Aqua Utopia｜海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
$LAYYYTER
titsay
styofa doing anything
tumblr dot com
DEAR READER
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
KIROKAZE
AnasAbdin
we're not kids anymore.
todays bird
oozey mess
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
almost home
NASA
Janaina Medeiros
Cosmic Funnies
One Nice Bug Per Day
@theartofmadeline
Misplaced Lens Cap
seen from Belgium
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Italy
seen from Philippines
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from United Kingdom
@asoiaf-vs-got
Personally, I plan to never get over how D&D tried to push Sansa Stark as the brains behind the Starks' martial strategy and leadership -- you know, with all of her "experience" vs Jon's literal years in a defence organization.
re that post I reblogged around people’s heartbreaking experience of GOT season 8 with a mental health perspective: if I thought for a moment that that was GRRM’s intention for the book series I’d probably stop reading.
I think Dany will be accused of being ‘mad’ in-world - she’s vying for a position of political power (and is female!!!) and so enemies or political rivals will sling shit. They will misconstrue her actions or outright lie (the slavers are already spreading lies about her). They will undermine the claims (not originating from her) that she’s any kind of holy or prophesied savior and question her sanity that she can believe that she is (of course it’s also not a religion most Westerosi follow anyway).
But the thing is, she won’t be ‘mad’, not like that. I’m sure she’ll make mistakes, but she won’t be evil or insane, there will be some degree of logic as there always is.
Somebody I’m actually really curious about as a potential precursor is ‘Mad’ Danelle Lothston from the time of the Dunk & Egg stories. All we know so far is she wore armour and led her own army in the Mystery Knight, she apparently used black magic (very vague…) and tales are told of her that are similar to the kind of bullshit being spread about Dany by the slavers. It could literally just be that she’s an unconventional woman with political power (and an interest in magic) and the establishment Does Not Like That, so of course she’s ~mad~. Or maybe there’s more to it? I’m very curious and potentially suspicious.
So I guess my point is… D&D are fucking hacks and I refuse to let this ruin my enjoyment of the books until proven otherwise.
Interesting what you say about Danelle. You know what’s funny? I have actually seen Dany antis use Danelle as “foreshadowing” that Dany will go mad. Because, according to them, Daenerys and Danelle are similar names, they both have animals that are similar in appearance as their sigil (because dragons are said to have wings like a bat), both are called mad by other people, and therefore this is a hint that GRRM is giving us that Dany will go mad. I’m not sure how likely it is that GRRM was thinking about this when he named Danelle or created the Lothston sigil. But if he indeed thought about this and decided to make Danelle a parallel to Dany, then I think saying that it was to foreshadow Dany’s madness is entirely missing the point. If Dany and Danelle are indeed intentional parallels, then their parallel is not to foreshadow Dany’s madness, but to show how women in power and that defy gender roles are vilified and slandered.
What a good addition!
Actually another example, though I’m not sure she’s called mad so much as insinuated to be evil, is Rohanne Webber. Ooooh, she murdered all her husbands! Er, no, she didn’t, but Eustace Osgrey hates her (initially) and wants her castle so is happy to say/believe anything. But, as Rohanne points out, women have to ‘piss twice as hard’ in the lords’ pissing contests, so it’s not necessarily in a woman’s interests to undermine the fearsome reputations they’ve been given even if they’re untrue and unfair. I wonder if that’s true about Danelle Lothston with the rumours about her, and I wonder if it will ever serve Dany for her opponents to believe she’s mad/evil.
Though also, I think the thing about ‘madness’ being applied as a label is it often just means the labeller cannot understand that person’s beliefs/actions, whether for good reasons or bad. And the latter will apply to Dany from the slavers because it will seem crazy to them to try to end slavery, to put these people on a level with even the blood of Old Valyria, to undermine a whole economic system and society. Madness! But it’s not, it’s madness to us to think it’s alright to propagate such a cruel and inhumane system or to even think it can last.
Actual mental health conditions come in exceedingly rarely. Dany has had strange dreams and visions, but it’s established that ‘dragon dreams’ in her family are literally prophetic, she’s being targeted by people with strange powers (Quaithe) and towards the end of ADWD she may be suffering the effects of dehydration when she’s hearing Jorah and Viserys. And I don’t think there’s anything else about her that’s hard to relate to or understand unless you’re trying real hard to sell your crappy rushed ending by claiming it’s crazy to not be immediately and obviously devastated when your abusive brother who has literally just threatened your unborn child is killed for doing so, fuck you D&D
I rarely wanted to slap a character more than when Sansa Stark disrespected her Uncle Edmure in the GOT finale. It’s so incredibly emblematic of the problem with Sansa in the last two seasons of Game of Thrones: she makes objectively poor political choices, but it’s framed as smart and good because she sounds confident and badass about it, and the show protects her from facing any consequences.
In this scene, Sansa’s goal is establishing an independent North. For her to achieve that goal with the least amount of difficulty, she needs the acquiescence of whoever is chosen as King. Edmure proposes himself. He is Sansa’s own uncle, a non-greedy, non-conniving man, with a decent sense of honor and (most importantly) a history as an active supporter of Northern Independence. If Edmure becomes King, Sansa should have a pretty easy time becoming Queen in the North. This is a choice that benefits her political goals
And how does she act? She basically tells him to shut the fuck up. Now, is Edmure the best candidate? No. He is a bit of a fool and has made mistakes. But he is a decent man. He is also a long time prisoner of war who suffered immensely as a result of him covering for Sansa’s brother’s political blunder. He fought, bled, and suffered for Sansa’s family and deserves basic respect. But Sansa has no respect. She just insults him, even though not only was it unnecessary, but it is also against her own interests. She shuts downs a candidate who will give her exactly what she wants, presumably because she is so filled with smug superiority that she just can’t help but diminish people that she sees as beneath her.
She can probably get away with it to Edmure, who is family and not the type to hold a grudge like that. But when she does that to some other lord with no reason to support her? It’s going to make an enemy rather than make an ally. And that’s what Sansa’s entire approach to politics in season 7-8 is: making enemies rather than allies.
It reminds me a little bit of Aegon III shutting down and dismissing Torrhen Manderly. But the key difference is the histories acknowledge Aegon’s coldness towards his subjects as the major flaw of his character, the thing that held back his rule from being as well regarded and successful as it could have been. But with Sansa, there is no criticism. It’s framed as just her being a cool badass. It doesn’t matter that she rudely and stupidly shut down a candidate that aligns with her goals, because guess what? Tyrion happens to nominate her brother for king, who will also give her whatever she wants. Sansa had no way of knowing that Bran would be king, she certainly didn’t suggest him.
