Would Barristan have beaten Sansa?

[Jaak]

The easy, safe, honourable and cowardly course of action for Jaime might have been to heroically defend the walls of Red Keep somewhere, while letting Crakehall and his bunch do the dirty work of slaughtering Aerys. And then yield honourably after having defended the Red Keep a bit.

 

Jaime chose not to do this, and actively killed Aerys.

[TMIFairy]

IMO is beyond question that Barristan would beat Sansa. The King ordered it.

But there is a shade of doubt that he might not beat her to the best of his impressive abilities.

Only a shade, though ...

 

 

 

[Sigella]

19 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Pretty sure Joffery would see Jaimie as a coward-who stabbed his king in the back to save his ass when it became clear Aerys would lose. Which isn't exactly without merit honestly. 

Trying to kill Bran(he claims at least), was forced to do because of his love for Cers, Disobeying the king in full view of people much Joffery look weak. Joffery who Cersi loves to death. He will not risk her having to pick between him or her son, just spare the face of some girl. Bran was nothing. He could kill a thousand ramdom little boys with the line being to protect her, she would always take him back. But Joffery is her favorite son. She would try much harder. She would try much harder for Jaimie to actually avoid trying to make the boy look a fool in front of his subjects. 

But, again he didn't denigrate himself for having tried murdered a child, it's really odd to he'd shy away from hitting one when commanded  just to spare himself the headache. He's not an honorble man and he's done plenty of things that would be deemed as unbefitting of his status as well; such as robbing the corpse of his kin, trying to murder a 7 year old ect.

It's not as though he can't swallow his pride and not break his oaths to obey the king.

Robert made mockery of Jaime's kings laying ways as well yet he bit his tongue. 

Your arguments would work if the regent hadn't been a minor with a regent above him. As is they dont. 

[Lollygag]

On 4/3/2018 at 4:02 PM, Sigella said:

I see your point regarding value of hostages alive/dead. But one could argue that a girl with a smashed up uterus isn't as useful for house Lannister in usurping the North as one that can give Tyrion little lions with Stark blood.

This is a problem with me too. My best idea is that Robert beat Cersei this way but I don't know.

On 4/3/2018 at 4:02 PM, Sigella said:

Cersei does have a grasp of PR, she wouldn't let Sansa smile when getting dumped. I'm having difficulty picturing the Cersei that doesn't give a damn that everybody knows Joff likes to pit the KG on his girlfriends.

I'm doing a Lannister reread and came upon some things I didn't notice before regarding this. Cersei has a very confusing view of Joff. She wants him to obey her because she wants to call the shots, but at the same time, she is also very discouraged when Tommen obeys her as she sees it as a sign of weakness. She's giving Joff some very mixed signals.

Joff says a strong king acts boldly and when Tywin points out that this is stupid, Cersei says Robert told Joff that. But there's a lot pointing to Cersei telling Joff this. I can see Cersei interpreting Joff beating Sansa as looking "strong" which would be exceptionally messed up as Robert hit Cersei. We later find out that Cersei sees Marg as a threat due to her influence over Joff, so encouraging Joff to hate Sansa (while at the same time playing good cop herself) keeps Sansa from having any real power over Joff. As we see later, Cersei's brand of "bold" is not different than Joff's brand of "bold". 

I agree with you that Barristan would likely have grasped at straws but I don't see where it would have resulted in anything. He'd still have to choose to obey or not. Barristan would have known Cersei and Joff very well, and I can see him as not bothering to ask because he'd know how messed up Cersei and Joff are.

 

ASOS Tyrion VI

"Be quiet, Cersei. Joffrey, when your enemies defy you, you must serve them steel and fire. When they go to their knees, however, you must help them back to their feet. Elsewise no man will ever bend the knee to you. And any man who must say 'I am the king' is no true king at all. Aerys never understood that, but you will. When I've won your war for you, we will restore the king's peace and the king's justice. The only head that need concern you is Margaery Tyrell's maidenhead."

Joffrey had that sullen, sulky look he got. Cersei had him firmly by the shoulder, but perhaps she should have had him by the throat. The boy surprised them all. Instead of scuttling safely back under his rock, Joff drew himself up defiantly and said, "You talk about Aerys, Grandfather, but you were scared of him."

Oh, my, hasn't this gotten interesting? Tyrion thought.

Lord Tywin studied his grandchild in silence, gold flecks shining in his pale green eyes. "Joffrey, apologize to your grandfather," said Cersei.

He wrenched free of her. "Why should I? Everyone knows it's true. My father won all the battles. He killed Prince Rhaegar and took the crown, while your father was hiding under Casterly Rock." The boy gave his grandfather a defiant look. "A strong king acts boldly, he doesn't just talk."

"Thank you for that wisdom, Your Grace," Lord Tywin said, with a courtesy so cold it was like to freeze their ears off. "Ser Kevan, I can see the king is tired. Please see him safely back to his bedchamber. Pycelle, perhaps some gentle potion to help His Grace sleep restfully?"

"Dreamwine, my lord?"

"I don't want any dreamwine," Joffrey insisted.

Lord Tywin would have paid more heed to a mouse squeaking in the corner. "Dreamwine will serve. Cersei, Tyrion, remain."

Ser Kevan took Joffrey firmly by the arm and marched him out the door, where two of the Kingsguard were waiting. Grand Maester Pycelle scurried after them as fast as his shaky old legs could take him. Tyrion remained where he was.

"Father, I am sorry," Cersei said, when the door was shut. "Joff has always been willful, I did warn you . . ." ‘

"There is a long league's worth of difference between willful and stupid. 'A strong king acts boldly?' Who told him that?"

"Not me, I promise you," said Cersei. "Most like it was something he heard Robert say . . ."

"The part about you hiding under Casterly Rock does sound like Robert." Tyrion didn't want Lord Tywin forgetting that bit.

"Yes, I recall now," Cersei said, "Robert often told Joff that a king must be bold."

"And what were you telling him, pray? I did not fight a war to seat Robert the Second on the Iron Throne. You gave me to understand the boy cared nothing for his father."

