Jump to content

cpg2016

Members
  • Content count

    569
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About cpg2016

  • Rank
    Noble

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. cpg2016

    House Frey: Robb's Offer vs. Tywin's offer

    Robb was winning. Remember, the Freys are ready to turn on Robb even before he marries Jeyne. It's quite clear that Tywin is making this offer long before Robb's position becomes untenable (and, lets be clear, even post-Blackwater Robb's position isn't "unwinnable"). Besides which, Tywin is offering status quo ante bellum plus a "meh" offer in marrying into House Darry (not a particularly notable House) and a decent catch in Daven Lannister. Robb is offering (on his second marriage offer) a marriage into the Lord Paramount of the Riverlands and into the royal family. And what's the downside if the Freys keep fighting? Not much, honestly. Tywin's belief is in lending a hand up to those who bend the knee, so Walder has a limited downside (not going to be Reyne-d, basically). Especially because of the very close family ties; for the sake of his nephews, Tywin is going to keep House Frey in power. Actually this isn't necessarily true. And this goes to your continuing lack of understanding of feudal politics. Riverrun is a small-ish castle, well protected, but not particularly well-endowed with lands and holdings. It's significance comes from the fact that it's the seat of House Tully. Having a half-Frey Lord Paramount of the Riverlands is more important than Riverrun, especially when everyone in-universe acknowledges that Riverrun is a poisoned prize. House Frey has both the power and the marital connections to make itself the greatest House in the combined North/Riverlands realm with those marriages. They're already among the most powerful Houses in that "kingdom", and with that kind of favor they're unquestionably in "most favored" status. No, you don't understand. Cat has no authority to marry off her son, either. Walder drops a couple strong hints that what he wants is a marriage into House Tully; at this point, marrying Robb is not as attractive a possibility to Walder as marrying Edmure, and if Robb pulls Edmures chestnuts out of the fire (as he does), that is how he can force Edmure to accept the marriage as well. Cat should know this, too. The reaction in-universe also makes it clear that Catelyn gave up too much. Yeah sorry that's my mistake, was thinking about the Lannister's lack of fidelity in general, not towards the Freys specifically. Darry is a weak House, far weaker than many others that Walder has gotten his kids married into. And marrying into the female line isn't particularly important; all that the Lannisters really give up, there, is a potentially-bigger dowry. Yes, of course I am. Under Robb's terms, the Freys get a half-Frey Lord Paramount of the Riverlands. About the only better thing to get is the actual Lordship over the Riverlands. I mean, Walder doesn't need the benefit of hindsight - he sacrifices all credibility and honor and it isn't a secret in Westeros what comes of breaking the taboo of guest right. This was all 100% foreseeable. And breaking that ancient tradition, stronger than law, is part and parcel of his deal with Tywin. If you want to weigh the offers, then you HAVE to weigh that. Your point is that while Walder had less to gain from Tywin's offer, he also ensured that he would lose nothing, whereas Robb's offer was better (it was, by the way) but entailed more risk. But the fact that House Frey is going to be hunted like animals for the rest of the series is unquestionably something Walder could and should know is coming. So the fact that he won't hold Riverrun, that his kids and grandkids are going to be murdered, and that everything he gained will be stripped away... that all has to gbe factored in as well. That is NOT a "benefit of hindsight" thing, or not entirely.
  2. cpg2016

