Use the code TREE for 40% off World Anvil with the link worldanvil.com/?c=mltt Or else try it out for free!! Hope you enjoy the video, let me know what else you want me to analyze... ...also, let me know if you can spot the BEANS
Ned is the breaker of generational cycles, maybe in the harsh physical world his actions seem ineffective, but because of his loving nature he managed to raise kids that were strong and kind and who make better leaders for a better world. That is the true power of love
Good people? Sure. Good leaders? Arguable. What kind of good leader decides to break a vow and cause enough disruption amongst it's allies and vassals during a war just because he "fell in love" with a pretty foreign girl? Another example is that Jon bringing all the wildlings and giants through the Wall is a sign that he is a good person, but doing so without stocking an enormous amount of extra food and supplies makes him a poor leader.
@@henriquecesardesouzasilva8766 "What kind of good leader decides to break a vow and cause enough disruption amongst it's allies and vassals during a war just because he "fell in love" with a pretty foreign girl?" This did not happen in the book. Robb didn't marry Jeyne Westerling because he loved her, or because she was pretty, it was because he took her virginity and felt that he had to save her honour, especially if she was pregnant. Which is something almost no other highborn boy would do, but he did because he was Ned's son and was raised to believe in the importance of honour. That's not even getting into the possibility that this was a deliberate plot by Sybelle Spicer and Tywin.
I want to point out that while i feel for the OP l's perspective most of the Stark kids are scattered and/or killed off as of now with untold amounts of horror unfolding in part because of the decisions of our Starky boys and girls so i am loathe to talk about the 'power of love' in this context
Ned has always been my favorite, not only because he is one of the more “noble” characters, but he also feels the most human to me. Him holding in all his rage and sadness and being so distant, but loving really speaks to me.
A tragic but real character. He is meant to symbolize that in politics, good, honest men are doomed to fail. The system is meant for the schemers and tyrants.
That’s why I like Rob so much. He feels so real to me. Like a child forced into being a leader, desperately trying and being good at it but still being terrified.
Ned may have been honorable and noble, but that is what killed him. In King’s Landing, Ned was meant to lose. You have to be an asshole or someone who is willing to be dishonorable to win. Especially within wartime and governing 7 kingdoms.
@@peterversiononehe didn't lose, he became a martyr. No one gives a shit about tywin lannister after his death, not even his kids care. Ned on the other hand garners an amount of respect that lives forever. Immediately after husband death, a the north came to war. If Tywin had died, nothing of the same would have happened.
I think it's interesting how quickly people get pulled into the ethical standards of the world of ASoIaF so as to harshly criticize a character who represents the absolute moral height of the series. Someone who is disgusted by those who employ child murder in a world where it's commonplace. Who wants to be merciful among people who would abuse their power with impunity. With hindsight of later events people are quick to pick the easier and less moral path for the "greater good," but I think the picture GRRM is ultimately trying to paint is that a world where people pick the ruthless options because they grant the most immediate and pragmatic results are not building a stable world that truly lasts.
Exactly. People who say that ruthless pragmatism is the "only way" forget that Tywin Lannister played the game perfectly. He was ruthless. And he was pragmatic. But he still died an unceremonious death and the dynasty he spent decades building crumbled almost immediately after he died.
I do think that GRR Martin wanted to convey a message with Neds dead. He needed to show the cost of Neds way before he could show its benefits. Otherwise it would feel less true. Yes he gets himself killed and the Starks to the brink of extinction. But they bounce back from a point probably no other of the great houses could. Certainly not the Lanisters. At least in part that is possible because there is an extra ordanery amount of Loyalty they have built up in the North over centuries, if not millenia. You can not do that by maximizing short term opportunism. The fact that there is a deap tradition for holding up certain values in the Stark family is instrumental for that.
The Manderly, the Mormont and the Umber are living proofs of that No bullshit like in the series where the Umber just betrayed the Starks at the first moment, they are still fiercily loyal to the Starks
Thats true. People kinda miss the fact that even though Nedd gets caught lacking early on, because everyone around him was more ruthless than he was, his values and the roots of his house run so deep that he was kinda never truly killed. Everyone of the Starks embodied Nedd's teachings to some degree or aspect. Nedd's name in particular still carried weight way into the third or fourth season and way out beyond the wall. His reputation as a good and honest man meant that he gained a loyalty and support that was largely unwavering. The Stark name was baked into the culture of the North. Nedd managed to do through building trust and holding to his principles what Tywin was hellbent on doing, but ultimately failed to do through deceit, intimidation and cruelty, he built a dynasty that could last for a 1000 years.
I don't think Ayra is deliberately favoured over Sansa. Ned is simply a man with no exposure to a girly girl. I'm sure he simply left her raising of a girl to his wife, and only intervened withAyra due to her familiarity in personality. Neds sister was more like Ayra so he understands how to talk to her. Ned does not understand Sansa, the life she aspires to, or her desire to aspire to Kingslanding position, no doubt in large part due to his lack of availability in her early years, and his neglect of telling her the reality of Kingslanding.
Ned never sits down and actually talks to Sansa. He gets Arya a swordsmaster, never gets Sansa a harp teacher. He upends Sansa’s life over and over again, and doesn’t even take the time to explain why. He never even thinks to tell Sansa they aren’t safe when they’re in a dangerous, precarious situation. The ONE event they attend together, he acts like it’s a huge chore to interact with Sansa and share in her interests. Instead of offering to hunt down Nymeria, an animal proven to be willing to attack humans and therefore a danger to all of society, he kills Lady. Would he have offered up Sansa’s hand in favour of Arya facing judicial amputation, had Cersei been more stubborn? So, whether or not he favoured Arya on purpose, the damage was done and it was pretty extensive.
@@misskate3815 don't disagree, just adding a possiblity to the background from my own view of parental relationship. It's impossible for parents to get it right, they have strengths and weaknesses. Ned did fail Sansa, but in many different ways he failed all his children. he took the easier way around Sansa, neglected her and she suffered as a result. It wasn't from a lack of love or desire to do right, he just didn't know how to engage with her. He did give her what she wanted many times, he just didn't warn her of the horror she was chasing. It's hard to disabuse children of thier simplistic and idealist views. And she became strong, confident and powerful.
@Miss Kate oh come on. You really think he'd offer up Sansa's hand for Arya? That's a bit much. He wasn't a prefect father but I don't really think fathers were all that involved in their children's lives in the medieval age... least of all their daughters. That seems a normal thing for the time. That doesn't mean that he loves them any less. He had more in common with Arya, not only because of her similar personality to his sister but also because of her interests. I think he enjoyed Arysa's company more than that of Sansa's but Arya was still a little kid where Sansa was already a bitchy teenager. Do you have teenagers? I do. They suck to be around.
@@ljb8157 well, he was happy to metaphorically murder Sansa in the form of Lady, so who the fuck knows? Also, the reason Sansa was sullen was bc he dad was ignoring her, not facilitating her interests in any way, MURDERED HER HELPLESS AND INNOCENT SPIRITUAL AVATAR, and spoiling her younger sister and letting said child get away with everything. You’d have an attitude, too. (Also, wow, super uncomfortable that you’re going to compare Sansa’s legit trauma to your kid having a bad mood, like, not the same, dunno how to tell you that.)
Ned Stark is literally one of the greatest characters in fiction and to me is a great example of someone who never broke in a world where people praise those who break who they are for power and glory. Great video man. You gave a good idea about Ned as more than what his critics see him as being the stereotype good guy who gets killed. I see so much of myself in Ned for the reason that he never stops questioning things but knows deep down who and what he values and what he would give up for them.
I definitely never saw Ned as stupid. I think he always made the right decision based on the information available. He had no idea that Robert was going to die by a boar when he confronted Cersei. He had nod idea that his wife was going to arrest Tyrion when they were plotting their plan which caused Jaimie to attack him. He didn't know that Littlefinger would betray him even though he never trusted him to begin with, but it was because Katlyn trusted him. He trusted his wife, so he begrudgingly trusted little finger. He didn't know his own daughter would go to Cersei to inform on him about them leaving. There were so many terrible things that just went against Ned in the worst way to undo his actually brilliant but flawed plan. And as you said, he had a morality which most of the people around him in King's landing lacked. It is both a strength and a weakness.
Same. I never saw him as stupid. Just not a terrible person. Unfortunately he was surrounded by terrible and/or foolish people. Everything that goes wrong for him can be attributed to someone else’s foolishness(Kat arresting Tyrion, Sansa letting her mouth go in front of Cersei) or villainy(Everything else). He also had some pretty shit luck with Robert getting gutted by a boar and all that.
That ptsd scene where he recollects war memories while wathcing Arya and Syrio shows whatever happened then constantly is with him.This seems to cause lots of indecisiveness and passivity except when it comes to protection of children.Also,I don't if it was intentional or not but you can see a slight grief in sean bean's face even when there is a jovial situation.
A very noble (as in nobility) morality. He did know, or at least acknowledge that his actions would lead to war. He has been to war and knows how many commoner children will be murdered by his action...but he didn't see them..
@@saraa.4295to be fair, the death of noble children has a much worse impact than that of commoner children realistically. You see it often throughout history and in the history of Game of Thrones
Fucking Gerald HighTower, the White Bull eventually said something to Jaime when he see's his expression, "your job is to protect the king, not judge him". I swear Jaime was one of the only men who served on the Kings Guard who had real honor and he killed his king and fucked his sister.
Honestly a fantastic video, I never really considered how Ned's trauma would effect who he becomes, as he just seems so. . . normal. Most people, like the Lannister's and Robert end up as shells of who they were. I never considered Ned being who he is, is a doubling down on what you believe is right via that trauma, hence his rigidity. Truthfully you did a brilliant job with this one, and ought to be proud of it.
I always thought it was pretty obvious. That's why he tells Cersei of his plan. And you always have people saying he is just an idiot for doing that. Not considering the type of trauma he endured after the situation with Elia Martell and her kids.
@@nostalgicbliss5547 Yes and he was thrown into the pit with no prior experience. It's akin to Mr. Smith Goes to Washington in that an honorable man is thrown into a cesspool of corruption with no prep, and no defense except his ethics. Of course Mr. Smith had a more fortunate outcome, but in "real life" he'd probably be assassinated.
Thank you ❤👏 Not so many people seem to understand characters like Ned (even though he's rather the classical hero archetype kind of character). Many misunderstand kindness for stupidity and, imo, mistakingly think being Machiavellian and ruthless is the better way.
When all those self-serving Machiavellian characters die during the Long Night, those people will all look foolish. Ned raised children specifically to survive in a hard environment, where loyalty and kindness and resilience are paramount to insure the survival of everyone around you. You can't con yourself out of being cold. You can't steal food from the neighbor you might desperately need on the morrow. You can't trick an ancient ice monster. You have to stick together and these scheming characters keep their cards close to their chest. I think the Machiavellian characters are cool and are glorified, but only because this story isn't finished yet.
I love ned for all of the obvious reasons, but I also love how ever present he is in so many character's minds, similar to rhaegar, even long after his death. Will forever be my favorite character.
Ned Stark was brought up to be his older brothers banner man and to be a honorable knight. He basically was raised to be a follower not a leader and is put in a position of leadership only because his father and brother died. He's a good man with a kind heart always trying to do what is right. I believe it's because of that it's what makes him a rarity in a world of GOT.
