Why doesn't Catelyn believe Tyrion's reasoning?

[OnionAhaiReborn]

I wasn't talking about marrying Jeyne, I was talking about fighting a war because he wouldn't bow to his father's killers. It's easy for people to admit that Robb was irrational about Jeyne, but they rarely mention the succession and war. On top of that Robb is motivated by justice while Cat is motivated by vengeance, even though she did her best to stay within the justice system.

No, your argument was that Catelyn gets criticized for being emotional while other characters don't. So it doesn't really matter what specific instance Robb's emotions are being criticized, the fact is that he takes criticism for rash, emotional action just like Catelyn does.

[Xerox in 4 Parts]

No, actually, my argument is about that specific comparison because it's more appropriate. Marrying Jeyne has nothing to do with either justice or vengeance, but refusing to bend the knee does. The Lannisters tried to kill Bran and they tried and succeeded in killing Ned. Tywin Lannister acted as the main adversary in both instances. So yeah the specific instance does matter.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

No, actually, my argument is about that specific comparison because it's more appropriate. Marrying Jeyne has nothing to do with either justice or vengeance, but refusing to bend the knee does. The Lannisters tried to kill Bran and they tried and succeeded in killing Ned. Tywin Lannister acted as the main adversary in both instances. So yeah the specific instance does matter.

Got it, so it only matters that Robb be called emotional in the instance that you care about. I'll say it for you then: Robb was motivated by emotion when he decided to continue the war against the Lannisters.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

The books clearly indicates that seizing Tyrion was the one "rash" decision that Catelyn herself admits she makes without having the time to think all the way through.

From her point of view and with the information she had at the time, seizing Tyrion and getting to the Eyrie seems the best and logical course. Vengeance is part of it, but justice is obviously part of it too, She could have simply killed Tyrion and raced for Winterfell if it was just a matter of vengeance. Catelyn wants to know WHY the Lannisters targeted Bran and why Jon Arryn was killed as well.

Cat is not dumb nor is she hot headed. Most of her decisions are fairly shrewd, she makes some costly mistakes but not becasue she isn't thinking. They make sense in context, but martin makes sure that NO ONE ever has all the relevant information.

But why doesn't she accept Tyrion's arguments at face value? Because he is a Lannister for one. Because the things he says are more or less exactly what a guilty man trying to save his neck would say. Because Littlefinger's story is plausible enough and she trusts Littlefinger enough that once the die is cast in the inn, Catelyn doesn't have any choice but get to the Eyrie and play for time.

It is like a Greek tragedy in way, we can see how Cat's choices are leading to disaster but it all makes perfect sense why she is doing what she does. I don't think her choices were particulary "emotional" but the fact is she has the wrong man and it all leads inexorably to war.

Once again, I don't see how being a 'woman" is relevant.

[Xerox in 4 Parts]

I told you why I cared about it, I offered a legitimate argument why it was more relevant. Thanks though. Let's hope that most people can see it in similar proportion.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

@ Imp Beyond the Wall

I mostly agree with what you're saying. I think the points of contention are over a couple of things here.

From her point of view and with the information she had at the time, seizing Tyrion and getting to the Eyrie seems the best and logical course. Vengeance is part of it, but justice is obviously part of it too, She could have simply killed Tyrion and raced for Winterfell if it was just a matter of vengeance. Catelyn wants to know WHY the Lannisters targeted Bran and why Jon Arryn was killed as well.

I don't see a lot of daylight between 'vengeance' and 'justice.' I know a lot of people see it differently, but that's my opinion on the terms. I think the desire for revenge is fundamentally an issue of passion and not strategy.

As I've said earlier, Catelyn goes to the Eyrie, as she explains, because she fully understands the consequences of seizing Tywin Lannister's son. Her decision to take Tyrion, for whatever reason, with the knowledge of how Tywin would respond was the wrong decision, which is the point I've been trying to make. While she certainly has limited information on the issue of Tyrion's guilt, she has enough information that she should decide that the consequences of capturing Tyrion far outweigh the benefits.