    House Frey: Robb's Offer vs. Tywin's offer

    For what it's worth, even the second offer the Freys get from Robb is better than Tywin's. A marriage into the Tully's AND the Starks makes them the effective third family in the Riverlands/North. It's also pretty clear that Walder Frey was angling from the outset to arrange a marriage to Edmure, and that Catelyn bungled that initial negotiation by offering Robb's hand. As many of the characters in universe say, Tywin has given the Freys a pretty raw deal. He screws them over with the whole "Joy/joy" thing. He gives them a poison pill of a castle in Riverrun, because he doesn't actually hold it at the time and it's traditional holder is still alive. He doesn't give them overlordship of the Riverlands. So really all they get are a couple of dynastically unimportant marriages, a castle they'll struggle to hold, and a chance at revenge. In return, they're earning the long term enmity of every other person in Westeros and a reputation for absolute unreliability. Far from being comparable to Robb's deal, this is actively bad negotiating on the part of Walder Frey. He comes out well the loser here. In addition to all that, he also is being required to contribute his levies far afield in order to maintain Lannister power, leaving him with less manpower to defend his newly won castles and lands.
  3. Seems pretty obvious. The Frey/Bolton forces are led by a man known for being rash and stupid. Stannis is sitting on top of/next to a frozen lake, which we've already had lampshaded is being ice fished. He's going to use the weakened ice and the snow and terrain and lure the Freys into a trap, the same as he lured Victarion off Fair Isle in the Greyjoy Rebellion. The Freys are meant to charge in across the lake which they don't know is there, have their cavalry fall through the ice and die, and the Manderlys will change sides and massacre the rest. The Pink Letter is probably authentically from Ramsay. Seems pretty clear from his character arc, personality, and souring relationship with Roose that he'll kill his father and be taken in by a ruse from some of the returning Manderly men that Stannis is dead and the battle won (because we know Ramsay has no caution) and immediately taunt Jon about it. Stannis will sneak into the castle through the massive Chekhov's Gun of the tunnels under Winterfell, and hold the castle once the Wall comes down. There will be no Battle of the Bastards, which was a stupid, poorly executed, and poorly plotted fiction the show cooked up along with all the other shitty television Benioff and Weiss decided to broadcast over the last few seasons.
  4. cpg2016

    Did Tywin have to kill Rheagar's children

    His little chat with Tyrion makes it pretty clear. He's not upset about the murders, but about the manner in which they were done. He doesn't rebuke Tyrion for asking if he ordered their deaths, only for asking if he thought he ordered their rapes as well. It's the same thing. He's the commander of that army - if the city is sacked, it's his fault. And since everyone in universe holds Tywin responsible, we should too. The city opened its gates peacefully and was sacked anyway; that is 100% on him. Words are wind. And Robert's relief was palpable. As stupid as he was, even he knew that Rhaegar's children had to die if his throne was ever to be secure. Yet he saw himself as a hero, and heroes do not kill children. Robert would have been uneasy killing children. It is much easier to say that than to do it. How many times have you thought or said "I could kill him/her"? How often have you killed someone in cold blood? Yeah... Sure, I agree, and it sucks that the exigencies of politics got in the way... but what does this have to do with the main thrust? Tywin, not Robert, is responsible for what happened during the Sack.
  5. cpg2016

    Did Edmure save Robb's Life?

