|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 19, 2017 17:43:05 GMT
I think my distaste for him is mostly rooted in his lack of fear, in his lack of value for life, including his own, and his humility. He was very much afraid by the time of his beheading.
It's not his fear of dying that is a concern. Someone can be ok with risking their life because they don't think they are actually in danger. Him being brave for himself is a non-issue although in his case it's overrated.
The reality is that Ned was rarely in danger in the first place and he remained cautious throughout his time in KL. Again, the only thing he did not foresee is Robert's death by boaring.
In any event, the dude is was not humble nor was he honorable.
He lied routinely.
He deceived routinely
He thought less of others routinely
He argued for his view constantly even if it was wrong
One could make the argument that he was honorable, but just to his siblings.
The book gives a ton of clues tat the dude wasn't all there.
I don't even believe Howland Reed is in his corner anymore but basically exiled to his swamp.
Are you trolling here? Pretty much everything you say here is dead wrong. He was concerned for his family and not himself, even up to his beheading. He was acutely aware of the danger he was in the during the entirety of his stay on KL, yet he routinely stood up to all threats both obvious and obscure. He argued with the council and the King himself. He took calculated risks that were in the realm's best interest and even offered to help Cersei by letting her escape with her children when he confronted her. He lied to protect his nephew and his sister's dying wish. This secret was harmful to no one and protected the realm from more bloodshed. What was he wrong about? He wasn't comfortable with assassinating a teenage girl, and in the end he was right about that because Westeros needs her now more than ever (and I'm not a fan of Dany); he tried to give Cersei the chance to live her life instead of killing her outright; he tried to remove a false, insanely dangerous heir to the throne from power. Ned was betrayed by the Baratheons. Stannis ran away and Renley refused to help Ned unless Ned also ignored the rules of succession and supported Renley's false claim to the throne. Ned only turned to Littlefinger when he had no other choice, and even then he knew it was risky. Eddard was neither stupid nor cowardly at any time. Nobody tricked him. He was simply unwilling to sink to the levels of those around him. He stood for his beliefs and he died for them. It's amazing to me how fans of GOT think it's stupid to have morals. In their world, you're either a creep or you're stupid. Ned wasn't stupid nor was he a coward. He even sacrificed his honor by confessing to a crime he didn't commit in order to protect his family (and the entire realm) from a war he knew would result in his (I'll say it) assassination. Ned was looking at the big picture. Yeah, particularly when he was dueling Jaime in the streets and was stabbed by a Lannister soldier, when Littlefinger held a knife to his throat (a man who had previously warned Ned not to trust him but again he had no choice at that point), and especially when he was actually beheaded. No danger at all.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 19, 2017 17:49:37 GMT
Rey KahukaI didn't say he wasn't. In fact, I specifically made the point earlier that Ned knew the game better than anyone this side of Cersei Lannister. Ned had ignored the rules of succession before so supporting Renley would not have been unusual. However, I don't recall him supporting Renley. In fact I specifically remember him sticking to Stannis.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 19, 2017 19:05:38 GMT
Rey Kahuka I didn't say he wasn't. In fact, I specifically made the point earlier that Ned knew the game better than anyone this side of Cersei Lannister. Ned had ignored the rules of succession before so supporting Renley would not have been unusual. However, I don't recall him supporting Renley. In fact I specifically remember him sticking to Stannis. I said unless Ned ignored the rules of succession and supported Renly, which he did not do. That was my point, not sure how you missed it. You said he wasn't in danger. Stop changing your story.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 19, 2017 20:37:09 GMT
Rey Kahuka I didn't say he wasn't. In fact, I specifically made the point earlier that Ned knew the game better than anyone this side of Cersei Lannister. Ned had ignored the rules of succession before so supporting Renley would not have been unusual. However, I don't recall him supporting Renley. In fact I specifically remember him sticking to Stannis. I said unless Ned ignored the rules of succession and supported Renly, which he did not do. That was my point, not sure how you missed it. You said he wasn't in danger. Stop changing your story. I must have missed it among all the nonsense you were saying...
My statement was another dig at Ned anyway...
