Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[HBO] Game of Thrones S2 on Sunday; spoilers abound, no tags; NO BOOKS

12829313334101

Posts

  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular
    Organichu wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    what the...

    certain things happened in the show. let's focus on one specific thing: catelyn being a dick to jon. the glares. the major dickishness while watching over bran. those things happened.

    it is now a matter of viewer perspective whether that makes catelyn a SUPER bitch and whether it means she needs to suffer horribly. there are people who have access to the same data as you and come to another conclusion.

    What the? The whole conversation came up when I asked someone why they hated Cat and their response was to misrepresent events or take them out of context to justify it.

    You can FEEL however you want.

    I said calling her a a "SUPER bitch" who needs to "suffer horribly" is an opinion completely on you and not backed up by the show. The text of the show simply does not support such a ridiculous conclusion without a crazy amount of mental gymnastics involved.

    That underlined part? That's where misrepresenting things and taking them out of context comes in.

    i truly don't understand the point you're making right now. do you legitimately not believe that there are multiple interpretations that might exist? the text of the show supports any number of conclusions depending upon the viewer and his or her lens. it seems like you feel the show offers data to support X outcome and all non-X outcomes are not just wrong but... objectively not possible to conclude from the data shown?

    all these people are working off is the data they're shown!


    I'm talking (and have only been talking) about the reasons given being taken out of context or misrepresented.

    "I hate you because you told me to shut up when there was that home invasion going on and you wanted to keep us safe," makes a person a goose but whatever.

    Chopping it down to "I hate you you because you told me shut up," to not sound unreasonable is nonsense and does not count as a legitimate interpretation of the events.


    "I hate Cat because she got mad at Jon when she was out of her mind with grief and had not slept for days while sitting a vigil for a son she loved dearly and thought was dying," shows a complete lack of empathy for a female character and the mitigating quality of the circumstances around her and is pretty goosey, but whatever. Your choice. Go for it.

    "I hate Cat because she got mad at Jon [full stop]" makes Cat out to be an unreasonable "SUPER bitch," and doesn't count as legitimate because you're removing all context from what happened.

  • OrganichuOrganichu Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Organichu wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    what the...

    certain things happened in the show. let's focus on one specific thing: catelyn being a dick to jon. the glares. the major dickishness while watching over bran. those things happened.

    it is now a matter of viewer perspective whether that makes catelyn a SUPER bitch and whether it means she needs to suffer horribly. there are people who have access to the same data as you and come to another conclusion.

    What the? The whole conversation came up when I asked someone why they hated Cat and their response was to misrepresent events or take them out of context to justify it.

    You can FEEL however you want.

    I said calling her a a "SUPER bitch" who needs to "suffer horribly" is an opinion completely on you and not backed up by the show. The text of the show simply does not support such a ridiculous conclusion without a crazy amount of mental gymnastics involved.

    That underlined part? That's where misrepresenting things and taking them out of context comes in.

    i truly don't understand the point you're making right now. do you legitimately not believe that there are multiple interpretations that might exist? the text of the show supports any number of conclusions depending upon the viewer and his or her lens. it seems like you feel the show offers data to support X outcome and all non-X outcomes are not just wrong but... objectively not possible to conclude from the data shown?

    all these people are working off is the data they're shown!


    I'm talking (and have only been talking) about the reasons given being taken out of context or misrepresented.

    "I hate you because you told me to shut up when there was that home invasion going on and you wanted to keep us safe," makes a person a goose but whatever.

    Chopping it down to "I hate you you because you told me shut up," to not sound unreasonable is nonsense and does not count as a legitimate interpretation of the events.


    "I hate Cat because she got mad at Jon when she was out of her mind with grief and had not slept for days while sitting a vigil for a son she loved dearly and thought was dying," shows a complete lack of empathy for a female character and the mitigating quality of the circumstances around her and is pretty goosey, but whatever. Your choice. Go for it.

    "I hate Cat because she got mad at Jon [full stop]" makes Cat out to be an unreasonable "SUPER bitch," and doesn't count as legitimate because you're removing all context from what happened.

    but this is exactly what everyone's saying. absolutely no one is doing the latter example- everyone has watched the show. they have access to the same data you do. i dunno if you're trying to be polite in not telling people they're geese, or whatever... but that is the more accurate criticism. people aren't pretending cat wasn't grieving. they knew she was. they think she's a 'SUPER bitch' (well, that dude thinks it at least) anyway.

    that's what people are saying to you: we watched the same show you did. we're different people. we're not changing what happened in the show to suit our interpretation. we have different personalities, apparently, and that explains our different interpretation.