It is like a Greek tragedy in way, we can see how Cat's choices are leading to disaster but it all makes perfect sense why she is doing what she does. I don't think her choices were particulary "emotional" but the fact is she has the wrong man and it all leads inexorably to war.

And this is my other main point of contention. You aren't saying this, but people are pushing the idea that Catelyn taking Tyrion was actually a good idea which produced a positive outcome. It reminds me of politicians who say they would have invaded Iraq even knowing all of the information we know today.

Even if you think Catelyn's information was so limited that she made the best decision she could have at the time, I don't see how people can insist that it was the right decision in hindsight, knowing, as we do, that Tyrion was innocent, Tywin reacted by attacking the Riverlands and slaughtering smallfolk, and Ned was attacked in the streets of King's Landing as a result.

[Melifeather]

Women are more frequently accused of being too emotional versus men, which is biased, because everyone's decisions are ruled by emotion. Our brains are wired to utilize emotion over intelligence. The very point of choice is arguably always based on emotion. When logical choices are wrong, we often feel that it is so. When we ignore our subconsious and our emotions, it frequently turns out badly. Catelyn is a case in point. She shoves all doubts away.

@OnionAhaiReborn... no one is suggesting that Catelyn taking Tyrion was a postive outcome, or the right decison in hindsight. I don't know how you got that impression. She thinks its the right decision at the time, and I empathize with the character and can see how she reached that conclusion. I think we all agree that it was a bad decision in hindsight.

It makes sense to me that she thought Tyrion was guilty and therefore was lying. That he would use his own knife is more problematic for Catelyn than his "lies". I'd like to conclude that if Lysa didn't turn out to be such a wacko, that this could have turned out differently. Even if Catelyn would have come to the conclusion that he was innocent, she may have kept him as a hostage, which was a common strategy during conflicts to hold people to "honor". And, I believe the whole series is an exploration of "honor" and whether or not it can prevail in an unhonorable world.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

@OnionAhaiReborn... no one is suggesting that Catelyn taking Tyrion was a postive outcome, or the right decison in hindsight. I don't know how you got that impression.

That is precisely the argument Ran is making:

Sure it does. That tiny secret is what keeps Cersei Lannister from moving against Robert and Ned immediately, out of fear for herself and her children. Had she known Catelyn was on her way back from King's Landing, rather than on her way to (or, perhaps, on the way to Riverrun to see her ailing father -- who knows?), the only obvious conclusion was that the Starks knew about what Bran saw and it was only a matter of time before they told Robert. She'd have to strike first. That's very much in her persona.

Certainly, the inevitable war launches with surprising alacrity -- almost as if the Lannisters were preparing to do just that anyway... but it's left to Ned to truly screw the pooch and give up the fact that he knows Cersei's secrets. Very shortly after that, Robert is dead and he is imprisoned. Catelyn succeeded at staving that off long enough... for Ned to actually get the knowledge they were after, and to get into position to make use of it effectively.

I don't think Catelyn 'succeeded' at anything. I think she made a big mistake, just as Ned made his own gigantic mistakes in King's Landing.

It makes sense to me that she thought Tyrion was guilty and therefore was lying. That he would use his own knife is more problematic for Catelyn than his "lies". I'd like to conclude that if Lysa didn't turn out to be such a wacko, that this could have turned out differently. Even if Catelyn would have come to the conclusion that he was innocent, she may have kept him as a hostage, which was a common strategy during conflicts to hold people to "honor". And, I believe the whole series is an exploration of "honor" and whether or not it can prevail in an unhonorable world.

I'd also just like to reiterate my position on the opening question of this thread. My first response was that Catelyn may have seen the logic of Tyrion's argument that he wouldn't arm an assassin with his own knife, but at the point they were at it was far too late to turn back. The Mountain Clans were on them and even if the could have made it back to the Riverlands Tywin's men would have been out looking for them. I stand by that position.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

@OnionAhaiReborn...Don't get it twisted, you know me, all I have said I say as one who can't stand Cat and never could. I just think the dismissing Cat's choices and emotion (grief or rage, doesn't matter) or as stupidity, or as naivete is a misreading of the character.

