What made you mad? *SPOILERS POSSIBLE*

[Cardo]

Originally posted by Eurytus
Whoever Jon’s parents are is not really relevant as we are talking about people judging Cat. You can only judge someone’s actions by the information they are given. As Cat has not been told that Jon is Lyanna’s son then the fact is not relevant. You can’t judge someone ill because you are in a position to know more about the situation than she is. Jamie now believes that Tyrion murdered his son. In that situation Jamie would be justified in killing Tyrion in retribution, putting him on trial for his life at the very least. Would you condemn him for it because we, the reader, are in a position to know what Jamie can’t. And yet you condemn Cat.

The reference to Jons parents is important in the judgement of Ned's actions not Cat's and that is why it is relevant here, I presented it as a defence for your accusations about his behaviour. I agree with you that peoples actions should be judged according to what they know, not what is the real truth.

And what does she know: that she's got a loving and honest husband, with the exception of one misstep when he was really young, and even that one he tried to correct the best way he ever could, even against old traditions, shouldn't such behaviour need a bit of respect.

It can hardly be said that Ned’s lies have been all for the common good. The common good of Westeros? How so. How does Ned lying about who Jon is be for the good of Tyrion? Or Brienne? Or Theon? Or the Red Viper?
I could of course go on but the point is made I think. Ned’s lie is only really for the benefit of his sister and Jon himself. But in choosing to lie and present a closed mind to his wife Ned is also responsible for the consequences of that lie.

The common good, what about stopping a civil war? If it would be known that the Targaryens have a heir in the north some would rally for him some against him. Even though he wouldn't want to make him a king he would have to fight for Jons right to live, he couldn't let Jon get executed, as some would wan't!

You ask that she trust Ned whilst at the same time giving Ned a pass for not trusting her. Interesting behaviour.

It's only in the face of distrust that real trust can be shown !

 

[Eurytus]

You still haven't indicated where all these examples of Cat's mistreatment are.

 

[Eurytus]

Originally posted by Cardo


The common good, what about stopping a civil war? If it would be known that the Targaryens have a heir in the north some would rally for him some against him. Even though he wouldn't want to make him a king he would have to fight for Jons right to live, he couldn't let Jon get executed, as some would wan't!

Jon would only be a Targaryen heir were Rhaegar and Lyana married making him legitimate and it is unlikely that there would be anyone around who would know if that had occured and even fewer who would believe it even if told.

 

[Cardo]

Originally posted by Eurytus

Jon would only be a Targaryen heir were Rhaegar and Lyana married making him legitimate and it is unlikely that there would be anyone around who would know if that had occured and even fewer who would believe it even if told.

It doesn't matter if they would believe it or not, the question is if they would WANT to believe it! The most important thing would be that he MIGHT have Targaryen blood in his veins!

And about occasions where Cat mistreated Jon, I would remember that every action she made around Jon was one of utter contempt and dislike!

 

[Evil Agent]

Everyone is making good points, but in the end I have to agree that the dislike towards Cat is mostly unwarranted. But it's just a gut reaction, because the readers love Jon so much (myself included), and when she was cruel to him (at least verballY) it just made readers defensive and decide they didn't like Cat.

But since then Cat has become one of the most important, if not always exciting, characters. She counseled and oversaw the early victories of Robb, the Young Wolf, she ran around Westeros rtying to make peace with people like Renly and others, she arrested Tyrion, and by the end of Storm of Swords, she seems more bad-ass than ever. If all these things haven't made the readers get over there defensive anger towards her, then oh well... does it really matter?

We should keep in mind here that in Martin's world, ALL characters are flawed...Even Ned, one of my top favorites ever. He made stupid choices, and was often blinded by his own honor. In regards to Jon, he's trapped by his sworn oath to his sister (if that's indeed the true story). Remember, "Promis me, Ned!", which he still hears in his head like 15 years later. Cat was acting how someone in her world and situation would probably react towards Jon. "Disliking" someone, even a family member, is not that bad a crime.

 

[Eurytus]

Originally posted by Cardo


And about occasions where Cat mistreated Jon, I would remember that every action she made around Jon was one of utter contempt and dislike!

So you don't have any examples then?

 

[SilverDagger]

When Bran fell and was unconsious, if I remember right Jon tried to visit him to say goodbye. Cat made it clear that he wasn't needed there, and that it should have been Jon not Bran.

