155 replies to this topic

[Blackfish Blues]

Whoa.

Horza, on 30 July 2010 - 01:39 AM, said:

I agree with this and Lucky Shield's piece - the Lannisters are the only Great House with my respect because they're by and large not goofy good-natured screwups.

To paraphrase Tyrion: "Speaking for the goofy good-natured screwups, I beg to differ."

Lady Blackfish, on 30 July 2010 - 02:00 AM, said:

Starks = house tragic woe
Lannisters = house theatrical dysfunction
Targaryens = house special snowflake
Baratheons = house epic macho
Tyrells = house glitter
Tullys = ... house boring

EPIC WIN.

Datepalm, on 30 July 2010 - 02:23 AM, said:

Aw, come now. They're a bunch of hot, earthy redheads. That has to be worth something.

Finally someone who tells it like it is. Am I shallow? How about all the hot incestuous green-eyed blondes, the violet-eyed ash-blond dragon descendants, the sultry Southern spear-wielding sexbombs? This saga has a fetish for everyone.

Datepalm, on 30 July 2010 - 02:23 AM, said:

I think the Tullys might be the one house that sort of...interacts with the enviorment a lot. They're actually influenced by their bannermen and their smallfolk and their role as rulers, rather than sort of floating above that as a pure soap opera. With the other houses, anyone not from the house itself who ever shows up is just an incidental plot necessity - the reynes to demonstratr Tywins ruthlessness, The Florents or Redqynes or whoever to stand about and bumble and be less pretty than Tyrells, etc. Tully bannermen actually show up with their own problems, and they're the only ones I can ever remember taking smallfolk into actual consideration.

I appreciate the sense of morality that they have which belongs to something like actual humans, rather than to that construct known as 'gritty and grey fantasy characters', which given its rarity elsewhere helps the whole thing not to become completely divorced from reality. Edmure cares about the lives of hundereds of people! O.M.G. what a freak!!!!

To sum up, I like the Tullys as a whole (Lysa is rather low in my esteem) because they are down-to-earth and fallible. I love reading about the great Houses and their drama and glamour, but I don't think it's a contradiction to say that at the same time I identify with the more normal (for our standards), decent, yes, even dumb and boring famlies.I recognize much of myself in them, especially the dumb part.

Edited by Blackfish Blues, 30 July 2010 - 04:14 AM.

[Horza]

Tyrion isn't good-natured.

He's more self-aware than yer average nobleman, I'll give him that but he's got a solid streak of ruthlessness and more than a dash of cunning. He carries more nous in his gnarled toes than Eddard, Robb and Jon put together.

[Blackfish Blues]

Horza, on 30 July 2010 - 05:08 AM, said:

Tyrion isn't good-natured.

He's more self-aware than yer average nobleman, I'll give him that but he's got a solid streak of ruthlessness and more than a dash of cunning. He carries more nous in his gnarled toes than Eddard, Robb and Jon put together.

Horza, I didn't explain myself well (typical): I was applying to myself and the  Tullys the Tyrion quote "Speaking for the grotesques, I beg to differ.  Death is so terribly final, while life is full of possibilities." Tyrion may not be good-natured but I am, except when I go on a murdering spree.

I love that quote, it's an affirmation of life - whatever you are, even a despised dwarf, you can not only survive but LIVE. I think I started truly liking Tyrion when he said that.

BTW but OT, what you say is interesting. I entirely agree with your description of Tyrion, but I think he is also a nice guy deep inside. The scene that comes to my mind is his not-consummation of his marriage to Sansa. Tyrion has always got the short straw and has suffered a load of pain that would break most of us, but he's still there and, until now, has managed not to break down. Tyrion abides.

It will be VERY interesting to see, judging from the spoiler ADWD chapters, where he goes from here. (Easy answer... "wherever whores go.")

[Olenna]

Blackfish Blues, on 30 July 2010 - 04:13 AM, said:

To sum up, I like the Tullys as a whole (Lysa is rather low in my esteem) because they are down-to-earth and fallible. I love reading about the great Houses and their drama and glamour, but I don't think it's a contradiction to say that at the same time I identify with the more normal (for our standards), decent, yes, even dumb and boring famlies.I recognize much of myself in them, especially the dumb part.

