Opinions on Theon

[INCBlackbird]

5 minutes ago, OwloftheRainwood said:

Shenanigans. Concocting a plan to murder two children to cover up one's own stupidity is not the same as unintended war casualties. By that logic, basically any head of state anywhere that ever fought a war is the moral equivalent of a child murderer.

Ok so why does Robb get to have a reason and Theon doesn't ? And yes, if you say that the reason doesn't matter, as you just said to me, it's the action that makes the person evil, then yes they are moral equivalents of child murderers. They knew very well that if they started a war, children would die.

[OwloftheRainwood]

17 minutes ago, INCBlackbird said:

Ok so why does Robb get to have a reason and Theon doesn't ? And yes, if you say that the reason doesn't matter, as you just said to me, it's the action that makes the person evil, then yes they are moral equivalents of child murderers. They knew very well that if they started a war, children would die.

I would say the difference is volition and the reasoning behind the action. Nowhere did I say Theon "doesn't get to have a reason". Theon has his reasons for targeting and murdering 2 specific children: covering up his own stupidity in the incompetent attempt to seize and hold Winterfell. He intended to kill those boys to cover up weakness. I'm not aware of Robb committing murder to cover up his own incompetence. Is Robb innocent? Of course not! His war against a sadisitic, sociopathic and illegitimate child king led to the deaths of many, but I don't recall him committing murder like Theon. That's why I find it silly to be an apologist for any one character, or defending them no matter what, they're all flawed.

[OwloftheRainwood]

29 minutes ago, INCBlackbird said:

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. And like I have said before, I disagree with that and I do think it's a black and white view. Like I pointed out before we have a court system for a reason, it's important to look at why a person did something bad, how did they get to that point, how do they feel about it. There's a thing called mitigating circemstances for a reason, because it's often not that simple. People will judge those who went to prison harshly, treat them as subhumans even, but what they don't realise is that if they grew up under the same circemstances, they'd probably be the ones who went to prison. they shouldn't be judging... they could maybe just try to understand how that person got to the point where they did whatever it is that they did. In most cases there's a very good and understandable reason for it. as there is in Theon's case.

Of course, I never said Theon had it easy or there are not explanations for his flaws and crimes. I'm saying those circumstances do not absolve him of his cruelty or stupidity. Mitigating cirumstances do not erase murder. Usually, mitigating circumstances refer to the sentencing phase of court cases and it doesn't mean you get a pass - you might get your sentence reduced. I get it, you like Theon and you're going to be his apologist. I'm not, but I think he's an interesting character worth discussing. Is he evil on the order to Gregor Clegane or Ramsay? Probably not, but he made some grave mistakes that are not so easily dismissed and he will continue to suffer for them.

[INCBlackbird]

39 minutes ago, OwloftheRainwood said:

I would say the difference is volition and the reasoning behind the action. Nowhere did I say Theon "doesn't get to have a reason". Theon has his reasons for targeting and murdering 2 specific children: covering up his own stupidity in the incompetent attempt to seize and hold Winterfell. He intended to kill those boys to cover up weakness. I'm not aware of Robb committing murder to cover up his own incompetence. Is Robb innocent? Of course not! His war against a sadisitic, sociopathic and illegitimate child king led to the deaths of many, but I don't recall him committing murder like Theon. That's why I find it silly to be an apologist for any one character, or defending them no matter what, they're all flawed.

You did say that he is evil because of his actions though. That is what I am referring to, if it's just his actions and nothing else matters you're disregarding his reasons. And again, I have to repeat my previous statement (that I said to someone else though I believe) you're simplifying Theon's reasons for killing those boys. And well... if I remember correctly Robb sacrificed 2000 men for a war tactic. Yet, I don't go arround calling Robb evil.

"they're all flawed" that's my point... they're all flawed because humans happen to be flawed and that's ok. And it's kinda judgemental (in my opinion) to expect people/characters not to make mistakes.