    The point of the exercise was to take the war to the Westerlands and harry Tywin Lannister's home base. As a feudal lord, Robb and all his vassal lords would well know that harrying the West would force Tywin to come home; if he cannot defend his vassals land, he violates his feudal responsibilities and will lose his army and authority. Defeating Stafford's host at Oxcross is the immediate goal in the larger plan; without that army, there is nothing to keep Robb from sacking castles and towns at will, meaning Tywin has to come back west. Your summer working as a bookie has been wasted. Perhaps you should have read a bit in your spare time to understand what "winning" and "losing" means. If Kings Landing falls, Tywin loses the war. Full stop. No ifs, ands, or buts. If you cannot understand this, you need to reread the books. If KL is sacked, Cersei dies, Joffrey dies, Tyrion dies, and Jaime is now a prisoner who Tywin has no one to trade for (maybe Tommen and Myrcella survive). Which means Tywin loses. His war aims are to preserve his grandchildren on the throne. If he fails in that, he loses. You don't have much of a brain so you've constructed all these other scenarios, all of which also mean Tywin loses. Note I didn't say "Robb wins" which is the point you are arguing (because you are mostly illiterate, it seems). And the last scenario is the most absurd. These people don't have cars or teleporters. It takes months to travel those distances, and as it is, Tywin makes it back east literally in the nick of time. Another day later and he loses the war. Beating Stannis does not mean winning, if Joffrey and two of his children die. I'm not sure how "defend Riverrun" is vague. What would be more specific? If he said "defend your lands," that would be vague. He was told to hold a single, specific castle, and ONLY that single, specific castle. It is not possible, and I mean that literally, to be more specific. And Robb is most certainly not clueless on the Tyrells position, since the first thing he says on coming back was "I told you not to stop Tywin specifically so that Stannis would take Kings Landing," showing he has a good understanding of the political situation - that the Tyrells have no reasonable claim to the throne after Renly's death and they can only help the Lannisters at that point. And his whole effing plan is to have Tywin head back, which is why his orders allow for that to happen! Edmure is a young aristocrat hungry for glory and to make up for earlier failures in a society where martial prowess is the highest form of social currency. He sees his nephew hailed as a hero and military genius and wants some of that action, as he himself says. That is why he disobeys a direct order. This cannot be clearer. His instruction is highly specific and unambiguous. The only defense anyone has of Edmure is that Robb should have shared the full plan with him, which isn't even a defense of Edmure, and anyway the problems with that should be obvious on their face. Except we know they didn't, because Robb stacks both Ashemark and the Crag, which shouldn't be possible, really, with well-garrisoned castles. The Greatjon captures a bunch of gold mines. Maege Mormont raids the coast. You know what that sounds like? Like a bunch of armies, free to roam at will, capturing what should be well defended locations (castles, mines) and burning everything else. Here's the thing. Between Tywin and Jaime, huge portions of the Westerlands have been mobilized. There are no soldiers left. Not literally, but in any scale at all. Hence why Stafford's force at Oxcross is all sellswords and raw young men from Lannisport. All of the main levies have been called up. Tywin doesn't have a reserve of garrisoned forces to call upon, they're all fighting with him in the Riverlands. You are aware that Robb is with a big honkin army, and not doing all of this literally by himself, right? And that Tywin is reacting not to Robb's presence, but the presence of that big army burning the shit out of his vassals' lands and peasants and goods, right? Cuz it doesn't seem like you understand that, at all. Robb has lots of commanders, who, aside from Edmure, seem to get the big picture - get Tywin away from Kings Landing so Stannis can do his thing. Not the case. You have an incredibly bad sense of how easy it is to supply a large army on the move, which is why it rarely happened from the fall of Rome til the Early Modern Era. Tywin can't just stop in a town and go to the grocery store; it requires massing food stores which might not exist or be in readiness, and Robb can just as easily sack the town collecting it as Tywin can stop there for the night. Again, horses don't grow on trees, there aren't thousands of spare mounts lying around in random towns in the West. Owning and provisioning and stabling a horse is such an expensive proposition that it requires being given a bunch of land and its tax revenues to do it. And Robb doesn't need to build super well protected camps; he's noted to be uncompromising about his scouting, and if he's with a force comprised purely of cavalry, the Westerners won't be able to catch him. And Robb can go around the road, you know? And again, there aren't "many garrisons" of the West, which is why Robb's armies have such success in doing whatever the fuck they want after Oxcross. You don't think that those garrisons would be defending castles and mines and herds and lands as Robb is ravaging them? Of course they would, that is their point. The fact that they don't is because they don't exist.
  6. Has he? I'd like to read that interview quote, I couldn't find it. There is nothing about Daeron I that says "obsessed with war and conquest". Again, his society places a huge emphasis on war and martial pursuits. But beyond that, he was literate and wrote a book, something many noblemen are unable to do, which certainly rounds out his character beyond "obsessed with war". He was facing a difficult domestic situation, in that the power of the Targaryen monarchy had been dealt a shattering blow with the death of the last dragons. Resuming the conquest of Dorne would be a powerful message about the viability of the monarchy in the absence of draconic power. So there is no reasonable way to conclude that Daeron was insane or mad. And as we see again and again and again, the Marcher Lords and the Reachmen especially don't need to be "forced" to accept a war against Dorne - the Stormlands and the Reach had been more or less constantly at war with the Dornish neighbors for thousands of years.
  7. A desire for conquest isn't "mad" and especially not in the context of an explicitly martial feudal aristocracy. But to the bigger question, neither Rhaenyra nor Aegon II were mad, in the sense that they were insane. They were both stupid, greedy, vain, and cruel people who put their own desires ahead of the welfare of, well... everyone.
  8. cpg2016