"Why would he? Robert ignored him. He would have beat him if I'd allowed it. That brute you made me marry once hit the boy so hard he knocked out two of his baby teeth, over some mischief with a cat. I told him I'd kill him in his sleep if he ever did it again, and he never did, but sometimes he would say things . . ."

"It appears things needed to be said." Lord Tywin waved two fingers at her, a brusque dismissal. "Go."

She went, seething.

 

AFFC Cersei II (Cersei orders Tommen and is disappointed when he obeys seeing it as weakness)

Tommen did as he was bid. His meekness troubled her. A king had to be strong. Joffrey would have argued. He was never easy to cow. "Don't slump so," she told Tommen. "Sit like a king. Put your shoulders back and straighten your crown. Do you want it to tumble off your head in front of all your lords?"

…

Cersei led the king up three short steps, to kneel beside the body. Tommen's eyes were filled with tears. "Weep quietly," she told him, leaning close. "You are a king, not a squalling child. Your lords are watching you." The boy swiped the tears away with the back of his hand. He had her eyes, emerald green, as large and bright as Jaime's eyes had been when he was Tommen's age. Her brother had been such a pretty boy . . . but fierce as well, as fierce as Joffrey, a true lion cub. The queen put her arm around Tommen and kissed his golden curls. He will need me to teach him how to rule and keep him safe from his enemies. Some of them stood around them even now, pretending to be friends.

…

"No," Ser Kevan agreed. "Which is why you should return to Casterly Rock and leave the king with those who do."

"The king is my son!" Cersei rose to her feet.

"Aye," her uncle said, "and from what I saw of Joffrey, you are as unfit a mother as you are a ruler."

 

 

ACOK Tyrion I

Tyrion shrugged. "He knows that your son's short reign has been a long parade of follies and disasters. That suggests that someone is giving Joffrey some very bad counsel."

Cersei gave him a searching look. "Joff has had no lack of good counsel. He's always been strong-willed. Now that he's king, he believes he should do as he pleases, not as he's bid."

 

AFFC Cersei VI

"The mob loved the fat High Septon so well they tore him limb from limb, and him a holy man," she reminded him. All it did was make him sullen with her. Just as Margaery wants, I wager. Every day in every way she tries to steal him from me. Joffrey would have seen through her schemer's smile and let her know her place, but Tommen was more gullible. She knew Joff was too strong for her, Cersei thought, remembering the gold coin Qyburn had found. For House Tyrell to hope to rule, he had to be removed.

[Sigella]

11 hours ago, Lollygag said:

This is a problem with me too. My best idea is that Robert beat Cersei this way but I don't know.

I'm doing a Lannister reread and came upon some things I didn't notice before regarding this. Cersei has a very confusing view of Joff. She wants him to obey her because she wants to call the shots, but at the same time, she is also very discouraged when Tommen obeys her as she sees it as a sign of weakness. She's giving Joff some very mixed signals.

Joff says a strong king acts boldly and when Tywin points out that this is stupid, Cersei says Robert told Joff that. But there's a lot pointing to Cersei telling Joff this. I can see Cersei interpreting Joff beating Sansa as looking "strong" which would be exceptionally messed up as Robert hit Cersei. We later find out that Cersei sees Marg as a threat due to her influence over Joff, so encouraging Joff to hate Sansa (while at the same time playing good cop herself) keeps Sansa from having any real power over Joff. As we see later, Cersei's brand of "bold" is not different than Joff's brand of "bold". 

I agree with you that Barristan would likely have grasped at straws but I don't see where it would have resulted in anything. He'd still have to choose to obey or not. Barristan would have known Cersei and Joff very well, and I can see him as not bothering to ask because he'd know how messed up Cersei and Joff are.

I think what confuses Cersei's view of Joff is the fact that he died. Romanticising the dead is a universal habit. If you'd order your quotes  chronologically you'll see her views aren't confused but changes after he dies.

 

edit: And I just thought of another thing. Barristan knew and liked Ned. Beating Ned's daughter would be worse for him than hitting a random girl.

[TMIFairy]

31 minutes ago, Sigella said:

edit: And I just thought of another thing. Barristan knew and liked Ned. Beating Ned's daughter would be worse for him than hitting a random girl.

Well, my heart just bleeds for Barristan now ...

 

[Lollygag]

2 hours ago, Sigella said:

I think what confuses Cersei's view of Joff is the fact that he died. Romanticising the dead is a universal habit. If you'd order your quotes  chronologically you'll see her views aren't confused but changes after he dies.

 

edit: And I just thought of another thing. Barristan knew and liked Ned. Beating Ned's daughter would be worse for him than hitting a random girl.

Joff was told that a strong king acts boldly while he was alive. It wasn't until we get Cersei's POV after he died that we see it really came from Cersei, not Robert.

Agree Barristan would have a problem with their treatment of Ned and Sansa as Ned's daughter. I wonder if this is part of the reason why Cersei (with an uncertain amount of involvement from Varys) had Barristan removed. He might have gone along with it all in the end, but he wasn't quick enough to drink the Kool-Aid and did so without enough enthusiasm.

 

[TMIFairy]

Barristan - standing by as innocents suffer since 262AC ...

Sansa is just one more victim of torment by the King - Barry would do nothing to help her. Cersei either was too stupid to see that or - more likely - wanted Lord Commander for Jaime.

[Lollygag]

She says outright that she had Jaime as LC on her mind in a quote earlier. Other reasons though aren't mutually exclusive. Cersei's future picks for the KG indicate that she's very much aware of the KG's loyalties especially concerning the types of requests Cersei is apt to make.

[TheThreeEyedCow]

I don't think Barristan would of, no. Just imo based on his nature. I think Joff would of certainly been obnoxious enough to ask him though, and it would of been a more entertaining way for them to part company! 

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, TheThreeEyedCow said:

I don't think Barristan would of, no. Just imo based on his nature. I think Joff would of certainly been obnoxious enough to ask him though, and it would of been a more entertaining way for them to part company! 

Considering that he didn't demand it of Sandor, I doubt he would have tried to force Barristan. What would be the point? He wasn't playing a power game there with his Kingsguard, he was playing with Sansa.

