A spectre is haunting Westeros — the spectre of the smallfolk

[Fisch]

This is not to say that heroic actions do not drive this story, but Martin is constantly subverting the idea that the hero is a shining knight on a white horse . We are constantly getting exposition from the Hound, Jaime, Jorah, etc. on the horrible things knights do. We have an entire subplot on slavery. We have small folk regularly saying they don't care whether it is a wolf or a lion raping and murdering them. I am not aware that Rob Stark ever expresses concern over the impact of the war on the small folk. (It might be worth a reread.)

So yes, Tywin is a naked villain, but the small folk on the Riverlands have no reason to view Robb as a hero.

"Heroic" in this instance doesn't refer to the concept of a knight in shining armour, but to the idea that "history is shaped by individual men and women and the choices that they make, by deeds glorious and terrible." (GRRM's words, not mine).

And I don't believe Robb expresses his thoughts on the smallfolk, no. His mother and father do, and he was their son in near everything.

[Mal Malenkirk]

And I don't believe Robb expresses his thoughts on the smallfolk, no. His mother and father do, and he was their son in near everything.

Well, he did set out to plunder the Westerlands.

I'm not saying it's not a valid tactic to counter Tywin, but I am guaranteeing you that this involves a whole lot of smallfolk suffering as a direct consequence. For example, Mormont stealing a lot of cattles sound fun and dashing, but I will point out that in the middle age there are no rich ranchers with huge herds. The cattle she stole, she took from hundreds of smallfolk family who had very small herds, if not a single cow in some case. These are their beast of burden and means of sustenance. And winter is coming, as the Stark well know... This is far from harmless. There is a reason why stealing cattles carried severe punishment in the past and was sometime even ground for execution; It's because depriving families of their cattle could indeed bring them to destitution and in some case to starve (especially during a years long winter!).

And that's just one example. We don't know exactly what Robb's men did to live off the land, but it wasn't pleasant for the peasants, I guarantee you that.

Right from the start, when Tywin split his army between the King's Road and Riverrun, Robb could have minimized collateral damage if it was a concern. A perfeclty valid decision would have been for Robb to take his entire army and attack Tywin's, using his (and Brynden's) knack for tactics to win that fight. A risky proposition, no doubt, but one which minimize impact on the small folks by forcing a quick resolution.

Robb chose otherwise, we can respect that, and he's no Tywin, but it's obvious he never seeked to minimize collateral damage either. It just was never a concern of his.

[Fisch]

Well, he did set out to plunder the Westerlands.

I'm not saying it's not a valid tactic to counter Tywin, but I am guaranteeing you that this involves a whole lot of smallfolk suffering as a direct consequence. For example, Mormont stealing a lot of cattles sound fun and dashing, but I will point out that in the middle age there are no rich ranchers with huge herds. The cattle she stole, she took from hundreds of smallfolk family who had very small herds, if not a single cow in some case. These are their beast of burden and means of sustenance. And winter is coming, as the Stark well know... This is far from harmless. There is a reason why stealing cattles carried severe punishment in the past and was sometime even ground for execution; It's because depriving families of their cattle could indeed bring them to destitution and in some case to starve (especially during a years long winter!).

And that's just one example. We don't know exactly what Robb's men did to live off the land, but it wasn't pleasant for the peasants, I guarantee you that.

Right from the start, when Tywin split his army between the King's Road and Riverrun, Robb could have minimized collateral dammage if it was a concern. A perfeclty valid decision would have been for Robb to take his entire army and attack Tywin's, using his (and Brynden's) knack for tactics to win that fight. A risky proposition, no doubt, but one which minimize impact on the small folks by forcing a quick resolution.

Robb chose otherwise, we can respect that, and he's no Tywin, but it's obvious he never seeked to minimize collateral damage either. It just was never a concern of his.

Fair enough. I'll even add to your example: the Blackfish is no Tywin either, but he expelled unneeded mouths from Riverrun.

[Mal Malenkirk]

Fair enough. I'll even add to your example: the Blackfish is no Tywin either, but he expelled unneeded mouths from Riverrun.

Good point. Which reminds me that Edmure did the opposite. I wish he wasn't treated like such a buttmonkey by other characters and the author. He's one of the nicest guy we've met. Same morals with some more skills and savvyness would be a great character.

[giant snake]

I like the points about Aegon being a populist. The Targaryan bloodline loyalty isn't what makes a king legitimate. Robert had it and was a failed king in the end. If Aegon is everything he's cracked up to be, then maybe he is the one who should be king.

Without getting into the Blackfyre theories, I think that Varys recognized this early on. There is a general sense that the Targaryan kings had lost their way, which inherently leads to the rebellion and the war of five kings and so on.