[INCBlackbird]

14 minutes ago, OwloftheRainwood said:

Of course, I never said Theon had it easy or there are not explanations for his flaws and crimes. I'm saying those circumstances do not absolve him of his cruelty or stupidity. Mitigating cirumstances do not erase murder. Usually, mitigating circumstances refer to the sentencing phase of court cases and it doesn't mean you get a pass - you might get your sentence reduced. I get it, you like Theon and you're going to be his apologist. I'm not, but I think he's an interesting character worth discussing. Is he evil on the order to Gregor Clegane or Ramsay? Probably not, but he made some grave mistakes that are not so easily dismissed and he will continue to suffer for them.

exactly, those are mitigating circemstances, and never did I say that Theon is not guilty did I? I just said he's not evil, which is that same thing that happens in court when there are mitigating circemstances, someone might be guilty of a crime but that doesn't make them evil, while someone else who commited the same crime might be evil, it depends on the circemstances, the reasons the murderer had, the way they feel about what they did and so on. which is exactly what I've been argueing here this whole time. I don't really see how saying that a character is not evil because they feel guilt is being an apologist. And indeed, he made mistakes, as in he didn't do it on purpose. I believe everybody makes mistakes in their life... sadly Theon just happened to be in a position of power so his mistakes had bigger consequences than they would have had if he hadn't been in power. it's the same with Dany, Robb.... (and with them on an even bigger scale cause they had even more power and more responsibility.)

[sifth]

3 hours ago, INCBlackbird said:

I like reading about monsters like Roose, Ramsay and Tywin as well but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about characters like Robb, Dany... characters who are considered heroes but have way more blood on their hands then Theon.

I don't view Robb as a hero though, I view him as a fool. An interesting character to read about, but a fool all around. Dany I liked for a while, but since Meereen started I can't stand reading her chapters. Ser. Jorah and Barry remain my favorite parts of her chapters though. If anything Ser. Barry taking over as the Meereen POV really fixed a lot of issues with that plot for me.

 

I have to second that it's rather disturbing how you're trying to justify the cold blooded murdered of two little boys and their mother, just to cover up a mans incompetence. I don't care what world you live in, crap like that is just sick, especially what he did to their little bodies after the fact. Maybe we should next have a pity party for the Mountain and Ramsay, for having psychological issues and not being able to tell right from wrong? No one actually wakes up and says "hey I want to be evil today", it's their actions that make them that way, not their mind set in doing so.

[No True Knights]

There is blood on the hands of most characters but there is a clear difference between characters like Robb who go to war in ignorance about things like children possibly dying and Theon having the choice of losing pride or murdering two children and their mother with Ramsay/Reek and choosing the second option.

Theon is a really interesting character(like most in the series) and I don't even believe he betrayed the Starks as a whole, as he was a hostage against his will stolen off from his family but to pretend his actions don't mean he is much closer to the black then the white in character morality just starts to appear as pure fan bias.

I love Sandor Clegane but I won't try to defend some of his actions such as cutting down an unarmed fleeing Mycah and the many other horrendous actions he will have done in his time.

 

 

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

15 hours ago, sifth said:

Some crimes are just beyond redemption.

That presupposes there's such a thing as redemption.

14 hours ago, Winter's Cold said:

The only reliable way to judge whether a character actions are evil or not are by their actions.

That presupposes there's such a thing as evil.

I'm not trying to justify Theon's killing of the miller's family, my point is that simply stating "Theon did this and therefore he's evil" is just a bit pointless. People can make moral judgements on characters' actions endlessly, but it gets you nowhere. The only way that point would be relevant is in a discussion with someone who thought child-murder was a reasonable thing to do. If instead you actually want to understand a character in any real depth you take it a read that that action is obviously terrible and then move on to things like motivation, context and background. 

[INCBlackbird]

1 hour ago, sifth said:

I don't view Robb as a hero though, I view him as a fool. An interesting character to read about, but a fool all around. Dany I liked for a while, but since Meereen started I can't stand reading her chapters. Ser. Jorah and Barry remain my favorite parts of her chapters though. If anything Ser. Barry taking over as the Meereen POV really fixed a lot of issues with that plot for me.

