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

Banner houses are your vassals, not your friends. The Reyens and Tarbecks had lost all respect for the Lannisters and were showing it. The Reynes flat out refused to repay their debts to their liege lords and urged others to do the same. If Tywin had not struck first, the Reynes and Tarbecks eventually would have.

Oh, I don't deny he needed to give them a smacking to make them heel. But wiping them out root and branch was crazy excessive - and they didn't actually rebel until Tywin deliberately provoked them by accusing them of "crimes" and implying that Casterly Rock was revoking its protection. He deliberately set out to scuttle any chance of the normal process of negotiation and reconciliation that usually characterizes relations between liege and banners. There was no good reason for him to wipe out their whole families. Most responsible lords would have been satidfied with taking out Lord Walderan, Lady Ellyn, and maybe their son and the Red Lion as well - every single person who wore a Tarbeck surcoat or lived at Castamere, many of whom were completely innocent, didn't have to die for Tywin to prove his point, yet he did anyway. His hand wasn't forced. He chose it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why is it always aerys the mad king sucked so tywin is not so terrible... he was dealt a rough hand.


i can think of plenty of characters that are dealt much worse. that doesnt explain his immorral behavior and uncanny ability to use everyone and anyone at his dispossal


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tywin had every reason to hate Aerys, everyone did but it was Tywin's actions, deliberate actions against innocents and others that make him the asshole he is known to be.

Yeah this! Aerys' actions towards Tywin were annoying and would-be unbearable for some, but TYwin chose to stay in power under Aerys all those years though, he could have quit and walked out at anytime if he wasn't so power hungry.

But we cannot blame Aerys for posthumous actions by Tywin. Aerys didn't make him do all the Tysha stuff, nor did Aerys have anything to do with the Red Wedding. And while it was Aerys who kept Elia and the kids in KL as Dornish hostages, he is not the one who gave the order for them to be raped and brutally murdered, Tywin did that all on his own.

Although I will allow that there is only so much people can take, and Aerys pushed Tywin,IMO, over the limit by the public embarrassment, the cuckolding and then to crown it all, left Tywin to raise his dwarf bastard, who killed his lovely wife, as a constant reminder of everything for the next 30 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah this! Aerys' actions towards Tywin were annoying and would-be unbearable for some, but TYwin chose to stay in power under Aerys all those years though, he could have quit and walked out at anytime if he wasn't so power hungry.

But we cannot blame Aerys for posthumous actions by Tywin. Aerys didn't make him do all the Tysha stuff, nor did Aerys have anything to do with the Red Wedding. And while it was Aerys who kept Elia and the kids in KL as Dornish hostages, he is not the one who gave the order for them to be raped and brutally murdered, Tywin did that all on his own.

Although I will allow that there is only so much people can take, and Aerys pushed Tywin,IMO, over the limit by the public embarrassment, the cuckolding and then to crown it all, left Tywin to raise his dwarf bastard, who killed his lovely wife, as a constant reminder of everything for the next 30 years.

Tywin was a capable ruler. To a large extent, the Reynes and Tarbecks brought their end on themselves.

But, his massacres in the Riverlands; the murder of Elia and her children; the gang-rape of Tysha? They're unforgiveable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tywin was a capable ruler. To a large extent, the Reynes and Tarbecks brought their end on themselves.

But, his massacres in the Riverlands; the murder of Elia and her children; the gang-rape of Tysha? They're unforgiveable.

I agree with what happened to Tysha, Elia, and Rhaegar’s children, but not so much the Riverlands. War is hell, plain and simple. The objective is to win by destroying or subjugating the enemy, often by any means necessary. There is no United Nations Security Council or Geneva Convention in Westeros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tywin was a capable ruler. To a large extent, the Reynes and Tarbecks brought their end on themselves.

But, his massacres in the Riverlands; the murder of Elia and her children; the gang-rape of Tysha? They're unforgiveable.

The woiaf book clarifies the difference between the kinds of action Tywin commits. He was always ruthless and brutal, as we saw in the Reyne/Tarbeck rebellion. However, the sexual humiliation and murder of women, for no strategic gain, was, I think, brought on by Aerys's rape of Joanna in 272. Young Tywin was probably likely to engage in actions like the harrying of the riverlands if he thought it was advantageous but, as it happened, the suppression of the Reynes did not involve violence against the smallfolk. His war against the Reynes thus has him in a more sympathetic light than that against the Starks/Tullys, although the westerlands history reading brought that out more than the woiaf book itself.

His darkness as a character now parallels Tyrion's. Tyrion was never a good man, even though he came across sympathetically at first. He also didn't have much of a problem with ruthless wartime action (note how he says Tywin's actions in the riverlands are just war). After he murders Shae he gets very dark and starts a pattern of rape, and that's when most people lose sympathy with him. He thinks he's become a monster, like Tywin did after the sack of KL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what happened to Tysha, Elia, and Rhaegar’s children, but not so much the Riverlands. War is hell, plain and simple. The objective is to win by destroying or subjugating the enemy, often by any means necessary. There is no United Nations Security Council or Geneva Convention in Westeros.