I'm sure he would have known better than to push Selmy.

[Darth Sidious]

5 hours ago, TheThreeEyedCow said:

I don't think Barristan would of, no. Just imo based on his nature. I think Joff would of certainly been obnoxious enough to ask him though, and it would of been a more entertaining way for them to part company! 

Joffrey is not the smartest of young men but people generally know who they can push and who they can't.  People get a measure of who will do what they ask with no resistance, little resistance, or refuse.  Most people will follow the path of least resistance.  So unless Joffrey was feeling particularly obstinate that moment, he would choose to order someone like Trant for that kind of work.  

[Elaena Targaryen]

Weird thread, while it's interesting and complex it still boils down to - if this has an answer what does it prove? Even so, it is thought provoking and I enjoy digging deeper! I find what it might prove seems quite expansive.

My answer is no. At first thought I felt Barristan would not hit Sansa himself but would have stood by and watched, I have tentatively changed my mind on the latter.

Barristan was the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard and that position gave him a seat on the small council. This is during the reign of an underage monarch that was using his personal knights to beat a helpless girl, knights Barristan was in charge of and I do believe he would have addressed it in council. Also Barristan sided against Robert during a small council meeting "Your Grace, there is honor in facing an enemy on the battlefield, but none in killing him in his mother's womb. Forgive me, but I must stand with Lord Eddard." so I do believe he would have at the least questioned it.

Part of the KG vows are "to ward the king with all my strength" and "to give my blood for his". Even Jaime points out "show me where it is in our vows that we swear to beat women and children". I just can't see Barristan not appealing to other authorities in these circumstances, he might even consider it his duty to do so. A beating was stopped by the acting Hand and the next LC chastised Meryn for his past participation. They were however both related to the king so that gave them more leeway. 

Now there are other considerations brought up in this thread I've thought about like Dunk, Aerys, Jaime, Sandor and Cersei. Also Sansa's status as hostage and betrothal to her kingly abuser. I agree with many points from Lord Varys and I have a few others.

First Dunk is easy so I'll get it out of the way, no I don't believe he would beat a little girl and I don't believe Egg would have asked him. Which does come back to others on the list. I don't think anyone would have even asked Barristan to hit Sansa, he wasn't the right tool for the job. Joff wouldn't have had any trouble finding someone even if he looked outside of the KG like he should have. Joff used the KG for this because they were convenient, always handy and discreet, but it's a great risk to the reputation of the institution. LV is right that Joff reduced them to common thugs and reputation is everything in a culture like this.

The first time Joff has a KG hit Sansa he tells her "My mother tells me that it isn't fitting that a king should strike his wife" so Cersei instilled this into her son likely because Robert hit her. It doesn't really make sense that using the KG instead would be any better but Cersei does know Joff is doing so. "He's never been able to forget that day on the Trident when you saw her shame him, so he shames you in turn. You're stronger than you seem, though- I expect you'll survive a bit of humiliation. I did." She downgrades it to shaming but I feel Sansa was in more danger than Cersei, while Bob was a brute Joff was more twisted. Cersei was at times able to cow Bob and I don't think Sansa would have survived very long with Joff. Would Cersei order the KG to beat Sansa, yes she could but there are too many variables to determine if she would I think. However it never did happen in front of her either.

On 4/4/2018 at 10:40 AM, Lord Varys said:

Aerys and Rhaella are the king and the queen. And Rhaella is not only Aerys' wife she is also his younger sister. He owns her as her brother, her husband, and her king. The Kingsguard still realized that what Aerys was doing there was very wrong, but it was still something he could do within the rights given to him by the society he lived in.

And not just because he was the king, but also because Rhaella was his wife. Ramsay can also treat Jeyne the way he does because he is her lord husband. There is, as far as I know, no indication that marital rape is a crime in the Seven Kingdoms. Robert raped Cersei occasionally, Lysa did not like to have sex with Jon Arryn, Selyse might not enjoy sex with Stannis, etc.

Nobody ever mentions that (violent) sex between husband and wife is a crime in the Seven Kingdoms. Or rather: a crime bad enough so that the servants and men-at-arms of the husband have a right to intervene.

I don't see that on the basis of the evidence we have. Barristan turns against Joff very quickly, and he never did that kind of thing under Aerys, either, at least not as far as we know. Standing around while the king rapes his sister-wife isn't the same as beaten a little girl (or raping a woman/the queen yourself).

I agree. And would add I don't think they were necessarily troubled that Aerys raped his wife - it was the brutality of it that was disturbing but not enough to interfere. Martin discusses an alien mindset in an interview and I think this is one the types of behavior he meant to touch on - even if he could have taken it further.

 Westeros isn't medieval England but, from my readings in history, one of the things that impresses you is that the medieval mindset was very different and I'm trying to convey that. I think that is lost in modern fantasy. While they may be riding horses and living in castles, it is a very modern setting. You see peasants sassing princesses, religion being disregarded and lots of things that happen. I can't say I've done a complete medieval mindset. I haven't. In fact, if I had I think it would be too alien. But I've tried to convey some of it.

This was just another factor in Sansa's beatings since they were betrothed, almost no one could or would intervene to help her. 

Quote

The Sandor example is also sort of weird in that context. This man is much worse than Barristan Selmy ever could be because of the things he did - he confessed to have killed women and children - whereas Selmy most likely never did that. Selmy certainly could have prevented some things Aerys did, but it is a difference if you commit crimes yourself, and if you just do not prevent them.

Sandor treating Sansa nicely and butchering Mycah shows that his priorities lie where his own heart/sexual desires lie. He treats Sansa gently because he wants something from her, because he idolizes her, because ... whatever. He doesn't do that because he isn't a violent person or living up to chivalric values.

It is still a good thing that he doesn't hit her, of course, but one good thing among many bad things doesn't make him a 'true knight'. It certainly fits in the theme that not all bad people might be completely rotten people (and that not all good people might be perfectly good people).

