Cersei was right to kill Robert

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

8 hours ago, boltons are sick said:

Also, no, not a troll. Why is it acceptable to defend the male characters in the series who go around a murder people and do similar things to what Cersei has done, but somehow, it's not ok to defend Cersei when she does exactly the same things as the other characters from ASOIAF because she lives in a brutal world where murdering people is more "acceptable" than today.

I called them trolls, too. Probably should know more about me before assuming I wouldn't. As I said, I think you are just a Tywin-stan rebranded. Much as I dislike Tywin-stans who defend an OBVIOUSLY evil man, yes, I also think defending Cersei is in a similar vein. She is obviously evil. She makes obviously selfish decisions. She obviously disregards human life of anyone who is of a lower class than her. Why do I know she ordered Mycah's death despite "not having proof", well because we saw her order other people's death when she became the POV. She could care less about murdering people of a lower station. When I re-read the 4th book, I'll make sure to start a topic and tag you called : A  list of all the obviously evil stuff Cersei does and thinks. It will be long. Off the top of my head, she spends an excessive amount of time essentially trying to get Maergerry killed. No, saying that because there is a prophecy she is justified...is not an actual reason. Murder is almost never justified but murderers almost always have reasons for murdering. Just because they have reasons...does not make those reasons just. 

Also you said Cersei had no choices. Yes she did. She could run away. I can tell you flatly right now, if someone threatened to..reveal something that would cause me to die, but gave me time to run away. I wouldn't murder them, I'd run away. Because I'm not a murderer. Why in god's name do I have to spend so long in this forum explaining why murder is bad? It makes me so tired. Why equating murder as an acceptable course of action when someone inconveniences you is obviously an evil act. Both Cersei (and in another chat I am discussing) Tyrion do murders...because of convenience. And no, it's not random that they both do it..because they saw their father do it, they were trained to think the lives of the small folk are less important than their lives, and they act on that information as adults. Jaime Lannister orders Eddard Stark's men killed casually..to chasten him..and this kind of act from the Lannisters is COMMON, because they don't think anyone who isn't royal's life has importance. To make this clear : Avoiding a prophecy is NOT  reasonable reason for it okay for you to commit murders, lie, order people beaten,etc. etc. Didn't Cersei order Chataya (or Chataya daughter?) beaten...for...existing. Like literally just for existing. Defend that one. And no....being angry at your brother is not a good excuse for beating a random woman. No, it's not. Stop. And if you are going to come at Cersei with the "She's a woman" defense (which seems to be your main ploy)......Cersei actively harms women. Constantly. She is an abuser of women. She treats women the same way many other male characters do. And again, if you are going to defend her with "she was abused" - So were those male characters. Most people who do abuse women were abused. That is how the cycle of abuse works. You can still condemn the abuse they do to other people EVEN if they were abused in the past. I was raped. I will be blunt. I have been raped. It is very possible that my rapists were raped in the past. That does not excuse their evil actions. At all. Period. What they did was wrong REGARDLESS of what was done to them in the past. 

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

8 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

Cersei didn't kill Mycah, the Hound killed Mycah, apparently without even being ordered to do so. 

Offer proof of this. I know you don't have it by the way. We never get either the Hound of Cersei's POV on this. It's just my opinion vs. your opinion. 

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

8 hours ago, boltons are sick said:

Ned is just as much at fault for the War of the Five Kings as Cersei. 

No, he isn't. Cersei and the Lannisters knew a war would eventually happen. I would argue that is why they tried to get as many honors from Robert as possible before said war happened. Not just Cersei or the Lannisters knew war was coming though, so did Varys, Petyr, Renly, and probably Stannis. Like, everyone knew war was coming. Do you know why they knew war was coming? Because the Lannisters wanted the crown. Wanted the Iron Throne, in particular Tywin and Cersei. Eddard admittedly...does not think things through. He honestly believed Cersei would listen to him and run to Casterly Rock or the Free Cities. He obviously believed everyone would just listen to him for the most part if he said Stannis was the real heir to Robert. Honestly, I am rereading the books now and Eddard's actions are unbelievably frustrating because it's like he is playing checkers while everyone else is playing chess...but he fundamentally believes what he is doing is the best thing for the realm. Cersei doesn't. She fundamentally believes what she doing is best for HERSELF. There is a fundamental difference in how these two characters see the world.

Cersei believes she can do WHATEVER she wants to people who are less powerful than herself and she believes any heinous act is justified in order to get what she wants. Like, let's say Cersei....didn't order Mycah killed. If Joffrey had asked her to order Mycah's death, do you believe she would have turned him down? Do you remember the Blue Bard who she had tortured? How about how she knows Qyburn is torturing women and she just gives him women to torture. She is the one who orders those women delivered to Qyburn and she knows what he is doing. Like, you are focusing specifically on Mycah as though..she didn't do obvious, from her POV, worst things to other characters. Why do I think Cersei ordered Mycah's death...because everything in her character suggests she would. Even if she didn't...she would in a different situation. Cersei treats those below her as pawns to be used with as she wishes, and could care less if they live or die (and will order their deaths or torture without thinking too hard about it). 