    Organichu on
    XMSODhjrer45.gif
  • pirateluigipirateluigi Registered User regular
    You know, I don't want to stir up this hornet's nest, but is Catelyn really that different than Cersei? Not saying that Cat is evil, but Cersei isn't really that bad. A bad mother, absolutely. But she's not really an evil character, just someone that would do anything to protect her kids and brother/lover.

    From her point of view, her relationship with Robert sucked. She never had any chance of being loved, but had to keep up the marriage for the sake of the familial alliance. And knowing what happened to the Targaryen children, you can't blame her for going all out to protect her own kids.

    Catelyn hasn't done anything to differentiate herself, outside of being Ned's wife. @frandelgearslip's point 4 really isn't off base.

    http://www.danreviewstheworld.com
    Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi 3DS: 3136-6586-7691
    G&T Grass Type Pokemon Gym Leader, In-Game Name: Dan
  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular
    Organichu wrote: »
    but this is exactly what everyone's saying. absolutely no one is doing the latter example- everyone has watched the show. they have access to the same data you do. i dunno if you're trying to be polite in not telling people they're geese, or whatever... but that is the more accurate criticism. people aren't pretending cat wasn't grieving. they knew she was. they think she's a 'SUPER bitch' (well, that dude thinks it at least) anyway.

    that's what people are saying to you: we watched the same show you did. we're different people. we're not changing what happened in the show to suit our interpretation. we have different personalities, apparently, and that explains our different interpretation.

    The person I was first responding to took it out of context. He also blamed her for (paraphrased) "kidnapping his favorite character and taking him to be killed by her crazy sister" which again is misrepresenting a series of events that included traveling to the capitol, getting evidence and then, in the name of the king and the law, making an arrest. None of that is her abducting someone just to kill him as was claimed.

    Everyone else just jumped on the band wagon.


  • OrganichuOrganichu Registered User regular
    i am talking about the catelyn thing you butt.

    XMSODhjrer45.gif
  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular
    You know, I don't want to stir up this hornet's nest, but is Catelyn really that different than Cersei? Not saying that Cat is evil, but Cersei isn't really that bad. A bad mother, absolutely. But she's not really an evil character, just someone that would do anything to protect her kids and brother/lover.

    From her point of view, her relationship with Robert sucked. She never had any chance of being loved, but had to keep up the marriage for the sake of the familial alliance. And knowing what happened to the Targaryen children, you can't blame her for going all out to protect her own kids.

    Catelyn hasn't done anything to differentiate herself, outside of being Ned's wife. @frandelgearslip's point 4 really isn't off base.

    Do you really think she would support trying to murder someone's kid to protect a secret?

  • ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Catelyn didn't raise children who might ever think it's acceptable to round up and murder their half-siblings on principle.

    So there's that.

    Catelyn also didn't start fucking her cousin the second Ned left Winterfell

    ArbitraryDescriptor on
    Automata-Sg.png
  • pirateluigipirateluigi Registered User regular
    You know, I don't want to stir up this hornet's nest, but is Catelyn really that different than Cersei? Not saying that Cat is evil, but Cersei isn't really that bad. A bad mother, absolutely. But she's not really an evil character, just someone that would do anything to protect her kids and brother/lover.

    From her point of view, her relationship with Robert sucked. She never had any chance of being loved, but had to keep up the marriage for the sake of the familial alliance. And knowing what happened to the Targaryen children, you can't blame her for going all out to protect her own kids.

    Catelyn hasn't done anything to differentiate herself, outside of being Ned's wife. @frandelgearslip's point 4 really isn't off base.

    Do you really think she would support trying to murder someone's kid to protect a secret?

    If the secret could cost her own children their lives? Yes. Yes I do.
    Catelyn didn't raise children who might ever think it's acceptable to round up and murder their half-siblings on principle.

    I'll give you that. It takes a "special" kind of person to raise a monster like Joffrey.

    http://www.danreviewstheworld.com
    Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi 3DS: 3136-6586-7691
    G&T Grass Type Pokemon Gym Leader, In-Game Name: Dan
  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular
    Catelyn didn't raise children who might ever think it's acceptable to round up and murder their half-siblings on principle.

