Jump to content

Rereading Tyrion V (ASOS-ADWD)


Lummel

Recommended Posts

Welcome to rereading Tyrion V!

Here are some rules that help the thread to keep together

  • Don't over anticipate - don't have whole posts discussing future events. Yes, allude to or mention or bring in the future, but please keep the focus on the present chapter.
  • Be relevant. If you are drawing parallels or bringing in other material don't be shy, but please show how this relates to Tyrion and his story.
  • It is a reread not a general love or hate Tyrion thread. The intention is to be critical. To pull apart the POV and the story. To question the honesty of the narrators and wonder about what GRRM is doing with the character and why he made certain decisions.
  • The only requirement in taking part is that you find Tyrion and/or his story interesting. But it certainly helps if you reread the chapters too. :)
  • No roughhousing, sniping or punching below the belt, we want a clean orderly discussion here!

Aside from that we are half way through the reread at the start of ASOS. The reread is hosted by Butterbumps!, Ragnorak and myself. We aim to introduce two chapters of the book each week. The previous threads can be found here: Tyrion I, Tyrion II, Tyrion III and Tyrion IV. We had a brief round up AGOT and ACOK here.

Please feel free to bring critical perspectives, special knowledge, other information from outside GRRM and his works to the reread if it is relevant and adds to the discussion.

We currently have three Tyrion chapters to read in ASOS before we spit on our hands and limber up ready to take on ADWD. We are discussing Tyrion VIII(ASOS) the Purple Wedding Chapter, so grab your book and come join us!

ETA imaginative thread title eh? Hope you all like it. :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...The monster, maiden Sansa is confronted with in Kings Landing, is men...

(Ok, some people - men, most likly :) - on this forum may feel this post to come on a little negative on men. But as I said, GRRM magnifies certain characteristics of Tyrion up to the level of a caricatur and I'm just following him in that. So no bad feeling for Uncat, please)

Now that I've stopped weeping... ;)

Man is the monster then.

I'm turning this round a bit because we can't say that all ASOIAF men are monstrous, one or two look fairly decent (ok, fairly decent relatively speaking by the standards of westeros) eg Davos, The Ned, Septon Meribald, the Elder Brother. I would include Septon Meribald's dog in that list but I don't think that it is definitive that Dog is male.

You mentioned Joffrey, Tyrion's erection and Sandor and I fell to thinking about the ego, id and superego (interesting how I ordered that, Freudian slip anyone?), I'm kind of feeling my way forward here (as the actress said to the bishop) trying to find some words for my thoughts. There are basic drives and desires, some men have found a way to deal with them others are subject to them and as a result are monsters. Somebody said that civilisation was the result of repression of certain drives and desires. I'm thinking something like that here, but maybe a bit more positive sounding, maybe a bit more blue and green and slightly more cloud like too (that's what my thoughts are like!).

ETA but if the person fails to deal with, resolve, integrate those drives then they are a monster and not a man? Something like that. What about the ASOIAF women? Obviously for reasons of personal plumbing I recuse myself, but some of you are more personally qualified to speak on the matter, do they have the same or similar basic or potential monstrousness that needs to be overcome?

...And a final sidenote on Lord Tytos: The Titans were the second generation of the greek god which came before Zeus and his crop. Uranus was their boss. He fathered Zeus and the others but ate them, becouse of a bad prophecy. Zeus brought him down and forced him to reurgitate his (obviously not yet digested) siblings. This made Zeus the new boss. Tywin did not bring down his father, but he really would have loved to (or may be even did it with a little help of some poison, who is to know?). He does not force the fallen titan to reurgitate something, but he goes through great lengths to get something back, his father kind of ate up: the honnor and power of the family...

I do think that element you get in greek tragedy of an initial sin working it's way down through the generations as people react and over react to it is strong in ASOIAF, obviously bad prophecies are pretty relevant too :)

And Tyrion might wear his masculine sexuality like a mummer's garb to hide the insecure boy craving for love and recognition under it.

But don't they all......... :D ?

Curses! How can I respond to that with out proving it to be true! :laugh:

...Due to being so cynical, I feel that the first category has more "touchy feely" reasons, while the second has more realpolitik. Which means I am inclined to go with the second, and to forever cross out Garlan as "the gallant" in my mind. :crying:

I like the notion that by calling him "the Gallant" he becomes so, the kind of construction of reality, without him necessarily having to be actually gallant. It's like the songs about the battle of the blackwater, or Littlefinger's rumours about Selyse sleeping with Patchface. If people believe it - it is their truth. Equally people see the twisted little monkey demon, or the Imp, rather than Tyrion. Am I reaching for something like public relations and brand management here? What have we got, Garlan Tyrell, well lets relaunch him as Garlan the Gallant...