Eddard on the other hand tries to do what is right. He tries to protect his friend, but also is willing to stand up to that friend when that friend is doing something he believes is wrong. He repeatedly goes at Robert (risking his own life) to defend innocents. Eddard tells Cersei to run SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE he wants to protect Tommon, Joffrey, and Myrcella from being murdered by Robert. Eddard treats those below him with love and respect. He defends them and their lives. 

And by the way, other people are responsible for the War of 5 Kings, there may be some sexists in this forum who try to blame everything on female characters, but there are plenty of reasonable people who go through the list of blame. Varys and Petyr obviously wanted the war to happen. Renly and Stannis did almost nothing to prevent the war, and I would guess also thought a war would be coming (Renly wanted Robert to put Cersei aside, and Stannis wanted to be King even well before Robert's death, I would guess). Tywin Lannister was SHOCKINGLY prepared to go to war at a the drop of a hat (I am implying I think Tywin knew war was coming and actually possibly..not exactly relished it, but looked forward to it). Robert was a fool who did not leave the realm ready to just accept his son as King. Honestly I don't feel like listing how badly Robert managed the realm or his kingdom, but essentially...there is a reason a war followed his death and it is because he didn't really secure the throne for his sons (he was them as his sons) or his brothers. Plenty of people are to blame...Ned Stark is not an equal member of this. He tries to do what is right, even if he does it horribly. 

Edited July 27, 2023 by Lord of Raventree Hall

[Alester Florent]

@Craving Peaches had an interesting and worthwhile thread a while back about applying moral standards to characters and the importance of consistency in doing so. In essence, you can apply either an "in-character" set of ethics and judge characters on that, or a "real life now" (or any other standard you can think of), but you can't mix and match within the same argumentation.

With regard to Cersei, I think she fails by either measure. On an ASoIaF standard, it's obvious. Robert is the king and her husband, he's entitled to sex with her. His behaviour may not be laudable but he hasn't really done anything wrong. Her response, even if we limit it to "just" the killing, is the worst crime possible in her society. It's a slam-dunk.

By modern standards, it's harder because rape is obviously a terrible crime and the usual "legitimate" options for addressing it (law enforcement) are unavailable to Cersei under the circumstances. But I still think that in most instances, murder is an unjustifiable response. There is also, I think, and I'm trying to tread somewhat carefully here, a difference between a husband occasionally stumbling drunk into his wife's bed and trying to get her to have sex with him (whether he succeeds or no) and a deliberate, systematic campaign of sexual abuse. In the latter case, for want of other options, I might consider killing the husband in order to stop the abuse to be, if not necessarily justifiable per se, at least reasonable, and arguably to fall under the category of a self-defence killing But the impression I get of Robert and Cersei's relationship is very much the former.

But there are two other points which merit attention, at least one of which has been mentioned in this thread already. Firstly, Cersei didn't kill Robert in order to stop the abuse. She was perfectly prepared to let the abuse continue indefinitely if it meant she was able to continue in her position as queen. She killed him to cover up her own crimes. That's a major point when it comes to justifying her killing him.

Secondly, I'm not sure to what extent I actually believe Cersei in all of this. This isn't because I think rape victims shouldn't be believed in general, or what have you, but because we see inside Cersei's head and she is an expert in self-delusion, twisting the facts to fit her own narrative, and demonising people who she has taken against for petty, sometimes nonexistent, reasons. I mean, I can absolutely believe that in the later years of their marriage Robert would come to her bed drunk and wanting sex, but I wonder in how many of those instances Cersei turned him down and he accepted that and just fell asleep, or they compromised with a handjob, or even where she has reclassified instances of consensual sex between them as rape because she now finds any thought of him disgusting. If we were hearing about Ned doing the same to Cat from Cat's POV, I wouldn't have any trouble believing Cat, but with Cersei I think I have to doubt everything she thinks and says.

That's without even getting into Cersei's own crimes (the abuse in the relationship was not one-sided, even leaving aside her affair with Jaime, aborting or killing Robert's kids, etc.)

[Frey family reunion]

8 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Offer proof of this. I know you don't have it by the way. We never get either the Hound of Cersei's POV on this. It's just my opinion vs. your opinion. 

Umm, no, we’re in the Hall when Cersei offers 100 gold for Nymeria’s pelt.  Cersei never says anything about putting a bounty on Mycah.  Then when the Hound is confronted by Arya over Mycah’s murder, he never says anything about being ordered by Cersei to kill him:

Quote

Harwin took her arm to draw her back as Lord Beric said, “The girl has named you a murderer. Do you deny killing this butcher’s boy, Mycah?”
            The big man shrugged. “I was Joffrey’s sworn shield. The butcher’s boy attacked a prince of the blood.”
            “That’s a lie!” Arya squirmed in Harwin’s grip. “It was me. I hit Joffrey and threw Lion’s Paw in the river. Mycah just ran away, like I told him.”
            “Did you see the boy attack Prince Joffrey?” Lord Beric Dondarrion asked the Hound.
            “I heard it from the royal lips. It’s not my place to question princes.”  Cregan’s jerked his hands toward Arya.  “This one’s own sister told the same tale when she stood before your precious Robert.”