    So there's that.

    Catelyn also didn't start fucking her cousin the second Ned left Winterfell

    She hasn't punished someone by punishing someone else as a proxy.

  • SealSeal Registered User regular
    Cersei isn't really that bad. A bad mother, absolutely. But she's not really an evil character.
    She murdered her first born out of spite for Robert. What does she have to do before she crosses into evil territory, grow a mustach and start twirling it?

  • pirateluigipirateluigi Registered User regular
    Seal wrote: »
    Cersei isn't really that bad. A bad mother, absolutely. But she's not really an evil character.
    She murdered her first born out of spite for Robert. What does she have to do before she crosses into evil territory, grow a mustach and start twirling it?

    Wait... when did that happen? Because I totally missed it and that would completely change my argument.

    I am afraid to look it up because of spoilers. (They're everywhere)

    http://www.danreviewstheworld.com
    Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi 3DS: 3136-6586-7691
    G&T Grass Type Pokemon Gym Leader, In-Game Name: Dan
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    Seal wrote: »
    Cersei isn't really that bad. A bad mother, absolutely. But she's not really an evil character.
    She murdered her first born out of spite for Robert. What does she have to do before she crosses into evil territory, grow a mustach and start twirling it?

    Wait... when did that happen? Because I totally missed it and that would completely change my argument.

    I am afraid to look it up because of spoilers. (They're everywhere)

    she had a conversation with Cat about her "loss" early on, and I am pretty sure she fessed up to never letting robert's seed be sown in her in her conversation with Ned. She wanted nothing to do with his children.

    I mean, there are some stunning differences between Cat and Cersei. Cersei would have had one of her husband's bastards sent to the wall or killed if he had the audacity to parade him around in court. Cat wore that shame for 16+ years.

  • SealSeal Registered User regular
    Watch episode one of the first season, when she talks about her first born. Note how it died and how Jon Arryn died.

    That plus other conversations which make it clear that she came to hate Robert since the first time he drunkenly stumbled into her bed chamber and refered to her as his dead former love interests name.

  • pirateluigipirateluigi Registered User regular
    Seal wrote: »
    Watch episode one of the first season, when she talks about her first born. Note how it died and how Jon Arryn died.

    That plus other conversations which make it clear that she came to hate Robert since the first time he drunkenly stumbled into her bed chamber and refered to her as his dead former love interests name.

    Wow. I knew that she had lost a child, but I never considered that she would have been the one to kill it.

    That... that would change things. I'll have to watch the episode again! (I'm always happy for more excuses to watch this show.)

    That said, I will be a little dissappointed if it's true. I loved that Cersei was complex and deeply flawed, but not evil. Turning her into a card carrying baby killer just isn't as interesting to me.

    http://www.danreviewstheworld.com
    Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi 3DS: 3136-6586-7691
    G&T Grass Type Pokemon Gym Leader, In-Game Name: Dan
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    You know, I don't want to stir up this hornet's nest, but is Catelyn really that different than Cersei? Not saying that Cat is evil, but Cersei isn't really that bad. A bad mother, absolutely. But she's not really an evil character, just someone that would do anything to protect her kids and brother/lover.

    From her point of view, her relationship with Robert sucked. She never had any chance of being loved, but had to keep up the marriage for the sake of the familial alliance. And knowing what happened to the Targaryen children, you can't blame her for going all out to protect her own kids.

    Her relationship with Robert was tragic. That said, villains having sympathetic traits don't make them good people or excuse their vile actions. Sure she has a worthy cause in defending her children but she also had the option to flee with them when she had the chance and rather than taking it (from someone who had the right to do destroy her for almost killing Bran from her own warped logic) she exploited Ned's honor to install Joffrey, put Ned in a position that lead to his death, made Sansa a hostage and started another civil war. Not to mention her obsession with power. She's an enormous hypocrite.

    Harry Dresden on
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    I don't see why you need info from the books to declare Catelyn stupid. She apprehended the son of the post powerful lord in Westeros while her family was in a city more or less at the mercy of his family. She did this on ridiculously flimsy evidence.