It’s understandable for Sansa’s trauma to manifest as coldness, suspicion, and unnecessarily antagonistic behavior. But we see with Aegon III that when those traits go too far, it becomes a hinderance rather than a strength. But precious Sansa is spared from such consequences. She can treat anyone as rude as she wants, and it’s fine. It’s just her being smart and shrewd and playing the game. Because playing the game at the expense of honor and compassion and fighting the true threat of the white walkers is bad… unless it’s Sansa doing it.
one of the things i wish the show emphasised more is how awful jaime pushing bran out of that window was, permanently paralysing him. cos obviously doing that to a child is awful but the emphasis on how ruined bran sees his life now in the books is something i wish was translated onto screen better, because he wanted to be a knight, he had always always dreamt of becoming a knight he had no desire to get married or become a lord, all that mattered was becoming like all of his idols and become knighted, and that’s something that now he will never be able to do, because one man laid a simple hand on his chest and pushed him. that’s a harrowing thing for an eight year old to go through and it’s something, because it goes so undiscussed in the show, that is so frequently forgotten. bran is so tragic!
yeah didn't like how they handled their meeting, building it up to just brush it aside... everything they did with Bran felt false and not who Bran is in the books, especially after they decided to drop him for an entire season. weird or just lazy choices
Remember how horrible was Dany's season 2 arc?
They invented a whole subplot of her handmaiden betraying( when Doreah in the books died in the desert with Dany holding her hand) instead of showing us more of her actual second book arc.
They also killed more of her Dothraki followers ( who are still alive in the books) to have her further isolated. And the HotU was such a mess. It's one of the highlights of the second book ( not only for Dany's storyline, in general) and they messed it up so badly.
Yk as I’m rereading the series I’m once again realising just how terribly the show understood Arya’s character. Which yeah no shit Sherlock, the show known for ruining every single character ruined Arya too. But the specific problem I have is that I’m not even sure whether they ever understood her, even in the beginnings. The show ultimately deciding to NOT include the character of Chiswyck was a brutal mistake. Because yeah, Arya’s Harrenhal kills are not the most thought-out, which is understandable seeing as she’s a child& it’s something she herself reflects on:
I’m so stupid, she thought. Weese did not matter, no more than Chiswyck had. These were the men who mattered, the ones she ought to have killed. Last night she could have whispered any of them dead, if only she hadn’t been so mad at Weese for hitting her and lying about the capon. Lord Tywin, why didn’t I say Lord Tywin?
(ACOK, Arya VIII)
But I think it’s super important and meaningful for her character that the very first person she has J’aqen kill is someone whom she overhears joyfully remembering the gang rape of a young girl that he’s participated in (ACOK, ARYA VII). She is a slave at Harrenhal, yet she uses the tiniest ounce of power she has to get revenge/justice for a girl she’s never met.
She already has her kill-list by this point,and Chiswyck is on it,
“Every night Arya would say their names. "Ser Gregor," she'd whisper to her stone pillow. "Dunsen, Polliver, Chiswyck, Raff the Sweetling. The Tickler and the Hound. Ser Amory, Ser Ilyn, Ser Meryn, King Joffrey, Queen Cersei."
but THIS is what makes her give her his name to J’aqen.
GRRM did his absolute most to make sure his audience understands that Arya is not by any measure a “not like other girls” female character who thinks she’s superior to other girls because she “doesn’t act like other woman”, so I find it pretty fucking outrageous that the showrunners just thought it’s a good time for Arya to tell to Tywin “most girls are idiots.” at a time when her book counterpart had a man punished for the brutal rape of a girl.
And obviously once the writing started to seriously decline, so did Arya. And by the end of the show she is completely unrecognisable from her book version. She is a stone cold killer that fucks off into the middle of nowhere on a ship after reuniting with her family that she spend years trying to get back to. However GRRM’s counterpart is anything but stone cold, or someone who is apathetic to deaths. So far she has killed two people on her list; The Tickler and Raf Sweetling.
What got the Tickler on the list;
"Tickler makes them howl so hard they piss themselves," old stoop-shoulder Chiswyck told them.
The questions were always the same. Was there gold hidden in the village? Silver, gems? Was there more food? Where was Lord Beric Dondarrion? Which of the village folk had aided him? When he rode off, where did he go? How many men were with them? How many knights, how many bowmen, how many men-at-arms? How were they armed? How many were horsed? How many were wounded? What other enemy had they seen? How many? When? What banners did they fly? Where did they go? Was there gold hidden in the village? Silver, gems? Where was Lord Beric Dondarrion? How many men were with him? By the third day, Arya could have asked the questions herself.
(ACOK, ARYA VI)
vs. when she kills him;
It was the easiest thing in the world for Arya to step up behind him and stab him.
"Is there gold hidden in the village?" she shouted as she drove the blade up through his back. "Is there silver? Gems?" She stabbed twice more. "Is there food? Where is Lord Beric?" She was on top of him by then, still stabbing. "Where did he go? How many men were with him? How many knights? How many bowmen? How many, how many, how many, how many, how many, how many? Is there gold in the village?"
(ASOS, Arya XIII)
What puts Raf Sweetling on her list;
“Something wrong with your leg, boy?”
“It got hurt.”
“Can you walk?” He sounded concerned.
“No,” said Lommy. “You got to carry me.”
“Think so?” The man lifted his spear casually and drove the point through the boy’s soft throat. Lommy never even had time to yield again. He jerked once, and that was all. When the man pulled his spear loose, blood sprayed out in a dark fountain. “Carry him, he says,” he muttered, chuckling.”
(ACOK, ARYA V)
vs. how she kills him;
“There’s one on the next canal, but he won’t come. You have to go to him. Can’t you walk?”
“Walk?” His fingers were slick with blood. “Are you blind, girl? I’m bleeding like a stuck pig. I can’t walk on this.”
“Well,” she said, “I don’t know how you’ll get there, then.”
“You’ll need to carry me.”
See? thought Mercy. You know your line, and so do I.
“Think so?” asked Arya, sweetly.