Which slides rather neatly into:

...Someone once said be careful who you pretend to be because you will become that person...

Thanks for that, given how many characters are going around under false names and identities that's a thought worth holding on to

... and if Tyrion ended up having to take the rap, well you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs, and Tyrion is no innocent but a full player of the Game of Thrones, and a Lannister...

:crying: poor Tyrion, doomed to be either the omelette or the egg :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am old enough to have grown up watching Laura Ingalls and "Little House on the Prairie", but I am afraid I will still have to be sour and suspicious about Garlan Tyrell! For a couple of reasons, most of which Lummel and Rapsie already covered above.

In short: Garlan the trecherous was already established when he agreed to wear Renly's armour in battle, hence his capacity for deceit is proven, despite his name and demeanor of being "the Gallant" (but in any case he confesses that this is a name he got from Willas, so it was not "earnt" as such, he is just in a way trying to act as his name suggests).

Secondly, the men Olenna speaks poorly of are Mace, Loras and her own oafish (but pleasant enough) husband. Willas gets props, but Garlan is left out. We do see that Garlan seems to look up to and appreciate Willas though, given his own commentary on how he gained the name "the gallant".

Further, although it at first glance looks like he really is the gallant, what with being nice to Sansa and Tyrion, we also know that he is possibly quite greedy since he accepted Brightwater Keep ahead of Randyll Tarly, who had a better claim by blood (his wife is a Florent). Brightwater Keep also has very rich grounds from what we are made to understand. Although that was Mace's decision, it doesn't seem that Garlan, Olenna et al have any problems with him gaining Brightwater Keep and being raised to basically a Great Lord himself for a battle that was won in a joint effort between the Tyrells and the Lannisters, and especially by Tyrion's effort inside Kings Landing. Plus Tarly also lead the centre host himself, with Garlan in the van and Tywin and Mace taking the left and right.

<snip>

Not analyzing the seating arrangements and why they are that way really shows just how self absorbed Tyrion is here. He's gone from being blinded by his obsession with Cersei last book to being blinded by his own self pity here. At least he had enough awareness in Clash to notice LF was a danger. Even earlier when he notes LF was after Harrenhal for the marriage to Lysa he never connects any dots. He never recalls the hunger in LF's eyes when Tyrion made the Harrenhal offer and wonders how far back LF's scheme goes. He puts together that it wasn't Cersei or Jaime that tried to kill Bran but never thought enough about Harrenhal and the implications to question their involvement in Jon Arryn's death. He knows it was murder based on his questions to Pycelle. Tyrion could have used a seeing lesson or two from Syrio.

You tie this together very nicely, and I'm generally a sucker for textual evidence. Noting Garlan's omission on Olenna's list, connecting him to the Willas, and especially pointing out his rather ungallantly taking the fruits of victory over Tarly makes a very good case.

The real problem I have with your reasoning is that it unnecessarily runs the risk of inflating Fearless Leader's ego. Sheesh, we only just passed the 200 year anniversary of the War of 1812-- do you even know how to hold a grudge? Lyanna, you just aren't keeping up your side of this continental conflict. The John is a Lou and they don't even spell his name right. These people call cookies biscuits! Oh the humanity! Think of the children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations to Tyrion Re-read thread, the Fifth of its name!

To continue a bit here on the Tyrell theme:

Count me a hopeless romantic, but while I entirely agree that Garlan was in on Joffrey's murder, and that he was nice to Tyrion and Sansa out of policy, I think he can still keep that "Gallant".

After all Joffrey had to die, I think we all would agree, and if Tyrion ended up having to take the rap, well you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs, and Tyrion is no innocent but a full player of the Game of Thrones, and a Lannister. While Sansa brought her unfortunate fate on herself, despite the Tyrell attempt to save her, by blabbing of their plans for her.

While being nice to people can make them drop their guard, it also makes them happier and generally makes the world a better place. There is nothing wrong with being polite, paying compliments, offering consolation, and giving credit where it is due; even when talking to a pawn, opponent or potential enemy.

So, given Garlan seems to be someone who plays the Game of Thrones in a distinctly courteous way, I am happy for him to retain that "Gallant".

Ah yes, I think we have a disagreement here between the romanticists and the cynicists! :lol:

Given what we have seen so far though, there seems to be no given with how many of the Tyrells were actually involved in the murder of Joffrey, or how "in the know" the were about the blame being placed on Tyrion.