Haha, yeah. In RL, most of us would rather hang out with someone like Edmure than Tyrion (because we'd be the butt of his jokes) or Dany (because she's impossible to live up to) or Jon (because he takes life so damn seriously and never takes a break to knock back a beer).

The Tullys provide a valuable corrective/foil to all the epic heroics that surround them.

[Jaime L]

Olenna, on 30 July 2010 - 06:26 AM, said:

or Jon (because he takes life so damn seriously and never takes a break to knock back a beer).

Not only that, he'd sit there quietly judging you at the bar as you knock back your own. It would be like: "Dude, why are you even here?"

It would also get irritating when, at the end of the night, the bar owner would throw Jon the keys to the place out of some vague notion of him "liking the cut of his jib."

Quote

The Tullys provide a valuable corrective/foil to all the epic heroics that surround them.

I've long believed one of the primary reasons for Edmure as a character (one almost exclusively seen through Catelyn's POV) is to highlight, by contrast, Robb's superior leadership and maturity. Apparently Robb can do no wrong while Edmure can do no right...which makes it all the more perfect that the mistakes Robb makes (as opposed to Edmure's smaller foibles) are ultimately what destroys the North. Moreover though Edmure is not the smoothest operator I'd argue there's a lot to like about the guy in an everyman sense. Guy just can't buy a break.

[Eddison Tollet]

Errant Bard, on 30 July 2010 - 01:27 AM, said:

6. Bran. "But I never fall!" Well now you do, dumbass. Way to start a war. If you had not overestimated your climbing, or not been curious enough to overtax your skills, Nothing would have happened. But then again, if you had the guts to remember what you saw, it would likely not have happened either. Also, taking over Hodor by force and likely not stopping there isn't going to make you more sympathetic.

7. Rickon. Cannot do the difference between Luwin and Gregor Clegane, would send wolf on both, now that's the definition of dim. If left alone, would prove more of a liability to his own allies than to the enemy. The epitome of stupidity.

Epic.  I admit, I lol'ed.

Lady Blackfish, on 30 July 2010 - 02:00 AM, said:

Starks = house tragic woe
Lannisters = house theatrical dysfunction
Targaryens = house special snowflake
Baratheons = house epic macho
Tyrells = house glitter
Tullys = ... house boring

Wouldn't the Lannisters be something more like:
Lannisters = house incest is best


I agree that the Tullys get more grief than they deserve.

[Lady Blackfish]

Eddison Tollet, on 30 July 2010 - 06:51 PM, said:

Wouldn't the Lannisters be something more like:
Lannisters = house incest is best

I think that definitely falls under theatrical dysfunction.  Their love is greater than custom, greater than law, greater than the gods!  Also this way you can horn in the touching Tywin-Tyrion bond.

Edited by Lady Blackfish, 30 July 2010 - 08:29 PM.

[Lucky Shield]

Lady Blackfish, on 29 July 2010 - 10:21 PM, said:

No Tully had anything to do with Robb sleeping with Jeyne or sending Theon to Balon Greyjoy, for one.  And the entire revolt was a silly idea that came from a vengeance-bound northman, as I recall.

Killing someone with no justification is called murder, and it's a bad thing.  Newsflash: Tywin is not a role model.

Quote

its called being a king. Dangerous people have to go sometimes being rationnal is better then being full of honour

Killing the Lannister hostages was Rickard Karstark's decision, he is a grown man capable of and responsible for his own choices.  Executing Karstark was actually insisted upon by Robb himself, and opposed by Tully voices as I recall.  It was favored by Stark honor, but in no way inarguably necessary.

Quote

Jaime's release was what started everything tough

Robb's orders were unclear, he did not explicitly order Edmure to not engage Tywin.  We can fault Edmure perhaps for not being a tactical genius, as he failed to see what Robb saw from the maps, but Robb committed his own error with his lack of specificity.