 

Again I totally agree. While it is great he doesn't hit Sansa he damn sure isn't The White Knight because of it. Sandor wasn't asked to hit Sansa. Sandor actually did stand by and watch like Barristan is being demeaned for when we don't know he would have. But I think the important point is Sandor didn't want to hit her, because he likes her. If it was some other girl I don't think it would have bothered him a bit since he has admitted to killing women and children. I've learned to like Sandor over the years but I'm honest about what he is and your only safe if he cares about you.

I've saved Jaime for last. I don't think Joff would ever ask Jaime to do something like that and I don't think Jaime would ever accept orders like that from his son. Would he have hit Sansa? No, he's made it clear that he would not. 

"Ser Meryn." Jaime smiled at the sour knight with the rust-red hair and the pouches under his eyes. "I have heard it said that Joffrey made use of you to chastise Sansa Stark." He turned the White Book around one-handed. "Here, show me where it is in our vows that we swear to beat women and children."

"I did as His Grace commanded me. We are sworn to obey."

"Henceforth you will temper that obedience. My sister is Queen Regent. My father is the King's Hand. I am Lord Commander of the Kingsguard. Obey us. None other."

Ser Meryn got a stubborn look on his face. "Are you telling us not to obey the king?"

"The king is eight. Our first duty is to protect him, which includes protecting him from himself. Use that ugly thing you keep inside your helm. If Tommen wants you to saddle his horse, obey him. If he tells you to kill his horse, come to me."

But for me that does not let him off the hook, even though I like him. I feel Jaime would not hit Sansa because the circumstances allow for it not because he truly gives a shit. He is arrogant and it's beneath him, he wants to be a true knight for vanity not empathy, his status and family gives him leeway to choose and his oath to Catelyn amuses him. I do believe he truly wants to do good and his reasons for me are irrelevant so long as he continues but I think under other circumstances he most assuredly would hit a little girl. If another king at another time with another girl oh yes he would.

I've seen comments that he wouldn't hurt a girl or what about when he pushed Bran - but everyone always forgets the time Jaime spent four days hunting a nine year old girl to maim and kill her... luckily he didn't find her.... oh the things he does for love...

"As I was fucking her, Cersei cried, 'I want.' I thought that she meant me, but it was the Stark girl that she wanted, maimed or dead." The things I do for love. "It was only by chance that Stark's own men found the girl before me. If I had come on her first . . ."

Yes he is trying to be a different person now but he is very capable of hurting a little girl for very selfish reasons.

 

[Lord Varys]

6 hours ago, Elaena Targaryen said:

My answer is no. At first thought I felt Barristan would not hit Sansa himself but would have stood by and watched, I have tentatively changed my mind on the latter.

One can see Selmy standing there, watching, and doing nothing when dealing with an adult king - as he did back during Aerys II's bad years - but we can be pretty sure that he would have tried to prevent the excesses of minor King Joffrey precisely because of his memories of Aerys II.

I mean, it is this experience with Aerys II - and presumably also with Robert the Fool, Cersei, and Joffrey - that caused to him to check whether the next monarch he pledges his sword to is worthy of it.

Joffrey's excesses are reminiscent of a Maegor the Cruel in the making, nor a Aerys II. Aerys became as worse as he was because of his mental illness and the Duskendale trauma. But Joffrey was a child on the fast track to become a really cruel king. Selmy would have considered it his duty to try and influence the king's upbringing and education to the point that such an ugly thing could have been prevented.

And if he had realized that things were hopeless, he would have abandoned the boy. Like he did when they offered him honorable retirement. As I've said - the speed in which he says rather provoking and ugly things shows that this man wasn't loyal to this new Lannister regime at heart.

Ned thinks Selmy would have stood with Joff had he told him about his plans, but the way Selmy talks about Ned in ADwD actually indicates that the man might have stood with Ned against the Lannisters had Ned given him the chance to make that choice.

6 hours ago, Elaena Targaryen said:

First Dunk is easy so I'll get it out of the way, no I don't believe he would beat a little girl and I don't believe Egg would have asked him.

I'd agree that Dunk would likely never have participated in the petty torture/humiliation of a hostage. What I don't think is that Dunk would have never killed a child if it was necessary to protect his best friend and king and his family. We don't know whether Aegon V ever collected hostages from the many rebels that stood up against him after he defeated them in battle - but it is possible. and if they continued their treason there would have been a response.

I don't think Aegon V would have commanded Dunk to act as his executioner, but he might have stood there while Aegon V executed the young son, daughter, or wife of some rebel committing vile treason to send a message to the Realm that he would not pamper and spare the lives of the hostages he had taken to ensure the loyalty of his lords.

And as I've laid out somewhere above - one can make a case that Dunk's decision to face Lord Lyonel Baratheon in a trial-by-combat is actually a more despicable thing than beating a little girl. Dunk owes his life to this man who did the right thing back at Ashford - defending the dishonorable and selfish behavior of Prince Duncan Targaryen clearly isn't the right thing to do.

There is no place for egoistic love and private happiness in this world. Princes do have do their duty in the marriage bed, not follow their passion.

In that sense we can say that Dunk put his namesake Prince Duncan - and Aegon V and his family - before everything else at this point, even his personal feelings towards Lord Lyonel. It is also pretty clear that neither Prince Duncan nor King Aegon V could have forced Dunk to fight this man - he could have deliberately lost, like Daeron the Drunk did, after all - so I think we can reasonably say (although we don't know any details yet) that Dunk decided to do this of his own free will.

6 hours ago, Elaena Targaryen said:

I agree. And would add I don't think they were necessarily troubled that Aerys raped his wife - it was the brutality of it that was disturbing but not enough to interfere. Martin discusses an alien mindset in an interview and I think this is one the types of behavior he meant to touch on - even if he could have taken it further.

Yes, it is not the rape, it is the way it happens, the thing Aerys II does do his sister-wife while he is raping her. That is what makes it so difficult to bear to stand there and hear (and later see) what happens, yet being unable to do something about it.

If they saw just a weeping woman being escorted into the king's bedchamber - or a woman weeping when the king came to visit her in her bedchamber - and there was afterwards no commotion and no hint that any violence aside from the rape had happened, it would be a completely different thing.

