the trees have eyes
-
Posts
2,167 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by the trees have eyes
-
-
On 10/3/2022 at 3:28 AM, Nevets said:
Of course he wants FArya back. She's his hostage against the Northerners. Without her safety to worry about, there's nothing stopping them from tearing him into itsy bitsy pieces. Her absence probably isn't known yet, but it will be, and he needs her back.
Indeed, (F)Arya is essential to his claim to WF succeeding. Until she bears him an heir he can claim to be the grandchild of Ned Stark he is on incredibly shaky ground. He needs her back to cement his claim and establish his dynasty. And as you say she is his hostage for the Northern Lords' good behaviour. Without her he's a bastard Bolton in a Stark castle with no legitimacy and a whole host of enemies.
Tywin proposed the same marriage-inheritance plan to Tyrion but with Sansa as bride. That plan would collapse as well if Sansa ran off without Tyrion having an heir.
I'm surprised there is an argument Ramsay doesn't want or need (F)Arya back.
-
12 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:
If the story goes as written up until Daenerys gets the dragons but she doesn't get the dragons then no, I cannot see how she would be able to follow the storyline she did with the dragons. It would be a different story.
Indeed. No dragons, no bloodriders or Dothraki followers and off to the Dosh Khaleen with her. No dragons, nothing to bargain for The Unsullied.
The best way to see the dragons is as part of her. She is the mother of dragons but without them she would have been in a tight spot after Drogo's death. It's possible GRRM could have conjured up some escape with Ser Jorah but then she's in the middle of the Dothraki Sea with one follower.
Of course she was doing just fine without dragons before Drogo's death, having embraced her role as Khaleesi, won Drogo's love and, after the botched assassination attempt, his commitment to conquer Westeros. But GRRM then did one of his signature rug pulls by taking it all away from her except, for once, he made it a net win by giving her the dragons.
-
11 hours ago, SeanF said:
Not that anyone in Westeros is seriously going to argue “hang on, in Grazdan vs Hargo, you ruled differently” if she rolls up with a large army.
I want this to happen
-
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:
If you don't think that quote is alarming and utterly hypocritical, well I don't really feel sorry for you cuz I don't know you, but I'm kinda bummed out about humanity. Kinda, it's no big deal
If you find Robert burning people with wildfire for shit and giggles or roasting one of his lords in his own armour instead of a duel while his son strangled himself trying to escape the torture machine he was bound in then we'll talk.
Aerys attempting to remove Ned after he had killed his father and brother has a cruel logic to it but is short-sighted; but striking at Robert is foolish as it unites two Houses in opposition and the marriage alliance network makes that four.
Robert striking at a pregnant Dany is cruel but it's precisely to avoid the threat of a Targaryen heir leading an invasion and sparking a civil war. Exactly what happens in ADWD when (F)Aegon attacks The Stormlands. It's why there is no voice in opposition on The Small Council except Ned. Note that Robert later rescinds the order.....
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:He's a character
Of course he's a character. You know very well this is still evasion but your m.o. is shift away from the point you can't answer - evidence of Robert being regarded as a tyrant in the books- and try and focus on the red herring. It's kind of lame.
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:I've given plenty of examples of Roberts egregious behaviors (rapes, murder, terrifying Ned to raise his nephew, disrespect of laws), just because nobody in the book does, like with the others doesn't make it a whataboutism.
You really haven't. You've made a series of allegations that don't amount to anything like what you claim. Even where they amount to behaviour on Robert's part that deserves criticism it's laughable to deem them tyranny, which has a specific political and governmental meaning. You don't like Robert? Fine. I'll not try and persuade you otherwise but there's no reason to make illogical claims out of dislike.
There is no evidence of rape. Before you get on your moral high horse this is a society where marital rape is not recognised and marriages are arranged. Most people have no say in who they sleep with and most women have no say (legally) about when they sleep with their husband. Cersei objects to Robert claiming his rights but she has a way of dealing with it:
A Game of Thrones - Eddard XII
She lifted her head, defiant. "Your Robert got me with child once," she said, her voice thick with contempt. "My brother found a woman to cleanse me. He never knew. If truth be told, I can scarcely bear for him to touch me, and I have not let him inside me for years. I know other ways to pleasure him, when he leaves his whores long enough to stagger up to my bedchamber. Whatever we do, the king is usually so drunk that he's forgotten it all by the next morning."If you want rape and murder you're better off looking at Roose, Ramsay or Gregor Clegane.
Robert murdered no one. The murder of Rhaegar's children was carried out by Tywin's henchmen on Tywin's orders to prove he had thrown his lot in with Robert. Robert orders the assassination of Dany, an order he rescinds on his deathbed while acknowledging it was wrong.