 

I have to second that it's rather disturbing how you're trying to justify the cold blooded murdered of two little boys and their mother, just to cover up a mans incompetence. I don't care what world you live in, crap like that is just sick, especially what he did to their little bodies after the fact. Maybe we should next have a pity party for the Mountain and Ramsay, for having psychological issues and not being able to tell right from wrong? No one actually wakes up and says "hey I want to be evil today", it's their actions that make them that way, not their mind set in doing so.

where did I justify what Theon did? saying that he's not evil is not the same as justifying something...

Ramsay and the mountain are psychopaths, aka they lack empathy. And Ramsay for sure (but I think the mountain as well) is a sadist, and yeah he definitly wakes up and says "hey I want to be evil today" cause guess what he enjoys it.

[INCBlackbird]

17 minutes ago, No True Knights said:

There is blood on the hands of most characters but there is a clear difference between characters like Robb who go to war in ignorance about things like children possibly dying and Theon having the choice of his pride or murdering two children and their mother with Ramsay/Reek and choosing the second option.

Theon is a really interesting character(like most in the series) and I don't even believe he betrayed the Starks as a whole, as he was a hostage against his will stolen off from his family but to pretend his actions don't mean he is much closer to the black then the white in character morality just starts to appear as pure fan bias.

I love Sandor Clegane but I won't try to defend some of his actions such as cutting down an unarmed fleeing Mycah and the many other horrendous actions he will have done in his time.

 

 

Are you saying that Robb was not aware that when he went to war, children (and men and women for that matter) would die? I don't believe that. I don't think that Robb had bad intensions, and I don't blame him at all for wanting revenge for his father but I think he is just as much responsible for the people who died in his war than Theon is for the people who died when he decided to take Winterfell and yes that includes those two boys because they were a consequence of taking Winterfell.

I think that depends on what you personally consider more black. I tend to be very lenient, others are not so lenient, the point is to be consistent in your judgement.

I don't really care for Sandor but I get why he did what he did and I don't consider him evil either. In fact, there's very few characters I consider to be evil or even dark grey and it's mostly characters like Ramsay, Roose, the Mountain, Petyr Baelish.

[INCBlackbird]

29 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

That presupposes there's such a thing as redemption.

That presupposes there's such a thing as evil.

I'm not trying to justify Theon's killing of the miller's family, my point is that simply stating "Theon did this and therefore he's evil" is just a bit pointless. People can make moral judgements on characters' actions endlessly, but it gets you nowhere. The only way that point would be relevant is in a discussion with someone who thought child-murder was a reasonable thing to do. If instead you actually want to understand a character in any real depth you take it a read that that action is obviously terrible and then move on to things like motivation, context and background. 

THIS! This exactly!

[sweetsunray]

Theon had several completely innocent people killed who did not oppose him, did not fight him, heck even followed his orders. The miller family, and making Farlen out to be the killer in WF those had the worst motive ever. He killed a family, including children, all to cover up his incompetence and not to lose face (and sorry... those are not the actions to "gain face"), and then had another innocent framed and executed (and he couldn't even do that right, poor Farlen), someone who helped him look, to cover his tracks.

Sure, he feels guilt over it in aCoK, but no remorse whatsoever. His nightmares serve only to show us that he's not a psychopath, but do not redeem him. Why? The moment he has a chance to surrender, take the black (and Rodrik Cassel and the other Northeners would certainly have accepted it), he goes out instead and has little Beth hung from a noose. His answer that's how he felt when he was taken by Robert and Ned from Pyke is actually irrelevant to what's happening. Rodrik did not capture him. Heck, he trained Theon in arms. And Rodrik's daughter has even less to do with it. So, arguing that Theon noosing Beth is excusable for what happened to him a decade ago, is basically arguing that if someone harmed me in a certain way ten years ago, it's suddenly alright to do the exact same thing to some poor person who never had anything to do with the events back then. If someone hold me hostage in a bank robbery, I can't just robb a bank and hold someone else hostage ten years later. Total BS argument. Theon was willing to hang Beth, another innocent, to keep an unattainable position. So, despite his nightmares he did not alter his thinking nor his actions. Beth would have just been another extra nightmare.

The only time that Theon actually truly starts to feel actual remorse is in aDwD, after he's been Reekified and he lost all his assets - his youth, his handsomeness, his manhood. Only then does he truly confront the question - were all those horrible things I did worth it? Obviously not. Because he lost everything, including himself because of it.