I've always seen Ned and Robert as the two sides of an ideal soldier. Ned is a near perfect representation of a soldier's duty, which distinguishes them from a vain glory-seeking savage, but as you described he snuffed out all the fire that would allow him to become truly great at fighting and actually achieve what he felt was right (pretty good guess that he kills that part of himself due to feeling internally disgusted at his own hidden impulses after witnessing King's Landing and becomes even stricter with himself). Robert on the other hand has all the natural fire that makes a soldier truly exceptional and perform the most amazing deeds, but he has next to no sense of duty despite Arryn's best attempts to the contrary and after he 'slays his dragon', it never occurs to him to change himself even a little bit in his later years. He likely feels he doesn't have to change either, when he can just ask his childhood friend Ned to serve as his Hand, clean up his messes again and thus enable him to keep on wallowing in his misery that he masks through whoring and drinking. Also as for 'monster' being a bit too strong of a word for Robert, I felt the Histories and Lore at the end of season 7 summed it up perfectly with Jaime narrating it, in regards to the Targaryen children being killed: "I saw what Ned couldn't. Robert was ashamed of the bodies...and more ashamed of his relief. He knew that they had to die, or his position as the new king would never be safe. But 'glorious heroes' don't go around killing children. They simply don't punish their murderers."
A great summary. Also Robert created the Cersei we know at time of story through abuse and his obsession with the idea of Lyanna. Probably his second greatest sin after allowing the killers of the children go unpunished.
I know the Histories & Lore said Robert was ashamed about Rhaenys & Aegon but in Neds chapters when he’s remembering that time his disgust with Robert came from Roberts happiness at “dragonspawn” being killed so I push back against Jaimes narrative. While it’s entirely true to secure Roberts reign the previous one had to literally die, Roberts enjoyment over a 3 year old being stabbed 50 times & a 1 year old being smashed against a wall along with not sparing a second thought to Elia and what happened to her, monster is more appropriate than not IMO
@@TheRepublic4 being married to Robert Baratheon would fuck any woman up, but Cersei was already well on her way there before they met. She threatened her fathers staff, abused Tyrion and killed her own friend. She was also already cheating on Robert during their wedding day, so she can't really be all upset that her husband loves someone else when she's not faithful either.
@@DavidCarradinesBelt the happiness at the children's death was just an act he put on in front of others because he was too proud to admit his regret and he needed to act like the super arrogant and powerful warrior king. When he was by himself he most definitely was like Jaimes account which is probably why he was basically living in depression drinking and whoring the rest of his life away not caring about The Throne that he had to kill the children to secure. I am a psychologist and this behavior is consistent with how people who have serious regrets in their life actually behave. When they're put on the defensive and think that they need to validate their decisions in front of others they suddenly start acting like they didn't have a care in the world about what they did and how their victim deserved it. But when they're by themselves alone at night that regret comes out and it causes deep-seated shame inside of them. I've heard stories like this a bunch with patients, of course not about killing children lol, but other things people can feel shameful about having done.
@@philippeblais8594 yes, that’s what I said. He lost Rob to grief during the war. The man who he viewed as a brother didn’t survive, only this grief ridden beast remained of who he once was.
@@ronanchristiana.belleza9270 probably explains why Jon has a much stronger sense of duty than his siblings. Tho lyanna might have named him Jon. We don't know for sure what happened yet.
I never thought about Ned as a champion of children much less as a reaction to Elia's. Good catch. I always just saw it as Ned being good but that's hardly a reason when the rest of the world seems to not have as much of a problem. You found complexity in a character I saw as very one note before now. Thanks.
I mean it was pretty obvious Ned was struggling with trauma and grief. The actor portrayed it perfectly. The show even knocked you on the head with it when he was watching Arya train with the dancing master and he was shown to be having PTSD flashbacks. Ned was actually one of the more complicated characters in the story. Just didn't last long enough to see him evolve.
So is what happened in the war why Ned, when watching Arya water dance with her sword, hears the fighting and screaming and looks very scared? For her? Scared the ptsd he has will happen to her at some point if she learns and begins to enjoy war?
I can't criticize what you missed, but I do think you did him justice in explaining his character and breaking him down to his most important traits. I liked listening to this and hearing about the humanity of the character, it's my favorite thing to understand about them. Thank you for the video!
one thing that absolutely fascinates me is how all GoT characters are extremely deep, just so many layers. there are so many main characters in books and movies (especially movies lol) that are as plain as a blank piece of paper and it's never the case here. i've never really understood people who don't like Ned or think that he's just a dumb politician. like, honey, no. there's much more depth in him and so much human nature which i personally love. so, thank you for this video! you always open up characters in such a brilliant way. i'd love to see more Stark analyses heh, i could listen for hours :D
Your analysis has honestly fully explained why I always felt so connected with Ned. He feelings and struggles when it comes to children are similar to my own. I know if I ever have kids, I'll have the same trouble finding a balance between protecting and preparing my children. And I do think you're quite right that his main struggle is fundamentally about being forced to lead when he prefers to follow, as well as the compromising of morals that can come from being a follower. But (though not related to Ned at all) I've always felt that the leader v follower dynamic feels incomplete. Leaders lead people, followers follow people. But what about the people who neither follow nor have any followers? What do we call them? Loners? Outcasts?
Really loved this video. The focus that Ned shows to children was always something that I had known but the extent was not something I had considered until you pointed it out. Its hard to not love this character for being so decent among so many people who just aren't.
This was a great vid. I get tired of hearing the same crappy takes on Ned. He really wasn't an idiot. Most ppl would be crushed if they had to make decisions with such dire consequences.
I think this 'follower who was forced to become a leader' is a fitting description. As someone who has always thought of himself as more of a supporter to his Borther/Father/Robert/John Aryn he has a much deeper understanding of the consequences and mindset of those who are affected by leaders descissions. So when he is ultimately foced to become a leader he vows to not be an arrogant leader, blind to consequences and people he is leading. Only that this aloof disregard also plays a role in leaders making hard choices and Ned (as you put it so well) struggles with hard choices because no matter what he choses the consequences are big so he shys away from a quick choice overall. That's not weakness or stupidity that's consideration. If you want to find a 'blindspot' for Ned it's that he tried to carry all the burdens himself in his attempts to shield his friends and family from the horrors he experienced and in the process failed to surround himself with helpers & advisers that believe in his code but are may be better at the part of leadership he struggles at LIKE political maneuvering or choices where all outcomes are undesireabe.
Always hate when people say that the war was built on a lie or that the war was wrong if lyanna went with rhaegar willingly. The realm was powder keg ready to explode and a rebellion was coming no matter what. All lyanna and rhaegar did was decide who it would be between. In cannon it is widely speculated (even by king aerys) that harrenhall was a cover to plan a coup or a rebelleion. Keep in mind that Roberts great-grandfather rebelled due to the targyraens breaking a betrothal with his daughter. And dorne would have rebelled if ellia and her children were cast aside for lyanna. So a rebellion was happening no matter what.
I hadn't realised a lot of things about Ned that you brought up, actually. Such as his obsession with protecting children specifically... and how the war/rebellion affected the way he makes decisions in general. It wasn't something I considered. I was under the common impression that his decisions came from a code of honour, one he was probably raised with, something more cultural. I figured he was brought up to be just and honorable and he holds himself and everyone else to a naive standard sometimes... but at the same time, sometimes he seemed to know better, but couldn't bring himself to act against his code. But I hadn't thought all that much about it. He isn't around for a very long time, thus I did not spend that much time thinking about him or his motivations as much as the others.
Father: I'd argue that Ned is doing his flawed best to individualize his parenting for his girls. He sat with Arya and said she will be a lady of the court, she refuses this birth right and favors dreams of wild adventure like her aunt. Seeing this desire, he fosters this desire by hiring Syrio. When presented with the marriage pact by his best friend Robert, Ned contemplates it, but Sansa jumps on the opportunity to become a princess and making babies, and the pride she takes in her needle work and general lady training. So, against his better judgements, takes Sansa to court to marry his daughter to his best friend's bratty son. Ned gave both his daughters what they asked for. His love language isn't words, like Lanis Tyrrel, for example, or gifts like a Lannister, or physical touch like the Martells. No, Ned favors acts of service for his love for his family and friends. Despite his own desire, he displays his love for his brother by avenging his death and honoring Brandon's marriage to Catelyn. He displays his love for Robert by honoring his request to travel south and replace his surrogate father Jon Arryn in court. He especially displays his love for Leanna by keeping her dying wish and protecting and raising his nephew as his own. No words of affirmation, no affection via physical touch, no focus on gifts, through a stoic sense of duty he provides acts of service, he honors his commitments to those he loves. No less so then his two daughters Sansa and Arya; who, in the end, get what the most desire in life: Sansa a queen, Queen in the North, and Arya a wild adventurer who sets sail to discover what is west of Westoros.
This was the most successful video I think you've made, because like George R R Martin you pointed us to more questions than answers. Ned has more mystery. Also because it was more indepth and complicated than others make him seem, especially considering he is human not metaphor for honour made man
I think Ned fights hard with trying to do what is right and good and not knowing what is right and good. I often find myself wondering if decisions I am making are really good for my children . Nothing like what Ned was involved in of course but it is not easy being in the position of taking care of others and Ned sees himself doing that for the entire north and later for Robert as well.
Ned stark is such a wonderful character, he’s always been my favorite, with Rob Stark coming in second. Something about the stark men demands loyalty. Even all these years later, I still cry about their deaths, fictional charters… George was on one when he wrote those men.
Ned is not a fool for being moral. He is a fool for pulling the thread of royal heirs after seeing what Robert and Cercei are like. Upon learning of Cercei's and Robert's bastards he could have done nothing. Not gone to the brothel, not told Robert or Cercei, not started anything. He could have ignored the rules of sucession and focused on preparing the realm for winter. Roberts kids would be safe, Cerceis kids would be safe, *his* kids would be safe, and the realm would have been spared a war. But Ned chose to pull on that thread.
Only through the intro so far but first off I have such a deep love/respect for Ned Stark that just talking about him and and also saying that people might think he's not interesting or dumb both sent emotional chills. Also just the way you talk about anything and how you have really well thought out points but then your recordings feel chaotic and improvised, what a wonderful channel
I think we can compare Ned's strong sense of morality, which is meant to make sense of the world and to protect others, while constantly humbling him and being enforced at his own expense, with Stannis' rigor, which seems as a way to separate and heighten himself from others (maybe fueled by long lasting jealousy for his younger brother Robert), and is often enforced at the expense of others (even if he still keeps himself to high standards most of the time). Stannis' rigor actually ends up hurting people directly without him being concerned, and becomes intertwined with a religious fanatism that also makes him nothing short of a demigod, which points to his rigidity serving to fuel his narcissism. That can explain why Stannis can commit monstrous acts (like fratricide) while still hiding himself being moral values (justice, religion, higher good), while Ned would have been incapable of committing such acts. It's interesting because they were both considered by outsiders "men of honor", and even considered each other that way.
I always thought it was kinda weird that Stannis got the "man of honor" title, when he took Davos' fingers, for his crimes as a smuggler. Dude saved your ass, and you take his fingers, before knighting him? If there had to be a punishment, couldn't it be something less life lasting, less crippling? Doesn't seem very honorable or just to me.
@@schmalzilla1985 But it is. Saving Stannis doesn't make Davos crimes from beforehand any less. And Stannis is just the kind of person who takes law and rules very seriously. That's why he punished Davos before he knighted him. That's also the only reason why he fought for to become King. He didn't WANT to be King nessessarily. He was next in line and it was his duty to take the throne. That's why he did it.
@@She-Devil94 I know,Mandy you're right, and that's what makes Stannis such a dick. He was in the position to change the type of punishment, and he did, to a degree, he could have gone with a less debilitating one, but he didn't. It may not absolve him of his past crimes, but everyone in Storms End benefited from that skill, and Stannis continued to benefit from using that skill in the future.
