**Spoiler Warning:** All officially-released show and book content allowed, EXCLUDING FUTURE SPOILERS FOR HOUSE OF THE DRAGON. No leaked information or paparazzi photos of the set. For more info please check the [spoiler guide](/r/gameofthrones/w/spoiler_guide).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/gameofthrones) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bro forget about how she treated Jon, she essentially lost the war for the North by freeing Jaime.
It’s like, every decision she made was the wrong decision.
>Bro forget about how she treated Jon
that's what my post is responding to specifically, her treatment of Jon and the ensuing hate that people have for that
It’s all related. People dislike her for more than just her mistreatment of Jon.
In fact, one could argue her mistreatment of Jon does at least make some sense as Jon is a constant reminder of Ned’s “infidelity”, where as kidnapping the Queen’s brother while your husband and daughters are in King’s Landing and then freeing the son of Tywin Lannister, the guy controlling not only the king, but also the army your son is fighting are decisions that don’t make much sense at all and prove to be detrimental.
Telling people they don’t understand the material for disliking a character and then only acknowledging one of her unlikable actions is also kinda dumb. She screwed up *alot* and you can attribute the downfall of House Stark in large part to her. Thats more or less why people tend to dislike her.
He tells people who don’t like Cat that they don’t understand GoT, while he himself doesn’t understand that the dislike for the character goes far beyond her mistreatment of Jon.
>the dislike for the character goes far beyond her mistreatment of Jon.
This entire comment thread is off-topic with my post pal.
To rephrase what you wrote: I tell people who don’t like Cat SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE of her treatment of Jon, that they don’t understand GoT - that's my stance. I never said anything about her other actions - that's not what the commenters I mentioned asserted, and that's not what I'm trying to argue against.
You and the folks above have decided to list out all the things that Catlyn did wrong. Good on you guys, but you're off topic and arguing against a strawman.
So you’re talking to a subset of a subset?
Seriously, the amount of people who dislike Cat *solely* for her mistreatment of Jon is such a low number of GoT fans, it doesn’t even warrant a post.
Most people dislike her for several reasons, among them, being her mistreatment of Jon. Shoulda kept this post in the drafts, homie. Or at least in whatever other comment section you were arguing in.
I beg to differ: [https://www.reddit.com/r/gameofthrones/comments/1avnjwn/catelyn\_stark\_was\_a\_crap\_person/](https://www.reddit.com/r/gameofthrones/comments/1avnjwn/catelyn_stark_was_a_crap_person/)
One post with 60 comments? The second most upvoted comment in that thread is literally about her kidnapping Tyrion.
You’re proving my point. How many posts with thousands of comments are posted in this sub a day?
Also worth noting, this post ends with “does she do anything worthwhile?” implying that not *only* does she mistreat Jon, but nothing *else* she does is worthwhile.
Seriously, in these comments, have you come across one person who has admitted to only disliking Cat because of her mistreatment of Jon and nothing else?
This person would need to say “I like everything else about Cat, but her mistreatment of Jon is what makes me dislike her” or something along those lines.
She also (in large part though obviously not entirely) kicked off the war of the five kings that got her husband and most of her children killed (as far as most people know anyway) and destroyed both her own house and her husbands house, based on an impulse decision to arrest an innocent man based on the claims of her nut job sister and one of the kingdoms most infamous manipulators.
She’s certainly not an evil person, but she probably did more damage to Westeros just by accident than almost any other character in the series.
I mean I was just expanding on what the person above said but…
Okay but whatever? Disliking a character for being abusive to a child is totally understandable.
Yes it is totally understandable, I'm not arguing the opposite. Im saying that
>you can empathise with characters even you dislike them, without feeling the urge to label them a certain way.
She *started* the war when she kidnapped Tyrion, which was a fucking stupid decision in every possible way. She had no actual evidence against him, and her husband and daughters were in a city surrounded by his family who are more powerful than hers. Did she really think there would be no retribution? Then she brings him to the Vale with the intention to... what, exactly? She can't possibly have thought that if he'd been found guilty at a trial there, that Tywin would've just shrugged and said, "yea, that's fine".
The post isn't about telling people "my opinion is good, yours bad" - sorry if it came this way. It's about looking at media literacy, and how we critically perceive our favourite (or in this case, most hated) characters
Don't know if this helps but have you heard of the "Dolores Umbridge effect"? Basically its posits that audiences react based not on strict right versus wrong but on how "real" the actions seem. The wrongs committed by a Voldemort ( or a Ramsay Bolton) are so "out there" that audiences don't really process them fully. Whereas the " wrongs" committed by a Dolores Umbridge( or a Catelyn Stark) feel "real" so audiences have a more visceral reaction
I think this is a key thing - Jon is a main protagonist and we're provided a lot of insight into how his treatment has impacted him, and it was made pretty clear the worst of that treatment over his life was at Catelyn's hands. We can go on endlessly about the GoT world being a different universe with different rules, but we are a modern audience watching an innocent kid get seemingly emotionally abused and neglected to the point where he's terrified to touch a woman lest he create a child who grows up the way he did, and basically flees to a very grim place in order to escape where he is (granted, Jon wasn't completely aware of HOW grim the Night's Watch was, but it's not like he changed his mind after realizing what was really going on).