It's possible at least that the Tyrells did not fully anticipate that Tyrion would be the fall guy (also dragging Sansa with him). Especially considering the Dornish presence, Oberyn seems to think the blame was meant to fall on the Dornish (which again makes you question if Oberyn thought the Tyrells were behind the poisoning?). I won't go more into the Tyrion - Oberyn dynamic, but it may be something to check for in future chapters. I also can't recall if Tyrion considers the blame issue for the poisoning further in ADWD, as I seem to recall he is mostly drunk, but that may also be something to study.

We see that he is consumed by feeling unloved and unhappy during the actual purple wedding, and it affects his ability to think critically about his surroundings and people's motives. He's just too consumed with himself, here.

Man is the monster then.

I'm turning this round a bit because we can't say that all ASOIAF men are monstrous, one or two look fairly decent (ok, fairly decent relatively speaking by the standards of westeros) eg Davos, The Ned, Septon Meribald, the Elder Brother. I would include Septon Meribald's dog in that list but I don't think that it is definitive that Dog is male.

Interesting too to consider what makes man a monster. Tyrion of AGOT knew he was often viewed as a monster, but didn't view himself as one. The death of Joffrey and then Shae seem to be the turning points in his downward spiral towards "monsterdom". But what may then make him come out on the other side, and once again transform from a monster into a man? Or will he be content being both? (There you have me on the theme on reconciliation again.)

The real problem I have with your reasoning is that it unnecessarily runs the risk of inflating Fearless Leader's ego. Sheesh, we only just passed the 200 year anniversary of the War of 1812-- do you even know how to hold a grudge? Lyanna, you just aren't keeping up your side of this continental conflict. The John is a Lou and they don't even spell his name right. These people call cookies biscuits! Oh the humanity! Think of the children.

I shall have to busy myself with several Ave Maria later in penance and perhaps even don one of the by Fearless Leader recommended hairshirts. :lol:

Garlan is interesting as a character though, since from the few things we know, he comes off as a bit of a contradiction. Gallant and nice, yet rather greedy and not beyond using trickery. Had some more thoughts on Garlan and his mask/role, but other things are calling!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

The real problem I have with your reasoning is that it unnecessarily runs the risk of inflating Fearless Leader's ego. Sheesh, we only just passed the 200 year anniversary of the War of 1812-- do you even know how to hold a grudge? Lyanna, you just aren't keeping up your side of this continental conflict. The John is a Lou and they don't even spell his name right. These people call cookies biscuits! Oh the humanity! Think of the children.

*shamed faced* What war of 1812 do you speak of?

I thought the most exciting anniversary this year was the London Underground being 150 years old.

In terms of Tyrion not seeing, it should also be pointed out that while LF arranged the Jousting Dwarves knowing Tyrion would react to it, it does not appear that the guests were laughing at it to humiliate Tyrion, but because it was funny. Ironically as the performance ends with the Wolf jouster being shafted by the Baratheon one, to was more of an insult to the Starks. It is interesting to see how far Tyrion has put his blinkers on by this chapter. This may also crop up in the discussion of the next chapter when he is looking for witnesses in his defense and the proceedings at the trial.

@Lummel

Don't worry. Most men are secure in their masculinity (or at least the ones I know!) It's "Nice Guys" that are generally the ones to avoid (and for definition of Nice Guy, see http://www.heartless-bitches.com/rants/niceguys/niceguys.shtml)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not analyzing the seating arrangements and why they are that way really shows just how self absorbed Tyrion is here. He's gone from being blinded by his obsession with Cersei last book to being blinded by his own self pity here. At least he had enough awareness in Clash to notice LF was a danger. Even earlier when he notes LF was after Harrenhal for the marriage to Lysa he never connects any dots. He never recalls the hunger in LF's eyes when Tyrion made the Harrenhal offer and wonders how far back LF's scheme goes. He puts together that it wasn't Cersei or Jaime that tried to kill Bran but never thought enough about Harrenhal and the implications to question their involvement in Jon Arryn's death. He knows it was murder based on his questions to Pycelle. Tyrion could have used a seeing lesson or two from Syrio.

You tie this together very nicely, and I'm generally a sucker for textual evidence. Noting Garlan's omission on Olenna's list, connecting him to the Willas, and especially pointing out his rather ungallantly taking the fruits of victory over Tarly makes a very good case.

The real problem I have with your reasoning is that it unnecessarily runs the risk of inflating Fearless Leader's ego. Sheesh, we only just passed the 200 year anniversary of the War of 1812-- do you even know how to hold a grudge? Lyanna, you just aren't keeping up your side of this continental conflict. The John is a Lou and they don't even spell his name right. These people call cookies biscuits! Oh the humanity! Think of the children.