Robert did not "terrify" Ned to raise his nephew. He literally did nothing other than express a total lack of remorse over the murder of Rhaegar's children by Tywin's men. You set so low a bar for tyranny that it is absurd. Ned simply acts prudently to protect his blood. Who knows? If the child looked like Ned (or Lyanna) maybe Robert would not give a shit as it's Rhaegar and Targaryens he hates not Ned and Starks.
Robert does not "disrespect laws". He orders the release of a man seized without adequate evidence and tries to damp down the rising tension between two powerful Houses. He does it in typical half-arsed Robert style but it's so laughably far from tyranny that I can't make sense of your obsessive focus on this. It's not a 21st century democracy: of course Ned (who claimed Cat acted on his orders), Cat, Jaime and Tyrion are going to receive preferential treatment, they are all connected to the ruling family by marriage alliances and are powerful feudal figures with private armies!
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:I think everyone does, or should, except the king.
This is simply not how the people of Westeros would see it. We don't have monarchy anymore. No one is trying to defend monarchy. But viewing Robert as a tyrant because he is a human being with flaws who happens to be king is pointless. Is he better or worse than people expect/fear, does he allow people to live in relative peace or does he terrorise his nobles or oppress the Smallfolk because he's insane (Aerys) or sees it as some diabolical way of reinforcing his power or extorting wealth (Ivan the Terrible)? Better, yes and no.
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:Or maybe Robert always owned it and it was never in Tyrions or Petyrs possession....
Is there any point to this rejoinder? We know this and we both know Robert could have followed up but didn't because he is lazy, sloppy and wants to avoid prolonging the crisis. Not because he's some terrible tyrant....
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:She arrested Tyrion to throw the Lannisters off? I'm sorry, I'm not following.
I'm assuming your familiar with the Catnapping arguments. Cat's visit to KL was in secret so as not to tip off the Lannisters that the Starks are on to them (the purpose of her visit is to let Ned know about the attempted murder of Bran). Ned orders Cat to prepare for war (Manderly to build ships and for Moat Cailin defences to be repaired) but to do nothing openly while he gathers evidence against the Lannisters to put before Robert to take them down while forestalling war. Cat's trip back is supposed to be in secret too but she gets careless leading to the chance encounter with Tyrion at The Inn. If she lets him go he will tell his siblings of her presence and situation which looks so suspicious (only one retainer, Winterfell's master-at-arms) and, as they are believed to be all working together and behind the attack on Bran, they will realise they have been rumbled and move against Ned. Taking Tyrion prevents him warning them and gives her a hostage against them striking at Ned. Of course, it's a split second decision and does not work as intended....
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:Um, I'm not. In Westeros? Beric can conclude a trial in like 15 seconds.
Um, are you suggesting Cat could have had Tyrion chopped up by Ser Rodrik right at The Crossroads Inn?
The accused can demand trial by combat as Tyrion does at The Eyrie and at KL. Lysa's justice is not justice at all of course and Arya provides evidence that The Hound confessed to killing Mycah, something The Hound himself confirms. Unlike Sandor, Tyrion protests his innocence.
I don't see anything to indicate Robert abusing the justice system like Lysa. Quite obviously, ordering Tyrion's release would have spared him that mockery of justice at The Eyrie.
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:Besides the evidence is there. Cat has a knife in her scarred up hand, the kings quartermaster would say oh that's mine, and then Tyrion would be exonerated and the case would continue.
I'm glad you accept there are no grounds for holding Tyrion that would not be uncovered by simple enquiry. When you say the case you of course mean the investigation, not the trial. Ned is conducting the investigation and does not intend to go before Robert until he has proof as Robert is married into the family he is investigating. That's usually called a conflict of interest that hinders objectivity not tyranny.
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:Everyone in Westeros finds Robert acceptable? See it's blanket statements like that that you gotta look out for. Balon Greyjoy does nor did not find Robert acceptable, the entire Iron Islands shared his belief. Dorne and it's princes and princesses do not find Robert acceptable, that Darry who had Targaryen curtains kicked under the sofa does not find Robert acceptable.
Sheesh. Does any of that have anything to do with tyranny? Greyjoy launches a bid for independence not because Robert is a tyrant but simply because he wants to be a king too. Robert actually leaves him as Lord Paramount of The Iron Islands. That's how much of a tyrant he is
Dorne wants vengeance for Elia and her children not justice for Robert's "tyranny". They get that with the punishment or untimely deaths of the Lannisters who ordered and carried out the murders.
There are indeed Targaryen loyalists like the Darrys who fought on the other side in the civil war. Are they persecuted or do they tick along ok? Are they proscribed and attainted, on the run and hunted and watched by the secret police and agents of The Crown or are they just ticking along in peace? Barristan The Bold sums up Robert's approach, forgive and forget (#Rhaegarexcepted). Robert stayed at the Darrys' castle, that's how little he held their previous allegiance against them or feared assassination.