 

[Eurytus]

Already dealt with that one. At this time Cat is distraught, it is clear that she is not actually far from losing her mind altogether. She thinks her son is dying. In that sort of extreme scenario I think she can be forgiven for verbally expressing the wish that it was someone other than one of her children. For it to be Jon in fact.
Martin has already stated that this was out of character for Cat.

So out of 4000 pages of writing it appears we have 1 example of Cat being nasty to Jon. An example wherein she was under extreme pressure and reacted inappropriately.

Big deal.
Doesn’t mean she should be condemned by all and sundry.

 

[Cardo]

As I don't have the books at I can't single out any of Cat's cruel acts, but I would remember that there were quite a few. Some that were described as deeds other that were purely of taking a stance against Jon.

And about condemning people, I wouldn't condemn Cat to anything based on her actions against Jon, but as you said she has some flaws as do other characters, like Ned. I'll just want to condemn those act's, not Cat.

Take my point?

 

[SilverDagger]

So out of 4000 pages of writing it appears we have 1 example of Cat being nasty to Jon. An example wherein she was under extreme pressure and reacted inappropriately.

No, Cat and Jon have got nothing to do with eachother after the 400 first pages. Because Jon follows Benjen to the wall.

Another example would be the one when Cat gets to know that Ned is going to go south with Robert, she reffuses to have Jon in winterfell...

But one can understand why Cat does that way, she can't forgive Ned what he did...or what she thinks he did, if he did.

 

[Cardo]

But one can understand why Cat does that way, she can't forgive Ned what he did...or what she thinks he did, if he did.

He did/she thinks he did/íf he did

 

[SilverDagger]

I thought I made my point clear there, even though I didn't really know how to write down everything.

 

[Cardo]

The point was very clear but you ended the post in such a hillarious way that I had difficulties to stay on my chair

 

[SilverDagger]

Well that was the point where I had some difficulties in expressing myself.

 

[kseniya]

Eurytus, I'm more than a little confused by your need for examples of Cat's "misbehavior to Jon". Do you think she loves Jon? Or, for that matter, that she does anything more than tolerate him? Do you honestly think he has not felt that?! Do you honestly think he felt part of the family? And who, tell me, of the others in the family - and you've got plenty to choose from - could have been responsible for that?!

It doesn't MATTER if she's done anything specific. The one instance you keep talking about doesn't matter at all. Jon was grown up, by then, and used to it. My point is that he was unhappy. She was responsible. And she - a grown person.

You're also right that it doesn't matter who Jon's parents are. It really doesn't. (Actually... and this may be revealing my own stupidity ... it had not occured to me that Jon might not be Ned's son until I came to this forum. Yet my opinion of Cat was the same. So you can't say I'm spoiled by the extra knowledge.) The thing is, whoever contributed DNA to Jon's creation, HE had no part in it. I'm not saying Ned's an angel. I'm not saying anything about "right"s and "wrong"s in terms on Ned's behavior. I like him, but you don't have to. All I'm saying is that JON had done NOTHING to Cat. Nothing at all. If she wanted to take it out on someone, Ned should have been that person. But she didn't want to ruin a relationship that needed to look pretty from the outside, at least. Also, I think if she raised any scenes about Jon in the beginning of the marriage, Ned would really have told her off. I mean, neither of them loved the other, in the beginning. Later, that changed, yes. But, later, Jon was not a fresh issue, anymore.

Anyway, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I don't think Cat's evil, but if I met a person like that, I would not be able to be anything approximating friends with her. You feel differently. Which is fine. She had every right to act as she did. That's not in question. (And, yes, that IS a Westeros value ). But she didn't HAVE to. If she hadn't, I would have liked her much better. As it is, her treatment of Jon early on spoiled, FOR ME, everything that followed with her involvement. The topic is "what made you mad". THAT made me MAD. That's all I'm saying.

Agent wrote:
Everyone is making good points, but in the end I have to agree that the dislike towards Cat is mostly unwarranted. But it's just a gut reaction, because the readers love Jon so much (myself included), and when she was cruel to him (at least verballY) it just made readers defensive and decide they didn't like Cat.