War is hell, as you say. He made it a very special kind of hell, by turning loose Ser Gregor, Ser Amory, and Vargo Hoat on the population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

War is hell, as you say. He made it a very special kind of hell, by turning loose Ser Gregor, Ser Amory, and Vargo Hoat on the population.

Tywin waged war much more brutally than most. However, other lords, like Hoster Tully, did put the smallfolk to the sword, as did the Targs in Dorne. In GoT Ned thought Marq Piper (one of Edmure's close friends) wanted to fight back by ravaging Clegane lands in the way Gregor ravaged the riverlands. It is even somewhat possible northern bannermen inflicted atrocities in the westerlands, given we are told the Starks and Freys were paying back the lannisters in their own coin.

There is also a big difference about the motivations people ascribe to Tywin for various actions. The Blackfish and Tyrion did not question that the ravaging of the riverlands made strategic sense. However, even Tywin couldn't justify the rape and murder of Elia (and didn't do a great job of justifying the murder of Aegon either).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what happened to Tysha, Elia, and Rhaegar’s children, but not so much the Riverlands. War is hell, plain and simple. The objective is to win by destroying or subjugating the enemy, often by any means necessary. There is no United Nations Security Council or Geneva Convention in Westeros.

I have said before that all is fair in love and war, If what Tywin did at the Red Wedding is fair, then it is perfectly fair for posters to criticize him for it, or for people in Westeros to never trust him or the Freys again. It is definitely a grey area. My opinion is that a wedding =/= war. Also the rules of Guest Right have nothing to do with war, they are two separate entities and should be treated as such. Ah well, he got a crossbow to the gut in the end, good for Tyrion :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

War is hell, as you say. He made it a very special kind of hell, by turning loose Ser Gregor, Ser Amory, and Vargo Hoat on the population.

That was his point, to end it as quickly and efficiently as possible. Had Rob not come south, Hoster Tully would have had no choice, but to bend the knee and swear to Joff.

Tywin waged war much more brutally than most. However, other lords, like Hoster Tully, did put the smallfolk to the sword, as did the Targs in Dorne. It is even somewhat possible northern bannermen inflicted atrocities in the westerlands, given we are told the Starks and Freys were paying back the lannisters in their own coin.

However, even Tywin couldn't justify the rape and murder of Elia (and didn't do a great job of justifying the murder of Aegon either).

1. The Riverlands, like the rest of the realm (except for the North) was bitterly divided. Many houses stayed loyal to the crown, which is to be expected considering a near 300 year reign by House Targaryen. Hoster was said by Notch to have put the Goodbrook villages to the torch, not the sword. That’s an error on the wiki.

2. I would wager the Northmen committed some atrocities in the West. The northmen are savage by nature, and Rob had to give some leeway to keep his men in check.

3. He did not try and justify Elia. I believe Tywin when he said that he never gave orders for Elia to harmed, he just did not give orders for her to be spared either. However, he did give justification for the killing of Rhaegar’s children. The problem is whether you accept them or not. He only abandoned the Targaryen after the Trident, and needed to demonstrate his loyalty to robert. What better way than killing the primary threats to Robert’s throne (Rhaegar’s children). He recognizes that it was done too brutally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. The Riverlands, like the rest of the realm (except for the North) was bitterly divided. Many houses stayed loyal to the crown, which is to be expected considering a near 300 year reign by House Targaryen. Hoster was said by Notch to have put the Goodbrook villages to the torch, not the sword. That’s an error on the wiki.

Relevance of the crossed out?

The way it is introduced in SoS makes it clear that Hoster's atrocities were similar to those of the lannisters. Arya thinks the village is the way it is because of the current ravaging and is then told, ugh, no, that was your grandfather.

I haven't read the wiki on the subject.

3. He did not try and justify Elia. I believe Tywin when he said that he never gave orders for Elia to harmed, he just did not give orders for her to be spared either. However, he did give justification for the killing of Rhaegar’s children. The problem is whether you accept them or not. He only abandoned the Targaryen after the Trident, and needed to demonstrate his loyalty to robert. What better way than killing the primary threats to Robert’s throne (Rhaegar’s children). He recognizes that it was done too brutally.


He said it was a mistake because it is impossible to justify from a realpolitik perspective. It is highly implausible he really did just forget about her. Tywin's attempt to justify the murder of the children make some amount of sense. However, it is fairly clear that in this situation, unlike, say, in the case of the Red Wedding, Tywin could have got what he wanted by playing it the other way. By murdering the Targ heirs he burnt his bridges with the Targs and had to support Robert no matter what, and he earned the enmity of Dorne.