Then we would talk about a wife doing her marital duties and a husband claiming his marital rights.

6 hours ago, Elaena Targaryen said:

Again I totally agree. While it is great he doesn't hit Sansa he damn sure isn't The White Knight because of it. Sandor wasn't asked to hit Sansa. Sandor actually did stand by and watch like Barristan is being demeaned for when we don't know he would have. But I think the important point is Sandor didn't want to hit her, because he likes her. If it was some other girl I don't think it would have bothered him a bit since he has admitted to killing women and children. I've learned to like Sandor over the years but I'm honest about what he is and your only safe if he cares about you.

In a sense, Sandor is just as 'worse' as Aerys' Seven there because he stands around and does nothing. He is better than Trant and the others, of course, not participating, but he is also doing nothing to stop it. If Jaime, Darry, etc. are accomplices of Aerys II many crimes, then Sandor is also an accomplice of the beatings of Sansa.

He doesn't really distance himself from any of that.

6 hours ago, Elaena Targaryen said:

But for me that does not let him off the hook, even though I like him. I feel Jaime would not hit Sansa because the circumstances allow for it not because he truly gives a shit. He is arrogant and it's beneath him, he wants to be a true knight for vanity not empathy, his status and family gives him leeway to choose and his oath to Catelyn amuses him. I do believe he truly wants to do good and his reasons for me are irrelevant so long as he continues but I think under other circumstances he most assuredly would hit a little girl. If another king at another time with another girl oh yes he would.

Indeed, Jaime is, in my opinion, a worse narcissist than Cersei. His motivations constantly revolve around himself and what he wants to be, how he wants to be seen. He is not motivated by doing the right thing, he is motivated by what he wants to be (or with whom he wants to be). He likes being a knight, and that's why he wanted to be the best knight. He is not motivated by empathy or compassion, or anything of that sort because he has very little of that.

The only people he feels close to are his own family, that's it. And that's because they are part of the very special Lannister people. I mean, what is ridiculous motivation to remain in Tommen's Kingsguard? Or not becoming Tommen's Hand? It is his arrogance and determination to do whatever the hell he wants to do, to not be ruled by other people, be it his father or sister.

And his nicer traits later in AFfC are also motivated by how acting this or that way will change the way people see him - he fantasizes about 'Goldenhand the Just' replacing the Kingslayer image. He doesn't care about doing the right thing because it is right but rather about how it makes him look. And that's also were Brienne fits in. She reminds him of himself, the way he was back before Aerys II - or rather: the way he thinks he was.

Cersei is very fucked-up, but she really loves her children in her own way. She is a bad mother and all, but she genuinely loves them. Jaime has no emotional connection whatsoever to any of his children, and that's not because Cersei didn't allow him to be the father, it is because he never cared to create such a bond. He was their uncle as well as their father, and Tyrion has a bond with his sister's children. Jaime has none, never mind that he was constantly around.

6 hours ago, Elaena Targaryen said:

I've seen comments that he wouldn't hurt a girl or what about when he pushed Bran - but everyone always forgets the time Jaime spent four days hunting a nine year old girl to maim and kill her... luckily he didn't find her.... oh the things he does for love...

"As I was fucking her, Cersei cried, 'I want.' I thought that she meant me, but it was the Stark girl that she wanted, maimed or dead." The things I do for love. "It was only by chance that Stark's own men found the girl before me. If I had come on her first . . ."

Yes he is trying to be a different person now but he is very capable of hurting a little girl for very selfish reasons.

We can also cite King Aerys II. His murder isn't a moral dilemma. It isn't the life of Aerys II against thousands of innocents, because Aerys isn't exactly holding the switch to activate the bomb the moment Jaime kills him (not to mention that a significant portion of the thousands of innocents are actually butchered by Lannister men in the moment Jaime kills his king).

He could have knocked out the man, he could have arrested him, he could have distracted him for a couple of minutes until the Lannister men were in the throne room, etc. Jaime killed Aerys because he wanted to. He was following a murderous impulse there. It is clear that he wanted to punish him for the wildfire plan but it is just as clear that he wanted payback for all the things Aerys made him witness - and also for the command he gave him: to kill his own father.

This isn't a person facing a moral dilemma. In fact, if Jaime was a moral person he would have long ago ended the incestuous relationship with his sister. He knows that this is wrong by all the rules and customs of the society he lives in but he doesn't care. Just as he knew that killing the king was the worst thing a Kingsguard could do. But he didn't care about that, either.

People breaking such strong societal taboos usually have very severe issues with morality. And in that sense it is hardly surprising that Jaime has no issue whatsoever killing a young child if that allows him to continue the life he is used to.

Nor that having fun with his sister causes him to have no second thoughts about murdering a young girl. You have to be very fucked-up to consider things like that. Not everybody having great sex with his gorgeous sister would considering murdering a girl afterwards...

[TheThreeEyedCow]

On 05/04/2018 at 10:48 PM, Lord Varys said:

Considering that he didn't demand it of Sandor, I doubt he would have tried to force Barristan. What would be the point? He wasn't playing a power game there with his Kingsguard, he was playing with Sansa.

I'm sure he would have known better than to push Selmy.

Maybe you're right, I just don't share your confidence. I see Joff as a chip off the old block (the actual block, not the cuckold R.B). Jaime does things purely because it amuses him. And Cersei seems so wonderfully inept at judging her peers, that I see their offspring as being the kind of guy who'll screw it up by acting like a maniacal, narcissistic, tyrannical idiot.

How long could it of worked? If Barristan stayed, I mean. Can you imagine Joff abiding a member of his own KG being beyond his absolute control; Cersei too? I think Joff would of goaded the aging knight just so he could watch the Hound kill him. Or try.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, TheThreeEyedCow said:

How long could it of worked? If Barristan stayed, I mean. Can you imagine Joff abiding a member of his own KG being beyond his absolute control; Cersei too? I think Joff would of goaded the aging knight just so he could watch the Hound kill him. Or try.