[Durran Durrandon]

Well, he did set out to plunder the Westerlands.

I'm not saying it's not a valid tactic to counter Tywin, but I am guaranteeing you that this involves a whole lot of smallfolk suffering as a direct consequence. For example, Mormont stealing a lot of cattles sound fun and dashing, but I will point out that in the middle age there are no rich ranchers with huge herds. The cattle she stole, she took from hundreds of smallfolk family who had very small herds, if not a single cow in some case. These are their beast of burden and means of sustenance. And winter is coming, as the Stark well know... This is far from harmless. There is a reason why stealing cattles carried severe punishment in the past and was sometime even ground for execution; It's because depriving families of their cattle could indeed bring them to destitution and in some case to starve (especially during a years long winter!).

And that's just one example. We don't know exactly what Robb's men did to live off the land, but it wasn't pleasant for the peasants, I guarantee you that.

Right from the start, when Tywin split his army between the King's Road and Riverrun, Robb could have minimized collateral dammage if it was a concern. A perfeclty valid decision would have been for Robb to take his entire army and attack Tywin's, using his (and Brynden's) knack for tactics to win that fight. A risky proposition, no doubt, but one which minimize impact on the small folks by forcing a quick resolution.

Robb chose otherwise, we can respect that, and he's no Tywin, but it's obvious he never seeked to minimize collateral damage either. It just was never a concern of his.

Thanks for this. I haven't read Clash or Storm in a while. I was lacking solid examples to back my point up.

[Durran Durrandon]

I like the points about Aegon being a populist. The Targaryan bloodline loyalty isn't what makes a king legitimate. Robert had it and was a failed king in the end. If Aegon is everything he's cracked up to be, then maybe he is the one who should be king.

Without getting into the Blackfyre theories, I think that Varys recognized this early on. There is a general sense that the Targaryan kings had lost their way, which inherently leads to the rebellion and the war of five kings and so on.

This is what was so jaw dropping about Varys' speech to Kevan in the epilogue of Dance. We finally get what looks it could be the truth about Varys' motives, and it's fantastic. Yes, it is probably doomed to failure and a lie anyhow, like all of the other good intentions in the series, but it is still fantastic.

[Mal Malenkirk]

This is what was so jaw dropping about Varys' speech to Kevan in the epilogue of Dance. We finally get what looks it could be the truth about Varys' motives, and it's fantastic. Yes, it is probably doomed to failure and a lie anyhow, like all of the other good intentions in the series, but it is still fantastic.

Yeah, Varys might have been lying through his teeth but I find myself hoping he was sincere.

[Durran Durrandon]

Yeah, Varys might have been lying through his teeth but I find myself hoping he was sincere.

My first though was that he was telling the truth. Why lie to a dying man? Then it occurred to me that he clearly could be lying for the sake of the child assassins who were getting ready to finish the job. Either way, if he is not launching a sincere populist revolution, he is at least pretending to for the sake of his followers.

[Lord Lannister]

My first though was that he was telling the truth. Why lie to a dying man? Then it occurred to me that he clearly could be lying for the sake of the child assassins who were getting ready to finish the job. Either way, if he is not launching a sincere populist revolution, he is at least pretending to for the sake of his followers.

Well three years and counting of war and devastation, blaming the ruling class and appealing to the smallfolk is a valid tactic. Especially when few of those lords are going to be backing his chosen king anyways.

[BalerionTheCat]

We have a feudal system in Westeros and slavery in Essos. And I think GRRM is demonstrating that neither system is better than the other. In some instances, we see slavers, mutilating children, making them soldiers, and at the same time explaining to Danerys that their slaves are better fed and protected that the lords' small folk. And we see that in war, the small folk is the first to pay the price.

I think the Free Folk have the right of it. I like particularly some Ygritte talk:

“The gods made the earth for all men t’ share. Only when the kings come with their crowns and steel swords, they claimed it was all theirs. My trees, they said, you can’t eat them apples. My stream, you can’t fish here. My wood, you’re not t’ hunt. My earth, my water, my castle, my daughter, keep your hands away or I’ll chop ’em off, but maybe if you kneel t’ me I’ll let you have a sniff.

I think Jon time with the Free Folk was meant to teach him what a ruler should be.

I think there was a reference somewhere, sounding like: the king should be the man you follow because you believe your life will be better with him than if you were alone or with someone else. In other words, a king has no purpose if he cannot make the life of his people better. I can't remember where I found it, but I like it. And I think that is what GRRM intend to do with Jon. Doing of him a king such as that.

