in the TV series unintentionally gave the impression it was not - see "Jaime/Cersei sex scene in Breaker of Chains" in the "Season 4" section, above). This turns out to be the last time that Jaime and Cersei have sex, as afterwards they grow increasingly distant, as Jaime becomes gradually more disgusted by Cersei's brazen and self-defeating actions.

After Jaime releases Tyrion, Tyrion is so enraged to hear the truth about Tysha that he tells Jaime "You poor stupid blind crippled fool. Must I spell every little thing out for you? Very well. Cersei is a lying whore, she's been fucking Lancel and Osmund Kettleblack and probably Moon Boy for all I know." Jaime wants to believe Tyrion lied to him, but Tyrion's words are confirmed by what Cersei told Jaime earlier "He's [Tyrion] lied to you a thousand times, and so have I". Throughout the fourth book, he is haunted by doubts.

On the way to Riverrun, Jaime pays a visit to his cousin Lancel at Darry. Lancel, who has become pious and deeply regets his past sins, tells Jaime tearfully the whole truth about his part in Robert's death and that he was Cersei's lover. That confession clears any doubts Jaime had about what Tyrion told him, and enforces his decision to stay away from his sister. Jaime also realizes why the High Septon (the one who preceded the High Sparrow) was killed, and that Cersei is responsible."
"


http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Cersei_and_Jaime_Lannister

your "show runners" have steadfastly said that the end game (for the five major characters) will be the same as it is in the books, as jamie clearly has a redemption arc in the books, it makes sense that the show will follow suit, and while they admittedly could have been doing a better job of it, the clues have always been there, and only those oblivious to it would be in denial.
 

Warrior Spirit

The Truth
Donator
Joined:
Sep 12, 2010
Posts:
41,927
Liked Posts:
15,379
[video=youtube;MtYhmD2TZs0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtYhmD2TZs0[/video]

If this doesn't settle the debate then you guys are delusional. As I said it's not a binary thing. George Martin himself explains LF's feelings on Sansa is not binary. She's the daughter he never had, she's young Cat, and she's a piece to be used. This is exactly been my point. He's teaching and manipulating her because his feelings for her are complicated.

Trying to paint it as she's merely a tool to be used and all he is doing is telling her things to use her completely misses the complicated nature of LF's feelings towards her hence why the showrunner can say that he's her teacher and also his weakness. You can't simply separate it into teacher or manipulator and say it has to be one or the other because LF doesn't have such a neat box that Sansa fits into. The part of him that sees Sansa as a daughter/lover wants to teach her while the part of him that sees her as a pawn in his game wants to manipulate her. So what we end up with is LF doing both as I've said all along.

So what honestly don't you guys get?
The part where you get he's teaching and grooming her out "she's a piece to be used."
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
62,649
Liked Posts:
40,132
The part where you get he's teaching and grooming her out "she's a piece to be used."

Don't be an idiot. That's one part of his feelings towards her with the other being his feelings towards her being the daughter he never had and a young cat. It's like you only listened to the part of the video that supports your point. What part of his feelings are complicated don't you get?
 

nc0gnet0

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Nov 27, 2014
Posts:
19,495
Liked Posts:
4,763
[video=youtube;MtYhmD2TZs0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtYhmD2TZs0[/video]

If this doesn't settle the debate then you guys are delusional. As I said it's not a binary thing. George Martin himself explains LF's feelings on Sansa is not binary. She's the daughter he never had, she's young Cat, and she's a piece to be used. This is exactly been my point. He's teaching and manipulating her because his feelings for her are complicated.

Trying to paint it as she's merely a tool to be used and all he is doing is telling her things to use her completely misses the complicated nature of LF's feelings towards her hence why the showrunner can say that he's her teacher and also his weakness. You can't simply separate it into teacher or manipulator and say it has to be one or the other because LF doesn't have such a neat box that Sansa fits into. The part of him that sees Sansa as a daughter/lover wants to teach her while the part of him that sees her as a pawn in his game wants to manipulate her. So what we end up with is LF doing both as I've said all along.

So what honestly don't you guys get?

GRRM also said the following: (Season 5)

"There have been differences between the novels and the television show since the first episode of season one. And for just as long, I have been talking about the butterfly effect. Small changes lead to larger changes lead to huge changes. HBO is more than forty hours into the impossible and demanding task of adapting my lengthy (extremely) and complex (exceedingly) novels, with their layers of plots and subplots, their twists and contradictions and unreliable narrators, viewpoint shifts and ambiguities, and a cast of characters in the hundreds.