    "The dagger belongs to Tyrion!" isn't evidence for anything, if she thought for five seconds about it she'd realize that nobody would ever use their dagger (such a distinctive one at that) in an assassination attempt

    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
  • Peter EbelPeter Ebel Deus Vult! OsloRegistered User regular
    Gotta agree with that.

    Fuck off and die.
  • pirateluigipirateluigi Registered User regular
    Her relationship with Robert was tragic. That said, villains having sympathetic traits don't make them good people or excuse their vile actions. Sure she has a worthy cause in defending her children but she also had the option to flee when she had the chance and rather than taking it, from someone who had the right to do destroy her for almost killing Bran from her own warped logic, she exploited Ned's honor to install Joffrey, put Ned in a position that lead to his death, made Sansa a hostage and started another civil war. Not to mention her obsession with power. Not to mention be involved in almost killing Bran twice, making her an enormous hypocrite.

    Oh, please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that she is a good person or excused. I see it as an interesting parallel to Cat in that they have very similar motivations but very different methods. Maybe if Cat was in the situation Cersei was in, she would have turned out similarly? Lord knows her sister isn't exactly a saint (or sane).


    http://www.danreviewstheworld.com
    Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi 3DS: 3136-6586-7691
    G&T Grass Type Pokemon Gym Leader, In-Game Name: Dan
  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    And it's not JUST that the act was stupid, but that at many other times she acts so much smarter than that, she just has these moments where her left brain disengages and she does something really dumb.

    I also consider scampering off to King's Landing with the dagger to be a dumb move, too many ways for her to get killed/captured, for the dagger (only piece of evidence) to be lost, and that's before she even gets to a city full of murderers and thieves that she KNOWS are all plotting and fomenting. Also, I may be misremembering but I don't think she sent a raven to Ned to let him know quickly, she had to go there herself because...? Any logical reason to do that is undercut by the act of going herself.

    She has such stunningly destructive "blonde moments."

    Boring7 on
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Her relationship with Robert was tragic. That said, villains having sympathetic traits don't make them good people or excuse their vile actions. Sure she has a worthy cause in defending her children but she also had the option to flee when she had the chance and rather than taking it, from someone who had the right to do destroy her for almost killing Bran from her own warped logic, she exploited Ned's honor to install Joffrey, put Ned in a position that lead to his death, made Sansa a hostage and started another civil war. Not to mention her obsession with power. Not to mention be involved in almost killing Bran twice, making her an enormous hypocrite.

    Oh, please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that she is a good person or excused. I see it as an interesting parallel to Cat in that they have very similar motivations but very different methods. Maybe if Cat was in the situation Cersei was in, she would have turned out similarly? Lord knows her sister isn't exactly a saint (or sane).


    She is an interesting parallel to Cat, I agree with you there. However, Cat never appeared anywhere near as brutal or deceptive in her methods. She only arrested Tyrion and bought him to the Veil for a trial, for instance. Were Cersei in her place she'd have hired the Mountain or whoever else she had on hand to kill whomever tried to drop Joffrey off a building.

    Cat switching places with Cersei wouldn't change her to much IMO. I'd assume she'd be much smarter manipulating people and more pragmatic but I doubt she'd be secretly killing the king's offspring or the other notorious deeds Cersei gets up to.

    Her sister, on the other hand, is practically a Cersei doppelganger already, though.

    Harry Dresden on
  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular
    [
    Oh, please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that she is a good person or excused. I see it as an interesting parallel to Cat in that they have very similar motivations but very different methods.

    If your question is, "Is Catelyn really that different from Cersei?" (which it was) "similar motivations but very different methods" (like Cersei supports child murder and Cat doesn't) make them wholly different. It's like saying "Harry Potter and Lord Voldemort, they're both parseltongues and orphans, are they really that different?" Unless Harry tried to grow up to be wizard Hitler, then yes, they're very different.

  • frandelgearslipfrandelgearslip Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Organichu wrote: »
    but this is exactly what everyone's saying. absolutely no one is doing the latter example- everyone has watched the show. they have access to the same data you do. i dunno if you're trying to be polite in not telling people they're geese, or whatever... but that is the more accurate criticism. people aren't pretending cat wasn't grieving. they knew she was. they think she's a 'SUPER bitch' (well, that dude thinks it at least) anyway.

    that's what people are saying to you: we watched the same show you did. we're different people. we're not changing what happened in the show to suit our interpretation. we have different personalities, apparently, and that explains our different interpretation.