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:I thought we were discussing Robert. But whatever, let's discuss Cat. (Even though last post I said I wasn't talking about a different cat, lol. Does GRRM mean to be this clever all the time) (also you keep saying there isn't evidence, but of course there is)
Don't dissemble and attempt smart rejoinders. We are discussing Robert's handling of Cat's seizure of Tyrion which you allege to be tyrannical. There is a piece of evidence, yes, but it is not evidence against Tyrion.
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:Lannister is on a roll, since pretty much usurping the govt they have poisoned her brother in law, frightened her sister and nephew into hiding, harmed her daughter, threatened her other daughter and husband and now she has the chance to nail them for when they tried to violently murder her son, twice. And you think the situation needs deescalation ?
Robert absolutely believes that it does. He may be weak, foolish and misguided but he is trying to avoid conflict. I don't see why that is hard to understand, particularly as he knows nothing about Jon Arryn being murdered or the lies that Lysa has told Catelyn at LF's instigation.
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:Yea I mean medieval monarchies and tyranny often go hand in hand, maybe it's the hat? (Although that scepter must serve some purpose)
Yes, but as you invited me earlier let's avoid blanket statements shall we? The people living under the monarch have more of a say than you seem to allow them.
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:If upon hearing "you can have whatever you want" he just has sex with their daughters right then and there is not a criticism of substance then I guess we're just at an impass on what constitutes an acceptable head executive.
Like the Ironborn parading the captive women on The Shield Islands into the Hall and raping one of them on the table right then and there? I mean if this what happened it's a fairly damning incident but is it?
On 8/19/2022 at 2:11 PM, Hugorfonics said:It would not. You don't have to read Voltaire to realize the king doesn't care about you. Beric and later Catelyn are leading a people's revolution in Westeros now. This is a massive amount of the population dedicated to feeding the people, caring for the orphans, and most certainly, fighting Westerosi tyranny
It surely would. The people are praying for a king who will re-establish order and protect them not setting up communes for self-government or working on a Bill of Rights. And it can't have escaped you that the breakdown in law and order followed Robert's death so the popular unrest is a reflection of civil war, famine and carnage not a popular movement against his tyranny.
Beric specifically acted on a command from Ned in Robert's name and un-Beric is clear that he is defending the people of the realm in the King's stead. He is doing his duty and filling a vacuum until order is re-established.
A Storm of Swords - Arya VI
"When we left King's Landing we were men of Winterfell and men of Darry and men of Blackhaven, Mallery men and Wylde men. We were knights and squires and men-at-arms, lords and commoners, bound together only by our purpose." The voice came from the man seated amongst the weirwood roots halfway up the wall. "Six score of us set out to bring the king's justice to your brother." The speaker was descending the tangle of steps toward the floor. "Six score brave men and true, led by a fool in a starry cloak." A scarecrow of a man, he wore a ragged black cloak speckled with stars and an iron breastplate dinted by a hundred battles. A thicket of red-gold hair hid most of his face, save for a bald spot above his left ear where his head had been smashed in. "More than eighty of our company are dead now, but others have taken up the swords that fell from their hands." When he reached the floor, the outlaws moved aside to let him pass. One of his eyes was gone, Arya saw, the flesh about the socket scarred and puckered, and he had a dark black ring all around his neck. "With their help, we fight on as best we can, for Robert and the realm.""Robert?" rasped Sandor Clegane, incredulous."Ned Stark sent us out," said pothelmed Jack-Be-Lucky, "but he was sitting the Iron Throne when he gave us our commands, so we were never truly his men, but Robert's.""Robert is the king of the worms now. Is that why you're down in the earth, to keep his court for him?""The king is dead," the scarecrow knight admitted, "but we are still king's men, though the royal banner we bore was lost at the Mummer's Ford when your brother's butchers fell upon us." He touched his breast with a fist. "Robert is slain, but his realm remains. And we defend her."I don't know if that could be any clearer about authority stemming from the king, about Robert being associated with defending the realm and those defending the realm and it's people acting at his command and in his name even after his death. It neatly encapsulates the idea (ideal) of kingship and the (highly eulogised) view of Robert but it flatly contradicts your allegation about Beric and is as far from your 21st century notions of equality, a "people's revolution" and Robert's "tyranny" as it is possible to get. -
10 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:
I wish I could
If you really mean that I feel sorry for you.
10 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Nonsense, huh?
Yes, your "all for Joffrey" evasion is pure nonsense and that's a charitable description.
10 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:When was Aerys called a tyrant? Or Cersei, Tywin, Joffrey, Euron, Stannis?
Why do you regard Stannis as a tyrant?
But with regard to all the others people have plenty to say about their character and the injustice of their actions. Aerys was known as the mad king for burning people for shit and giggles while Bobby B wanted to jack it all in and go off to Essos and be the sell sword king.
