|
Post by eyesofmist on Mar 13, 2015 8:04:20 GMT
Yes, I think sex is always implied when they are together although it's never adressed directly, except when Sansa recongnised in her thoughts that she felt he meant to kiss her. A woman does know when a man means to kiss her,I don't think it's possible not to notice this. Perhaps you many not realise that he wants to if he doesn't try but when he does approach you with this in his his mind you can tell.
He would be creepy if he talked about sex with poor Sansa but he never did,it was always implied though. In a way this sentence:"One day I'll have a song from you,whether you will it or not." is sweet when it could have been creepy because he says ONE DAY, meaning he will wait until it is the right time. Sillier and I have been talking about this recently. They are Guinevere and Lancelot once again but Joff isn't noble like Arthur and Sandor has a bad reputation,that's why we get distracted from what is really going on between these two. Theirs is a classical story of forbidden love although there are too many distractors for the readers to get it straight away,some don't get it after five books. The story plays more realistically too, because this is not a song, LOL, or is it?
He behaves like a besotted idiot and she doesn't get it at first as it could happen in a realistic situation.Come on,that guy was contemplating the prospect of dying in a battle after saving that little silly thing at the risk of his own poor life without ever getting a thank you and then here she is and she says thank you all too late. He gets angry and brags that it was nothing because his opponents were rats.
Oh,Sandor! So many readers took his words at face value although this wasn't the author's intention. He could have ended like ser Aaron because there were so many people there and he was on foot and alone in the middle of a furious crowd to pay for what others, the Lannisters, had done their people.
George writes that the crowd mobbed him and many people don't get the enormity of what he did by saving Sansa when little badass Tyrion rode away as fast he could,and all the rest did the same,even the KG. People should consider why George decided to write a scene where Joff makes Sandor go after a man in the middle of a furious crowd and on foot,sending Sandor to his death, like Tyrion said. He shows here how little Sandor's life is worth for the Lannisters and makes his deed seem magnificent by putting him in such a dangerous position; we even get to know how others were torn to pieces while Sandor was trying to approach Sansa and Sandor himself saw how ser Aron was slaughtered. What he did was great and some say it was just his duty. Come on,the others rode away as fast as possible while he was like a knight in a song cutting his way to the lady to save her, risking his own life in the process.
What I mean, after shamelessly derailing,LOL, is that everything seems to go wrong for them but it doesn't. He manages to save her and eventually she will fall in love with him too,although it takes her time to find out. And he will wait, like he said in that sentence. The sentence seems wrong also because he says he will have the song even if she doesn't want that,but it isn't wrong. I think it's implied she will moan or scream for him whether she wills it or not,not that he would ever force himself on her. That's why I think this is sweet. He wants her but he will wait until she is ready to sing for him.
It's quite bold for a sworn shield, a man belonging to a minor house, disfigured as he is as well, to tell a pretty high born lady,his master's betrothed to make matters even more dangerous and difficult for him,that he will have her one day.But I like his boldness. Good for Sandor.
|
|
|
Post by eyesofmist on Mar 13, 2015 12:11:22 GMT
What you have said above does make a lot of sense, it really does. Art needs to be convincing,not necessarily realistic unless realism is the author's aim. George's story seems convincing,the plot seems solid and the characterization feels believable in most cases but this doesn't mean we have to expect surprises at every turn,especially because surprises aren't all that satisfying in fiction.
In real life hazard and casuality are all too real,but in a book taking out surprising events out of one's hat as if you were a magician feels like cheating the readers and George never does that.
On the other hand, when something shocking happens and the readers realize they should have seen it coming because it had been foreshadowed by the author the impression is great. For instance,Ned was toast from the beginning,there were many signs that this would happen and despite that we were shocked when it did happen,perhaps not surprised but shocked indeed. Does this mean no one is safe in his books because George killed a protagonist? Not at all because Ned,as good a chracter as he was, had been designed for a purpose and he served this purpose. He had to die whereas other chracters are destined to survive the series,we just didn't know that in the beginning. Perhaps now we can make some bets on who they are,LOL.