There has seldom been any TV series as faithful to its source material, by and large (if you doubt that, talk to the Harry Dresden fans, or readers of the Sookie Stackhouse novels, or the fans of the original WALKING DEAD comic books)… but the longer the show goes on, the bigger the butterflies become. And now we have reached the point where the beat of butterfly wings is stirring up storms, like the one presently engulfing my email.

Prose and television have different strengths, different weaknesses, different requirements.

David and Dan and Bryan and HBO are trying to make the best television series that they can. And over here I am trying to write the best novels that I can
"

this interview was done right after the show aired the Ramsay/Sansa rape scene, and what Grrm is saying is, that D & D essentially destroyed the LF/Sansa narrative and made it much different than what he spoke about in the interview your provided.

Essentially, when the show runners decided to combine Jeynne Poole's storyline with Sansa, they created one of these storms, essentially destroying the narrative G. Martin speaks of in that video. Your video is conveniently from season 4, before D & D threw in the Sansa to Ramsay twist. Ergo, your argument might hold water in the books, but not in the show. Each of Grrm's interviews after the show ran out of book material have become increasingly critical of some of the storylines.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
62,649
Liked Posts:
40,132
nc0gnet0

I'm not going to quote your wall of bullshit so I will just enumerate the points.

1. He gave her up to the Boltons because once again his feelings are complicated. Like holy shit, it's like you don't listen to anything being said. He is teaching her and manipulating her because shes a daughter/lover but she is also a piece to be used. So the part of him that views her as the former teaches her and the parts of him that view her as the latter manipulates her. It's amazing you can understand that Jamie has good and bad in him but you reduce everything related to LF to just manipulation when the showrunner and Martin make it clear that his feelings for Sansa are complicated.

2. Martin and the Showrunner have everything to do with it because they help bring the show to screen. I never claimed Martin was referring to the Roose thing. I pointed out that Martin and the Showrunner have described LF and Sansa's relationship in it's totality. You are cherry picking one example and trying to act like it's all their interactions. I am saying that it is clear from both Martin and the showrunner than over the course of their entire relationship that spans 7 seasons and not just the one incident where he convinced her to marry Ramsey that Martin and the showrunner make it clear that his feelings for her are not as simplistic as her merely being a tool to be used. You would have to be dense to think that is the sum total of their relationship over these 7 seasons and when the showrunner and Martin who was commenting in his role as an executive producer of the show (ie he was commenting on their TV relationship) make it clear that Sansa is a daugher/lover/tool and that LF is a teacher and a manipulator.

3. I was the one that said he taught her the game so you can't then respond and try to tell me what I meant by that statement. That's absurd. I don't use terms based on what you think they mean. I use terms based on what I think they mean and it is clear being a teacher does not require being a good guy. And it is clear the showrunner agrees with me because he describes LF as Sansa's devious teacher. So your straw man is bullshit. It requires me to magically determine what you mean by a word as if I am in your head before I choose to use it which is dumb and then to also disregard the fact that someone intimately involved in developing these characters used the word in the same manner that I did. As well as disregard the way I used the term is how it is actually defined in the dictionary. It is like you want me to create an alternative facts world where you get to decide for me what I meant by something I said.

4. And if you are proven right or produce the evidence then we can revisit the discussion. Until then, you have provided no evidence for you claim. By contrast, I provided clear evidence of what Martin and the showrunner actually said. Not something you have to infer or make an analogy to or claim they have said the show will be like the novels and the novels said this. Like do you realize how ridiculous your stance is here. You want me to ignore flat out what Martin and the showrunner said about LF feelings and his teaching Sansa. Yet you want me to then take something the showrunners said about the tv show matching the novels and then just assume that means things will play out like you say. How hypocritical can you be?

5. Also I never said that something hasn't been foreshadowed. I said the character hasn't grown because he's still Cersei's *****. Foreshadowing does not equal character growth. Those are two completely different words that mean two completely different things. As it stands, the writers have really painted themselves into a corner because more than likely the eventual reason for his turning on her will still leave me thinking he should have bailed when his young and ultimately good son chose suicide over Cersei. Like in your crystal ball where you will be proven right, what dastardly act do you think Cersei is going to commit that will trump their son killing himself because of her actions? The growth should have arrived a long time ago dude. Maybe one of his kids would be alive if it had. I'm not really all that interested in this foreshadowed event to arrive given all the fucked up shit Cersei has already done. I checked out of that whole story line before the good son hit the pavement.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
62,649
Liked Posts:
40,132
GRRM also said the following: (Season 5)

"There have been differences between the novels and the television show since the first episode of season one. And for just as long, I have been talking about the butterfly effect. Small changes lead to larger changes lead to huge changes. HBO is more than forty hours into the impossible and demanding task of adapting my lengthy (extremely) and complex (exceedingly) novels, with their layers of plots and subplots, their twists and contradictions and unreliable narrators, viewpoint shifts and ambiguities, and a cast of characters in the hundreds.