Seems you're being evasive and indulging in whataboutism rather than backing up what you say.
I think fundamentally you have an issue with kingship, so any abuse of power, favouritism or simply the reality of inequality is all tyranny to you.
10 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Guilty till proven innocent is the way the laws work.
Just stop. You are being absurd.
10 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:And there are adequate grounds, he was pointed out by the corresponding authorities that Tyrion was the guilty party
Utter nonsense. There is an allegation that Tyrion owned the dagger at one time. Maybe he sold it or gave it away, maybe it was stolen. All there is is a line of enquiry that may lead nowhere. As it of course does.....
10 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Why do you think this?
For the same reason Catelyn's visit to KL is kept secret. To avoid making the Lannisters suspicious of what they know or intend. It backfires somewhat.
11 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Any random witness like the king or Jaime, presumably others, would recognize the knife instantly and would say it never belonged to Tyrion, so day 1 of the trial?
You must be aware that trials only take place after a period of evidence gathering and if the case is weak - or non-existent - it's dropped.
11 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:No, its not. Which is why the rulers back then were so quick to wear the label tyrant. Like Louis XVI or George III, they werent that bad tbh (compared to contemporaries), but theyre still unacceptable
As I said your problem is with kingship in general. That seems a pointless complaint given the setting of the story. Unacceptable to who? To you, maybe but that's a pointless value judgment. The people of Westeros don't consider Robert a tyrant. Everyone in Westeros finds Robert acceptable. He's flawed but he's not unpopular let alone loathed or regarded as an unjust tyrant.
11 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:But we're not discussing a different cat, nor a shopkeeper, but a Stark.
We're discussing the treatment of Tyrion Lannister, the Queen's brother and son of a Lord Paramount. It may offend your sense of justice but there are good reasons for treading softly before arresting someone of that rank without a shred of evidence.
Trying to de-escalate the situation makes a lot of sense. In the meantime Ned can actually try and find some evidence. Problem of course is that would point to Joffrey which would be an even bigger shitstorm.
11 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:You know your coming up with a lot words that I think are just sugar coating the actions of a tyrant, but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar
I think you know he's not but generally dislike him and use hyperbole to emphasize this. When pushed you either evade or have some broad criticisms that seem to rest on unrealistic views of medieval monarchies and you have no case against Robert of any substance.
Also, George III? This is pre-enlightenment, more a magna carta world, there are no representative assemblies of any kind. What is unacceptable to you would baffle the people of Westeros.
-
4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:
He climbed onto the throne on the skulls of Aegon and his sister, if you think that's cool then fine.
Robert took the throne after a civil war to remove a tyrant. I think you must see the difference however much you pretend otherwise.
4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:And asking rando Westerosi how they feel about current events just gets you characters like All For Joffrey.
I mean it's not like we have five volumes, thousands of pages and several dozen povs with characters' internal thoughts the length and breadth of the seven kingdoms. You can't find a single example of anyone in universe considering him a tyrant so you dissemble with this smokescreen that we can never know what anyone thinks as if the only way of conveying information is for the author to have The Goldcloaks grab Pete the turnip seller and demand to know what he thinks of the King
. Pure nonsense.
4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:He's obstructing justice. Catelyn's hand scars are real enough, a crime was committed and justice demands answers.
Who is? Tyrion did nothing. Justice requires you don't punish the innocent or assume guilt or deprive someone of their liberty without adequate grounds. Ned knew that. So did Catelyn. She took Tyrion (ironically enough) to forestall danger to Ned.
4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:There's a knife that according to the kings councilors was in possession of Tyrion, in fact he gives the time and place Tyrion supposedly acquired the murder weapon.
That's proves absolutely nothing. All it purports to prove is that the knife belonged to Tyrion at one time, just as LF claims it belonged to him at one time, when in fact it belonged to Robert all the time.
The first line of enquiry is to interview Tyrion about the knife and whether he ever owned it. He might breezily say yes (like LF) but that he passed it on to someone else, he might say - as he does to Catelyn - that he never owned it at all. How long should he remain in jail while his presumed guilt trumps his innocence?
4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Can't have a trial without a defendant.
I shouldn't have to say this but.... You don't hold a trial without a case...... Or at least you shouldn't......
4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Lannister is not above the law. Jaime acts like it is, Cersei thinks it is and Tywins insists it is, but they're not. They're all the kings subjects and subjugated to the same laws as everyone else.
It's not a 21st century democracy. The Queen's brother is not going to be treated the same way as a shopkeeper. Largely because mistreating a shopkeeper won't spark a civil war. I don't know why this bothers you so much but inequality is a fact of life in a feudal society. Inequality or favouritism isn't tyranny.
4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Tywin already sent in his troops, Edumre called in his banners, shit was already popping.