In real life we don't get clues about what is going to happen but in literature it feels great when the author does that. Not all authors choose this technique but George is very classical as a writer,his style feels classical although there is fantasy in his novels. So his world may feel realistic but we can't forget there is nothing random when the writer is pulling the strings and decides every move,every move serves a purpose or is there to convey something,nothing appears there by chance although when we read it we have the impression that the characters live in a world like ours where we can never be sure of what may happen tomorrow. With literature we may have an idea because it is decided by the author and he/she may have left some signs that indicate where he's going with his plot and his/her characters.
|
|
|
Post by sillierthings on Mar 13, 2015 14:18:50 GMT
I love that interpretation of that line, eyesofmist. It has been one of those lines that bothered me because it seemed out of character. He has just helped her, showed his attraction to her but still backed off when it seemed like he was getting too inappropriate, and now he says something about having her song whether she wills it or not, implying non-consensual activity if necessary to get what he wants from her. The idea that he might be suggesting that he'll have her "singing" because she just cannot help herself fits more with what we know about his character. How hot is that interpretation, really? He's telling her that he is going to bring her such pleasure she cannot help but sing. Whew! What a guy!
Don't get me wrong, there is danger in that line. I think there is that Hound part of him that does threaten her with death and here, potentially with rape, but the Sandor in him would not do that, especially since we know he stopped himself from kissing her when he thought she couldn't bear to look at him, at a time he was already a deserter. There was no going back for him after he left the battlefield, so a few more crimes would not have made his position any worse, really. Sansa was alone and he could have gotten away with doing anything to her. He restrained himself even when there was no reason he could not have taken what he wanted. That says a lot about his character and what he is capable of.
And I agree, how bold and passionate he is, with his looks and status, to suggest such a thing to his king's betrothed! He either truly has a death wish, lol, or his feelings for her are very intense indeed and it slips out like that. I also think we can look at this as more evidence for Sandor's philosophy in life --everyone's meat and I'm the butcher--as being a great equalizer. Despite such a philosophy, some people, like Sansa, do mean more, and the fact that he saves her when everyone one else leaves her behind, on foot, shows not only how strong he is but also the depth of his feelings for her. He "cut his way to her side." I like the way that is worded--"to her side." There, again, is an equality in that statement. He's not kneeling at her feet. He's going to stand by her side.
I also tend to think that Sandor does know the old songs. I think he probably knows the story of Naerys and her Dragonknight. I can imagine him cupping the Little Bird's chin, telling her he would have a song from her because they were already playing out a song, and he knew it.
|
|
|
Post by eyesofmist on Mar 13, 2015 15:08:18 GMT
That line has always bothered me but Le Cygne said there is a similar sentence between Jaimie and Clare in Outlander,where they say this:
And that it is very similar to this one between Sansa and Sandor:
Jaime and Sandor sound agressive when they say that,but Le Cigne says both scenes are meant to be sexy and not rapey. I think this is clear with Jaime and Claire but with Sandor this element of danger is always present,or so it seems. I say it seems because Sandor is supposed to be terrible but we have never witnessed anything that supports his reputation except killing Mycah and in my view,that blame should lay at someone else's feet rather than his. But that is another matter.
Well, perhaps what Le Cygne says is true and that scene is meant to be sexy and going a step further,I bet he would never take her without her consent so he doesn't mean rape when he says that.
How could a man rape a girl if he didn't kiss her when he had nothing to lose because he thought she didn't want him? How could he rape her when his final words were for her and he was ashamed for making her sing against her will and not helping her enough? It makes no sense to me,not at all. For me Sandor doesn't have two personas and that Hound helm is just his armour in a figurative sense. He hides behind the alias he has built for himself but he has been Sandor all along,that's why his eyes look brilliant behind the mask after killing Mycah. Sansa has her courtesy and he has his aggresivity as a means to protect himself from the world. I can't belive that when he feels like the Hound he could rape her but when he thinks twice he couldn't because I think he is only Sandor,all along and he wouldn't rape her,just like Jaime wouldn't rape anyone,that's not like him and neither is like Sandor.
If he is not a rapist his sentence means something else,and like Jaime in Outlander he is talking about possession, he feels passionate and possessive of her and how he abhors the idea of leaving her during the battle of BW seems to support this. He wants to possess her in all possible ways and that includes making her sing because she can't help herself.