Also, you gave two examples of Ned being in danger and one of them was only after he was tricked by Littlefinger and lost the game he was deeply involved in.
That's fairly rare. His people were routinely in far more danger though.
Further, he definitely had a choice in not trusting Littlefinger. Heck, LF was practically begging him NOT to trust him when he stayed the course with Stannis.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 744
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Sept 19, 2017 22:50:58 GMT
I said unless Ned ignored the rules of succession and supported Renly, which he did not do. That was my point, not sure how you missed it. You said he wasn't in danger. Stop changing your story. I must have missed it among all the nonsense you were saying...
My statement was another dig at Ned anyway...
Also, you gave two examples of Ned being in danger and one of them was only after he was tricked by Littlefinger and lost the game he was deeply involved in.
That's fairly rare. His people were routinely in far more danger though.
Further, he definitely had a choice in not trusting Littlefinger. Heck, LF was practically begging him NOT to trust him when he stayed the course with Stannis.
He wasn't speaking nonsense, that was an excellent post correcting many of your misunderstandings. Having just re-watched season one again (which I suggest you do as well) Ned knew from the moment he arrived in King's Landing that they'd ventured to a very dangerous place. It got even more dangerous when he defied King Robert over the assassination of Daenerys at which time he was hoping to sneak out of King's Landing but was tempted to stay by Baelish who offered up potential evidence regarding why Jon Arryn, Ned's foster father and mentor, was killed. That led to Ned being attacked in the streets and some of his men being killed, including his Captain of the Guard Jory Cassel. He further depleted his guard when he sent some with Beric Dondarrion in pursuit of the Mountain. At this juncture Ned Stark was essentially defenseless, wounded himself and without many men to defend him, the death of King Robert meant a power struggle was about to ensue and Ned didn't have the horses to defend his claim as regent. Renly Baratheon offered his household guard if Ned would back his claim, Ned refused even though Renly reiterated just what danger Ned was in from Cersei. Lord Baelish also made an offer to rule the Realm alongside Ned with Joffrey as a puppet, but Ned refused as the information he'd discovered (and confronted Cersei with) indicated Stannis was the legitimate heir to Robert, not Joffrey. Ned's choices were poor at that juncture, he could sneak out of King's Landing or he could trust that Littlefinger would honor the pledge he'd made to his wife Cat and help Ned. As King Robert's dying wish had been imploring Ned to sort out the mess he'd made of the Realm, Ned stayed. Note that there were three main forces that could be used to control the capital, the Baratheon household guard, the Lannister household guard and the Gold Cloaks, Ned's household guard had been weakened by Jaime's attack in the streets and his detailing some to ride with Beric. If he'd have run for it, Tywin was waiting to ambush him, just like Gregor Clegane ambushed Beric Dondarrion at the Mummer's Ford. So no, Ned didn't really have any realistic choice other than to trust Littlefinger, or betray what he knew was true, that Stannis Baratheon was Robert's legitimate heir.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 19, 2017 23:34:38 GMT
What was he wrong about? He wasn't comfortable with assassinating a teenage girl, and in the end he was right about that because Westeros needs her now more than ever (and I'm not a fan of Dany); … he tried to remove a false, insanely dangerous heir to the throne from power. Ned was betrayed by the Baratheons. Ned couldn't know what role Daenerys could be able to play in the future, so let's not give him credit or guilt for any of it. For all we know, Daenerys' presence is the reason the Wall came down after she brought her stupid beasts north and her very invasion was a disaster to start with but no one blames the midwives who helped bring baby Stalin to this world, do they? Joffrey's personality was not part of the reasons Ned decided to cast him aside. He never made the slightest remark about it. He was all "we must have war now because he's not the rightful heir; there is no other choice".