Two noble families were getting close to conflict. Shit hit the fan when Robert was dead. Unless you happen to think Stannis or Renly or Robb or Balon would declare themselves king while Robert was still alive? No? Maybe Joffrey then.
4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Asked to look at the evidence, and upon seeing the knife ordering the arrest of Petyr. Instead of throwing a temper tantrum which is accomplished nothing but was rather amusing
Where is the knife? Following up like that would be thoughtful and intelligent but that's not Bobby B. He's careless and finds it all a drag. Lazy and negligent of him but then that's his personality and it comes back to bite him. Hardly tyrannical though.
-
2 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:
His best friends son, if he found out who his parents were he'd kill them all. I'm not sure why you don't think he dabbles in tyranny.
Can you point to any examples in the series where Robert is regarded as a tyrant? By anyone. He was king for fifteen years so there should be plenty of voices or examples for you to choose from. I wonder why not.
2 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:But then Catelyn changed her mind
Of course she changed her mind. It has nothing to do with having any evidence and was all about the danger Ned might be in if the Lannisters became suspicious of her secret visit. Which they were bound to as it was suspicious, lol.
2 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:There's the knife. That's all the evidence the court would need to find Petyr guilty of obstruction and Joffrey of attempt murder.
Right, right. Petyr and Joffrey. Not Tyrion. People Robert does not suspect of any wrongdoing and whom he does not put his thumb on the scales of justice to protect. Why should Tyrion not be released though? What tyranny is involved here?
2 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:A suspected attempted murder acts like nothing is wrong despite being pointed by two of the kings direct counselors, one being the mater of whisperers.
Does justice stop because Tyrion has a famous last name?
If there was evidence Ned would have planned to arrest him. Because there isn't he doesn't.
It's grounds for an investigation but if all that turns up is a false accusation why should Tyrion be imprisoned?
It's a medieval fantasy world, not the 21st century. You don't arrest the Queen's brother on an unsubstantiated allegation. More accurately, justice could be stopped because of Tyrion's last name but Robert actually moves to stop a miscarriage of justice and unlawful imprisonment because of the family's importance.
All that is turned on it's head when Tyrion is framed for Joffrey's murder which is the sort of injustice and "tyranny" you should be worked up about, not sloppy old Bobby B.
2 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Funny how it works on opposite sides of the spectrum too
If only there was a guilty man being set free for us to get worked up about.
Funny how someone can be so disappointed by an innocent man being ordered set free
3 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:History is filled with disappointments. And tyrants.
It certainly is. Doesn't mean we should mistake the former for the latter either in fantasy or history.
3 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:But he didn't prevent anything, right? Westeros is in the middle of it's worst war in it's 10k year history
He was murdered. Then the shit hit the fan. You might have noticed either or both of those things.
It's the worst war since the Robellion and it might be the worst war since the Targaryen conquest but that's what happens with a contested succession. Let's calm down before we compare this to the apocalypse or say the Long Night wasn't even a patch on TWOT5K.
3 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:The arrest of Tyrion is the catalyst of Roberts reign, and he handled it so spectacularly horrendously.
He ordered Tyrion released, told Ned he would not arrest Jaime and that he wanted no more fighting between Stark and Lannister. Then he made Ned Hand again, went hunting and was murdered.
It's classic Bobby B but should he have put heads on pikes or ordered more arrests and taken hostages for good behaviour from his friend's and his wife's family? What should he have done in your opinion?
-
9 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:
Hes far from Aerys or Joffrey, but hes far from acceptable either.
Of course he's acceptable. The only trouble in Robert's reign is when Balon Greyjoy reaches for a crown. Who does he lock up without trial or dispossess of their estates on a whim, what customary rights and privileges does he revoke and who does he oppress, what people's revolts or discontent is there? No one, no one, none, no one and none.
He has his flaws but tyranny is not one of them.
10 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Thats funny, right? I thought that too. But letting a suspected attempted murderer, and with possible information about the murder of the greatest lord (ever?) go because he wants a blowjob? (we all know Cersei isnt giving it up)
Its not that hes right, its that Tyrions innocent. But to disregard the law like that, (because he thinks he can, like Aerys, as if he Aerys wasnt touchable) when dealing with highly sensitive issues is straight tyrannical. And if there was a trial? Then everything in the world would be set right, LF and Joff would go down hard, thats another thing thats funny.You realise there would not be a trial, yes? Catelyn only took Tyrion because of LF's lies and manipulation. She and Ned were both led by LF to suspect Tyrion but agreed they should do nothing until Ned had some proof. They never have any and never could because Tyrion is innocent. The catnapping came about because Cat's visit to KL was in secret and Cat believed Tyrion divulging it to his siblings would lead to Ned being in(even more) danger from the Lannisters. All there is against Tyrion is a malicious allegation with zero proof behind it. Tyrion absolutely should be released because he never should have been arrested.
