Jump to content

Archived

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

Panther2000

Tywin Lannister, OMG may not be that bad afterall

Recommended Posts

And she only looked like a shrewd manipulator in the first book but never was. It was all Littlefinger that did everything for her (and Ned Stark as well). If you look at her methods in GoT, than they are no different than those in FfC - either plainly killing her enemies or using a bed.

She was pretty shrewd in AGOT, afterwards she had the stress of armies advancing to kill her and her children while her SO was captured. But even then she is still keeping it together.

AFFC she has cracked, but she has just had her son and father killed by her brother in the space of a month. That would be enough to drive anyone crazy. I'm not surprised that she is now making unhinged choices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She was pretty shrewd in AGOT, afterwards she had the stress of armies advancing to kill her and her children while her SO was captured. But even then she is still keeping it together.

AFFC she has cracked, but she has just had her son and father killed by her brother in the space of a month. That would be enough to drive anyone crazy. I'm not surprised that she is now making unhinged choices.

How exactly was she shrewd in GoT? The only thing she did herself was the murder of Robert and that was with a plan that would work once in thousand times. Cersei got extremely lucky that it worked exactly when she needed it. Everything else was done by Lettlefinger and Ned himself, Cersei herself did nothing in that power grab. Also, in GoT, in Darry Cersei pissed off Lord of the North, Robert's best friend and future Hand, as well as the father of her son's betrothed only to make herself happy. Not to mention she wanted that lord's daughter killed or maimed, probably out of her political shrewdness :dunno: . There is a reason why Tywin send Tyrion to KG to limit Cersei's power.

Until FfC, her actions were in check by Tyrion and Tywin. Yet, CoK an SoS are still full of her crazy ideas, they were just not going forward.

In FfC yeah, she suffers from massive paranoia because of Joffrey but her father's death was not a trauma to her at all. She was actually happy because finally she received an opportunity to rule herself. She didn't really crack, it's just the way she is - Cersei is dumb. Not Victarion level dumb, but she has no idea how to rule, how to make allies, she has no judgement, nothing. Rearming the Faith, for example, was nothing to do with paranoia or craziness, it's just Cersei believed that this was an amazing and wise idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really really appreciate Tywin more after reading the part about him and Aerys.



Like how Tywin is responsible for Tyrion's behaviour its because of Aerys that Tywin became the man he is.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How exactly was she shrewd in GoT?

Not only did she competently get rid of Robert at the exact right time that he could have become a problem, but she managed to keep the most shocking secret in Westeros under wraps for over a decade, that itself takes a certain level of cunning.

She wanted Ned kept alive as a prisoner, it was Joffrey who had him executed escalating the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How exactly was she shrewd in GoT? The only thing she did herself was the murder of Robert and that was with a plan that would work once in thousand times. Cersei got extremely lucky that it worked exactly when she needed it. Everything else was done by Lettlefinger and Ned himself, Cersei herself did nothing in that power grab. Also, in GoT, in Darry Cersei pissed off Lord of the North, Robert's best friend and future Hand, as well as the father of her son's betrothed only to make herself happy. Not to mention she wanted that lord's daughter killed or maimed, probably out of her political shrewdness :dunno: . There is a reason why Tywin send Tyrion to KG to limit Cersei's power.

Until FfC, her actions were in check by Tyrion and Tywin. Yet, CoK an SoS are still full of her crazy ideas, they were just not going forward.

In FfC yeah, she suffers from massive paranoia because of Joffrey but her father's death was not a trauma to her at all. She was actually happy because finally she received an opportunity to rule herself. She didn't really crack, it's just the way she is - Cersei is dumb. Not Victarion level dumb, but she has no idea how to rule, how to make allies, she has no judgement, nothing. Rearming the Faith, for example, was nothing to do with paranoia or craziness, it's just Cersei believed that this was an amazing and wise idea.

I'm thinking that she used the opportunity at the Trident to not only get rid of one wolf, but both, and she correctly surmised that the wolves were not simple pets but part of the Stark power structure.

As well, she tries to manipulate Robert into fighting in the melee by telling him he should not do so, a bit of reverse psychology that was thwarted only when Ned stepped in.

Yes, she got lucky that Robert was terminally wounded when he was, because if that plan failed it would have been game-over for her, but it was still a subtle piece of work to make it seem as if the king got himself killed. She must have been sweating bullets when Robert ordered everyone but Ned out of the room, thinking that he was about to spill the whole story, but she kept her head and did not act until she knew the time was right.

And then she also outwitted Ned at the end by tricking him into thinking the gold cloaks were his. Yes, LF was the one who did the actual betraying, but Cersei still had the presence to know that she actually had the upper hand in the throne room that day.

Wow, what an amazing thread: from Tywin's morality to the events at King's Landing to Cersei's state of mind. I wonder what's next? Does anybody want to talk about the Purple Wedding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really really appreciate Tywin more after reading the part about him and Aerys.