There has seldom been any TV series as faithful to its source material, by and large (if you doubt that, talk to the Harry Dresden fans, or readers of the Sookie Stackhouse novels, or the fans of the original WALKING DEAD comic books)… but the longer the show goes on, the bigger the butterflies become. And now we have reached the point where the beat of butterfly wings is stirring up storms, like the one presently engulfing my email.

Prose and television have different strengths, different weaknesses, different requirements.

David and Dan and Bryan and HBO are trying to make the best television series that they can. And over here I am trying to write the best novels that I can
"

this interview was done right after the show aired the Ramsay/Sansa rape scene, and what Grrm is saying is, that D & D essentially destroyed the LF/Sansa narrative and made it much different than what he spoke about in the interview your provided.

Essentially, when the show runners decided to combine Jeynne Poole's storyline with Sansa, they created one of these storms, essentially destroying the narrative G. Martin speaks of in that video. Your video is conveniently from season 4, before D & D threw in the Sansa to Ramsay twist. Ergo, your argument might hold water in the books, but not in the show. Each of Grrm's interviews after the show ran out of book material have become increasingly critical of some of the storylines.

This argument makes no sense because once again I never limited my comments to just the Ramsey wedding. That's you trying to move the goalposts. I said he taught her the game. That teaching has been over the full 7 seasons not simply one incident. Further the Ramsey wedding doesn't invalidate anything Martin said because Martin said that LF sees her as a daughter/lover/tool. So during the Ramsey incident, as Martin said, LF just detached himself from his feelings for her and treated her more as a tool. That doesn't prove he never taught her or that he doesn't view her as a daughter/lover. It just proves that in that particular moment he viewed her more as a tool to be used. However in other moments over the course of the show, his viewing her as a daughter/lover led to him teaching her.

I don't really get why you seem confused that over the course of 7 seasons, he has taught her or why you keep using one anecdotal example as if that explains the entire relationship. It's like you don't understand any complexities of the character and you think Martin or the showrunners just created a one dimensional character. That's stupid. LF's relationship with Sansa over the course of the entire show cannot be explained by just the Ramsey incident. You can't be this dense.

Martin and the showrunners made it clear the nature of the relationship in it's totality not simply based on one incident.
 

nc0gnet0

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Nov 27, 2014
Posts:
19,495
Liked Posts:
4,763
This argument makes no sense because once again I never limited my comments to just the Ramsey wedding. That's you trying to move the goalposts. I said he taught her the game. That teaching has been over the full 7 seasons not simply one incident. Further the Ramsey wedding doesn't invalidate anything Martin said because Martin said that LF sees her as a daughter/lover/tool. So during the Ramsey incident, as Martin said, LF just detached himself from his feelings for her and treated her more as a tool. That doesn't prove he never taught her or that he doesn't view her as a daughter/lover. It just proves that in that particular moment he viewed her more as a tool to be used. However in other moments over the course of the show, his viewing her as a daughter/lover led to him teaching her.

I don't really get why you seem confused that over the course of 7 seasons, he has taught her or why you keep using one anecdotal example as if that explains the entire relationship. It's like you don't understand any complexities of the character and you think Martin or the showrunners just created a one dimensional character. That's stupid. LF's relationship with Sansa over the course of the entire show cannot be explained by just the Ramsey incident. You can't be this dense.

Martin and the showrunners made it clear the nature of the relationship in it's totality not simply based on one incident.

LMAO,

Again, there is no duality to there relationship in the show, Sansa is a piece to be played in the Game of Thrones, for his benefit, nothing else. Your cannot seperate the manor of which LF plays the game, which is in this case is him presenting himself as a mentor to Sansa to gain her trust, from the reality of LF, which is as Sansa already learned, LF does nothing that does not benefit him. Period. End of discussion. No duality, get it? got it? good!