Did he deserve to be Reekified? No. I don't think Vargo Hoat deserved to be tortured and fed his own limbs either. On the other hand, the horrible Reekifying is what pushes Theon to feel remorse, and not just guilt. 

[INCBlackbird]

4 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Theon had several completely innocent people killed who did not oppose him, did not fight him, heck even followed his orders. The miller family, and making Farlen out to be the killer in WF those had the worst motive ever. He killed a family, including children, all to cover up his incompetence and not to lose face (and sorry... those are not the actions to "gain face"), and then had another innocent framed and executed (and he couldn't even do that right, poor Farlen), someone who helped him look, to cover his tracks.

Sure, he fuils guilt over it in aCoK, but no remorse whatsoever. His nightmares serve only to show us that he's not a psychopath, but do not redeem him. Why? The moment he has a chance to surrender, take the black (and Rodrik Cassel and the other Northeners would certainly have accepted it), he goes out instead and has little Beth hung from a noose. His answer that's how he felt when he was taken by Robert and Ned from Pyke is actually irrelevant to what's happening. Rodrik did not capture him. Heck, he trained Theon in arms. And Rodrik's daughter has even less to do with it. So, arguing that Theon noosing Beth is excusable for what happened to him a decade ago, is basically arguing that if someone harmed me in a certain way ten years ago, it's suddenly alright to do the exact same thing to some poor person who never had anything to do with the events back then. If someone hold me hostage in a bank robbery, I can't just robb a bank and hold someone else hostage ten years later. Total BS argument. Theon was willing to hang Beth, another innocent, to keep an unattainable position. So, despite his nightmares he did not alter his thinking nor his actions. Beth would have just been another extra nightmare.

The only time that Theon actually truly starts to feel actual remorse is in aDwD, after he's been Reekified and he lost all his assets - his youth, his handsomeness, his manhood. Only then does he truly confront the question - were all those horrible things I did worth it? Obviously not. Because he lost everything, including himself because of it.

Did he deserve to be Reekified? No. I don't think Vargo Hoat deserved to be tortured and fed his own limbs either. On the other hand, the horrible Reekifying is what pushes Theon to feel remorse, and not just guilt. 

First of all, guilt and remorse are synonyms... So yeah, Theon felt guilt/remorse pretty much right after doing something wrong, in some cases even while doing something wrong or allowing something wrong to happen.

Also, I don't know if you're confusing with the tv show here but in the books, Theon did not reject Luwin's suggestion to take the black, it actually seemed like he was about to take it but then he was interrupted because the Stark bannermen were already at his gate.

The comment about feeling like he had a noose arround his neck is not a justification it's both Theon finally admitting to himself that he suffered from what happened to him and pointing out that Rodrik is a hypocrite. Because as he points out what Theon is doing to beth is horrible, yet he was ok with it when Ned/Robert did the same thing to Theon. Also, it's pretty clear that Theon would not have gone through with hanging Beth, he knows he can't win at that point.

[No True Knights]

3 hours ago, INCBlackbird said:

Are you saying that Robb was not aware that when he went to war, children (and men and women for that matter) would die? I don't believe that. I don't think that Robb had bad intensions, and I don't blame him at all for wanting revenge for his father but I think he is just as much responsible for the people who died in his war than Theon is for the people who died when he decided to take Winterfell and yes that includes those two boys because they were a consequence of taking Winterfell.

I think that depends on what you personally consider more black. I tend to be very lenient, others are not so lenient, the point is to be consistent in your judgement.

I don't really care for Sandor but I get why he did what he did and I don't consider him evil either. In fact, there's very few characters I consider to be evil or even dark grey and it's mostly characters like Ramsay, Roose, the Mountain, Petyr Baelish.

Well for starters, is there any evidence that any children were actually murdered by Robb or his men other then the Karstark incident in which Robb condemned and executed the perpetrators.

Ignorance is not an excuse but I doubt Robb lead his host to war thinking that innocent children would end up murdered.

Back to Theon.

In what way were the two boys anything to do with him taking Winterfell?

