|
Post by CynicalDreamer2 on Aug 10, 2017 0:59:41 GMT
I don't buy it. Ned's father and brother's death may be stylistically similar to Cersei's treatment of Ellaria and Tyene but the reasons were not similar. Cersei was giving Ellaria an eye for an eye for the largely unprovoked murder of Myrcella, while as the Mad King's punishment was way way beyond an eye for an eye. As for her "enemies all around" speech - it's right. She is surrounded by enemies. Again very different from the mad king's unwarranted paranoia. And blowing up the sept was extreme and despicable but from a tactical point of view, it was her best option. If she hadn't done it she would have been killed or been imprisoned to atone for the rest of her life. Not saying her act was justified (far from it!) but to say it was crazy, is a bit far, it was far too calculated and effective to be the act of a crazy person. Do you really not believe sociopaths aren't calculating? She could have blown up the sept at any time (even though she started it by getting Loras imprisoned) the Tyrells didn't need to be part of that.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 10, 2017 1:39:09 GMT
I don't buy it. Ned's father and brother's death may be stylistically similar to Cersei's treatment of Ellaria and Tyene but the reasons were not similar. Cersei was giving Ellaria an eye for an eye for the largely unprovoked murder of Myrcella, while as the Mad King's punishment was way way beyond an eye for an eye. As for her "enemies all around" speech - it's right. She is surrounded by enemies. Again very different from the mad king's unwarranted paranoia. And blowing up the sept was extreme and despicable but from a tactical point of view, it was her best option. If she hadn't done it she would have been killed or been imprisoned to atone for the rest of her life. Not saying her act was justified (far from it!) but to say it was crazy, is a bit far, it was far too calculated and effective to be the act of a crazy person. I fully understand if you don't buy that and think she did so because she is evil and not because she is bordering towards madness. But I have no idea why you or anyone would call it her best option or why some people insist as her only way out. It was a step that she took. People take decisions as per their intelligence (or in some case decisions when they are out of their mind). The books/shows don't tell us about other options available. But in absence of that we can't make judgements regarding what were a person's best options. Doing things which are definitely bound to hurt you in future from every direction can't be only way out. She just chose that because her mind works like that.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 10, 2017 1:44:50 GMT
I don't buy it. Ned's father and brother's death may be stylistically similar to Cersei's treatment of Ellaria and Tyene but the reasons were not similar. Cersei was giving Ellaria an eye for an eye for the largely unprovoked murder of Myrcella, while as the Mad King's punishment was way way beyond an eye for an eye. As for her "enemies all around" speech - it's right. She is surrounded by enemies. Again very different from the mad king's unwarranted paranoia. And blowing up the sept was extreme and despicable but from a tactical point of view, it was her best option. If she hadn't done it she would have been killed or been imprisoned to atone for the rest of her life. Not saying her act was justified (far from it!) but to say it was crazy, is a bit far, it was far too calculated and effective to be the act of a crazy person. Do you really not believe sociopaths aren't calculating? She could have blown up the sept at any time (even though she started it by getting Loras imprisoned) the Tyrells didn't need to be part of that. The trial was the only moment she knew for sure the High Sparrow and all his supporters would be in there.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 10, 2017 1:47:16 GMT
I don't buy it. Ned's father and brother's death may be stylistically similar to Cersei's treatment of Ellaria and Tyene but the reasons were not similar. Cersei was giving Ellaria an eye for an eye for the largely unprovoked murder of Myrcella, while as the Mad King's punishment was way way beyond an eye for an eye. As for her "enemies all around" speech - it's right. She is surrounded by enemies. Again very different from the mad king's unwarranted paranoia. And blowing up the sept was extreme and despicable but from a tactical point of view, it was her best option. If she hadn't done it she would have been killed or been imprisoned to atone for the rest of her life. Not saying her act was justified (far from it!) but to say it was crazy, is a bit far, it was far too calculated and effective to be the act of a crazy person. I fully understand if you don't buy that and think she did so because she is evil and not because she is bordering towards madness. But I have no idea why you or anyone would call it her best option or why some people insist as her only way out. It was a step that she took. People take decisions as per their intelligence (or in some case decisions when they are out of their mind). The books/shows don't tell us about other options available. But in absence of that we can't make judgements regarding what were a person's best option. Doing things which are definitely bound to hurt you in future can't be only way out. She just chose that because her mind works like that. Typical prejudiced opinion. "I don't know if she had other options but I'll just assume there must have been because I think she's evil anyway." And here's an idiot's logic: "Doing things which are definitely bound to hurt you in future can't be only way out."