Joff the boy wouldn't have pushed the adults too far. Just look how Tywin can send him to bed. Selmy isn't Tywin, of course, but Selmy is Barristan the Bold, a man with the greatest reputation any living man in Westeros has at this point.

Joffrey the grown-up king would be another matter. He wouldn't have known any bounds. He would have done whatever he wanted. Not sure if he had wanted Selmy to strike Sansa, though - an adult Joff would have just kept her as a sex slave, eventually killing her when he was done with her.

You seem to misunderstand the game Joff is playing there. Joff doesn't play a power game with his Kingsguard. He plays with Sansa. And he uses his KG to beat her because they are, unfortunately, his thugs. They are very rotten people, for the most part, and they want to follow his orders. They have no issues beating Sansa.

It gets better with Ser Balon Swann (who joins the KG only in ASoS), but Blount, Trant, Moore, Greenfield are all thugs. And Oakheart doesn't have the strength to resist after the others went through with the royal command.

Joff with any other KG - Aerys II KG perhaps - would simply have used other thugs to beat a little girl. Kings always have people doing their dirty work for them - and there were some such KGs under some kings (Ser Owen Bush under Maegor, say). But most kings had other men doing that for them.

Tywin makes it clear: You have hounds and dogs doing shit for you. But they don't eat at the table. And the KG very much is the table. Such men shouldn't serve there.

In Joff's KG they did, and that's why they are used for dirty work.

At heart, Joff is a coward. He isn't the kind of person who pushes people beyond a certain point when he thinks they would fight back. As grown-up king he might overcome that problem, but he never got there.

[TheThreeEyedCow]

All good points there @Lord Varys and food for thought. I just see him surrounding himself with enough sycophants in order to enable him to do something very stupid. And when we consider the fact that discord was a clear objective and a vital part of the machinations surrounding the IT, it seems likely that should Barristan remain, he would of eventually found himself between a rock and a hard place. Robert Baratheon did things in his cups that he claimed he couldn't remember. How long until Joff got drunk and stupid? How long until he felt as if he were facing Arya at the Ruby Ford, humiliated and desperate for the approval he could never get? Eventually, there wouldn't of been anyone left to march him to bed. 
 

[Lord Varys]

18 hours ago, TheThreeEyedCow said:

All good points there @Lord Varys and food for thought. I just see him surrounding himself with enough sycophants in order to enable him to do something very stupid. And when we consider the fact that discord was a clear objective and a vital part of the machinations surrounding the IT, it seems likely that should Barristan remain, he would of eventually found himself between a rock and a hard place. Robert Baratheon did things in his cups that he claimed he couldn't remember. How long until Joff got drunk and stupid? How long until he felt as if he were facing Arya at the Ruby Ford, humiliated and desperate for the approval he could never get? Eventually, there wouldn't of been anyone left to march him to bed. 

Sure, Joff was a time bomb. But I daresay the guy may have gotten himself killed long before he ended up raising the ire of Barristan Selmy. I mean, Olenna Redwyne took one good look at him, saw what he was, and decided he had to go for the good of all - long before he had any chance to hurt or harm House Tyrell in any way.

What people start to overlook - in no small part, I think, thanks to what the TV show did with Joffrey - is that Joff is just a 12-13-year-old boy in the books. He is still a child. He doesn't have any real power aside from the power his family, government, and court grant him. He wears the crown, but he doesn't attend his own council, doesn't decide the policies of his government, doesn't lead any armies, doesn't decide strategy, etc.

People overlook that Ned's execution was just a charade gone wrong. If Cersei hadn't allowed to make a speech, it wouldn't have gone wrong. He didn't have the power to force mother and his council him to allow to make decisions. And the same goes for his cruel sentences, his torture of Sansa, etc. That is just a spoiled boy running amok, not a king actually exerting his sovereign power. What power Joff really has becomes evident when Tywin sends him to bed and when Tyrion chastises him after the riots.

If he had really had any power - embodied by his hold over men who were truly devoted him as their lord and king - then Tywin wouldn't have been able to send him to bed, and Tyrion and Bronn would have been immediately executed because they were threatening/hurting the king.

[cpg2016]

On 4/4/2018 at 10:40 AM, Lord Varys said:

I don't see that on the basis of the evidence we have. Barristan turns against Joff very quickly, and he never did that kind of thing under Aerys, either, at least not as far as we know. Standing around while the king rapes his sister-wife isn't the same as beaten a little girl (or raping a woman/the queen yourself).

Is this a joke?  It's much worse.  Sansa is betrothed to Joffrey.  If raping and beating a ruling Queen is acceptable, then it's pretty obvious that beating a prisoner who is the King's future wife to boot is totally kosher.  

Aside from being just... horribly wrong in the particulars, your post has no internal consistency either.  We have MULTIPLE POVs that show that beating one's wife is not supposed to be done, and that doing so can cause real problems.  Infidelity on the part of a husband, even a certain degree of what we'd call marital rape, are socially acceptable in Westeros.  What Aerys did to Rhaella, or what Ramsay is doing to "Arya" is wrong.  The fact that the Kingsguard are so clearly aware of this in the former case is proof positive.

On 4/4/2018 at 10:40 AM, Lord Varys said:

Jaime murdered his king because he wanted to, not to protect anyone. He did not have to kill Aerys II to save the people of King's Landing from the wildfire. He could have just knocked him out or arrested him. He wanted to kill Aerys because of what Aerys had done - and because of what he planned to do (to his father and his Westerland buddies who were just butchering the Kingslanders) - but he didn't do it to save anyone.

Jaime himself states, and justifies, his reasons for killing Aerys.  Your headcanon is immaterial.  We have no reason to doubt Jaime's word on this.  Take this idiocy somewhere else.  Just because you can't understand the thematic elements of the story doesn't mean you shouldn't understand the literal written English on the page (or whatever language you are reading in).

On 4/4/2018 at 10:40 AM, Lord Varys said:

It is still a good thing that he doesn't hit her, of course, but one good thing among many bad things doesn't make him a 'true knight'. It certainly fits in the theme that not all bad people might be completely rotten people (and that not all good people might be perfectly good people).

