What made you mad? *SPOILERS POSSIBLE*

[Eventine]

I find it astonishing that asking to be shown where Cat mistreats Jon is classed as nitpicking, especially since it is the crux of the whole discussion.

Well, I was more discussing my perception of Cat than anything else. If you want to go quote for quote with someone, you should probably head to a Martin board and find someone who didn't read the book 5 years ago to discuss it with.

I would hazard a guess that the comment about "it should have been you" regarding Bran is 90% plus of the reason that people think Cat is being harsh to Jon.

Probably is. I'd call that effective characterisation.

 

[Eurytus]

Well, I was more discussing my perception of Cat than anything else. If you want to go quote for quote with someone, you should probably head to a Martin board and find someone who didn't read the book 5 years ago to discuss it with.

Quote to quote is not even needed. Even some indication of where Cat has treated Jon harshly would be nice. So far none has been forthcoming.

Its been more a case of;

I think Cat treated Jon terrribly.
Why?
I can't say where exactly but I sure got that impression.

Not exactly cut and dried.

Probably is. I'd call that effective characterisation.

Effective characterisation? You believe that someone’s attitude towards another can be summed up in one sentence. Moreover one sentence uttered at a time when the person involved is close to spiralling into insanity (as Cat herself acknowledges she was close to later).

In that case perhaps we should condemn Tyrion for telling Jamie that he killed Joffrey. After all, finding out the truth about Tysha is obviously no excuse.

 

[Eventine]

Yep, effective characterisation. Martin has managed to convince people that Cat wasn't chummy with John. I'm not too hung up on how he did it, which seems to be where we differ. I'm sure Martin could have changed the "it should have been you" sentence or included a little scene with an intimate moment between Jon and Cat that would have changed my impression. He didn't though, and that's the way I felt when I read it. I feel that Martin was trying to get that response from his readers, and that he was mostly successful.

 

[knivesout]

I must say that this whole exchange is motivating me to go check the series out more than anything else has.

 

[SilverDagger]

Eurytus what did you think when you first read the pages from where all these examples have been taken?

 

[Eurytus]

Can’t really answer that question since I have not spotted EXAMPLES. I have only seen one and that is the “should have been you” comment.

In regards to that one I was shocked at first but then once I considered the circumstances I could see why she would say that.

I saw no other examples worth speaking of.

 

[SilverDagger]

Well what about that one when Ned told Cat that he would follow Robert, and that he would take Arya and Sansa with him. Cat said that she don't want to have Jon in Winterfell?

 

[Eurytus]

Provide the quote and I will tell you.
But as I recall she tells Ned that she would like him to take Jon with him, which in itself I do not find objectionable. Since he is more Ned's son than hers I would think that Ned should take him south with him. After all the other children who were to remain were for logical reasons;

Robb: to ensure the heir remained at Winterfell
Rickon: too young to leave his mother and go south with Ned

All the remaining trueborn children were to go south, why wouldn't Jon go too?

 

[SilverDagger]

I can't provide you with a quote, because I don't have the books. It might have been the way you said...that she asked Ned to take Jon with him and now as i think of it that's the way it was. But still there was something in that part that annoyed me in some way. Something that made me feel that Catelyn didn't want Jon to be arround.

 

[Eurytus]

Even IF she did not want him around, and this issue doesn't really prove it either way, why is that such a crime.

From her point of view Jon's one blood relative is going south and taking the majority of Jon's half-siblings with him.
It would be natural for Jon to head south with Ned surely?

 

[Oorag]

Cat and Jon both reflect on their relationship at some point in their own chapters, but the "it should have been you" scene was pretty much the only time they interact "onscreen," since Jon leaves after the feast. From what I remember, Cat was never openly rude or mean to Jon, but she didn't want him around and made it clear that he was a stranger in her household. Cat feels a little guilty about it at one point, but resigns herself to it.

 

[SilverDagger]

I don't think that it's a crime if Cat doesn't want Jon around when Ned is leaving. And I don't hate Cat at all, it didn't happen so much in all of her chapters but still she is a strong character. I really want to know what is going to happen to her after Thoros did his "magic".

 

[kseniya]

Originally posted by Eventine:
maybe Martin is using the culture difference between our two cultures as a device to cause a reader reaction - having his characters perform acts that are normal within Westeros society but uncommon in ours to gain a response form the reader?

Hmmm, interesting... Yes, that's possible. Though I would not expected it, seeing as usually writers try to achieve a degree of association between the reader and the characters. As in, indentifying with them, rather than shocking them. And we KNOW Martin's good at making us identify with characters. I mean, looks at what he's done with Jaime! I actually LIKE the man now!