(TWOW excerpt, Mercy)
She kills people who are literal monsters who delight in the suffering of the innocent. And she is so seriously affected by what she had seen to the point where she can word-by-word recreate Lommy’s death and Tickler’s questions. That is a little girl extremely traumatised by what she has seen, which I find it absurd to portray her as cold or indifferent to suffering, when she is anything but.
Yeah, they actually ruined her from the beginning, even in the pilot. First they had Arya shooting a bow to best Bran and her parents laughing about it. In the books, Arya would have been punished by this for not conforming and Arya not being able to conform is a big part of who she is because it plays a huge part in her self-esteem issues and why she feels like she can't be a Lady. It has nothing to do with "not being like other girls" and more about feeling inadequate and "ugly" (because of the bullying about her looks) than anything else. Arya also doesn't know how to use a bow, which is actually an interesting choice in the books since it's based off of a real world time where it was socially acceptable for women to do archery and the like. Secondly, they had Arya away from her family watching the Baratheons come in and then when she finally goes to her family she's shoving Bran around and being mean to her siblings. Arya is actually pretty obedient to Ned, and she's not mean to her siblings unprompted. And third, they had Arya being disruptive at the feast and throwing food at Sansa and being the instigator in their relationship when Arya was never the instigator in their relationship, Sansa and Jeyne were.
And this doesn't even touch on how they changed Arya in the first season alone. Like how Arya was being violent and stabbing the table in a scene that was meant to kind of be the starting scene of Arya II AGOT where she is refusing to eat because of how grief-stricken she is over the events of the Trident and Mycah's death. There she just excuses herself and then runs to her room and locks the door. Or how they had Arya go to the tourney and being the one fascinated by Ser Hugh's death even though that was Sansa in the books. Or how she loudly proclaimed she liked killing "fat boys" at the end of the season, something that never should have been put in because it gives the audience the wrong idea.
Or how about later on when Arya is happy about Joffrey's death even though in the books she realizes that she can't be happy about it because no matter what it wouldn't bring her family back.
Oh and along with them completely omitting Arya's struggles of fitting in and making her a misogynist who is actually vengeful rather than traumatized and just trying to survive and get justice when she can, they made her into a cold-hearted isolationist introvert. The fact that they made Arya an introvert just floors me considering Arya is still very much an extrovert in the books despite all of the trauma she has faced. She loved being Cat because she got to be so social and got to make friends. And another thing, they never actually explored how freaking intelligent Arya is. Not only is Arya observant, a lot more cautious than people give her credit for, and cunning, but Arya is learning so much in Braavos that it's reminiscent of a university education in that type of world. The fact that Arya can fluently speak Braavosi with a perfect Braavosi accent now only after like 6 months while learning 3-4 other languages is commendable. And this isn't even taking into account how she's basically learning things that fall into the categories of biology, anatomy, botany, and chemistry, and she's already pretty good at being a mummer considering she's a good actress and is able to recount all the lines from everybody else in the play she's participating in in Mercy TWOW.
D&D NEVER understood Arya. She's the one character that was completely butchered from the beginning when most of the characters had at least a few episodes or a season before being butchered. I feel Sansa was a close second on being butchered as well. They changed a lot about her in order to prop her up. The fact that they completely omitted the one proactive thing she does in the books all because it made her look not the greatest just tells us everything. I also think making Tyrion more lascivious from the pilot was certainly a choice. I was pretty surprised when I read the books for the first time and saw that Tyrion basically had his head in a book during all those scenes.
One of things that I think is missed a lot in the fandom (I honestly blame the show for this), is that when she is not in an extremely traumatic situation, Arya really is a cheerful, extraverted little girl who names babies and picks up flowers for her father and makes friends with everyone.
And the thing is, if they didn't want to adapt her first chapter at all (which is a shame because it establishes a lot of her relationships and themes), instead of having her take the shot from Bran while her parents look on fondly (which... I love Cat and Ned but they would not react like that to her doing this at all) they could have her with Jon on the side, looking like she wants to join and tries what Bran is doing without doing so, and have them (Jon and Arya) bond in episode 1 on the outside, or actually have her pick up flowers outside while the boys are training.
And then instead of making her late because she is looking at the knights arriving, make her late because she was in the kitchen, talking with the cook, trying to figure out a name for the new baby, have them call her Arya Underfoot to show that it's something she does usually anyway or in the stable talking to the stableboy, being friends with him or just something that shows Arya Underfoot.
I'm not even following HOTD but I saw that apparently the s2 finale was leaked and it seems like they did a confirmation of Daenerys being The Prince Who Was Promised from the prophecy?
And I mean, like, in book canon-- duh? It's been a while since I read the books so I don't remember that much, but if I recall the prophecy, Daenerys was always the most plausible person to be The Prince Who Was Promised/Azor Ahai/Whatever?? Like she's the one who fits the prophecy perfectly? Anyone is actually shocked?????
Anyway, show canon wise-- I don't know why HBO acts like the GOT showrunners didn't completely butcher Daenerys' character (along with Jon's and Jaime's and literally most characters) in the later seasons and also fucked up the whole prophecy deal and the White Walkers stuff and-- then make it a big point of HOTD? You're making the White Walkers and the Prophecy the whole point of the show when people already know how underwhelming everything was at the end? Lmao?
it just came to me the thought that show!gendrya actually is lady stoneheart x edric storm and that is a hell of a crackship that the show put in there...🙃
“I try never to bring anyone back [to life] or if I do, they’re REALLY screwed up.”
—
George R. R. Martin, October 11, 2019
Given how firmly against bringing characters back to life GRRM is, I really do wonder how Jon’s TWOW story will play out.
When ADWD first came out, he heavily suggested that whether Jon was alive or dead was up for debate. That debate went on until the show killed Jon and resurrected him in the most unremarkable way a character could possibly be resurrected. For the show, it was basically treated as a “Get Out of the Night’s Watch Free” card while completely disregarding the fact that he was a zombie or wight.
Given the backlash from the show’s final season, I’m surprised more people haven’t gone back to speculating that Jon survived the mutiny. Were he to survive or for there to be a twist, he would still have a possibility of surviving the series If he really did die, that means that he will either stay dead or become a fire wight like Catelyn and Beric. That cuts off quite a few of Jon’s story and relationship possibilities. Just based on the previous fire wight, we know a resurrected Jon wouldn’t eat, sleep, or heal from wounds. I seriously doubt he’ll be able to procreate or even get an erection, destroying a lot of the shipping and endgame dreams that goes on around him.