So when you accuse someone of murder you should have some type of evidence to support that claim.  We have no evidence that Cersei was involved in Mycah’s murder.

And in the first book, Cersei is actually a fairly complicated character.  Certainly she’s not a sympathetic one, but she’s more complicated than her subsequent portrayal in a FFC.  After all, she never killed Jon Arryn, she wasn’t happy that Jaime pushed Bran out of the tower, and she was upset that Joffrey ordered Ned’s death.   Her biggest crimes are her incestuous relationship with Jaime, her infidelity against Robert, and making sure that Robert was given plenty of fortified wine, which he happily drank on the hunt, in the hopes that he would get himself killed.

And even her involvement in Robert’s death is at least somewhat mitigated over the fact that she was repeatedly raped and physically abused by Robert.
 

Her power play which ended in Eddard’s imprisonment was an act of self survival, once Ned confronted her with the knowledge that her children were all incestuous bastards.  Her choices were either execution, exile, or seizing power for her children.  I’m not sure what she had in mind was any worse, than Renly’s plan to kidnap her children and hold them hostage to force her into submission.

For some reason GRRM in AFFC decided to make her a cartoon villain.  Now while, those chapters could be fairly entertaining, they are also probably some of his shallowest portrayals of a character in the books.

[Alester Florent]

29 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

Umm, no, we’re in the Hall when Cersei offers 100 gold for Nymeria’s pelt.  Cersei never says anything about putting a bounty on Mycah.  Then when the Hound is confronted by Arya over Mycah’s murder, he never says anything about being ordered by Cersei to kill him:

So when you accuse someone of murder you should have some type of evidence to support that claim.  We have no evidence that Cersei was involved in Mycah’s murder.

My assumption would be that while it's possible the Hound did it on his own initiative, it was most likely Joffrey who gave the order. Or at least gave him the order to "find Arya, her wolf, and that butcher's boy" and assumed that Sandor would take that as an instruction that Nymeria and Mycah were to be killed if found.

[Frey family reunion]

39 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

My assumption would be that while it's possible the Hound did it on his own initiative, it was most likely Joffrey who gave the order. Or at least gave him the order to "find Arya, her wolf, and that butcher's boy" and assumed that Sandor would take that as an instruction that Nymeria and Mycah were to be killed if found.

Then the Hound would have simply told the Brotherhood that he was ordered to kill Mycah by Joffrey but he doesn’t.  

The Hound merely says that he took Joffrey at his word, that Micah viciously attacked Joffrey without provocation.  The Hound took that to mean that Micah’s life was now forfeit because he attacked the royal bloodline.

And interestingly enough, it’s not like the Brotherhood took issue with that basic premise.  The issue was whether or not Micah really attacked Joffrey (or perhaps if the Hound was justified in believing Joffrey).  If Micah didn’t, then the Hound killing Micah would be unjust.  If Micah did attack Joffrey (or the Hound reasonably believed he did) then what the Hound did was justified.  That was the reason behind the “trial”, not to determine whether or not the Hound killed Micah, but to determine if the Hound was justified in his killing of Micah.

ETA: But regardless, there is no allegation that Cersei ordered Micah’s killing.

Edited July 27, 2023 by Frey family reunion

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

56 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

So when you accuse someone of murder you should have some type of evidence to support that claim. 

No, I don't. I know that someone under the Lannister's pay murdered Mycah. I know that same characters ordered the murder of other people casually. To be blunt, I don't care if she actually did order the murder or not. She would order the murder in other circumstances.Cersei is a murderer regardless, and she doesn't care that Mycah was murdered whether she ordered the murder directly or not. We are meant to read this scene as Cersei and Joffrey being horrible to anyone of lesser status then them, regardless on whether Sandor Clegane acted on Joffrey's orders or Cersei's orders...or misunderstood their orders (he definitely had some orders). The point of this is to talk about Cersei's general disregard of human life, not have a trial for the murder of Mycah. 

[boltons are sick]

5 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

No, I don't. I know that someone under the Lannister's pay murdered Mycah. I know that same characters ordered the murder of other people casually. To be blunt, I don't care if she actually did order the murder or not. She would order the murder in other circumstances.Cersei is a murderer regardless, and she doesn't care that Mycah was murdered whether she ordered the murder directly or not. We are meant to read this scene as Cersei and Joffrey being horrible to anyone of lesser status then them, regardless on whether Sandor Clegane acted on Joffrey's orders or Cersei's orders...or misunderstood their orders (he definitely had some orders). The point of this is to talk about Cersei's general disregard of human life, not have a trial for the murder of Mycah. 

