I don’t know if you have read the latest books or not, but SPOILER ALERT -
George RR Martin has gotten away from casting the Lannisters as the end all, be all villains that they were in the earlier books. Tyrion Lannister has practically become a “hero,” and even Jaime Lannister has been softened to the point that he is a sympathetic if not likeable character. Tywin is dead, but Cersei is still cast as a horrible person, but then I guess GRRM would have had a revolt on his hands if he got rid of all his villains.
I don’t think Ned Stark is stupid. By all accounts, he’s an effective ruler of the North, and he’s smart enough to figure out Cersei’s secret. I think the problem with Ned Stark is that he’s the third most powerful man in the Kingdom, and, until the first book started, spent pretty much all his time in the North, in his power base, as a virtual dictator, surrounded by people who owed him loyalty, allegiance, and friendship. Then he comes south as the Hand, and it destroys him, because now he’s got to worry about all the political games and having active enemies and having to be persuasive to get his way rather than just being able to order people to do things. And he’s not good at it because he doesn’t have any experience with it. His experience has been, he makes the decisions and everybody carries them out, and that he doesn’t really have to worry about what other people want.
Also, for all of Ned Stark’s “honor”, Roose Bolton is still one of his bannermen in good standing
I think it’s going to come down to whoever can protect the kingdoms from The Others. Stannis has the upper hand here, so far, but I half-expect Daenerys to dragon in and melt everything. However, I don’t think that will be enough on her own, and still expect some marriage or merger. Maybe with Tyrion? I seem to recall comments about him being somewhat dragon-touched, for some reason.
I think this question gets to the heart of what makes this series interesting. Martin sets everything up at first in a very familiar, comfortable pattern: the child-murdering incestuous villains vs the noble animal loving heroes. And then, in so many ways, he slowly - and sometimes not very slowly - yanks the rug out from under us. All of the expectations that we’ve been trained to have by centuries of writers are skillfully turned on their head, and suddenly there aren’t good guys, there aren’t bad guys, there are just PEOPLE, who are more or less flawed in different and interesting ways, and who are each trying to make their way through life in some way that fits their personality. I love it. My biggest concern is simply that I cannot see a way to end the book that’s satisfying. Someone is going to have to win, and unless everyone else gets killed off, someone is going to have to lose, and at this point, there aren’t many characters that I’d be completely happy to see lose.
FWIW, the TV series did a lot to give Cersei, Tywin and even Jaime soft human sides to them ; instead of the unmitigated assholes they are in the books. I know I loved to loathe Cersei while reading, but her on-screen moments of weakness and conflicts and emotional outbursts make me sympathize quite a bit more with her. On TV she’s not an absolute, almost cartoonish frigid venom-filled bitch, she’s a tragic character like any other. Yes, she’s mean and stuff - but you can sort of glimpse that it wasn’t always so. Life in Westeros, life in King’s Landing in particular, just shaped her that way.
The problem with Dany on the throne is that who would be her heir? Even if she had another kid, the chances are he’d be a evil loon, it runs in her blood.
You’re right. I shouldn’t have said stupidity when it was really it was more naivete that was the problem. Yes, his experience was definitely Northern, but he wasn’t ignorant of Southron politics. He just hated them and insisted on clinging to his Northern ways when he knew that no one else would. I can’t imagine he really believed that Cersei would just up and leave when confronted with the truth, but I think he hoped she would. As I said before, I think his biggest mistake was not taking Catelyn to King’s Landing as an advisor. When the shit was hitting the fan back in Winterfell, she was one step ahead of Ned with just what it all would mean for them politically.
I think Ned’s honor was as much a moral fallback position as it was a first choice. Ned was clearly unprepared to handle becoming Lord of the North and I think that’s true from day one up to the day he left, which is why men like Roose Bolton was a bannerman in good standing. He assumed that everyone in the North followed his value system, not just because he hoped it was the truth, but also because it was easier to believe.
There isn’t any actual reason he shouldn’t be, but Roose Bolton isn’t exactly in keeping with Ned’s vision of Northern honor. House Bolton is one you would definitely want on your side, politically - strong and ruthless. But, since we know that Ned was politically blind, it does make you wonder why he was considered an ally. And, why Ned seemingly turned a blind eye to Bolton’s occasional cruelty. You could argue that there’s no way he could know everything that everyone was doing and you’d be right, but I also think it’s because Ned didn’t want to know and was more than happy to just believe that the North wasn’t capable of certain things.
Well, he’s not his bastard son, but he’s definitely an asshole to anyone underneath him.
I guess the corresponding real-life question would be “Who were the villains in the Wars of the Roses?”
Anyway, while the world is already pretty complicated and often raises questions (they’ve stagnated at this level for how long?) I wonder why there was never more action by the various lords against the power of the crown. Sure, initially the Targareyns had dragons, but there was plenty of time after all the dragons were gone with some really lousy kings. You’d think there’d be a chance for a parallel to the Magna Carta, even if it was as ineffective initially.
Well, I’d like to think Ned’s outlawing the flayings was his way to say “Um, guys ? See that ? That is not cool. Could we please all agree to tone the Old Ways down a notch up in this piece ? That would be great. Thanks in advance”. That he knew at least some of the unpleasantness surrounding House Bolton, and wasn’t too keen on it, but wasn’t ready to straight up strip them of their lands and titles over it just yet (be it for moral, traditional or basely political reasons). That he was hoping they’d either take the hint, or give him a reason to move without antagonizing too many of his other barons.
In other words, that while he’s still too backwards and savage to enjoy and accept Civilization as it exists in King’s Landing, and all its trappings of compromise, quid-pro-quo, negociations and so forth ; he’s nevertheless a progressive in the context of his retarded hick backwoods.
Then again, I do have kind of a soft spot for Ned, so maybe that’s projecting on my part
Ned didn’t outlaw the flayings. An ancestor of his did. From A Clash of Kings:
The Boltons, the Umbers, the Northern Lords are pretty hard and cruel, Somebody’s said that Ned is politically blind. I don’t think he is. He’s just a northerner, and politics is played differently in the North than it is in the South. In the North, being a successful leader is about being strong, and brave, and willing to lead your men in battle, and personally cutting off the heads of the people you sentence to death. From A Game of Thrones, after Ned’s death, where Robb is trying to deal with his new vassals and plan an attack on the south:
Further, while Tyrion eventually was pushed beyond the breaking point, he was never anything like a monster; as acting Hand, he was humane and effective.
Agreed. Tyrion is not evil.
Does this conflict with your notion that Lannisters are not evil?
I disagree with this quite a bit. How could the fact that Jaime and Cersei’s inbred bastards will inherit the throne not be a huge state issue? Look what happened when they were found out, which was sure to happen eventually. The same goes for the attempt on Bran’s life. You can’t expect to try to kill a nobleman’s son and not start a war.
I think GRRM has done an awesome job of writing characters (the Starks) that are far, far from perfect, and yet we root for them. They make many bad choices, but they’re almost always driven by the desire to live morally and do the right thing.
I found it mildly unsettling to read the first Jaime POV chapter, because he was, up until that point, about the one character left who was purely and completely evil. He fathered children with his sister, he killed the king he was sworn to protect, he’d tried to kill Bran, etc, etc. But then, in that one chapter, we got to see his, well, point of view on all these things, and suddenly he was sympathetic. He couldn’t help loving who he did, the king needed to die, etc, etc. That was, for me, a powerful moment in the series.