    The person I was first responding to took it out of context. He also blamed her for (paraphrased) "kidnapping his favorite character and taking him to be killed by her crazy sister" which again is misrepresenting a series of events that included traveling to the capitol, getting evidence and then, in the name of the king and the law, making an arrest. None of that is her abducting someone just to kill him as was claimed.

    Everyone else just jumped on the band wagon.


    Catelyn did not do anything in the king's law. If Tyrion had been a commoner Catelyn could have have done whatever she wanted, but Tyrion was a noble. I am not exactly sure how it works, but I assume Catelyn would need the King's or the hands permission to arrest Tyrion (lest westeros descend into anarchy). She did not have Robert's permission and Ned only claimed to have given her permission after the fact to cover for her. So yes kidnapping, because she had no legal authority to do what she did to him. And yes it was to kill him (leave him in a cell long enough for him to confess and then kill him), the only reason Tyrion got a trial was because he demanded one in public where Catelyn and Lysa could not deny it.

    Also read my posts again I never once brought up the scene between her and Jon at Bran's bedside, that was other people. I don't blame her for that, because as you said she was mad with grief, so whatever. I hold her unreasonable hatred for Jon from before that episode against her.

    This all started because I listed my least favorite characters. Not least moral, least favorite. On The Wire I liked Proposition Joe way more than Bubbles who was a far more moral character. I am listing who I like or don't like not who should win the Nobel Peace Prize.

    Yes wishing Catelyn a horrible death would be goosey, if Catelyn was a real character. I guess this is news or something, but Catelyn is fictional. If she suffers horribly, nobody actually suffers at all. Also me wishing her to suffer horribly is standard internet convention that your the one overreacting to. Earlier I showed a post from the How I Met Your Mother thread where somebody wanted a character to be eaten by bears for even less then Catelyn and everybody in that thread managed to take it in stride without having a three page freakout.

    At this point your being unreasonable, not me.

    frandelgearslip on
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    At this point aren't we just slapping the joffrey?

  • pirateluigipirateluigi Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    [
    Oh, please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that she is a good person or excused. I see it as an interesting parallel to Cat in that they have very similar motivations but very different methods.

    If your question is, "Is Catelyn really that different from Cersei?" (which it was) "similar motivations but very different methods" (like Cersei supports child murder and Cat doesn't) make them wholly different. It's like saying "Harry Potter and Lord Voldemort, they're both parseltongues and orphans, are they really that different?" Unless Harry tried to grow up to be wizard Hitler, then yes, they're very different.

    But a major theme of Harry Potter is that he could have been Lord Voldemort, were it not for the love of his family and friends.

    I can easily look at Cersei and say, "There, but for the grace of God, goes Cat". If your opinion is that Cat would not have ended up the same under similar circumstances, then that's fine, but I think she would.

    pirateluigi on
    http://www.danreviewstheworld.com
    Nintendo Network ID - PirateLuigi 3DS: 3136-6586-7691
    G&T Grass Type Pokemon Gym Leader, In-Game Name: Dan
  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular

    Catelyn did not do anything in the king's law. If Tyrion had been a commoner Catelyn could have have done whatever she wanted, but Tyrion was a noble. I am not exactly sure how it works, but I assume Catelyn would need the King's or the hands permission to arrest Tyrion (lest westeros descend into anarchy). She did not have Robert's permission and Ned only claimed to have given her permission after the fact to cover for her. So yes kidnapping, because she had no legal authority to do what she did to him. And yes it was to kill him (leave him in a cell long enough for him to confess and then kill him), the only reason Tyrion got a trial was because he demanded one in public where Catelyn and Lysa could not deny it.

    I'm not Westerosi legal scribe, so I'll go with "arrest" as she claims, as the books claim, etc. Arresting is not a synonym for kidnapping.


  • frandelgearslipfrandelgearslip Registered User regular

    Catelyn did not do anything in the king's law. If Tyrion had been a commoner Catelyn could have have done whatever she wanted, but Tyrion was a noble. I am not exactly sure how it works, but I assume Catelyn would need the King's or the hands permission to arrest Tyrion (lest westeros descend into anarchy). She did not have Robert's permission and Ned only claimed to have given her permission after the fact to cover for her. So yes kidnapping, because she had no legal authority to do what she did to him. And yes it was to kill him (leave him in a cell long enough for him to confess and then kill him), the only reason Tyrion got a trial was because he demanded one in public where Catelyn and Lysa could not deny it.