Would you be willing to clarify what you mean by pinning Stannis' loss at Blackwater on Edmure?

Quote

Just hold the Castle, how clear is that? I mean everyone says the orders are unspecific but we never heard them. Just hold the castle, Robb said. Tywin's forces were turned back and he got back in time to KL, contributing to Stannis's loss

What is the problem here?

Quote

None i like Brynden. Just saying that no Tully is quite normal.

No doubt it was pretty terrible, but I'm curious what you think honorable Rickard Stark would do if Lyanna came home to Winterfell with Rhaegar Targaryen's child in tow, in some alternate scenario in which both lived, having disobeyed her father's plans for her?  Do you really think he'd be pleased with the prospect of finding a suitable match for her after that?  And I hope you don't seriously mean that Hoster Tully should have foreseen that Petyr Baelish would be where he is now -- which, BTW, is still a few degrees off from "claim to the iron throne".  Furthermore, he's hardly an honorable sort, and you know, kind of a murdering asshole. Why would any decent father want him for their daughter?

Quote

I thought Tywin was not a role model Bastards exist can't do nothing about it. Just let the kid live you know.

[Errant Bard]

Lucky Shield, on 31 July 2010 - 12:58 PM, said:

Jaime's release was what started everything tough

No. You see, the problem with going up the causality chain is that it does not make sense to stop at one point instead of another, except for prejudice. I can say as well that it was Robb not wanting to exchange Jaime that started everything. Or was it Tyrion vowing he would exchange Sansa for Jaime? Maybe Jaime actually killing Kastarks sons? No, probably Kastark going to war with his sons thinking it's play and nothing would happen to them. Or Robb weakening his own side by forgiving Catelyn when he ought to have punished her to appease the Kastarks? hmmmm

Quote

None i like Brynden. Just saying that no Tully is quite normal.

So being gay isn't being normal? And you give homosexuality as reason for (paraphrasing) "HATING the tullys because they are idiots"? You're digging your grave deeper here.

[Lucky Shield]

Errant Bard, on 31 July 2010 - 01:17 PM, said:

No. You see, the problem with going up the causality chain is that it does not make sense to stop at one point instead of another, except for prejudice. I can say as well that it was Robb not wanting to exchange Jaime that started everything. Or was it Tyrion vowing he would exchange Sansa for Jaime? Maybe Jaime actually killing Kastarks sons? No, probably Kastark going to war with his sons thinking it's play and nothing would happen to them. Or Robb weakening his own side by forgiving Catelyn when he ought to have punished her to appease the Kastarks? hmmmm

So being gay isn't being normal? And you give homosexuality as reason for (paraphrasing) "HATING the tullys because they are idiots"? You're digging your grave deeper here.

Noooooo no i did say i believed he was in love with his brothers wife more no problem bout the gay guys

And it is very true bout going up the causality chain, but everyone knew Karstark was clear about killing Jaime. Catelyn's impact on the situation is much more direct than the others. Except for Jaime killing them but hey that's war

[Display Name]

Idiot Tullys' who can't see into the future.

[Datepalm]

Lucky Shield, on 31 July 2010 - 01:26 PM, said:

Noooooo no i did say i believed he was in love with his brothers wife more no problem bout the gay guys

And it is very true bout going up the causality chain, but everyone knew Karstark was clear about killing Jaime. Catelyn's impact on the situation is much more direct than the others. Except for Jaime killing them but hey that's war

So the people who irrationaly start a war are blameless while the people who rationaly react to circumstances within it are the guilty party?

[Spastic Plastic]

The war was already lost by the time Karstark killed the Lannister hostages. There was nothing Catelyn or Edmure or Brynden could have done.

To put it in Jaime's words: "Stark won a few battles in the field and lost the war in the bedroom, poor fool."