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 10, 2017 1:49:59 GMT
I fully understand if you don't buy that and think she did so because she is evil and not because she is bordering towards madness. But I have no idea why you or anyone would call it her best option or why some people insist as her only way out. It was a step that she took. People take decisions as per their intelligence (or in some case decisions when they are out of their mind). The books/shows don't tell us about other options available. But in absence of that we can't make judgements regarding what were a person's best option. Doing things which are definitely bound to hurt you in future can't be only way out. She just chose that because her mind works like that. Typical prejudiced opinion. "I don't know if she had other options but I'll just assume there must have been because I think she's evil anyway." That would be you. Just biased instead of prejudiced. Now that she a took a horrible step I will justify that as only possible way for her to save herself. The same as for throwing a kid out of window to die. Yes, doing things which involved hurting those who were not her enemy was not her only way out. Sparrows were her enemy and not the most others. But of course she was the idiot who made sparrows what they were and you are too big of an idiot to not recognise that.
|
|
|
Post by CynicalDreamer2 on Aug 10, 2017 1:59:10 GMT
Do you really not believe sociopaths aren't calculating? She could have blown up the sept at any time (even though she started it by getting Loras imprisoned) the Tyrells didn't need to be part of that. The trial was the only moment she knew for sure the High Sparrow and all his supporters would be in there. And to hell with everyone else, including her son's wife because she'll be damned if she'll face the consequences of her actions and the plot she put in motion.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 10, 2017 2:06:19 GMT
Typical prejudiced opinion. "I don't know if she had other options but I'll just assume there must have been because I think she's evil anyway." That would be you. Just biased instead of prejudiced. Now that she a took a horrible step I will justify that as only possible way for her to save herself. The same as for throwing a kid out of window to die. Cersei scolded Jaime for throwing Bran out of the window. She did not approve and even Jaime admitted they could have handled him. It was the reflex of a fighter in the heat of perceived danger (Cersei to Jaime in S5E01: "You're a man of action, aren't you? When it occurs to you to do something, you do it. Never mind the consequences.") Regarding the Sept, we were not shown Cersei rejecting other possibilities or selecting this one amongst others. In a fictional story, what is not shown, announced or implied does not exist. The subset of what is shown is a conscious decision and the writers decided not to show Cersei having a choice, apart from accepting whatever judgement would be pronounced. We were not shown any communication towards Cersei as to how it would turn out, no offers were made and we were shown the High Sparrow was not even respecting his own engagements twice: when Lancel came to fetch her in S6E08 and when he had Loras' forehead carved with the Seven Pointed Star, upsetting Margaery). All these things clearly presented the High Sparrow as a man who was not to be trusted. We were told she was on trial for the murder of King Robert (S5E08) and the sentence for regicide would be death by beheading (Jaime to Tyrion, S4E08). I analyse what I see, you jump to whatever conclusions you want.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 10, 2017 2:10:40 GMT
The trial was the only moment she knew for sure the High Sparrow and all his supporters would be in there. And to hell with everyone else, including her son's wife because she'll be damned if she'll face the consequences of her actions and the plot she put in motion. To Hell with anything when self-preservation is at stake, yes. There is no debating this.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 10, 2017 2:12:43 GMT
That would be you. Just biased instead of prejudiced. Now that she a took a horrible step I will justify that as only possible way for her to save herself. The same as for throwing a kid out of window to die. Cersei scolded Jaime for throwing Bran out of the window. She did not approve and even Jaime admitted they could have handled him. It was the reflex of a fighter in the heat of perceived danger (Cersei to Jaime in S5E01: "You're a man of action, aren't you? When it occurs to you to do something, you do it. Never mind the consequences.") Regarding the Sept, we were not shown Cersei rejecting other possibilities or selecting this one amongst others. In a fictional story, what is not shown, announced or implied does not exist. The subset of what is shown is a conscious decision and the writers decided not to show Cersei having a choice, apart from accepting whatever judgement would be pronounced. We were not shown any communication towards Cersei as to how it would turn out, no offers were made and we were shown the High Sparrow was not even respecting his own engagements twice: when Lancel came to fetch her in S6E08 and when he had Loras' forehead carved with the Seven Pointed Star, upsetting Margaery). All these things clearly presented the High Sparrow as a man who was not to be trusted. We were told she was on trial for the murder of King Robert (S5E08) and the sentence for regicide would be death by beheading (Jaime to Tyrion, S4E08). I analyse what I see, you jump to whatever conclusions you want. In a fictional story, what is not shown, announced or implied does not exist.
In a fictional story what is shown is how people do a thing according to their nature and intelligence. It is for biased people to then justify the action as only legitimate defence plan of the doer of the action.
|
|
|
Post by CynicalDreamer2 on Aug 10, 2017 2:16:30 GMT
And to hell with everyone else, including her son's wife because she'll be damned if she'll face the consequences of her actions and the plot she put in motion. To Hell with anything when self-preservation is at stake, yes. There is no debating this. There is when you have children. I guess I'm one of those weird people who is prepared to face the consequences of my heinous actions. Oh but then again I'm not a power hungry, incestuous, murdering sociopath who can't see past her desires to the potential fallout.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 10, 2017 2:20:58 GMT
To Hell with anything when self-preservation is at stake, yes. There is no debating this. There is when you have children. I guess I'm one of those weird people who is prepared to face the consequences of my heinous actions. Oh but then again I'm not a power hungry, incestuous, murdering sociopath who can't see past her desires to the potential fallout. Come on, there were no heinous actions. You know she did it all for her children:
|
|
|
Post by CynicalDreamer2 on Aug 10, 2017 2:27:54 GMT
There is when you have children. I guess I'm one of those weird people who is prepared to face the consequences of my heinous actions. Oh but then again I'm not a power hungry, incestuous, murdering sociopath who can't see past her desires to the potential fallout. Come on, there were no heinous actions. You know she did it all for her children: Come on man, the one and only single thing she did for her children was to avenge Marcella.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 10, 2017 2:32:31 GMT
Come on, there were no heinous actions. You know she did it all for her children: Come on man, the one and only single thing she did for her children was to avenge Marcella. Vengeance does nothing for the dead.