    I'm not Westerosi legal scribe, so I'll go with "arrest" as she claims, as the books claim, etc. Arresting is not a synonym for kidnapping.

    Who is going by the books now? Wow at this point I am done. I think you just proved who is being ridiculous in this conversation without my help.

  • quantumcat42quantumcat42 Registered User regular
    mcdermott wrote: »
    At this point aren't we just slapping the joffrey?
    Is this a thing now? Can this be a thing now? I would very much like it if this were a thing now.

  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular
    [
    Oh, please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that she is a good person or excused. I see it as an interesting parallel to Cat in that they have very similar motivations but very different methods.

    If your question is, "Is Catelyn really that different from Cersei?" (which it was) "similar motivations but very different methods" (like Cersei supports child murder and Cat doesn't) make them wholly different. It's like saying "Harry Potter and Lord Voldemort, they're both parseltongues and orphans, are they really that different?" Unless Harry tried to grow up to be wizard Hitler, then yes, they're very different.

    But a major theme of Harry Potter is that he could have been Lord Voldemort, were it not for the love of his family and friends.

    I can easily look at Cersei and say, "There, but for the grace of God, goes Cat". If your opinion is that Cat would not have ended up the same under similar circumstances, then that's fine, but I think she would.

    The theme of Harry Potter (as stated several times, by Dumbledore, Sirius, etc.) is that it's our choices who make us what we are. He could only have been like Lord Voldemort by choosing to be like him.

    How we define how people are is by how they act. I'm not going to say you're like Jeffrey Dahmer because under other circumstances you could be a cannibal murderer. It's silly. Under other circumstances everyone would be something different.

    I'm not getting the point in saying Cat and Cersei aren't that different if only Cat would have acted like Cersei instead of like herself.





  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular
    edited April 2012

    Catelyn did not do anything in the king's law. If Tyrion had been a commoner Catelyn could have have done whatever she wanted, but Tyrion was a noble. I am not exactly sure how it works, but I assume Catelyn would need the King's or the hands permission to arrest Tyrion (lest westeros descend into anarchy). She did not have Robert's permission and Ned only claimed to have given her permission after the fact to cover for her. So yes kidnapping, because she had no legal authority to do what she did to him. And yes it was to kill him (leave him in a cell long enough for him to confess and then kill him), the only reason Tyrion got a trial was because he demanded one in public where Catelyn and Lysa could not deny it.

    I'm not Westerosi legal scribe, so I'll go with "arrest" as she claims, as the books claim, etc. Arresting is not a synonym for kidnapping.

    Who is going by the books now? Wow at this point I am done. I think you just proved who is being ridiculous in this conversation without my help.



    The word for taking somebody in the name of the law is "arrest." Not "kidnap."

    Mad King George on
  • Drunken BastardDrunken Bastard Registered User regular

    Catelyn did not do anything in the king's law. If Tyrion had been a commoner Catelyn could have have done whatever she wanted, but Tyrion was a noble. I am not exactly sure how it works, but I assume Catelyn would need the King's or the hands permission to arrest Tyrion (lest westeros descend into anarchy). She did not have Robert's permission and Ned only claimed to have given her permission after the fact to cover for her. So yes kidnapping, because she had no legal authority to do what she did to him. And yes it was to kill him (leave him in a cell long enough for him to confess and then kill him), the only reason Tyrion got a trial was because he demanded one in public where Catelyn and Lysa could not deny it.

    I'm not Westerosi legal scribe, so I'll go with "arrest" as she claims, as the books claim, etc. Arresting is not a synonym for kidnapping.


    Cat is a very conflicted woman - They killed her husband (who she married as a stand-in and came to love or at least respect). They crippled her son, chopped the head off her husband and made her fav son a general at the tender age of 16. Not to mention if what Littlefinger hinted at way back then was true...

    She is a she-wolf who saw her mate die and her pubs taken away. Not someone you would like to cross.
    Tully born or not she is a Stark.

    steam_sig.png
  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular

    Catelyn did not do anything in the king's law. If Tyrion had been a commoner Catelyn could have have done whatever she wanted, but Tyrion was a noble. I am not exactly sure how it works, but I assume Catelyn would need the King's or the hands permission to arrest Tyrion (lest westeros descend into anarchy). She did not have Robert's permission and Ned only claimed to have given her permission after the fact to cover for her. So yes kidnapping, because she had no legal authority to do what she did to him. And yes it was to kill him (leave him in a cell long enough for him to confess and then kill him), the only reason Tyrion got a trial was because he demanded one in public where Catelyn and Lysa could not deny it.