@@She-Devil94 issue with all this is if he actually burns his daughter alive in the books like in the show. If he dies then there goes that man of honor shite.
@@Kris-wo4pj His daughther isn't even near him. And he is already at Winterfell. If Shereen actually gets burned then it's by his wife and the red lady.
You know what really makes things interesting with the whole conflict between Ned and Robert and the Targaryens and Lannisters is the fact that the houses were so closely tied together. At least with the Baratheons, Targeyrens and Lannisters. In the book The World of Ice and Fire, it mentions that Tywin Lannister, Arys Targaryen, and Steffon Baratheon (Robert's father) were all close friends growing up and Steffon died on a quest for the King. Even more so is that Baratheon is just an offshoot house of the Targaryens since the founder, Orys was rumored to be the Bastard brother of Aegon the Conqueror. Then you considered all the marriages between the houses, and how closely the blood is mixed between them, it just makes it more of a family conflict than anything. Especially since the war started over a woman.
He is a man of integrity in a world that's out to break that. But the breaking of him nearly broke the world in return. This one man dying resulted in another family line going nearly extinct, shook 'the most powerful family' in the Lannisters right to the core and perhaps slowly killed it and much much more. Yes, he is somewhat foolish, but only from the perspective of his own life. From a historical perspective the man will be seen as a visionary of righteousness. Not perfect, but a very, very good man. A man who planted his feet and told the world to change rather than change himself.
I can certainly understand your points on Ned trying to protect his kids while at the same time preparing them (for some of them anyway) But I do remember a quote from the show that gives you an idea of Ned's level of experience with dealing with his daughters. "War was easier than daughters." Plus in regards to Ned killing Lady instead of letting it go. I feel it would have been the best thing to do. Since I'm pretty sure had Ned just let Lady escape, Cersei would have found out and called a hunt to kill it. Which would have resulted in a brutal death. Had Ned tried to convince Robert longer. Cersei likely would have gone behind their backs and have Ser Ilyn execute Lady anyway. Once again, leading to a brutal death. Plus Cersei would have kept the pelt. Almost like a big "fuck you" to the Starks.
Would love to see your breakdown of basically every main character on Succession. There’s so much complexity to dive into and you’d do a great job putting it into words.
I think both Ned and Catelyn deliberately allowed at least their daughters to be over-sheltered. Catelyn was given the responsibilities of the Lady of Riverrun when she was a young girl after her mother's untimely death. It taught her courtesy and reliance upon diplomacy, but her late childhood/early 'girlhood' might have been shadowed by her responsibilities. And then, instead of a joyful marriage to the handsome heir to Winterfell, Catelyn loses her betrothed to a horrible death at the hands of the Mad King and the next thing she knows, she's betrothed, then married to the less handsome younger brother and new heir and her father is joining in a dangerous rebellion. Catelyn goes through her first pregnancy without seeing her new, barely known husband, and having to worry that their child might never know its father, that he might die in war. There was also the chance that Robert's Rebellion would fail, and if so, what would happen to Catelyn and her father and her child as well as Ned? Catelyn had to shoulder a lot of worry. Of course, Ned had to suffer through not only learning of the horrific deaths of his father and brother shortly following his sister's abduction, he was condemned to death by the king and had to join a rebellion to save his own life as well as hopefully recover his sister. All of this while they were teenagers. I believe that consciously or unconsciously, Ned and Catelyn gave Arya and Sansa much more leeway. Arya was allowed to get to the age of nine with habits that most noble-born girls, even some northern ones, would scorn, as well as a bad case of lack of impulse control (how she didn't know that it was a huge No-No to attack the King's son, even when that boy was being a brutal brat is impossible to guess. I think she did know and didn't care, Arya was allowed to prolong her childhood). Sansa was tremendously over-sheltered; to believe in legends and romances at an age where many young girls were being given more lessons about household management and (if noble) politics. I believe that Ned and Catelyn wanted at least their daughters to have a gentle, easier, childhood and girlhood; they couldn't really soften the boys' lives too much, since boys had to grow up to be fighters and strong vassals to their future lord (Robb), and to hold the respect of the North. But they could spoil their daughters; and I think they did. Luckily, Catelyn and especially Ned had a strong sense of fairness (Catelyn's only weakness on that score was that she could not bring herself to be fair to Jon Snow, she was hurt by and terrified of everything he represented, so she could not unbend and treat the actual child with kindness).
Ned is definitely one of my favorite characters in the series and I'm glad to see a rigorous breakdown of his character. He felt more real than many of the other characters, trying to do the right thing, frustrated with those that only scheme for their own gain, struggling to figure out how to navigate this world so different from his own.
Awesome analysis. I really appreciate the effort put into it as Ned is often tossed aside as the generic "good-guy" whose death subverts expectations. As for your request at the end of the video regarding things we might add or disagree with: Anger. Ned, by nature, is conciliatory and does not want conflict. Nevertheless, he has a subdued rage to him. I think your whole section on children sums that side of his personality up. He is angry at the horrific things that were done in Robert's name - By Robert's men, Jon Aryn's men, Tywin Lannister's men, and worst of all- his own men. This contributes to his reaction to Jaime Lannister on the throne. Where Jaime interprets it as: "How dare you, get off of Robert's chair!" I think Ned, in that moment, was more like: "Your father's done the work. We've one. Stop posturing and get down, you douche."
Lord Stark is trying to get things as best he can, but doesn’t involve himself in plans or tricks, which is inherently noble. One of The most “straightforward” character besides Robert in the series as a whole.
Song of Ice and Fire is an incredible work of art, and yet is still so incomplete. I'm not even talking about the last two books - there's gaps throughout the novels that are ripe for expansion and refining. I truly hope George has written notes filling in the blanks that can be compiled into additional elements of the story - like can any of us imagine if there's a new book that focuses on events from A Game of Thrones but are from a different perspective character? An example would be a Night's Watch series that tells us of Benjen's last Range and how his disappearance is received by the officers who knew him best, or maybe a story following Varys as he pieces together that various plots happening in King's Landing that he attempts to spin into his own grander schemes, or Lyssa coming to terms with the consequences of her lord husband's death and fending off the vultures who swoop around her son. Or heck, new characters who seemingly have little importance in the grand scheme of things and how they understand events as they know them and the part they play - like a hedge knight in the service of the Lannisters having his own perspective on the horrors inflicted in the Riverlands and feeling powerless to do anything about it as his morality is chipped away.
@@danielmejorado6098 Exactly! I hope George himself can do the work once the main series is finished, though I won't blame him for wanting to take a break and do something else for a while. Or just retire and drink cocktails on a beach for the rest of his life.
I like the idea of Ned being slight unconsciously jealous of Brandon; it mirrors Jon’s feeling toward Rob in a storm of swords, when he dreams of killing him and taking Winterfell, it’s a nice parallel between the two of them that I’ve never thought about.
I always had a problem with Ned not telling his wife the truth about Jon. The emotional burden of raising (what she believes) a child from her husband’s affair. How could she ever really trust him? The guilt she feels for harbouring resentment towards an innocent child. It could be seen as Ned utilising “honour” like currency and also as armour he presumed would protect him from uncomfortable situations, like sharing his feelings. He is too busy being honourable to acknowledge others feelings. I never saw Ned as a “good” character but a character consumed with being good.
This was hurtful to Catlyn but if you thought she hated Jon and was cold to him before, if she’d known who his actual parents are then she’d fear him and hate him. Ned hiding Jon is super mega ultra treason. If he was found out not just Jon and Ned but the entirety of house stark could be branded as traitors to the crown and killed. I don’t think knowing would give her any peace of mind or love for Jon or Ned.
@@teacuptearex6333 So you are saying Catlyn would not have been capable of keeping a secret to protect her nephew (Jon)? Ned’s inability to break a promise ruined a child’s relationship with the only potential mother he could have had. I kinda see where you are coming from…Ned hides Jon from Robert then he gave Cerci a chance to run with her illegitimate children from Robert. The latter is why he died. So, I think my point still stands, if he had honoured his wife instead of protecting his own honour he would not have lost his head…and there wouldn’t have been a second season. Ned’s flaw is the catalyst of the story.
Ice was big enough, the Man Who Passes The Sentence should have been able to get Joff, Tom, and Myrcella with one Swing of The Sword. If not the whole Lannister crew. Oh he totally would have faked Theon’s beheading
The reason for Robert's Rebellion was never that Lyanna was kidnapped, it was that the Mad King murdered one of the seven highest Lords, and blantantly threaten two more of them, in essence the Mad King Broke his covenant with his High Lords, and the only other option was to let the Mad King kill Ned and Robert(who is one of the seven high lords). There was no real threat of rebellion, Brandon and his father, both thought they could negotiate with the Mad King.
I was thinking... Maybe Jon Arryn imparted his interpretation of honor on Eddard when Ned was his ward; but due to feelings of inferiority (compared to Brandon) and impostor syndrome, Eddard never came to "Own" his interpretation of honour, he followed an ideal of honour that was Jon Arryn's, not his own. His own inner conflict and insecurities prevented him from directly defining what honour was by himself; leaving him only with speculations and inferences on what his mentor would consider to be honorable. In effect; Ned couldn't "decide" on what was honorable he could only "discover" what was honorable. I don't know if I managed to make my point clear or comprehensible; also, I have no sources.
Do you think Ned's love of children is why he took Theon as a ward? Maybe Ned noticed Balon was an asshole so he thought he could raise him better. That would make Theon's betrayal of Robb worse. Ned hoped Theon would be a loyal, younger brother type. But hopefully Theon has a comeback despite his mistake.
That was a great analysis. I've never read any of the books nor seen any of the show, but I know the characters and some of the plot and I love getting to know the chatacters better. It's great to get some insight into the character who's often treated as the most uncomplicated one, I suppose, and see all this depth of characterization. Thanks for the video!
Really liking these ASoIaF analysis series. Even though of course the discussion is re fictional characters, due to GRRM's genius they're so well-drawn they offer a world of insights. Re Eddard Stark, his answer to Bran's question of how a man can be brave when he's afraid has stuck with me for years, and imo elucidates the essence of his character. "The only time a man can be truly brave is when he's afraid".
What I found notable about the show vs the books is how Eddard is pushed further into the stereotype of a gruff, straightforward northerner. In the scene where he first arrives at the Red Keep, he is told that the small council is waiting for him. In the show, the steward asks if Ned wants to freshen up first, to which Ned responds with an annoyed glare. The steward then drops the matter. In the book, Ned is the one telling the steward he'll go see the council right after making himself presentable. So yes, he is an honorable northerner, ill at home in the viper's pit that is King's Landing. But he is still a proper Lord of one of the greatest houses in Westeros. Not some sellsword that lucked himself into a title. Edit: Oh, looks like you do mention that scene, just not the part that I'm talking about.
Excellent video, as always! :) My GoT knowledge is mostly cultural osmosis and lore reading (though I did watch House of the Dragon), so I may be way off base here, but it seems like Ned is unusual in this universe simply because he considers things like honor and ethics at all. The characters who do take them into account by and large seem to be ones with limited autonomy (Kingsguard members like Selmy or Dayne, for example, or Jon Snow of the Watch), and most characters with independence operate on a more utilitarian framework, or at the very least a single-minded pursuit of what they consider the highest good. Maybe Ned has spent much of his life looking for a cause worthy of his devotion and has found all causes lacking. Maybe he's looking for things worth risking his life for, in contrast to Robert who seeks danger and excitement just to feel alive, to feel relevant.