But the thing that’s undebatable, in my opinion, about the way the show handled the fallout of the Night’s Watch mutiny against Jon is that it will be very different from what George will write. There are consequences to everything that happens in his story. Having Jon use his death and resurrection purely to get out of the NW and for there to be no issues with him being a zombie (ex. body not working right, looking like a corpse, losing some of his memories, having other characters get creeped out by him or trying to destroy him since he’s a wight) is the complete opposite of what GRRM would do. Should he bring him back to life, Jon is screwed.
Jon will have a different process than Beric and Cat. They lost some of their memories after the ressurection but Jon Snow won’t. Remember that he is a warg and right now he is living his second life in Ghost. His memories are still intact and Jon Snow is alive yet, in a wolf body but alive. We can’t really predict what his behavour is going to be like because Jon won’t be a regular fire wight, his warg abbilities will make him go through a different process. That said, there will be consequences and his personality will change, that’s a given, but in a different way.
THIS is ALL assumptions and speculations, we don’t know what GRRM will do. We can all safely assume that it will be different than Beric and Catelyn, they were basically the precursors that this idea / phenomenon exists in the world and how it can affect those brought back, we can speculate on timing, mindset at death, and the faith and feelings of the giver and what it may cost them… but we really don’t know for sure. With Beric we get a mostly ideal situation and with Catelyn a darker more cautionary version.
We (fandom) speculate that Jon’s warg abilities will play a part, but we don’t know for sure yet, as those chapters haven’t been released - we don’t know he is living a ‘second’ life, or that his memories will still be intact within his wolf bond/form, or even how long Jon will be in this between state and how that can affect him - these are both fandom speculations… given what GRRM has said on the matter and given that Jon is one of his most important POV characters, Jon’s journey will be the most affected and complex one, unlike Catelyn I do think GRRM will continue to give Jon’s a POV, so we will be able to understand the process, and it will have major consequences to Jon. We can speculate on all of this, but that is all it is at this point fandom speculation.
Given the backlash from the show’s final season, I’m surprised more people haven’t gone back to speculating that Jon survived the mutiny. Were he to survive or for there to be a twist, he would still have a possibility of surviving the series If he really did die, that means that he will either stay dead or become a fire wight like Catelyn and Beric. That cuts off quite a few of Jon’s story and relationship possibilities. Just based on the previous fire wight, we know a resurrected Jon wouldn’t eat, sleep, or heal from wounds. I seriously doubt he’ll be able to procreate or even get an erection, destroying a lot of the shipping and endgame dreams that goes on around him.
You see speculation on this from time to time, but most people in fandom are either shippers or fans of the idea that Jon will be like all the other traditional heroes in fantasy: the secret love child, legitimate heir, true king, the prince that was promised, magical birthrights, the main hero/warrior/champion that will save and lead us all to victory… basically the obvious hero and number one love interest in this story… on paper Jon is or could be all of that, but I think that is also where GRRM is going to play with this trope, but diving too much into this kind of speculation isn’t as popular as the one true king versions. Like you mentioned, if Jon really dies, that cuts off a lot of potential Jon endgame scenarios, especially the happy - married with kids and a kingdom scenarios. And many in the fandom just don’t like the idea of Jon dying for good so don’t speculate on it as much, especially tumblr fandom - which is heavily based on shipping and character stans.
I do agree though, I think the two main POVs most likely to die are the two most prominent POV characters: Tyrion and / or Jon, both have more setup to potentially have this kind of conclusion to their narratives, more so than the others to me. Like you mentioned if Jon dies and is resurrected using magic - then to me he is on ‘borrowed’ time, IMO. Regardless of what happened with his minds journey
Tyrion has almost ceased to care about anything anymore, he has a death wish and only wants to take down Cersei before he dies, so he might be going down the darkest path of all the characters. I just can’t see Bran, Arya or Sansa (or Rickon) dying… GRRM has already killed off so many of the Starks and these are the youngest. I really don’t want to think about any of these children, who have yet to even have a modicum of real agency in their lives yet to die to save the world or turn evil and need to be taken out.
Maybe that is just me, but if would feel really unnecessary and disappointing to have a storyline like that and it is not the impression I ever get when reading the books. The other older characters, even Dany, who is still young, but feels a lot older as she has had agency, is a leader and making big decisions with high stakes, has a lot of enemies, that I can see where even she isn’t out of the question. Anyone who is in a prominent position of power is always potentially at risk of dying. Goes with the position
I am going to say that what Arya Stark needs is salwar kameez (for the lack of a better word). People go on and on and on about her not liking dresses. And truly she doesn't like it when they hinder her from doing what she wants. But we do see her in Braavos. She isn't constantly complaining about her dress while selling oysters or working as an apprentice under Izembaro. Like i am a bit frustrated that there is nothing to imagination in a fantasy series when it comes to costuming. I am not saying to appropriate a dress, but the inspiration to fashion for make a believe world is so limited when it comes to Hollywood. And I am sitting here and thinking...
Like do you see the pants?
Arya and dresses and pretty frilly things won't ever really comfortably mash but to see fandom people and actual GoT costume designers going from rags to bland boiled leather when she is a princess. Even during celebration where she is being celebrated...😭😭😭😭😭😭 like you know Michelle Clapton spent so little time on Arya's costumes and excused it with "oh Arya is not like other girls!"
The funniest thing about Pol!Jon theories about him killing Dany just so he'll be available to marry Sansa is that it almost makes sense... solely from Sansa's perspective. Something Jon would actually be capable or willing to do or conspire to do alongside of her? Absolutely zero sense. In season 7 she's entirely antagonistic towards him in their scenes together until he lets her be in charge of Winterfell lol. That's all she cared about at that point, nothing about the Others coming down from the north. At what point would they actually have the time to conspire to manipulate Dany?
I saw a comment the other day from someone saying that if it hadn't been for Sansa's involvement with Ramsay they would've seen her actions in that last few seasons as villainous and it honestly made me reconsider my view of why D&D made that change to Sansa's storyline in the first place. It was always easy to take them at face value that they thought her Vale storyline didn't have enough content to make her as front and center as they wanted her to be, or they had to write around the decision to cut characters who would've appeared in her TWOW storyline, but I've never considered the idea that they wanted to make sure the audience was predisposed to feel sympathy for her otherwise they'd realize how terrible she comes off. Considering how often she's defended for being openly antagonistic towards Dany in season 8 apparently it worked. D&D didn't fuck up her storyline by making her an unfeeling girlboss, their biggest problem is that every time she was supposed to come off as Cersei or Littlefinger 2.0 they reeled her back in to make sure she'd be likable and on the correct side.
