He did that because he could tell she wasn’t going to kill him out of mercy.
Yeah, because she’s not the sociopath you keep saying she is.
I think Arya not giving the Hound the mercy-killing he wanted was her way of crossing him off her list. He was asking to be killed so she did the opposite because the idea of getting revenge on someone is to do something to them they don’t want you to do. A mercy-killing would have been just that, mercy, and she was still not willing to give him that or forgive him. I don’t think this necessarily makes her a psycho.
I don’t follow this at all. She wouldn’t kill him for mercy’s sake, and he couldn’t get her to do it by making her angry. I think we agree that she refused to kill him because she wanted him to suffer. I have mixed feelings about using the word sociopath because it gets overused so much - that’s why I said she reacted “like a sociopath” but didn’t act like I was diagnosing her - but I think the point remains. I didn’t see any evidence she couldn’t kill him because they’d grown close. It’s not like she took his name off her kill list during their time together.
My problem with it, is that it made her unsympathetic to me. (And she was one of the very few characters I had previously been sympathetic towards in the show.) A slow, torturous death, I think very few people deserve that. And The Hound was not one of them.
And I don’t follow this. You think it’s normal to stab someone you care about in the heart? Jojen’s sister hesitated so long before she killed her brother, she almost died too-- and he wasn’t reciting a long list of reasons why she shouldn’t show him mercy.
Not stabbing someone in the heart is a sign of mental illness. Shyeah, right.
I thought the lowest thing that the Hound did of his own volition (i.e. he wasn’t ordered to do it) was torturing the farmer who invited them to dinner and stealing his silver. His rationale was “somebody’s going to steal it, so it might as well be us”.
Arya hated him for that as well, but then takes the silver with her as he’s dying. I guess her rationale was “somebody’s going to take it, might as well be me.”
There’s an interesting lecture to be made on pragmatism and morality using Arya and the Hound.
And I so hope Rory McCann wins some awards for his performance. He’s a great actor.
For most people? No, of course not. Arya’s not most people. She’s a hardened killer. I think she’s killed three people and she ordered a couple more murders on top of that. Most people couldn’t do that, so you can’t compare her to everyone else. She is not bothered at all by killing people if she feels like killing people.
Meera hesitated for maybe 30 seconds, and then she tearfully killed him. The scene between Arya and the Hound was much longer and she never moved a muscle.
This is why I shouldn’t have used that word. You’re focusing on it and ignoring the sense of what I said. Instead of saying Arya reacted like a sociopath, pretend I said her reaction was frighteningly calculated and cruel, and it was a level we have not seen from her before. Here’s what I think: Arya didn’t kill the Hound because she wanted him to suffer as much as possible. I think you totally misread the scene if you think she wanted to kill him and just couldn’t bring herself to do it. Meera hesitated, cried, and killed Jojen because it had to be done. That’s what it looks like when you’re forced to kill someone you care about. Arya just sat there while the Hound pleaded with her to kill him, then she kept sitting there while he tried to make her angry, then she had the presence of mind to steal his wallet, then she left him in pain to die of exposure or infection.
And here’s the other thing: my view is that Arya wouldn’t kill the Hound because she wanted him to suffer, and yours is that she didn’t kill him because he made her mad at the last minute. Your argument that Arya is not a sociopath makes her sound just as crazy as my argument that she acted like a sociopath.
I agree with this. But it could be argued that in the barfight, emotions were running high–and Arya’s act was related to the fact that she’d spent the last few minutes in fear for her life, while The Hound was laying about with his sword against multiple opponents.
Thus her act was not quite as cold-blooded as was her sitting watching The Hound’s wounds bleed, knowing that he was in for a horribly drawn-out death (and that she could have given him, instead, a mercifully quick death).
I agree with all these points, mr. jp. But the showrunners know that many in the audience (for this and other stories) admire and enjoy characters who commit cold-blooded murder. They would miss such characters if none were provided.