Literally nearly every single character in these books is a murderer in some capacity. NEARLY. EVERY. SINGLE. CHARACTER.

 However, when a character you don't like does it, he/she is a monster because of it even if they have justifiable reasons, but when a character you like does it, he/she is not a "murderer".

In the same book Daenerys literally burns a woman alive for daring to take revenge against the Dothraki who raided her town and raped and killed all of her neighbors. She later tortures two young girls in front of their father for information. Catelyn slices the throat of Jinglebell even though he is innocent and his death wouldn't accomplish anything at this point because Robb has been killed. Arya kills a person for fun and to practice her assassination skills during her exile. Robb Stark goes on a sacking campaign in the Westlands which kills way more people than Cersei ever does.

I don't hate any of the aforementioned characters and I understand the circumstances behind their decisions, but I am sure you are going to come up with a defense for their actions while you think that Cersei killing the people who threaten the lives of her children makes her a monster. The reason for this is because you like all these other characters and you are more willing to defend them, but not Cersei.

If you think that in the case of Cersei murder is never justified and she can't save the lives of her children by murdering people who endanger them, then that's fine, but you should extend the exact same scrutiny to all the other ASOIAF characters like the Starks or Daenerys and not overlook them because every single one of them has murdered people, sometimes even more than Cersei.

 And, yes, it's important to check your facts before claiming that Cersei has murdered someone because I can also claim that Daenerys is a serial torturer of kids and has had dozens of kids tortured simply because she has done it once, but I have no evidence to claim that, so you shouldn't make Cersei out to be worse than she is without evidence.

 And for the record, killing Lady is one of the least evil things anyone has ever done in these books because she is a direwolf, not a sentient human being.

Edited July 27, 2023 by boltons are sick

[csuszka1948]

9 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

If you think that in the case of Cersei murder is never justified and she can't save the lives of her children by murdering people who endanger them, you should, then that's fine, but you should extend the exact same scrutiny to all the other ASOIAF characters like the Starks or Daenerys and not overlook them because every single one of them has murdered people, sometimes even more than Cersei.

 And, yes, it's important to check your facts before claiming that Cersei has murdered someone because I can also claim that Daenerys is a serial torturer of kids and has had dozens of kids tortured simply because she has done it once, but I have no evidence to claim that, so you shouldn't make Cersei out to be worse than she is without evidence.

 

Daenerys is torturing suspects because she believes this will allow her to find the terrorists murdering freedmen. Cersei murders people because of a slight against her or her son or to protect her power.

The reason why Dany gets less scrutiny is because her goals are different... she actually cares about her people, while Cersei only cares about herself, Jaime and her children and the most important thing for her is keeping her power - that's why she didn't try to run away after Robert's death (when Ned would have surely let her go).

9 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

 And for the record, killing Lady is one of the least evil things anyone has ever done in these books because she is a werewolf, not a sentient human being.

 

I kinda think Lady's murder is a bit too vilified. Most women in Cersei's situation would demand at the very least that Lady is sent back to Winterfell after the other direwolf has bitten their son.

[SeanF]

4 hours ago, boltons are sick said:

Literally nearly every single character in these books is a murderer in some capacity. NEARLY. EVERY. SINGLE. CHARACTER.

 However, when a character you don't like does it, he/she is a monster because of it even if they have justifiable reasons, but when a character you like does it, he/she is not a "murderer".

In the same book Daenerys literally burns a woman alive for daring to take revenge against the Dothraki who raided her town and raped and killed all of her neighbors. She later tortures two young girls in front of their father for information. Catelyn slices the throat of Jinglebell even though he is innocent and his death wouldn't accomplish anything at this point because Robb has been killed. Arya kills a person for fun and to practice her assassination skills during her exile. Robb Stark goes on a sacking campaign in the Westlands which kills way more people than Cersei ever does.

I don't hate any of the aforementioned characters and I understand the circumstances behind their decisions, but I am sure you are going to come up with a defense for their actions while you think that Cersei killing the people who threaten the lives of her children makes her a monster. The reason for this is because you like all these other characters and you are more willing to defend them, but not Cersei.

If you think that in the case of Cersei murder is never justified and she can't save the lives of her children by murdering people who endanger them, then that's fine, but you should extend the exact same scrutiny to all the other ASOIAF characters like the Starks or Daenerys and not overlook them because every single one of them has murdered people, sometimes even more than Cersei.

 And, yes, it's important to check your facts before claiming that Cersei has murdered someone because I can also claim that Daenerys is a serial torturer of kids and has had dozens of kids tortured simply because she has done it once, but I have no evidence to claim that, so you shouldn't make Cersei out to be worse than she is without evidence.

 And for the record, killing Lady is one of the least evil things anyone has ever done in these books because she is a werewolf, not a sentient human being.

As we will see, in ACOK, Cersei has infants murdered out of pure spite.

[Maegor_the_Cool]

I don’t have any sympathy for Robert, but kill him caused so much chaos for so many others that it is just evil. Regardless of any moral reasons she’d have to do it (saving her children, marital rape) his murder was absolutely the greater evil.