Very interesting. I have thought about Ned so often and I agree that all this "Ned was stupid" or, "Well, that is honor-for-brains Stark for you!" just don't get him completely. Maybe because we are, esp. in High Fantasy, so used to the good vs evil dichonomy. It has been said that SOIAF is not a psychological story, but a sociological story at heart. And that is why mayor character Ned can just die in the first book (and he would have to, from a narrative point of view- he knew too much). I think he had more time to spare for Arya because she had been the odd one out in Winterfell. We only really seen Sansa and Arya in their last few weeks of childhood together. Not the almost decade before that. Sansa was asking Cat if Arya was a bastard like Jon. She was okay with Septa Mordane, she had an instructor to her strengths all her life. Only after Ned no longer had the boys to instruct he turns to Arya, who had mostly turned to Jon, not to anybody else. Because he understood being different. And Sansa is shutting Ned out, too. She misses being the center of attention of her little "court", even though at least Jeyne and the Septa are with her. She will feel a lot of guilt: Arya did a lot more to save Lady then she said and Robert gave her the opportunity (but she would have crossed her idolized motherfigure Cersei). If it had been a statement against statement situation in a court and it was about a dog hurting a child, I know how a court here would have ordered. The dog would have been killed. It would not have justice to let lady live. But hearing about how Summer saved Bran, it was still very hard on Ned. Also I think this whole "Aegons Dream" story that was made part of HotD is very interesting. I think this is something that was passed on to Rheagar and a reason not only for him to elope with Lyanna, but also for Lyanna (she was not "only a teenage girl" but also the lady of the house for one of the great houses of Westeros, we see a bit how important that position is when Robb has problems to cope while Cat is out because of Bran) to go with him. I don't think it was all starry eyed romance with those too (I am biased against romance in fiction, though). Maybe Lyanna wrote everything down and the story played a role in Ned getting so sick at the tower of joy, bringing the sword to the Daynes and them being rather cordial to him even though he caused the death of two members of the family (their heir is called Ned, after all!). And he might have told Benjen and this might have been a reason for Benjen to go to the wall. Maybe Ned really knew WHAT winter was comming (the 2nd Long Night). And tried to deny it (Cat said he did not heed omens and portents and he seemed to have kept the kids in the dark about this).
I don't think Ned really favored Arya. When he went to King's Landing with his daughters, Sansa was excited to go and seemingly fit in very well with the ladies of the south. Arya on the other hand was lonely- she spent most of her days missing her friends and family in Winterfell, just wandering around the Red Keep alone getting into trouble. Of course he'd spend more time focusing on Arya. She seemed like the one who needed more help at the time.
This was a great video! I really appreciate the nuance you bring to Ned's character. He wouldn't want people either to glorify him as a paragon of honor or to belittle him as a naïve fool. Like everything in life, it's a bit more complicated. This series of yours analyzing ASoIaF characters is so compelling. I would love it if you did a video like this analyzing the psyche of Theon Greyjoy. There's so much there, in my opinion. I really enjoy these videos you make, so I'm curious what your take on Theon/Reek would be
It's great to revisit Ned's character back now that I have some more perspective. I always thought it was odd that people automatically thought that Ned's kindness and honor-bound is what got him and that's why the Lannisters were the best (never mind that they're the ones who set a lot of things in motion. Them going against the Mad King, Jaime pushing Bran out the window when he's caught with Cersei, and Geoffrey being a tyrant. I mean, when a family is in charge of and affected most of structures in that world, I thought it would be obvious they were at fault since they chose to do a lot bad actions. It concerned me when someone told me the Lannisters were their faves because they win all the time. Not like even going into how they know they're bad and acknowledge their flaws like some people would about characters who're antagonists and or the bad guys of the story. I feel like some people missed the fact that Ned was literally betrayed by Geoffrey being violent tyrant in the making for "his kindness and honor got him killed in a world where that never works"). Your videos are getting me back into GoT again, and now knowing more context of the characters. I didn't know GRRM was a pacifist and that makes me feel better knowing that. Was kinda afraid to pick up the books and immerse myself in a world where violence and corruption rules (already have enough of that in the real world. I didn't want to go into a fantasy world with violence for shock value and just for the sake of violence. Kinda weird now looking back at it that friends who were into GoT (both avid readers and watchers) just highlighted and praised that the most. And Ned's death was not all in vain. If anything, it gives the rest of the surviving Starks more reason to come back at the Lannisters, who're eventually going to deal with the repercussions of their previous actions. One choice that happened in the final season of the show was the Stark children winning and triumphing in the end, all but one of the Lannisters are dead. I can't wait to see what's coming to the Lannisters in the books. I'm looking forward to seeing the rest of the Starks
I very much agree. I love the Lannisters too but not because of that. I love them because their psychology is fascinating, they are most certainly not the victors. Thanks for the comment, was an interesting read
That's the best any of us can hope for. Some small part of what we were living on inside of our children making them who they are and their children, grandchildren and so on.
The more I read and mull over the series, the more I realise that Ned is my favourite character. He's more than just an honourable fool. And he's NOT stupid. Ned's legacy hangs greater across the world of Westeros than Tywin's ever will...
I feel like "good" characters, characters who's main thing is how hard they try to be good, generally are harder for people to pin down. I know in comics, I often feel like writers have a way harder time with Superman than Batman for just this reason, that it's easier to pick out and explain narcissism or anger or fear or whatever than to explain what being good means, especially since different people have different ideas about what good is. And yet there are things that still stand out, it's not totally subjective... It's elusive?
I think the issue is that the standard writing "method" is to highlight the flaws of characters and then put them in situations where those flaws cause more harm and gets the character in deeper trouble until they overcome that flaw. Batman's flaw is easy to pick out, he's too paranoid, and emotionally stunted/numb after witnessing his parents murder. Tony Stark is a narcissist trying to do good, but his ego frequently gets in the way. Bruce Banner has his lifetime of repressed rage. Peter Parker has an immense guilt complex. Tyrion wants to be accepted by a society that will never accept him in return and so on. For characters like Superman, Ned, and others characters who are genuinely good, their flaw isn't something inherently negative or harmful. Superman wants to do as much good for those around him and the world as possible. Ned Stark wants to live in peace and honor with the family he has left. Those aren't really "flaws" at first glance. If anything they are strengths and admirable traits. It's only when you dig deeper do you see how harmful it can become. Superman wants to do good, but with his powers it would be far too easy for him to just impose his will on the world and become a tyrant. So he puts strict rules on himself to prevent that from happening, but those rules often cause him problems as he faces villains who keep pushing his patience and his effectiveness is limited because of those rules. And he wants to be trusted and accepted by Earth, but the Earth sometimes not as trusting or understanding towards him. Ned as the video points out was so traumatized by the brutality of Robert's Rebellion that he cannot stand to conduct the same wicked and brutal acts, not even to save his own life, which ultimately gets him killed. So I feel like writers and fans who say Superman is "boring" and "hard to write for" and who say Ned was just an "honorable fool" are only looking at the surface.
This was fabulous. My first of your videos, so quite perplexed that you would be self-critical in comparing it to others. It makes me wanting to see even more!
To be fair, I'm normally more self critical than it's fair to be but ehh. I make these videos in a quick 1 or 2 week frenzy around working my job...so I know they'll be stuff I miss that I would've noticed with more time. I don't much mind the imperfection, it's just typical of creators to expect the most of themselves 😆
This was a wonderful video, Ned is one of my favorite characters and I loved seeing this deep dive into his character. Would you consider doing a video of Robb Stark? I think he is another character who gets labeled with the 'honourable to the point of stupid' label and I think there is so much more to him. Looking forward to seeing more of your videos on GoT characters!
Super late on this but I think out of all your videos the one done on Ned is one of your best. Because we get so little time with Ned it's important to take a hard look at what we are given. Every point you made on Ned's character was well thought out and put in a way that is clear. I adore Ned. He is my favorite character in the series and that should say something. With almost five books worth and an entire series out to flesh out other characters and show their redemption, Ned is still my favorite. Pointing out the fact that in a world that doesn't seem to value life as much, Ned takes a hard stance on protecting it. He protects the future of Westeros by protecting children and breaking the cycle. We love Ned because a lot of us see ourselves in Ned. Good people trying to make the world a better place by loving it and protecting it. I know I see a lot of my self doubt in Ned. Constantly asking myself if what I'm doing is enough and can I forgive myself for the times that I didn't do more. Rambling aside, thank you for this video. I love character analysis videos and talk, it was very refreshing to see one that showed that sometimes doing the right thing doesn't make you an idiot.
Use the code TREE for 40% off World Anvil with the link worldanvil.com/?c=mltt
Or else try it out for free!!
Hope you enjoy the video, let me know what else you want me to analyze...
...also, let me know if you can spot the BEANS
Are you making one on Daenerys Targarian?
Would love to hear you analyze the characters from the Storm Light Archive. Kaladin and Shallan specifically
Ned is the breaker of generational cycles, maybe in the harsh physical world his actions seem ineffective, but because of his loving nature he managed to raise kids that were strong and kind and who make better leaders for a better world. That is the true power of love
This!!
Good people? Sure. Good leaders? Arguable. What kind of good leader decides to break a vow and cause enough disruption amongst it's allies and vassals during a war just because he "fell in love" with a pretty foreign girl?
Another example is that Jon bringing all the wildlings and giants through the Wall is a sign that he is a good person, but doing so without stocking an enormous amount of extra food and supplies makes him a poor leader.
@@henriquecesardesouzasilva8766 "What kind of good leader decides to break a vow and cause enough disruption amongst it's allies and vassals during a war just because he "fell in love" with a pretty foreign girl?"
This did not happen in the book. Robb didn't marry Jeyne Westerling because he loved her, or because she was pretty, it was because he took her virginity and felt that he had to save her honour, especially if she was pregnant. Which is something almost no other highborn boy would do, but he did because he was Ned's son and was raised to believe in the importance of honour.
That's not even getting into the possibility that this was a deliberate plot by Sybelle Spicer and Tywin.
@@bookswithike3256 hence why he is a poor leader
I want to point out that while i feel for the OP l's perspective most of the Stark kids are scattered and/or killed off as of now with untold amounts of horror unfolding in part because of the decisions of our Starky boys and girls so i am loathe to talk about the 'power of love' in this context
I like how in the book Ned realizes his great mistake of killing Lady after he hears how Bran's wolf saved him from an assassin.
Ned has always been my favorite, not only because he is one of the more “noble” characters, but he also feels the most human to me. Him holding in all his rage and sadness and being so distant, but loving really speaks to me.
A tragic but real character. He is meant to symbolize that in politics, good, honest men are doomed to fail. The system is meant for the schemers and tyrants.
A true man, not like soyboy little finger or no T varys
That’s why I like Rob so much. He feels so real to me. Like a child forced into being a leader, desperately trying and being good at it but still being terrified.
Ned may have been honorable and noble, but that is what killed him. In King’s Landing, Ned was meant to lose. You have to be an asshole or someone who is willing to be dishonorable to win. Especially within wartime and governing 7 kingdoms.
@@peterversiononehe didn't lose, he became a martyr. No one gives a shit about tywin lannister after his death, not even his kids care. Ned on the other hand garners an amount of respect that lives forever. Immediately after husband death, a the north came to war. If Tywin had died, nothing of the same would have happened.
I think it's interesting how quickly people get pulled into the ethical standards of the world of ASoIaF so as to harshly criticize a character who represents the absolute moral height of the series. Someone who is disgusted by those who employ child murder in a world where it's commonplace. Who wants to be merciful among people who would abuse their power with impunity. With hindsight of later events people are quick to pick the easier and less moral path for the "greater good," but I think the picture GRRM is ultimately trying to paint is that a world where people pick the ruthless options because they grant the most immediate and pragmatic results are not building a stable world that truly lasts.
