114 replies to this topic

[starki]

Chirios, on 01 July 2011 - 02:43 AM, said:

She didn't capture Shae. Shae voluntarily went to her.



So she almost murdered one of her only commanding officers in the middle of a very important battle and that's a sign of competence?



Which largely consisted of her saying mean things to him and him saying mean things to her. In ACoK it takes about a week for Tyrion to completely remove her control over the Gold Cloaks and even her household guard. It takes him perhaps a month to completely remove her control over the closed council as well. Tyrion won their game in ACoK. Yes, she was dangerous, but that's not because she was particularly clever. She had the title of Queen-Regent, which was given to her solely because of her marriage to Robert.



Her downfall was because of her own idiocy.



No it wasn't. She says "He saw us" in the book as well. Then Jaime lifts Bran up. Then she says: "What are you doing?" That makes it seem like she was complaining about him lifting him up, not about him pushing Bran.

Not Shae. Another whore, the one when Tyrion threatens to hurt Joffrey (or is it Tommen?) the same way she got hurt. COK is the book I think. The name starts with an A.


Nearly killing the third smartest man in Seven Kingdoms (after LF and Varys) is pretty good in my book. And Tyrion acknowledges her smarts more than once in the books.


She had the title, but it had nothing to do with her brain.


I don't believe for a second Cersei in AFFC is the same Cersei we saw in the first three books. Murder of Joffrey changed her.


As for Bran...there were better options than pushing him. But Jamie was never much of a thinker as much as he is a fighter/warrior.

Edited by starki, 01 July 2011 - 04:21 AM.

[Marcus of the South]

That was Alayaya, who Tyrion didn't really care about since he was just using her as a front. Cersei thought she'd caught Shae (though she didn't know who Shae was). Fail on her part really.

[starki]

She may have thought it was Shae...still not bad since it catches Tyrion completely off guard.

[Sixshells]

starki, on 01 July 2011 - 04:25 AM, said:

She may have thought it was Shae...still not bad since it catches Tyrion completely off guard.

True but not exceptional for someone disposing of a network of informers. We know she has spies, and even if Varys didn't tell, LF and Pycelle also have spies. Tyrion always new the risk existed, that's why he used Alayaya as a front in the first place. He was more caught off guard because of the fact he never really thought what it would entail when Cersei finds out.

[mcb]

Marcus Adler, on 01 July 2011 - 12:36 AM, said:

Of course not.  But that doesn't mean Cersei doesn't protect him to a level of paranoia and jealousy.  

Yes, she wants to keep him alive, no argument here. Still, I don't believe it's enough to call it "love".

[Chirios]

starki, on 01 July 2011 - 04:20 AM, said:

Not Shae. Another whore, the one when Tyrion threatens to hurt Joffrey (or is it Tommen?) the same way she got hurt.

She kidnapped the wrong woman. Completely the wrong woman. While having an army of spies on her side, she still manages to kidnap the wrong woman.

Quote

Nearly killing the third smartest man in Seven Kingdoms (after LF and Varys) is pretty good in my book.

Again, this is something anyone could do, and regardless it was a dumb decision. He was the only high ranking battle officer on the field. He dies, there's a good chance that the rest of her soldiers will flee. And also, it's not an incident of cleverness. Manipulating someone into doing what you want when they think they're doing what they want is clever, manipulating circumstances to increase your odds of gaining a tangible benefit, that's clever, completely misunderstanding a situation then attempting to murder someone who was doing nothing except ensuring the safety of you and your children is dumb.

Quote

And Tyrion acknowledges her smarts more than once in the books.

No he doesn't, he acknowledges her "low cunning", but thinks that she is ultimately a lot less smart than she thinks she is, that she is too emotional and not very subtle at all. Cersei isn't clever, she's just willing to cross a lot more lines than other people so occasionally she surprises the protagonists, that's it. She is incapable of reading other peoples desires, she has no understanding of empathy or of delaying her own pointless gratification, she is a maroon, to quote a certain blog and always has been in every single on of the books. Her only trick is to sleep with someone, promise to sleep with someone, or try and have someone killed. Murder is not that difficult.

