Jump to content


Photo

Think Cersei would do it all again?


  • Please log in to reply
282 replies to this topic

#1 The Frosted King

The Frosted King

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,836 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 09:14 AM

Seeing what she has lost, think she would chose next time to just pop out some true black n blue Baratheons?

#2 straits

straits

    m̂ͪ͋ͩ͗̓̈ͨ̓̏

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,184 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 09:31 AM

Yes, she'd do it all again. Her pattern of thoughts in aDwD show that she does not regret. All that stuff she says about being a lioness, pride etc? She'd do everything the exact same way she did the first time around. If anything, she'd be more brutal to everyone. Robert would have died earlier, Sansa would have suffered more, Tyrion would have lost his head. Bran would have probably been 'taken care of', too, regardless of her initial idea to just talk to the kid.

#3 E-Ro

E-Ro

    Guttersnipe

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,050 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 09:34 AM

Yup, she would. She regrets nothing.

#4 Starfell

Starfell

    Sword of the Early-Mid Afternoon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 801 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 09:45 AM

Yeah, she doesn't have the mentality to give ground in order to secure a long term gain, and popping out a trueborn heir before any twincest babies would be that from where she's standing. All she knows how to do is the same as she ever has but with different degrees of ruthlessness, that's part of the reason why Varys and Littlefinger can scheme rings around her

#5 ab aeterno

ab aeterno

    fidei defensor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,624 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 09:50 AM

Yup, she would. She regrets nothing.


I agree. This is definitely my impression, though I'd like to hear WK's feelings on this. She is the Cersei expert these days. /smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

#6 Winter's Knight

Winter's Knight

    Social Justce Captain of the flagship Briennsa

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,485 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:01 AM

Yes she would do it all again, rather than bear the child of the man whoo rapes her. And you know what? Bearing Bob's child wouldn't have changed anything-Ned went to KL on Jon's death and Lysa's letter. He'd still have poked around and LF'd have given him some other pretext for turning against the Lannisrters-play up Tywin ravaging the Riverlands perhaps. Renly'd still have declared himself king on Rob's death.

#7 E-Ro

E-Ro

    Guttersnipe

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,050 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:08 AM

Yes she would do it all again, rather than bear the child of the man whoo rapes her. And you know what? Bearing Bob's child wouldn't have changed anything-Ned went to KL on Jon's death and Lysa's letter. He'd still have poked around and LF'd have given him some other pretext for turning against the Lannisrters-play up Tywin ravaging the Riverlands perhaps. Renly'd still have declared himself king on Rob's death.

Perhaps but then stannis would have joined the lannisters and renly would only have the reach and se. Robb and the north and riverlands would fight with tywin I think, what really set ned off was roberts lack of kids, no way he turns on a trueborn baratheon. I dont want to upset you, but I think cercei having one of roberts kids would really have changed the realm for the better.

#8 ab aeterno

ab aeterno

    fidei defensor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,624 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:09 AM

Yes she would do it all again, rather than bear the child of the man whoo rapes her. And you know what? Bearing Bob's child wouldn't have changed anything-Ned went to KL on Jon's death and Lysa's letter. He'd still have poked around and LF'd have given him some other pretext for turning against the Lannisrters-play up Tywin ravaging the Riverlands perhaps. Renly'd still have declared himself king on Rob's death.


I agree. Stannis would not have declared himself king though, I don't think. And wouldn't that have made things interesting...

EDIT: And as OAR says, Ned probably wouldn't have died either.

Edited by ab aeterno, 23 December 2012 - 10:12 AM.


#9 OnionAhaiReborn

OnionAhaiReborn

    coprophagously a-grin

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,327 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:10 AM

Bearing Bob's child wouldn't have changed anything-Ned went to KL on Jon's death and Lysa's letter. He'd still have poked around and LF'd have given him some other pretext for turning against the Lannisrters-play up Tywin ravaging the Riverlands perhaps. Renly'd still have declared himself king on Rob's death.


Defend Cersei all you like, but don't twist up reason to this extent in order to do so. If Ned hadn't discovered that the children weren't Robert's and gone to Cersei, who then admitted it, he would not have tried to make Stannis king, gotten himself killed, and then made peace between Starks and Lannisters impossible. Nor would Stannis be claiming the throne in the first place. It obviously changes a whole lot.

Edited by OnionAhaiReborn, 23 December 2012 - 10:10 AM.


#10 Winter's Knight

Winter's Knight

    Social Justce Captain of the flagship Briennsa

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,485 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:26 AM

Defend Cersei all you like, but don't twist up reason to this extent in order to do so. If Ned hadn't discovered that the children weren't Robert's and gone to Cersei, who then admitted it, he would not have tried to make Stannis king, gotten himself killed, and then made peace between Starks and Lannisters impossible. Nor would Stannis be claiming the throne in the first place. It obviously changes a whole lot.


But see, Cersei's treason was just a pretext, similar to Helen's abduction being a pretext for Agamemnon and co. to sack Troy.

The following'd still have happened:
  • Jon Arryn would have died at Lysa's hands.
  • Lysa'd still have blamed the Lannisters
  • Stannis'd still hae fled KL.
  • Bran'd still have fallen.
  • Joff'd still send an assassin.
  • Robert'd still have died.
  • Renly'd still declare himself king.
  • Balon'd still rise.
  • Varys'd still plan Aegon's ascension.

The difference'd be that now, Ned'd fight for the Lannisters, Sansa'd be wed to Joff and LF'd still try to make chaos-probably by playing up the Cat-napping of Tyrion.

