Tywin, not such a bad guy afterall?

[larastone]

I just simply can't give a fuck about Tywin or care about him because I just don't see the complexity that people see in him I guess. I have no problem liking characters with questionable moral values, antiheroes and villains etc (I love characters like Don Draper, Betty Draper, Walter White etc) but Tywin is just a cold monster to me and I can't see any parts of myself in him at all. He's interesting in how he influenced his children and how Cersei especially tries to emulate him but as a character by himself, he's just boring as fuck to me. Don't get me wrong, I *get* why Tywin does what he does, but his reasons are just not interesting enough for me I guess. And lol @ people saying Tywin wasn't evil, he's one of the biggest monsters in the story. I felt much more sympathy for Joanna and Rhaella with how Aerys treated them rather than Tywin. In fact, its kind of weird to me why there aren't more threads here about feeling sympathy for those two poor women but these Tywin threads.

[Maid So Fair]

1. It was not pointless terrorism in a strategical sense, he wanted Edmure to split his forces and provoce him to start the war.

Yet he keeps going long after Edmure has split his forces and lost on the battlefield. In fact, he doesn't stop the entire war.

[John Doe]

Yet he keeps going long after Edmure has split his forces and lost on the battlefield. In fact, he doesn't stop the entire war.

He can't stop the war if his enemy is still willing to fight, and they were until after the RW.

[John Doe]

Didn't they teach in kindergarten that "But he did it too" is not a good excuse?

Well, cultural context is important.

[C.T. Phipps]

Some fans defend Tywin unleashing the Mountain on the Riverlands for utilitarian reasons, but tell me something:

What did send the Mountain to rape people collaborated in having Tyrion released? In what way the story of Tyrion's release would have been different if Tywin had not unleashed his monsters? The only answer is that it accomplished nothing and influenced nothing.

And what would happen if Robert hadn't died? Then Tywin would at best be in serious trouble with the Warden of the North AND Hand of the King AND The king's best friend AND father of the future queen AND uncle by marriage of the LP of the Vale and brother in law of his mother and regent AND who also happened to be an extremely popular figure among the lords of the Vale AND Son-in-Law of the LP of the Riverlands, who would ALSO be mad at him as well. At worse he would be beheaded (and all that ignoring the incest).

You know, now that I write this down, I realize Ned at that point in AGOT was everything Tywin ever wanted to be: Hand of the King and best friend of the King and his daughter a future queen. And he achieved all that not by lying, or scheming or ordering mass murder and rape, but just by being a competent commander and an honorable man. And in all that his reputation is that of an extremely honorable and incorruptible man, and he's extremely popular not only in his Kingdom, but in the Vale and Riverlands as well, and not hated anywhere.

I can't imagine Tywin was at least a little jealous: Ned was the guy that proved everything he ever said to be complete BS, that you can achieve success without drowning yourself in the mud.

As for your last paragraph, I agree.

Tywin is evil by the standards of Westeros, which is quite impressive.

I think Tywin's pursuit of more power and wealth for his family aren't, necessarily wrong.

Nor do I think he punished the Reynes unfairly.

I do think Tywin's consistent doubling down on ruthlessness and cruelty as "strong", however, destroyed his House.

And laid the seeds for his downfall as well as his family's.

Tytos was a poor ruler but the Lannisters will only perhaps end because of Tywin.

[John Doe]

I do think Tywin's consistent doubling down on ruthlessness and cruelty as "strong", however, destroyed his House.

Tyrion ruined his house by killing him. The downfall began when Tywin died.

Or to be more precise, Varys destroyed his house, and the fact Tywin had no suitable heirs.

Tywin is evil by the standards of Westeros,

Not much.

[Winterfell is Burning]

Tyrion ruined his house by killing him. The downfall began when Tywin died.

Or to be more precise, Varys destroyed his house, and the fact Tywin had no suitable heirs.

Not much.