Funny but I always though arresting people without any grounds other than malicious intent or political calculation was tyrannical, not setting them free.
If you're looking for 21st or even 20th century justice norms then you'll be disappointed in fantasy, historical fiction or history in any period other than the 21st or 20th century. Trying to prevent two of his most powerful noble families from starting a feud is pretty common sense even if it offends your notion of the purity of the law. He's still right about releasing Tyrion though.
You would be better off focusing on Robert ignoring Jaime ordering five of Ned's men cut down in the streets of KL but this seems pretty realistic for the faux-medieval world - nobles have private armies and they quarrel and fight, the king tells them to settle down and binds them to keep the King's peace, things settle down until they flare up again. It's a flawed system but it's not tyrannical.
-
55 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:
Sure, but who wouldn't do that? I mean to just pave the way to death? Might as well just jump and get it over with.
The thing is not to commit adultery, cuckolding a Lord Paramount and Hand of The King and then orchestrating his murder. The attempt to conceal a crime often leads to more crimes and that's not a shrug of the shoulders "what's a poor murderer to do, we've all been there, folks" moment.
59 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:Im not sure, I tend lean harder that Petyr was being sincere. And I kinda think Catelyn was a reason for that. (I mean, LF woulda ate nicely in this deal too.)
Again, I don't think I've heard anyone say that before. He has been manipulating Ned and Catelyn throughout the book and he knows if Ned uncovers he was responsible for Jon Arryn's death he's finished. He may temporarily support Ned - only to avoid Stannis taking the throne - but he's as insincere and slippery as ever. It's only a matter of time before he betrays Ned.
And his "love" for Catelyn is akin to Robert's for Lyanna, driven by nostalgia and the elevation of a lost/unattainable love into an unrealistically ideal woman, shorn of any imperfections and flaws, the easiest kind of love to cherish as it can't be tested. We see how deep and meaningful that is when he betrays her and starts grooming her daughter. You're far too generous to LF.
1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:What shit? The book?
No, this shit:
4 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:The mass rape is hard to look past, showing up to any dudes house and just pointing at rando daughter, if it's not tyranty it's certainly in the making.
1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:Charming guy
He's a heart throb in his youth who becomes a middle aged fat drunk. He remains a womaniser that's for sure.
1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:Call it what you want but it's ordering a hit on a pregnant child, kings are supposed to be virtuous and just, brave and honorable, not whatever Robert is.
Life is not a song. Robert is not some mythical ideal of kingship or Good King "insert name" from fairy tales or children's fables but he's very far from a tyrant.
1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:And if we're talking about national security then pissing off the most powerful khal ever is not a good decision. It can lead to, well worst case scenario, Dany.
You mean the dead khal?
Remember how, when Robert ordered the assassination, all the members of his Council warned him how dangerous upsetting the Dothraki would be and how much they enjoy seaborn invasions and how it was only a matter of time before they came for revenge? No, I don't either. It's not seen as even a remote risk by anyone. The only argument is over the morality or "honour" of the order.
1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:Its really the knife that gets me. Ordering Tyrions release without calling for a trial is just blatantly flipping off the rule of law. When kings do that it's tyrannical.
This is your definition of tyranny and your line in the sand moment? Jesus. He's being badgered by Cersei (Oh Robert, you nasty tyrant, you!), can't be arsed to deal with a complex problem and goes hunting to escape the cares and duties of kingship and blow off some steam. He's actually in the right as there is no evidence against Tyrion, just LF's malicious little lie, and is trying to keep two important families he is trying to bring together (Sansa and Joffrey) from quarrelling and coming to blows.
I always thought tyrants locked people up with no evidence rather than demanded they be released as there was insufficient proof of their guilt.
-
1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:
Ok, but that'd be signing his death sentence. Stannis makes it clear to Janos that because of his and Petyrs corruption that without evidence he would have executed him. Its almost guaranteed that if LF brought the legitimate heir on the throne it'd mean his death.
Instead Petyr argued that Ned should become the most powerful man in Westeros, when Ned refused everything but Stannis he played Petyrs hand for him. (why Ned didn't go straight to Janos or why he thought the gold cloaks only move through bribery is another smh Eddard moment)
So he's not helping Ned, he's helping himself. He's guilty and needs to keep Stannis off the throne. When Ned doesn't oblige he takes Ned out too. So much for help. The only way Ned would accept LF's offer is if he was was venal, corrupt and Machiavellian like LF - in which case LF would have recognised him as dangerous rather than honest and naïve and no way would he have worked to cement Ned's powerbase.
1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:Loyal? He's a traitor.
Loyal to his friends, absolutely. That's why he won people over and kept their loyalty in return.
As for being a traitor, Aerys demanded his head for no reason at all. Half the kingdom were traitors. Would you not regard Ned Stark as loyal?