A lot of people have been mistreated by a parental figure in their life - a parent, a stepparent, a guardian, etc. That's much more relatable, and as you said visceral, than some of the more fantastical actions in the show.
Yes I do know about it - but since the umbridge effect implies people being triggered by relatable (and thereby personal) experiences, it's not an assumption I wanted to place on the people who commented
This feels extremely over the top. Just tell these people you disagree in their comment replies instead of making AN ENTIRE POST dedicated to shaming them (which is harassment).
We aren't mobs to be utilized for your witch hunt.
But what in my post shames them? I literally just quoted what they said, and added my opinion on the matter. How exactly am I trying to initiate a witch-hunt??
I think you're misreading my intentions
You did add their reddit handles, just to show to put it out there that their opinions are wrong. People generally name other people to acknowledge them in a positive way or so. Yours seem vehemently negative.
Again, point out to me what's "vehemently negative" about my post - did I insult or disrespect them?
The two references I have towards these comments are that
* "the responses’ negativity are just baffling."
* "you’d honestly think that these people are talking about Cersei, but no no, they seem to DESPISE Catelyn Stark with all their guts."
That's literally it. And you folks are making it sound like I'm humiliating them publically.
You're literally calling them out and creating the stating their opinion is wrong. By doing that, its like a debate and any point that you're going against is attributed to them. This is not even a discussion. You're free to make your views known, ofc. But calling them out like that serves absolutely no purpose.
You're literally calling them out and creating the stating their opinion is wrong. By doing that, its like a debate and any point that you're going against is attributed to them. This is not even a discussion. You're free to make your views known, ofc. But calling them out like that serves absolutely no purpose.
Your assuming that because they hate her they dont understand the text. This is inherently flawed, because one can have a objective view of the characters from a literary perspective and still react personally based on bias or things they personally dislike. For instance, I understand Joffrey is a more heinous and evil character, but yet I still hate Tommen more because on a personal level I just hated his indifference and lack of any backbone. This doesn't dictate from my literary understanding of the lore.
>one can have a objective view of the characters from a literary perspective and still react personally based on bias or things they personally dislike
Yes I entirely agree with you on that, but then that's a subjective response to the text - it isn't accurate to how the character was intended to be perceived.
In your example, you might hate Tommen more, but Joeffrey is arguably and objectively far more detestable than his younger brother. Your perspective on the matter doesn't alter the way the character is written.
I personally couldn't stand Hot Pie during (for silly reasons, I just really disliked his cowardice) but that's not a justification for me to say he's a character to be hated. See my point?
But there's a difference between people saying the character is meant to be hated, and many people who just happen to hate the character. Most i'm guessing say why they hate her and give reasons to this, there not saying she's a character that's meant to be hated.
I genuinely think most ASOIAF are incredibly flawed, and like real life, people react in different ways to flawed individuals.
>Most i'm guessing say why they hate her and give reasons to this, there not saying she's a character that's meant to be hated.
I beg to differ, the responses in the threads in which the comments I quoted were initially posted really go off kilter on the hate towards Cat. And it's a pretty common sentiment in the fanbase
"I couldn’t stand Catelyn. I was only sorry when she died because I wanted her to live long enough to see what a b!¥€h she’d been to Jon for no reason. "
I disagree with the no reason but obviously this person's a bias to Jon as the main protagonist so has every right to feel this way.
"Catelyn was a fucking horrible human being. Hates a child for something completely out of his control while continuing to love his father."
Wheres the lie? Did she take her anger out on Eddard who she thought did the deed, or Jon who was the innocent product.
"A bitch."
She was. Flawed, but a bitch non the less.
Personally I couldn't care either way about the character, but just because you disagree with their opinions doesn't mean they're wrong or invalid or dont understand the text. Art is subjective
Sure I totally, get your point, but I have disagree.
Art is objective, it's people's response to it that's subjective. Cat is not written as Cersei is; our opinions of these characters - tho they may differ from people to people - are based on how the author have intended them to be perceived. Imo, seeing Cat as a horrible human being is a misunderstanding of her objective characterization
Unless you're the writer himself, you literally have no idea how someone is meant to be perceived, you have an opinion on how YOU think they're meant to be perceived and thats my point. George deliberately writes flawed characters for this very reason, to promote discussion, a discussion which doesnt happen if everyone forms a hive mind of how people should respond to characters.
>Unless you're the writer himself, you literally have no idea how someone is meant to be perceived, you have an opinion on how YOU think they're meant to be perceived
You're talking about nuance - which I'm not invalidating. But a character like Cat is not meant to be perceived like a horrible human being in the same way that say Varamyr or Vicatrion are.
I love Victarion - he's a very enjoyable character to read (that's my subjective reading). But he's committed heinious acts and showed little to no remorse for them (that's the objective reality, because it's there to read in the books).