I think you are absolutely right, "justice" and "vengeance", particulary in Westeros, and especially in the case of violence against a highborn child, are not that far apart. Everything that we have seen that passes for a "trial" is arbitrary at best. Even Ned's summary exectuon of the NW deserter not "justice" as we would recognize it. Clearly Cat is thinking that someone must pay, that is clear. I do not however think that she was in any way blinded by it. I don't think that vengeance alone is what drove her decision making. The only time that Cat is blindly irrational is when it comes to Jon Snow, but that is another discussion altogether.

We know that following that first instinct to remain anonymous was the far wiser course, but unfornately Tyrion sees Cat and calls her out. At that point I think that what motivates here to act "foolishly" is the assessment that with her fathers bannermen present and Tyrion for all intents and purposes undefended, there will never be another opportunity to grab him so I think that she "strategically" makes her move.

I have always thought that she was a cold blooded pragmatist rather than a "hysteric." I don't even dignify that "sexism" stuff with a response, I'll let the actual sexists defend against that crap.

I think she knows waht she is doing, she knows the risks and she make a clear eyed judgement call. The wrong one to be sure, but no excuses. No grieving mother. No poor naive highborn lady who doesn't understand the stakes. None of that. Robb was a brilliant tactician but Cat was a better strategist.

I may be reading too much into it but I thnk that Cat starts to have doubts as to whether she really has Bran's attacker almost immediately. Elsewise I really think she would have had Bronn slit Tyrion's throat before the first mountain clan attack rather than allowing Tyrion to have a weapon. She knows that the Lannister's are clearly her enemies but I think she also knows that something about this situation does not add up.

If Lysa, a true "hysteric", hadn't messed it up, I think that Cat would have spent considerable time trying the get at the truth before any "making the bad man fly" would have come about. Remember, she doesn't kill him. If not for Lysa's idiocy I expect there would have been some negotiations with King Landings before all out war.

One other thing, the seizure of the Imp leads directly to Jaime attacking Ned in the street, but it is Ned's confrontation of Cersei and the revelations by Sansa of ned's plan to get the girls out of King's Landing that leads directly to Robert's death, Ned's arrest and subsequent beheading and it is unclear how damaging Cat's precipitous move would have been absent those other events outside her control. IMHO.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

One of my favorite biases is the fundamental attribution error, "the tendency to over-value dispositional or personality-based explanations for the observed behaviors of others while under-valuing situational explanations for those behaviors". So when Catelyn arrests Tyrion, it's because she's an emotional personality, not because her situation was ambiguous based on the realistically limited information she could gather at the time that action was prompted. People commit that kind of cognitive bias a lot, but it's still a bias.

Here's the thing, I read just as many posts using Catelyn's supposed "emotional state" to excuse her actions as posts using it to attack her. Both are wrong.

Cat has a handle of her emotions. She overmasters them, over and over throughout the story. It reminds me of when Sonny tells Tom Hagen that Michael wanting to kill Virgil Sollozzo and Captain McCluskey, is taking things "very personally". Michael has to explain that while it may look like he reacting emotionally, but the long range view is, they (Sollozzo and the Tataglias) are going to kill Don Corleone, it is act now or lose the game. Anybody who says, "it's not Cat's fault because she was distraught" or "Cat was guided by her stupid emotional womaniness," is not seeing the forest for the trees. IMO.

Michael loved the Godfather but his decisions were businesslike. Cat is being the "Godmother", she loves her family but her decisions are businesslike. If you respect her as a character then acknowledge that she is a responsible adult, accountable for the consequence of her decisions. She gambled and ultimately lost, but arguing that her decision making capacity was somehow diminished, for any of the reasons popping up in this thread, is to either say she is something comparable to a child or a mental incompetent, and I see that as a cop out.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

"Family, Duty, Honor". You can pretty much understand everything Catelyn ever does, good or bad, in terms of the Tully motto.

@Ran, I agree with pretty much everything you say in the post that this quote is taken from, but I find it truly ironic that the Tully words describe Jon Snow better than anyone else in the series and Cat is unable to see it.

[Xerox in 4 Parts]

Here's the thing, I read just as many posts using Catelyn's supposed "emotional state" to excuse her actions as posts using it to attack her. Both are wrong.