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 19, 2017 23:39:51 GMT
As King Robert's dying wish had been imploring Ned to sort out the mess he'd made of the Realm, Ned stayed. He'd made more of a mess in two episodes than Robert had in 17 years, "holding it together" with his wife and her family.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 744
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Sept 19, 2017 23:55:33 GMT
What was he wrong about? He wasn't comfortable with assassinating a teenage girl, and in the end he was right about that because Westeros needs her now more than ever (and I'm not a fan of Dany); … he tried to remove a false, insanely dangerous heir to the throne from power. Ned was betrayed by the Baratheons. Ned couldn't know what role Daenerys could be able to play in the future, so let's not give him credit or guilt for any of it. For all we know, Daenerys' presence is the reason the Wall came down after she brought her stupid beasts north and her very invasion was a disaster to start with but no one blames the midwives who helped bring baby Stalin to this world, do they? Joffrey's personality was never part of the reasons Ned decided to cast him aside. He never made the slightest remark about it. He was all "we must have war now because he's not the rightful heir and there is no other choice". That's not why the war started though, but I agree that Joffrey's personality was not part of Ned's decision. Joffrey in Season One wasn't the monster he'd become by Season Three and Ned's reason for denying him the crown wasn't based upon that anyway, that was Renly's argument and it got nowhere with Ned. The war started because Tywin Lannister sent the Mountain into the Riverlands to do this: 'They burned most everything in the Riverlands, our fields, our granaries, our homes. They took our women, then they took them again, and when they were done they butchered them as if they were animals. They covered our children in pitch and then lit them on fire.' That's what caused Ned Stark to send Beric Dondarrion to arrest the Mountain and demand Tywin Lannister come to King's Landing to account for the crimes of his vassal, Gregor Clegane. www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKB0ogglzGQ
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 20, 2017 4:05:45 GMT
Ned couldn't know what role Daenerys could be able to play in the future, so let's not give him credit or guilt for any of it. For all we know, Daenerys' presence is the reason the Wall came down after she brought her stupid beasts north and her very invasion was a disaster to start with but no one blames the midwives who helped bring baby Stalin to this world, do they? Joffrey's personality was never part of the reasons Ned decided to cast him aside. He never made the slightest remark about it. He was all "we must have war now because he's not the rightful heir and there is no other choice". That's not why the war started though, but I agree that Joffrey's personality was not part of Ned's decision. Joffrey in Season One wasn't the monster he'd become by Season Three and Ned's reason for denying him the crown wasn't based upon that anyway, that was Renly's argument and it got nowhere with Ned. The war started because Tywin Lannister sent the Mountain into the Riverlands … This is a different war, the "War for the Imp". It was a local thing both parties could stop at will after some sort of agreement, not a "win or die" shot at the throne which split the realm into opposite allegiances. Robb Stark started the "War of the Five Kings" when he took his banners south to topple the king and free his father but had Ned's coup succeeded, he knew Stannis would have to fight his way to the throne against a Lannister family he had set aside and captured. Ned's attempted coup in the throne room was the first act of war for the throne. It was the equivalent of Richard III locking the princes in the tower and having them declared illegitimate.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 20, 2017 12:12:53 GMT
What was he wrong about? He wasn't comfortable with assassinating a teenage girl, and in the end he was right about that because Westeros needs her now more than ever (and I'm not a fan of Dany); … he tried to remove a false, insanely dangerous heir to the throne from power. Ned was betrayed by the Baratheons. Ned couldn't know what role Daenerys could be able to play in the future, so let's not give him credit or guilt for any of it. For all we know, Daenerys' presence is the reason the Wall came down after she brought her stupid beasts north and her very invasion was a disaster to start with but no one blames the midwives who helped bring baby Stalin to this world, do they? Joffrey's personality was not part of the reasons Ned decided to cast him aside. He never made the slightest remark about it. He was all "we must have war now because he's not the rightful heir; there is no other choice". I wasn't suggesting he knew what Dany would become, only that there was wisdom in sparing her life. He also didn't want a war, he wanted to remove an illegitimate heir from the throne. Joff being insanely dangerous was meant to be my commentary, not Ned's.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 20, 2017 12:15:17 GMT
I said unless Ned ignored the rules of succession and supported Renly, which he did not do. That was my point, not sure how you missed it. You said he wasn't in danger. Stop changing your story. I must have missed it among all the nonsense you were saying...
My statement was another dig at Ned anyway...