It is interesting that Robert justifies his marriage to Cersei in GoT by saying Jon told him it would win him lannister support in case Viserys ever returned. Clearly Robert was being rather thick, seeing as Tywin himself noted he'd irrevocably burnt his bridges with the Targs during the sack. The sack of KL, and the rape and murder of the Targs was thus mainly about revenge on Aerys, even though Tywin managed to wedge it, somewhat, into political advancement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have said before that all is fair in love and war, If what Tywin did at the Red Wedding is fair, then it is perfectly fair for posters to criticize him for it, or for people in Westeros to never trust him or the Freys again. It is definitely a grey area. My opinion is that a wedding =/= war. Also the rules of Guest Right have nothing to do with war, they are two separate entities and should be treated as such. Ah well, he got a crossbow to the gut in the end, good for Tyrion :)

I will disagree about the Guest Right. Even Tywin backed away from that one, and readily laid it at the feet of Walder Frey when pressed by Tyrion. Guarantees of safety and safe conduct are paramount for negotiation. Undermining and eliminating such institutions will lead to chaos, when civility could have ruled the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relevance of the crossed out?

The way it is introduced in SoS makes it clear that Hoster's atrocities were similar to those of the lannisters. Arya thinks the village is the way it is because of the current ravaging and is then told, ugh, no, that was your grandfather.

I haven't read the wiki on the subject.

1. Well, aside from being able to write whatever the hell I like, it simply some background to set up the point. Take it or leave it, or in your case cross it out.

2. More importantly, putting a town to the torch is not necessarily a war crime/atrocity, while putting a town to the sword certainly is. By torching a town you are depriving the enemy of supplies, lodging, troops, etc. It can be viewed as a proper war tactic.

3. You argued (wrongly) that the actions of Hoster Tully were equal to those of Tywin Lannister, sorry no proof of that.

4. If you go back to the reading, which you really should before making points, you will see that Arya and her companions rode to a town with old burned buildings and found it abandoned. Arya does wonder if the Lannisters killed all the people, but is corrected and shown that the town was burnt out long ago. However, you are free to extrapolate what you like from the reading.

5. You haven’t read the wiki? Well, that means you simply botched and butchered the text, while attempting to make a valid point, yet again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All round silliness.

I'm not going to get into the majority of the post, which is just generalized bitterness consequent on your humiliation in the Aerys/Joanna threads but ... it is pretty clear Hoster killed the smallfolk.

He is described as putting the village to the torch, but then its 'fire and sword,' and we hear the peace after the Trident did not 'help the dead none,' in other words people in the village were killed. Notch is also asked, by Gendry, who killed the people around here, and answers 'Hoster Tully.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to get into the majority of the post, which is just generalized bitterness consequent on your humiliation in the Aerys/Joanna threads but ... it is pretty clear Hoster killed the smallfolk.

He is described as putting the village to the torch, but then its 'fire and sword,' and we hear the peace after the Trident did not 'help the dead none,' in other words people in the village were killed. Notch is also asked, by Gendry, who killed the people around here, and answers 'Hoster Tully.'

Humiliation? Bitterness? Really? When I destroyed you and your ilk time and again? What the hell are you talking about dude? You are funny, I will give you that at least. As I said, you are free to interpret the reading as you see fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humiliation? Bitterness? Really? When I destroyed you and your ilk time and again? What the hell are you talking about dude? You are funny, I will give you that at least. As I said, you are free to interpret the reading as you see fit.

In your deluded dreams. Although given you actually stopped answering points I think you know you got busted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will disagree about the Guest Right. Even Tywin backed away from that one, and readily laid it at the feet of Walder Frey when pressed by Tyrion. Guarantees of safety and safe conduct are paramount for negotiation. Undermining and eliminating such institutions will lead to chaos, when civility could have ruled the day.

Well then we agree. I feel the same way about guest right. And yes, technically it was Walder who broke the guest right, not Tywin. But it was Tywin's plan, which I guess is just a smart move on his part, planning something terrible but not being physically involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In your deluded dreams. Although given you actually stopped answering points I think you know you got busted.

You are the deluded one, and somewhat idiotic if I may add. I stopped answering your points because I rested my case long ago. As I said then, you can make a counterpoint to any point, but the counterpoint being made may not be a good one, nor a plausible one, as your points were not. But I will rest yet again, to prevent a flame war and from bogging down this thread.

Well then we agree. I feel the same way about guest right. And yes, technically it was Walder who broke the guest right, not Tywin. But it was Tywin's plan, which I guess is just a smart move on his part, planning something terrible but not being physically involved.

Agreed, that was his intent, to eliminate Rob and keep his hands clean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, his massacres in the Riverlands; the murder of Elia and her children; the gang-rape of Tysha? They're unforgiveable.

Tywin's biggest mistake was that he failed to save Elia, killing her children was a necessary act, even Dorn would understand that, but have Elia rapped and killed is completely unecessary and unforgiveable, it would only buy himself a powerful enenmy who would cause so many troubles to him.

P.S no one care a lowborn like Tysha, no one would care what happened to her in the realm.

Share this post


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

×