Exactly. People who say that ruthless pragmatism is the "only way" forget that Tywin Lannister played the game perfectly. He was ruthless. And he was pragmatic. But he still died an unceremonious death and the dynasty he spent decades building crumbled almost immediately after he died.
Thank you!
I do think that GRR Martin wanted to convey a message with Neds dead. He needed to show the cost of Neds way before he could show its benefits. Otherwise it would feel less true. Yes he gets himself killed and the Starks to the brink of extinction. But they bounce back from a point probably no other of the great houses could. Certainly not the Lanisters.
At least in part that is possible because there is an extra ordanery amount of Loyalty they have built up in the North over centuries, if not millenia. You can not do that by maximizing short term opportunism. The fact that there is a deap tradition for holding up certain values in the Stark family is instrumental for that.
In fairness, I wholeheartedly agree
The Manderly, the Mormont and the Umber are living proofs of that
No bullshit like in the series where the Umber just betrayed the Starks at the first moment, they are still fiercily loyal to the Starks
@@guifdcanalli don't forget the Reets.
The show runners did that, stupid as they were. GRRM still has the Starks
Separated and eating shit in the books
Thats true. People kinda miss the fact that even though Nedd gets caught lacking early on, because everyone around him was more ruthless than he was, his values and the roots of his house run so deep that he was kinda never truly killed. Everyone of the Starks embodied Nedd's teachings to some degree or aspect. Nedd's name in particular still carried weight way into the third or fourth season and way out beyond the wall. His reputation as a good and honest man meant that he gained a loyalty and support that was largely unwavering. The Stark name was baked into the culture of the North. Nedd managed to do through building trust and holding to his principles what Tywin was hellbent on doing, but ultimately failed to do through deceit, intimidation and cruelty, he built a dynasty that could last for a 1000 years.
Ned's commentary on King's Landing is felt deep in the heart of every Yorkshireman in London
What do you mean?
@@Δ-Δ-Δ-Δ "I'm a Northman. I've no place in that rat's nest they call a capital"
@@jeanpaulsinatra Oh, hahaha.
Don't forget how the Scottish feel whenever they venture down into England.
I don't think Ayra is deliberately favoured over Sansa. Ned is simply a man with no exposure to a girly girl. I'm sure he simply left her raising of a girl to his wife, and only intervened withAyra due to her familiarity in personality.
Neds sister was more like Ayra so he understands how to talk to her.
Ned does not understand Sansa, the life she aspires to, or her desire to aspire to Kingslanding position, no doubt in large part due to his lack of availability in her early years, and his neglect of telling her the reality of Kingslanding.
Ned never sits down and actually talks to Sansa. He gets Arya a swordsmaster, never gets Sansa a harp teacher. He upends Sansa’s life over and over again, and doesn’t even take the time to explain why. He never even thinks to tell Sansa they aren’t safe when they’re in a dangerous, precarious situation. The ONE event they attend together, he acts like it’s a huge chore to interact with Sansa and share in her interests.
Instead of offering to hunt down Nymeria, an animal proven to be willing to attack humans and therefore a danger to all of society, he kills Lady. Would he have offered up Sansa’s hand in favour of Arya facing judicial amputation, had Cersei been more stubborn?
So, whether or not he favoured Arya on purpose, the damage was done and it was pretty extensive.
@@misskate3815 don't disagree, just adding a possiblity to the background from my own view of parental relationship.
It's impossible for parents to get it right, they have strengths and weaknesses. Ned did fail Sansa, but in many different ways he failed all his children. he took the easier way around Sansa, neglected her and she suffered as a result. It wasn't from a lack of love or desire to do right, he just didn't know how to engage with her.
He did give her what she wanted many times, he just didn't warn her of the horror she was chasing. It's hard to disabuse children of thier simplistic and idealist views.
And she became strong, confident and powerful.
@@lizcollinson2692 she’s not a grown woman, she’s a thirteen year old in the hands of a monster.
@Miss Kate oh come on. You really think he'd offer up Sansa's hand for Arya? That's a bit much. He wasn't a prefect father but I don't really think fathers were all that involved in their children's lives in the medieval age... least of all their daughters. That seems a normal thing for the time. That doesn't mean that he loves them any less. He had more in common with Arya, not only because of her similar personality to his sister but also because of her interests.
I think he enjoyed Arysa's company more than that of Sansa's but Arya was still a little kid where Sansa was already a bitchy teenager. Do you have teenagers? I do. They suck to be around.
@@ljb8157 well, he was happy to metaphorically murder Sansa in the form of Lady, so who the fuck knows?
Also, the reason Sansa was sullen was bc he dad was ignoring her, not facilitating her interests in any way, MURDERED HER HELPLESS AND INNOCENT SPIRITUAL AVATAR, and spoiling her younger sister and letting said child get away with everything. You’d have an attitude, too.
(Also, wow, super uncomfortable that you’re going to compare Sansa’s legit trauma to your kid having a bad mood, like, not the same, dunno how to tell you that.)
Ned Stark is literally one of the greatest characters in fiction and to me is a great example of someone who never broke in a world where people praise those who break who they are for power and glory.
Great video man. You gave a good idea about Ned as more than what his critics see him as being the stereotype good guy who gets killed. I see so much of myself in Ned for the reason that he never stops questioning things but knows deep down who and what he values and what he would give up for them.
I definitely never saw Ned as stupid. I think he always made the right decision based on the information available. He had no idea that Robert was going to die by a boar when he confronted Cersei. He had nod idea that his wife was going to arrest Tyrion when they were plotting their plan which caused Jaimie to attack him. He didn't know that Littlefinger would betray him even though he never trusted him to begin with, but it was because Katlyn trusted him. He trusted his wife, so he begrudgingly trusted little finger. He didn't know his own daughter would go to Cersei to inform on him about them leaving. There were so many terrible things that just went against Ned in the worst way to undo his actually brilliant but flawed plan. And as you said, he had a morality which most of the people around him in King's landing lacked. It is both a strength and a weakness.
Same.
I never saw him as stupid. Just not a terrible person.
Unfortunately he was surrounded by terrible and/or foolish people. Everything that goes wrong for him can be attributed to someone else’s foolishness(Kat arresting Tyrion, Sansa letting her mouth go in front of Cersei) or villainy(Everything else). He also had some pretty shit luck with Robert getting gutted by a boar and all that.
That ptsd scene where he recollects war memories while wathcing Arya and Syrio shows whatever happened then constantly is with him.This seems to cause lots of indecisiveness and passivity except when it comes to protection of children.Also,I don't if it was intentional or not but you can see a slight grief in sean bean's face even when there is a jovial situation.
It was definitely intentional
Ned chose not to drag children out of their beds and allow their eventual murder. That’s not stupidity, or honor, it’s morality.
A very noble (as in nobility) morality. He did know, or at least acknowledge that his actions would lead to war.
He has been to war and knows how many commoner children will be murdered by his action...but he didn't see them..
It can be all three at the same time...
@@reacenessthank you!
No, it was still stupid.
@@saraa.4295to be fair, the death of noble children has a much worse impact than that of commoner children realistically. You see it often throughout history and in the history of Game of Thrones
And just because I don't think I heard you say anything on it (not out of malice), but MAD props to Sean Bean on the portrayal of Ned
As you describe the father and brother's death I remembered what Jamie said. How nobody said a word as it happened.
Imagine the screams and then the smell of burning flesh in armor
Fucking Gerald HighTower, the White Bull eventually said something to Jaime when he see's his expression, "your job is to protect the king, not judge him". I swear Jaime was one of the only men who served on the Kings Guard who had real honor and he killed his king and fucked his sister.
Honestly a fantastic video, I never really considered how Ned's trauma would effect who he becomes, as he just seems so. . . normal. Most people, like the Lannister's and Robert end up as shells of who they were. I never considered Ned being who he is, is a doubling down on what you believe is right via that trauma, hence his rigidity. Truthfully you did a brilliant job with this one, and ought to be proud of it.
I always thought it was pretty obvious. That's why he tells Cersei of his plan. And you always have people saying he is just an idiot for doing that. Not considering the type of trauma he endured after the situation with Elia Martell and her kids.
@@nostalgicbliss5547
Yes and he was thrown into the pit with no prior experience. It's akin to Mr. Smith Goes to Washington in that an honorable man is thrown into a cesspool of corruption with no prep, and no defense except his ethics.
Of course Mr. Smith had a more fortunate outcome, but in "real life" he'd probably be assassinated.
Thank you ❤👏
Not so many people seem to understand characters like Ned (even though he's rather the classical hero archetype kind of character). Many misunderstand kindness for stupidity and, imo, mistakingly think being Machiavellian and ruthless is the better way.
Yeah I hate how idealised Machiavellian approaches often get
When all those self-serving Machiavellian characters die during the Long Night, those people will all look foolish. Ned raised children specifically to survive in a hard environment, where loyalty and kindness and resilience are paramount to insure the survival of everyone around you. You can't con yourself out of being cold. You can't steal food from the neighbor you might desperately need on the morrow. You can't trick an ancient ice monster. You have to stick together and these scheming characters keep their cards close to their chest.
I think the Machiavellian characters are cool and are glorified, but only because this story isn't finished yet.
@@jessjess23brooks89 thanks for this perspective 👏
I’d love to see an introspective on Sansa! She’s probably one of my favorite characters, and I’d love to see your take on her!
I love ned for all of the obvious reasons, but I also love how ever present he is in so many character's minds, similar to rhaegar, even long after his death. Will forever be my favorite character.
The name “Ned” and “Eddard” are uttered 343 times across books 2-5, an average of well over once per chapter
Ned Stark was brought up to be his older brothers banner man and to be a honorable knight. He basically was raised to be a follower not a leader and is put in a position of leadership only because his father and brother died. He's a good man with a kind heart always trying to do what is right. I believe it's because of that it's what makes him a rarity in a world of GOT.
I've always seen Ned and Robert as the two sides of an ideal soldier. Ned is a near perfect representation of a soldier's duty, which distinguishes them from a vain glory-seeking savage, but as you described he snuffed out all the fire that would allow him to become truly great at fighting and actually achieve what he felt was right (pretty good guess that he kills that part of himself due to feeling internally disgusted at his own hidden impulses after witnessing King's Landing and becomes even stricter with himself). Robert on the other hand has all the natural fire that makes a soldier truly exceptional and perform the most amazing deeds, but he has next to no sense of duty despite Arryn's best attempts to the contrary and after he 'slays his dragon', it never occurs to him to change himself even a little bit in his later years. He likely feels he doesn't have to change either, when he can just ask his childhood friend Ned to serve as his Hand, clean up his messes again and thus enable him to keep on wallowing in his misery that he masks through whoring and drinking.
Also as for 'monster' being a bit too strong of a word for Robert, I felt the Histories and Lore at the end of season 7 summed it up perfectly with Jaime narrating it, in regards to the Targaryen children being killed: "I saw what Ned couldn't. Robert was ashamed of the bodies...and more ashamed of his relief. He knew that they had to die, or his position as the new king would never be safe. But 'glorious heroes' don't go around killing children. They simply don't punish their murderers."
A great summary. Also Robert created the Cersei we know at time of story through abuse and his obsession with the idea of Lyanna. Probably his second greatest sin after allowing the killers of the children go unpunished.