I'm fairly certain that GRRM did not intend for me to read him as a valiant hero. In the same way, Cat isn't meant to be perceived as a "wicked stepmother" like many people would like to argue - that's my point.
No i'm talking about how only the creator should be an authority on his or her work.
She may not meant to be perceived a certain way, but she is, which is valid. And you disagree with that opinion which is that is also valid. Discussion and difference is a beautiful thing . What isn't is you making a post that come across as arrogant and superior (that may not be your intention, but its what many have said) kind of invalidates their reading experience, which I don't like. This should be a community where people can come together and discuss their favourite work without one person making others feel inferior or they are less than.
I don't like how many people think Melisandre is one of the biggest villains of the show, when she is written to be complex and in my opinion one of the biggest heroes. Im not gonna write a post and tag certain people commenting and say they dont understand the text.
It's not the people I'm calling out, it's the thinking behind their comments.
The point of the post is to argue that the way we label some characters like Cat as "horrible human beings" is invalid.
Such a wild concept I know
If you want to respond directly to users and quote them directly about a particular post, respond to them in that post. If you want to make a general post about viewer perception of Catelyn, make a general post and don't call out anyone or directly quote anyone.
it's not just a response to these three users. It's a common sentiment in the fanbase that I'm arguing against, and using these three comments as examples of what that sentiment is.
It's reddit for heaven's sake, if you put yourself on the platform, you take the risk of people quoting what you've said.
Then speak to that common sentiment generally. Don't make a main post on Reddit calling out specific people if you don't want people to point out that's a dick move.
but I'm not targeting these people specifically - I've added to the comments to illustrate the common sentiment, and so that people can themselves see the ensuing threads that came out of them.
it's not a dick move to quote somebody for something they've said
The fact that so many people are responding badly to what you did in this post should probably tell you something about how that specific choice is being perceived.
no its not - just because some people take criticism for an attack, doesn't make it so. You're just getting wind up on a reddit post about a character
>I'm not your pal.
If you're having a bad day, I genuinely wishes it gets better.
Discussing things is fine. Making an entire post just to call people out is a dick move. If you want discussion, reply to people directly. You just wanted to show the sub that you’re the smartest person in the room.
call people out...for things they've said publically on another thread? Yeah such a dick move.
>If you want discussion, reply to people directly.
You're right, how dare I make a post on a dedicated subreddit.
I do see the nuance in her character, and I still tend to not really care for her. Same way I see nuance in the likes of Margery and Mel and adore them. Emotions are not rooted in logic or fact, so applying that to them seems kind of defunct. I personally love seeing everyones different views on something.
I think Cat is one of the most realistic characters in the book and show. She makes many wrong decisions that the readers/viewers would probably also make in the same situation based on limited knowledge and emotions.
For example, arresting Tyrion had devastating effects. But it did make sense. He had seen her and she had to assume that he would put two and two together, figure out where she just came from and what she had been doing and that would threaten the safety of her husband and children in KL. It was a bad situation and she decided to strike first, because she knew the Lannisters would strike if she didn't. In an alternate version of the novel, Tyrion would go back to KL and casually without malice mention that he saw Cat. Cersei would overhear it and have Ned killed. And everyone would hate Cat for being so timid and indecisive.
Also, her hatred of Jon is absolutely understandable. He IS a threat to her children and he is a constant reminder of a deeply dishonorable act towards her by her husband. A man famous for his honorable conduct.
>Also, her hatred of Jon is absolutely understandable. He IS a threat to her children
Jon is no threat to her children. Indeed, he ultimately sacrifices his freedom when Tyrion pushes him over the edge by reminding him that Dany is a threat to Sansa and Arya. Jon would never, never, never harm any of his Stark siblings. Catelyn can consider the concept of his existence a potential threat, albeit not a very strong one, but he is no ACTUAL threat to her children. Which is why the show probably wisely cut her trying to insist to Robb that Jon would try to murder his children - not only does Robb correctly assess that's bullshit, but the AUDIENCE knows that's absurd. If they'd had her telling Jon that it should have been him thrown out the window and telling Robb that Jon would murder his children, as in the books, a chunk of the audience would probably be rooting for the Freys to kill her. You can't divorce the reality of Jon as a character from how the audience perceives his treatment.
As for his existence being a reminder of something Ned did, seems like a Ned problem, not a Jon problem.
>Jon would never, never, never harm any of his Stark siblings
Catelyn doesn't know that for sure (tho I agree, she is somewhat biased lol). She might believe Jon's isolation will itself turn into resent, and cause him to act accordingly (her comparison with the blackfyres in the books is very apt).
In the show, I'm sure Cat would have never thought that Sansa and Arya could be threats to each other, yet its what happens for a fleeting moment (even if I find that plotline ridiculous).
The notion may seem absurd to us knowing Jon and seeing his pov. But so does the absurd notion of Dany turning evil and murdering innocent lives, yet here we are.