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

On 7/28/2023 at 1:42 AM, boltons are sick said:

Literally nearly every single character in these books is a murderer in some capacity. NEARLY. EVERY. SINGLE. CHARACTER.

 However, when a character you don't like does it, he/she is a monster because of it even if they have justifiable reasons, but when a character you like does it, he/she is not a "murderer".

In the same book Daenerys literally burns a woman alive for daring to take revenge against the Dothraki who raided her town and raped and killed all of her neighbors. She later tortures two young girls in front of their father for information. Catelyn slices the throat of Jinglebell even though he is innocent and his death wouldn't accomplish anything at this point because Robb has been killed. Arya kills a person for fun and to practice her assassination skills during her exile. Robb Stark goes on a sacking campaign in the Westlands which kills way more people than Cersei ever does.

I don't hate any of the aforementioned characters and I understand the circumstances behind their decisions, but I am sure you are going to come up with a defense for their actions while you think that Cersei killing the people who threaten the lives of her children makes her a monster. The reason for this is because you like all these other characters and you are more willing to defend them, but not Cersei.

If you think that in the case of Cersei murder is never justified and she can't save the lives of her children by murdering people who endanger them, then that's fine, but you should extend the exact same scrutiny to all the other ASOIAF characters like the Starks or Daenerys and not overlook them because every single one of them has murdered people, sometimes even more than Cersei.

 And, yes, it's important to check your facts before claiming that Cersei has murdered someone because I can also claim that Daenerys is a serial torturer of kids and has had dozens of kids tortured simply because she has done it once, but I have no evidence to claim that, so you shouldn't make Cersei out to be worse than she is without evidence.

 And for the record, killing Lady is one of the least evil things anyone has ever done in these books because she is a direwolf, not a sentient human being.

This was a wild ride. You actually think Cersei is the same as the other characters don't you. I have a suggestion, email George R.R. Martin and ask him this, "Is Cersei a villain in your series?" - I don't think he will email you back, but if he does, I am almost 100% sure he will say yes. He wrote her as a villain. I know, you are trying so hard to twist things around, and make things seem "unfair" to Cersei in the fandom, but we aren't being unfair. Cersei, by your own words, is motivated almost entirely by self preservation. She doesn't do things to help people or make the world better. She just does things to help herself and make her situation better. She tortures people who did NOTHING WRONG merely because it is convenient for her. She orders people murdered who agian...didn't really do anything. She has a vendetta against a random woman who was literally her ally. Like....her ally. She spies on her, tortures people, murders people, and all to try to get her executed.....for doing absolutely nothing. She isn't doing anything to Cersei, in fact her family is a large part of the reason Cersei is even in power. She also tortures Tyrion's "lover"....because she doesn't like Tyrion. That's it. Not some special reason, not even for like....something that would help her in something. Okay, you want to downplay Lady's murder. Do you know the difference though? She orders Lady's murder out of spite. Not because she thinks Lady is a threat. Not because Lady is actually going to hurt her son. Because...she is a horrible person. Because she is selfish and cruel. 

See what you are missing here is...Cersei is not an actual person. Neither are any of these other characters. They are written and created by one man to serve purposes in a story. Cersei's purpose...is to be an antagonist. It's why she exists in the story. A cool and fun antagonist who is easy to hate in fact (I actually like her as a character, fun fact..I enjoyed her POVs and think she is an interesting character to read from the POV of), but...yes an antagonist. He wrote the murder of Mycah and Lady specifically for us to understand the stakes. Understand what kind of people Cersei and Joffrey are. We are meant to see the murder of Lady...as spiteful, as selfish, as vindictive, and finally perhaps as a sort of warning to Eddard or a statement of how much control she has over Robert (again as a message to Eddard). I get it, the crime itself...is not that substantial...but it's that the crime has..no actual reason to be enacted. She doesn't actually think it solves any problem. It's just done for cruelty's (and perhaps to exert her power) sake. 

Honestly, I wish I was not on the first book, but alas I am. Again, I know that Cersei does...heinous, heinous things in book 4. Selfish, manipulative, power-hungry, egotistical...you name it. She is a villain, and she was written to be a villain. And yes, I get it, other people...also do murders. However, as far as I remember, for the most part other characters didn't torture people. Like off the top of my head - Eddard, Catelyn, Jon, and Sansa for sure never torture anyone. Brienne never tortures anyone. Heck..even Jaime, who did do evil stuff early on, never tortures anyone from my memory. Now Daenerys did...the slave masters. She does it...as an act of vengeance..which frankly, yes, I think makes it different. If Cersei was torturing...someone who previously had tortured other people...as an act of vengeance..it would change her actions. But..she isn't doing that. She is just using people to get thigns she wants. She just..does anything she possibly can to get what she want. Her motivations are entirely selfish. I want to make this abundantly clear to you : Avoiding a prophecy ...is not a good reason to commit murder, rape, torture, etc. It's ...just not. Actually I want to actually quote specific things : 

Daenerys burning a woman alive - She did that to avenge the murder of her husband and child. Did Cersei murder Falyse ...for essentially no reason. Just she was annoyed with her for not handling the Bronn situation? 