Yeah that's actually pretty gross too.

Since someone brought up the consequences that Catelyn herself expected: she thought Tywin would follow her and Tyrion thought she was clever to redirect them. Were they both irrational assuming Tywin would do that instead of attacking the riverlands?

[Melifeather]

Cat is being the "Godmother"

Nice! :smoking:

[OnionAhaiReborn]

@OnionAhaiReborn...Don't get it twisted, you know me, all I have said I say as one who can't stand Cat and never could. I just think the dismissing Cat's choices and emotion (grief or rage, doesn't matter) or as stupidity, or as naivete is a misreading of the character.

I know we think basically the same way about Cat in most places, I just wanted to try to explain myself better. I've said in a lot my posts that Catelyn did understand the implications of taking Tyrion (war with the Lannisters) and she should have recognized the consequences were greater than the potential benefits. I don't think Catelyn herself is stupid (and I've said the opposite), I think her decision was stupid.

The reason the issue of vengeance came up is because the argument was made that Catelyn made a purely dispassionate and, importantly, purely defensive decision. I disagree most strongly with the idea that taking Tyrion was a good defensive move. I'm probably equating desire for vengeance too strongly and directly with the term 'emotion,' but I do think the issue of vengeance is crucial to Catelyn's arc. Sometimes she wants vengeance for her children, other times she wants peace for her children instead of taking vengeance, and ultimately she ends up as Lady Stoneheart, the Frey-hanging vengeance zombie of the Riverlands.

[lyvyathan]

It's realistically limited because at the time she was forced to act she didn't have the chance to corroborate it or seek other lines of evidence like she wanted to. And you know it had nothing to do with pride, she was afraid that the Lannisters could harm her family in King's Landing if they knew the Starks were up to something.

I'm busy with work and don't have time to address your other points. But why makes you think was she "forced to act" - you make it sound as if Tyrion walked up to her and tried to put a knife to her throat.

All he did was to - in his typical smart ass fashion - call her out and laugh at her.

At this point, Catelyn only possessed a small piece of weak circumstantial evidence to suggest that Tyrion was involved in Bran's attempted assasination. But now its this small insult to her pride - the fact that this dwarf had uncovered her disguise that made her angry. Her pride was hurt. Now she had to get back at this dwarf (and of course save the world) That's why it is written:

"She did not know what was more satisfying the sound of a dozen swords drawn or the look on Tyrion Lannister's face". (GoT, page 283)

Now There were a number of things she could have done.

1. She could have glared at him and told him to bugger off.

2. Jumped on her chair and screamed and told the whole Inn she was scared of this evil dwarf and demand that soldiers escort her post haste to Riverrun, which was very close by - and from there, send ravens to KL, Winterfell to warn them that "DWARF IS COMING" etc..

3. Continue on eating her food.

4. Go and take a dump. Looks like she could do with the relief.

5. or the outcome that she took in the book.

Don't forget - and I'll say this for a 1000 times - Ned was also confronted with the same piece of evidence and he did not exercise his prerogative as The King's Hand to order the immediate arrest or call for the interrogation of Tyrion or even make subteguge plans to capture the dwarf.

Tyrion was also Tywin's son - and you don't go around making arresting or kidnapping the sons or daughters of highly dangerous Warlords ad hoc on flimsy evidence. The last time someone did something as crazy as this was Rhaegar "kidnap" of Lyanna and everyone knew how badly things went.

You mention that Cat was fearful that Tyrion may harm Ned and her daughters in KL. Apart from the sheer silliness of the idea - is there any mention in the book that Cat voiced out this fear??? I find this absolutely hilarous and would be very happy to see the revelant quote and page number too please.

As I recall from my reading Catelyn

1. captured Tyrion because she hoped that with Lysa's help she'd be able to unlock the Lannister Conspiracy - including the suspected murder of Jon Arryn - and Save the World.

2. wanted revenge for Bran's injuries.