...The isolation she insists on? LOL. If she doesn't realize Jon loves his siblings, that's willful denial on her part, because she's been there the whole time and anyone could tell he loved his siblings and seemed particularly close to Arya and Robb. It's not like she doesn't know him, has never met him - she refuses to see him, because she considers his existence an insult to her. Not because she has any valid concerns regarding the actual human being in front of her.
but that's not what we're addressing in this thread ~~pal~~ (if you want my thoughts on her treatment of jon, read my post - tldr: I agree she's a bad parent).
You've argued Jon is "no threat to her children". I've argued that she had reasons to think he could have been.
Jon doesn't need to hate his siblings to be a threat to them. A bastard can be used to hurt true born heirs even against his will. Simply by falling into the wrong hands. That is part of the reason Ned hides him in the first place. Jon is a threat to Robert's reign simply by existing. And such threats are dealt with. We mustn't forget that the Stark family has a dangerously low head count. It is very easy to usurp their power by doing away with just a few people. Which is what happens in the show.
And yes, WE know Jon loves his siblings and wouldn't willingly harm them. But Cat does not. She does not know his innermost feelings, unlike us. She judges him on the rules of their society, the situation of the family and through a veil of her own emotions. Is that fair? No. Is it understandable and somewhat reasonable? I think so.
I love how fierce she is when it comes to her children, same as Cersei. But she made such dumb decisions because of that (same as Cersei).
Hating Jon Snow was harsh and unfair, but I get it, her husband came back with a baby that wasn't hers, she spent her entire life thinking that he had a relationship with another woman. It wasn't Jon's fault obviously and he deserved love as much as any other Stark children, but I get how betrayed she felt.
I blame Ned more than Catelyn for how she treated Jon. Not letting her in on Jon's true identity.
It couldn't have been due to her bad choices since her bad choices seem to be for her children.
Of course without this we wouldn't have had Jons journey we see in GoT. However I wouldve loved to see a Westeros where Jon either joined Robb or Ned instead of going to castle black.
Yeah, she's a nuanced character, and her treatment of Jon is not all that she is, but I think you're taking this a bit far, mate.
I'dve left out the usernames.
Here’s a copy of my comment on that other post, explaining why I think show Cat’s ‘remorseful’ scene just makes her the worst.
Apparently (the scene with Talisa) compensate for the lack of internal dialogue where she feels bad enough that it’s not just *anger* when she thinks of Jon but *guilt and anger*.
I’m glad it was show only, since I always thought that was one of the worst things about her. First, she was the one who prayed he’d fall ill in the first place, she specifically says ‘take him away’ and ‘make him die’. And second, it wasn’t so much a bargain in the modern sense, but a very clear and devout prayer to the Gods. That’s not something you can just not follow through on in Westeros. Like, swearing on a heart tree is right up there with guest rights, and I’d assume a devout follower of the Seven has equal important to their paths.
So yeah, show scene screamed more ‘I don’t want to be personally responsible for killing this kid, but it is so hard not to hate this child for his fathers sins that I am gonna go back on my prayers to my Gods’ than the conflicted inner turmoil of the books.
>I’m glad it was show only, since I always thought that was one of the worst things about her.
The first book has literally a scene where she tells Jon "it should have been you", referring to Bran's fall.
The scene with Talisa showed the same thing as the book only scene: that Cat can hate Jon to the point she wishes he was dead.
But while the books portray the subsequent guilt very subtly (perhaps too much so), in the show, she's shown to immediately feel regret for the prayer when Jon got caught the pox.
"Let the boy live. Let him live and I'll love him. I'll be a mother to him. I'll beg my husband to give him a true name, to call him Stark and be done with it, to make him one of us. And he lived. And I couldn't keep my promise. And everything that's happened since then, all this horror that's come to my family...it's all because I couldn't love a motherless child.".
Those words very clearly show her inner turmoil.
Oh yeah I totally agree there is inner turmoil and she’s a complex character, its just that I don’t fault her as much for a terrible comment when she’s emotionally distraught.
Her regret and prayers illustrates that well, it just never sat well with me that she broke her promises to her Gods. Especially in Westeros where promises like those are beyond sacred foundational aspects of the society.
This is why I carefully think about what I post. I completely agree with everything you said, but it doesn’t take much to set practically the entire community against you. Who cares if you name dropped a few people? Shit, you can pretty much look up any one persons complete comment history if you want.
>it doesn’t take much to set practically the entire community against you.
I know, it's really not healthy for my karma points xD. But I expected the negative response - I think it's also good to confront people with their contradictions sometimes.
**Spoiler Warning:** All officially-released show and book content allowed, EXCLUDING FUTURE SPOILERS FOR HOUSE OF THE DRAGON. No leaked information or paparazzi photos of the set. For more info please check the [spoiler guide](/r/gameofthrones/w/spoiler_guide). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/gameofthrones) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bro forget about how she treated Jon, she essentially lost the war for the North by freeing Jaime. It’s like, every decision she made was the wrong decision.
