Jump to content

Opinions on Theon


INCBlackbird

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, INCBlackbird said:

You are again talking about taking sides, Theon gets a small amount of empathy while his victims get a big ammount of empathy. That is picking a side. That's like if someone murdered someone's family member and the judge judges from the perspective of the family members only when they are not judging them but they are judging the killer. That's not an accurate judgement.

Of course it's an accurate judgement! The murdered family member and the rest of the family had a crime committed against them! The victim(s) of a crime are the whole point of the judgement!

It's like you're saying that a criminal should be judged without reference to the crime that he committed.

Jeepers.

 

52 minutes ago, INCBlackbird said:

And of course the situation is complex, because humans are complex, do you seriously think that any of us are simple?

That is exactly what you seem to think, considering the number of times you bring up how readers try to make things black-and-white, leave out context, are not self-aware (and how exactly can you know that? Let me emphasize the word "self"), and constantly simplify the situation in order to reduce Theon to a caricature because he's too hard to understand otherwise..... and so on and so forth ad nauseum.

 

57 minutes ago, INCBlackbird said:

Empathising with his victims is irrelevant as you are not judging them, you are judging Theon.

Wow. Just wow.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, INCBlackbird said:



 

Emapthy means to put yourself in someone's shoes, therefore if you don't empathise with him you cannot understand him and therefore you can't judge him from an objective standpoint.

Pretty much anyone is capable of doing horrible things like torture, that has been proven in several experiments. I don't think child murder is an exception to this. Therefore the action in itself tells us little.
 

There's a difference between just reading a book and analysing a character.

Empathise does not just mean standing in someone's shoes, its more than that. It involves agreeing with their actions to a certain degree. Very few people can empathise with a child killer thankfully. Your premise here is incorrect, you don't need to empathise with somebody to understand them. It may make you more likely to understand a person's character but its not essential. 

The action of killing children so you don't lose face tells us an awful lot about a person's character, none of it is good.

It is patently untrue that anyone is capable of torture- if you are referring to Milgram and the Stanford experiment its totally incorrect to say that every participant inflicted mild physical and moderate psychological violence on the other participants, never mind claiming anyone can be child murderer. 

Your arguments would be more acceptable if you just claimed you love Theon as character and are prepared to forgive him anything, your insistence that he is a good person despite his horrible deeds and the excuses you make for him whilst insulting those that disagree with you by saying they cannot empathise because they don't have self awareness is uncomfortable to read now so I'm out too. Its unfair and very rude of you to ask for opinions and then denigrate the people who take the trouble to reply to you imo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, INCBlackbird said:

  You are again talking about taking sides, Theon gets a small amount of empathy while his victims get a big ammount of empathy. That is picking a side. That's like if someone murdered someone's family member and the judge judges from the perspective of the family members only when they are not judging them but they are judging the killer. That's not an accurate judgement.

Empathising with his victims is irrelevant as you are not judging them, you are judging Theon.
 

Emapthy means to put yourself in someone's shoes, therefore if you don't empathise with him you cannot understand him and therefore you can't judge him from an objective standpoint.

 

Seriously?? A trial about a child murder is not about the murdered child? The murders stands accused of child murder, that is the whole point of the trial. In most violent crime trials there are also victim impact statements, to make the judge/jury emphatic to them. They are judging the accused of the crime he committed, they are not just at random judging his personality and life-story.

 

And if anyone in this discussion is not objective when it comes to Theon, it is you! The rest of us are quite objective about Theon, but you seem to only put yourself in his shoes, not in the shoes of anyone around him. That is subjectivity, not objectivity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, BlueBard said:

It is patently untrue that anyone is capable of torture- if you are referring to Milgram and the Stanford experiment its totally incorrect to say that every participant inflicted mild physical and moderate psychological violence on the other participants, never mind claiming anyone can be child murderer. 

Agreed. What's more. The most important thing about the Milgram experiment that is often not cited and forgotten altogether was that Milgram also did a variation, where he had the subjects wait and see what another supposed subject did when ordered to give electroshocks. That supposed subject was another actor. And when the actor refused the "order", the actual subjects increasingly refused the order as well. Milgram's experiment does not show that everybody would torture or kill someone, but that people are prone to follow orders when in a subordinate position. Theon's not in a subordinate position at all.

The same is true for the Stanford experiment where you had jailors and prisoners. Even the jailors were given instructions to make sure that the prisoners could not rebel. Stanford and Milgram explains why subjects UNDER Theon would follow his orders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, INCBlackbird said:

That's what I've been saying so how exactly do I not see that? I've litarly said a million times that just cause I understand him doesn't mean I condone him.