That's it exactly. I'm not denying this in the least. But it set my opinion of the woman in stone. I'm glad my opinion of her is not the only opinion of her because then she'd be universally despised and she had done a lot of good and reasonable things on her family's behalf, obviously. So, knowing that someone else is doing her more justice, I feel free to be as unreasonable about this as I please.

Originally Posted by SilverDagger
But one can understand why Cat does that way, she can't forgive Ned what he did...or what she thinks he did, if he did.

LOL! What's the problem?! That's just about the most reasonable statement we've had here in some time! (Including/especially mine.)

 

[Eurytus]

I am afraid we will have to agree to disagree on this one. You seem to portray Cat as being the person responsible for his unhappiness. This is false. Throughout the books Jon hardly thinks about Cat at all, and perhaps only once or twice with negative feelings.
If he is unhappy it would be reasonable for the source of his unhappiness to be revealed in his internal monologues. It’s not revealed to be Cat but it is revealed. His main source of unhappiness and much of what drives him is because he IS a bastard and not because of his treatment due to this.
He ruminates more than once on the “tainted” blood that bastards are supposed to have, a problem believed in by most of Westeros. His unhappiness on the wall greatly stems from the fact that those who do not like him use his bastard status to taunt his lordly manner. He ruminates that everyone (Arya apart) from Cat, through to Robb and Ned’s bannermen always consider him a bastard. Whatever else they may consider him they know he is not one of Ned’s trueborn children. And he isn’t.
Nothing Cat says or does can change the fact that he is a bastard, treated as different in Westeros society. Thought to be untrustworthy. Thought to be liable to treachery. And a constant example of their lord’s loss of honour.

Little of that is due to Cat and as I have already mentioned her behaviour towards Jon is absolutely brilliant by Westeros standards. Her small failures towards him make her more human and I think it is the fact that she is not some “blessed faultless mother” type figure that makes people turn against her. It is what people expect.

I, on the other hand, would no more condemn Cat for her (well above average behaviour) than I would condemn someone living in the UK in the middle ages distrusting a Muslim. Both are a product of the environment, not of the person.

 

[Eurytus]

I know it probably makes a virtuous woman of Cat when she fights for her family like she does, but the only thing that does is remind me how she excludes Jon from that counting.

I should point out that everyone's favourite saint, Ned, also excludes Jon from the list of his family when talking to Cersei and he ponders what he would do to protect the lives of his children.

 

[SilverDagger]

We can't know what Lyanna told Ned before she died, and if that has got something to do with Jon, we'll probably get to know what it was. Jon is Ned's bastard son, I don't know why he left Jon out when he was talking with Cersei but he did. If he wanted to protect him in someway...but I can't see why he would only have protected Jon and not the other ones. Maybe he did so because it was something that was expected of a man like him. Why would he start to talk about his bastard with Cersei? I mean if Jon was lord Tywin's bastard son Tywin wouldn't even want to hear his name, and anyone who would talk about his bastard would get himself killed. But in the end I think that Ned loved Jon just as much as he loved Robb, Bran, Rickon, Sansa and Arya.

 

[Eurytus]

No, Ned does not talk about Jon to Cersei. He doesn’t talk about any of his kids to Cersei. Cersei asks Ned what he would do to protect his own children and this is what he thinks;

Ned thought, If it came to that, the life of some child I did not know, against Robb and Sansa and Arya and Bran and Rickon, what would I do? Even more so, what would Catelyn do, if it were Jon’s life, against the children of her body? He did not know. He prayed he never would

It is quite clear that he does not think of Jon as one of his children at this point.

 

[Beldaran]

No, Ned does not talk about Jon to Cersei. He doesn’t talk about any of his kids to Cersei. Cersei asks Ned what he would do to protect his own children and this is what he thinks;

Ned thought, If it came to that, the life of some child I did not know, against Robb and Sansa and Arya and Bran and Rickon, what would I do? Even more so, what would Catelyn do, if it were Jon’s life, against the children of her body? He did not know. He prayed he never would

It is quite clear that he does not think of Jon as one of his children at this point.

well, why would he talk with ceresei about jon, especially when all of her children are bastards, and some peopel actually know about that and that knowledge got them killed?

and I have never liked catelyn anyway, you would think that a mother would have more love to spare to other children than her own, shame on her!

and who's to say if he does or does not think Jon is his child or not...