Cercei's public penitence procession: Did the punishment fit the crime?

[SeanF]

Id say she was plenty humiliated in that trial chapter where that executioner dude,the musketeers and her brother-in-law screw her up.

Milday deserved alot of things but one thing disturbs me.Athos tried to kill her cause he saw that she was branded or something..he didnt even try to ask her to explain..he just went ahead and tried to hang her.(She never harmed him or anything,infact i think she actually loved him)So Athos might be a Jaime parallal?(btw ive read the unabridged and english translated edition)

Sorry for going so off-topic :(

Athos' behaviour towards Milady was appalling.

[mormont]

[mod] Posts have been deleted and those concerned will be messaged: that's the end of the argument, OK? [/mod]

[Fire_Kiss]

GRRM is full of nonsense. The punishment of Jane Shore bears no resemblance to Cersei's walk of shame. Nor was the practice of wearing humble, plain and simple garb, while doing penance, restricted to women.

Well, you're right that Jane Shore wasn't forced to walk naked, but she was forced to walk the streets, gathering male attention.

I see the parallels, though it's true the Cersei had a bigger cross to bear.

Edited for typos

[Arkash]

No, she didnt deserve it at all.

[Arkash]

"Shore" would have been a good bastard name for the Westerlands... better than "Hill".

[Fearsome Fred]

Lancel was responsible indirectly for Robert's murder! Regicide! And psychological torture and penance was all he had to do for his atonement. It's egregiously unfair.

Like I said, I have no interest in the "unfairness" of it. I think that misunderstands the purpose of penance. Cersei was proud; Lancel was not. Other circumstances ensured that public nudie shaming would not have been an appropriate penance to impose on Lancel (it would have been a public accusation of a still-powerful and deadly queen). I don't know what you mean by "psychological torture", but much of Lancel's suffering has been physical. I also find it interesting that Lancel had been angry at Cersei, and the High Septon had convinced him to forgive her.

But I really do not want to be manipulated into defending the walk-of-shame sequence, because I think it is grotesque and ridiculous. If he had just had her shave her head and wear a simple white gown or shift, and walk barefoot, it would have been credible, and I would have considered his failure to impose an identical penance on Lancel to be completely irrelevant.

Cersei's WoS was solely to punish her for fornication.

Not entirely. It was also penance for pride.

I'll agree with you the HS is nuts about public nudity shaming rituals. So KL seeing Cersei naked isn't going to instill lust in them? Are their insults okay (what about the Mother's mercy?).

Right. If this penance somehow brings out the best in Cersei it will only be at the expense of bringing out the worst in everyone else, including the High Septon.

I don't agree that GRRM has any deficiency of modesty. The middle ages were quite bawdy times to live in.

Compared to what? Compared to Victorian times, sure. Compared to modern times? Hell, no.

Nudity wasn't a huge deal - I don't see Cat walking across a room naked in front of her virtual OBGYN to be immodest.

Nudity has always been a big deal. And I don't think most women would feel right about casually appearing nude in front of their OBGYN doctors outside of a clinical setting.

Repulsive attempt to show Lysa as deranged and puffy? That's her character! She's been through a forced abortion at a young age, had 6 children and only one lived and he's sickly, and she breast-feeds him. She's got a serious mental illness (obsession with Petyr also, let's not forget that). She kills her husband.

All of which could have been conveyed without a lurid, voyeuristic description of the breastfeeding process, where the ugliness of her body is used to demean her in the eyes of the reader.

Why is this GRRM's fault? Why would you want him to write Lysa as a docile kind and beautiful lady....

I never said I wanted that.

And I doubt it was uncommon for females to say "I am a woman flowered". That's quite a euphemism, because menstruation is not flowery at all

Euphemisms exist to resolve the tension between the rule that certain things are not to be discussed, and the rule that sometimes one needs to discuss them.

Sansa had no reason to discuss her menstrual functions AT ALL in front of strange men she was being introduced to for the first time.

She could say "I'm not a child. I'm 14". That would be a zillion times more appropriate. But even that would be a rude and disrespectful thing for a teenager to say to a woman three times her age.