    Did Tywin have to kill Rheagar's children

    Both of them are 100% not responsible. Tywin is rightly considered to have given the order, and his detractors are suspicious of his denials, because of his actions! First off, he has a carefully cultivated reputation as a man willing to commit serious war crimes and escalate violence in a major way to make his "enemies" fear him. For example, his ordering of the Sack of Kings Landing despite the city peacefully opening its gates is a major black mark against him here. His argument that Elia and her kids die in the confusion is obvious bullshit, because the "confusion" was entirely of his own making anyway, even if he doesn't directly order the murders. Second, his actions after the murders. He presents the bodies as gifts to Robert, wrapped in Lannister cloaks. This is an explicit endorsement of not only their deaths, but the manner in which they died. He is literally cloaking the murders in Lannister colors. Nothing stopped him from reporting on their unfortunate and accidental death. No, he wrapped up his own Lannister image in their corpses, and a more clear declaration of intent and endorsement cannot be imagined. So even without knowing whether Tywin told Gregor and Amory Lorch to kill Elia and her kids (and he all but admits that he did to Tyrion), he deliberately creates the conditions in which such a murder can happen, and condones and trumpets the results. As he says, he didn't really need them killed so brutally, but that's not a defense. Robert, by contrast, never orders the deaths of those two and its noted a few times that he would have been uncomfortable with the thought of murdering children. Tywin was 100% NOT Robert's subordinate at this time, so even that already-stupid argument should be discarded. That Robert's life was made easier by their death (and that was the whole point of Tywin killing them, as he lampshades) does not imply responsibility or intent. There needs to be some indication that Tywin was acting on Robert's orders or expressed wishes for Robert to bear responsibility here, and that is explicitly not the case. And since Tywin is not a vassal or subordinate or even ally of Robert's at this point, not even to the tiniest degree, Robert bears no responsibility even in the sense that the actions of a subordinate flow up the chain of command.
  9. It's got nothing to do with his potential status as a royal heir (he's not, by the way) threatening her kids. The threat is more visceral and more immediate; if word gets out that Jon is Rhaegar's kid, Robert will kill him. He may very well kill Ned for hiding it. And that would directly, physically, endanger Catelyn's children. Cat is already self-conscious about Jon's ability to keep her own kids from inheriting, which Ned knows. If he spills the beans to Cat to assuage her as to his fidelity, she might betray that secret for the sake of her children. Even if she doesn't do it willingly, it still threatens Ned's entire family, the one thought he cannot abide.
  10. cpg2016

    Disscusion on the Golden Company

    They could try. But all of a sudden they have all the expenses of governance, as well as paying their fighting men, and the enmity of several powerful, populous, and rich city-states all gunning for them. Instead of asking "why not", ask "why". What do the top members gain? They now bear significant personal responsibility for the governance and upkeep of their new domain. They gain a number of prominent enemies, all of whom are vastly more powerful than they are. And they take on significant complication in terms of balancing the competing needs of their fellow soldiers who now need to be appeased with lands and titles. Whereas, as a mercenary company, they have none of those responsibilities and risks, and still can earn significant coin while holding out for a potential return to Westeros.
  11. cpg2016

    Did Edmure save Robb's Life?

    As Robb says, his force was entirely horse, which means he doesn't have to give battle, and the entire point of the exercise was to draw Tywin away from King's Landing long enough for the capital to fall, meaning Tywin would lose the war. Robb doesn't have to fight.
  12. cpg2016

    Could Rhaegar have fought for the other side?