Was Tywin planning on living forever? If not, that means he would die some day and the house would be ruined anyway. And as we saw in the ADWD prologue, Tywin's death wouldn't come that far. And that not considering the plausible theories that Tywin was poisoned.

[John Doe]

Was Tywin planning on living forever? If not, that means he would die some day and the house would be ruined anyway. And as we saw in the ADWD prologue, Tywin's death wouldn't come that far. And that not considering the plausible theories that Tywin was poisoned.

Well, he can hardly consider to die surprisingly at the privey. He wanted to marry Cersei off, which would have enabled Kevan (since Jaime wanted to stay in the King's guard) to take the power in KL (and it would have been good for Tommen of course.

And with Kevan in charge, all the bad decisions that undermined Lannister rule in AFFC & ADWD would have been prevented.

[C.T. Phipps]

Tyrion ruined his house by killing him. The downfall began when Tywin died.

Or to be more precise, Varys destroyed his house, and the fact Tywin had no suitable heirs.

I'd argue that's not really the case. As people keep bringing up, Tywin is the only reason the situation isn't falling apart and he's surrounded by incompetents. He's also managed to make enemies of every single House in Westeros but a handful of very untrustworthy allies. He handled a lot of extremely difficult problems deftly but refused to take care of the really problematic ones like Cersei and Jaime. Ironically, had he not gone after Tyrion, he'd have had a good person for picking up the slack.

Varys, of course, was a card no one could see coming.

As for Tywin being evil by the standards of Westeros, one of the few things expected of noble lords is they honor diplomatic treaties, they look after their families, they do not harm children, and they honor fealty. Tywin Lannister's chronic backstabbing, abuse of his family, and the murder of his lord regent's grandchildren plus role in the Red Wedding really slide him far into the evil scale as Westeros morality goes for noblemen.

[John Doe]

I'd argue that's not really the case. As people keep bringing up, Tywin is the only reason the situation isn't falling apart and he's surrounded by incompetents. He's also managed to make enemies of every single House in Westeros but a handful of very untrustworthy allies. He handled a lot of extremely difficult problems deftly but refused to take care of the really problematic ones like Cersei and Jaime. Ironically, had he not gone after Tyrion, he'd have had a good person for picking up the slack.

Varys, of course, was a card no one could see coming.

As for Tywin being evil by the standards of Westeros, one of the few things expected of noble lords is they honor diplomatic treaties, they look after their families, they do not harm children, and they honor fealty. Tywin Lannister's chronic backstabbing, abuse of his family, and the murder of his lord regent's grandchildren plus role in the Red Wedding really slide him far into the evil scale as Westeros morality goes for noblemen.

He looks for his family. Even Tyrion who is despised by him gets enough money to travel through Westeros, seems to be tolerated at court, and is later made de- facto hand and master of coin. That already puts him far above Randyll Tarly, who has no reason to doubt Tyrions' parentage and whose son is no "dwarf".

His daughter is married to a king and his son would have inherited the Rock had he not chosen to be a KG member.

He honors diplomatic treaties, the RW was Walder Frey betraying his King, not Tywin. Not sure about the backstabbing.

About fealty... appearently Ned, Robert, Robb, Edmure Tully, Renly, the Tyrells etc. all don't honor it, or else they wouldn't have rebelled.

[Winterfell is Burning]

Well, he can hardly consider to die surprisingly at the privey. He wanted to marry Cersei off, which would have enabled Kevan (since Jaime wanted to stay in the King's guard) to take the power in KL (and it would have been good for Tommen of course.

And with Kevan in charge, all the bad decisions that undermined Lannister rule in AFFC & ADWD would have been prevented.

Kevan was only two years younger, he couldn't have expected him to live that much more than him (he already had lost two younger brothers after all). And when he died would have been succeeded by...Lancel?