|
|
|
Post by CynicalDreamer2 on Aug 10, 2017 2:53:10 GMT
Come on man, the one and only single thing she did for her children was to avenge Marcella. Vengeance does nothing for the dead. No, the dead are dead. Vengeance is for the living and the guilty should be punished. Regardless of our differences regarding vengeance she did nothing for her children outside of Marcella and you asserted she did it for her children. No, she did it for HERSELF, she knew dayum well her children had no right to the throne but she killed people and babies to keep her heinous secret.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 10, 2017 3:02:07 GMT
Vengeance does nothing for the dead. No, the dead are dead. Vengeance is for the living and the guilty should be punished. Regardless of our differences regarding vengeance she did nothing for her children outside of Marcella and you asserted she did it for her children. No, she did it for HERSELF, she knew dayum well her children had no right to the throne but she killed people and babies to keep her heinous secret. Cersei never had babies killed, Joffrey did. She sacrificed herself and raised children so Robert's reign would gain stability by providing heirs. She even let him believe he had children to be proud of. It was the last bit of love she could find for him. That's what Cersei did.
|
|
|
Post by CynicalDreamer2 on Aug 10, 2017 3:35:43 GMT
No, the dead are dead. Vengeance is for the living and the guilty should be punished. Regardless of our differences regarding vengeance she did nothing for her children outside of Marcella and you asserted she did it for her children. No, she did it for HERSELF, she knew dayum well her children had no right to the throne but she killed people and babies to keep her heinous secret. Cersei never had babies killed, Joffrey did. She sacrificed herself and raised children so Robert's reign would gain stability by providing heirs. She even let him believe he had children to be proud of. It was the last bit of love she could find for him. That's what Cersei did. Ohhh, I forgot you are of the belief that I didn't read the books because I skimmed the last two. My sincerest apologies to anyone who got spoiled. Cercei didn't sacrifice shit and you know it. She wanted the throne through HER children and she hated Robert. The hypocrisy is right there for everyone to see. She hated his bastards so killed most of them while putting HER bastards on the throne. They both created 'illegitimate' kids.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,672
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by The Lost One on Aug 10, 2017 4:45:25 GMT
And to hell with everyone else, including her son's wife because she'll be damned if she'll face the consequences of her actions and the plot she put in motion. Her son's wife was probably her biggest enemy there. Though it was Cersei's stupidity in making an enemy of Margaery in the first place. As for her being a sociopath - she might be. But if so, it's a very different madness from that of the mad king.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 10, 2017 4:58:53 GMT
Cersei never had babies killed, Joffrey did. She sacrificed herself and raised children so Robert's reign would gain stability by providing heirs. She even let him believe he had children to be proud of. It was the last bit of love she could find for him. That's what Cersei did. Ohhh, I forgot you are of the belief that I didn't read the books because I skimmed the last two. My sincerest apologies to anyone who got spoiled. Cercei didn't sacrifice shit and you know it. She wanted the throne through HER children and she hated Robert. The hypocrisy is right there for everyone to see. She hated his bastards so killed most of them while putting HER bastards on the throne. They both created 'illegitimate' kids. I do not discuss the books. It's a different character, a different story, different actions. Keep them separate.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 10, 2017 5:01:40 GMT
And to hell with everyone else, including her son's wife because she'll be damned if she'll face the consequences of her actions and the plot she put in motion. Her son's wife was probably her biggest enemy there. Though it was Cersei's stupidity in making an enemy of Margaery in the first place. As for her being a sociopath - she might be. But if so, it's a very different madness from that of the mad king. Here's an interesting analysis of Cersei's mental issues. I don't agree with all of it but it's still worth watching:
|
|
|
Post by CynicalDreamer2 on Aug 10, 2017 13:40:23 GMT
And to hell with everyone else, including her son's wife because she'll be damned if she'll face the consequences of her actions and the plot she put in motion. Her son's wife was probably her biggest enemy there. Though it was Cersei's stupidity in making an enemy of Margaery in the first place. As for her being a sociopath - she might be. But if so, it's a very different madness from that of the mad king. Margaery wasn't her enemy in the sense that she wanted her dead, she wanted to be the Queen so the worst I can see is her convincing Tommen to finally make her go back to the Rock. Cercei viewed her as an enemy because that's how she views anyone who challenges her which is crazy considering she was no longer the Queen. That being said I don't she's quite the same as the Mad King, I agree with you there.
|
|