    But Maggy the Frog isn't making the new love potions. Again, this is another example of you taking whatever the hell you want to be true, and asserting it is. Whereas you are an absolute skeptic on anything else. Rhaegar accosts Lyanna with a bunch of armed men, and then Lyanna is stuck in a tower on the far side of the continent with an armed guard to keep her there, where she dies. You say that all of that is suspect, and that we cannot ascribe any facts or even motivations to the characters involved, and yet the fact that Maggy the Frog was capable of predicting Cersei's future is ironclad evidence that her granddaughter is capable of making working love potions? I'm not even saying that isn't possible. But your standards for what you accept and what you don't are downright stupid. Show me that text. Here is what I see. Robb and Jeyne are having sex, at least once a day and often more. He is only happy when he's with her and her family. He's genuinely upset to be leaving her, and touched when she reciprocates the feeling, even in an inappropriate setting. After his death, Jeyne is completely inconsolable. This goes to my above point; a love potion is a certainty, but the fact that the text repeatedly says that Robb and Jeyne love each other, and that this continues after Robb dies and any chance of Jeyne being drugged is gone, is meaningless or inconclusive? Besides which, you don't have any fucking clue what their relationship was like pre-Riverrun. None at all. But somehow you just know that the fire is gone? It's laughable. You are absolutely devoid of any logical consistency. Either get off this absurd high horse about side-eyeing all the evidence hinted at in the text, or stop asserting positions for which you have no evidence at all. You're sitting there telling me that we can't make any assumptions about, say, Rhaegar and Lyanna's relationship, because we don't have any evidence, and simultaneously telling me that Robb and Jeyne have lost the passion in their relationship despite having even less information about their relationship before coming to Riverrun. Um, I don't think that at all? Stop putting words in my mouth just because you are incapable of keeping a consistent and logical position (a sure sign of someone who doesn't understand the text). Sybell absolutely conspires with Tywin, and absolutely throws Jeyne at Robb. She knows nothing about Robb, to her mind, putting a pretty girl in front of him while he's vulnerable might lead to something. Once it does, Sybell can play both sides. You aren't taking an more "realistic" view, because w'ere told all this. We know Sybell encourages Jeyne to nurse Robb (not "Sybell gives her daughter potions to make her better at nursing Robb). We know she gets in touch with Tywin the moment the Crag falls. We know she gives Jeyne contraceptives for months. All of this is attested to in the text, so saying that you have some "realistic" view is stupid; we all know this, it isn't any kind of revelation. You know what the text doesn't say? That Jeyne doses Robb with a love potion. We don't even get a hint that it's happened, unlike with the abortifacients, which are clearly called out in the text when Jeyne mentions that her mother is giving her drugs every morning. That is called a textual hint. Why in all the world would GRRM be careful to hint at that, and not at the love potion? You are, as most idiots on here do, over-egging the pudding. Not everyone is a person in disguise. Not everything has to have a sinister or mysterious motive. Two attractive teenagers sleeping together while in a vulnerable mental and physical state? That's perfectly legitimate and obvious and doesn't need another explanation. It undermines the story. Robb makes a bad decision after receiving the emotional blow that his brothers have died, and then refuses to abandon the woman he made that decision with. That makes FAR more sense to his story than him being poisoned so he'd sleep with Jeyne, and has more narrative resonance than "Robb is a perfect king who literally never makes a single mistake despite being like 16 years old, and loses the war due wholly to factors outside his control". The whole plot to bring about his downfall is covered with Sybell dosing Jeyne. You don't need another conspiracy, you already have one right there! There is no thematic purpose to the love potion, because the abortifacient plot is already covering it.
  13. cpg2016

    Did Edmure save Robb's Life?

    There isn't any arguing with the highly specific orders Edmure was given. Additionally, Edmure knows that Robb's force is entirely cavalry, because he would have been there when they rode out, and therefore should know Robb is in no real danger. But this is all moot. We know why Edmure fights Tywin - he lampshades it himself. He wants glory. He sees Robb winning victory after victory, all after he was repeatedly humiliated militarily. That's it. He has a history of making bad military decisions for good moral reasons (allowing his lords to disperse to defend their lands against raids, allowing his people into Riverrun despite it being a terrible idea), and this is one of them, except he mixes it in with his own glory-hunting, and the results are disastrous. Yes, he's trying to protect his lands, but he's also doing it because Westerosi nobles are a military caste and winning battles gains social prestige, which Edmure sorely wants. These both contribute to why he disobeys a direct order.
  14. cpg2016

    Did Edmure save Robb's Life?

    They don't tell Edmure for the same reason they don't tell every single man in the army - it shouldn't be necessary. They give him orders to hold Riverrun. Not the Riverlands, not to stop Tywin, but to hold Riverrun. That is it. To read more into those orders is to exceed the mandate of those orders. If the President tells his generals he wants to make sure no enemy forces land on American soil, and they immediately launch a full scale war against Syria, have they obeyed their orders or exceeded them? The answer to that is clear. If Robb had said "defend my interests and your land" then that is open to interpretation. But the order was to defend a single, specifically named castle.
  15. cpg2016

    Could Rhaegar have fought for the other side?