They did not live at Winterfell, they were just two local young boys who happened to live in the same area as two other boys(Bran and Rickon) who had escaped him.

I don't believe Theon is evil but how can you really not see the difference between ignorance of war on the part of a character like Robb and the choice to kill two innocent children(and their mother) just so Theon would not lose any respect from his men.

I understand why Theon decided to make that decision but that does not make it at all acceptable other then in the sadistic mind of Ramsay/Reek and the delusional self centred mind of Theon himself.

Final point, the argument that because other characters have done the same or worse makes it not really that bad, does not make any sense.

Choosing to personally murder innocent children is still wrong, no matter if his total body count is less then others in the series.

[The Ned's Little Girl]

7 hours ago, INCBlackbird said:

Well, we are talking about a world in which this stuff is normal though. It's not about everybody does it, it's about everybody does it because it's part of life.

What??? Wherever did you get that idea? It is not normal. Like, at all. Theon's murder of the two children is clearly presented as the evil act of a desperate man. Other characters who don't bat their eyes at murdering children are clearly presented as not-normal (Craster, for instance, or Cersei).

 

7 hours ago, INCBlackbird said:

Especially since the story is mostly focussed on the nobility, they have the power of life and death and thus are responsible for a lot of death. This is what happens when there is war. therefor I think it's unfair to call him a child murderer as if he did that stuff in our world.

So what? Just because the nobility has the power of life or death over the smallfolk doesn't mean that everybody thinks it's right and good. Maybe that's the point: that nobility is responsible for the death of innocents while they play their games of thrones - and it's bad and wrong.

Secondly, of course it's fair to call him a child murderer (because he murdered children, you know) as if he did that stuff in our world. Because he did that stuff in our world. Westeros doesn't actually exist, A Song of Ice and Fire is not actually history or documentary. These books are written for late-20th and early 21st-century people; we're meant to read them and see reflections of ourselves and our own societies.

Theon in particular exists only to perform this function. We readers witness his destruction of Winterfell and everything else he does there - and wish all kinds of tortuous reprisal upon him for doing so. Then, two books later, we're appalled by the spectacle of him getting what we wished for. 

But the entire point of Theon as a character is lost if the only reaction is to make excuses for him.

 

7 hours ago, INCBlackbird said:

Theon was a 20 year old with severe psychological issues who was given the responsibility of leading a small army (or well... not even sure if you can call it an army but you know what I mean) while never even having had control over his own life and suddenly he has to make decisions for others, couple that with his desparation to be loved and things were bound to go wrong. it's not like he rubbed his hands together and was all like "muhahah, I'll kill two children". He felt like he had no choice.

Utter nonsense. It doesn't matter if "he felt like he had no choice". Whatever he "felt like", he did have a choice. And furthermore he knew that he had a choice. It's not a coincidence that his other option - to lose face in front of his men - is such a crappy reason to commit the cold-blooded murder of innocents. That choice should have been a no-brainer and would have been if the character making it was even a halfway-decent person.

Honestly. This constant whitewashing and excusing of Theon's behavior is breathtaking - and disturbing.

 

[INCBlackbird]

5 minutes ago, No True Knights said:

Well for starters, is there any evidence that any children were actually murdered by Robb or his men other then the Karstark incident in which Robb condemned and executed the perpetrators.

Ignorance is not an excuse but I doubt Robb lead his host to war thinking that innocent children would end up murdered.

Back to Theon.

In what way were the two boys anything to do with him taking Winterfell?

They did not live at Winterfell, they were just two local young boys who happened to live in the same area as two other boys(Bran and Rickon) who had escaped him.

I don't believe Theon is evil but how can you really not see the difference between ignorance of war on the part of a character like Robb and the choice to kill two innocent children(and their mother) just so Theon would not lose any respect from his men.

I understand why Theon decided to make that decision but that does not make it at all acceptable other then in the sadistic mind of Ramsay/Reek and the delusional self centred mind of Theon himself.

Final point, the argument that because other characters have done the same or worse makes it not really that bad, does not make any sense.

Choosing to personally murder innocent children is wrong, no matter if his total body count is less then others in the series.