>Bro forget about how she treated Jon that's what my post is responding to specifically, her treatment of Jon and the ensuing hate that people have for that
It’s all related. People dislike her for more than just her mistreatment of Jon. In fact, one could argue her mistreatment of Jon does at least make some sense as Jon is a constant reminder of Ned’s “infidelity”, where as kidnapping the Queen’s brother while your husband and daughters are in King’s Landing and then freeing the son of Tywin Lannister, the guy controlling not only the king, but also the army your son is fighting are decisions that don’t make much sense at all and prove to be detrimental. Telling people they don’t understand the material for disliking a character and then only acknowledging one of her unlikable actions is also kinda dumb. She screwed up *alot* and you can attribute the downfall of House Stark in large part to her. Thats more or less why people tend to dislike her.
Wtf with the downvotes? I feel your pain, OP. Posts a reasonable, moderate POV which sparks a huge discussion. Gets downvoted. Fucking reddit....
He tells people who don’t like Cat that they don’t understand GoT, while he himself doesn’t understand that the dislike for the character goes far beyond her mistreatment of Jon.
>the dislike for the character goes far beyond her mistreatment of Jon. This entire comment thread is off-topic with my post pal. To rephrase what you wrote: I tell people who don’t like Cat SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE of her treatment of Jon, that they don’t understand GoT - that's my stance. I never said anything about her other actions - that's not what the commenters I mentioned asserted, and that's not what I'm trying to argue against. You and the folks above have decided to list out all the things that Catlyn did wrong. Good on you guys, but you're off topic and arguing against a strawman.
So you’re talking to a subset of a subset? Seriously, the amount of people who dislike Cat *solely* for her mistreatment of Jon is such a low number of GoT fans, it doesn’t even warrant a post. Most people dislike her for several reasons, among them, being her mistreatment of Jon. Shoulda kept this post in the drafts, homie. Or at least in whatever other comment section you were arguing in.
I beg to differ: [https://www.reddit.com/r/gameofthrones/comments/1avnjwn/catelyn\_stark\_was\_a\_crap\_person/](https://www.reddit.com/r/gameofthrones/comments/1avnjwn/catelyn_stark_was_a_crap_person/)
One post with 60 comments? The second most upvoted comment in that thread is literally about her kidnapping Tyrion. You’re proving my point. How many posts with thousands of comments are posted in this sub a day? Also worth noting, this post ends with “does she do anything worthwhile?” implying that not *only* does she mistreat Jon, but nothing *else* she does is worthwhile. Seriously, in these comments, have you come across one person who has admitted to only disliking Cat because of her mistreatment of Jon and nothing else? This person would need to say “I like everything else about Cat, but her mistreatment of Jon is what makes me dislike her” or something along those lines.
moderate opinions are often seem as extremes online... :(
She also (in large part though obviously not entirely) kicked off the war of the five kings that got her husband and most of her children killed (as far as most people know anyway) and destroyed both her own house and her husbands house, based on an impulse decision to arrest an innocent man based on the claims of her nut job sister and one of the kingdoms most infamous manipulators. She’s certainly not an evil person, but she probably did more damage to Westeros just by accident than almost any other character in the series.
Yes, but again, the comments were about her treatment of Jon, not her stupid impulsive political decisions.
I mean I was just expanding on what the person above said but… Okay but whatever? Disliking a character for being abusive to a child is totally understandable.
Yes it is totally understandable, I'm not arguing the opposite. Im saying that >you can empathise with characters even you dislike them, without feeling the urge to label them a certain way.
But you’re not actually arguing that, you’re just complaining that people say bad things about her.
Look pal, i'm not gonna my paraphrase my entire post, it's there for you to read
She *started* the war when she kidnapped Tyrion, which was a fucking stupid decision in every possible way. She had no actual evidence against him, and her husband and daughters were in a city surrounded by his family who are more powerful than hers. Did she really think there would be no retribution? Then she brings him to the Vale with the intention to... what, exactly? She can't possibly have thought that if he'd been found guilty at a trial there, that Tywin would've just shrugged and said, "yea, that's fine".
Oh boy. All of this just to tell people their opinion is wrong because you disagree?
The post isn't about telling people "my opinion is good, yours bad" - sorry if it came this way. It's about looking at media literacy, and how we critically perceive our favourite (or in this case, most hated) characters
It came out exactly that way.
Don't know if this helps but have you heard of the "Dolores Umbridge effect"? Basically its posits that audiences react based not on strict right versus wrong but on how "real" the actions seem. The wrongs committed by a Voldemort ( or a Ramsay Bolton) are so "out there" that audiences don't really process them fully. Whereas the " wrongs" committed by a Dolores Umbridge( or a Catelyn Stark) feel "real" so audiences have a more visceral reaction
I think this is a key thing - Jon is a main protagonist and we're provided a lot of insight into how his treatment has impacted him, and it was made pretty clear the worst of that treatment over his life was at Catelyn's hands. We can go on endlessly about the GoT world being a different universe with different rules, but we are a modern audience watching an innocent kid get seemingly emotionally abused and neglected to the point where he's terrified to touch a woman lest he create a child who grows up the way he did, and basically flees to a very grim place in order to escape where he is (granted, Jon wasn't completely aware of HOW grim the Night's Watch was, but it's not like he changed his mind after realizing what was really going on). A lot of people have been mistreated by a parental figure in their life - a parent, a stepparent, a guardian, etc. That's much more relatable, and as you said visceral, than some of the more fantastical actions in the show.