Originally posted by Eurytus:
I find it astonishing that asking to be shown where Cat mistreats Jon is classed as nitpicking, especially since it is the crux of the whole discussion.

No, Eurytus, it isn't. You people talking about "actions." The reason some people disliked how Cat treated Jon were NOT her actions. It was her attitude. You compare the way she behaved with Ned's not putting Jon in the line of succession. That WOULD be an action - and one with very serious consequences (not to mention the fact that there's no reason to believe that Robert would have granted this. it was never a wise choice.) Ned was restricted in this. There were more than one consideration. Ultimately, I think it was not an option, not a choice.

That's what you get with actions. Attitudes, esp attitudes within your own household, are a much more flexible thing. She could have acted differently. People would only have thought better of her for it. She CHOSE not to. Perhaps to indirectly get back at Ned for keeping secrets. Purhaps because she just didn't like Jon. It doesn't matter.

Originally posted by Eurytus:
I would hazard a guess that the comment about "it should have been you" regarding Bran is 90% plus of the reason that people think Cat is being harsh to Jon.

Not at all. By the time she said it, my mind was already made up about her.

Originally posted by Eurytus:
Its been more a case of;

I think Cat treated Jon terrribly.
Why?
I can't say where exactly but I sure got that impression.

Not exactly cut and dried.

::sigh:: Didn't realize we were in court. Also thought the very point of this whole forum was to discuss opinions - let me say that again: OPINIONS!

And, in any case, what anyone thinks and feels about anyone else is never orbitrary. This does not mean I would condemn Cat to some horrible death at a trial for being mean to a child. I just wouldn't come anywhere near her, if I had to live in that world. Personal. Opinion.

Originally posted by Eurytus:
Effective characterisation? You believe that someone’s attitude towards another can be summed up in one sentence. Moreover one sentence uttered at a time when the person involved is close to spiralling into insanity (as Cat herself acknowledges she was close to later).

Not insanity. Grief. People in that state of mind, or absence of mind, have no room in them for thoughts of anything but the object of their grief, so they can't be expected to use the niceties of speak that they don't really feel. She said exactly, exactly what she meant. Can you see her screeming that at Aria? Aria looked too much a Stark, too, you know. Your own point, there.

Originally posted by Eurytus:
In that case perhaps we should condemn Tyrion for telling Jamie that he killed Joffrey. After all, finding out the truth about Tysha is obviously no excuse.

Jaime was a grown-up. And he did very much deserve it, though that's utterly beside the point.

Originally posted by Knivesout:
I must say that this whole exchange is motivating me to go check the series out more than anything else has.

LOL! OH, that's good.... At least this is doing someone some good. Because it's just driving me up the wall with the stubborn pointlessness of it all! GO READ IT!

(Actually, it's motivating me to a re-read, which isn't nice. I have a To Read pile that's wildly out control and growing growing growing... )

Originally posted by Eventine:
I don't think that it's a crime if Cat doesn't want Jon around when Ned is leaving. And I don't hate Cat at all, it didn't happen so much in all of her chapters but still she is a strong character. I really want to know what is going to happen to her after Thoros did his "magic".

Ah, a voice of reason. I have said, several times, that I don't consider it a crime. Cat was perfectly within her rights. Most importantly, I don't think that either Jon or Cat dwelt on it (they really didn't have time for idle thought, now did they? ). And I'm glad of that. But I blame her for the fact that Jon feels himself to be a bastard. YES, I know that's what he is. NO, I don't expect that anyone needed to be fooled about it. But no one made her rub it in his face. That's both unnecessary and hurtful. Because Cat is such an important character and gets so much time centerstage, I had hoped she would be less petty. That is ALL.

 

[Eurytus]

Because Cat is such an important character and gets so much time centerstage, I had hoped she would be less petty. That is ALL.

And here at last we have the crux of the matter. Because you think Cat doesn't match up to the ideal mother role you think her petty. This despite the fact that by the standards of the story world she is not.

So in reality you want the characters to conform to your moral world view and not that of the story world.

Well I prefer characters to be true to the environments in which they live.

 

[Cardo]

So in reality you want the characters to conform to your moral world view and not that of the story world.

Well I prefer characters to be true to the environments in which they live.

True to the environment?, there is no question about that Cat is true the environment she lives in, but that doesn't mean that there is only one way in which she could have acted. Even though she would have had a much better attitude against Jon she could have been a very true character. The environment cannot confine the actions of a character if she/he really want's to act untraditionally, therefore there is no reason for Cat to not be on friendly terms with Jon, and being nice to Jon cannot even be seen as a big break in traditions, or maybe even not a break at all. And that is stressed with the thought that no one outside the castle would have needed to know how well she treated a bastard, if it is that you are afraid of revealing Eurytus.