Take the incident with Arya's Direwolf, and having Sansa's murdered. That was a dumb decision because it permanently soured Eddard Stark against her. Stark was going to be her husbands hand, it behooved her to be nice to him. Take Tyrion's arrest. She had an opportunity to permanently embarrass the Starks in front of every noble in KL, and turn their word into something worth less than nothing, which would've been useful had Bran remembered a certain something and started talking BS, but no, she's all: "I Want Stark Whipped!"

Quote

IMO not really. You make it sound like "anyone" could have killed Robert and gotten away with it and I don't see why we have any reason to believe that this is true. Anyway it's not like she's the only person who ever tried to kill Robert. And again, the point here is that in AFfC she's at the point where she can't even make sure that her assassinations are properly carried out. In the earlier books we see that she's a bit more competent. This isn't an example of her being a genius this is an example of her not being totally incompetent and stupid.

Boar-hunting is a dangerous sport, it doesn't take extreme cleverness to figure that out. If I'm trying to kill someone, and I say, okay, they'll be driving a sports car this afternoon, let's get them plastered and have them drive themselves home, and then they have a car crash, that doesn't make me clever, that just means that I have some basic understanding of cause and effect. And let's not pretend like Cersei didn't get horrifically lucky in that incident. If Robert doesn't miss his thrust, he lives, if Robert let's someone else kill the boar, he lives. Getting Robert drunk and hoping that he dies is not a good plan.

And who else tried to kill Robert?

Edited by Chirios, 01 July 2011 - 05:25 AM.

[Lady Tanalyth]

I meant in battle--Robert being a tough guy to kill.

I also disagree that it was a dumb move for Cersei to take the direwolf out in this case. Based on what happened to Joffrey and knowing that they still aren't out of the woods yet regarding the Bran thing why would she want to have two of those animals roaming around the Red Keep? It's totally cold but she nipped it in the bud because it doesn't take a genius to figure out that something worse could happen next time especially when a kid has a personality like her sons. The direwolves would have been a huge source of protection for the girls at KL and Cersei would have known that.

Tyrion acknowledges her low cunning in addition to acknowledging that she's made several good moves over the course of the story.

Murder is not that difficult. Murder without getting caught on the other hand I think most people would agree is far from easy.

Agreed that she missed a huge opportunity during Tyrion's kidnapping.

[starki]

Chirios, on 01 July 2011 - 05:24 AM, said:

She kidnapped the wrong woman. Completely the wrong woman. While having an army of spies on her side, she still manages to kidnap the wrong woman.



Again, this is something anyone could do, and regardless it was a dumb decision. He was the only high ranking battle officer on the field. He dies, there's a good chance that the rest of her soldiers will flee. And also, it's not an incident of cleverness. Manipulating someone into doing what you want when they think they're doing what they want is clever, manipulating circumstances to increase your odds of gaining a tangible benefit, that's clever, completely misunderstanding a situation then attempting to murder someone who was doing nothing except ensuring the safety of you and your children is dumb.



No he doesn't, he acknowledges her "low cunning", but thinks that she is ultimately a lot less smart than she thinks she is, that she is too emotional and not very subtle at all. Cersei isn't clever, she's just willing to cross a lot more lines than other people so occasionally she surprises the protagonists, that's it. She is incapable of reading other peoples desires, she has no understanding of empathy or of delaying her own pointless gratification, she is a maroon, to quote a certain blog and always has been in every single on of the books. Her only trick is to sleep with someone, promise to sleep with someone, or try and have someone killed. Murder is not that difficult.

Take the incident with Arya's Direwolf, and having Sansa's murdered. That was a dumb decision because it permanently soured Eddard Stark against her. Stark was going to be her husbands hand, it behooved her to be nice to him. Take Tyrion's arrest. She had an opportunity to permanently embarrass the Starks in front of every noble in KL, and turn their word into something worth less than nothing, which would've been useful had Bran remembered a certain something and started talking BS, but no, she's all: "I Want Stark Whipped!"