It goes hand in hand with how Stansas actively deny her agency in favor of painting her as a passive victim. So many Jonsas would rather theorize her being sexually assaulted by Littlefinger or Harry in order to have Jon be her savior than consider the power she could have as Lady of the Vale through marriage. Instead the latter is seen as hating on her lol. Fandom's actively unwilling to engage in the possibility of Sansa not only having agency but actively continuing to work with Littlefinger and be involved in his schemes. Sansa and Littlefinger's rapport makes little sense in the season 7 because of the break in their relationship in seasons 5 and 6, but it seems most likely that they'd be in tandem for the most part in the books until the perfect time Sansa can reveal she had never actually fallen under his thumb. But fandom would rather get mad when it's pointed out how callous she is towards Sweetrobin and how she and her father have larger concerns than acknowledge it's far more likely she would cause his death than prevent it.
But otherwise, Sansa going from wanting Jon out of the fucking way so she can gain power up until she learns about his parentage and decides she can be his queen instead but realizes there's no way he'd choose her over Dany or even Arya? Makes far more sense than Pol!Jon lol. You actually can throw in their favorite theory of Arya doing the dirty work by killing Dany because there's a chance she could get rid of two birds with one stone that way. Honestly it's the most fucked up scenario I can think of regarding Sansa and most likely too harsh but considering how nasty and cruel Jonsas are to Dany it'd be a hilarious monkey's paw scenario for them. And not entirely implausible considering what some of the women do in Fire and Blood, for what it's worth.
Okay, this is going to be a long answer! Anon, quotes from your ask will be in purple! Yes, the Jon and Sansa scenes in the show have these two characters frequently at odds. In the commentary for 7x01, GoT director Jeremy Podeswa states, “So chiefly here is the dynamic between Sansa and Jon and what’s going on between them and this slight power play and a slight sort of questioning of Jon’s authority as King in the North.”
Point that out to Jonsas, however, and they respond, “They bicker like an old married couple, he can be ‘himself’ with her 😍😍😍!!” (you mean Jon’s angry, fed up self?) while they try to claim the “power play” is between Jon and Dany because she is his queen, making their dynamic “so unhealthy” and “oppressive” for Jon. In this context involving two characters holding different political levels of power, can that really be a power play if one of the characters (Show!Jon) is not interested in their partner’s position and/or never wanted it in the first place?
However, Show!Sansa wanted Show!Jon’s position (x, x, x, x, x) – a position Jon didn’t want himself and one he took because it would give him the authority to mobilize the defense against the army of the dead, which actually is something Dany can and vowed to help with, inspiring Jon to willingly give Dany his crown because he found her worthy.
Jon has truly never seen a girl like this before. Her beauty, her strength, her grief and the pain it makes him feel . . . they all push him to the realization that he loves her.
Script direction from 7x06 Unlike with Show!Sansa, Jon was able to witness Dany’s heroism firsthand when she flew in to save Jon and his group beyond the Wall, even losing her dragon during that rescue mission. What has Sansa ever done to show Jon her heroism? By that point, Sansa had already lied to Jon for an entire season, manipulated him into joining the battle against Ramsay over a brother Sansa later urges Jon to give up for dead, made his job as King in the North harder when she opted to publicly dissent against his decisions, and withheld crucial military information that nearly resulted in Jon’s death. And when Jon and Dany disagree or have an issue? Jonsas don’t swoon “they bicker like an old married couple” like they do for Jon and Sansa’s disagreements. Nope, criteria changes. Instead, Jonsas claim, “omg, see how he just bristles at Dany’s authority? He HATES HER.” And this is what they use as support for Pol!Jon (ie. Jon not placating Dany with whatever she wants to hear) while claiming Jon’s always just agreeing with Dany to placate her into happy, satisfied submission. Jon and Sansa conspiring together against Dany in the books (and show) makes little and less sense – not least because the Pol!Jon “strategy” has Jon utilizing a no-win strategy in which he warmongers more amongst the human realm with 100% absolute loyalty to the Stark (Sansa) dynasty. What Jonsas seem to miss is that Jon’s storyline and arc do not exist to revolve around Sansa and what Sansa’s standom want for her. Their Pol!Jon theory seeks to turn Jon into Sansa Stark’s personal foot soldier who is willing to sexually abuse an ally for Sansa’s sake, twisting Jon into a figure who fights for the Starks and only the Starks which I’d argue takes away everything special and meaningful about Jon: a) how Jon grows beyond his initial prejudices and preconceptions to recognize how truly complex and morally difficult the world really is;
b) how Jon realizes the wildlings (regarded by the Westerosi as a savage enemy) are as much human people as the Westerosi, that all people – no matter how different – are people, and the importance of unity among humankind against a common threat to them all;
c) how Jon learns and grows from his experiences and fellow misfits: Arya, Sam, the wildlings, his friends in the Night’s Watch, Tyrion. Jon is surrounded by fellow outsiders in the books and is able to empathize with them because he, too, is an outsider who faces lifelong prejudice for his bastardy. This is key to Jon being able to see what is truly unjust and wrong about Westerosi society because he is not and has never been accepted into that society purely because of his birth status;
d) that Jon’s goodness doesn’t come from his Stark blood or being a good little Stark soldier for Sansa fighting for Stark rule, it comes from his choices which are only meaningful because they come with a great personal cost and emotional weight for Jon. Otherwise, doing the right thing in the interest of others (largely strangers) is easy because it demands nothing important. And I don’t mean simply costing Jon his “honour” that he has already discarded for the greater good from books 2-5. What makes Jon’s hardest choices so agonizing is because love and real feeling are involved – love for Robb, love for his father, love for Ygritte, love for Arya. Jon wants to avoid growing close to the wildlings during his time with them precisely because he knows it’d make his betrayal of them that much harder. Love and genuine feeling is what makes doing the right thing for others hard and choosing to do the right thing for others meaningful. I’m not just talking about the right thing for family but, again, the right thing for perfect strangers: the realm, the same realm which has rejected Jon based entirely on prejudice. This is the significance to Jon’s decisions. Why would Jon team up with Sansa to conspire against Dany anyway? Why would Jon trust Sansa, the sibling who was the most classist and distant toward Jon because of his bastardy? The sibling who treated Jon the most like how Westeros treated Jon? And what is Jon supposed to have against Dany to the point of discarding his efforts for unity and instead, inciting more civil war with either Dany herself and/or her supporters? Because she fights with fire? Well, Jon did too in the Battle for Castle Black. Because she’s a conqueror? So is Jon’s beloved brother Robb Stark, the legions of Stark ancestors before him, and Jon’s boyhood hero the Young Dragon. Because Dany’s dragon killed a little girl? Jon threatened Gilly’s baby, is resolute on executing the wildling child hostages if a wildling parent steps out of line, while Sansa is poisoning her 8-year old cousin despite being warned about the harmful effects to his health.