Also, you gave two examples of Ned being in danger and one of them was only after he was tricked by Littlefinger and lost the game he was deeply involved in.
That's fairly rare. His people were routinely in far more danger though.
Further, he definitely had a choice in not trusting Littlefinger. Heck, LF was practically begging him NOT to trust him when he stayed the course with Stannis.
Either you're trolling or you're incredibly stupid. It's the internet so 50/50.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 20, 2017 12:39:32 GMT
He also didn't want a war, he wanted to remove an illegitimate heir from the throne. He did not want it but was very accepting of the eventuality and did not consider Littlefinger's alternative to it. He was also very provocative in the way he summoned Tywin Lannister. To him, war was like work to be done, not something to avoid.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 20, 2017 12:42:50 GMT
He also didn't want a war, he wanted to remove an illegitimate heir from the throne. He did not want it but was very accepting of the eventuality and did not consider Littlefinger's alternative to it. He was also very provocative in the way he summoned Tywin Lannister. To him, war was like work to be done, not something to avoid. Regardless he did not want war. He was very accepting of all eventualities, that's what competent leadership is. And let's be honest, any second guessing of Tywin is provocative from his perspective.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 20, 2017 13:00:49 GMT
He did not want it but was very accepting of the eventuality and did not consider Littlefinger's alternative to it. He was also very provocative in the way he summoned Tywin Lannister. To him, war was like work to be done, not something to avoid. He was very accepting of all eventualities, that's what competent leadership is. No. Definitely not. I would not follow someone who is "very accepting of all eventualities". This is incompetent, opportunistic leadership. This is not what Ned Stark was doing, though. He preferred war to politics. That was something he understood.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 20, 2017 14:29:52 GMT
He was very accepting of all eventualities, that's what competent leadership is. No. Definitely not. I would not follow someone who is "very accepting of all eventualities". This is incompetent, opportunistic leadership. This is not what Ned Stark was doing, though. He preferred war to politics. That was something he understood. Understanding would be a better word. Understanding of these eventualities. He was aware of the eventuality of war and tried to prevent it. He wasn't a bad politician in the least, he simply had different priorities than those around him. Self-interest was not relevant to him, the betterment of the realm (stability, through a natural heir to the throne and a just man-- not a bastard born to a cruel woman). War was always a potential outcome. In the years that I've been discussing this story online, I've found that Ned Stark debates always come down to 20/20 hindsight. Had Renly listened to reason and respected Stannis' claim, a unified Baratheon alliance keeps control of KL, Ned lives and who knows what becomes of Cersei and her brood of freaks. But Renly had aspirations of his own, egged on by the Tyrells. Yet somehow this makes Ned the poor politician? Or is he a poor politician because he didn't make every decision by the edge of a sword? On the old GOT board on IMDb, I was amused by how many people thought Ned was an idiot and Cersei was some kind of genius after season one. Then they watched the rest of the story unfold and realized how dense she was. Tywin, Tyrion, Littlefinger, the Queen of Thorns and the High Sparrow ran circles around her in the political arena. Ruthlessness is not intelligence. Hell, she only got where she is now by blowing up a building with wildfire, which is something literally anyone can do. Cersei invites war with every decision she makes (even now, at the end of the world, she won't forge an alliance!) and you bow down to her while saying Ned's decisions make you uncomfortable. Hilarious stuff, Leo. 'Incompetent, opportunistic leadership' indeed.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 20, 2017 14:58:01 GMT
No. Definitely not. I would not follow someone who is "very accepting of all eventualities". This is incompetent, opportunistic leadership. This is not what Ned Stark was doing, though. He preferred war to politics. That was something he understood. Understanding would be a better word. Understanding of these eventualities. He was aware of the eventuality of war and tried to prevent it. He wasn't a bad politician in the least, he simply had different priorities than those around him. Self-interest was not relevant to him, the betterment of the realm (stability, through a natural heir to the throne and a just man-- not a bastard born to a cruel woman). War was always a potential outcome. No, sorry, Ned did not try to prevent war. To Robert who worried about it and the Dothraki threat he replied "we'll throw them back into the sea". Ned was a warrior and he used war to solve problems. He didn't care for stability or he would have kept the alliance that had brought it for 17 years. He cared for truth, honour of maybe just the feudal concept of power as a personal property which he saw betrayed by Joffrey not being Robert's real son. He through peace and stability to the winds for these things. Ned Stark was a reluctant politician too. He embodied the ideal of a world where rules replace the need to agree on things. I never thought Ned was an idiot. To me he is an enemy of individual freedom, a representative of the anthill mentality while the Lannisters represent the will to self-realisation. Of course the writing is the work of a leftist who will always make the collectivist side look better and turn their opponents into dumb or evil antagonists.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 20, 2017 15:31:12 GMT
I must have missed it among all the nonsense you were saying...