1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:Charismatic and generous, sure. I guess, Stannis would disagree
A bitter and jealous younger brother. Not exactly a clinching argument.
1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:The mass rape is hard to look past, showing up to any dudes house and just pointing at rando daughter, if it's not tyranty it's certainly in the making.
What? Let's not flood the zone with sh*t.
2 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Idk, when he shows up to councils it's either to plan on spending 1/3 of the treasury on a party idolizing his kingdom or to spend an additional third on the assassination of a pregnant child.
Lazy, negligent, careless, sure. Tyrannical, not a bit. He just wants to party. And this tourney is to honour his best buddy, Ned. And to party. Always to party....
The latter is realpolitik and dealing with the threat of regime change. It used to be called statecraft and now it's called national security and leads to unsavoury actions like the murder of innocents. It shows Robert in a poor light but what triggers the assassination is the news that Dany is pregnant with the prospect of an heir and pretender to trouble Robert and his heirs.
There are good grounds to criticise Robert but tyranny is not one of them.
-
3 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:
Petyr, honestly, did everything in his power to help Ned.
I don't think I've ever head anyone say that before. He manipulates Ned, deceiving him and Catelyn from the very start of the story with his lies about who killed Jon Arryn and the dagger being Tyion's. It's all CYA to deflect any potential suspicion from him and Lysa as the murderers of Jon Arryn but it's clearly in his interest to obstruct Ned's inquiry and point the Starks and Lannisters at each other's throats He "unhelps" Ned quite spectacularly, culminating in the betrayal when Ned attempts to put Stannis, the legitimate heir, on the throne.
3 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:Roberts hard to look at any time and not picture a lethargic asshole tyrant in the making, perhaps Ned never saw him clearly?
Robert is undisciplined but is a brave, generous, loyal and charismatic figure in his youth. It's remarked how he turned enemies into friends by being open-handed and that people responded to him with loyalty and affection. This is the Robert Ned was friends with.
Middle-aged Robert is soured on life by being in a toxic marriage and trapped in a kingship he has no interest in. He is a deeply unhappy man, drowning his disappointments in drink and entertainment to try and forget that. He's hardly a tyrant, he's so hands off he leaves everything to Jon Arryn or Ned and the Small Council.
-
On 8/10/2022 at 10:51 PM, ShadowFaction said:
Looking back, I think he intended to entrap Ned Stark.
This is confirmed later on
A Storm of Swords - Arya III
Only six Winterfell men remained of the twenty her father had sent west with Beric Dondarrion, Harwin told her, and they were scattered. "It was a trap, milady. Lord Tywin sent his Mountain across the Red Fork with fire and sword, hoping to draw your lord father. He planned for Lord Eddard to come west himself to deal with Gregor Clegane. If he had he would have been killed, or taken prisoner and traded for the Imp, who was your lady mother's captive at the time. Only the Kingslayer never knew Lord Tywin's plan, and when he heard about his brother's capture he attacked your father in the streets of King's Landing."It's plausible that Robert would have dressed down both Ned and Tywin for squabbling and breaking the King's Peace but as neither were in rebellion against the crown and both could claim they were protecting their family honour / members he probably would have forgiven both.Tywin's conduct in the Riverlands is particularly brutal but as his men carried no banners and wore no livery he has plausible denial. -
6 hours ago, The Lord of the Crossing said:
The red wedding was a war strategy to get rid of a rebellious lord who got into his head to declare a portion of Westeros as his own kingdom. It may have saved a lot of loyalists' lives. Many more lives on both sides would have been lost if they had fought a traditional battle.
The Freys were rebels themselves. They then betrayed the Starks-Tullys to join the side that appeared to be winning. Even Jaime throws this in their faces at Riverrun when they are besieging it later on. I hope you are not insinuating the Freys are loyalists as it's not at all the case.
Is it understandable to change sides in warfare? Yes. Is it considered honourable? No. And the price of the Freys turning their cloaks was murdering a lot of men who had been granted safe conduct. It makes perfect sense for Tywin as the infamy attaches to Walder Frey and Roose Bolton but they have just painted targets on themselves as the families of their victims will not forget.
-
On 2/23/2022 at 2:29 AM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:
The Starks will demand revenge on the Freys and might even make it a condition to peace.
On 2/25/2022 at 10:22 PM, Quoth the raven, said:The Freys already lost Stevron, Petyr, Merrett, Little Walder, Aegon, and Jared to the Starks and their bannermen. Enough of revenge. What crime was done as a result of the RW has been repaid.
There are a lot of posts in this thread making it out as some sort of Stark vs Frey feud.
The real picture is that the Freys butchered a good deal of the Northern and Riverlands nobility and took a bunch more prisoner for ransom and as hostages. In other words Robb Stark broke a promise of a marriage alliance and Walder Frey (and Roose Bolton) responded by starting a blood feud with practically every House in The North and The Riverlands.
