This.
There are many examples of how Sansa's fantasy world that she wanted more than anything to live in caused problems for other characters. She's being used simply as a pawn in this game, I'd say, even up to the end of the fourth book. We have yet to see her really make any moves that better her situation or the situation of those around her (aside from the attempt to save her dad, which again, was inteded to be used for the queens purposes.) She's a pawn, a dreamer, and in this game of thrones, she's moved around and manipulated to suit the purposes of other characters, mainly the lannisters.
I expect her at some point, maybe the 5th book, maybe later, to come into her own as a character and flip from being the ideological, naive and pawn player, to a person who still appears to have that role, but instead is making her own moves. I expect something terrible to happen to her though to force this change.
But here's more spoiler stuff, so don't read on unless you've finished the books or don't care. It's interesting to look at the characters based purely on how manipulative they are, and see what that gets them in the book. The more noble you are (rob, ned,Brienne-maybe) the worse your outcome, and in some cases, when you go from bad to good, or do something noble, like tyrian heading up the charge when the castle was under siege, or Jamie going back for Brienne, you're punished and have lasting scars, or you may die (again, Brienne looks like that's her outcome, but maybe not). While those who manipulate are generally still in power and doing fairly well.
It's an interesting book where just about anything can happen to anyone, which is nice to read, and it's also a very cynical book that, imo at least, accurately reflects the way the world works - which is that in order to succeed, you must be cunning and willing to do whatever it takes to hold onto power. Sure, there are exceptions, but that's the trend...and we see that reflected in the book, again, with some exceptions.
Reading books like this remind me of other books with similar styles. Ken Follet's "Pillars of the Earth" and "World Without End" are two that come to mind where the world is hard, and it seems like bad qualities trump good ones. Those are good books too, in case anyone is done with these for now and are looking for a filler until July 12th
.
Apart from having a neon sign pointing at them flashing "bad guys" for the 1st half an hour of the show, I don't think you can telegraph bad guyness any more blatantly than divulging they're responsible for assassinating the king and having the siblings screwing each other on screen in the first act. Maybe blatantly obvious would have been a more apt description than cookie cutter, but the idea's the same. Painfully obvious exposition of severe moral decrepitude right off the bat isn't exactly leaving the viewer a whole lot of room for interpretation of whether those characters are bad guys. I'm hoping the obviousness of this is just a misdirection and these characters end up having some more depth to them with a few twists down the road - but so far that really doesn't seem to be the style. I.e. so far they've been non-dimensional, cookie cutter (or mustache twisting to use Scoobygang's term) bad guys from the start.
id Cersei or Jamie murder/poison Robert's only true heir (the one described by Cersei when she goes to "console" Lady Stark). The description of the "fever" death seemed similar to the death of John Arryn.
We're looking at the same events, but under different lights.