So much of Jon’s arc is focused on unifying disparate peoples against one common threat. Jon (and Arya) aren’t Sansa’s personal assistants to do her killing (so I must disagree that it’d make sense for Arya to be doing Sansa’s dirty work as Arya isn’t a hapless bodyguard to kill at Sansa’s pleasure). Relegating Jon and Arya to Sansa’s personal bodyguards and executioners is so dismissive, disrespectful to the characters, and overlooks Jon and Arya as individuals with their own story arcs and lessons.
But otherwise, Sansa going from wanting Jon out of the fucking way so she can gain power up until she learns about his parentage and decides she can be his queen instead but realizes there's no way he'd choose her over Dany or even Arya? Makes far more sense than Pol!Jon lol. You actually can throw in their favorite theory of Arya doing the dirty work by killing Dany because there's a chance she could get rid of two birds with one stone that way. Honestly it's the most fucked up scenario I can think of regarding Sansa and most likely too harsh but considering how nasty and cruel Jonsas are to Dany it'd be a hilarious monkey's paw scenario for them. And not entirely implausible considering what some of the women do in Fire and Blood, for what it's worth.
While I deeply disagree with the notion of Arya as Sansa's hapless executioner ready to be manipulated at Sansa's ready, it's notable is that even in the most fucked up scenario you can think of regarding Sansa, it doesn't involve her brutal and cruel death by the hand of a misogynistic Littlefinger-esque character (Pol!Jon) who tricked her into being his lover as he sexually manipulates/extorts/and callously uses her like a a $2 kazoo from the dollar store as she plays Bimbo Villain who is thirsty for some Jon dick.
Sansa's still motivated by power and rivalry in that scenario but at least Sansa gets to live and have agency rather than dying like some bizarre and deceived Ursula-esque thot monster slain in a Disney film.
(It almost seems like Jonsas have a Dany death fetish.)
I really wonder... do Jonsas seriously not recognize the transparency of their "speculations" and "theories"? They often take shape in the form of something Twilight-esque with Sansa taking on Bella's early role as the "beloved" protagonist-protectorate while Jon/Edward obsessively guards and protects her using any means necessary, the darker the better (Jonsas have commonly said "violence is love" of Jon). Lucky Dany/General Villain gets to play the evil jealous monster to Sansa's "pure pretty princess".
This kind of storyline... it adheres to the most basic and simplistic of tropes rather than subverting or exploring them in any meaningful way. They ignore Jon's narrative, they cherry pick Sansa's characterization, and cast the other characters into predefined slots at their pleasure.
The majority ofJonsas I've seen have objected to even a basically decent humane relationship between Jon and Dany. If it's not pure hate and bitterness between them (at least from Jon's end), Jonsas aren't interested. Yikers.
But to give my thoughts of your speculations regarding D&D's motive behind Show!Sansa :)
Pol!Sansa
I saw a comment the other day from someone saying that if it hadn't been for Sansa's involvement with Ramsay they would've seen her actions in that last few seasons as villainous and it honestly made me reconsider my view of why D&D made that change to Sansa's storyline in the first place.
I'd agree that Pol!Sansa makes a hell of a lot more sense than Pol!Jon from a Show!Sansa perspective (but I do think the bar set by Pol!Jon is low...) but I’m not quite sure if it'd make sense for her book counterpart yet as Sansa has had a largely passive role as of ADWD, though GRRM states Sansa has her 'wits':
She is beginning to at least try to understand how she can play the game of thrones and be not a piece, but a player. With her own goals, and moving other pieces around. And she’s not a warrior like Robb, Jon Snow. She’s not even a wild child like Arya. She can’t fight with swords, axes. She can’t raise armies. But she has her wits! Same as Littlefinger has.
GRRM on Sansa
I think one thing is pretty certain: if Book!Sansa did try to use Jon as a pawn, I'm doubtful she would find a Northern-nationalist-Sansa-Stark-loyalist-mindlessly-devoted-to-her-aims-bodyguard in Jon Snow -- and much less after Jon comes back from a violent, mutinous death. Even Show!Jon often goes against what Sansa wants, still accepted the position of King in the North over abdicating in Sansa's favour when the Northern lords chose him as king, and canonically cannot really forgive Sansa for betraying his secret. Meanwhile, in the books, Jon deeply wants Winterfell and in spite of his love for his Stark siblings (where Sansa doesn't exactly rank at the top). It took Ghost's return as a reminder of the Old Gods to prevent Jon from accepting Stannis's offer, not regard for Sansa's claim.
When it comes to Show!Sansa, if we forget D&D's interviews and script snippets when it comes to Sansa's intents (and Sansa's sisterly "love" for Jon), I'd say one can rather easily argue that Sansa was intending and trying to use Jon as a pawn in grabs for control and power in these ways (but oops, the Northern lords choose Jon as king instead and Jon isn't so compliant to Sansa's demands, resulting in their frequent bickering). Sansa:
pulls Jon into joining a war he has no interest in for a castle he was told he had no place in by using their little brother's life to pull him in;
...before proceeding to demand that Jon give up that same brother for dead (the whole reason Jon agreed to fight in the first place) on the eve before battle;
lies to Jon throughout season 6 for reasons unknown;
doesn't bother to tell her beloved brother Jon at all about the offer of a large army she received from Littlefinger and the Vale, allowing him to go up against overwhelming forces with Jon believing these are all the men he can rally into helping him fight;
publicly sows discord with Jon while Jon is a brand new king trying to prepare the North and the Northern lords for an ice apocalypse;
"let's thank the Northern lords for wanting to pull a coup against my brother in favour of meeeeee because "DiPLomAcy" (oops, it's actually because Sansa wants the Northern lords on her side);
promises to keep Jon's secret before betraying Jon's trust like five minutes later when she tells Tyrion in hopes of deposing Dany, the woman Jon has chosen as queen and who Jon canonically loves, placing Jon at the centre of a claimant war and making him the target of Daenerys's supporters.