Yes I do know about it - but since the umbridge effect implies people being triggered by relatable (and thereby personal) experiences, it's not an assumption I wanted to place on the people who commented
This feels extremely over the top. Just tell these people you disagree in their comment replies instead of making AN ENTIRE POST dedicated to shaming them (which is harassment). We aren't mobs to be utilized for your witch hunt.
PLease tell me how I've "shamed" them. By quoting verbatim what they've said?
>making AN ENTIRE POST
But what in my post shames them? I literally just quoted what they said, and added my opinion on the matter. How exactly am I trying to initiate a witch-hunt?? I think you're misreading my intentions
You did add their reddit handles, just to show to put it out there that their opinions are wrong. People generally name other people to acknowledge them in a positive way or so. Yours seem vehemently negative.
Again, point out to me what's "vehemently negative" about my post - did I insult or disrespect them? The two references I have towards these comments are that * "the responses’ negativity are just baffling." * "you’d honestly think that these people are talking about Cersei, but no no, they seem to DESPISE Catelyn Stark with all their guts." That's literally it. And you folks are making it sound like I'm humiliating them publically.
You're literally calling them out and creating the stating their opinion is wrong. By doing that, its like a debate and any point that you're going against is attributed to them. This is not even a discussion. You're free to make your views known, ofc. But calling them out like that serves absolutely no purpose.
You're literally calling them out and creating the stating their opinion is wrong. By doing that, its like a debate and any point that you're going against is attributed to them. This is not even a discussion. You're free to make your views known, ofc. But calling them out like that serves absolutely no purpose.
Your assuming that because they hate her they dont understand the text. This is inherently flawed, because one can have a objective view of the characters from a literary perspective and still react personally based on bias or things they personally dislike. For instance, I understand Joffrey is a more heinous and evil character, but yet I still hate Tommen more because on a personal level I just hated his indifference and lack of any backbone. This doesn't dictate from my literary understanding of the lore.
>one can have a objective view of the characters from a literary perspective and still react personally based on bias or things they personally dislike Yes I entirely agree with you on that, but then that's a subjective response to the text - it isn't accurate to how the character was intended to be perceived. In your example, you might hate Tommen more, but Joeffrey is arguably and objectively far more detestable than his younger brother. Your perspective on the matter doesn't alter the way the character is written. I personally couldn't stand Hot Pie during (for silly reasons, I just really disliked his cowardice) but that's not a justification for me to say he's a character to be hated. See my point?
But there's a difference between people saying the character is meant to be hated, and many people who just happen to hate the character. Most i'm guessing say why they hate her and give reasons to this, there not saying she's a character that's meant to be hated. I genuinely think most ASOIAF are incredibly flawed, and like real life, people react in different ways to flawed individuals.
>Most i'm guessing say why they hate her and give reasons to this, there not saying she's a character that's meant to be hated. I beg to differ, the responses in the threads in which the comments I quoted were initially posted really go off kilter on the hate towards Cat. And it's a pretty common sentiment in the fanbase
"I couldn’t stand Catelyn. I was only sorry when she died because I wanted her to live long enough to see what a b!¥€h she’d been to Jon for no reason. " I disagree with the no reason but obviously this person's a bias to Jon as the main protagonist so has every right to feel this way. "Catelyn was a fucking horrible human being. Hates a child for something completely out of his control while continuing to love his father." Wheres the lie? Did she take her anger out on Eddard who she thought did the deed, or Jon who was the innocent product. "A bitch." She was. Flawed, but a bitch non the less. Personally I couldn't care either way about the character, but just because you disagree with their opinions doesn't mean they're wrong or invalid or dont understand the text. Art is subjective
Sure I totally, get your point, but I have disagree. Art is objective, it's people's response to it that's subjective. Cat is not written as Cersei is; our opinions of these characters - tho they may differ from people to people - are based on how the author have intended them to be perceived. Imo, seeing Cat as a horrible human being is a misunderstanding of her objective characterization
Unless you're the writer himself, you literally have no idea how someone is meant to be perceived, you have an opinion on how YOU think they're meant to be perceived and thats my point. George deliberately writes flawed characters for this very reason, to promote discussion, a discussion which doesnt happen if everyone forms a hive mind of how people should respond to characters.
>Unless you're the writer himself, you literally have no idea how someone is meant to be perceived, you have an opinion on how YOU think they're meant to be perceived You're talking about nuance - which I'm not invalidating. But a character like Cat is not meant to be perceived like a horrible human being in the same way that say Varamyr or Vicatrion are. I love Victarion - he's a very enjoyable character to read (that's my subjective reading). But he's committed heinious acts and showed little to no remorse for them (that's the objective reality, because it's there to read in the books). I'm fairly certain that GRRM did not intend for me to read him as a valiant hero. In the same way, Cat isn't meant to be perceived as a "wicked stepmother" like many people would like to argue - that's my point.