Like how Tywin is responsible for Tyrion's behaviour its because of Aerys that Tywin became the man he is.

What are you referring to here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not only did she competently get rid of Robert at the exact right time that he could have become a problem, but she managed to keep the most shocking secret in Westeros under wraps for over a decade, that itself takes a certain level of cunning.

She wanted Ned kept alive as a prisoner, it was Joffrey who had him executed escalating the war.

I would have agreed with you about Robert if the plan to kill him was not so idiotic, it was no better than her FfC plans, really. But it worked, as even Cersei's stupid plans will work once in a while, only because the probability theory says so. That was an extreme luck that she managed to kill Robert and exactly at the time that she needed him to die.

I don't think that her managing to keep her incest with Jaime really shows her cunning. There is no needed to be cunning for this and they were not discovered probably out of luck and due to the fact that nobody would think that twins could be lovers. I mean, during the books Cersei attacked Jaime just next to sleeping Robert. That doesn't really show any level of cunning whatsoever, it's the other way around, actually.

About Ned, yeah indeed she didn't want to kill him. But Tywin sent Tyrion to KG not only because of that, but also because of giving Harenhall to Janos Slynt, dismissing Barristan and making Sandor a kingsguard. He didn't blame Cersei thought at that time. He thought that Joffrey was being an idiot and that his counselors were giving him a bad advice. But all these stupid decisions were actually done by Cersei.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking that she used the opportunity at the Trident to not only get rid of one wolf, but both, and she correctly surmised that the wolves were not simple pets but part of the Stark power structure.

As well, she tries to manipulate Robert into fighting in the melee by telling him he should not do so, a bit of reverse psychology that was thwarted only when Ned stepped in.

Yes, she got lucky that Robert was terminally wounded when he was, because if that plan failed it would have been game-over for her, but it was still a subtle piece of work to make it seem as if the king got himself killed. She must have been sweating bullets when Robert ordered everyone but Ned out of the room, thinking that he was about to spill the whole story, but she kept her head and did not act until she knew the time was right.

And then she also outwitted Ned at the end by tricking him into thinking the gold cloaks were his. Yes, LF was the one who did the actual betraying, but Cersei still had the presence to know that she actually had the upper hand in the throne room that day.

Wow, what an amazing thread: from Tywin's morality to the events at King's Landing to Cersei's state of mind. I wonder what's next? Does anybody want to talk about the Purple Wedding?

Don't forget that Cersei also wanted to kill or maim Arya at the Trident. The desire for this was the same as the desire to kill the wolves - to hurt the Starks as much as possible. I don't believe that she actually considered the wolves parts of the Starks power structure - to her they were just pets of the Stark girls and thus an opportunity to hurt them (as she believes that Starks are her enemies).

About Robert's manipulation, yeah, but she lived with him for so long and knew him very well. It's not really that smart for her to use a reverse psychology against him. At least I don't consider this as very smart. I also don't consider her a Victarion level dumb as well :)

It's a huge huge luck that her plan to kill Robert worked. If it didn't, we would all laugh about how dumb her plan was.

Again, she is not as dumb as Victarion but even Vic would be able to pretend that gold cloaks are Ned's even though they are his in Cersei's place. That's not exactly a feat.

But yeah, this is actually a massive offtopic :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Victarion isn't even that dumb.

Nah, he is pretty dumb, at least from all the POV characters he is definitely the dumbest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really?

I can understand Tywin putting down the Reyne and Tarbecks because they were rebelling and causing chaos in the west with their actions. Though he took it too far when he killed all the innocent men, women and children whose only crime was serving their liege lords. Tywin is a mass murderer and a monster.

Even if Aerys did all that was said of him in the world book(and I say IF hugely because the Maester is obviously very biased in the Lannister's favor especially Tywin's)that still gives Tywin no right to sick a child murdering little freak and 7ft tall unstable sadistic monster on a fragile woman and her babies. Aerys couldn't have said or done anything for his grandchildren or daughter-in-law to have suffered and died the way they did.

Tywin is a mass murderer, a mysoginistic, a inhumane oppressor, and down right evil he had a child raped by probably a bunch of violent war hardened soldiers than walked his father's mistress across a city nekid just to strip her of her power. Tywin is a sadistic fuck who brought the world nothing but violence, rape, murder, Gregor Clegan, Jaime and Cersei, and just anarchy.

Agree. He is an 'for the greater good' person. But your ways are not justified by your endgoal, your endgoal should be your way. There are people in Westeros who understand this, like Jon, or even Ned.

What Tywin creates is power for himself. It is not because he is an efficient ruler he is correct. His ways solve the short run (and his own power) not the long run. He destroyed ancient certainties such as guest right ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites





What Tywin creates is power for himself. It is not because he is an efficient ruler he is correct. His ways solve the short run (and his own power) not the long run. He destroyed ancient certainties such as guest right ...




That were the Freys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree. He is an 'for the greater good' person. But your ways are not justified by your endgoal, your endgoal should be your way. There are people in Westeros who understand this, like Jon, or even Ned.