Boar-hunting is a dangerous sport, it doesn't take extreme cleverness to figure that out. If I'm trying to kill someone, and I say, okay, they'll be driving a sports car this afternoon, let's get them plastered and have them drive themselves home, and then they have a car crash, that doesn't make me clever, that just means that I have some basic understanding of cause and effect. And let's not pretend like Cersei didn't get horrifically lucky in that incident. If Robert doesn't miss his thrust, he lives, if Robert let's someone else kill the boar, he lives. Getting Robert drunk and hoping that he dies is not a good plan.

And who else tried to kill Robert?

And manages to catch Tyrion completely by surprise.


He was her biggest rival. In medieval times, people would remove this kind of opposition all the time.


Crossing the line ? Most characters in ASOIAF do it. She uses her body as a weapon, yes. Sounds pretty modern for a medieval female character. Murder ? No. Getting away with it is a little harder. And the "Robert" plan (get him drunk, and get him to hunt. no one will blame her since pretty much no one knows about the incest children) was not that bad. Certainly better than the hot headed Joff ordering a hired man to stab Bran.


Robert is going down in a little while, why be nice to his Hand ? And it was still Robert that ultimately judged that the direwolf gets killed.

How would she embarass the Starks when they kidnapped Tyrion ? If a Lannister is captured, making a move against Starks would not be a good idea.

[Manfryd Lothston]

I wouldn't go so far as to call Cersei an idiot. There are reasons for everything she does, and though her actions are definitely affected by emotion, so are the actions of every other POV character. Tyrion is constantly plaqued by his whore troubles and inferiority complex, Ned and Catelyn had fear and love for their children, Robb had the affair with Jeyne Westerling etc. etc., and some of these actions (e.g. the Westerling marriage) were far more disastrous than anything Cersei ever did (maybe with the exception of her siring the Lannister bastards).

Cersei is often short-sighted, true, but only in comparison with the genius plotters like Tywin, Littlefinger or Varys. Let's be honest, how many of the bad consequences of her actions in AFFC did we actually anticipate when we read the book for the first time? For me, the most dramatic ones certainly came as a surprise, and though in hindsight they were the results of her mistakes, the situation was so confused and complex it's no surprise Cersei couldn't see things too clearly.

Her main flaw, IMO, is not stupidity but arrogance, and every prominent Lannister was guilty of that (except maybe Kevan). She is really not a bad politician, though ruthless and machiavellian to the extreme; she is also plagued by a deeply rooted fear (of the prophecy). But how can you blame her for having "trust issues" when her own brother Tyrion is actually really out to get her (to wrestle power away from her), and her own father would use her as a pawn in his political game without a second thought? Her only hope for true personal freedom is gaining power for herself and ensuring her child sits on the Throne, and she was doing her best to achieve this.

Edited by Manfryd Lothston, 01 July 2011 - 04:36 PM.

[Howdyphillip]

Chirios, on 01 July 2011 - 05:24 AM, said:

Take the incident with Arya's Direwolf, and having Sansa's murdered. That was a dumb decision because it permanently soured Eddard Stark against her. Stark was going to be her husbands hand, it behooved her to be nice to him.

I actually think that was one of her smartest moves. It let Ned know that she had power, and that he could not as boldly act against her.

[Baramos]

Marcus of the South, on 01 July 2011 - 04:22 AM, said:

That was Alayaya, who Tyrion didn't really care about since he was just using her as a front. Cersei thought she'd caught Shae (though she didn't know who Shae was). Fail on her part really.

He still cared about her but just because he's a nice guy. This is the scene where he threatens that "in the moment of her greatest joy he'll do something to make it turn to ashes in her mouth" which is evidence she uses against him when she accuses him of murdering Joffrey.

But yeah he wasn't in love with her like he was with Shae so Cersei did screw up, of course. Just thought I'd clarify.