    I'm not Westerosi legal scribe, so I'll go with "arrest" as she claims, as the books claim, etc. Arresting is not a synonym for kidnapping.

    Who is going by the books now? Wow at this point I am done. I think you just proved who is being ridiculous in this conversation without my help.



    The word for taking somebody in the name of the law is "arrest." Not "kidnap."

    Goddamn that's a great scene.

    And it also led to Bronn and Tyrion being awesome together. So that makes it even better.

  • TaminTamin Registered User regular
    mcdermott wrote: »
    At this point aren't we just slapping the joffrey?
    Is this a thing now? Can this be a thing now? I would very much like it if this were a thing now.

    I, too, want this to be a thing.

  • frandelgearslipfrandelgearslip Registered User regular

    Catelyn did not do anything in the king's law. If Tyrion had been a commoner Catelyn could have have done whatever she wanted, but Tyrion was a noble. I am not exactly sure how it works, but I assume Catelyn would need the King's or the hands permission to arrest Tyrion (lest westeros descend into anarchy). She did not have Robert's permission and Ned only claimed to have given her permission after the fact to cover for her. So yes kidnapping, because she had no legal authority to do what she did to him. And yes it was to kill him (leave him in a cell long enough for him to confess and then kill him), the only reason Tyrion got a trial was because he demanded one in public where Catelyn and Lysa could not deny it.

    I'm not Westerosi legal scribe, so I'll go with "arrest" as she claims, as the books claim, etc. Arresting is not a synonym for kidnapping.
    I am probably a little biased in that Catelyn is on my list of characters I most want to suffer horribly:

    Why?

    1. She kidnapped my favorite character and took him to an insane madhouse and was pissed when he managed to walk out alive.
    2. Like Ned Stark she walks around with an holier than thou attitude even when asking for help(and unlike Ned Stark she isn't actually holier than thou).
    3. The way she treated Jon does not sit well with me. I know what it feels like to live in a house where somebody hates you so badly that the hate permeates the walls.
    4. Honestly the only differences I see between her and Cersei is that she is not screwing her brother and Robb is not a piece of shit like Joffery.

    Those seem like book quibbles because there's definitely not enough in the show to support that hate.

    So your a hypocrite. Also I can get in my car and kidnap anybody I want as long as I make sure that I say the word "arrest". It does not matter what Catelyn says people always justify their actions.

    Also
    Spoiler:

  • YarYar Registered User regular
    Heisenberg wrote: »
    My girlfriend thinks it's funny how many girls love Jon when (to her) Jaime is significantly hotter. I pretty much agree.

    Jon has that smoldering shaggy quiet-type look going on, that almost any dude can emulate. Jaime has classic rugged good looks that are one in a million. Shave their heads and face and Jon looks like any freak, while Jaime is still hunktastic.

    Regarding Catelyn, it's cool to debate how much of a bitch she is or isn't, but can you leave off debating about each other's worthiness to debate? That part is taking up space and not contributing anything.

  • Mad King GeorgeMad King George Registered User regular
    So your a hypocrite. Also I can get in my car and kidnap anybody I want as long as I make sure that I say the word "arrest". It does not matter what Catelyn says people always justify their actions.

    That's the way the legal system in Westeros works. Tyrion even uses it to his advantage. She's not "saying" it, she's arresting him according to how their law works.

    You've got a serious hate-on for her.

  • JokermanJokerman Hillbilly Scam-artist Appalachia?Registered User regular

    Catelyn did not do anything in the king's law. If Tyrion had been a commoner Catelyn could have have done whatever she wanted, but Tyrion was a noble. I am not exactly sure how it works, but I assume Catelyn would need the King's or the hands permission to arrest Tyrion (lest westeros descend into anarchy). She did not have Robert's permission and Ned only claimed to have given her permission after the fact to cover for her. So yes kidnapping, because she had no legal authority to do what she did to him. And yes it was to kill him (leave him in a cell long enough for him to confess and then kill him), the only reason Tyrion got a trial was because he demanded one in public where Catelyn and Lysa could not deny it.