Even if she was concerned that Tyrion may somehow cause harm to Ned - she has not a shred of evidence for this. But by kidnapping out in the open - she was in effect declaring war on Tywin Lannister. Some people might mention she had no control over what Tywin might do. C'mon pull the other one. Tywin was notorious as the most vicious warlord in the 7 Kingdoms - it was well known that he ordered the brutal slaughter of the King's family. Now if it wasn't Tyrion but Tywin standing in front of her - yeah, maybe that might have made some sense. But this is freaking Tyrion, the despised dwarf son of Tywin Lannister - it was already a well established fact in the 7 Kingdoms that bastards (Catelyn's pet peeve) and dwarfs were on the same despised pedestal.

Take a gun and shoot a Lion dead - fine. Take a stick and poke the Lion's backside and you're just asking for trouble.

Capturing Tyrion would only give House Lannister the pretext to initiate hostilities. Now if it was part of an orchastrated plan - that might work - but this is an ad hoc off the cuff rogue scheme. But when she did that - she had absolutely no way of warning Ned nor the Tully family of this new development - hence they were open to whatever retribution Tywin would inflict upon then. And by going to the Eyrie - she was only going to lengthen the time it took to send the warnings letters off. (There's a mention of this need in page 353.)

[lyvyathan]

The books clearly indicates that seizing Tyrion was the one "rash" decision that Catelyn herself admits she makes without having the time to think all the way through.

You're mistaken - there are a number:

1. When she gets Lysa's letter - she exposes herself without any hesistation in front of the Maester. Have some dignity woman, you're a freaking Lady.

2. Ignoring her youngest child for a lengthy period of time after Bran's fall. Robb makes mention of this.

3. Repeatedly ordering the burial of men in the Vale - despite the fact that the ground is stone cold and the presence of enemy guerilla fighters.

4. Releaseing Jamie Lannister from prison - which was one of the most stupidiest decisions of the entire series. It was based on such flawed logic. Not surprising of course - given it was done by Catelyn :D That act really joins the dots up for Catelyn and what does it spell? :D

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

You're mistaken - there are a number:

1. When she gets Lysa's letter - she exposes herself without any hesistation in front of the Maester. Have some dignity woman, you're a freaking Lady.

2. Ignoring her youngest child for a lengthy period of time after Bran's fall. Robb makes mention of this.

3. Repeatedly ordering the burial of men in the Vale - despite the fact that the ground is stone cold and the presence of enemy guerilla fighters.

4. Releaseing Jamie Lannister from prison - which was one of the most stupidiest decisions of the entire series. It was based on such flawed logic. Not surprising of course - given it was done by Catelyn :D That act really joins the dots up for Catelyn and what does it spell? :D

Cat does many things that are bad decisions. "Rash" is what I was talking about. I mentioned the scene in the inn as the "one thing" because Cat herself actually notes that she does not have time to "think it through." I do not in anyway mean to say it is the only thing she gets "wrong."

The thing with Maester Luwin, who cares, there are no consequences associated with going naked in front of him.

Ignoring Rickon and the rest of the family wasn't really a "snap" decision either. Cat was in her "being strong" mode. And she looks up two weeks later and she hasn't left Bran's beside.

Burying the dead? Again this was not a "rash" decision made under pressure, it was just not practical, and she sees sense pretty quickly.

Jaime, ahh, now that is something interesting. I can see where people think of this is "rash" and emotional decision. I disagree. I looked at this as a Cat thinking that Robb was being rash for continuing a war with no clear benefit and that she was making the "pragmatic let's cut our losses" decision. A bad, but rational, decision on her part. She doesn't "release" the Kingslayer, she sends him to KL in chains.

Going back to my Godfather analogy: Tom Hagen tells Sonny to accept Sollozzo's peace overture and end the war, Sonny wants to go in guns blazing. Michael overrules them both with a better plan. Cat is Tom in this analogy. She thinks that accept Tyrion's offer is the smart thing, she thinks that the war is futile and they will never be in a "better" position to sue for peace. But the point is that like Consigliere Tm Hagen, she is thinking, not emoting or even panicking. Unfortunately there is no "Michael" to save the day for Cat and Robb.

You say that her logic is flawed, what do you think her logic is and what is the flaw?

[lyvyathan]

Cat does many things that are bad decisions. "Rash" is what I was talking about. I mentioned the scene in the inn as the "one thing" because Cat herself actually notes that she does not have time to "think it through." I do not in anyway mean to say it is the only thing she gets "wrong."