I know the Histories & Lore said Robert was ashamed about Rhaenys & Aegon but in Neds chapters when he’s remembering that time his disgust with Robert came from Roberts happiness at “dragonspawn” being killed so I push back against Jaimes narrative. While it’s entirely true to secure Roberts reign the previous one had to literally die, Roberts enjoyment over a 3 year old being stabbed 50 times & a 1 year old being smashed against a wall along with not sparing a second thought to Elia and what happened to her, monster is more appropriate than not IMO
@@TheRepublic4 being married to Robert Baratheon would fuck any woman up, but Cersei was already well on her way there before they met. She threatened her fathers staff, abused Tyrion and killed her own friend. She was also already cheating on Robert during their wedding day, so she can't really be all upset that her husband loves someone else when she's not faithful either.
@@EnanoPancracio yeah not going to claim she was a good person before. She did kill Melaria Heatherspoon, just saying he made her exponentially worse
@@DavidCarradinesBelt the happiness at the children's death was just an act he put on in front of others because he was too proud to admit his regret and he needed to act like the super arrogant and powerful warrior king. When he was by himself he most definitely was like Jaimes account which is probably why he was basically living in depression drinking and whoring the rest of his life away not caring about The Throne that he had to kill the children to secure.
I am a psychologist and this behavior is consistent with how people who have serious regrets in their life actually behave. When they're put on the defensive and think that they need to validate their decisions in front of others they suddenly start acting like they didn't have a care in the world about what they did and how their victim deserved it. But when they're by themselves alone at night that regret comes out and it causes deep-seated shame inside of them. I've heard stories like this a bunch with patients, of course not about killing children lol, but other things people can feel shameful about having done.
I find it interesting that all of Ned’s trueborn sons are named for men he lost: Rob (to grief) Bran (for his brother) and Rickon (for his father)
What about Jon that he gave to his Nephew? Do you think he named it after Jon Arryn (Duty)?
Rickard is the name of Ned's father
Pretty sure Robb was named after Robert. Same as Robin Arryn. Robb and Robin being just shorter nicknames for them.
@@philippeblais8594 yes, that’s what I said. He lost Rob to grief during the war. The man who he viewed as a brother didn’t survive, only this grief ridden beast remained of who he once was.
@@ronanchristiana.belleza9270 probably explains why Jon has a much stronger sense of duty than his siblings. Tho lyanna might have named him Jon. We don't know for sure what happened yet.
I never thought about Ned as a champion of children much less as a reaction to Elia's. Good catch. I always just saw it as Ned being good but that's hardly a reason when the rest of the world seems to not have as much of a problem. You found complexity in a character I saw as very one note before now. Thanks.
I mean it was pretty obvious Ned was struggling with trauma and grief. The actor portrayed it perfectly. The show even knocked you on the head with it when he was watching Arya train with the dancing master and he was shown to be having PTSD flashbacks. Ned was actually one of the more complicated characters in the story. Just didn't last long enough to see him evolve.
So is what happened in the war why Ned, when watching Arya water dance with her sword, hears the fighting and screaming and looks very scared? For her? Scared the ptsd he has will happen to her at some point if she learns and begins to enjoy war?
Combination of all those things
I can't criticize what you missed, but I do think you did him justice in explaining his character and breaking him down to his most important traits. I liked listening to this and hearing about the humanity of the character, it's my favorite thing to understand about them. Thank you for the video!
Often the most unsuspecting ones, as opposed to the total wrecks like Cersei, are surprisingly complex when unraveled. Great job!
one thing that absolutely fascinates me is how all GoT characters are extremely deep, just so many layers. there are so many main characters in books and movies (especially movies lol) that are as plain as a blank piece of paper and it's never the case here. i've never really understood people who don't like Ned or think that he's just a dumb politician. like, honey, no. there's much more depth in him and so much human nature which i personally love. so, thank you for this video! you always open up characters in such a brilliant way. i'd love to see more Stark analyses heh, i could listen for hours :D
Your analysis has honestly fully explained why I always felt so connected with Ned. He feelings and struggles when it comes to children are similar to my own. I know if I ever have kids, I'll have the same trouble finding a balance between protecting and preparing my children.
And I do think you're quite right that his main struggle is fundamentally about being forced to lead when he prefers to follow, as well as the compromising of morals that can come from being a follower. But (though not related to Ned at all) I've always felt that the leader v follower dynamic feels incomplete. Leaders lead people, followers follow people. But what about the people who neither follow nor have any followers? What do we call them? Loners? Outcasts?
We send them to the Wall.
Yes send them to the wall!!
free spirits? King´s fools? ;))
@@neuralmute 😁😅
Really loved this video. The focus that Ned shows to children was always something that I had known but the extent was not something I had considered until you pointed it out. Its hard to not love this character for being so decent among so many people who just aren't.
This was a great vid. I get tired of hearing the same crappy takes on Ned. He really wasn't an idiot. Most ppl would be crushed if they had to make decisions with such dire consequences.
I think this 'follower who was forced to become a leader' is a fitting description. As someone who has always thought of himself as more of a supporter to his Borther/Father/Robert/John Aryn he has a much deeper understanding of the consequences and mindset of those who are affected by leaders descissions. So when he is ultimately foced to become a leader he vows to not be an arrogant leader, blind to consequences and people he is leading.
Only that this aloof disregard also plays a role in leaders making hard choices and Ned (as you put it so well) struggles with hard choices because no matter what he choses the consequences are big so he shys away from a quick choice overall. That's not weakness or stupidity that's consideration. If you want to find a 'blindspot' for Ned it's that he tried to carry all the burdens himself in his attempts to shield his friends and family from the horrors he experienced and in the process failed to surround himself with helpers & advisers that believe in his code but are may be better at the part of leadership he struggles at LIKE political maneuvering or choices where all outcomes are undesireabe.
Always hate when people say that the war was built on a lie or that the war was wrong if lyanna went with rhaegar willingly. The realm was powder keg ready to explode and a rebellion was coming no matter what. All lyanna and rhaegar did was decide who it would be between. In cannon it is widely speculated (even by king aerys) that harrenhall was a cover to plan a coup or a rebelleion.
Keep in mind that Roberts great-grandfather rebelled due to the targyraens breaking a betrothal with his daughter. And dorne would have rebelled if ellia and her children were cast aside for lyanna.
So a rebellion was happening no matter what.
I hadn't realised a lot of things about Ned that you brought up, actually. Such as his obsession with protecting children specifically... and how the war/rebellion affected the way he makes decisions in general. It wasn't something I considered. I was under the common impression that his decisions came from a code of honour, one he was probably raised with, something more cultural. I figured he was brought up to be just and honorable and he holds himself and everyone else to a naive standard sometimes... but at the same time, sometimes he seemed to know better, but couldn't bring himself to act against his code. But I hadn't thought all that much about it. He isn't around for a very long time, thus I did not spend that much time thinking about him or his motivations as much as the others.
His trauma plays a huge role in his decision making
Father: I'd argue that Ned is doing his flawed best to individualize his parenting for his girls. He sat with Arya and said she will be a lady of the court, she refuses this birth right and favors dreams of wild adventure like her aunt. Seeing this desire, he fosters this desire by hiring Syrio. When presented with the marriage pact by his best friend Robert, Ned contemplates it, but Sansa jumps on the opportunity to become a princess and making babies, and the pride she takes in her needle work and general lady training. So, against his better judgements, takes Sansa to court to marry his daughter to his best friend's bratty son.
Ned gave both his daughters what they asked for. His love language isn't words, like Lanis Tyrrel, for example, or gifts like a Lannister, or physical touch like the Martells. No, Ned favors acts of service for his love for his family and friends. Despite his own desire, he displays his love for his brother by avenging his death and honoring Brandon's marriage to Catelyn. He displays his love for Robert by honoring his request to travel south and replace his surrogate father Jon Arryn in court. He especially displays his love for Leanna by keeping her dying wish and protecting and raising his nephew as his own.
No words of affirmation, no affection via physical touch, no focus on gifts, through a stoic sense of duty he provides acts of service, he honors his commitments to those he loves. No less so then his two daughters Sansa and Arya; who, in the end, get what the most desire in life: Sansa a queen, Queen in the North, and Arya a wild adventurer who sets sail to discover what is west of Westoros.
This was the most successful video I think you've made, because like George R R Martin you pointed us to more questions than answers. Ned has more mystery. Also because it was more indepth and complicated than others make him seem, especially considering he is human not metaphor for honour made man
I think Ned fights hard with trying to do what is right and good and not knowing what is right and good. I often find myself wondering if decisions I am making are really good for my children . Nothing like what Ned was involved in of course but it is not easy being in the position of taking care of others and Ned sees himself doing that for the entire north and later for Robert as well.
Ned stark is such a wonderful character, he’s always been my favorite, with Rob Stark coming in second. Something about the stark men demands loyalty. Even all these years later, I still cry about their deaths, fictional charters… George was on one when he wrote those men.
Ned was an honorable mensch.
Says the kingslayer
Ned is not a fool for being moral.
He is a fool for pulling the thread of royal heirs after seeing what Robert and Cercei are like.
Upon learning of Cercei's and Robert's bastards he could have done nothing. Not gone to the brothel, not told Robert or Cercei, not started anything.
He could have ignored the rules of sucession and focused on preparing the realm for winter.
Roberts kids would be safe, Cerceis kids would be safe, *his* kids would be safe, and the realm would have been spared a war.
But Ned chose to pull on that thread.
Only through the intro so far but first off I have such a deep love/respect for Ned Stark that just talking about him and and also saying that people might think he's not interesting or dumb both sent emotional chills. Also just the way you talk about anything and how you have really well thought out points but then your recordings feel chaotic and improvised, what a wonderful channel
Thanks man, always nice to see your comments! I like the description of well thought out yet chaotic and improvised 😂 I think often my videos are both
Those people are usually shallow types. The ones that want to pretend they would survive even a week in Westeros.
@@mylittlethoughttree
You have a real gift for engaging, insightful analysis. Thanks for sharing your gift with us ASoIaF aficionados.
Great video. Even though the video is really long, i would definitely listen to you speaking for 2 hours about these characters 👌
Ned certainly suffered from PTSD over Lyanna and Jon situation.
I think we can compare Ned's strong sense of morality, which is meant to make sense of the world and to protect others, while constantly humbling him and being enforced at his own expense, with Stannis' rigor, which seems as a way to separate and heighten himself from others (maybe fueled by long lasting jealousy for his younger brother Robert), and is often enforced at the expense of others (even if he still keeps himself to high standards most of the time). Stannis' rigor actually ends up hurting people directly without him being concerned, and becomes intertwined with a religious fanatism that also makes him nothing short of a demigod, which points to his rigidity serving to fuel his narcissism. That can explain why Stannis can commit monstrous acts (like fratricide) while still hiding himself being moral values (justice, religion, higher good), while Ned would have been incapable of committing such acts. It's interesting because they were both considered by outsiders "men of honor", and even considered each other that way.
I always thought it was kinda weird that Stannis got the "man of honor" title, when he took Davos' fingers, for his crimes as a smuggler. Dude saved your ass, and you take his fingers, before knighting him? If there had to be a punishment, couldn't it be something less life lasting, less crippling? Doesn't seem very honorable or just to me.
@@schmalzilla1985 But it is. Saving Stannis doesn't make Davos crimes from beforehand any less.
And Stannis is just the kind of person who takes law and rules very seriously. That's why he punished Davos before he knighted him.
That's also the only reason why he fought for to become King. He didn't WANT to be King nessessarily. He was next in line and it was his duty to take the throne. That's why he did it.