    I'm not Westerosi legal scribe, so I'll go with "arrest" as she claims, as the books claim, etc. Arresting is not a synonym for kidnapping.

    Who is going by the books now? Wow at this point I am done. I think you just proved who is being ridiculous in this conversation without my help.



    The word for taking somebody in the name of the law is "arrest." Not "kidnap."

    The law is handled by the king, but did she take him to kings landing? Nope.jpg.

    Furthermore, she treat Jon like shit just because he happened to be a bastard. And the incident with Bran is only one example (Albiet the best one). Was she filled with grief when she wouldn't let Jon feast?

    Chanus wrote: »
    the best asians are white people
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Jokerman wrote: »

    Catelyn did not do anything in the king's law. If Tyrion had been a commoner Catelyn could have have done whatever she wanted, but Tyrion was a noble. I am not exactly sure how it works, but I assume Catelyn would need the King's or the hands permission to arrest Tyrion (lest westeros descend into anarchy). She did not have Robert's permission and Ned only claimed to have given her permission after the fact to cover for her. So yes kidnapping, because she had no legal authority to do what she did to him. And yes it was to kill him (leave him in a cell long enough for him to confess and then kill him), the only reason Tyrion got a trial was because he demanded one in public where Catelyn and Lysa could not deny it.

    I'm not Westerosi legal scribe, so I'll go with "arrest" as she claims, as the books claim, etc. Arresting is not a synonym for kidnapping.

    Who is going by the books now? Wow at this point I am done. I think you just proved who is being ridiculous in this conversation without my help.



    The word for taking somebody in the name of the law is "arrest." Not "kidnap."

    The law is handled by the king, but did she take him to kings landing? Nope.jpg.

    Furthermore, she treat Jon like shit just because he happened to be a bastard. And the incident with Bran is only one example (Albiet the best one). Was she filled with grief when she wouldn't let Jon feast?

    My impression was Jon was the only outlet for her rage about Ned cheating on her. So she focused all her anger from Ned to him.

  • JokermanJokerman Hillbilly Scam-artist Appalachia?Registered User regular
    Jokerman wrote: »

    Catelyn did not do anything in the king's law. If Tyrion had been a commoner Catelyn could have have done whatever she wanted, but Tyrion was a noble. I am not exactly sure how it works, but I assume Catelyn would need the King's or the hands permission to arrest Tyrion (lest westeros descend into anarchy). She did not have Robert's permission and Ned only claimed to have given her permission after the fact to cover for her. So yes kidnapping, because she had no legal authority to do what she did to him. And yes it was to kill him (leave him in a cell long enough for him to confess and then kill him), the only reason Tyrion got a trial was because he demanded one in public where Catelyn and Lysa could not deny it.

    I'm not Westerosi legal scribe, so I'll go with "arrest" as she claims, as the books claim, etc. Arresting is not a synonym for kidnapping.

    Who is going by the books now? Wow at this point I am done. I think you just proved who is being ridiculous in this conversation without my help.



    The word for taking somebody in the name of the law is "arrest." Not "kidnap."

    The law is handled by the king, but did she take him to kings landing? Nope.jpg.

    Furthermore, she treat Jon like shit just because he happened to be a bastard. And the incident with Bran is only one example (Albiet the best one). Was she filled with grief when she wouldn't let Jon feast?

    My impression was Jon was the only outlet for her rage about Ned cheating on her. So she focused all her anger from Ned to him.

    I mean yeah, it's clearly displacement, but does he deserve it?

    Chanus wrote: »
    the best asians are white people
  • KanaKana Registered User regular

    History is an account, mostly false, of events, mostly unimportant, which are brought about by rulers, mostly knaves, and soldiers, mostly fools.
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    So your a hypocrite. Also I can get in my car and kidnap anybody I want as long as I make sure that I say the word "arrest". It does not matter what Catelyn says people always justify their actions.

    That's the way the legal system in Westeros works. Tyrion even uses it to his advantage. She's not "saying" it, she's arresting him according to how their law works.

    You've got a serious hate-on for her.

    Tyrion takes advantage of the pretense of law that they have constructed to justify revenge against a Lannister

    It would have only been legal if she took him to king's landing

    override367 on
    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
This discussion has been closed.