What it does is reduce the five kings to three-although Mel'd still be convinced that Stannis is AA and thus would do her best to get him to declare for the throne.

#11 Clariana

Clariana

    Kaneesi, mother of doggies...

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 928 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:28 AM

I think it is the nature of truly tragic characters the Oedipuses, Electras and Oresteses that they are destined to repeat for evermore the self-same actions that bought them down in the first place, thus the truly tragic thing about tragedy is that it runs for all etermity driven by sheer human pig headedness and inevitability. Unsurprisingly tragedy always has it roots in family matters. So, yeah, Cersei would do it all again.

Not so sure about Jamie... The Kingslaying and twincest, yes... But I think he would at least attempt to be more of a father to his offspring and that may have changed a great deal.

Now Tyrion... Tyrion wise head that he is, he would have done everything differently. Starting with disowning his family and all its problems at the earliest opportunity.

#12 danm_999

danm_999

    Hoofsoldier in Borroq's Pig Army

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,679 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:32 AM

The following'd still have happened:

  • Jon Arryn would have died at Lysa's hands.


Here's where you run into problems. Why is Jon Arryn being killed if there's no twincest to uncover?

#13 E-Ro

E-Ro

    Guttersnipe

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,050 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:35 AM

Here's where you run into problems. Why is Jon Arryn being killed if there's no twincest to uncover?

Lysa did that to prevent robert from being fostered at ds.

#14 OnionAhaiReborn

OnionAhaiReborn

    coprophagously a-grin

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,327 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:35 AM

But see, Cersei's treason was just a pretext, similar to Helen's abduction being a pretext for Agamemnon and co. to sack Troy.

The following'd still have happened:

  • Jon Arryn would have died at Lysa's hands.
  • Lysa'd still have blamed the Lannisters
  • Stannis'd still hae fled KL.
  • Bran'd still have fallen.
  • Joff'd still send an assassin.
  • Robert'd still have died.
  • Renly'd still declare himself king.
  • Balon'd still rise.
  • Varys'd still plan Aegon's ascension.

The difference'd be that now, Ned'd fight for the Lannisters, Sansa'd be wed to Joff and LF'd still try to make chaos-probably by playing up the Cat-napping of Tyrion.

What it does is reduce the five kings to three-although Mel'd still be convinced that Stannis is AA and thus would do her best to get him to declare for the throne.


These are really major differences though. A far cry from saying it 'wouldn't have changed anything.'

I also reject numbers 3 and 6 on your list.

3) I don't see why Stannis would have fled if he were not investigating Joffrey/Tommen/Mycella's parentage alongside Jon Arryn when Jon Arryn was killed. This is what makes Stannis fearful and fleeful (just made that word up /smug.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':smug:' />), there's no reason it would have happened with nothing to investigate.

6) It's not clear that Cersei would have felt the need to kill Robert if she weren't concerned about her secret being uncovered and the consequences of that for her and her children. Indeed, Ned telling her that he knew is, according to Varys, what pushed Cersei into killing Robert. So it seems to have been mostly an act of self defense made unnecessary if the children actually were Robert's.

#15 Winter's Knight

Winter's Knight

    Social Justce Captain of the flagship Briennsa

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,485 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:37 AM

Here's where you run into problems. Why is Jon Arryn being killed if there's no twincest to uncover?


Jon A. was poisoned by Lysa wasn't he, at LF's orders? Lysa then promptly fled to the Eyrie whilst dropping Cat an ominous note-LF just needs a pretext here. Say, Jon A. was poisoned by the Lannisters because he discovered that they were going to kill Robert because the king was going to set Cersei aside-which Pycelle mentions in ACoK, I think.

#16 danm_999

danm_999

    Hoofsoldier in Borroq's Pig Army

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,679 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:37 AM

Lysa did that to prevent robert from being fostered at ds.


Ah, but he was already going to be fostered at Casterly Rock, and that did not cause Littlefinger to prompt Lysa to murder Jon Arryn.

What did Jon Arryn in was that he and Stannis had uncovered twincest, which ruined Littlefinger's plans.

#17 ab aeterno

ab aeterno

    fidei defensor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,624 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:38 AM

Here's where you run into problems. Why is Jon Arryn being killed if there's no twincest to uncover?


LF wants him dead.

What did Jon Arryn in was that he and Stannis had uncovered twincest, which ruined Littlefinger's plans.


Not if LF always wanted the Vale.

Edited by ab aeterno, 23 December 2012 - 10:39 AM.


#18 Winter's Knight

Winter's Knight

    Social Justce Captain of the flagship Briennsa

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,485 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:39 AM

6) It's not clear that Cersei would have felt the need to kill Robert if she weren't concerned about her secret being uncovered and the consequences of that for her and her children. Indeed, Ned telling her that he knew is, according to Varys, what pushed Cersei into killing Robert. So it seems to have been mostly an act of self defense made unnecessary if the children actually were Robert's.


Cersei has several reasons to want Robert dead: the incest, Renly's plot to have Rob put her aside, the abuse just to name three.

#19 danm_999

danm_999

    Hoofsoldier in Borroq's Pig Army

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,679 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:39 AM

Jon A. was poisoned by Lysa wasn't he, at LF's orders?


And Littlefinger ordered this because the discovery of twincest erodes his ability to manipulate the court. If Stannis becomes the heir, he loses the pliable Joffrey.

#20 E-Ro

E-Ro

    Guttersnipe

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,050 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:40 AM

Also joff would be sane, and probably more like robert so everyone would love him.