Lord Lannister

Members
  • Content count

    4,811
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lord Lannister

  • Rank
    Hear Me Purr
  • Birthday 09/17/1982

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Enchanted Rock

Recent Profile Visitors

4,004 profile views
  1. This has a lot of large obstacles to overcome. Tywin might be interested in reaching an accommodation with Robb, but Cersei and Joffrey definitely were not. As a Clash of Kings clearly showed, there was a definite misalignment in both political and military strategy between King's Landing and the Lannister forces in the field. For this to have any chance, Robb would have to present his independence demands directly to Tywin rather than to King's Landing. Tywin of course isn't going to agree to them, but might see them as a starting point for negotiations. The terms you suggest might be reasonable, from Tywin's point of view, save for the abdication of Joffrey. That could very well represent a loss of face that is intolerable, coupled with the detail that Joffrey and Cersei would never agree to it and Tywin would have to overthrow them with force to enforce this. Which brings us back to Robb. His reaction to the counteroffer is almost certainly going to be indignation. Tywin and company get off freely for burning the Riverlands, He's already engaged to the Frey girl at this point, which for irony would be the primary reasoning behind his declining, and the Northern lords aren't going to tolerate submitting to the Lannisters, just to get entangled in a war against the Baratheons. Even if Catelyn for some reason were to encourage Robb to accept this, we all know Robb has no problem with going against his family's advice. Especially since Renly would seem to be a better candidate to reach an accommodation with. His offer was actually better.
  2. I always thought the fantasy elements of the series were it's weakest parts. The political drama, maneuvering and compelling characters were what hooked me.
  3. Based on what I saw on the screen, the Lannister army was far more impressive than the Dothraki mob. Individually, they're better fighers sure. But there's no cohesive units or formations so the collective whole is a lot less. The Lannisters were literally ambushed and with less than a minutes warning were able to get into cohesive battle lines to face their enemy. Then when literally confronted with a destructive creature of legend, they stood their ground and fought effectively as circumstances allowed. The Dothraki were only as effective as they were because they outnumbered their foe vastly(despite some beliefs, only a fraction of the Lannister forces were there) and they had a dragon blasting huge holes into their line. Even sized forces, the Westerosi would easily win the day.
  4. Naturally this is a result of the compressed season more than anything. Still it's disappointing. They could've easily gotten another episode or two without much more expense just by letting the dialogue flow a bit more naturally. Some of the most interesting conversations and character moments have been when people are randomly traveling. I should've liked to see Euron gloat over Yara's imprisonment or victory over Dany's fleet at Casterly Rock. Dickon and Randyll getting some moments to discuss their shifting allegiances and maybe even Sam and Heartsbane. Jaime and Bronn planning their moves after Highgarden's fall further, Theon planning to rescue his sister, maybe even some more scenes wit Jon. Tyrion and Davos having any sort of conversation enroute, Gendry should have something to say to a Lannister also. To say nothing of the short scenes that could be expanded upon. Jaime and Tyrion should've had much more to say during their reunion. So much missed potential this season.
  5. No, that didn't even cross my mind until I read this. I'm pretty critical of some of the choices she's been making this season, but this seems outright character assassination for it's own sake.
  6. While I'm of the opinion that a monarch that's supposed to be a protagonist shouldn't need advisors telling her, "Maybe you shouldn't do evil things if you don't want people to think you're evil," she has listened most of the time this season. The only time she really blatantly dismissed the advice of her counsel was with the execution of the Tarlys. The rest of the season she has let Tyrion change or moderate her approach to problems.
  7. Skilled orator? This season she's sounding like a pull string doll that says "Bend the knee" every time you pull it.
  8. How Dany treats (f)Aegon will be revealing. Having been told to beware the mummer's dragon though, I don't expect for a moment she'll embrace him, given he threatens her claim to the Iron Throne. The same will go for Jon. If she finds out about his lineage, his claim threatens hers. If she doesn't, he's just the bastard of one of the "Usurper's dogs." In her head there's no difference between Tywin Lannister and Ned Stark. Hardly the foundation of a great romance. I don't see Dany entering a marriage where she's not the dominant figure in it at this point.
  9. Seems to me it's just Martin being cute while reminding the reader the real threat is still looming. Given dragonglass is supposed to be "frozen fire" I would imagine fire wouldn't be good for the Others. It's just often a moot point given the severe cold of the Others often extinguishes any flame. In cases of extreme heat like wildfire or dragonfire, I imagine the results wouldn't be good for the Others. All this exchange really reminds me of is how much more interesting the political maneuvering is in the novels than the fantasy elements.