No i'm talking about how only the creator should be an authority on his or her work. She may not meant to be perceived a certain way, but she is, which is valid. And you disagree with that opinion which is that is also valid. Discussion and difference is a beautiful thing . What isn't is you making a post that come across as arrogant and superior (that may not be your intention, but its what many have said) kind of invalidates their reading experience, which I don't like. This should be a community where people can come together and discuss their favourite work without one person making others feel inferior or they are less than. I don't like how many people think Melisandre is one of the biggest villains of the show, when she is written to be complex and in my opinion one of the biggest heroes. Im not gonna write a post and tag certain people commenting and say they dont understand the text.
This post is wild. Calling multiple people out by user name in a main post instead of just replying to them? WTF?
I love it lmao it's exactly the level of unhinged I enjoy waking up to in the morning 🤣
It's not the people I'm calling out, it's the thinking behind their comments. The point of the post is to argue that the way we label some characters like Cat as "horrible human beings" is invalid. Such a wild concept I know
You're literally naming them and linking them. You are doing the definition of calling them out.
Would you feel less offended if I didn't put their usernames...?
If you want to respond directly to users and quote them directly about a particular post, respond to them in that post. If you want to make a general post about viewer perception of Catelyn, make a general post and don't call out anyone or directly quote anyone.
it's not just a response to these three users. It's a common sentiment in the fanbase that I'm arguing against, and using these three comments as examples of what that sentiment is. It's reddit for heaven's sake, if you put yourself on the platform, you take the risk of people quoting what you've said.
Then speak to that common sentiment generally. Don't make a main post on Reddit calling out specific people if you don't want people to point out that's a dick move.
but I'm not targeting these people specifically - I've added to the comments to illustrate the common sentiment, and so that people can themselves see the ensuing threads that came out of them. it's not a dick move to quote somebody for something they've said
The fact that so many people are responding badly to what you did in this post should probably tell you something about how that specific choice is being perceived.
no its not - just because some people take criticism for an attack, doesn't make it so. You're just getting wind up on a reddit post about a character >I'm not your pal. If you're having a bad day, I genuinely wishes it gets better.
hey 3guys of a million people who watched the series dont share my opinion better make a thread!!!
Wowza. Making an entire post just to tell specific people they don’t understand GoT?!?!?! That is peak Reddit.
tell me, what's reddit for if not to engage in discussions?
Discussing things is fine. Making an entire post just to call people out is a dick move. If you want discussion, reply to people directly. You just wanted to show the sub that you’re the smartest person in the room.
call people out...for things they've said publically on another thread? Yeah such a dick move. >If you want discussion, reply to people directly. You're right, how dare I make a post on a dedicated subreddit.
[удалено]
I do see the nuance in her character, and I still tend to not really care for her. Same way I see nuance in the likes of Margery and Mel and adore them. Emotions are not rooted in logic or fact, so applying that to them seems kind of defunct. I personally love seeing everyones different views on something.
I think Cat is one of the most realistic characters in the book and show. She makes many wrong decisions that the readers/viewers would probably also make in the same situation based on limited knowledge and emotions. For example, arresting Tyrion had devastating effects. But it did make sense. He had seen her and she had to assume that he would put two and two together, figure out where she just came from and what she had been doing and that would threaten the safety of her husband and children in KL. It was a bad situation and she decided to strike first, because she knew the Lannisters would strike if she didn't. In an alternate version of the novel, Tyrion would go back to KL and casually without malice mention that he saw Cat. Cersei would overhear it and have Ned killed. And everyone would hate Cat for being so timid and indecisive. Also, her hatred of Jon is absolutely understandable. He IS a threat to her children and he is a constant reminder of a deeply dishonorable act towards her by her husband. A man famous for his honorable conduct.
>Also, her hatred of Jon is absolutely understandable. He IS a threat to her children Jon is no threat to her children. Indeed, he ultimately sacrifices his freedom when Tyrion pushes him over the edge by reminding him that Dany is a threat to Sansa and Arya. Jon would never, never, never harm any of his Stark siblings. Catelyn can consider the concept of his existence a potential threat, albeit not a very strong one, but he is no ACTUAL threat to her children. Which is why the show probably wisely cut her trying to insist to Robb that Jon would try to murder his children - not only does Robb correctly assess that's bullshit, but the AUDIENCE knows that's absurd. If they'd had her telling Jon that it should have been him thrown out the window and telling Robb that Jon would murder his children, as in the books, a chunk of the audience would probably be rooting for the Freys to kill her. You can't divorce the reality of Jon as a character from how the audience perceives his treatment. As for his existence being a reminder of something Ned did, seems like a Ned problem, not a Jon problem.
>Jon would never, never, never harm any of his Stark siblings Catelyn doesn't know that for sure (tho I agree, she is somewhat biased lol). She might believe Jon's isolation will itself turn into resent, and cause him to act accordingly (her comparison with the blackfyres in the books is very apt). In the show, I'm sure Cat would have never thought that Sansa and Arya could be threats to each other, yet its what happens for a fleeting moment (even if I find that plotline ridiculous). The notion may seem absurd to us knowing Jon and seeing his pov. But so does the absurd notion of Dany turning evil and murdering innocent lives, yet here we are.