Garlan is interesting as a character though, since from the few things we know, he comes off as a bit of a contradiction. Gallant and nice, yet rather greedy and not beyond using trickery. Had some more thoughts on Garlan and his mask/role, but other things are calling!

There is another example of Garlan's willingness to assume a mask/role that I haven't seen brought up yet. In the final Sansa chapter in Clash, he's part of the Tyrell trio that makes the publicly brokered marriage alliance between his house and the Lannisters. As Sansa could so easily pick up, the entire thing was rehearsed, all of the characters were acting - and that includes Garlan. He was quite willing to play in a mummer's farce here to advance the cause of House Tyrell.

Also, to revisit something brought up at the end of the last thread, there is another tourney that was called off prematurely before it could end - Joff's nameday tourney at the beginning of Clash. In this case, it was Joff that made the decision to end it rather than dragon or animal. Perhaps, in this case, it was another form of beast or monster that cut it short. Interistingly, it ended before Lothur and Dontos could fight - two characters that would later go on to be a protector of Sansa in their own ways. This is also the very same tourney were Tyrion makes his grand entrance to KL and the Red Keep.

And also, Ragnorak, I live in the American South. Strong grudges remain 150 years later in some of these parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That seems to be typical of Tyrion, he's all on the surface and his insights seems more to be instinctual than intellectual. maybe I'm being unfair.

I don't think that Cersei pinning the blame on Tyrion was foreseeable from the Tyrell POV, and perhaps that goes some way to explaining the buttering up that Tyrion and Sansa get. You are less likely to point out the suspicious behaviour of people you like and trust.

Maybe they planned to pin the blame on Oberyn, there again people do choke to death on their pigeon pies. It is known.

And oi! Ragnorak, Lyanna's from the Realpolitik side of the Atlantic!

I don't know about monsterism, it was a thought spark off by Uncat, then again - Daenerys in ADWD "If they are monsters, than so am I" there is that conscious recognition of parts of the personality or potential in yourself that you don't want to acknowledge or are maybe scared of or dislike. If you wholly embrace those aspects then you are a monster, mayhaps, I'll thinking of a Tyrion quote but can't quite remember something like I'll be the twisted little monkey demon they think I am.

But that does point to that need for reconciliation, becoming whole, within a person that we've spoken about, definitely in learning to lead, I think earlier here too when we were talking about the different parts of Tyrion's personality.

ETA Rapsie this doesn't tell you what you need to know. But yes we burnt down their White House! Haha, how many times have you burnt down Parliament USA? Oh that's right ZERO!

ETA II one day USA you too will be post Imperial and will make the most of these kinds of things!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lummel

Don't worry. Most men are secure in their masculinity (or at least the ones I know!) It's "Nice Guys" that are generally the ones to avoid (and for definition of Nice Guy, see http://www.heartless.../niceguys.shtml)

Thank you for the link, textbook definition of nice guy. Your comment on most men reflect my observations as the vast majority are secure with who they are and their masculinity. The little boy underneath is no more real for men that the idea of a little girl underneath most women it seems.

That seems to be typical of Tyrion, he's all on the surface and his insights seems more to be instinctual than intellectual. maybe I'm being unfair.

Lummel, I'm trying to figure out an accurate way to describe when Tyrion is most accurate in his insights and when he misses the mark. Right now, I wonder how much his emotional response or state influence his understanding. As has been stated, his self-pity during the PW is having a strong influence on what he sees. Earlier in Clash with LF, he was enjoying his power and we saw little of that self-pity that we do in Storm, perhaps making his judgment a bit clearer. I don't want to jump to far in the future, but his observation of Brown Ben Plumm is pretty accurate as well - but again no emotional stake with that individual either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lummel, I'm trying to figure out an accurate way to describe when Tyrion is most accurate in his insights and when he misses the mark. Right now, I wonder how much his emotional response or state influence his understanding. As has been stated, his self-pity during the PW is having a strong influence on what he sees. Earlier in Clash with LF, he was enjoying his power and we saw little of that self-pity that we do in Storm, perhaps making his judgment a bit clearer. I don't want to jump to far in the future, but his observation of Brown Ben Plumm is pretty accurate as well - but again no emotional stake with that individual either.

Tyrion seems to be at his best when he is not constantly pondering himself. In Clash, he is very focused on dealing with problems: Stannis coming towards Kings Landing, rooting out betrayers in the ranks (Pycelle, vs Varys vs LF), battling Cersei and generally getting things done.