There was quite a lot of discussion over this divide (between those that find cold-blooded killing to be badass and admirable, and those who find it to be less-than-admirable) when the last episode of Series 3 of Sherlock aired. Forums all over the Internet cover this BBC show, of course, and a lot of people were talking about it. Those who thought the cold-blooded killing could be justified had a whole raft of what they considered to be good reasons. And others thought that the act of finding justifications for cold-blooded killing was pretty revealing, all on its own. As I recall, few changed the positions with which they’d begun.
It’s a real dichotomy–as real as belief in the supernatural versus non-belief.
Yes, I don’t think there was any grey area here. The showrunners had set up Arya’s decision point very clearly and openly: using Needle on The Hound would have been mercy, and declining to do so was…something else. How people choose to define that ‘something else’ is a window into their values. (And in my opinion, the presence of this sort of thing in the show represents its most meritorious and useful function as a cultural phenomenon.)
So…why do the Wildings need that one tunnel (for which they were fighting the Crows), to get to safety? If the waters off their lands are navigable enough for Stannis’ ships to land, then why can’t the Wildings use some of that plentiful wood all around them, and practice making boats until they get it right?
Letting them live and potentially tell his brother that he was there was less dangerous than starting a one-on-five fight.
They’re fleeing ice zombies. They don’t have time to learn the art of shipbuilding.
But they don’t need to become master shipbuilders. They just need to build rafts that can take them, what, about a mile? less? (from the north side of the wall to the south side). Even if the place that Stannis landed was a few miles north, that’s still not a great distance for a raft.
If the waters were calm enough for Stannis to land what looked like thousands of horses-and-riders (and if not thousands, then at least hundreds), then all that the Wildings would need would be rafts or small boats that could be rowed–or even just poled.
The Wildings seemed to have enough freedom from zombie-attacks to have been able to mount the campaign against Castle Black (and we saw no zombie attacks on them during the battle or after). So it doesn’t appear as though they are under continuous siege.
I’m pretty sure the other Night’s Watch Castles are at each end of the wall, to make sure the Wildlings don’t go around.
Ah, I see what you’re saying. I’m not an expert on sailing, but you can’t tell me that traveling on a ship and traveling on a homemade raft or little boat are equally safe. That body of water is called The Shivering Sea (more specifically the Bay of Seals), and the name “shivering sea” should highlight one of the risks. And 100,000 people trying to travel that way sounds like chaos. They’d drown by the thousands. I think it’s easy to see why they’d rather stay on land and try to get through a tunnel.
They would outnumber them just like they outnumber the men at Castle Black.
I would guess the Night’s Watch castle right on the water in the east has a small naval force.
I imagined that The Wall is between two mountains, so that it’s the only way through. Has they shown where it’s located?
A ridiculously detailed and useful map. Make sure you click “episodes” so it only shows you what’s happened in the series.
Rafting across an open frigid sea is a bad idea unless you have absolutely no other options. You’d first have to make a sea-worthy raft. Then they would have to row the rafts or make sails. None of the wildlings has been shown to have sailing or boating knowledge. This would have to be done while maintaining an alliance that is held together by a combination of desperation and force of personality. The longer they take, the greater the chance the ice zombies reach them. The quicker they take, the shoddier and fewer rafts they have. And before that happened they would need to actually reach the coast - adding many miles to an already long march.
And even if by some chance they pulled that off and began rafting southward along the coast, all it takes is one Crow scout to notice them and the plan is basically fucked. The Night’s Watch could send some archers to lob flaming arrows at the sea-borne rafts as soon as they got within range, and have soldiers waiting to finish off those who make it to shore. They might still make it through due to sheer numbers, but countless of their numbers would die.
Wow I had Qarth in a totally different place in my head. I thought Dany was still going the wrong way when she went from Qarth to Astapor, but I guess that was on the way back to Westeros.
And don’t confuse Qarth with Tarth