[Rhaegar Targaryen's Ghost]

I think this is where Aegon comes in. The cheering crowd around the mummer's dragon points to his popularity among the peasants. And I think Varys shrewdly acknowledges the untapped support that the peasant and working classes can give while the noble classes are weakened and divided. I think Aegon allies with the Faith and the sparrows and that this alliances forms the backbone of his popular support and legitimacy.

I also think it's relevant that several dragons, including Syrax and Dreamfyre, were killed by a peasant mob. That mob was also led by a nameless zealot called the Shepherd, who might be a parallel of sorts to the High Sparrow. Point is, people in force can be deadly if they're pushed far enough.

A pet theory of mine is that fAegon accomplishes that by Illyrio exporting vast amounts of food to Westeros. When Illyrio meets Tyrion in ADWD he says, that Westeros will soon face a famine and IIRC he also says, that it will soon get scarce in the other Free Cities. Since his enormous wealth and his profession as a tradesman allows him to sell and store large amounts of food in Pentos and in the other Free Cities it would be quite easy for him to help fAegon win popularity in Westeros that way.

I really like the combination of these two ideas. We hear time and time again that the nobles play their game of thrones and the common people suffer. Having Aegon show up with food and a level head on his shoulders is lightyears ahead of what Stannis, Dany, or Tommen could offer them.

[giant snake]

I don't think that the Free Folk or the Dothraki have anything to teach anyone.

One of the good points of the show was Khal Drogo's murder of Viserys. Not that Viserys didn't deserve to die now. The way he leers at him as he dies just sums up the Essos attitude towards human life. The Wildlings are no better and probably worse, considering that they rely on thievery and murder as a way of life without any notable exceptions.

I think one of the reasons that the Targs have so much respect is that there were several populist kings and queens. The problem is their latent insanity which sort of counteracted all of that. They prefer to forget the bad kings and think on what-ifs like Baelor Breakspear and Rhaegar.

[Mal Malenkirk]

One of the good points of the show was Khal Drogo's murder of Viserys. Not that Viserys didn't deserve to die now. The way he leers at him as he dies just sums up the Essos attitude towards human life. The Wildlings are no better and probably worse, considering that they rely on thievery and murder as a way of life without any notable exceptions.

The free folks are much better. The Dothraki roam in humongous bands that can't live off the land and therefore are completely dependant on resources acquired from extorsion or pillaging.

The wildlings do raid south of the wall from time to time but why are you under the impression that these minor and irregular raids are 100% of what they live off? It's impossible. We saw how many there are and we know raids are not that common and successful. Most of their sustenance must come from hunting. They have to live mostly like inuits or the like with a supplement of ressources coming from raiding. And considering how much harsher their environment is, it's more understandable.

[giant snake]

Maybe you're right, but they almost all seem to live by a rule of 'Might is right,' which is exactly what causes most of the suffering inside Westeros itself. I think that the closest thing to a 'noble savage' type of person is the regular Northman, whose violence is moderated by existing laws and by the long Stark rule.

[BalerionTheCat]

I don't think that the Free Folk or the Dothraki have anything to teach anyone.

Not everything is good in the FF, by far. And Jon is pointing it to Ygritte. But the concept of kings holding the land by force of steel is thievery alike. And it is the same for the Ironborn paying with iron.

To me, the Dothraki seem utterly desperate. They seem to understand only rape and destruction. I think Danerys will only create more damage if she attempt to make use of them again.

[UnFit Finlay]

I don't think that the Free Folk or the Dothraki have anything to teach anyone.

One of the good points of the show was Khal Drogo's murder of Viserys. Not that Viserys didn't deserve to die now. The way he leers at him as he dies just sums up the Essos attitude towards human life. The Wildlings are no better and probably worse, considering that they rely on thievery and murder as a way of life without any notable exceptions.

I think one of the reasons that the Targs have so much respect is that there were several populist kings and queens. The problem is their latent insanity which sort of counteracted all of that. They prefer to forget the bad kings and think on what-ifs like Baelor Breakspear and Rhaegar.

Good point. I'd also add that the latent insanity might not even be that noticeable to the smallfolk. The majority of them will never have seen the King, much less know what he's actually like. I doubt it was common knowledge that Aerys II was burning people alive, for example.

[Durran Durrandon]

Not everything is good in the FF, by far. And Jon is pointing it to Ygritte. But the concept of kings holding the land by force of steel is thievery alike. And it is the same for the Ironborn paying with iron.

To me, the Dothraki seem utterly desperate. They seem to understand only rape and destruction. I think Danerys will only create more damage if she attempt to make use of them again.

The Free Folk have a solid critique of feudalism, if not s solid alternative social model. It's all well and good to protest feudalism when you live in a climate that doesn't support much agriculture.

I really hope Danerys doesn't try to use the Dothraki, she has gone a long way since Drogo to avoid harming innocents.