And Jonsas call Dany manipulative and abusive (where has Dany ever lied to Jon?)
Meanwhile, when has Sansa respected a choice Jon made without trying to go behind his back to override it?
Glass houses, Jonsas.
However, all that said, I truly don't think this was D&D's motive or intent, despite these actions of Sansa's really demonstrating her to be a crappy sister not worthy of trust in the slightest. D&D's writing became steadily worse, sloppier, and more dependent on shock/spectacle/one-liners/and actor-based plotting as seasons went on rather than more character-driven stories. I'd argue this was not only true of Sansa's plotting and characterization but with just about all the characters and plots.
I don't think D&D were thinking deeply or thoughtfully enough to consider Sansa's self-contradictory behaviour, words, or how that would impact reception of her later actions -- if they recognized those flaws in their writing of the character at all. Even with other characters: to use Dany as an example. I look at how they shifted from stating Dany is "driven by a kind of a deep empathy — a much deeper empathy than probably anybody else on the show" and one of the "good Targaryens" to oops, Dany is going to burn a surrendered population now because "Mad Queen" (curiously, when HBO GoT uploaded the linked video themselves, this segment was named 'Mad Queen' but it was deleted from the channel shortly afterward).
Sansa seems to be a favourite for D&D, if not the favourite ("Sansa is a character we care about almost more than any other"/"In the books, Sansa has very few chapters in the Vale once she’s up there. That was not going to be an option for one of our lead characters. While this is a very bold departure, [we liked] the power of bringing a Stark back to Winterfell and having her reunite with Theon under these circumstances." X)
Per their scripting and interviews, I do think D&D intended for Sansa to love Jon. However, Damaged Traumatized "I'm stronger because I was raped" Sansa prioritized her own safety, security, and the "North's"/Sansa's interests above familial love, using the North's "sacrifices" (ie. their s6-8 complaining and flip-flopping) and Sansa's trauma to justify her actions.
And I think we're supposed to side with Sansa and view her decisions as correct. I mean, Sansa is "the smartest person [Arya's] ever met" while Jon gets to be "not always the quickest on the uptake".
To D&D, it seems Sansa is the Truest Stark to ever Stark:
Sansa is the one who "suffered" the most for Winterfell (raped and tormented by Ramsay in a poorly set up scheme she... agreed to... in order to wrest "control" of Winterfell from the inside with nobody but herself and later Theon to help out).
Sansa is the Stark who was the "truly" winner of the Battle of the Bastards by bringing in the Vale forces, just ignore the shady bits of Sansa's actions in not telling a soul about Littlefinger's offer (or that she had written to accept it) and focus on how so "sexist" Jon, Davos, and Tormund are against Sansa because they never listen to the womenfolk (?!?!)
Sansa is the one who stood for Northern independence, refusing to prioritize any other issue above it (like an imminent zombie ice apocalypse, the North's lack of self-sustainability, or basic diplomacy for a queen who is showing up to save their asses). She is the one who was willing to risk anything and everything (including and especially Jon's choices and well-being) for the goal of an independent North it can hardly maintain without major outside support in the form of defense/food/resources.
All that said though, I do believe D&D had Sansa with Ramsay to drum up more sympathy for Sansa's character, absolutely. I think they may have overestimated that viewer sympathy though.
Yet, I do think it was to place Sansa in a more prominent position as D&D explained, namely the forefront of the Northern storyline.
But fandom would rather get mad when it's pointed out how callous she is towards Sweetrobin and how she and her father have larger concerns than acknowledge it's far more likely she would cause his death than prevent it.
I know this post is getting to be long so I'll try to keep this short but, yes, I agree. I would say there is definitely that elephant-in-the-room contradiction of the fandom trying to pass off Sansa's actions as pure and noble intentioned while still arguing she's among the smartest characters in ASOIAF/GoT. This topic was was discussed in a thread where @jackoshadows made the excellent point that:
The reason for why GRRM is unable to write Sansa as a smart character yet is mainly because of Littlefinger IMO. LF is one of the main, human antagonists and supposed to be this smart player of the game. His moves and plans have to remain a secret to the reader for some time. Sansa figuring things out early means he’s out of the game early and her story finishes early. So we have to keep reading her being ignorant and unable to connect the dots until it’s game over for LF. Which would be fine if it weren’t for her fans constantly telling us how she’s the smartest character in the series. So Sansa is not smart. And she will remain clueless until it’s time for LF to go.
I think this is one of GRRM's key issues with writing Sansa while, for D&D, I think they devoted much of GoT into becoming what they wanted to happen for Sansa (more screen time, more relevance to the Northern storyline, more Sophie Turner).
The Sansa Stark Conundrum.
sansa - blabbing something about daenerys, her army and dragons bla bla what dragons eat anyway whatever
daenerys - sweetie, do you want us to leave? you think you can beat the dead army without us? one more word and we're out
sansa -
curtain.
I would also add that this wasn't only with Dany, but how it almost always ends when Sansa starts blabbing something about others or directed towards them. Few examples:
Sansa: *says she trusts Jon; he's her brother; he will protect her* Brienne: *asks Sansa that if she actually trusts Jon, why didn't she tell the truth that she learned about Blackfish and his rebel army from Littlefinger, not Boltons* Sansa: -
Lord Glover: *tells Jon and Sansa that Boltons helped them win back the castle, so they won't fight against them* Sansa: *decides to remind Lord Glover that House Glover swore loyalty to the Starks* Lord Glover: *reminds Sansa that the Starks, as their liege lords, swore to protect them and their lands. He reminds Sansa that Robb left the North defenseless while he fought in the South. Reminds them that they shouldn't expect loyalty when they didn't do anything to earn it* Sansa: -
Sansa: *asks Jon if Davos is his most trusted advisor because he actually did something useful for their cause* Jon: *answers that he's standing here because of Davos, and he's good and useful with his knowledge* Sansa: *changes subject to recite Stannis failures and says they need more men, but refuses to tell about Knights of the Vale* Jon: *answers that there's no time before another snowstorm hits and that they have as many men as they can have.* Sansa: - Also, Sansa: *still doesn't say anything about the Knights of the Vale*
Sansa: *whines to Jon that nobody asked her opinion and that she "might have some insight" that could help* Jon: *asks what should they do* Sansa: I don't know. I don't know anything about battleplans.