However, when we see him throughout ASOS, it gives an impression of a self obsessed person instead, focusing inward on his own, personal issues instead of on the world around him. I think Lummel's comment on him taking a lesson from Syrio with "See with your eyes" is a good one. In ACOK, Tyrion is far better at seeing things, but in ASOS, he is projecting, navel gazing and in general he's totally lost perspective, making him inefficient.

In ACOK, he's very astute in judging Littlefinger, for instance, and his treatment of Slynt I actually think is a point in Tyrion's favour, in general.

However, in ASOS, we have singer stew, the forced marriage to Sansa and Shae's and Tywin's murder. Those are hardly achievements compared to his upward arc in AGOT/ACOK.

EDIT: spelling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tyrion seems to be at his best when he is not constantly pondering himself. In Clash, he is very focused on dealing with problems: Stannis coming towards Kings Landing, rooting out betrayers in the ranks (Pycelle, vs Varys vs LF), battling Cersei and generally getting things done.

However, when we see him throughout ASOS, it gives an impression of a self obsessed person instead, focusing inward on his own, personal issues instead of on the world around him. I think Lummel's comment on him taking a lesson from Syrio with "See with your eyes" is a good one. In ACOK, Tyrion is far better at seeing things, but in ASOS, he is projecting, navel gazing and in general he's totally lost perspective, making him inefficient.

In ACOK, he's very astute in judging Littlefinger, for instance, and his treatment of Slynt I actually think is a point in Tyrion's favour, in general.

However, in ASOS, we have singer stew, the forced marriage to Sansa and Shae's and Tywin's murder. Those are hardy achievements compared to his upward arc in AGOT/ACOK.

I like this. So, perhaps a good way to summarize it would be to say that Tyrion is at his best when he is in a position to or is able to remove himself from his observations, leading to much more accurate insights - he's actually looking with his eyes rather than from an emotive state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this. So, perhaps a good way to summarize it would be to say that Tyrion is at his best when he is in a position to or is able to remove himself from his observations, leading to much more accurate insights - he's actually looking with his eyes rather than from an emotive state.

I think so.

Not to get ahead, but I think he has a similar path in ADWD. At first, we have the self pity, the wallowing, the navel gazing and Tyrion is a pretty horrible human being. Then once we get to an actual problem he can solve (escape the slavers, join the sellwords company) he's far better.

It mirrors his behaviour in ACOK and ASOS, it seems, in that Tyrion is a far more awesome presence when he is solving problems and focusing on "the job" instead of his "woe is me". Not trying to get ahead of the reread, but it may be a general theme to look out for: how Tyrion's personal issues, projections and focus on the internal get in the way of his efficiency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lummel - about the man is a monster theme. . . Women are just as monsterous in their own way. For example, with the three feminine archetypes presented to us through Martin's Seven, the beautiful maiden can easily twist into the hideous face of Medusa and turn men to stone, the loving mother, can turn quickly into Medea and slay her children, and the wise Crone, a witch wreaking hovac in every tale and myth across every continent in the world. Just as with three archetypes of men represented in the Faith, the threes types of women have a dark side. That's why there is only one Stranger who remains sexless. The Stranger, like death, represents the not only the unknown, but also that which we would prefer not to know.

Last night I watched The Iron Lady. I have no opinion about Thatcher as a PM, as I am not British. However, there was a line in the film that was powerful and true. (I am paraphrasing) It went something like, "we must focus on what we can do, rather than who we can be." In the case of Tyrion, as noted above, he's much less monsterous when his focus is on what he can do; the chain, the wildfire, the war, than when he is focusing upon who he can be, which more often than not includes a list of all of the things he cannot be; tall, handsome, Lord of Casterly Rock. . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Nice Guys" that are generally the ones to avoid (and for definition of Nice Guy, see http://www.heartless.../niceguys.shtml)

but, but, how come they know so much about me! :laugh:

...Also, to revisit something brought up at the end of the last thread, there is another tourney that was called off prematurely before it could end - Joff's nameday tourney at the beginning of Clash...

It's quite subtle because we don't, I think - maybe you all disagree - have any investment in those events we've mentioned, I don't think we really care about hearing all the seven singers or seeing the end of those tournaments. I suppose it works along the lines that GRRM has established a chapter in which he tells us to expect certain events - seven singers singing and a dancing bear...dancing. So we read on and expect nothing more than Tyrion wise cracking about the songs when of a sudden Joffrey chokes to death.

Personally now when characters tell us that something will happen I tend to suspect that it won't, so maybe I've become wise to the technique!