[Fire_Kiss]

Fred, I'd like to respond to everything, but there's too much and I'm too lazy (haha)

So, about the obgyn thing: I believe that is a personal opinion of yours, and I must say I have an entirely different one. Cat and Ned had just had sex, we're lying naked in bed when the Maester came in with the box. I don't believe she was being immodest, because 1) why clothe yourself when you don't want to 2) Maester whatshisface had already seen her naked (and believe me, after you've been to the obgyn a few times a month for HPV treatment, it's kind of hard to be embarrassed around your doctor) and 3) (perhaps most important to me) she was anxious to see what her sister had sent her.

That showed me right there that Cat thought whatever was in the box as too important to put on clothes for.

In no way did I feel she was being immodest, it's not like she roams naked through the halls of Winterfell. And if she did, I can't say I really blame her. I like to walk naked through my own home, so *shrug*

But overall, I think it's a matter of preference.

Next, regarding the "woman flowered"... In this culture and setting, it was many people's business wether or not a girl had flowered.

Getting your period is a mark of womanhood, it literally transformed you from a girl to a woman. It needed to be known for marriage reasons, among others.

Now, I don't think Fred mentioned this, but someone brought it up (back at the "spewing blood" stage) and it's relevant, periods can *hurt*. There's significant cramping in both the lower abdominals and lower back.

So I don't find her comment of "I'm a woman grown and flowered" to be anything but courteous.

[Queen Cersei I]

GRRM is full of nonsense. The punishment of Jane Shore bears no resemblance to Cersei's walk of shame. Nor was the practice of wearing humble, plain and simple garb, while doing penance, restricted to women.

Also interesting to me is the comparison of the amiable, gentle Jane Shore who, in her lifetime, never so much as hurt a fly, with Cersei, multiple murderer, tyrant, and torturer. Are we supposed to believe that the two are comparable... because, I don't know, they both used sex to get ahead? They are both "whores?" (Ugh, the reflection of Cersei that "grandfather's whore" ran and covered herself during a nude walk and that she would never be a whore like that, followed by Cersei running and covering herself in the same chapter (just like a whore-- hahaha) was one of the clunkiest elements in an incredibly clunky storyline, imo.)

Also, people were appalled by Jane Shore's treatment.

The funny thing about the walk is that it has an element of, "oh yeah, you think you're so hot? You think you can manipulate men with that body of yours? You think you can act all sexy and better than anyone else? Well you can't-- you're just a dirty, common, aging, used slut at heart. You think you can use your sexuality for power? Well ha! You are powerless, you aging, hideous hussy! And I'll show you that!" And then, for extra giggles, the woman herself automatically agrees with it at the end.

Whatever anyone says, there was not a real element in Jane Shore's historical punishment. But there certainly was in Cersei's. And what adds to the disturbing nature of the whole thing is that some pretty heavy overtones of that have been present in Cersei's characterization from the very beginning.

Jane Shore's punishment was about religious reformation and repentence, as much as shame; Cersei's, by the way it was written, was about "making her see herself as she was"-- a dirty, aging used woman who was-- and deserved to be-- powerless. Then we can all see her as human after she's come to hate herself and renounce all her pride, but never before.

Cersei's pride, lust for power, sexual deeds, and the way these three uniquely intersect, is central to her villainization, though they should not be. (Certainly, no route like this is taken for any male villain, even when the aforementioned villains foul deeds include rape.) I am used to the "ambitious woman who uses sex to get ahead" archetype. And, as such, I am used to seeing female sexual manipulations presented as evil. But I've never seen them dwelt on to such an extent, or implied to lessen a female characters worth, so much as they are with Cersei.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

I think you all are forgetting something. The situations (Lancels and Cersei's sex acts) were not treated equally because they were not equal. Lancel decided to join a holy order. The high septon may have deemed that atonement enough. The high septon also has said he scourges himself to rid his own flesh of sin; its possible Lancel's back is scarred so heavily it resembles a tree trunk.