Sansa: *while safely sitting in the crypts, tells Tyrion that they would never have worked out because he chose to serve Daenerys, who's currently fighting against the dead* Missandei: *reminds sansa that without Dany they would all be dead* Sansa: -
And yet her stans crow about how she's "the smartest person in the show". D&D seriously tried to force that narrative while writing these scenes lmao.
Sansa not having any response to the most obvious points against her paints her as nothing more than a petulant girl who doesn't understand politics or the real world. She just sits there and pouts and her stans insist that she's just a genius who soooo politically savvy.
well, at least they wrote her consistantly... the only wonder is why the writers thought this made her seem smart?
you forgot one (might be more), her conversation with Lyanna Mormont / Davos - I always thought that scene was especially egregious to her as a character, not only was she politically shammed by a child half her age, but she couldn't even course correct and Davos had to correct her mistake and make the deal - then later she belittles his help to Jon... WTF writers!?! Why do her stans like this show version of her again? cause she 'wins'? is the aesthetic 'crown' all that really all that matters? Nearly every decision they made after they ran out of material was worse for her as a character, most of it is regressive, doesn't make logical sense, and wildly out of character for her book counter part... I could NEVER see book!Sansa behaving like show!Sansa, even if she was r@ped - I just don't think it is in her character to act like show!Sansa at all...
‘the lion does not concern himself with the opinions of the sheep’ has been adopted so fully as like a sigma manosphere line because charles dance is very charming and seems very competent but actually tywin shouldn’t be either of those things and it’s a ridiculous sweeping thing to say. the opinions of the sheep are half of politics and everyone hating the lannisters is one of their most significant political weaknesses and also as jaime literally points out he’s contradicting himself later in the same speech
The most ridiculous ASOIAF "essayist" tendency is all the nitpicking about young characters like Robb, Jon or Dany as not being good enough politicians because they don't unrealistically please/are liked by everyone of any allegiance, but put someone like Tywin on a pedestal who has no real allies, no friends, and isn't even liked by his own father or children.
I'd argue that Tywin doesn't give a damn if people like him and is instead shrewd and cunning to get what he wants. The same with Olenna Tyrell, she doesn't care if people like her, even has the title queen of thorns, which is essentially saying she's a gigantic bitch. But she's also a shrewd negotiator and cunning to boot, able to outwit pretty much everyone but Tywin.
Meanwhile Dany, Jon and Robb are too concerned with being liked or being seen as good and for the most part it bites them in the ass like the people turning on Dany in Mereen, the nights watch stabbing Jon or Robb's army abandoning him because he executed one of his lords.
They each fail to see the consequences of their actions and the ramifications for trying to save face. Same with Ned Stark, an honorable man to be sure, but to tell the queen you know her secret and to just stick around waiting to be turned on, trusting peter fucking Baelish, politically Ned was also a moron
Tywin and Olenna trusted no one and got more done than any around them. Tywin died because of high treason by Jaime, letting a prisoner go and the final season doesn't exist for me so yea.
to be fair:
Ned 'trusted' Baelish against his better instincts because Catelyn vouched for him... Ned underestimating Cersei was just sexism, which yes is dumb...
Jamie released Tyrion because he knew he was innocent... so... Tywin died because he concocted a mock trial to condemn his SON to death on false charges and his son killed him for all the unwarranted years and years of abuse and hate because of his dwarfism that was really behind the 'trial' (and the lie and treatment of his wife in the books which was the real catalyst that fueled his lust for revenge, to me, that messed Tyrion up).
Olenna really got stuff done, but to what end? Her ENTIRE family was dead before her, all of her shrewdness and cunning really worked out for her!
Point: balance is needed. Yes you need to be cunning and ruthless sometimes, but you also need to balance that out with compassion and compromise... figuring that out is part of Jon, Dany, and every other young POVs challenge
Τhe difference between Asoiaf Arya and Got Arya and why the former will always be superior:
D&D didn't ruin only Daenerys, Jon, the Martells etc, but also....these two
Rhaegar and Lyanna are central figure in the books (especially Rhaegar) but in the show their only role was .....being Jon's parents and being used as a weapon to make Jon the "rightful king" and to create a nonsensical conflict between him and Dany the MaD QuEeN.
They have erased Rhaegar’s connection to Dany… he literally passed the Ice and Fire prophecy to her in a vision but D&D couldn’t have that because it conflicts their misogynistic narrative. They have also erased Dany's love for her family. She was mad when she found out Jon is Rhaegar's son....book Dany would never :/
They have erased Jon Connington, Faegon and other IMPORTANT characters connected to him and his storyline.
They have erased the importance of Lyanna for the Starks, especially ARYA AND JON. The parallels between Arya and Lyanna in the books are absolutely important and the way Jon didn't care about his mother in the show is....ugh
I just hate it.
Dumb and Dumber did their damnest to "simplify" (as in "cut as much content we deem unecessary as possible even though is extremely important") the story while adapting to the tv series. I hate that they cut the House of The Undying and changed Dany's visions and cut the visions she saw (it would've been so chilling if we got to see both her seeing the post-Red Wedding Robb and Rhaegar talking about the song of ice and fire), hate that they didn't even dare to have Lyanna until the S6 flashbacks and cut the comparisons between her and Arya. Dany would've loved to know she's not alone in the world and that Jon is the son of her beloved brother she admires so much and wished he was still alive. The way they erased that important part of Dany in the show was so sad. It really felt like Jon only told her because of the "icky incest" and she misunderstood him, thinking this was a trick to contest her claim. Instead of her thinking of marrying him so their claim could be stronger, it spiraled down into a stupid conflict. Fuck D&D so much.
One of the worst things about season 8 is how much they forgot that book!Sansa (and show!Sansa) actually admires women in power. She likes Olenna, Margaery, even Cersei in the beginning. She’s totally fine with book!Myranda who has a larger than life type of personality. Sansa is happy to have Myranda, Marg, Olenna, Cersei because she appreciates a female presence. Sansa, by all accounts, should have LOVED Dany. I mean here’s this woman who was also in an abusive marriage, who ENDED slavery, who was coming with all her power to save the North and Sansa does the absolute most to be make her feel unwelcome.
