Jump to content

(TWOIAF Spoilers) Bloodraven almost as ruthless as Tywin


Mr Hodor

Recommended Posts

what stuck me the most about Bloodraven was that he nearly as ruthless as Tywin.


Admittedly he had to rule over an unstable kingdom but hanging men who spoke out against him, tearing down whitewalls and having the ground salted, and capture of Dameon II was something that Tywin would do.


To top that was the execution of Aenys Blackfyre and presenting his head to probable rebels is quite close to red wedding (from blackfyre point of view) even if guest rights were not violated.


So why is it that Bloodraven is usually liked by Tywin universally hated? Perhaps it is because of his obsession with Tyrion.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

The people of his time did hate Bloodraven. And in turn, he hated them.

Aenys Blackfyre is one person... Tywin killed hundreds, thousands.

Aenys is nothing compared to that. Only because it was treachery was it bad.

I mean why do fans hate Tywin and not bloodraven

He gave us Egg on the Throne, Tywin gave us Joffrey [emoji6]

:idea:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that Bloodraven was nearly ruthless as Tywin. Just compare how Bloodraven dealt with Butterwell and how Tywin dealt with Reynes and Tarbecks.

Better example would be how he dealt with House Peake. First they lost two of the tree castles and later the leader was executed.

Also most lords did not lose their heads because of leniency of Baelor Breakspear and later Aerys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better example would be how he dealt with House Peake. First they lost two of the tree castles and later the leader was executed.

Also most lords did not lose their heads because of leniency of Baelor Breakspear and later Aerys.

Lord Peake was executed because it was second time he tried to rebel. But other members of house Pyke stay in power otherwise they would loose their last castle too, so Bloodraven wasn't ruthless as he could bewith House Peake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He certainly was no lamb. In fact he does sound like a ruthless anx tyrannical ruler. I agree that the execution of Aenys Blackfyre is on the level of the Red Wedding. He gave his word of safe passage and pissed on it. Without going to motivations though, there is a difference of scale and collateral damage. Compared to Tywin, Bloodraven was surgical and there is no mentions of him revertinng to wholesale slaughter, collective punishment, or employing psychopaths like the Mountain or the Bloody Mummers. Bloodraven defeated, subdued and killed his enemies by any means neccessary. He didn't annihilate them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lord Peake was executed because it was second time he tried to rebel. But other members of house Pyke stay in power otherwise they would loose their last castle too, so Bloodraven wasn't ruthless as he could bewith House Peake.

Did lady Peake take three members of House Targaryen prisoner and threatened to kill them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like both characters. I think too that they are similar, but a difference is that Bloodraven was under a king and couldn't do anything what he wanted, if he could he made more people die etc. so he was kept on a tighter leash than Tywin. And Tywin by beeing childhood friend of the king and one of the most powerful lords (or THE most powerful) he did what he wanted.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just as ruthless, but a lot smarter as well. He knew when to use force and when a decisive and ruthless moves were necessary and when his goals could be accomplished by other means. He doesn't commit atrocities just because he could and it doesn't appear to have been his first choice either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never got the BR love. I guess some people must love the thought of a strong ruler controlling everything while they tug their forelocks and act worthy. Although I do hope it is just because many have assumed that BR is going to help Jon or Bran (or Egg), rather than just use them, but then that is still supporting immoral behaviour just because it helps your side.



Also people find power really attractive. Some readers want BR to be able to save their beloved characters without them having to suffer for it. Some also want there to have been someone watching over everyone and pulling the strings which would give an easy answers to difficult questions regarding how some of the characters have acted. People assume that BR has infinite power and has been influencing everything, completely ignoring Qhorin's line "the trees have eyes again" which indicates that the weirwood has been powered down for some time meaning that BR has not been able to practise his greenseering properly until quite recently and certainly won't of been playing the game in any serious way before the start of the books. I don't think BR is going to provide easy solutions to any of the problems in the books.



We also have the fact that BR was on the winning side in the Blackfyre rebellions and the winners write history. Is Bloodraven really any different to Bittersteel other than the side he chose? Would Westeros really have been terrible under the Blackfyres compared to the Targs? Egg's nice but so is Daemon Blackfyre II.



Even without the murders BR was running a surveillance state where people expected to be watched everywhere all the time and anything they said could be used as a reason to execute them. Maybe readers are just so used to freedom, and telling everyone their thoughts willingly over the internet, they don't realise why that might be a bad thing.



I really can't see GRRM having anything good coming from BR in the main books. GRRM has a practical, rather than a romantic, view of how government and power works. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Tree/BR ain't going to be a good guy.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

We also have the fact that BR was on the winning side in the Blackfyre rebellions and the winners write history. Is Bloodraven really any different to Bittersteel other than the side he chose? Would Westeros really have been terrible under the Blackfyres compared to the Targs? Egg's nice but so is Daemon Blackfyre II.

BR is actually worse. Way worse. Bittersteel never committed atrocities, BR did it all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We also have the fact that BR was on the winning side in the Blackfyre rebellions and the winners write history. Is Bloodraven really any different to Bittersteel other than the side he chose?

Tree/BR ain't going to be a good guy.

:agree:

Seeing what Aerys did I doubt the Blackfyres would have made worse kings.

Bitttersteel was more honorable than Bloodraven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...