He isn't.  But the point of Sandor's story is supposed to be that he thinks he's "seen through" the rot at the heart of Westerosi chivalry, starting with his brother, who is an evil psychopath and yet was knighted by the Crown Prince.

Sansa is in the story to teach/show Sandor that the chivalric principle isn't wrong in general, which is why Sandor goes from a callous butcher for Joffrey, to acting increasingly like a knight as he is exposed to Sansa's idealism.  No, he's not perfect at any point.  But his character arc is one of someone coming to peace with himself and atoning for his past, in large part by hewing closer to the ideal of knighthood.  As you say, not beating Sansa doesn't make him a "good" man, but it does expose the essential hypocrisy of the Kingsguard knights, who to a man abandon their oaths of knighthood to follow their Kingsguard oaths.

On 4/4/2018 at 10:40 AM, Lord Varys said:

He was witnessing stuff like that. To what degree he was personally involved is unclear and actually dependent on when he was attending the king and when he was elsewhere.

The story implies very strongly that Aerys' actions are long-standing habits, not one off events.

And the point is that his passive compliance (at minimum) is an indictment of his character.  I still don't see how you can say that a man who sits by and obeys a psychotic murderer like Aerys, and actively fights to preserve his right to commit atrocities, would refuse to beat Sansa.  Barristan is injured fighting FOR the royalist cause.  That isn't even passive anymore.

This doesn't even seem like a question.  All that jars Barristan Selmy into reconsidering his life's choices is being on the receiving end of his king's injustice.  That isn't exactly a gleaming recommendation of his character.  

[Lord Varys]

14 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

Is this a joke?  It's much worse.  Sansa is betrothed to Joffrey.  If raping and beating a ruling Queen is acceptable, then it's pretty obvious that beating a prisoner who is the King's future wife to boot is totally kosher.

Queen Rhaella was a queen consort. She wasn't ruling anything but her household. She sat at the king's side and was, at times confined to her apartments as per the king's command.

Sansa's betrothal to Joff was apparently over as soon they arrested Ned. At least that's what we learn in Cersei's second ADwD chapter. It seems Cersei made her believe she could still marry Joff but in truth she decided to marry her to some insignificant Lannister at this point (when Littefinger offered to marry Sansa instead of Joff).

But even if Sansa was the betrothed of the king - she was also a hostage. And a hostage's purpose is to be punished for her family's transgressions and crimes. Robb, Cat, and the Tullys continued their rebellion after the letter - a really stern man (Tywin, or Bloodraven, say, or kings like Aegon I, Maekar, Aegon V, Viserys II, etc.) would have taken Sansa's head to punish her family for their crimes.

Beating her up when her brother won some battles is actually pretty harmless if you compare it a proper execution or the kind of stuff the Boltons do with their hostages.

Ask yourself - who is the kinder person? Joffrey beating up Sansa or Ned executing young Theon because his daddy decided to rebel against King Robert a second time? And there is no question that Ned would have taken Theon's head with his own hands if Balon had broken his word.

14 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

Aside from being just... horribly wrong in the particulars, your post has no internal consistency either.  We have MULTIPLE POVs that show that beating one's wife is not supposed to be done, and that doing so can cause real problems.

It does? Where, exactly? Jeyne weeping is the only thing of that sort I remember, and here it is just the impression the weeping gives the other Northmen. Nobody cares - or presumes to intervene - what husband and wife do in their bedchamber. That's a private thing.

Robert beats Cersei and while this is not seen as nice, there is no indication that this is a horrible crime or something that he cannot do.

Not to mention that we actually have a royal judgment - the Rule of Six - regulating (not outlawing!) wife-beating.

14 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

Infidelity on the part of a husband, even a certain degree of what we'd call marital rape, are socially acceptable in Westeros.

What we'd call marital rape actually seems to be the norm in many arranged marriages - meaning those where husband and wife do not like each other or find each other sexually desirable/want to have sex with each other. Such marriages still are supposed to produce children. A man like Tyrion is actually pushed by his own father to rape his wife Sansa. It doesn't come to that, but we can reasonably assume that many other parents force their sons to consummate their marriages - even if they are not inclined to do so - simply because that's necessary to make the marriage legal - and, of course, to produce heirs.

By our standards Jon Arryn would have raped Lysa any time they had sex, just as Arianne would have been raped by Walder Frey, or her friend Sylva Santagar did likely not marry Lord Estermont of her own free will (nor is she likely to consummate this marriage by her own free will).

We can delude ourselves and say most men are nice and all, and would not have sex with their wives unless they wanted it, too. But this is actually not all that likely. If you happen to be the wife of a man who actually desires you - while you really loathe and despise him - then you should be in a similar position as Cersei is - who essentially was raped throughout her marriage whenever she had sex with Robert (aside from their first night together).

And this is not restricted to women - whenever Stannis was sleeping with Selyse, doing his 'marital duty', he was doing something he had force himself to do.

14 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

What Aerys did to Rhaella, or what Ramsay is doing to "Arya" is wrong.  The fact that the Kingsguard are so clearly aware of this in the former case is proof positive.

Whether it is wrong or not isn't the issue. I agree that it is wrong. And the characters witnessing those things also think it is wrong. The issue is whether it is still the right of those people to do that kind of thing. And as far as we know it is. Wives have to do their marital duty - which is to have sex and give birth to the children of their husbands. Neither Queen Rhaella nor Jeyne nor Sansa are allowed to refuse that. In fact, we see how deeply this is ingrained in the women of this world when Sansa and Jeyne offer each other to their husbands. They don't want to have sex (or marry) those men, but they marry them either way, and they know they will also have to allow them to sleep with them.

Whether it is okay for a husband to do the stuff Ramsay did to his wives isn't clear, but it is quite clear that King Aerys II actually could do what he did to his sister-wife. 

14 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

Jaime himself states, and justifies, his reasons for killing Aerys.  Your headcanon is immaterial.  We have no reason to doubt Jaime's word on this.  Take this idiocy somewhere else.