Tyrion seems to be at his best when he is not constantly pondering himself. In Clash, he is very focused on dealing with problems: Stannis coming towards Kings Landing, rooting out betrayers in the ranks (Pycelle, vs Varys vs LF), battling Cersei and generally getting things done...

Yes, but...we had a fair consensus that Tyrion was himself being played or wasting his time in ACOK.

I like what you and Kitty Kat Knits are saying about the external focus being sharp but the internal is self pitying, but, and I'm bumping my head here against the issue, that doesn't seem to be quite right if his focus is as off kilter as we thought in ACOK. Perhaps there is also an issue that he's not as clever as he thinks he is, or maybe it's the old Lannister arrogance and he can't imagine that anyone would try to manipulate him so he isn't suspicious of Varys?

...Last night I watched The Iron Lady. I have no opinion about Thatcher as a PM, as I am not British. However, there was a line in the film that was powerful and true. (I am paraphrasing) It went something like, "we must focus on what we can do, rather than who we can be." In the case of Tyrion, as noted above, he's much less monsterous when his focus is on what he can do; the chain, the wildfire, the war, than when he is focusing upon who he can be, which more often than not includes a list of all of the things he cannot be; tall, handsome, Lord of Casterly Rock. . . .

Urrgghh! Mrs T! Bane of my youth! :laugh:

What I like about that is the role that his emotion plays in clouding his judgement, oh woe is me, I'll never be lord of casterly rock boo hoo,

I don't know. Maybe my expectations of Tyrion's capacities are too high and that's my problem here :dunno:

ETA it wasn't me, at least I don't remember, who said that Tyrion needed to learn Syrio's lesson about looking. The credit for that is somebody else's (please step forward and collect your prize :) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bah! I feel like Tyrion looking for witnesses for my defense. When you women need to stick your precious shoes in a cupboard instead of a closet don't come crying to me. I'll be in a drunken stupor in Essos.

And also, Ragnorak, I live in the American South. Strong grudges remain 150 years later in some of these parts.

Nice catch on the marriage charade.

Somewhat off topic but I've always thought that the cultural differences we see between the North and South in Westeros had a bit of a post American Civil War feel. The sense of Nationalism then was loyalty to each State rather than the country as a whole which is a limited fuedal parallel. Even the army was composed of units from individual States unlike now. Robert E. Lee went with the South because Virginia did, not out of any affinity for the Confederacy or its cause much like personal loyalty trumps politics in Westeros. Arlington Cemetery is a bit of a Rains of Castamere on his old estate with a mix of Artos Stark making the Nights Watch bury the dead. We see a similar resentment to Reconstruction in places like the Riverlands where vassals have a grudging fealty to their newly imposed lords.

Dorne and The North have a bit more of a Texas First attitude. They have historically been more unified political entities where the borders of the other kingdoms have shifted far more in the past. Dorne stands out in that they have First Men, Andals, and the Rhoynish that seem to have integrated and unified in a way that the Seven Kingdoms have not. Even the smallfolk of Sunspear want the Sand Snakes released and revenge for Oberyn which is a contrast to the indifference Arya finds in Harrenhal. The idea of Tyrion taking Sansa North to rule Winterfell definitely has a "carpetbagger" feel to it. Far more political similarity than historical but the decentralized sense of loyalty and regional differences results in a similar dynamic and we see some of those strong grudges play out.

ETA Rapsie this doesn't tell you what you need to know. But yes we burnt down their White House! Haha, how many times have you burnt down Parliament USA? Oh that's right ZERO!

Those, Ser, would be fighting words were it not for my desire to see you do it again-- as long as you put the rest of the city to the torch while you're at it. I know how many Dornishman it takes to shoe a horse but not how many American politicians it takes to balance a checkbook. IIRC there's still grafitti carved by British soldiers in the White House-- in a fireplace I think but I don't recall what it says. Break out your family tree, Lummel. It might have been your great great great grandfather.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*shamed faced* What war of 1812 do you speak of?

Don't worry Rapsie, you weren't the only one :blushing:

About Tyrion’s self pity, I’ve been thinking on a point someone did in the last thread(sorry, can’t remember who it was) about Tyrion’s advice to Jon back in AGOT and how he himself doesn’t follow his own counsel. The advice was:

Never forget what you are, for surely the world will not. Make it your strength. Then it can never be your weakness. Armor yourself in it, and it will never be used to hurt you.