Had Cersei decided to renounce Queen and title as Lancel renounced his lordship and land, I think the result would have been vastly different. But she did not. So, by the standards of the High Septon, the only standard that matters, as mine do not for sure...I dont exist as far as HE is concerned; the punishment fit the crime.

[Fire_Kiss]

< snip for space >

So, I have to say that I respect your opinion. However, in regards to "no male villains have had their story portrayed this way" I beg to differ.

First point: Theon. He in no way "slept his way tithe top" but he did abuse women, and that vilified him in my eyes. His punishment? He was flayed in multiple areas, including (possibly) his cock. Was this done in typical justice format? No, but it's arguably karmatic "justice".

Second: The mountain that rides. We've seen several sexual offenses on his part, including but not limited to: Elia, Aegon, Rhaenys, people in the village near the gods eye and the barkeep's daughter.

Third: Petyr Baelish: he got Lysa's panties so twisted in a knot, I suspect this is the reason he was even Master of Coin in the first place. He uses sex, or sexual "misconduct" to manipulate his way to the top. He slept with and married Lysa, only to kiss Sansa and push Lysa out the window. Then there's the whole, turning Jeyne Pool into a whore and fake Arya thing... That pretty much makes him a villain in my book.

And one more thing: Cersei is a wonderful villain. See my list of her crimes in a post a few pages back. But I don't think the WoS was to break her pride. And if it did break her pride, she's the only one to blame. Pride is not something that can be taken, humiliated, or beaten away from you. You have to agree to let it go.

[Queen Cersei I]

This did seem to me to be part of the point. Laying aside for the moment the arguments about Kevan's possible complicity in the deal, I think GRRM intended to provide an illustration of exactly how much strength the Faith now has in King's Landing. Their power may be temporary, but it is - for the moment at least - very real. For the High Septon, who I think is a smarter cookie than is sometimes taken into account, the very thing you're complaining about is part of what he wanted out of the deal: his intention is to make an ambitious statement that nobody is beyond his power, a message that could add to his standing with the smallfolk and make the nobles cautious in moving against him.

Is it realistic? Well, it's certainly very exaggerated. But if you're going to say you dislike exaggerated political situations, you're reading the wrong series (and probably the wrong genre).

I think asking for consistent characterizations, believable plotting, coherent storylines, and a lack of smutty, fantastically contrived incidents is not asking too much from a work of literature, whatever the genre. Bad writing is bad writing. And Maggy the Frog would be painful to read about in any genre-- historical fiction, general fiction, sci. fi, fantasy, you name it.

In the game of thrones you either win or you die.

Or if you're Cersei, you apparently do neither, but proceed to fuck up so repeatedly and spectacularly that you end up having to walk through the streets buck nekkid.

Um yeah, how is Bush-bashing coming into this argument? It's an inappropriate analogy. Waterboarding is not the same as using and vilely torturing women to create a zombie monster KG. Can we keep politics OUT of this? It never ends well...

I have no wish to bring Bush baiting or politics into this, but there is an interesting paralell between waterboarding and Cersei's ordeal. Many of those who have been waterboarded (including political supporters of Bush's policies) have testified that they could not stand it, and categorized it unambiguously as torture. Those who are waterboarded live and are not physically maimed, but there is a fine line between physical torture and "mere" psychological torture.

Just as there is a fine line between "only a walk" and an instance of extended sexual harassment and emotional abuse.

Once and for all, walk approvers-- no one's saying that Cersei "should get off for her crimes" because she's a woman, the walk was gross, etc. I have never denied that Cersei should be held fully culpable for what she has done, and have suggested either a quick beheading or life imprisonment as a consequence. However, the walk was gross-- its not that Cersei does not deserve to be punished; its that she does not deserve that. (The fact that Cersei's true crimes are not sexual in nature only makes for added hilarity. And I find it funny that those who complained that Cersei is guilty of "statuatory rape" with Lancel (using clearly modern standards) have no objection to stating that Cersei deserves to die for cheating on Robert... because of the standards of her time.)