The thing with Maester Luwin, who cares, there are no consequences associated with going naked in front of him.

But its a rash act. Impulsive. Her husband even asks her to cover up and Maester Luwin is embrassed by it. How would you feel if your doctor came to your room and your wife greeted him without her clothes on? Look before I'm accused of being a prude - we're talking about Catelyn Stark her- a woman whose sense of honor is so finely honed that she spends 15 years rankling at the thought that her husband's bastard child is in their castle. We're not talking about outcomes here either- you used the word "rash", This was clearly a rash (indiscrete) act.

Ignoring Rickon and the rest of the family wasn't really a "snap" decision either. Cat was in her "being strong" mode. And she looks up two weeks later and she hasn't left Bran's beside.

I think you can call it "rash" in that she didn't think too much about going to his room and spending weeks inside without bothering to see to her youngest child. But anyway...

You call its snap now? What's the dictionary meaning of rash?

rash

1 acting or tending to act too hastily or without due consideration.

2. characterized by or showing too great haste or lack of consideration: rash promises.

Synonyms

1. hasty, impetuous, reckless, venturous, incautious, precipitate, indiscreet, foolhardy.

Burying the dead? Again this was not a "rash" decision made under pressure, it was just not practical, and she sees sense pretty quickly.

I refer you to the dictionary definition again. Might I also add that she and her party were under pressure to get away from the murderous clans - she had nearly been killed if not for Tyrion's act of selfless bravery. She does not actually see sense quickly - one of the knights has to tell her twice why it was imprudent to bury the dead - but she refused his reasonable and logical replies twice. It took Bron to tell her off in her face that she could do it - but without his help. So she was essentially forced to abandon this crazy plan of hers - and the text says that she did so unwillingly and angrily.

Jaime, ahh, now that is something interesting. I can see where people think of this is "rash" and emotional decision. I disagree. I looked at this as a Cat thinking that Robb was being rash for continuing a war with no clear benefit and that she was making the "pragmatic let's cut our losses" decision. A bad, but rational, decision on her part. She doesn't "release" the Kingslayer, she sends him to KL in chains.

Hahaha ??? Wow. Seriously? C'mon man, now you're starting to think like Catelyn. That whole idea of releasing Jamie hits the ball out of the Park of Rational Responses.

You're seriously arguing that sending Jamie back to the Lannisters - across battlelines filled with thousands of murderous Stark, Lannister, mercenary soldiers, and fearful village folk who would probably shoot them on first sight and steal their horses before asking questions - is a "rational decision".

Cat didn't even send Jamie back as a peace offering - she sent him back on the forlorn hope that this "under the table" exchange would save the lives of her two precious daughters. And that's seriously all she cares about.

I mentioned sometime back that Cat's sole purpose is to protect her family - that's why she hates Jon - because she sees him as a threat to her children's inheritance. When she helps Jamie escape she's only thinking about Sansa and Arya.

The sickening thing is that this plan was absolutely ridiculous - there's absolutely nothing logical about it.

1. It seriously damages Robb's fragile coalition. (Now please don't say she didn't see it coming :)

2. The chances of Jamie reaching his side was practically nil. The small party could have been caught by Stark/Karstark etc.. forces who would have executed Brienne as a traitor before hanging Jamie Lannister on the spot out of sheer hatred.

3. Mercenary forces could have captured them - which is was what happened in the story.

4. There's a massive war going on - and the chances of them being caught by bandits or killed out of hand by starving or disposed villagers was high.

Now - even Catelyn Stark of all people could have figured this out - she herself had nearly been killed when she took the way to the Vale during peacetime - and she was already armed with a sizable escort. Her level of desperation is so great and so pathetic that she places her trust in a single female fighter and one elderly enemy knight for this vital mission.