At first I thought too that this might be the case of Tyrion imparting wisdom he doesn’t necessarily live up to but this might not be entirely the case. For example, the way he made the name “half man” bestowed on him by the clansmen his own is a perfect example of Tyrion making strength out of his weakness. Is not a coincidence I think that this was a moment in which Tyrion was focusing on “what he could do” to take a nod from Blisscraft.

So in trying to see this from a different angle I wonder if Tyrion’s own advice doesn’t morphed into something more obscure instead as his story progresses. I don’t know if you notice but the number of times Tyrion laments his physical appereance in ASOS is increased in comparison with AGOT and ACOK. This of couse is related to his facial disfiguration, his father’s presence and Sansa. But I find that thoughts like the following:

Whatever you wear, you’re still a dwarf. You’ll never be as tall as that knight on the steps, him with his long straight legs and hard stomach and wide manly shoulders.

Are in a twisted way Tyrion reminding himself who and what he is, but he is doing it in a way in which he can take neither comfort nor strength from it thus removing the benefits that same assimilation of his condition as a dwarf brought him in times like those with the clansmen. Also notice, that along with the acceptance of his dwarfism Tyrion is focusing on what “he can never be” in the same sentence in opposite of what "he can do" as he did in ACOK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope she does not learn to taime that in way like Cersei, Shae and Ariane does...

But I can say as well, that tyrion is her lesson about sex and marriage, and her answer was that she does not want it with him. ANd the lesson with tyrion is that people will want to steal WF by marrying her, which we see she rejects and she does not want a marriage like that.

I actually think rather than learning to use men through their sexual desire, I think Sansa rejected that idea there, with her rejecting tyrion. So while I can see her charming people with her manners, personality, I don't think she will try to seduce them in the sheets, like Arianne or Shae does.

In a way if you think about it Sansa rejected Joffrey (altough she could not reject him openly. But her telling Marg is one as well), The Hound, when she didn't go with him, and tyrion.

So they are not simply lessons. In this scenario the beauty rejected all the beasts. She does not hate them, wish to die (she even felt somewhat bad for Joff), but she does not love them either.

Someone once said be careful who you pretend to be because you will become that person.

Both personalities are tyrions personalities, he is not just the abused little boy, but the adult who is capable to abuse others as well. And that is part of his real personality as well.

You know if we are talking about Greece, then tyrion is already doomed, since he killed his father.

Zeus with his numerous lovers, and his jealous wife Hera, reminds me more of Robert and Cersei.

Actually, he isn't. At least Tywin did absolute him from the sin of slaying his father (back, when he told him, that in the eyes of the gods, Tyrion is no son of his). Only the criminal charge remains and that can be dealt with. and then we know from the Nightfort Tales, that the Gods are really ok with a little kinslaying. The only thing, they really, really frwon upon is the guestright business :D

As for Sansa, I guess, I expressed poorly, what I meant. Sansa is not going to pull a Shea or Arianna. She saw into the poor, ugly and helpless little face wich hides behind the mummers garp - thank you for the picture - of power and manhood great men love to wear and she will never again let that impress her. I still am at a loss of words to tell, what I mean (and this really rarely happens to me). So sorry.

Oh, and I'm really not that bad as I may look in this posts. Really.

Just cross posting Uncat's reply to Silverin here in case anybody misses it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but...we had a fair consensus that Tyrion was himself being played or wasting his time in ACOK.

I like what you and Kitty Kat Knits are saying about the external focus being sharp but the internal is self pitying, but, and I'm bumping my head here against the issue, that doesn't seem to be quite right if his focus is as off kilter as we thought in ACOK. Perhaps there is also an issue that he's not as clever as he thinks he is, or maybe it's the old Lannister arrogance and he can't imagine that anyone would try to manipulate him so he isn't suspicious of Varys?

Oh, I don't mean to imply that Tyrion is a flawless hero in ACOK, but he's definitely in a better position mentally there, plus despite having to lean on Varys and getting "played" to a degree, he still gets a lot of things done and is comparably quite efficient. Plus had he had more time, I think LF would have met an untimely end, too.

What really stands out is his focus though, as it's almost completely external. He is looking more with his eyes, to use Syrio speech. In ASOS he is almost doing the opposite, in that he is constantly projecting and deluding himself in various ways, with the marriage, with how people view him, with his position, with inheriting Casterly Rock, etc.

That said, even ACOK Tyrion would not have managed to unseat Varys, I think, since Varys didn't show his hand that early. As of ADWD, Varys has showed his hand more, and to borrow LF's words: once you know what a man wants, you can move him. (Varys' version is perhaps more when you know what a man believes, but in this case I think for Varys, they are one and the same.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally now when characters tell us that something will happen I tend to suspect that it won't, so maybe I've become wise to the technique!