Don't feel bad for her? I get it. Cersei has done some horrible, evil things, and I get how that would remove her from human sympathy in the eyes of some. But that is different than saying, "the walk was justified." Whether or not you feel for Cersei as a human being has no bearing in the matter. The walk was unjust and gross and messed up. One needn't feel any sympathy for Cersei as a person to recognize that.

[Lummel]

I suppose my point is that there is no just punishment in westeros, or barely any, there is a gross and blatant power struggle instead in which the only rule is - if you see someone down: kick them.

In this case cersei is the victim. What she is accused of or what we may consider her to be guilt of is irrelevant. The point is she is weak and her power rivals are going to use the opportunity of her weakness to attempt to break her and more importantly to seize power from her.

"Unjust and gross and messed up" - yes absolutely it was. The fact that her own uncle is behind this just goes to show how extremely gross this power struggle is and how there are no limits. You win or you die in the game of thrones according to Cersei - yes she is still alive but it was clear from the epilogue that her life is still at risk.

For me this is one of the themes of westeros: "life is not a song". For most of the players of the game of thrones its a case of on the outside, pretty tournaments and chivalry, while on the inside they will not hesitate to stoop to the lowest grossest actions to further themselves.

[Lady Tanalyth]

I don't think Cersei's punishment fit the so-called crimes that she admitted to. I just disapprove in general of someone being punished for their sexuality and I feel like that's exactly what happened with her. (Obviously I'm not talking about someone being punished for rape or underage sex crimes or things that are plainly wrong.)

The scene annoyed me for a few reasons not the least of which was that it really made me get pissed off with Kevan and the Tyrells for ever allowing it to happen. I find it hard to believe that Kevan's loyalty to Tywin would just go up in flames like that even with Kevan's knowledge of what happened with Cersei and Lancel. And the Tyrells have a reason to not want to see Cersei convicted or even accused of her crimes because it would eventually end up jeopardizing Tommen's position and consequently Margaery's. It all just felt so stupid and unnecessary to me. If Margaery was allowed out without having to go through that then IMO the same should have been done for Cersei.

I also think that the High Septon is a creep and wielding power seems to get him off. He's subtle in a way but he seems like he thinks he's the most powerful man in KL and I just want him to be knocked off of his self-righteous pedestal. I think it would be awesome if Melisandre or somebody from another faith were to roll in and be the one responsible for taking him down or discrediting him in some way. OTOH I also wouldn't mind seeing Cersei get revenge on him in someway.

Also, just to clairfy, if Cersei had been found guilty of murder and torture then I would think that she got off easy.

ETA:

Lol, all that and I forgot to put that I agree with those who think a walk like that is disgusting in general. I can't see how a punishment like that does anyone any good. What does a situation like Cersei's walks do beyond providing the smallfolk a brief opportunity to engage in harrassment? Cersei might be changed but something like that isn't going to suddenly make her a "good" queen, a "good" mother to the king, or even a "good" person. In fact I won't be surprised if the Walk ends up doing certain people more harm than good.

I also disapprove of a community getting its kicks by watching the torture and humiliation of another human being. This is the same crowd of people that were totally excited and fine with Ned getting his head cut off. They seem to enjoy watching the highborns get punished and humiliated and that just seems wrong to me. I don't think lowborn people should be treated that way and I don't think highborn people should be treated that way.

[Sasha Steelsong]

One of the men she was accused of having sex with was one of her guards during her walk of shame, only he was fully clothed, not on display and not being punished.

I loathe Cersei, and she deserves whatever she gets for the murders she's ordered and caused and condoned. But slut-shaming her for having sex and making her walk like that, when a man wouldn't have to face a similar punishment, was disgusting.

This. I agree Cersei has a boatload of bad karma heading her way and she deserves every bit of it, because she has done some god awful things to people. If she was walking as part of her punishment her real crimes I'm not sure I would feel this way, but she isn't. The only reason she is doing the walk is because she had sex (and yes the fact that the man she had sex with is walking next to her clothed and without shame proves that it was because she was a woman who had sex). It is not even as if they are accusing her of cheating on Robert (rightfully treason when dealing with a monarchy and a king) which might at least elevate the "crime", but basically it was just cause she had sex. So while she has a lot of pain righfully coming to her, this was not among them. This was slut-shaming plain and simple and there is never a time I think that is an appropriate punishment.