I never said it excuses him, nothing excuses killing someone else (except if you really are unaware of your actions perhaps) it doesn't bother me that people condemn him for what he did, it doesn't bother even bother me when people call him evil perse because if that is there standard for an evil person fine. What does bother me is that they say things about Theon that aren't true, like that he is cruel, that he doesn't  feel guilty, that he doesn't feel empathy for anyone else, take your pick of the things people have said even just in this thread that aren't true. All of that shows a misunderstanding of the character so I try to explain to them why it's a misunderstanding, I explain Theon to them and yet they just repeat the same things over and over, that is frustrating.

Presented this way, I could agree with you.

I've never seen Theon as particularly cruel. I don't think I would even say he lacks empathy.
I've always seen him (before his capture by Ramsay) as an arrogant prick with a feeling of entitlement hiding a complex of inferiority and a minor identity crisis. Nothing particularly shocking for a young noble who was a ward/hostage of another family whom he grew to genuinely like.

7 hours ago, INCBlackbird said:

it's not but people are shaped by their experiences, it's what makes them into who they are (certainly their experiences at a young age) And Theon's identity crisis can be traced back to his childhood. It's a big part of him, especially in clash because his support system fell down and his identity suddenly became very unstable and he does what he does trying to create new support and failing. The events in Winterfell are basically him being stuck in a vicious circle of doom and getting deeper and deeper because he's not self aware enough to end it, neither is he mature enough.

The problem here is that not everyone who is going through an identity crisis ends up murdering children...
I think I (and others) understand the situation Theon found himself in. We simply refuse to condone in any way his killing children.

7 hours ago, INCBlackbird said:

and this is besides the point but because you brought it up: I generally don't like characters who protect the innocents over themselves because I often consider them unrealistic. That said, I don't remember someone in asoiaf who does that, i'm not saying it didn't happen but could you give an example?

Sure. Remember this bit?

 
Quote

 

He is an old man, Jon told himself. Fifty, maybe even sixty. He lived a longer life than most. The Thenns will kill him anyway, nothing I can say or do will save him. Longclaw seemed heavier than lead in his hand, too heavy to lift. The man kept staring at him, with eyes as big and black as wells. I will fall into those eyes and drown. The Magnar was looking at him too, and he could almost taste the mistrust. The man is dead. What matter if it is my hand that slays him? One cut would do it, quick and clean. Longclaw was forged of Valyrian steel. Like Ice. Jon remembered another killing; the deserter on his knees, his head rolling, the brightness of blood on snow . . . his father's sword, his father's words, his father's face . . .
"Do it, Jon Snow," Ygritte urged. "You must. T' prove you are no crow, but one o' the free folk."
A Storm of Swords, Jon V

 

Jon chooses not to kill the old man and thus puts himself in mortal danger (and actually takes a arrow for this shortly thereafter).
And yet, Jon would have had so many excuses to kill the old man... The old man's age (as he reflects), his duty to the Night's Watch (to remain undercover), his love for Ygritte... I could even argue that at this point Jon has an identity crisis of his own to deal with...
But he doesn't do it.
He isn't even in control in this situation. He is barely trusted by the Thenns, he doesn't get to give orders, he knows the old man will die anyway, he knows his rectitude won't change anything except put him in danger.
But he doesn't do it.
This is why Jon is a hero -and Theon is not.
 
6 hours ago, INCBlackbird said:

A psychopath is a person who suffers from antisocial personality disorder (at least that is the closest to an actual method to diagnose someone). which is characterised by things such as : a lack of empathy, skilled at manipulating others.... I think that when the word psychopath is used in every day life however, people often mean someone who suffers from a certain type of antisocial personality disorder (not all of them kill people of course) the type that has elements of the narcissistic personality disorder and/or sadism.

So I don't see how Arya could be a psychopath? She certainly does messed up things, but she is very empathic, it's normal that she's angry after the trauma's she's been through and I don't think that anything she does goes beyond that of a traumatised kid, what do you think went beyond it?

Uh... Killing? Traumatised kids aren't supposed to become killers y'know...

6 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

It's very easy to determine that Arya is not a psychopath. Psychopathy does not mean "a murderer". She kills from the same mindset an executioner would. More, from the same mindset that Ned Stark executes a man. She learns a man's history, watches his actions in the presence, judges him and decides he's not worth her empathy, and executes him. She is exactly the example of a very empathic person, who chooses not to empathize with those who harm innocents. She empathizes with the victims. [...]

She's an empath who chooses not to sympathize with people who consistently harm innocent people and make silly excuses for it. Imagine Arya witnessing Theon doing what he does in WF from a hiding place, and he'd have died stuck by the pointy end in aCoK.

With all due respect, this is hilarious.

