houseHB Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 People are going to hate this thread I know! Yes we lost our dearly beloved Eddard, Robb and Jon (?), but the Lannisters I think have suffered graver losses and more by the time the series is over. The Lannisters have lost Tywin, Joffrey and Kevan. By the end of the series I think Jaime, Cersei and their children will all be dead (Maggy's prophecy) along with Tyrion. While Theon, Bran, Sansa, Arya and Rickon are still alive, Benjen is too for all we know. I think when we look back on the series we will think the Starks got out of this better than the Lannisters did. I did not include Catelyn as amongst the dead, because she came back as Un-Cat, in my mind Theon will identify himself as part of the Starks when it is all over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostcause Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 The main difference between the Lannisters and the Starks as I see it. Is that the Starks didn't really want or ask to become a part of "the mess in the south".They were fine up in the North, until Robert came and made Ned his Hand.The Lannisters wanted power and had/have power, and some have paid the price for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cat of the Canal Girl Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 I would say there's a difference between "being wronged" and "suffering losses".Losses are to be expected when you engage in a conflict. Northmen slaughtered at the Red Wedding, Lannister armies defeated by Robb, those are losses.Theon wronged Robb by taking Winterfell after being sent as a peaceful envoy to Pyke. The Boltons wronged the Starks by turning traitor and burning Winterfell. Littlefinger wronged Catelyn by lying about the dagger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter's Knight Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Umm, Daenerys anyone?As to the Starks-the point is not in the loss itself as in how much they value it. If Cersei were to die, would Tyrion care the way Jon or Bran do for Arya? If Tyrion snuffs it, would Cersei consider naming a son after him like Sansa does for her brothers? Could we even expect a sort of mourning-the way Dany mourns for Viserys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booknerd2 Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 They are the biggest downfall of a House currently. But there have been others before them. You could say Targ and even what happened to Dontos'family and others.The Starks have been wronged, victims of treachery, bad luck, you name it, but they also made very serious missteps and mistakes that brought bad chains of events.Ned - thinking of Cersei and her children and not securing the exit of his girls sooner. Cat's abduction of Tyrion. Sansa telling Cersei Ned's plans. Robb killing Karstark and not honoring the Frey marriage agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElizaMartell Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 The Starks had a rough start but the Lannisters have been really suffering lately. I found it interesting that perhaps the mysterious deaths of corresponding allied Hands of the King led to turbulence in those perspective houses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostcause Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Umm, Daenerys anyone?As to the Starks-the point is not in the loss itself as in how much they value it. If Cersei were to die, would Tyrion care the way Jon or Bran do for Arya? If Tyrion snuffs it, would Cersei consider naming a son after him like Sansa does for her brothers? Could we even expect a sort of mourning-the way Dany mourns for Viserys?Daenerys is not a house, she's a person.And again I think the main difference here is the Targs, just like the Lannisters, suffered losses while playing the Game of Thrones.The Starks would rather be left out of all that entirely, and were more or less dragged in to it all, starting with Robert arriving in WF. It's easier to feel empathy with them for that very reason.Dany does mourn Viserys, but not really the brother she saw get killed. Rather the brother she knew when he was younger, before the madness got to him. One feels empathy for the loss, as one does with the Starks when they mourn the deaths (or supposed deaths) of family members.The Lannister adults, are all too busy scheming with and against themselves. The ones they will all mourn are the children - barring Joff, not many except his mother felt sorrow at his dying. Cercei felt it enough for 10 people though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oakenhelm Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 The first step in comparisons is whether or not the family has a home. Lannisters still have the Rock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budj Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Yea - I agree with others. The Stark's didn't ask for it and were dragged into it essentially... The Lannister house laid the ground work for their demise. They never should have been in power.My personal theory is that Tywin new that marrying the remaining Targ heirs into the new dynasty would be the best way to "heal" the realm post-rebellion so he took care of that situation allowing his family to be the one that married in. That was just the start, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 The Starks have lost everything. Their home, their land, their past and their future. They are dead or scattered. They have literally nothing but the love of their people. I think that they have been wronged most of the others.BTW: Theon is not a Stark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deaner Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 The Lannisters have mostly reaped what they have sown. One could say if you go back a generation that the Starks did too... If Lyanna did go away and stay with Rhaegar of her own accord knowingly causing the war and rebellion... The political deals and after effects of that war are very much responsible for most of the current events in the books.Regardless I believe the Wolves will return so have no fear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houseHB Posted August 27, 2012 Author Share Posted August 27, 2012 The Starks have lost everything. Their home, their land, their past and their future. They are dead or scattered. They have literally nothing but the love of their people. I think that they have been wronged most of the others.BTW: Theon is not a Stark.I know that!!! That is why I said he will Identify himself as part of the Stark family at the end! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElizaMartell Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 The Starks have been in existence for a long time, I am sure they have had previous moments where things had looked just a crappy as this and it probably wouldn't be the last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Cersei I Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 People are going to hate this thread I know! Yes we lost our dearly beloved Eddard, Robb and Jon (?), but the Lannisters I think have suffered graver losses and more by the time the series is over. The Lannisters have lost Tywin, Joffrey and Kevan. By the end of the series I think Jaime, Cersei and their children will all be dead (Maggy's prophecy) along with Tyrion. While Theon, Bran, Sansa, Arya and Rickon are still alive, Benjen is too for all we know. I think when we look back on the series we will think the Starks got out of this better than the Lannisters did. I did not include Catelyn as amongst the dead, because she came back as Un-Cat, in my mind Theon will identify himself as part of the Starks when it is all over.I'd say that no noble family, including the Starks, have had it as rough as the smallfolik as a whole during this war. The Starks have had it rough; the smallfolk have had it far, far rougher. Plus, they've done absolutely nothing to create this war that is essentially for dynastic dominance.Eddard, even though it is made to look that no honorable man would have ever agreed to allow a kid on the throne made from the wrong man's spunk (generally, GRRM plays fast and lose and mocks and couldn't care less about dynastic rules, but the sacred issue of Cersei's unthinkable female rebellion and the kids being made from the right sperm is something that he's didactic about), Eddard could have just as easily sent Jaime away, got rid of Joffrey somehow, and replaced Joffrey with Tommen, whom he, Eddard, could have helped shape and teach.This option is presented as wicked and unthinkable. No men with "a shred of honor" would even think of it, or consider it. Even though, you know, the right of inheritance is hardly sacred if one thinks about it. The sacred patriarch whose sperm Edddard deems so sacred and necessary was really just placed upon the throne by Eddard and co, to replace a 300 year old dynasty... because said usurper had a loose blood connection to that dynasty. Previously, 300 years before an incestuous trio had come riding dragons and taken over. (And the idea that all women in between that period had been faithful wives and born rightful children for their husbands is all entirely a matter of faith. However, GRRM makes it look like bearing children to any other man than one's raping, abusive husband is unthinkable; only possible for unnnatural, evil, depraved bitches. Wishful thinking, I say.)Honestly, who is to say that what Cersei's done here is any better or more "fair" than any other dynastic takeover in the past. As I've noted, GRRM otherwise endlessly mocks and ridicules the right of inheritance, but when it comes to women shaking the sacred patriarchal privilege at its roots, he takes every step to ensure that such an act will not be seen as anything other than Pure Evil (as he clearly sees it.)In short, Eddard could have (If he were the creation of a slightly less didactic writer) have stabilized the power situation in kings landing and put a worthy person in power if he wanted to avoid war. He didn't. Becasue the trueborn spunk of Robert Baratheon was just that important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budj Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 I know that!!! That is why I said he will Identify himself as part of the Stark family at the end!He wanted to be a Stark - always felt indignant - but the funny thing is that people percieve him as a kinslayer...so effectively the North DID view him as at least a pseudo-Stark...until of course he screwed it up by betraying Robb / all Starks / the North... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 I know that!!! That is why I said he will Identify himself as part of the Stark family at the end! I just can't find why he can identify himself (or others count him) as a Stark after all he betrayed them and he sacked Winterfell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budj Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 snip for lengthI can see your point and do agree to a point...but I view it more as Ned had to follow the system to not buck the system. It is such a shaky - unstable - method of ruling anyways...as you point out, but whether Ned proclaimed it or not Stannis was going to attempt to take back the throne from the incest children anyways. One could argue Ned's attempts at maintaining the line of succession was to prevent the power plays that ensued after Robert's death anyways...and it may well have if LF/Slynt hadn't interferred with Ned removing them from power in book 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castel Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Honestly, who is to say that what Cersei's done here is any better or more "fair" than any other dynastic takeover in the past. As I've noted, GRRM otherwise endlessly mocks and ridicules the right of inheritance, but when it comes to women shaking the sacred patriarchal privilege at its roots, he takes every step to ensure that such an act will not be seen as anything other than Pure Evil (as he clearly sees it.)Just curious here: where are Cersei's action portrayed as such by the writer? Eddard Stark, being what he is cannot help but act the way he did. Littlefinger and Renly both show him that his path is unneccessary , but he does so because he is what he is: a product of his society. Honor and the other mores of his society are important to him.If anything you want a more didactic writer. One that will show you that Cersei was not wrong, despite the fact that most of the POVs have every incentive to pretend otherwise,by having a character stand up on a soapbox or invalidate everything we knew about him up to that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady B Pudding Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 The Starks will make a come back there is no doubt in my mind. The Lannisters on the other hand will not. The difference in these two families is the Lannisters were their own worse doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Arya Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 The Starks have also lost Ice and Winterfell, also the Warden of the North status. Robb's body was also desecrated and he hasn't been put to rest in the crypts yet, which is also a loss to stark tradition. Pretty heavy losses. Hopefully they will be able to reclaim it all, go Rickon!As of now the Lannisters have lost loved ones, but still retain all property and rights, although I think they will lose them in the end. Definitely the throne. I'm betting Jaime and Cersei and their kids will all be dead, maybe Tyrion too:( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.