[Fire_Kiss]

If Margaery was allowed out without having to go through that then IMO the same should have been done for Cersei.

Also, just to clairfy, if Cersei had been found guilty of murder and torture then I would think that she got off easy.

First, Margary was not guilty of anything, especially if the High Septon believes Kettleblack. Second, Randall Tarley had a friggin army: no way the Septon could keep her without a fight.

Last, don't you think the HS is gonna take one look at the Blue Bard and think, hmmm this "witness" looks tortured?

ETA: I for one, am tired of the "she wasn't found guilty of her other (more heinous) crimes and therefore shouldn't have been punished" argument.

She's guilty as sin. I dont see what the issue is here.

[Guest]

I think all I want is for the issues of violence, slut shaming, ect to be less heavy handed than they currently are in Cersei's chapters. If you read any of Toni Morrison's novels, you can see how the same topics are written with much a finer grace and introspection. Compared to Morrison, GRRM's attempts at dealing with the same subjects come across as cheap.

Lummel, we get the Game and how they exploited Cersei's weakness.

However, if this is her catalyst for redemption, why does it have to come from her believing she's an ugly, vile, slut?

[Lummel]

However, if this is her catalyst for redemption, why does it have to come from her believing she's an ugly, vile, slut?

Redemption? If there is to be redemption it will have to come from her. On the other hand redemption - what for? She in the same category as the other game players. I doubt she sees herself as needing to be redeemed.

Does she believe that she is vile, ugly and a slut? Probably not. I can't imagine that if she did that would be a trigger for redemption either.

[mormont]

[mod] Let me make this very clear:

The topic of the thread is Cersei's public shaming. If you want to discuss what role you believe it plays in the story, what you imagine the intention of the author was in writing the scene, whether you think it's realistic or well written, whether you believe Kevan had a hand in it, what you think the Faith's motives were, the distinction between religious sin and crime, historical comparisons, whether you think the average Westerosi would consider it just, or even whether you as a modern person consider it just, go ahead.

If on the other hand you want an excuse to type out your own bizarre revenge fantasies - no. We won't be doing that. Any such post will be removed and the poster, having now been warned, will receive a penalty for ignoring the warning. [/mod]

[Baitac]

I am very offended by gender-specific punishment. I cannot imagine living in a country where sentencing guidelines differed based on gender. Also, if you have a society where acts are criminal, then my friends you have a legal system. I do not accept that this was not about the laws or conventions of Westeros. Kevan and the High Septon may have come to an agreement about Cersei, but what they agreed on was how to punish her. This walk wasn't meant to humble her, it was meant to break her. You think the Septon said: "well let's go ahead and humble that sucker"! This never would have happened if Cersei was a man and a King. Unfortunately for her, she is neither. Worst of all is that she has always been intelligent enough to know how much this mattered.

[Guest]

Redemption? If there is to be redemption it will have to come from her. On the other hand redemption - what for? She in the same category as the other game players. I doubt she sees herself as needing to be redeemed.

I think we're confusing author's intent with character motive. I'm talking about the former, the way the author has chosen to characterize her and write her arc.

GRRM has given her a POV. I assume that means there will be some kind of "change" in her, even if she is among the most depraved game players. She even refers to her walk as her "atonement" (see below).

If GRRM doesn't give her a single redeemable quality, while Theon and Jaime get it by the bucket load in their arcs, then I'm done with these novels. Full stop.

Does she believe that she is vile, ugly and a slut? Probably not. I can't imagine that if she did that would be a trigger for redemption either.

Sorry, yeah, she does:

"She did not feel beautiful, though. She felt old, used, filthy, ugly."

"This is my penance," Cersei told herself. "I have sinned most grievously, this is my atonement."

"I should never have let them see me...What have I done?"