5. Even if Brienne had reached Lannister lines safely and brought Jamie to Tyrion - the chances of Sansa and Arya being released and brought back safely to Catelyn was even more remote. Again of all people why trust Tyrion? Catelyn had kidnapped him, dragged him to the Vale which also nearly killed him before her sister imprisoned him. Even when he was saved by Bronn - did Catelyn say anything to help Tyrion get down from the Vale safely with an escort of soldiers - even from her own posse? No. She didn't despite knowing full way that Tyrion walk down the Vale was practically a death sentence in itself.

Besides - we also have the fact that its Tywin in charge - not to mention Cersei and Jamie's opinion in the matter. Even if Tyrion released Sansa and Arya - do you honestly think that they together with Brienne could make it back in one piece? Pass the mercenaries, bandits, etc.. Its the freaking Lannisters we're talking about here - the same treacherous people who made 2 attempts on Bran's life, executed her husband, and etc..

Going back to my Godfather analogy: Tom Hagen tells Sonny to accept Sollozzo's peace overture and end the war, Sonny wants to go in guns blazing. Michael overrules them both with a better plan. Cat is Tom in this analogy. She thinks that accept Tyrion's offer is the smart thing, she thinks that the war is futile and they will never be in a "better" position to sue for peace. But the point is that like Consigliere Tm Hagen, she is thinking, not emoting or even panicking. Unfortunately there is no "Michael" to save the day for Cat and Robb.

You say that her logic is flawed, what do you think her logic is and what is the flaw?

Sending Jamie with Brienne back is not sueing for peace - its an irrational act by a very deluded and desperate character. Without Jamie, Robb has no bargaining chip. By "releasing" Jamie, she scores an own goal and damages Robb's fragile alliance.

That's the problem with Catelyn - she's stubborn and won't listen to reason unless its forced down upon her.

Now having said that. I don't mean to imply that she's not a good person. But she's definitely a person who does irrational and rash acts.

Now you made this statement:

The books clearly indicates that seizing Tyrion was the one "rash" decision that Catelyn herself admits she makes without having the time to think all the way through.

Well, you were wrong.

"Lady Stark, I urge you to press on, with all haste," Ser Willis Wode said, his eyes scanning the ridgetops warily... "We drove them off for the moment, but they will not have gone far."

"We must bury the dead, Ser Willis," she said 'These were brave men. I will not leave them to the crows and shadowcats."

(Note: Apparently she did not seem to think that the shadowcats may take a fancy to live flesh.)

"This soil is too stony for digging." Ser Willis said.

Catelyn, "Then we shall gather stones for cairns"

Gather all the stones you want", Bronn told her, "but do it without me or Chiggen. I've better things to do than pile rocks on dead men..."

"My lady, I fear he speaks the truth," Sir Rodrik said wearily. ... "If we linger here, they will be on us again for a certainty, and we may not live through a second attack."...

Tyrion could see the anger in Catelyn's face, but she had no choice.

(GoT pg 326.)

[Ran]

Catelyn made the exact opposite of a rash decision there, curiously. She proposes something, the others pointed out the problems associated with, she realizes that their advice was correct, and she decides that they should indeed move on.

What awful behavior.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

@lyvyathan - Let me address the first thing you say. Flashing Maester Luwin, it is the very definition of pragmatic rationalism. When Ned and Luwin react to her nakedness Cat basically has to tell them , "Grow up. We got business to attend to."

I read your definitions and I stand by what I said.

rash

1 acting or tending to act too hastily or without due consideration.

2. characterized by or showing too great haste or lack of consideration: rash promises.

Synonyms

1. hasty, impetuous, reckless, venturous, incautious, precipitate, indiscreet, foolhardy.

Yeah, grabbing the Imp without knowing what was going on at the Eyrie, with out being able to consult with or at least warn Ned, and above all, no plan, that fits the definition of rash.

The rest of what you wrote??? Who cares? "Text is digital wind..."

I don't like Cat. I don't like her choices and I am going defend them. If it pleases you to think that she rash, irrational, stupid, or emotional, help yourself. People should be happy. I think you have an overly simplistic view of the character, but I don't actually care.

We have the opposite view, you say she is "good" but "irrational", while I do not think Cat is particularly good, but she is obviously intelligent and rational. She makes mistakes, all of the characters do. They all make decisions that sometimes backfire or are based on imcomplete or incorrect information and that is what makes the story good.