I suggests you take your idiocy somewhere else and go back read the things you pretend to talk about. Including my posts. I don't deny that Jaime killed Aerys because of the wildfire plan. It played a role. What I doubt is that there was a moral dilemma and Jaime had to choose between the murder of King Aerys II and the lives of the denizens of KL. This wasn't a moral dilemma. Rossart was dead already, and Jaime had plenty of other means besides murdering the lunatic to prevent him from sending another messenger.

Jaime is not a guy who suddenly did the right thing in a very bad situation. He did a rather horrible thing in a situation where he could get away with it alive. Jaime killed Aerys because he wanted to kill the man. With his own hands. He knew the man would die, but he didn't want his father or his father's men to do it. He wanted to do it himself, and he intended to cowardly sneak away afterwards, ensuring his honor would not be tarnished.

His own memories of the murder shows that the man was enjoying himself there. He entered the throne room covered in blood. He told Aerys what he had done to Rossart so that he would know what he would do to him know, so that the man feared for his life - a stupid thing, actually, since it may have condemned KL to death had Aerys been able to flee the throne room or had been saved by some loyal guardsmen suddenly racing in the throne room. If Jaime had never told Aerys that he had killed Rossart, Aerys would have never even considered sending another messenger to the alchemists - after all, he would have believed Rossart was executing the plan.

There is no empathy there in Jaime's mind. No moral conflict. No fight between the Kingsguard vows and the vows of a knight. Nor emotional connection to the Kingslander his daddy's men are butchering right now (sure, the wildfire would have killed more - and, more importantly, Tywin and the Westerlanders, too - but the point is that Jaime has no emotional connection to the Kingslanders).

Still, I agree that Jaime is not as rotten in the act of murdering Aerys as he could have been. He could have killed him to ensure his father or Robert (or he himself, as Ned believes) could become king. That wasn't his motivation. But that doesn't change that he killed a man who was a walking corpse already (Tywin's men saw Aerys dying, which means they were practically outside the door when Jaime cut Aerys' throat) - and there was no need to do this. 

14 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

Just because you can't understand the thematic elements of the story doesn't mean you shouldn't understand the literal written English on the page (or whatever language you are reading in).

You don't seem to understand the thematic elements in the story because George R. R. Martin didn't put Jaime in a moral dilemma there.

And he isn't even in a moral dilemma later when he tried to murder Bran. Sure, there was a chance that Bran would talk about what he saw. But there was also a chance he and Cersei would get out of that whole thing without murdering a child. A chance he wasn't willing to take. But his choice is actually only a choice a morally corrupt person would make - a person who doesn't care about the moral values of the society he lives in because he thinks those rules don't apply to him. He thinks he is better than everyone else.

He fucks his sister - which is a vile crime and a sin in this world. He kills the king he has sworn to protect. He fucks the queen of the king he has sworn to protect. He cuckolds said king a fathers three children on the queen. He tries to kill a child whose knowledge might force him to actually take responsibilities for the things he did.

14 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

Sansa is in the story to teach/show Sandor that the chivalric principle isn't wrong in general, which is why Sandor goes from a callous butcher for Joffrey, to acting increasingly like a knight as he is exposed to Sansa's idealism.  No, he's not perfect at any point.  But his character arc is one of someone coming to peace with himself and atoning for his past, in large part by hewing closer to the ideal of knighthood.  As you say, not beating Sansa doesn't make him a "good" man, but it does expose the essential hypocrisy of the Kingsguard knights, who to a man abandon their oaths of knighthood to follow their Kingsguard oaths.

That is what expected of a Kingsguard. The Kingsguard vows do, of course, overrule the oaths of knighthood. Jaime talking about the vows he swore is a way to rationalize his actions. There is a hierarchy of vows here. The Kingsguard is an elite order. You join it body and soul, and you have only one duty thereafter. Protect and obey the king. What you did before no longer matters.

Just as when a knight takes the black - if some clansmen rape and kill some innocent girl in their lands and this is witnessed by some black brother who happens to be a knight from the New Gift (or some wandering crow walking the Seven Kingdoms witnesses a similar thing) then he has no longer a right to intervene because the Watch does not interfere. They have a more important duty, a duty to the realms of men, not individual people.

And Jaime is no moron. He knows that the Kingsguard are not free to do as they like - to follow their own moral compass or the other vows and interests that might motivate them. That's what he tries to teach his sworn brothers when he returns as Lord Commander.

George raises moral questions in his stories. But there are no (clear) answers to them. And we are not supposed to go away from the story with the impression that we know what would have been the right answer/action.

Although, you know, I think Sandor should have been punished for the murder of Mycah. Just like any murderer should.

14 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

The story implies very strongly that Aerys' actions are long-standing habits, not one off events.

Still, whether Selmy witnessed the worst atrocities or not is relevant in this context.

14 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

And the point is that his passive compliance (at minimum) is an indictment of his character.  I still don't see how you can say that a man who sits by and obeys a psychotic murderer like Aerys, and actively fights to preserve his right to commit atrocities, would refuse to beat Sansa.  Barristan is injured fighting FOR the royalist cause.  That isn't even passive anymore.

Sorry, King Aerys II was the king, not a psychopathic murderer. He sentenced people to death, he did not murder them. And by the laws and customs of this world he isn't a murderer. Not sure if a king can be a murderer in this world - perhaps when he goes around and randomly kills people with his own hands for really no reason? I don't know. Aerys may have made sentenced to death innocent people, but that doesn't make him a 'psychopathic murderer'. He may actually have believed they were guilty.

And while burning people alive is an ugly thing it is just one of many ways to execute people. I say putting men in crow cages (as seen in TSS or done by the allies of the Brotherhood in ASoS) is even a worse way to execute people.

You also seem to fail understand that there is a difference between a person doing his duty - because he swore a vow - and protecting and serving his lord or king, and that person actually condoning all (or most) actions of said lord or king. Selmy can protect and serve his king and not approve of Aerys raping his sister-wife or him killing innocent people - just as Davos can serve Stannis and not approve of him using a sorceress to murder Renly and Penrose, or of him sacrificing his own nephew.