@@She-Devil94 I know,Mandy you're right, and that's what makes Stannis such a dick. He was in the position to change the type of punishment, and he did, to a degree, he could have gone with a less debilitating one, but he didn't.
It may not absolve him of his past crimes, but everyone in Storms End benefited from that skill, and Stannis continued to benefit from using that skill in the future.
@@She-Devil94 issue with all this is if he actually burns his daughter alive in the books like in the show. If he dies then there goes that man of honor shite.
@@Kris-wo4pj His daughther isn't even near him. And he is already at Winterfell.
If Shereen actually gets burned then it's by his wife and the red lady.
This is becoming one of my favorite channels, love all the ASOIAF psychology, fantasy characters in general can be fascinating
You know what really makes things interesting with the whole conflict between Ned and Robert and the Targaryens and Lannisters is the fact that the houses were so closely tied together. At least with the Baratheons, Targeyrens and Lannisters. In the book The World of Ice and Fire, it mentions that Tywin Lannister, Arys Targaryen, and Steffon Baratheon (Robert's father) were all close friends growing up and Steffon died on a quest for the King. Even more so is that Baratheon is just an offshoot house of the Targaryens since the founder, Orys was rumored to be the Bastard brother of Aegon the Conqueror.
Then you considered all the marriages between the houses, and how closely the blood is mixed between them, it just makes it more of a family conflict than anything. Especially since the war started over a woman.
He is a man of integrity in a world that's out to break that. But the breaking of him nearly broke the world in return. This one man dying resulted in another family line going nearly extinct, shook 'the most powerful family' in the Lannisters right to the core and perhaps slowly killed it and much much more. Yes, he is somewhat foolish, but only from the perspective of his own life. From a historical perspective the man will be seen as a visionary of righteousness. Not perfect, but a very, very good man. A man who planted his feet and told the world to change rather than change himself.
I'd love to see you analyze the character of Katniss from the hunger games...
Her psychology has always fascinated me.
Yes!!!
He would do great with her character! I love Katniss
Love this.
Will you do one on Ramsay Bolton? :) Can a person be just so evil by default, or what might need to happen to become a person like Ramsay?
That would be a good one!
I can certainly understand your points on Ned trying to protect his kids while at the same time preparing them (for some of them anyway) But I do remember a quote from the show that gives you an idea of Ned's level of experience with dealing with his daughters. "War was easier than daughters." Plus in regards to Ned killing Lady instead of letting it go. I feel it would have been the best thing to do. Since I'm pretty sure had Ned just let Lady escape, Cersei would have found out and called a hunt to kill it. Which would have resulted in a brutal death. Had Ned tried to convince Robert longer. Cersei likely would have gone behind their backs and have Ser Ilyn execute Lady anyway. Once again, leading to a brutal death. Plus Cersei would have kept the pelt. Almost like a big "fuck you" to the Starks.
Would love to see your breakdown of basically every main character on Succession. There’s so much complexity to dive into and you’d do a great job putting it into words.
I think both Ned and Catelyn deliberately allowed at least their daughters to be over-sheltered. Catelyn was given the responsibilities of the Lady of Riverrun when she was a young girl after her mother's untimely death. It taught her courtesy and reliance upon diplomacy, but her late childhood/early 'girlhood' might have been shadowed by her responsibilities. And then, instead of a joyful marriage to the handsome heir to Winterfell, Catelyn loses her betrothed to a horrible death at the hands of the Mad King and the next thing she knows, she's betrothed, then married to the less handsome younger brother and new heir and her father is joining in a dangerous rebellion. Catelyn goes through her first pregnancy without seeing her new, barely known husband, and having to worry that their child might never know its father, that he might die in war. There was also the chance that Robert's Rebellion would fail, and if so, what would happen to Catelyn and her father and her child as well as Ned? Catelyn had to shoulder a lot of worry. Of course, Ned had to suffer through not only learning of the horrific deaths of his father and brother shortly following his sister's abduction, he was condemned to death by the king and had to join a rebellion to save his own life as well as hopefully recover his sister. All of this while they were teenagers.
I believe that consciously or unconsciously, Ned and Catelyn gave Arya and Sansa much more leeway. Arya was allowed to get to the age of nine with habits that most noble-born girls, even some northern ones, would scorn, as well as a bad case of lack of impulse control (how she didn't know that it was a huge No-No to attack the King's son, even when that boy was being a brutal brat is impossible to guess. I think she did know and didn't care, Arya was allowed to prolong her childhood). Sansa was tremendously over-sheltered; to believe in legends and romances at an age where many young girls were being given more lessons about household management and (if noble) politics. I believe that Ned and Catelyn wanted at least their daughters to have a gentle, easier, childhood and girlhood; they couldn't really soften the boys' lives too much, since boys had to grow up to be fighters and strong vassals to their future lord (Robb), and to hold the respect of the North. But they could spoil their daughters; and I think they did. Luckily, Catelyn and especially Ned had a strong sense of fairness (Catelyn's only weakness on that score was that she could not bring herself to be fair to Jon Snow, she was hurt by and terrified of everything he represented, so she could not unbend and treat the actual child with kindness).
I really appreciate you focusing on the text! This amazing video.
Honestly the two deaths I’m still scarred by in this series is Ned and Lady’s. Excellent analysis as always. Thoroughly enjoyed it!
Ned is definitely one of my favorite characters in the series and I'm glad to see a rigorous breakdown of his character. He felt more real than many of the other characters, trying to do the right thing, frustrated with those that only scheme for their own gain, struggling to figure out how to navigate this world so different from his own.
I think the guards were there to protect Rhaegar's son rather than Lianna. Look at what happened to his other children.
I tried to like this more than once, instinctually. Very good insights.
Awesome analysis. I really appreciate the effort put into it as Ned is often tossed aside as the generic "good-guy" whose death subverts expectations.
As for your request at the end of the video regarding things we might add or disagree with: Anger. Ned, by nature, is conciliatory and does not want conflict.
Nevertheless, he has a subdued rage to him. I think your whole section on children sums that side of his personality up. He is angry at the horrific things that were done in Robert's name - By Robert's men, Jon Aryn's men, Tywin Lannister's men, and worst of all- his own men.
This contributes to his reaction to Jaime Lannister on the throne. Where Jaime interprets it as: "How dare you, get off of Robert's chair!"
I think Ned, in that moment, was more like: "Your father's done the work. We've one. Stop posturing and get down, you douche."
I enjoyed the hell out of this. Can’t wait for the future Starks to be analyzed.
Brandon vs Ned really is a Boromir and Faramir situation
Lord Stark is trying to get things as best he can, but doesn’t involve himself in plans or tricks, which is inherently noble. One of The most “straightforward” character besides Robert in the series as a whole.
Song of Ice and Fire is an incredible work of art, and yet is still so incomplete. I'm not even talking about the last two books - there's gaps throughout the novels that are ripe for expansion and refining. I truly hope George has written notes filling in the blanks that can be compiled into additional elements of the story - like can any of us imagine if there's a new book that focuses on events from A Game of Thrones but are from a different perspective character? An example would be a Night's Watch series that tells us of Benjen's last Range and how his disappearance is received by the officers who knew him best, or maybe a story following Varys as he pieces together that various plots happening in King's Landing that he attempts to spin into his own grander schemes, or Lyssa coming to terms with the consequences of her lord husband's death and fending off the vultures who swoop around her son. Or heck, new characters who seemingly have little importance in the grand scheme of things and how they understand events as they know them and the part they play - like a hedge knight in the service of the Lannisters having his own perspective on the horrors inflicted in the Riverlands and feeling powerless to do anything about it as his morality is chipped away.
That would be absolutely incredible. Much like Tolkien had notes and letters on his work, Martin might have a similar cache of lore and appendices.
@@danielmejorado6098 Exactly! I hope George himself can do the work once the main series is finished, though I won't blame him for wanting to take a break and do something else for a while. Or just retire and drink cocktails on a beach for the rest of his life.
Brilliant video man, I never thought about Ned’s character in all the ways you’ve mentioned.
I like the idea of Ned being slight unconsciously jealous of Brandon; it mirrors Jon’s feeling toward Rob in a storm of swords, when he dreams of killing him and taking Winterfell, it’s a nice parallel between the two of them that I’ve never thought about.
I always had a problem with Ned not telling his wife the truth about Jon.
The emotional burden of raising (what she believes) a child from her husband’s affair.
How could she ever really trust him? The guilt she feels for harbouring resentment towards an innocent child. It could be seen as Ned utilising “honour” like currency and also as armour he presumed would protect him from uncomfortable situations, like sharing his feelings. He is too busy being honourable to acknowledge others feelings.
I never saw Ned as a “good” character but a character consumed with being good.
This was hurtful to Catlyn but if you thought she hated Jon and was cold to him before, if she’d known who his actual parents are then she’d fear him and hate him. Ned hiding Jon is super mega ultra treason. If he was found out not just Jon and Ned but the entirety of house stark could be branded as traitors to the crown and killed. I don’t think knowing would give her any peace of mind or love for Jon or Ned.
@@teacuptearex6333
So you are saying Catlyn would not have been capable of keeping a secret to protect her nephew (Jon)? Ned’s inability to break a promise ruined a child’s relationship with the only potential mother he could have had. I kinda see where you are coming from…Ned hides Jon from Robert then he gave Cerci a chance to run with her illegitimate children from Robert. The latter is why he died. So, I think my point still stands, if he had honoured his wife instead of protecting his own honour he would not have lost his head…and there wouldn’t have been a second season. Ned’s flaw is the catalyst of the story.
Ice was big enough, the Man Who Passes The Sentence should have been able to get Joff, Tom, and Myrcella with one Swing of The Sword. If not the whole Lannister crew.
Oh he totally would have faked Theon’s beheading
The reason for Robert's Rebellion was never that Lyanna was kidnapped, it was that the Mad King murdered one of the seven highest Lords, and blantantly threaten two more of them, in essence the Mad King Broke his covenant with his High Lords, and the only other option was to let the Mad King kill Ned and Robert(who is one of the seven high lords). There was no real threat of rebellion, Brandon and his father, both thought they could negotiate with the Mad King.
I was thinking... Maybe Jon Arryn imparted his interpretation of honor on Eddard when Ned was his ward; but due to feelings of inferiority (compared to Brandon) and impostor syndrome, Eddard never came to "Own" his interpretation of honour, he followed an ideal of honour that was Jon Arryn's, not his own. His own inner conflict and insecurities prevented him from directly defining what honour was by himself; leaving him only with speculations and inferences on what his mentor would consider to be honorable. In effect; Ned couldn't "decide" on what was honorable he could only "discover" what was honorable.
I don't know if I managed to make my point clear or comprehensible; also, I have no sources.
Do you think Ned's love of children is why he took Theon as a ward? Maybe Ned noticed Balon was an asshole so he thought he could raise him better. That would make Theon's betrayal of Robb worse. Ned hoped Theon would be a loyal, younger brother type. But hopefully Theon has a comeback despite his mistake.
If you do another one of these, I'd recommend it be about Robert Baratheon. I think that'd be super interesting.
That was a great analysis. I've never read any of the books nor seen any of the show, but I know the characters and some of the plot and I love getting to know the chatacters better. It's great to get some insight into the character who's often treated as the most uncomplicated one, I suppose, and see all this depth of characterization.
Thanks for the video!
Great video. I'd love one on Stannis, I feel like there's a lot of interesting things to talk about from your perspective.
Just recently read AGOT and yeah, this is what I got from Ned, the fact that he is haunted, a ghost of a father. Great video! ❤
Really liking these ASoIaF analysis series. Even though of course the discussion is re fictional characters, due to GRRM's genius they're so well-drawn they offer a world of insights.