[Chirios]

Howdyphillip, on 01 July 2011 - 04:41 PM, said:

I actually think that was one of her smartest moves. It let Ned know that she had power, and that he could not as boldly act against her.

What? He knows she has power. She's the bloody Queen. Flaunting your power is unnecessary, prideful, and never ends well. This is basic Machiavelli.

[Manfryd Lothston]

Chirios, on 01 July 2011 - 04:54 PM, said:

What? He knows she has power. She's the bloody Queen. Flaunting your power is unnecessary, prideful, and never ends well. This is basic Machiavelli.

Machiavelli also says you should completely destroy your enemies, leaving them no opportunity for recovery and revenge. From this standpoint, Joffrey's decision to lop Ned's head off was very Machiavellian (and truth be told, if their hand were played better, the Lannisters would gain more from annihilating the Starks than shaming them).

[Chirios]

Manfryd Lothston, on 01 July 2011 - 05:09 PM, said:

Machiavelli also says you should completely destroy your enemies, leaving them no opportunity for recovery and revenge. From this standpoint, Joffrey's decision to lop Ned's head off was very Machiavellian (and truth be told, if their hand were played better, the Lannisters would gain more from annihilating the Starks than shaming them).

No he doesn't, he says that when inflicting wounds on your enemies it is better to wound them in such a manner that they won't get back up again, not to always completely destroy your enemies. Basically he says that if you attack someone don't half ass it. You can't just keep murdering everyone; because, as is mentioned in the Prince, you will eventually become hated and people will rise against you. Equally, you have to understand that sometimes you need to make allies and not enemies. Destroying your enemies is all well and good, forcing them to permanently bend the knee is even better.

The stupidity of Joffrey's decision to kill Ned is well documented. The problem with Cersei's stupid decisions is that other characters don't explain in as much detail why the decisions are stupid, so people get the impression that she's cleverer than she actually is.

Edited by Chirios, 01 July 2011 - 05:30 PM.

[Lord Damian]

The pressure of her actions over the last 16 years have taken their toll on her. She had a treasonous relationship with her brother. All three children are incestuous bastards and she has usurped powers of the throne and has made enemies of half of the kingdom, bribed the other half and is in the process is betraying the ones she bribed. She has doomed herself. May the
"others" take her!

Edited by Lord Damian, 01 July 2011 - 05:47 PM.

[Baramos]

Littlefinger is Machiavellian. Compare Joff to Littlefinger and you'll see how non-Machiavellian Joff is.

[Sixshells]

Manfryd Lothston, on 01 July 2011 - 04:33 PM, said:

(snip)
Cersei is often short-sighted, true, but only in comparison with the genius plotters like Tywin, Littlefinger or Varys. Let's be honest, how many of the bad consequences of her actions in AFFC did we actually anticipate when we read the book for the first time? For me, the most dramatic ones certainly came as a surprise, and though in hindsight they were the results of her mistakes, the situation was so confused and complex it's no surprise Cersei couldn't see things too clearly.
(snip)

I didn't anticipate all the bad consequences of her actions because you can never entirely guess what the others will do. But it doesn't take several readings to see that driving away the competent people and surrounding herself with dubious yesmen is overall a bad idea. The same can be said about allowing the Faith to raise armies again (at a moment when they are showing increasing radicalism), without any other guarantee than a debt erased : it doesn't promises good for the future. Inventing (no, Pycelle actually doesn't count : reread her POVs) the accusation against Marg is a pretty bad idea too : had she actually managed to get Kettleblack in her bed that would have been slightly different, but there she was just asking for her scheme to be discovered. And it was still pretty shortighted considering she is the daughter of your most powerful ally.

Cercei's POVs in AFFC are like watching a train wreck taking place : even while first reading it you know she is driving herself into a wall, you just don't know where exactly she will crash and burn. Even though you don't know the final outcome, you see her drowning in her increasingly imprudent moves.