I don't think there needs to be a direct line that tells us that this person who fights on Robb's side killed a kid, children die in war. Do you really think that it's at all possible that no children at all were killed in Robb's war?

He might not have directly thought "children are gonna die" but he knew that they would, if he didn't think off it makes it worse in my opinion, cause that means that he cared so little for all the people who had to die for his revenge that he didn't even consider them. I don't think that's the case though, I think Robb was very empathic.

The Miller boy's killing was a direct result of Theon taking Winterfell, if he hadn't, he wouldn't have had any prisoners who escaped who he had to replace.

I see the difference I just don't think that war is an excuse to justify murder. And even if it is, then in Theon's case it was also during war time so. Either you condemn both or you condemn neither. Personally I think both are wrong but I can understand the character's point of view and I don't think they are evil for what they did.

It's not acceptable no, and Theon doesn't think so either. he's self centered and delusional for sure and yet he still doesn't think it's acceptable.

It's not about not making it that bad, it's about context. like I pointed out a few posts above the world or asoiaf or the middle ages are a very different world from our world, a world in which this type of voilence is very common and therefor considered acceptable (in world). The fact is that many of the characters in asoiaf are highborn and as a consequence they have a lot of power and with a lot of power comes a lot of responsibility and when you are bad at handling that and screw up that screw up has way bigger consequences then someone who has less power. As a person in a position of power there's also a lot more at stake, choices that you have to make are more difficult and have bigger consequences both for yourself and others. A lot of characters screw up in asoiaf, which is only normal especially since a lot of them are young or have psychological issues and so on. Theon is just one among many.

 

[Anirbas]

@sweetsunray as INCBlackbird said, you remember wrong. The parley with Rodrik Cassel and the threat of hanging Beth is before the scene with Luwin, where he's actually accepting to take the Black:

Quote

I have no hope, he thought. Yet he lowered the bow half an inch and said, “I will not run.”
“I do not speak of running. Take the black.”
“The Night’s Watch?” Theon let the bow unbend slowly and pointed the arrow at the ground.
“Ser Rodrik has served House Stark all his life, and House Stark has always been a friend to the Watch. He will not deny you. Open your gates, lay down your arms, accept his terms, and he must let you take the black.”
A brother of the Night’s Watch. It meant no crown, no sons, no wife... but it meant life, and life with honor. Ned Stark’s own brother had chosen the Watch, and Jon Snow as well

I blame the tv series everytime, but it seems that's never enough.

Moreover, those don't seem the words of a man who enjoys to do evil things. He acts out of desperation and constantly thinks he has no choice.
 

Quote

"They will attack, he thought gloomily, staring at the flames. Ser Rodrik loves his daughter, but he is still castellan, and most of all a knight. Had it been Theon with a noose around his neck and Lord Balon commanding the army without, the warhorns would already have sounded the attack, he had no doubt. He should thank the gods that Ser Rodrik was not ironborn. The men of the green lands were made of softer stuff, though he was not certain they would prove soft enough.
If not, if the old man gave the command to storm the castle regardless, Winterfell would fall; Theon entertained no delusions on that count."
 

or

"If I hang the girl, the northmen will attack at once, he thought as he loosed a shaft. If I do not hang her, they will know my threats are empty. He knocked another arrow to his bow. There is no way out, none."


 

 

By the way if Theon was an evil man like Gregor Clegane or Ramsay as you say, he would have captured, put in chains and even threatened of death or torture Bran and Rickon, killed the direwolves, raped all the women,  and he would have raided and burnt Winterfell without remorse. He would have been acclaimed as a great hero in the Islands and he wouldn't have been captured and tortured by Ramsay.
He never regrets not having done that for his sake and glory, on the contrary, even after excruciating tortures his only regret is that he didn't die with Robb.

And I want to clarify that nobody is saying that what Theon did is not wrong or that he's innocent because there are a lot of characters who did the same or worse than him. But in this fandom there's an afwul lot of double standards when Theon is involved and it's pretty tiring.