Saying enough Freys have died and we should call it dibs isn't going to work with Great Jon Umber and Edmure Tully any more than with Wyman Manderly. It's not a Stark / wild child Arya vengeance thing, it's far bigger than that.
The Freys will lose Riverrun and The Twins. Given Walder Frey has, what, 100 children, grandchildren and great grandchildren and they are married into any number of Houses in The Riverlands, Westerlands and Vale, plenty will survive but there will be either judicial or extra-judicial "proceedings" against those who took part in The Red Wedding who haven't yet met the BWB or a cold welcome in the North.
Sansa is slowly killing Sweetrobin
in General (ASoIaF)
Posted
Well, I was going to quote the text but it was already quoted before you typed this response so I wonder if there's any point. She told Ned the night Arya disappeared, so the day of the incident. Given the events are relayed through her pov we know exactly what she sees and given Ned calls her forward to confirm Arya's account we can also surmise what she told him. This is not difficult to follow.
Morality does matter. Telling the truth would not have saved Mycah, though it would have made some readers more sympathetic to Sansa. The political fall-out would have been even more damaging and dangerous than it was, if it didn't cause the betrothal to be broken off or a rupture between Robert and Ned. And I'm not sure we are reading the same series
The two incidents are far apart in time. She panics when called by Robert to tell the truth and says she doesn't remember. This of course infuriates Arya - who knows that Sansa can but won't back her up (for whatever reason). Later in KL she says something horrible to Arya but this is really an unpleasant sibling argument. As a character Sansa changes a lot from after AGOT when she learns life is not a song.
I wish GRRM had not given that mysterious little comment as it tends to raise speculation about "Dark Sansa" to fever pitch. The girl who spoke up for Dontos, a complete stranger, when Joffrey was going to have him killed for being drunk, or who empathised with Lancel after his wound, or felt sorry for Tyrion even though these two are Lannisters is still very much there. You can see her warning Margaery about Joffrey and most germane of all, leading a near-fitting Robert Arryn over a narrow ice bridge on the descent from The Eyrie. So much for killing him for convenience or as a path to power.
It does but only if you want Sansa to be the child of Ned and Cat rather than LF's protégé. Annoying little shit though he is, he is her cousin, an ill, lonely and vulnerable child.
It's not a trial, though. Cersei apparently might want it to be and as we learn from Jaime in AFFC (iirc) she has already been trying to persuade him to harm or kill Arya and this represents her last chance to get some revenge - ultimately exacted on Lady. Indeed after Robert dismisses it as a children's quarrel Cersei demands "I want her punished". But Robert does not ever consider or act as if Arya is on trial. We see the scene from Ned's pov and he's angry that Arya is brought before Robert on Cersei's orders but he doesn't regard it as a trial.
The meaning of the post you are picking at is pretty clear: Sansa and Joffrey hear swordplay so the "hidden fighters" are an unknown danger from Sansa's pov. Joffrey does arrogantly assure her that she is safe with him. He does go to look over Sansa's objections but he also intends to keep her safe. You're quibbling over Joffrey's primary motivation - to look out of curiosity - and his underlying and stated intention - to keep Sansa safe from any possible harm - because the post referenced the second underlying intention. That is not fanfiction
Arya is not on trial though. Sansa is not brought in to give testimony in the trial of Arya Stark for attacking the Crown Prince for which the penalty is death. If those were the circumstances and she consciously withheld testimony that resulted in Arya's conviction and execution / other punishment then she would certainly be guilty of betrayal. But those are not the circumstances.
Also, you might want to be careful with accusing people of fanfiction when you interpret a scene in a certain way. Tyrion is tried for Joffrey's murder. See the difference in how the actual trial is conducted to Robert asking some children to explain what happened?
Huh? Ned is looking for his daughter and comes in demanding why she was brought to Robert not him once found. He's not the defence, he's an angry parent, demanding to know why she isn't being looked after properly. It's not a Court, no one is appointed Prosecution or Defence Counsel.......
Not giving evidence means just that in a court of law. You can read into it what you want but taking the 5th or whatever equivalent does not count as backing up or refuting anyone's testimony.
At least you are aware it's not a court or trial.
If only characters could have growth. Is the Theon of ADWD the same person as the Theon of ACOK? And naive, romance-filled 12 year-old Sansa who wanted nothing more than to marry the handsome prince and live a fairy-tale life at Court has changed a great deal since AGOT.
How many times and how much control does she have over this? She's at most a pawn of LF who is trying to rope her in and so taint her by unwitting involvement.
This is my thought and I'm not sure how much she knows of potential dangers.
A Feast for Crows - Alayne II
A Feast for Crows - Alayne II