[Humble Maester]

I guess Tywin was sort of bad at dynastic planning. Though if he had lived further and managed to get (and force) Jaime out of the Kingsguard, I think he would had made at the very least a mediocre lord for the West. Pre-maiming he had the looks and the skill at arms (and he wasn't really an idiot per se, just quite full of himself, and Cersei). Post-maiming he started getting better and better to be a lord. Who knows what Tywin would had done with pretty near absolute reign in the KL if he had not been killed by that fiendish demon monkey :P

I do admit that even by Westerosi standards Tywin might be considered bit evil, but I think that's also an image he has cultivated on purpose. People don't really want to face you on the field if you win and then will kill them and their family. I am not quite sure if killing the little dragonlings was such a bad thing by their standards (even if Ned doesn't like it). Rival claim like that would had made a lot of the more "harsher" people in Westeros do the same thing. I do take Tywin for his word that he did not mean it to be as brutal and Elia-involving as it was. Gregor especially was rather unknown quantity at the time it seems (he had been knighted by Rhaegar himself and all). Can't say I'd condone of knowingly ordering the details that happened.

I still consider the whole Tysha thing his worst mistake, partly because it came back to bite him in the arse. That could had been dealt with a bit more grace.

[Maid So Fair]

He can't stop the war if his enemy is still willing to fight, and they were until after the RW.

So you agree that it wasn't just a strategy to provoke Edmure and provoke him into doing something stupid, but his main tactic the entire time?

[Chaircat Meow]

So you agree that it wasn't just a strategy to provoke Edmure and provoke him into doing something stupid, but his main tactic the entire time?

At the beginning of the war it was to encourage Edmure to scatter his men (which he did). At the beginning of CoK it was done to provoke a march on Harrenhal, or (very much second best) a dispersal of Robb's army. The BF made that pretty clear. Not sure why there is confusion on this point.

[C.T. Phipps]

I do admit that even by Westerosi standards Tywin might be considered bit evil, but I think that's also an image he has cultivated on purpose. People don't really want to face you on the field if you win and then will kill them and their family. I am not quite sure if killing the little dragonlings was such a bad thing by their standards (even if Ned doesn't like it).

One thing I appreciate about Martin is he remembers a fact a lot of media which exalts the anti-hero forgets, which is the fact the idea of "harsher and harder=strong" isn't a new idea. The thing is, this actually has been followed to its natural conclusion on many an occasion. In Medieval societies, this has resulted in the classical definition of the vendetta.

Where vengeance isn't some cool action movie thing but a generational thing where entire families dedicate themselves to the murder of you, your family, and everyone you care about. There's places in the world where whole villages of men have bee almost wiped out by the results of these things. This is actually something Machiavelli, who Tywin would normally agree with, advises to be wary of.

Attempting to murder the Targaryen children might seem like a good idea to remove them from the dynastic equation but its made an eternal enemy of Dorne and if the "s**** gold smell is a sign of poisoning" theory is right, then Tywin Lannister was dead anyway. Likewise, the Freys and the Boltons are so loathed in their territories that Tywin's association with them is a millstone. As we see, neither of them is going to last very long given the number of (again) revenge murders being launched against them.

In short, as Machiavelli says. "It is better to be feared than loved if a prince cannot do both but above all else, he must avoid becoming hated."

Noteworthy fact: Caesar Augustus, that political rat above all political rats, adopted the children of Cleopatra and Anthony.

[Humble Maester]

One thing I appreciate about Martin is he remembers a fact a lot of media which exalts the anti-hero forgets, which is the fact the idea of "harsher and harder=strong" isn't a new idea. The thing is, this actually has been followed to its natural conclusion on many an occasion. In Medieval societies, this has resulted in the classical definition of the vendetta.

Where vengeance isn't some cool action movie thing but a generational thing where entire families dedicate themselves to the murder of you, your family, and everyone you care about. There's places in the world where whole villages of men have bee almost wiped out by the results of these things. This is actually something Machiavelli, who Tywin would normally agree with, advises to be wary of.