I may be wrong,of course,but I can't imagine him forcing himself on her,that is out of character for sAndor.
|
|
|
Post by katie on Mar 13, 2015 15:20:35 GMT
No, Sandor would never in a million years rape Sansa. Like you said, he had the opportunity to do so -- when he first grabs her from behind in her bedchamber during the BoBW, he could have just done it then. But no, instead he just holds onto her wrist and has a little self-pitying chitty-chat with her, LOL. Even after she closes her eyes and he throws her on the bed, he could have raped her then, but we don't get any indication that that was even on his mind; there's nothing outwardly sexual about his actions -- sensual, yes, but not sexual or rapey. He had nothing to lose at that point, so if he really wanted to "fuck her bloody", he coulda done so.
But he did make good on his promise in a literal sense -- he DID take a song from her without her consent. In lieu of the ACTUAL song he wanted but knew he couldn't have. Yet.....
|
|
|
Post by sillierthings on Mar 13, 2015 15:26:42 GMT
No, I agree with your assessment of The Hound. I don't think he could ever rape Sansa, but when he's being The Hound--he threatens things that Sandor would not do. If that makes sense. I like Le Cygne's interpretation and comparison to Outlander. It makes sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by katie on Mar 13, 2015 15:32:25 GMT
Another possible interpretation of that line "One day I'll have a song from you, whether you will it or no" -- We can infer what Sandor means by this, but perhaps what GRRM means by this line is that one day Sandor will give Sansa her "song" she's been waiting her whole life for, and it'll be the last thing she expects because she has a very specific image in her head for what her "song" should be -- handsome gallant prince/knight that sweeps her off her feet, etc, etc. And yet she is falling in love with the LAST man in the world she would ever expect to, and it's gonna happen, whether she wills it or no. So, GRRM himself may be using this line to hint at their future relationship as a whole. Just give in, Sansa, you love the Hound!!! LOL
|
|
|
Post by eyesofmist on Mar 13, 2015 16:15:03 GMT
Yes, I mean the whole pack, he says he will own her, she will be hers and there's no way to stop this. It's not just about sex but about burning passion. It couldn't be less coming form him,that man with a buring heart.
This is me and I am very stubborn,but for me Sandor and the Hound are one and I can't see a duality or anything of the sort,just the everlasting struggle of the human soul,,the good against the bad,the animalistic against the spiritual,resentment against love. But everything is inside him and I can only see the same man all the time. Most of Martin's characters have dark aspects,they are good and bad depending on the circumstances but nobody says they are someone else when they are bad,as if they were Mr Hyde or call them by an alias or whatever when they do something bad. Tyirion is always Tyrion and the same can be said of Jaime or Cersei and they aren't wearing a helm or anything when they do bad deeds. The Hound is just Sandor for me,and he probably felt like shit when he killed Mycah. Of coursed this is only my reading of the character and I have no idea if this is what George expected readers to think or not.
|
|
|
Post by sillierthings on Mar 13, 2015 16:29:20 GMT
I think we are seeing things in the same way in regards to Sandor's character. Perhaps it's better to think that Sandor is "putting on the Hound" when he says and does certain things, but he's still Sandor. He knows it was wrong to kill Mycah. He knows he "took" Sansa's song. So, it's not like Good Sandor/Bad Hound, but I guess when I tend to think the harsher aspects of him being The Hound persona he adopts, that when he's doing something wrong, he hides behind the mask, but he's still who he is. I do think there must be some kind of duality though, on some level, since we have the whole "the Hound is dead, Sandor Clegane is at rest" situation, but I think that's just one way of representing that struggle of the soul you are talking about.
|
|
|
Post by katie on Mar 13, 2015 17:21:47 GMT
I think we are all generally on the same page when it comes to Sandor vs The Hound. The Hound is a persona -- it's not like Sandor has a split personality or anything, he just has this mask (literal and figurative) that he wears to hide behind. I tend to think The Hound is sort of symbolic of the Freudian Id, in that it appeals to one's very basest instincts. This seems to be exhibited by both Rorge and Lemoncloak possessing the helm and taking on the Hound persona and becoming even worse for it.