Your pathetic attempt to show what Sansa has learned how to manipulate people from LF fails to pass the smell test, on all levels. He manipulated Ramsay into killing Walda and her newborn son. Really? That was her intent? Really? You sure it wasn't just a rare opportunity to get a dig in on Ramsey? No tutelage needed for that.

Sansa manipulated Theon into aiding her to escape? Common man, everyone in that situation would have done the same. Period.

Of course there is the great pearl of wisdom LF gave to Sansa about Cersei being dangerous, you know the one were Sansa replied, " you mean to tell me the lady that killed my family is dangerous?" Obviously another higher level of learning moment from Professor Little finger.....

Your not grasping what GRRM is saying in the post I quoted. A major character deviation in the show not only impacts meaning and motive to the story moving forward, it also does the same to the events that conspired in the past. I will not deny that LF was being portrayed as a teacher to Sansa, and in the books their relationship is indeed more complicated. This is not the books, and while we can use the books for clues as for character motivation, they are not the end all be all in deciphering intent on the show. D & D abandoned the Sansa/ LF storyline in the book when they opted to combine Sansa and Jeynne Poole's story lines into a series of events that never happened in the books. The end of season 4 is where the show began to depart from book content, into content that had not yet been written by Grmm.

The culmination of events leading up to LF delivering Sansa to the Boltons makes all events that preceded it take on an entirely different meaning in the show, by the fact he did do exactly just that. It's not one anecdotal example as you try to make it out to be, it's a huge game changer, something you don't grasp. This is what GRMM is alluding to in the interview which was given right after the Sansa/ Ramsay wedding scene. Sansa never wed Ramsay in the book universe.

Book LF would have never taken this chance with Sansa, period, she was too valuable to him. For reasons you seem to keep ignoring, it redefined the duality, or lack there-of in the show universe. You simply don't do that to someone you care about, or are grooming for the future. The moment he did that it blatantly showed Sansa was a disposable piece to him, nothing more, regardless of how he might have been presenting himself. And as soon as he finds out she is no longer a piece in which he can manipulate, he will again betray her without hesitation, in a last desperate attempt to further his agenda. It will be his undoing. I could delve further into the nuances of how and why, but I am already treading dangerously into spoiler tag territory, so I will say no more on the topic until the end of the season.
 

Warrior Spirit

The Truth
Donator
Joined:
Sep 12, 2010
Posts:
41,927
Liked Posts:
15,379
Don't be an idiot. That's one part of his feelings towards her with the other being his feelings towards her being the daughter he never had and a young cat. It's like you only listened to the part of the video that supports your point. What part of his feelings are complicated don't you get?
I don't care if his feelings are complicated. That will be simplified when she orders him killed. You've been positing that he taught and groomed her, it didn't happen like that. This was never a teacher/student relationship.
 

nc0gnet0

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Nov 27, 2014
Posts:
19,495
Liked Posts:
4,763
Also I never said that something hasn't been foreshadowed. I said the character hasn't grown because he's still Cersei's *****. Foreshadowing does not equal character growth. Those are two completely different words that mean two completely different things. blah blah blah.


What? Foreshadowing does not equal character growth? Where did I ever say it did?. What is foreshadowed is the fact he will eventually leave Cersei, thus completing his redemption arc, or at least taking a big step in doing so. The foreshadowing is giving us clues into what Jamie is thinking, along with how he interacts with others. The fact that he is not progressing as fast as you seem to think he should is irrelevant to the process, the process is happening, none the less. I am not saying that there was never a good side to jamie, but rather there has been a progression and growth in that side of him from season one up until now. There is no given time line as to how fast this progression has to take place, and if or not he regress's at certain points in the arc. The fact remains it is still there.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
62,649
Liked Posts:
40,132
LMAO,

Again, there is no duality to there relationship in the show, Sansa is a piece to be played in the Game of Thrones, for his benefit, nothing else. Your cannot seperate the manor of which LF plays the game, which is in this case is him presenting himself as a mentor to Sansa to gain her trust, from the reality of LF, which is as Sansa already learned, LF does nothing that does not benefit him. Period. End of discussion. No duality, get it? got it? good!

Your pathetic attempt to show what Sansa has learned how to manipulate people from LF fails to pass the smell test, on all levels. He manipulated Ramsay into killing Walda and her newborn son. Really? That was her intent? Really? You sure it wasn't just a rare opportunity to get a dig in on Ramsey? No tutelage needed for that.