Catelyn slices the throat of Jinglebell - Her son was just murdered in front of her. Also, her daughters are probably dead from her point of view. Also her husband was murdered. I get that Jinglebell was innocent...but....like...I don't know, I can understand this action. Remember when Cersei had a random bard murdered...because she wanted to get another person executed? Remind me ...how that is the same as seeing your child murdered in front of you real quick. 

Arya - No, I actually agree. I find Arya's actions particularly int he 4th and 5th book fairly morally gray.....even sliding away from gray into another area. I think her murder of Daeron (was that his name) from the Night's Watch particularly stuck out to me as wrong. However...Arya is a child. A child with a lot of trauma..still becoming an assassin is probably essentially an evil thing to do. Again, I like Arya as a character, but I also like Cersei as a character as I've already mentioned. Just because I like a character, doesn't mean I need to defend their every action. 

Sacking campagain in Westerlands - It was war. Cersei indeed...is part of that war. Do you think because she isn't in the field she isn't..responsible for those deaths..Oh boy oh boy. No. She orders people to kill other people...via war...a lot. Like...she is in a leadership role. Even before she became queen regent, she was on the small council which was making decisions about war (and after Eddard's capture was the main leader of that small council before Tyrion showed up). Again though, Robb was acting...through vengeance...you know why, because the Lannisters had already started the war by murdering people. And yes, Cersei is involved in those decisions. We see it directly at several points, and ...she even says herself she wishes she was a man so she could be MORE directly involved in that. She literally says herself she wants that. She looks up to Tywin and wants to be like him. You know..Tywin...arguably the most horrible human being in the series. She says herself she wants to be like him!

Okay, I'm done. I think this is it. I am done responding to you. You are leaping over backwards to defend a character that was written as a villain by the author himself. You also seem to ...think anyone who thinks a villain is a villain (even though the author intended them to be a villain) is somehow...biased (again, even though...we are just reading teh character correctly as they were written). Cersei was never intended to be one of those...super in the middle characters, we are meant to read her in a certain way..but yes, GRRM is a good writer and he didn't write her without some redeeming traits. I prefer villains like Tywin or Cersei honestly to the likes of Euron (who is just pure evil, and I find..him kind of gross. I just really really hate Euron..and in a way that makes me not that interested in him as a character). Again, your specific claim here which is that "I don't like Cersei" is actually false. I like her. She is a well written villain. I just read the section where Ned tries to protect her children in the Godswood and it's a spectacular scene, and also could tell you everything you need to know about both characters in just one scene (Eddard acts selflessly really, and basically loses the game of thrones trying to have mercy for Cersei and her children; Cersei is just selfish, could care less about Eddard and makes the decision probably right then to murder/remove him from power). I should probably quote specific sections, but you know what, you have the book and you've read it, and if you misread it yourself, my quotes you will twist to mean something they don't too. Your defense of Cersei is the same as those who try to defend Tywin. They are villains. They do evil stuff, and honestly I think you have either misread the books or..if you truly believe in the way someone like Cersei lives there life is right...well Isuggest looking inside yourself as...she is clearly a villain.  Enjoy yourself, and please, let's try not to engage much in the future. 

[Craving Peaches]

1 minute ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Catelyn slices the throat of Jinglebell - Her son was just murdered in front of her. Also, her daughters are probably dead from her point of view. Also her husband was murdered. I get that Jinglebell was innocent...but....like...I don't know, I can understand this action.

When I was reading that scene I got the impression Catelyn was not in her right mind and had 'lost it' by that point.

[Lee-Sensei]

On 7/16/2023 at 2:07 PM, SeanF said:

There must have been a fair chance that Cersei would have been discreetly murdered, if and when Robert decided to replace her with Margaery.  There is no ground for annulment.

Self-defence is not far-fetched.  But that does not excuse infant murder by Cersei.

Even in a scenario where Robert re-married, he wasn't going to kill Cersei unless he found out about her treason. No. She wasn't right to murder Robert.

  

On 7/26/2023 at 4:25 AM, boltons are sick said:

100% agree that Cersei was right to act against Robert and Ned. Otherwise she and her children would have been executed for the "crime" of cheating on her husband even though he also cheated on her which demonstrates how sexist Westeros is because they would execute a woman and her children simply for cheating on her abusive husband. Plus, Robert raped her throughout their marriage which alone gives her the moral right to kill him.

The crime here isn't cheating on her husband (although it would have been considered cheating). The crime here is killing off Robert's children and then passing off her inbred children by her brother lover as the heirs to the throne before trying to kill off everyone in Robert's family to secure her theft. That seems a little worse than run of the mill cheating.