[Lady Blackfish]

Quote

its called being a king. Dangerous people have to go sometimes being rationnal is better then being full of honour

The Freys are a huge clan, exterminating them is likely to be an extended process, much more involving than taking care of the Reynes.  Or Lord Goodbrook, while we're on the subject of Hoster Tully's bannermen; in this case there was a clear pretext to the action taken against the disobedient lord (Goodbrook directy fought for the loyalists), but Walder Frey actually joined the rebel cause after the Battle of the Trident.  On what pretext should Hoster Tully then exterminate them?  Or are you saying that Hoster Tully should have diverted his resources away from fighting Aerys and the loyalists during the war, before the Trident, in order to take care of Walder Frey then?  Or are you saying that Hoster Tully should take action against Walder Frey for mere poor character, and calling that being rational?

Quote

Just hold the Castle, how clear is that? I mean everyone says the orders are unspecific but we never heard them. Just hold the castle, Robb said. Tywin's forces were turned back and he got back in time to KL, contributing to Stannis's loss

When Robb chastises Edmure he never mentions that he explicitly forbad him to do more.  If Robb would have had, it would have made all the sense in the world for him to bring it up at that point, because he is letting Edmure have it and it'd make no sense at all to withhold the most damning point.  It's clearly implied that Robb did not say any more than "Your job is to hold Riverrun," and Edmure actually did that.

Quote

None i like Brynden. Just saying that no Tully is quite normal.

Being in love with one's brother's wife is abnormal?  Well okay.  I suppose we operate on different definitions of abnormal behavior.

Quote

I thought Tywin was not a role model Bastards exist can't do nothing about it. Just let the kid live you know.

Hoster's actions were clearly undesirable, no debate there.  But I asked if you saw honorable Rickard Stark doing any better, and if so, what is the basis of your certainty?  As undesirable as the action was, the societal forces at play in Hoster Tully's decisions are pretty clear, and as one of them seems to be honor, I would think it'd be even harder on a sexually wayward girl if she was a Stark.  Granted, Lyanna may have married Rhaegar, but we don't know that yet.

Datepalm made the argument I would have made regarding your take on the chain of events issue.  I'm having trouble seeing the consistency in your criteria.  By the logic you display, as far as I can tell, I can just as easily say that Catelyn's capture of Tyrion didn't "start things", but Littlefinger's lie did.  I can just as easily castigate Ned for going to Cersei with his plans.  So on.

Edited by Lady Blackfish, 31 July 2010 - 05:20 PM.

[Datepalm]

I think this debate, and the reason we're slightly talking in circles about eachother, comes down to what one thinks needs 'explaining'. Why is Robbs death a screwup for which blame needs to be apportioned, but Karstarks sons/Sansa and Aryas captivity/etc are a natural product of war?

Is it just that people expect there to be a war in a fantasy novel, so trying to stop the war or undermine it in anyway is 'wrong' - for example, trading captives - while the right way for Sansa to be freed is when Robb wins the war and rides into the Red Keep to rescue her, because for the guys we like to win the war over the guys we don't like to achieve their ends (saving the world/the kingdom/the girl) is surely the point of the whole thing, right?

[Lady Blackfish]

Datepalm, on 31 July 2010 - 05:22 PM, said:

Is it just that people expect there to be a war in a fantasy novel, so trying to stop the war or undermine it in anyway is 'wrong' - for example, trading captives - while the right way for Sansa to be freed is when Robb wins the war and rides into the Red Keep to rescue her, because for the guys we like to win the war over the guys we don't like to achieve their ends (saving the world/the kingdom/the girl) is surely the point of the whole thing, right?

Yes, I think so.  It is debatable how clear GRRM makes it that we are not "supposed to" buy into all the traditional fantasy novel trappings, but then it's also debatable if GRRM needs to make it all that clear.

Also, sheer perspective bias.

[Datepalm]

Lady Blackfish, on 31 July 2010 - 05:29 PM, said:

Also, sheer perspective bias.

You lost me there with that high fangled literary sounding talking.

[Mad Monkey]

Datepalm, on 31 July 2010 - 05:41 PM, said:

You lost me there with that high fangled literary sounding talking.

I think that means that your bias is changing your perspective on the something.

Quote

while the right way for Sansa to be freed is when Robb wins the war  and rides into the Red Keep to rescue her, because for the guys we like to win the war over the guys we don't like to achieve their ends (saving the world/the kingdom/the girl) is surely the point of the whole thing, right?