My statement was another dig at Ned anyway...
Also, you gave two examples of Ned being in danger and one of them was only after he was tricked by Littlefinger and lost the game he was deeply involved in.
That's fairly rare. His people were routinely in far more danger though.
Further, he definitely had a choice in not trusting Littlefinger. Heck, LF was practically begging him NOT to trust him when he stayed the course with Stannis.
Either you're trolling or you're incredibly stupid. It's the internet so 50/50. You have yet to make either an accurate or intelligent statement on the matter and yet I'm the troll?
I bet you wrote this under a bridge somewhere.
Begone Ned fanboy
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 20, 2017 15:46:35 GMT
Understanding would be a better word. Understanding of these eventualities. He was aware of the eventuality of war and tried to prevent it. He wasn't a bad politician in the least, he simply had different priorities than those around him. Self-interest was not relevant to him, the betterment of the realm (stability, through a natural heir to the throne and a just man-- not a bastard born to a cruel woman). War was always a potential outcome. No, sorry, Ned did not try to prevent war. To Robert who worried about it and the Dothraki threat he replied "we'll throw them back into the sea". Ned was a warrior and he used war to solve problems. He didn't care for stability or he would have kept the alliance that had brought it for 17 years. He cared for truth, honour of maybe just the feudal concept of power as a personal property which he saw betrayed by Joffrey not being Robert's real son. He through peace and stability to the winds for these things. Ned Stark was a reluctant politician too. He embodied the ideal of a world where rules replace the need to agree on things. I never thought Ned was an idiot. To me he is an enemy of individual freedom, a representative of the anthill mentality while the Lannisters represent the will to self-realisation. Of course the writing is the work of a leftist who will always make the collectivist side look better and turn their opponents into dumb or evil antagonists. I agree he was a reluctant politician, doesn't mean he was a bad one. I still think it's comical that you critique Ned on moral grounds but worship Cersei Lannister. You make this board fun, Leo.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 20, 2017 15:47:25 GMT
Either you're trolling or you're incredibly stupid. It's the internet so 50/50. You have yet to make either an accurate or intelligent statement on the matter and yet I'm the troll?
I bet you wrote this under a bridge somewhere.
Begone Ned fanboy
I'd be insulted if I thought you could read.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 20, 2017 16:03:10 GMT
No, sorry, Ned did not try to prevent war. To Robert who worried about it and the Dothraki threat he replied "we'll throw them back into the sea". Ned was a warrior and he used war to solve problems. He didn't care for stability or he would have kept the alliance that had brought it for 17 years. He cared for truth, honour of maybe just the feudal concept of power as a personal property which he saw betrayed by Joffrey not being Robert's real son. He through peace and stability to the winds for these things. Ned Stark was a reluctant politician too. He embodied the ideal of a world where rules replace the need to agree on things. I never thought Ned was an idiot. To me he is an enemy of individual freedom, a representative of the anthill mentality while the Lannisters represent the will to self-realisation. Of course the writing is the work of a leftist who will always make the collectivist side look better and turn their opponents into dumb or evil antagonists. I agree he was a reluctant politician, doesn't mean he was a bad one. I still think it's comical that you critique Ned on moral grounds but worship Cersei Lannister. You make this board fun, Leo. I always criticised Ned's choices, not his mistakes. I disagree with him, I do not share his values. I have different morals than his, morals which fit better to those Tywin and Cersei display.
|
|