  

On 7/26/2023 at 3:04 PM, Frey family reunion said:

Cersei didn't kill Mycah, the Hound killed Mycah, apparently without even being ordered to do so.  Cersei also didn't kill Lady.  It was Robert who ordered Lady killed after Cersei suggested it.  Robert ended up agreeing with Cersei's suggestion.

As for the direwolves, you have to remember that the suggestion to kill a direwolf that attacked a person (especially a prince) wouldn't have been considered terribly unreasonable.  If you recall when they first found the dogs, Harwin was about to kill them with Eddard's blessing until Robb intervened.  

No. Cersei is definitely primarily responsible for Lady's death. You can throw in Robert, Ned and Sansa if you want, but the blood is on her hands.

  

On 7/26/2023 at 11:46 PM, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

No, he isn't. Cersei and the Lannisters knew a war would eventually happen. I would argue that is why they tried to get as many honors from Robert as possible before said war happened. Not just Cersei or the Lannisters knew war was coming though, so did Varys, Petyr, Renly, and probably Stannis. Like, everyone knew war was coming. Do you know why they knew war was coming? Because the Lannisters wanted the crown. Wanted the Iron Throne, in particular Tywin and Cersei. Eddard admittedly...does not think things through. He honestly believed Cersei would listen to him and run to Casterly Rock or the Free Cities. He obviously believed everyone would just listen to him for the most part if he said Stannis was the real heir to Robert. Honestly, I am rereading the books now and Eddard's actions are unbelievably frustrating because it's like he is playing checkers while everyone else is playing chess...but he fundamentally believes what he is doing is the best thing for the realm. Cersei doesn't. She fundamentally believes what she doing is best for HERSELF. There is a fundamental difference in how these two characters see the world.

Cersei believes she can do WHATEVER she wants to people who are less powerful than herself and she believes any heinous act is justified in order to get what she wants. Like, let's say Cersei....didn't order Mycah killed. If Joffrey had asked her to order Mycah's death, do you believe she would have turned him down? Do you remember the Blue Bard who she had tortured? How about how she knows Qyburn is torturing women and she just gives him women to torture. She is the one who orders those women delivered to Qyburn and she knows what he is doing. Like, you are focusing specifically on Mycah as though..she didn't do obvious, from her POV, worst things to other characters. Why do I think Cersei ordered Mycah's death...because everything in her character suggests she would. Even if she didn't...she would in a different situation. Cersei treats those below her as pawns to be used with as she wishes, and could care less if they live or die (and will order their deaths or torture without thinking too hard about it). 

Eddard on the other hand tries to do what is right. He tries to protect his friend, but also is willing to stand up to that friend when that friend is doing something he believes is wrong. He repeatedly goes at Robert (risking his own life) to defend innocents. Eddard tells Cersei to run SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE he wants to protect Tommon, Joffrey, and Myrcella from being murdered by Robert. Eddard treats those below him with love and respect. He defends them and their lives. 

And by the way, other people are responsible for the War of 5 Kings, there may be some sexists in this forum who try to blame everything on female characters, but there are plenty of reasonable people who go through the list of blame. Varys and Petyr obviously wanted the war to happen. Renly and Stannis did almost nothing to prevent the war, and I would guess also thought a war would be coming (Renly wanted Robert to put Cersei aside, and Stannis wanted to be King even well before Robert's death, I would guess). Tywin Lannister was SHOCKINGLY prepared to go to war at a the drop of a hat (I am implying I think Tywin knew war was coming and actually possibly..not exactly relished it, but looked forward to it). Robert was a fool who did not leave the realm ready to just accept his son as King. Honestly I don't feel like listing how badly Robert managed the realm or his kingdom, but essentially...there is a reason a war followed his death and it is because he didn't really secure the throne for his sons (he was them as his sons) or his brothers. Plenty of people are to blame...Ned Stark is not an equal member of this. He tries to do what is right, even if he does it horribly. 

Robert being lied to about the paternity of his children doesn't make him equally responsible imo. The reason the throne wasn't secured for his "sons", was because his "sons" weren't legitimate. Ned didn't tell him (to spare his feelings), but Robert did try to make sure the realm was in good hands by making Ned regent. If Robert had married almost anyone else, he would have passed on the throne to legitimate children. Heck, he might not have even died before his "sons" reached adulthood. Robert as many flaws and he definitely screwed up a lot as King, but the war wasn't his fault imo. It wasn't Ned's either though.

This applies to Stannis and Renly too actually. You can say that they didn't do enough to prevent the war, but that doesn't mean that their decisions actively caused it. I wouldn't put any of them in the same grouping as Cersei, Varys, Littlefinger, Jaime and possibly Tywin.

Edited August 5, 2023 by Lee-Sensei

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

2 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

Robert being lied to about the paternity of his children doesn't make him equally responsible imo. The reason the throne wasn't secured for his "sons", was because his "sons" weren't legitimate. Ned didn't tell him (to spare his feelings), but Robert did try to make sure the realm was in good hands by making Ned regent. If Robert had married almost anyone else, he would have passed on the throne to legitimate children. Heck, he might not have even died before his "sons" reached adulthood. Robert as many flaws and he definitely screwed up a lot as King, but the war wasn't his fault imo. It wasn't Ned's either though.