[INCBlackbird]

14 minutes ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

What??? Wherever did you get that idea? It is not normal. Like, at all. Theon's murder of the two children is clearly presented as the evil act of a desperate man. Other characters who don't bat their eyes at murdering children are clearly presented as not-normal (Craster, for instance, or Cersei).

first of all I was talking about violence in general not specifically the killing of children. But yes it is normal, Do you really think that anyone would have batted an eye if they didn't think that the children Theon killed were Bran and Rickon? I think there's very few people who would have. And yes of course it is presented as the evil act of a desparate man, because Theon has empathy and he actually feels guilty for what he did because he is responsible for their deaths.
 

20 minutes ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

So what? Just because the nobility has the power of life or death over the smallfolk doesn't mean that everybody thinks it's right and good. Maybe that's the point: that nobility is responsible for the death of innocents while they play their games of thrones - and it's bad and wrong.

Secondly, of course it's fair to call him a child murderer (because he murdered children, you know) as if he did that stuff in our world. Because he did that stuff in our world. Westeros doesn't actually exist, A Song of Ice and Fire is not actually history or documentary. These books are written for late-20th and early 21st-century people; we're meant to read them and see reflections of ourselves and our own societies.

Theon in particular exists only to perform this function. We readers witness his destruction of Winterfell and everything else he does there - and wish all kinds of tortuous reprisal upon him for doing so. Then, two books later, we're appalled by the spectacle of him getting what we wished for. 

But the entire point of Theon as a character is lost if the only reaction is to make excuses for him.

to the bolded: Yes, I believe that is definitly one of the messages GRRM is trying to give.

And Theon doesn't actually exist, he is fictional and as a fictional character he lives in westeros and therefore should be judged in the context of Westeros.

I agree that fiction should help us reflect on ourselves. I think that fictional characters can increase our empathy because when seeing through their eyes we experience their experiences by proxy, it is of course not the same as it happening to ourselves but we are forced to empathise and that is in my opinion the most important thing fiction can do. And therefore I think it's important that when reading Theon we analyse his actions and understand why he did what he did.

 

26 minutes ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

Utter nonsense. It doesn't matter if "he felt like he had no choice". Whatever he "felt like", he did have a choice. And furthermore he knew that he had a choice. It's not a coincidence that his other option - to lose face in front of his men - is such a crappy reason to commit the cold-blooded murder of innocents. That choice should have been a no-brainer and would have been if the character making it was even a halfway-decent person.

Honestly. This constant whitewashing and excusing of Theon's behavior is breathtaking - and disturbing.

 

again with the simplifying, I'm gonna have to write an entire essay on how Theon came to killing those boys am I not? On what humiliation mens in Westeros and specfically on what it means to Theon? on what bullying does to a person. It should be obvious but by the ammount of times I've seen this simplification I guess it's not....

 what is disturbing to me is the lack of understanding for human psychology some people appear to have.

 

[Winter's Cold]

30 minutes ago, Anirbas said:

By the way if Theon was an evil man like Gregor Clegane or Ramsay as you say, he would have captured, put in chains and even threatened of death or torture Bran and Rickon, killed the direwolves, raped all the women,  and he would have raided and burnt Winterfell without remorse. He would have been acclaimed as a great hero in the Islands and he wouldn't have been captured and tortured by Ramsay.
He never regrets not having done that for his sake and glory, on the contrary, even after excruciating tortures his only regret is that he didn't die with Robb.

Theon doesn't murder Bran and Rickon because they are far more useful as hostages. No Northern lord is going to storm Winterfell as that would endanger their lives. This can no longer work once they successfully escape. Theon feels that the revelation of this would undermine his authority. Therefore, he pretends that he killed them by killing two children about their age and tarring them to obscure their features. 

Theon doesn't burn and raze Winterfell for the same reason he captured it in the first place. He wants to lord of Winterfell. Winterfell is more of a home to him than Pyke is. He wants to be a Stark more than he wants to be an Ironborn prince. That's why he disobeys his father and attacks Winterfell. That's why he stays when his sister wants him to leave.

He isn't as psychopathic as Gregor or Ramsay are but he is still capable of great acts of evil as those characters are. 

[SerBronnsMullet]

I don't think he's the most fascinating character but he has the most fascinating arc.