And about the "It should have been you" incident:
I would say that in that moment she revealed her true feelings, because she was unable to cloak them during all that sorrow and stress. And even though she could have redeemed her words she didn't do it.

And as Kseniya said, this act scene didn't change my opinion about Cat but did only strengthen it.

And wouldn't you say that it is good characterization if you can form a character with a one liner?

 

[Eurytus]

Judging from the wealth of condemnation over the comments made by Cat in extremis I suppose that every time something is uttered in extreme circumstances it reveals the character.

A wife or husband tells her partner "I hate you" in the midst of a heated argument it means they really do hate them I guess.

Or whenever a character in a book tells someone I wish you were dead, whatever the circumstances, it means they do really wish they were dead.

But lets be honest, people are applying unrealistic aspirations to Cat whilst not actually being able to indentify instances of mistreatment (physical, verbal or mental).

And I would like to know in what universe a wife is compelled to love their husband's child that is produced by adultery.
No-one can be compelled to love someone else. If Cat does not love Jon then no-one has the right to criticise her. Love is not something that can be "turned on" because it is moral to do so.

 

[Eurytus]

As far as I am concerned the "it should have been you" moment, together with Bran's "fall" were the moments that I knew this would be a good series. It takes a brave author to allow the "good" characters to say unpleasant things. Many readers would wrongly identify them as a "bad" character in consequence.

Indeed Martin's willingness to do this has encouraged some truly bizarre thoughts from readers.

For example I have lost count of the number of readers who have said, well now I like Jamie now that we have seen his POV.

i.e. Now I like someone who attempted to kill a child.

Whilst still stating that they hate Cat for daring to be critical of Jon in a moment of extremis.

 

[SilverDagger]

LOL...Kseniya you have one quote there wihch is origanally posted by me, but you have it as Eventine's quote.

Eurytus Cat has to be one of your favourite characters because you are defending her so fiercely. Why wouldn't it be right to criticise Cat's actions? You said yourself that it first was a shock to read the "it should have been you" part

 

[Eurytus]

I wouldn’t say that Cat is my favourite character but I find her interesting because she is heavily involved in the story without being able to physically influence matters much. She is not a warrior Amazon, nor manipulative like Littlefinger. She is trying to do the best for her family in difficult circumstances and bit by bit has everything taken from her.
Needless to say, I am very interested to see where Martin goes with her character in the future.

 

[kseniya]

Originally posted by Silverdagger:LOL...Kseniya you have one quote there wihch is origanally posted by me, but you have it as Eventine's quote.

Woopsy daisy! My bad It's not that I'm getting confused; more like I'm losing my mind with all this . It needs to stop, and stop soon!

Eurytus, I'm quite certain now that you have not read a word I said. In all your recent posts, you've basically repeated things I have said more than once, almost word for word. Yet you use them to argue what I've said. Odd, don't you think?

Cat has EVERY right to love or hate who she will. She's got every right to dislike Jon and treat him in whatever way she pleases. Everyone in any world has that right with respect to anyone else. But how you treat people is an action with consequences. One of those consequences is that you give people the right to form opinions about your actions and about yourself. That's all that is happening here. Why is it so difficult for you to believe that your opinion is not the only one that may exist, in the world?

I also find you reference to Jaime monumentally interesting. Two points, there:
1. You say that we are NOT ALLOWED to judge Cat. Yet you judge Jaime, and use that judgement as a comparison. What is that?!
2. It IS an excellent comparison. Both are characters who have behaved questionably (at least in my mind). Both have POVs. Reading Jaime's perspective showed me something in him that allowed me to look beyond some incomparably evil things he had done. It's still difficult for me to believe that I can like him, despite everything. Cat, on the other hand... Even reading page upon page of her POV chapters had not altered my opinion of her, which was set early on because of Martin's effective characterization in the beginning. Don't get me wrong (I KNOW I'm repeating this, btw). I don't blame MARTIN for including an imperfect CHARACTER. That's the BEST thing a writer can do to make his books realistic. As a character, I think Cat is great! Look at all the interest she's generating! I'm not judging the writing, but the person who has been written. And the whole reason for presenting a character to an audience in a particular way is to allow them to form opinions.

One last thing... Are you saying that in Martin's world it was somehow inconceivable to be kind to a bastard boy? Then how do you explain all the other families with perfectly well-accepted bastards? Why do you think they are the exception from the rule, rather than Cat? You sound as if you think that unkindness in people was not incidental, but required. I'll never be able to accept that, I'm sorry.