Lummel, I'm pretty certain this is the second rule of Martin. If a character says they are going to do something, it's a safe bet they aren't. There is also a correlation between the grandness and complexity of a statement and the decreasing likelihood of it actually happening.

Not to get ahead, but I think he has a similar path in ADWD. At first, we have the self pity, the wallowing, the navel gazing and Tyrion is a pretty horrible human being. Then once we get to an actual problem he can solve (escape the slavers, join the sellwords company) he's far better.

It mirrors his behaviour in ACOK and ASOS, it seems, in that Tyrion is a far more awesome presence when he is solving problems and focusing on "the job" instead of his "woe is me". Not trying to get ahead of the reread, but it may be a general theme to look out for: how Tyrion's personal issues, projections and focus on the internal get in the way of his efficiency.

Last night I watched The Iron Lady. I have no opinion about Thatcher as a PM, as I am not British. However, there was a line in the film that was powerful and true. (I am paraphrasing) It went something like, "we must focus on what we can do, rather than who we can be." In the case of Tyrion, as noted above, he's much less monsterous when his focus is on what he can do; the chain, the wildfire, the war, than when he is focusing upon who he can be, which more often than not includes a list of all of the things he cannot be; tall, handsome, Lord of Casterly Rock. . . .

Yes, but...we had a fair consensus that Tyrion was himself being played or wasting his time in ACOK.

I like what you and Kitty Kat Knits are saying about the external focus being sharp but the internal is self pitying, but, and I'm bumping my head here against the issue, that doesn't seem to be quite right if his focus is as off kilter as we thought in ACOK. Perhaps there is also an issue that he's not as clever as he thinks he is, or maybe it's the old Lannister arrogance and he can't imagine that anyone would try to manipulate him so he isn't suspicious of Varys?

Urrgghh! Mrs T! Bane of my youth! :laugh:

What I like about that is the role that his emotion plays in clouding his judgement, oh woe is me, I'll never be lord of casterly rock boo hoo,

I don't know. Maybe my expectations of Tyrion's capacities are too high and that's my problem here :dunno:

ETA it wasn't me, at least I don't remember, who said that Tyrion needed to learn Syrio's lesson about looking. The credit for that is somebody else's (please step forward and collect your prize :) )

Perhaps there are two separate issues at play here? The internal focus, the navel gazing keeps Tyrion from being able to act or do. In Clash, from the very beginning he had an agenda and marching orders which kept that navel gazing at bay. There was little time for woe is me in between replacing Slynt, building the chain, and all the many tasks that would have consumed his time. He was able to do but that's not the same as saying he won't also be a pawn in the games of others or that he doesn't have a flaw that renders him immune to manipulation either. I guess what I'm trying to say is that an ability to function doesn't lead to a 100% success rate by default. So, essentially, we are talking about why he can't act (the be as Blisscraft put it so well) and why he isn't always getting it right when he is actually doing.

Also, back to the internal and navel gazing, it occurs to me that paying attention to this focus could provide big clues as to where Tyrion as a character is going in the series. LS pointed out what happened in Dance and I think that pattern could repeat itself when Winds comes out. Tyrion was at his best in Clash when he was focused outward. Tyrion's self-pity was pretty strong almost from his first paragraphs in Storm, laying the groundwork for his story in the rest of the book. It would not surprise me that his emotional state at any point in time will provide strong clues as to how he may behave or react in future chapters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Kittykatknits and Lyanna nailed Tyrion's blindness pretty well between that which emotionally impacts him and the internal vs external focus or work vs navel gazing. It may even just be that the work distracts him from his emotions. I would largely attribute his main deficiencies in Clash to his emotional state regarding Cersei. Nobody is perfect but he would have been played far less without the emotionally charged Cersei conflict.

There is also a school of thought that says intellectuals make good advisors but bad leaders or executives because they get mired in the intricacies of the problem at the expense of acting on it. Stannis and his plan to attack the Dreadfort is a good example of the opposite of this. Jon gives Stannis a host of concerns that may have set a man like Tyrion's wheels spinning in contemplation. Stannis knows he can't sit idle at the Wall and has to act. There is a binary choice of acceptable or unacceptable risk regardless of the fascinating set of complexities to be contemplated. He's open to an alternative action but not to brooding over possibilities instead of acting. We see some of this overthinking in Tyrion such as when he contemplates putting Varys, LF and Pycelle's heads on spikes. While it seems to be a bit of a factor I think the emotions and navel gazing is still the real root of his problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...