    We have no freakin clue if those love potions work. Like I said, you seem to have no problem assuming all sorts of fantastical or magical elements are ironclad reality while ignoring the overwhelming preponderance of textual evidence for other things. We can reasonably infer that moon tea is a working contraceptive, because it's widely regarded as such and seems to have 100% effectiveness in Cersei's case. But love potions? We've never seen one to work, we know magic wasn't very powerful prior to the start of the series, why should we possibly think that Maggy's grandmother (and by the way, you have no evidence that Maegi the Frog is Sybelle's grandma) had a working magical potion? You know what's more convincing? Robb is in a state of physical and emotional trauma, and reaches out to a pretty girl who is in intimate contact with him already for comfort. That's perfectly reasonable and borne out by actual human experiences. And after, he's infatuated with her, and it goes from there. None of the quotes you provided are any evidence that Robb is angry at Jeyne. She's a new wife (and a teenager!) who is trying to do her best by the man she married, who she barely knows or understands (and we know there are significant cultural differences between North and South). Given the massive strains Robb is under, it isn't surprising he is angry. But he is constantly positive in his regard for Jeyne, even in private, with the mother he knows disapproves of his action. Why lie to Catelyn, of all people? Jeyne makes him smile, and I have nothing to share with him but grief. He seemed to enjoy the company of his bride's brothers, as well; young Rollam his squire and Ser Raynald his standard-bearer. They are standing in the boots of those he's lost, Catelyn realized when she watched them together. Rollam has taken Bran's place, and Raynald is part Theon and part Jon Snow. Only with the Westerlings did she see Robb smile, or hear him laugh like the boy he was. To the others he was always the King in the North, head bowed beneath the weight of the crown even when his brows were bare. Cat doesn't say "Jeyne makes him horny" or "he must smile when with her." Robb takes public joy in the presence of his wife, and his wife's family no less, that he doesn't express at any other time. Your conflating two unrelated phenomenon; that Robb is angry and upset about the political and personal misfortunes he's had in the war, and the fact that Jeyne wants to make him feel better. Oh, and because you very deliberately cut out important contextual evidence in your quote, let me complete it for you: Robb bid farewell to his young queen thrice. Once in the godswood before the heart tree, in sight of gods and men. The second time beneath the portcullis, where Jeyne sent him forth with a long embrace and a longer kiss. And finally an hour beyond the Tumblestone, when the girl came galloping up on a well-lathered horse to plead with her young king to take her along. Robb was touched by that, Catelyn saw, but abashed as well. The day was damp and grey, a drizzle had begun to fall, and the last thing he wanted was to call a halt to his march so he could stand in the wet and console a tearful young wife in front of half his army. He speaks her gently, she thought as she watched them together, but there is anger underneath. Robb says goodbye twice, once in a meaningful religious/cultural setting. And Robb wouldn't be touched by the gesture of his wife not wanting him to leave if he didn't care for her. Yeah, he's pissed she's coming out, because he's a teenager and he is being forced into an awkward spot in front of his entire army and all his political supporters. He's abashed - that turns pretty easily to anger in a teenager. If he didn't care for her, he wouldn't be gentle and he wouldn't be touched. Moreover, Jeyne is very clearly still in love with Robb. "It was mine." Jeyne sobbed. "You had no right. Robb had it made for me. I loved him." Again, it takes some real contortion of logic to assume that Sybelle is still pumping her daughter full of love potion. To what end? And if Jeyne was genuinely in love with Robb, then doesn't it make far more sense that Robb genuinely cared for Jeyne? As I'll say below, why does it serve the narrative or the thematic elements of the story to have it be a love potion? It adds nothing. Part of what ties Robb and Ned, and leads to both of their downfall, is supposed to be their unyielding honor. Or their attempt at it. It makes the entire story more potent to have Robb genuinely care for Jeyne, and have that be one of the roots of his downfall, than it does to have it be a cheap trick on the part of Sybelle. That part is achieved by having her secretly dope her daughter with contraceptives. Why even have Jeyne in the story, in that case? Why not have him be seduced by some other person? Yes, and those things that turned out to be false have narrative or thematic purpose. You believe everything is suspect except what you want to be true, and the only dividing line between your absolute skepticism and your blind faith seems to be whatever position you've taken. I believe that certain things hold true from our world to the books (such as human nature) and that GRRM is writing a series with thematic and narrative arcs, and that if something looks like a duck (bears a resemblance to how actual humans behave) and squawks like a duck (has a reason for being in the story), then it's most likely a duck. You seem to accept random things, like the existence of effective love potions, as beyond skepticism, and consider that to be a stronger explanation for why Robb became infatuated with Jeyne than the much simpler explanation that he was vulnerable in many senses and she took pity on him (the Florence Nightingale Effect).
×