|
|
|
Post by eyesofmist on Mar 13, 2015 18:10:59 GMT
Oh, but I know it may be me that can't buy the Hound persona and perhaps it was George's intention to exploit this duality. It's me that can't envision that concept because I am incapable of that. For me Rorge has always been a monster and didn't become horrible because he was wearing the Hound's helm but the opposite. The Hound seemed much worse because of Rorge's nature. As for Lem,if he behaved badly it wasn't because of the helm but because he has it in him to do that. If Brienne wore the helm she would be as sweet as she ever was, and the Hound would seem sweet two. Sandor and Arya used the helm to give water to a dying man, Arya used it to hold wine and clean Sandor's wounds with it. I also remember the description of how water dripped from the helm's eye-holes as if it were crying for that poor man,showing mercy to him like Sandor himself. The hound is a dog and Sandor is proud of his House's origins, so the Hound is not evil,just honest and raw. Sandor also saved Arya at the Twins wearing that helm. I never saw the Hound persona as evil,unless Sandor Clegane himself was evil. It was both of them or none at all. I can't see that helm as ominous. How can I if Sandor beat Jaime and saved Loras wearing that helm? He won Sansa's father's tourney,the tourney of the Hand wearing it. There is no evil Hound persona for me,only a man with lights and shadows and if he wears that helm is because he feels proud of those dogs,those fierce dogs. You are right when you say the Hound died and Sandor is still alive but is the Elder Brother right? Perhaps the Hound represents Sandor's ferocity and that's still part of him,and the gravedigger threw dirt at the knights and Stranger is kicking and biting in the stables. Perhaps I feel like this because I liked the Beast part in him, I don't think the Hound is evil or that "he" could rape and kill whereas Sandor can't. I don't think Sandor had a choice when he killed Mycah, he was Joff's sworn shield and acted as an executioner following Cersei's orders. If Jaime had caught Mycah the result would have been the same and Jaime isn't wearing a Hound's helm. Call me crazy but I root for the Hound. I love that helm and the doggies, and Sandor,of course.
|
|
|
Post by sillierthings on Mar 13, 2015 20:27:53 GMT
One of my favorite quotations is as follows: "I claim the right to contradict myself. I don't want to deprive myself of the right to talk nonsense, and I ask humbly to be allowed to be wrong sometimes." (I think Fellini said that, but I'm not sure). So here goes--I'm probably going to contradict myself, but I think Sandor Clegane is just a great big walking contradiction in some ways. The nihilistic atheist who hopes SO hard for meaning and truth and the gods. The big, frightening man who cries at a little girl's song. I almost feel like there are 3 things we are dealing with in this character: 1. The man who longs for family and love and songs 2. The "dog"or pure primal masculine part of him--that loyalty, obedience, ferocity, strength and ability to spit out the harsh truth--all things that Sansa quite admires about him. She likes his ferocity. She's a wolf herself, after all. 3. The Hound--the terrifying persona he adopts as the underling of the Lannister. It's the persona imposed upon him by society. It's the armor he hides behind to protect himself. Unlike Rorge or Lem Lemoncloak, Sandor manages to use the Hound persona to benefit others, not just harm them, because that's who he is. He is kind. He did want to be a knight and help people. He saves Sansa. He saves Jeyne Poole. He tries to save Ser Aron Santigar. He saves Arya. He uses that helmet, as you said before, to give a drink to dying man, to boil wine for his wounds. Even though society has made him wear this mask of a monster, he still manages to use it for good many times because he is a good man. He's also passionate and has a temper. He's an efficient killer and hates lies. He growls and rasps. That's all Sandor, too. Maybe that comes out more when he has to be The Hound, but it's still a honest part of who he is. What do you think? Have I contradicted myself? Have I spoken nonsense? It's quite possible because I'm writing this in between work tasks . I do see your point though, and I like his animal nature. I think Sansa does too .
|
|
|
Post by katie on Mar 13, 2015 20:42:04 GMT
I think both of you are right, and I think it is because Sandor IS such a walking contradiction. And I think that stems from his struggle between wanting to be a good man and do the right thing and harboring so much trauma and anger at the same time. It's hard to WANT to do the right thing when you're constantly being shat on -- Remember how he guilt-tripped Sansa on Maegor's Rooftop about being grateful for seeing his ugly face when he saved her during the riot? Or how Arya's last words to him were "You should have saved my mother" even though he went out of his way to save HER during the Red Wedding? The man cannot win!! LOL! So is it any wonder how there is a constant internal push-and-pull?