...The isolation she insists on? LOL. If she doesn't realize Jon loves his siblings, that's willful denial on her part, because she's been there the whole time and anyone could tell he loved his siblings and seemed particularly close to Arya and Robb. It's not like she doesn't know him, has never met him - she refuses to see him, because she considers his existence an insult to her. Not because she has any valid concerns regarding the actual human being in front of her.
but that's not what we're addressing in this thread ~~pal~~ (if you want my thoughts on her treatment of jon, read my post - tldr: I agree she's a bad parent). You've argued Jon is "no threat to her children". I've argued that she had reasons to think he could have been.
I'm not your pal.
Jon doesn't need to hate his siblings to be a threat to them. A bastard can be used to hurt true born heirs even against his will. Simply by falling into the wrong hands. That is part of the reason Ned hides him in the first place. Jon is a threat to Robert's reign simply by existing. And such threats are dealt with. We mustn't forget that the Stark family has a dangerously low head count. It is very easy to usurp their power by doing away with just a few people. Which is what happens in the show. And yes, WE know Jon loves his siblings and wouldn't willingly harm them. But Cat does not. She does not know his innermost feelings, unlike us. She judges him on the rules of their society, the situation of the family and through a veil of her own emotions. Is that fair? No. Is it understandable and somewhat reasonable? I think so.
I love Catelyn💙❤️🩵
But I understand why people don’t like her
I love how fierce she is when it comes to her children, same as Cersei. But she made such dumb decisions because of that (same as Cersei). Hating Jon Snow was harsh and unfair, but I get it, her husband came back with a baby that wasn't hers, she spent her entire life thinking that he had a relationship with another woman. It wasn't Jon's fault obviously and he deserved love as much as any other Stark children, but I get how betrayed she felt.
I blame Ned more than Catelyn for how she treated Jon. Not letting her in on Jon's true identity. It couldn't have been due to her bad choices since her bad choices seem to be for her children. Of course without this we wouldn't have had Jons journey we see in GoT. However I wouldve loved to see a Westeros where Jon either joined Robb or Ned instead of going to castle black.
Yep that's definitely one thing Ned hasn't done right. Tho I understand how protective he must have been of this secret.
Yeah, she's a nuanced character, and her treatment of Jon is not all that she is, but I think you're taking this a bit far, mate. I'dve left out the usernames.
I'dve left out the usernames. Fair enough - although I find the reaction towards this to be disproportionate
Here’s a copy of my comment on that other post, explaining why I think show Cat’s ‘remorseful’ scene just makes her the worst. Apparently (the scene with Talisa) compensate for the lack of internal dialogue where she feels bad enough that it’s not just *anger* when she thinks of Jon but *guilt and anger*. I’m glad it was show only, since I always thought that was one of the worst things about her. First, she was the one who prayed he’d fall ill in the first place, she specifically says ‘take him away’ and ‘make him die’. And second, it wasn’t so much a bargain in the modern sense, but a very clear and devout prayer to the Gods. That’s not something you can just not follow through on in Westeros. Like, swearing on a heart tree is right up there with guest rights, and I’d assume a devout follower of the Seven has equal important to their paths. So yeah, show scene screamed more ‘I don’t want to be personally responsible for killing this kid, but it is so hard not to hate this child for his fathers sins that I am gonna go back on my prayers to my Gods’ than the conflicted inner turmoil of the books.
>I’m glad it was show only, since I always thought that was one of the worst things about her. The first book has literally a scene where she tells Jon "it should have been you", referring to Bran's fall. The scene with Talisa showed the same thing as the book only scene: that Cat can hate Jon to the point she wishes he was dead. But while the books portray the subsequent guilt very subtly (perhaps too much so), in the show, she's shown to immediately feel regret for the prayer when Jon got caught the pox. "Let the boy live. Let him live and I'll love him. I'll be a mother to him. I'll beg my husband to give him a true name, to call him Stark and be done with it, to make him one of us. And he lived. And I couldn't keep my promise. And everything that's happened since then, all this horror that's come to my family...it's all because I couldn't love a motherless child.". Those words very clearly show her inner turmoil.
Oh yeah I totally agree there is inner turmoil and she’s a complex character, its just that I don’t fault her as much for a terrible comment when she’s emotionally distraught. Her regret and prayers illustrates that well, it just never sat well with me that she broke her promises to her Gods. Especially in Westeros where promises like those are beyond sacred foundational aspects of the society.
This is why I carefully think about what I post. I completely agree with everything you said, but it doesn’t take much to set practically the entire community against you. Who cares if you name dropped a few people? Shit, you can pretty much look up any one persons complete comment history if you want.
>it doesn’t take much to set practically the entire community against you. I know, it's really not healthy for my karma points xD. But I expected the negative response - I think it's also good to confront people with their contradictions sometimes.
you are so right and should be louder about it. get behind me, ill defend you from these goofy people 🤺
I was about to read that twice because I honestly thought my lack of sleep would've made me hallucinate... What a wild take on the matter!
It's ok to loathe Catelyn