You do realize that Ned was willing to let War happen, and the thousands of peoples lives that comes with war, just because he was too scared to tell the King about his 'children'.

He bribed the Gold Cloaks in a bid to get his way.

Jon ignored thousands of years of Night Watch tradition by constantly involving himself in the affairs of Westeros.

Both Ned and Jon were happy to bend the rules for their family.

What Tywin creates is power for himself. It is not because he is an efficient ruler he is correct. His ways solve the short run (and his own power) not the long run. He destroyed ancient certainties such as guest right ...

Tywin had already won. The Battle of Blackwater decided that. What happened at the Twins was for the people of the Norths own good as Robb Stark would have carried on fighting till the very end no matter how many Northern people died in his petty need for revenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realize that Ned was willing to let War happen, and the thousands of peoples lives that comes with war, just because he was too scared to tell the King about his 'children'.

He bribed the Gold Cloaks in a bid to get his way.

Jon ignored thousands of years of Night Watch tradition by constantly involving himself in the affairs of Westeros.

Both Ned and Jon were happy to bend the rules for their family.

Tywin had already won. The Battle of Blackwater decided that. What happened at the Twins was for the people of the Norths own good as Robb Stark would have carried on fighting till the very end no matter how many Northern people died in his petty need for revenge.

So you're a greater good person. That's nice. I guess you would torture someone to find a missing child as well? Or killing the Targaryen children? Or Dany? It is the same idea.

'The greater good' seems intelligent and humane, but it is not a correct idea, because the line is usually drawn by people not being rational. It's all very fine if you are the one who decides who gets to die and who not, but in the end it is always people like Hitler.

Robb was their liege lord, if they wanted to die for him that's their choice, if they didn't they should rebel or simply not fight. The point remains Tywin destroyed an important rule of law while doing it and it won't come back. He should have let the north starve, they had the right to do so and would have learned more. What did they learn now? Not to mess with Lannisters? Cute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tywin parts of this book were just fascinating to me. I've always felt that he was a more interesting character then the one note Machiavellian villain a lot of people see him as. The stuff the secret passage from the tower of the hand to the brothels and how that relates to the way he treats Tyrion, Joanna being the only one to make him smile, Kevan and Genna's devotion to him, etc. When you see his career laid out and how many people were itching for him to fail just because of his family's wealth and power, not to mention the systematic and continual abuse he received from the mad king, it really puts things into perspective.



Not to say I excuse the way he treats Tyrion, his total war on the Riverlands, or any of the other horrible things he does. But I really like how he goes from being this brilliant young man with all this promise, to a cruel, callous, and ultimately tragic figure brought down by the fruits of his own hatred.



Also the history of the Westerlands was just great. And the bit about Tytos losing his wife "From that day forth, no one ever again called him the laughing lion" just a sad little bit of pathos for a character generally written off as weak and useless.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'The greater good' seems intelligent and humane, but it is not a correct idea, because the line is usually drawn by people not being rational. It's all very fine if you are the one who decides who gets to die and who not, but in the end it is always people like Hitler.

Why did Ned Stark chose to back Stannis, even though he knew that it would mean certain war?

You have a flimsy argument, the majority of the leaders who go to war think what they are doing is for the 'greater good', that does not make them all Hitler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did Ned Stark chose to back Stannis, even though he knew that it would mean certain war?

You have a flimsy argument, the majority of the leaders who go to war think what they are doing is for the 'greater good', that does not make them all Hitler.

About Ned, because it was the right thing to do? Thinking you have the power to decide who lives and who dies is to dangerous, you have to accept certain rules, we call them human rights, in a society such as Westeros it is things as guest right, oaths, even succession. Those guarantee the fundamentals of a society, so you can built something upon it. War is short term.

And most reasons for a war don't go with those rules, that's true.

(I am not really talking about going to war, but just answering the question whether it is worse to kill 1000 in battle instead of 10 over dinner. I am also not defending everything Ned did, just that he is more ethical, and I have a feeling he understands the value of certain things better. So do Tyrion and Dany, remember she set her unsullied free? Tywin would never have done that. I guess none of them would have done the red wedding.)

But it is true, he is a very well designed character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About Ned, because it was the right thing to do? Thinking you have the power to decide who lives and who dies is to dangerous, you have to accept certain rules, we call them human rights, in a society such as Westeros it is things as guest right, oaths, even succession. Those guarantee the fundamentals of a society, so you can built something upon it. War is short term.

And most reasons for a war don't go with those rules, that's true.

(I am not really talking about going to war, but just answering the question whether it is worse to kill 1000 in battle instead of 10 over dinner. I am also not defending everything Ned did, just that he is more ethical, and I have a feeling he understands the value of certain things better. So do Tyrion and Dany, remember she set her unsullied free? Tywin would never have done that. I guess none of them would have done the red wedding.)

Dany would have done the Red Wedding.

So too would Tyrion if the decision was his to make, I suspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×