[Manfryd Lothston]

Chirios, on 01 July 2011 - 05:28 PM, said:

No he doesn't, he says that when inflicting wounds on your enemies it is better to wound them in such a manner that they won't get back up again

Exactly. And if a city rebels, it's better to raze it to the ground. So from this standpoint, humiliating the Starks, insulting their honor, killing their rightful king (Robert), and putting incest-bred bastards on the Throne would have to be followed by exterminating the Starks as rebels and traitors, otherwise they would eventually attempt to wash the stain off their honor (and off the honor of the Realm) with Lannister blood.

Quote

You can't just keep murdering everyone; because, as is mentioned in the Prince, you will eventually become hated and people will rise against you.

And it is also said in "The Prince" that fear is better than love in terms of rulership - which is exactly what Cersei is doing.

Quote

Equally, you have to understand that sometimes you need to make allies and not enemies.

Cersei definitely tries to make allies. The entire "small council" was "hers" until Tyrion started mucking things up; and she also made allies from other families.

True enough, she alienated many with her arrogance and paranoia; but with regard to Tyrells, for instance, she was completely right to hate and fear them: they DID murder Joffrey, and Margaery was not a virgin (so likely to put out another bastard heir in time).

Quote

Destroying your enemies is all well and good, forcing them to permanently bend the knee is even better.

Who says the knee would stay bent? Oaths taken under threat of force are null and void even by Westerosi standards, it says so in the books many times.

Quote

The stupidity of Joffrey's decision to kill Ned is well documented.

And yet it did bring the complete downfall of House Stark and turned the North and the Iron Isles to fighting among themselves, leaving the Lannisters with an alliance with Highgarten and a claim to Winterfell in Sansa Stark.

If Eddard was alive to lead a Northern rebellion, things would probably have turned out much worse for the Lannisters. All they had to hold against him was one hostage (Sansa); remove that (like she was removed in the books), and Joffrey would be splattered like Aerys was.

Quote

The problem with Cersei's stupid decisions is that other characters don't explain in as much detail why the decisions are stupid, so people get the impression that she's cleverer than she actually is.

Tyrion never misses a chance to criticize his sister in a most derogatory manner.

And if you can't see her decisions as stupid without someone explaining their stupidity to you, then maybe she's not so stupid after all, hmm?

[Ser Greguh]

To use a poker metaphor, Cersei is a competent enough player when things are going perfectly her way, and efficient at taking money from (destroying and marginalizing) the clueless players, but she has no clue how to deal with the better players and has ridiculous tilt issues.  After her son was killed she's starting to lose it (though she did manage a competent enough slam-dunk court case against Tyrion), and after she actually ascends to the actual power she's gone completely off kilter.  It's not a stretch at all for her to have thought of wildfire circa aCoK, even if it was Tyrion that seized upon the idea and had the wits to actually make it viable.  It's the sort of thing she would think of - setting her enemies on fire is a good metaphor for her overall political strategy to begin with.  It's just that (a) barring armies that are literally marching on King's Landing, she's horrible at identifying who are actually her enemies, and ( she doesn't really have a follow-up plan for dealing with those enemies that actually know how to duck.

There's a certain dogpile tendency that comes into play whenever a deeply (deeply deeply) flawed character like Cersei comes into play: we assume that just because she's completely lost it by aFfC (sending people to be experimented upon and disposed of by Qyburn qualifies, for instance) that she must have been that crazy all along, and everyone tries to one-up each other regarding how stupid she really is.  It's not always entirely inaccurate, but it makes it easier to miss, or dismiss, the spots where she displays genuine cunning.

[DornishHighlander]

To me Cersei's downfall is a mixture of; Loss of key advisers, drinking like Robert, grief, obsessive in righting perceived wrongs and paranoia.


In a lot of ways she is similar to Lysa Arryn. Both are paranoid of perceived threats; Lysa - Every Shadow. Cersei - Maggy the Frog's prophecy & her Valonqar.

Both are/were obsessive about their children, Cersei is not near as bad as Lysa but she is very paranoid about what Tommen is doing and who he is seeing/talking to.