BTW, one of the things I love about that pic that eyesofmist posted is how totally into Ned looks, lolololol...
|
|
|
Post by eyesofmist on Mar 13, 2015 23:25:30 GMT
I see your point too and many people think Sandor is his good part and the Hound is the evil part,but I think he is just human and isn't the Hound now and Sandor later. The gravedigger seemed very Sandorish too me,scratching the dog's ears and throwing dirt at the knights. That is Sandor Clegane on the whole, with lights and shadows and the Lannisters call him dog to humiliate and dehumanize him but I can't see the Hound as a monster,I don't see that helm as something scary,it is the man himself who is scary in some situations because he was trained as a child soldier whose only value is his capacity to fight. The Hound is dead and Stranger refused to be cut and turned into Drifwood,so the helm isn't all that important,the man is what matters and isn't so contradictory as I see him. Is he against religion? Is he a cynic, is he nihilistic? Yes. All of this. This is what he is because he learned this from life,the hard way. But what does he want? Most cynics are disappointed idelists. After receiving too many blows they harden but they would love to be proven wrong. Many people who are agaisnt religion were raised in a religious environment,many cynics used to have utopic dreams that were shattered by reality. I can understand Sandor very well, Sandor is what most idealist are like after being battered mercilessly by other people and life itself. As a literary devide this duality Hound-Sandor is very interesting but I see it only as a literary device morroring Beauty and the Beast as I think Sandor resembles other fairy tales more than Beauty and the Beast. He is not such a beast in my view. He is quite smart, a noble although from a minor house,who takes care of his clothes and appearances, who likes songs and stories,who is capable of compassion and love. He is not like the Beast because he can't shed his Hound persona and become Sandor. Both Sandor and the Hound are the same person and there are no lines separating the two of them because this is like a human heart works,with the good and the bad. This is probably why I hate that idea of redemtion archs, will to chance and such things. Wanting to change a man or a woman is horrible in itself. If you love a person you should accept them as they are or not love them at all. People can grow, improve and develop or just the opposite,but changing? I don't believe and I don't even want this to happen. If Sandor changed to much I would prefer to have ended his days under that tree. That would be spoiling a fine character. I know many people won't agree and I see their point but I can't help to see Sandodor the Houd as one. I don't like Jeckyll and Hyde at all and I don't believe people are like that. By the way, I found this post I'd like to share with you,a short cartoon you will see in a couple of minutes. I love it and it reminds me of Sandor and his struggle. eyesofmistsecrets.tumblr.com/post/112788073468/lazyyogi-beautiful-native-american-wisdom-iSandor is like all of us, lights and shadows.
|
|
|
Post by katie on Mar 13, 2015 23:56:11 GMT
Again, I think we're all basically on the same page here, it's just a matter of semantics and terminology, LOL. Like I said, I don't think Sandor has a "split personality", but The Hound IS a persona that he hides behind. Like, say, Lady Gaga, LOL. It's an image he's crafted for himself and project to the world to shield him from that same world that has let him down time and time again, but it's still HIM. It's the "evil wolf" that he feeds, like in that cartoon you linked. On the QI, he is learning to feed his "good wolf".
This is maybe a bad example because I just said that Sandor doesn't have a split personality, LOL, but have you ever seen the movie 'The Three Faces of Eve'? It's about a woman named Eve White who is very meek and insecure, and she has another personality named 'Eve Black' who is her direct opposite -- loud, brash, and flashy. At the end of the movie, Eve discovers a 3rd personality, Mary, who is actually a combination of the two; she's kind and gentle but she's also assertive and strong. The best of both worlds. As with Sandor, I think it's important for him to find the balance of these two sides of his personality, his "good wolf" and his "evil wolf"; somewhere there's a middle ground, where the rage inside him will be gentled, just as Sansa prayed for. He'll be less angry but he'll still be fierce. He won't be so quick to anger but he'll still cut a bitch down if need be. He'll still be loyal and honest but he won't be quite so cynical or cruel.
Anyway, just my thoughts, but I think we may have reached an impasse here, LOL. I see your point, but I do think The Hound is an external persona that Sandor needs to extract himself from in order to heal and grow, but that doesn't mean that he will lose the GOOD aspects that the persona represents, because both he and The Hound were born from the same place.
|
|