Attempting to murder the Targaryen children might seem like a good idea to remove them from the dynastic equation but its made an eternal enemy of Dorne and if the "s**** gold smell is a sign of poisoning" theory is right, then Tywin Lannister was dead anyway. Likewise, the Freys and the Boltons are so loathed in their territories that Tywin's association with them is a millstone. As we see, neither of them is going to last very long given the number of (again) revenge murders being launched against them.

In short, as Machiavelli says. "It is better to be feared than loved if a prince cannot do both but above all else, he must avoid becoming hated."

Yeah, I guess he sort of exchanged short-term benefits for long-term benefits then. Though as I said before I don't think the killing of Elia was necessarily part of his plan, and having her at hand could had kept Dorne a bit cooler, especially if she was released later on. And Dorne all-in-all isn't that much of a threat to Westerlands, possible assassinations not-withstanding. Especially considering the position Tywin navigated his family. I do take him at his word that the blood of the children was necessary (in him mind) for Lannisters to completely reconcile with the new regime.

Also I can't really think of that many long standing vendettas in ASoIAF. Boltons and Starks have murdered one another forever and yet they seem to get along quite fine until Robb manages to fail everything (though Stannis gets credit for that too). I don't think the Manderlys had any huge beef with Gardeners after they settled in North. Even Dorne and Targaryens reconciled pretty well in the end, even after all the nastiness of their wars. It seems most people in power in ASoIAF are rather pragmatic.

Noteworthy fact: Caesar Augustus, that political rat above all political rats, adopted the children of Cleopatra and Anthony.

Poor Caesarion though :P

[Winterfell is Burning]

In short, as Machiavelli says. "It is better to be feared than loved if a prince cannot do both but above all else, he must avoid becoming hated."

The last part is the one that the Hobbesian brigade that often defends everything Tywin does- and really, defenders of "any means necessary" politics everywhere- doesn't get, often because they try Machiavellian politics without have actually reading him. Not being hated is pretty much the 1st commandment of politics according to Machiavelli, and one that Tywin doesn't even care to try to not violate.

[John Doe]

Kevan was only two years younger, he couldn't have expected him to live that much more than him (he already had lost two younger brothers after all). And when he died would have been succeeded by...Lancel?

What would you have done in his stead? Tyrion officially is a kingslayer, Cersei is mad, Jaime doesn't want the Rock. So yes, it would have to be Lancel.

[John Doe]

The last part is the one that the Hobbesian brigade that often defends everything Tywin does- and really, defenders of "any means necessary" politics everywhere- doesn't get, often because they try Machiavellian politics without have actually reading him. Not being hated is pretty much the 1st commandment of politics according to Machiavelli, and one that Tywin doesn't even care to try to not violate.

Who hates the Lannisters apart from the dornish? The scattered Starks who don't rule the North anymore? The scattered Targs who don't rule the seven kingdoms anymore? The dornish, who are too far away from the Westerlands to matter much?

[Humble Maester]

Yeah I'd guess the point of that is not to be hated by the wrong people. I am pretty sure some of the stuff Machiavelli suggests in that little book of his would make at least some both fear and hate the Prince. As long as the hating doesn't count I don't see how it matters. Those who you injure might hate you but the rest will fear you, and Tywin has been doing a pretty good job of annihilating everyone who he injures gravely.

"So a prince must not worry if he incurs reproach for his cruelty so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal".

If one actually reads the part where Machiavelli speaks of love vs. hate and pretty much condones of Cesario Borgia's actions, you can see that Tywin would fit that model pretty well too. Murdering a couple to appease the majority would sit well with Machiavelli, I'd reckon :P

Machiavelli mentions two examples for a Prince to become hated, one is killing people for no good reason, and the other even more important one is seizing their property. So I am not sure who here has reading comprehension problems, the whole part about fear vs. love is like two pages out of a tiny tiny booklet.