Re Eddard Stark, his answer to Bran's question of how a man can be brave when he's afraid has stuck with me for years, and imo elucidates the essence of his character.
"The only time a man can be truly brave is when he's afraid".
Hello love your ASOIAF videos. Please do Brienne of Tarth and Daenerys Targaryen
What I found notable about the show vs the books is how Eddard is pushed further into the stereotype of a gruff, straightforward northerner. In the scene where he first arrives at the Red Keep, he is told that the small council is waiting for him. In the show, the steward asks if Ned wants to freshen up first, to which Ned responds with an annoyed glare. The steward then drops the matter. In the book, Ned is the one telling the steward he'll go see the council right after making himself presentable.
So yes, he is an honorable northerner, ill at home in the viper's pit that is King's Landing. But he is still a proper Lord of one of the greatest houses in Westeros. Not some sellsword that lucked himself into a title.
Edit: Oh, looks like you do mention that scene, just not the part that I'm talking about.
Some unique and accurate takes -- excellent job, thanks
Idc about his flaws.....a truly honest man in a world of snakes and games. I'll fight for that man
Excellent video, as always! :)
My GoT knowledge is mostly cultural osmosis and lore reading (though I did watch House of the Dragon), so I may be way off base here, but it seems like Ned is unusual in this universe simply because he considers things like honor and ethics at all. The characters who do take them into account by and large seem to be ones with limited autonomy (Kingsguard members like Selmy or Dayne, for example, or Jon Snow of the Watch), and most characters with independence operate on a more utilitarian framework, or at the very least a single-minded pursuit of what they consider the highest good.
Maybe Ned has spent much of his life looking for a cause worthy of his devotion and has found all causes lacking. Maybe he's looking for things worth risking his life for, in contrast to Robert who seeks danger and excitement just to feel alive, to feel relevant.
Very interesting. I have thought about Ned so often and I agree that all this "Ned was stupid" or, "Well, that is honor-for-brains Stark for you!" just don't get him completely. Maybe because we are, esp. in High Fantasy, so used to the good vs evil dichonomy. It has been said that SOIAF is not a psychological story, but a sociological story at heart. And that is why mayor character Ned can just die in the first book (and he would have to, from a narrative point of view- he knew too much). I think he had more time to spare for Arya because she had been the odd one out in Winterfell. We only really seen Sansa and Arya in their last few weeks of childhood together. Not the almost decade before that. Sansa was asking Cat if Arya was a bastard like Jon. She was okay with Septa Mordane, she had an instructor to her strengths all her life. Only after Ned no longer had the boys to instruct he turns to Arya, who had mostly turned to Jon, not to anybody else. Because he understood being different. And Sansa is shutting Ned out, too. She misses being the center of attention of her little "court", even though at least Jeyne and the Septa are with her. She will feel a lot of guilt: Arya did a lot more to save Lady then she said and Robert gave her the opportunity (but she would have crossed her idolized motherfigure Cersei). If it had been a statement against statement situation in a court and it was about a dog hurting a child, I know how a court here would have ordered. The dog would have been killed. It would not have justice to let lady live. But hearing about how Summer saved Bran, it was still very hard on Ned. Also I think this whole "Aegons Dream" story that was made part of HotD is very interesting. I think this is something that was passed on to Rheagar and a reason not only for him to elope with Lyanna, but also for Lyanna (she was not "only a teenage girl" but also the lady of the house for one of the great houses of Westeros, we see a bit how important that position is when Robb has problems to cope while Cat is out because of Bran) to go with him. I don't think it was all starry eyed romance with those too (I am biased against romance in fiction, though). Maybe Lyanna wrote everything down and the story played a role in Ned getting so sick at the tower of joy, bringing the sword to the Daynes and them being rather cordial to him even though he caused the death of two members of the family (their heir is called Ned, after all!). And he might have told Benjen and this might have been a reason for Benjen to go to the wall. Maybe Ned really knew WHAT winter was comming (the 2nd Long Night). And tried to deny it (Cat said he did not heed omens and portents and he seemed to have kept the kids in the dark about this).
This is a video I didn’t know I needed
I don't think Ned really favored Arya. When he went to King's Landing with his daughters, Sansa was excited to go and seemingly fit in very well with the ladies of the south. Arya on the other hand was lonely- she spent most of her days missing her friends and family in Winterfell, just wandering around the Red Keep alone getting into trouble.
Of course he'd spend more time focusing on Arya. She seemed like the one who needed more help at the time.
I really love this series. I genuinely hope you continue on with it!
This was a great video! I really appreciate the nuance you bring to Ned's character. He wouldn't want people either to glorify him as a paragon of honor or to belittle him as a naïve fool. Like everything in life, it's a bit more complicated.
This series of yours analyzing ASoIaF characters is so compelling. I would love it if you did a video like this analyzing the psyche of Theon Greyjoy. There's so much there, in my opinion. I really enjoy these videos you make, so I'm curious what your take on Theon/Reek would be
It's great to revisit Ned's character back now that I have some more perspective. I always thought it was odd that people automatically thought that Ned's kindness and honor-bound is what got him and that's why the Lannisters were the best (never mind that they're the ones who set a lot of things in motion. Them going against the Mad King, Jaime pushing Bran out the window when he's caught with Cersei, and Geoffrey being a tyrant. I mean, when a family is in charge of and affected most of structures in that world, I thought it would be obvious they were at fault since they chose to do a lot bad actions. It concerned me when someone told me the Lannisters were their faves because they win all the time. Not like even going into how they know they're bad and acknowledge their flaws like some people would about characters who're antagonists and or the bad guys of the story. I feel like some people missed the fact that Ned was literally betrayed by Geoffrey being violent tyrant in the making for "his kindness and honor got him killed in a world where that never works").
Your videos are getting me back into GoT again, and now knowing more context of the characters. I didn't know GRRM was a pacifist and that makes me feel better knowing that. Was kinda afraid to pick up the books and immerse myself in a world where violence and corruption rules (already have enough of that in the real world. I didn't want to go into a fantasy world with violence for shock value and just for the sake of violence. Kinda weird now looking back at it that friends who were into GoT (both avid readers and watchers) just highlighted and praised that the most.
And Ned's death was not all in vain. If anything, it gives the rest of the surviving Starks more reason to come back at the Lannisters, who're eventually going to deal with the repercussions of their previous actions. One choice that happened in the final season of the show was the Stark children winning and triumphing in the end, all but one of the Lannisters are dead. I can't wait to see what's coming to the Lannisters in the books. I'm looking forward to seeing the rest of the Starks
I very much agree. I love the Lannisters too but not because of that. I love them because their psychology is fascinating, they are most certainly not the victors. Thanks for the comment, was an interesting read
Is it possible to make a video on the psychology of house Stark as a whole? Especially eddard stark's ancestors
Oooo, looking forward to Catelyn and how Stoneheart shows how rage and despair can make one monstrous. .
Wonderful video!! I know Ned was a challenging character to analyze, and you did such a great job, with so many interesting insights. Thank you!
Great analysis as always and random but I love the music I’m your videos! Really sets the tone perfectly!
Ooh thanks! I never get many comments about the music, so it's good to know!
A friend once told me that I was most like Ned Stark in our friend group. I've cherished that compliment, but I also try to be weary of the pitfalls.
Id love it of they all are calling you stupid but you take it as a compliment and act Stoic when they tell you 😂😂😂
@@based-ys9um Maybe, but I'd rather be stupid than imagine my friends to be unkind.
A great leader is bound by duty, not ambition. It's a shame how few leaders are such.
I can not wait for the breakdown on Sansa and Jon!
That was the best analysis of Ned I’ve ever heard
Ah, thanks!
That's the best any of us can hope for. Some small part of what we were living on inside of our children making them who they are and their children, grandchildren and so on.
The more I read and mull over the series, the more I realise that Ned is my favourite character. He's more than just an honourable fool. And he's NOT stupid. Ned's legacy hangs greater across the world of Westeros than Tywin's ever will...
Super excited for all the Stark family videos
Interesting video. Do Stannis next.
Fr tho.
Ask him nicely
I feel like "good" characters, characters who's main thing is how hard they try to be good, generally are harder for people to pin down. I know in comics, I often feel like writers have a way harder time with Superman than Batman for just this reason, that it's easier to pick out and explain narcissism or anger or fear or whatever than to explain what being good means, especially since different people have different ideas about what good is. And yet there are things that still stand out, it's not totally subjective... It's elusive?
I think the issue is that the standard writing "method" is to highlight the flaws of characters and then put them in situations where those flaws cause more harm and gets the character in deeper trouble until they overcome that flaw. Batman's flaw is easy to pick out, he's too paranoid, and emotionally stunted/numb after witnessing his parents murder. Tony Stark is a narcissist trying to do good, but his ego frequently gets in the way. Bruce Banner has his lifetime of repressed rage. Peter Parker has an immense guilt complex. Tyrion wants to be accepted by a society that will never accept him in return and so on.
For characters like Superman, Ned, and others characters who are genuinely good, their flaw isn't something inherently negative or harmful. Superman wants to do as much good for those around him and the world as possible. Ned Stark wants to live in peace and honor with the family he has left. Those aren't really "flaws" at first glance. If anything they are strengths and admirable traits. It's only when you dig deeper do you see how harmful it can become.
Superman wants to do good, but with his powers it would be far too easy for him to just impose his will on the world and become a tyrant. So he puts strict rules on himself to prevent that from happening, but those rules often cause him problems as he faces villains who keep pushing his patience and his effectiveness is limited because of those rules. And he wants to be trusted and accepted by Earth, but the Earth sometimes not as trusting or understanding towards him.
Ned as the video points out was so traumatized by the brutality of Robert's Rebellion that he cannot stand to conduct the same wicked and brutal acts, not even to save his own life, which ultimately gets him killed.
So I feel like writers and fans who say Superman is "boring" and "hard to write for" and who say Ned was just an "honorable fool" are only looking at the surface.
I’m loving this series
This was fabulous. My first of your videos, so quite perplexed that you would be self-critical in comparing it to others. It makes me wanting to see even more!
To be fair, I'm normally more self critical than it's fair to be but ehh. I make these videos in a quick 1 or 2 week frenzy around working my job...so I know they'll be stuff I miss that I would've noticed with more time. I don't much mind the imperfection, it's just typical of creators to expect the most of themselves 😆
I would love one of these videos about Ezio Auditore!
This was a wonderful video, Ned is one of my favorite characters and I loved seeing this deep dive into his character. Would you consider doing a video of Robb Stark? I think he is another character who gets labeled with the 'honourable to the point of stupid' label and I think there is so much more to him. Looking forward to seeing more of your videos on GoT characters!
Super late on this but I think out of all your videos the one done on Ned is one of your best. Because we get so little time with Ned it's important to take a hard look at what we are given. Every point you made on Ned's character was well thought out and put in a way that is clear.
I adore Ned. He is my favorite character in the series and that should say something. With almost five books worth and an entire series out to flesh out other characters and show their redemption, Ned is still my favorite. Pointing out the fact that in a world that doesn't seem to value life as much, Ned takes a hard stance on protecting it. He protects the future of Westeros by protecting children and breaking the cycle.
We love Ned because a lot of us see ourselves in Ned. Good people trying to make the world a better place by loving it and protecting it. I know I see a lot of my self doubt in Ned. Constantly asking myself if what I'm doing is enough and can I forgive myself for the times that I didn't do more.
Rambling aside, thank you for this video. I love character analysis videos and talk, it was very refreshing to see one that showed that sometimes doing the right thing doesn't make you an idiot.