  10. No it wasn't invented in the 20th century. It was entirely possible to be a moral person in antiquity, but societal perceptions of what is and isn't moral were very different then. For example, citing your thought of religious text, the Bible gives you instructions on how to treat your slaves. That was one of the South's biggest arguments for advocating it during the antebellum period. Education was less advanced in those times, so people were raised with the notion that things we would find objectionable today were perfectly acceptable. Coming up with the original notion that maybe this perfectly acceptable thing isn't, applying it to your life, and getting the rest of society to go along with it is a difficult and often time consuming endeavor. Often taking entire generations, if not more and resulting in violent upheaval when it begins effecting livelihoods and power bases. So when Ned Stark expects Catelyn to be completely obedient to him, it doesn't make him an evil person, it means Westerosi society still has a long way to go. There's a huge difference between how Ned treated his wife and how Ramsay Bolton treats his wife even if both sets of behavior stem from the same societal expectation that the ladies of the realm serve the men.
  11. I would point out that applying modern day morality to a medieval setting is an exercise in futility. Cultural morality, along with every other facet of culture, is something that evolves over time as a society progresses. You're going to find something to hate about every character in the book just about. But if that's how you derive your enjoyment from the story, then have fun with it. To Tyrion, yes he's one of my favorite characters. Is he morally gray? Definitely. I would definitely term him something for of an anti-hero. He's not pure as fallen snow as the show makes him out to be, but he's not the main villain of the series as others want to make him out to be. He spends the first three novels of the series, on the side of the primary antagonists in the series, thrown into a corrupt political system where viciousness is required to avoid ending up like Ned Stark. He's usually never actively cruel unless his perceived survival is at stake or he's being deliberately slighted. That marks the difference between him and someone like Joffrey or Cersei to me. I didn't much enjoy him in Dance as I did the first three novels(though I didn't enjoy Feast or Dance as much as I enjoyed the first three novels either). I see where Martin's going with this, him having lost everything literally and the bubble that partially shielded him from a world that was already very cruel to him was brutally burst. He's left with literally nothing and trying to figure out what truly matters to him now that the rest is gone. He could end up becoming a true hateful villain from this, or end up gravitating towards the better things in life. It's what makes him a compelling character that he manages to touch upon both ends of the emotional spectrum so vividly.
  12. I'll give it to Jon. He managed to be a badass without compromising the family values. Unless anyone thinks butchering two men, and serving their remnants to their father and who else knows, an honorable deed worthy of House Stark and not just as bad as anything the Freys did.
  13. That bizzzness ( ), would only make his death guaranteed. We all know every moment of joy in ASoIaF is bought with a moment of pain ten times worse.
  14. Should he? They probably could make one another happy. Will he? To paraphrase, if you think Jon's going to have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
  15. The five year gap would've made a lot more sense. In Feast/Dance virtually every major character is in a state of transition. Arya: Instead of currently training to be a Faceless Man, she could actually be one and ready to move on. Bran: Similarly, he could've learned much in how to master his greenseeing by now and is now ready to face his destiny. Dany: The whole Mereenese knot could be untangled off screen, with Dany transitioning in five years later as a successful ruler who overcame a lot. Not to mention her dragons are grown now and ready to dance. Sansa: Her time at the Vale, under Littlefinger's tutelage was productive and she emerges ready to play the game in her own right, possibly married to Sweetrobin or Harry the Heir. Tyrion: Instead of spending an entire novel feeling sorry for himself and traveling, he could've been a slave for years, perhaps setting himself up as the head of the Second sons or he could already be an integral part of either Aegon or Dany's forces, having regained the will to live. Cersei: Maintains a weak grasp on the Seven Kingdoms through Tommen, who is also growing up and growing even more infatuated with Margaery. Jaime: No reason his Riverlands plot couldn't be resolved off screen or wait until the five year gap progresses. Five years is a long time to slowly become even more discontented with his relationship with Cersei. The North: Upon arriving at the wall, there's no reason Stannis couldn't take years to raise an army capable of taking the North at the Wall, trying to win the support of the Northern houses and Iron Bank from Castle Black, Deepwood Motte or even White Harbor. Building from scratch can take a long time, and given both he and Roose have limited forces, it could be understandable that neither would want to commit to a decisive battle. Sam: He's probably a full maester in his own right in five years. Jon: We come to him in five years, secure in his role as Lord Commander, a man and not a boy. He turned down Stannis, and has been colonizing the wildlings in the Gift, with some success, much to the discontent of many of his Brothers. While much of the 4th novel would be catching up and dedicated to backstory, much like the first really, the story would advance and the 5th everyone would be moving ahead full swing. You still could introduce the Ironborn and Dornish characters on different terms as well. As things stand I just get the feeling the final two novels are going to be forced in their effort to tie up all the loose plot ends since we spent a full two novels on transition.