To be fair, that is the desirable end for the characters in the book. I think all of the Tullys and the Starks would have preferred to defeat Joffrey and rescue Sansa. Diplomacy would be difficult if not impossible; perhaps Queen Catelyn might have been able to negotiate peace with the Lannisters, but if Robb had suggested that he might not have been crowned King in the North and he might not have had the authority to make any deals on behalf of the Riverlands as well as the North.

I don't think that even Catelyn wanted Jaime to be roaming around free; she just saw freeing him as her only option at that point, since even if she believed that Robb must eventually win it might be too late or Sansa might be killed either by the vengeful Lannisters or during the chaos of a second Sack of King's Landing.

Quote

Why is Robbs death a screwup for which blame needs to be apportioned, but Karstarks sons/Sansa and Aryas captivity/etc are a natural product of war?

I think it's because Robb's death seems preventable at a later stage than what happened to Sansa and Arya. Sansa and Arya arrived in King's Landing back in Book 1, long before anyone had any idea that the Lannisters were going to go to war with the Starks. Robb's death came about as a result of circumstances that emerged much later than that. Even though both of them were preventable and (if you want to go that way), "unnatural", it's generally assumed that, if Robb had made even one decision differently, he might have survived.

Edited by Mad Monkey, 31 July 2010 - 06:00 PM.

[Ahmrogar]

When it comes down to it, the Tully's just aren't exceptional enough. They find themselves outmatched and overwhelmed and indeed, their own human weaknesses damn them.  They've got power, but they're not nearly as powerful as the other Great Houses. Unlike the Lannisters and Tyrells who have the force of arms to raise army after army, and able commanders to guide them (Tywin Lannister and Randyl Tarly, for instance) unlike the Starks, Edmure doesn't have Robb's tactical brilliance nor the seclusion of the North, and worst of all for a war, they care. They're too close to their banners and can't see them bleed.

Family. Duty. Honour. Isn't it? The Tully's take their duty to their vassals seriously, and are punished for it. We see this in GoT when Edmure strings out his forces to protect his smallfolk, thus making him easy prey.

Really though, all their 'failings' are very human. Catelyn's motherly instincts better her, I don't know about you guys but I've spoken to mothers before (haha ) and I think Catelyn's actions are very realistic. She sees the man who for all she knows tried to kill her son and does what she can, same with Sansa.

Hoster? He did his best to forge alliances, to make things best for his house and his people, and marrying into the Starks and Arryns guarantees the Riverlands two very powerful allies from great houses of noble repute. He knew Lysa was fertile. He knew Cat would do as instructed, and for a decade his choice was more or less sound. It just was a pity Lysa couldn't be happy with Jon, instead of doing as Petyr bid.

Lysa is just in love with Petyr, foolishly, obsessively so. But that's all it is, she does anything and everything to please him. I can't say I like her or that she's an attractive character, but I know girls (and guys) like her. You can't choose who you love and well, yeah...

Edmure is...well just not brilliant. He's decent enough as a leader, he won the Battle of the Fords afterall  and you can sympathise with him. But he cares for his smallfolk and doesn't really know what he's doing. I don't think you can fault a man for trying but being overcome by the magnitude of events around them.

[Errant Bard]

Ahmrogar, on 02 August 2010 - 12:57 AM, said:

When it comes down to it, the Tully's just aren't exceptional enough.

The Tully's take their duty to their vassals seriously, and are punished for it.

Catelyn's motherly instincts better her, I don't know about you guys but I've spoken to mothers before (haha ) and I think Catelyn's actions are very realistic.

But he cares for his smallfolk and doesn't really know what he's doing.

That's what makes them exceptional. Really exceptional. As in: actually caring for the well being of other more than about "victory" is a virtue, and they are the exception among nobles (Robb or Tyrion, they don't care any more than Ramsay Bolton)

I cannot bring myself to generalize by house, characters are much too different, but if I did "house boring" would not be what I'd call the Tullys, based on that.