This applies to Stannis and Renly too actually. You can say that they didn't do enough to prevent the war, but that doesn't mean that their decisions actively caused it. I wouldn't put any of them in the same grouping as Cersei, Varys, Littlefinger, Jaime and possibly Tywin.

You missed my point entirely. I am not saying Robert was responsible because he didn’t know the sons were his. He did not leave a secure throne for his sons. At all. He bankrupted the 7 kingdoms, went into huge debt to the Lannisters and also gave then tons of positions and power (probably because of said debt) and had 0 relationship with his sons including not preparing them for leadership positions at all. Renly was terrified of Cersei and the Lannisters and ran before Robert’s death and yes, that is partially on Robert. Securing 1. A relationship with Renly, would have changed Renly’s actions. 2. He didn’t know at all that Cersei was killing his children and was probably a threat ro his brothers. He did not see the Lannisters as a threat at all. He’s the King, bro. That’s part of his job. He is supposed to be on top of that. He is supposed to make a secure Kingdom, but particularly for his sons and brothers and other loved ones. He had had eyes completely shut to everything. Robert was a terrible King and even he knew it. And yes, when a new Dynasty takes over, if that dynasty is to succeed they need a strong King (which was not Robert). Setting up new systems of government is basic (he didn’t do it). Separating yourself from the old ruling party is also basic (He didn’t do it). Listen, I am a history major. Robert did not do so many basic things needed to prevent war following his death. Nothing. He was a lazy oaf who treated Kingship like a hobby rather than his duty/job. Heck, he got hands he trusted, then ignored literally everything they told him. You know why Ned didn’t tell Robert about the the kids not being his early on? Because he did’t trust him, because he was not doing the just thing and repeatedly averting his eyes from issues. I assume that is the same reason Jon Arryn and Stannis also didn’t go to Robert. That’s…on…Robert: 

In conclusion, Robert lazing around and doing nothing is partially directly responsible for what led to war. He is the flipping King. He is supposed to do King shit, not drink, have sex, and go hunting. He had a responsibility and he was TERRIBLE at it. He bankrupted the realm for god’s sake. In a historical sense, weak Kings often were followed by wars of succession for a reason (and yes Robert is a weak King). 

[Craving Peaches]

2 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

He bankrupted the realm for god’s sake.

I am not denying that Robert did not seem to care about money, but I do question whether he alone was responsible for the realm's terrible financial position. Someone here did the maths (By Popular Demand: “Who Stole Westeros?” | Race for the Iron Throne (wordpress.com)) and Robert would have to be holding a tourney the expense of the Hand's Tourney every few month since taking the throne in order to get the Realm in that much debt, and we know he wasn't. Robert not only has to get the Realm six million in debt but burn through the 'full treasury' Aerys left first. I know he is not moderate but that is a huge sum even by his standards. I suspect Littlefinger was involved by embezzling funds or something like that as well.

Edited August 5, 2023 by Craving Peaches

[SeanF]

The sack of Kings Landing, plus the cost of rebuilding the Royal Navy,  probably wrecked the royal finances.

The amount the Crown gets in terms of rents from properties, taxes, and customs, would probably be enormous, in a normal year.  The sack probably cost a couple years’ income in its entirety.  Merchants whose warehouses were plundered, shops and businesses that were destroyed, families who saw their breadwinners slaughtered, all would mean a collapse in revenue.

But, the rebuilding of the Royal Navy would have to be paid for up front.  So, Robert would turn to the Faith, Iron Bank, and Lannisters for loans, at high interest.  On top of which is rampant corruption.

[James Arryn]

I’ll note again that the primary means medieval monarchs had at hand to reduce spending is to go on procession. Paying for the food, lodging, entertainment, etc. for those ‘at court’ (and their attendants) was the single greatest regular expense a medieval ruler faced, and going on procession literally shifted that expense to whomever the King visited on procession for the duration of their visit. We read of lots of examples of potential threats having their wings clipped by an extended royal visit. Overtly an honor, it had the benefit of draining your hosts coffers too, and thereby reduce their ability to make trouble/build castles/raise armies. 
 

The only caveat is that Aerys also almost never went on procession and didn’t beggar the crown, so either GRRM just didn’t want to address this aspect or Aerys started with a huge surplus and ~ mitigated costs by almost never hosting anyone/ thing. 

Edited August 5, 2023 by James Arryn

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

On 7/16/2023 at 10:11 AM, Tradecraft said:

Renly was plotting to replace her with the Tyrell girl. And it sounded like a serious plot from the sound of Varys. 

Also, we don't know how deep this plot goes. Robert might have been in on it. He certainly didn't love Cersei. 

Cersei was up against the clock no matter what. 

Ned just moved the time schedule forward a bit. 

No . This was not a kill or be kill moment .