Sansa manipulated Theon into aiding her to escape? Common man, everyone in that situation would have done the same. Period.

Of course there is the great pearl of wisdom LF gave to Sansa about Cersei being dangerous, you know the one were Sansa replied, " you mean to tell me the lady that killed my family is dangerous?" Obviously another higher level of learning moment from Professor Little finger.....

Your not grasping what GRRM is saying in the post I quoted. A major character deviation in the show not only impacts meaning and motive to the story moving forward, it also does the same to the events that conspired in the past. I will not deny that LF was being portrayed as a teacher to Sansa, and in the books their relationship is indeed more complicated. This is not the books, and while we can use the books for clues as for character motivation, they are not the end all be all in deciphering intent on the show. D & D abandoned the Sansa/ LF storyline in the book when they opted to combine Sansa and Jeynne Poole's story lines into a series of events that never happened in the books. The end of season 4 is where the show began to depart from book content, into content that had not yet been written by Grmm.

The culmination of events leading up to LF delivering Sansa to the Boltons makes all events that preceded it take on an entirely different meaning in the show, by the fact he did do exactly just that. It's not one anecdotal example as you try to make it out to be, it's a huge game changer, something you don't grasp. This is what GRMM is alluding to in the interview which was given right after the Sansa/ Ramsay wedding scene. Sansa never wed Ramsay in the book universe.

Book LF would have never taken this chance with Sansa, period, she was too valuable to him. For reasons you seem to keep ignoring, it redefined the duality, or lack there-of in the show universe. You simply don't do that to someone you care about, or are grooming for the future. The moment he did that it blatantly showed Sansa was a disposable piece to him, nothing more, regardless of how he might have been presenting himself. And as soon as he finds out she is no longer a piece in which he can manipulate, he will again betray her without hesitation, in a last desperate attempt to further his agenda. It will be his undoing. I could delve further into the nuances of how and why, but I am already treading dangerously into spoiler tag territory, so I will say no more on the topic until the end of the season.

Once again, Martin was commenting on their relationship in the show during Season 4 so yes it is complicated. This is confirmed by Martin and it's confirmed by the showrunner who says LF is Sansa's devious teacher. So I don't need a wall of text with your unfounded opinion. When you have something that overrides Martin and the showrunner get back to me.

The Ramsey and Sansa scene once again has nothing to do with her learning from LF. You posted a Sophie Turner quote to discredit her and I responded by providing examples of what she meant by her comment. There is no reason for Sophie Turner to believe what you said as you have no evidence for your opinion. You are just wildly speculating. From Sophie Turner's perspective, she views those actions as attempts to manipulate things. That was the only point being made and your opinion holds no weight as it relates to her thoughts on her character's intentions. Again, you seem to think your opinion is more important than hers for some strange reason.

Your argument would be like saying that if I taught you math and then one day I betrayed you in some way, that means that all the math I thought you disappears. Don't be stupid. Sansa still learned all those things from LF and he was still her devious teacher as the showrunner said. The Bolton thing helps create distrust and will likely lead to Sansa ending their relationship as soon as LF outlives his usefulness to her but it does not alter all the things she learned from him up to that point. So you are grasping at straws.
 

Ares

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
42,309
Liked Posts:
35,040
Ima post naked old Melisandre pics till u guys knock this off...

melisandre-isnt-just-old--shes-centuries-old.jpg
 

The Hawk

Well-known member
Joined:
Jan 21, 2014
Posts:
18,007
Liked Posts:
3,238
Location:
Southern California
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
I think that Littlefingers "game" was/is to become King of the 7 Kingdoms himself and to do that he will need the North hence marrying Sansa. But his attempts to "woo" her are failing so he is attempting to use the other Stark kids to win favor for himself.
 

The Hawk

Well-known member
Joined:
Jan 21, 2014
Posts:
18,007
Liked Posts:
3,238
Location:
Southern California
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
has anyone else noticed that Khal Drogo died with a shoulder injury and the dragon named Drogo got injured in the shoulder as well? Would Qyburn poison the arrow?

Could be that you are correct.
 

Ares

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
42,309
Liked Posts:
35,040
I think that Littlefingers "game" was/is to become King of the 7 Kingdoms himself and to do that he will need the North hence marrying Sansa. But his attempts to "woo" her are failing so he is attempting to use the other Stark kids to win favor for himself.

b3cc282c1e0c721384572e6f9e5987956c251957348819d3835bb2e7b51f65c8.jpg
 

Top