All psychopathic killers see themselves as executioners and many of them think they are justice incarnate (or death, or a daemon, or whatever bullshit they use to justify their killing lust). The ability to kill easily and without remorse is the best symptom of psychopathy you can find!
Because you can't choose "not to empathize" with people you wish to kill. A normal human being needs serious training to be able to kill another human being ; and even with training, the guilt and remorse are so strong that they often lead to some forms of PTSD. Even if you feel self-righteous about killing someone, your basic human empathy is going to come back to bite you. That is the difference between a psychopath and a normal human being!

This is why Arya exhibits very clear signs of psychopathy. Not only does she not show any visible signs of remorse for killing people who probably "deserve" it within the context of the story (like Raff or the Tickler) or who she was forced to kill (guards for instance), she also goes on to kill people who may not deserve it like Dareon and the insurance salesman... And yet we have no descriptions of nightmares, of troubled thoughts, no internal conflict... It's easier for this girl to kill than for grown men...

And it's getting worse:

Quote

Psychopathy, in contrast, refers to a very specific and distinctive type of psychopathology. Psychopathy is a type of personality disorder defined chiefly by a combination of antisocial behavior and callousness and emotional detachment. As one set of writers recently noted, “Psychopaths are typically charismatic individuals who readily manipulate others and engage in risky behaviors designed to satisfy their own personal needs. They are undeterred by pangs of conscience and have little or no concern for the welfare of others. Their relationships tend to be shallow and they often meander from one opportunistic setting to another without much concern for the future” (Poythress, Skeem, Lilienfeld & Edens, 2000).

Basically, her experience as a FM trainee in Braavos has only made her closer to a textbook definition of a young psychopath. And don't even try the "empathy" crap, psychopaths can feel empathy (Decety et al. (2013)), it's just that they don't feel any for the people they kill.

What clearly showed me that Arya was turning into a psychopath was the fact that she readily told the kindly man that she'd killed Dareon. When I read that, I was like "oh, shit, she's crossed the line."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

All psychopathic killers see themselves as executioners and many of them think they are justice incarnate (or death, or a daemon, or whatever bullshit they use to justify their killing lust).

Where the fuck did you get this? And you're changing the goal posts here. First you talk "psychopaths" and now "psychopathic killers".

When we're talking about psychopathy we're taling about "pervasive" symptoms... For example when it says that a psychopath has low affective empathy (they have cognitive empathy), then that means that they don't feel no or low empathy for everyone, not just for a selection fo people. A psychopath would not care about what happens to the dwarf actor. A psychopath would not care about what happens to the another 14 year old girl being ogled and lied to by a selfish jerk. When it says they don't feel remorse and take no responsibility then that is with regards to anything they might have done wrong. Arya feels remorse and guilt over the stable boy, the HH guard, the squire. If she were a psychopath, or "turned" into one (which is total BS), then she would not feel remorse for them either. Since Arya does feel strong affective empathy for a great many people, including strangers, as well as guilt for those she wronged in self defense, and also takes responsibility for her actions, even when she feels justified, we're not talking about a psychopath at all. Another symptom is a pathological liar. While Arya learns to lie, she does not lie just for the sake of lying. Pathological liars lie even when it's not necessary. They enjoy lying over big and small stuff all the time, of harmful and harmless stuff. If you say it's raining outside, a psychopath will say the sun is shining, even if you can both see with your own eyes it's pouring cats and dogs. They lie just to lie. 

ETA: you assertion that we get no reports whatsoever of dreams and thoughts implying feelings of remorse and guilt is patently false. Arya thinks often of the stable boy and the guard in aSoS when facing returning to Robb and her mother. She wonders what they would say and think. That's not the same thing as fearing being caught, because she's a kid of 10 at that point, and she is still of an age where she needs to use role models to reflect on her choices. We also have a nightmare dream in her last aDwD chapter where she sees dead faces grouped in 3 different groups: dead kin, people she killed and feels unjustified for (including Dareon) and then men she killed with full conviction like the Tickler without feeling remorse for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

This is why Arya exhibits very clear signs of psychopathy. Not only does she not show any visible signs of remorse for killing people who probably "deserve" it within the context of the story (like Raff or the Tickler) or who she was forced to kill (guards for instance), she also goes on to kill people who may not deserve it like Dareon and the insurance salesman... And yet we have no descriptions of nightmares, of troubled thoughts, no internal conflict... It's easier for this girl to kill than for grown men...

By this logic, shouldn't Dany be a psychopath 10 times over for her killing of people whom she "felt" deserved it -  Mirri Maz Duur, the entire over 13 tokar-wearing population of Astapor, 163 crucifixions in Meereen, so on and so forth?

Let me also add she failed to ascertain individual guilt in two of the above cases. Yet I don't see her losing sleep over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Where the fuck did you get this?

From the scientific literature, where else? But I sense my phrasing is wrong. What I meant is that all psychopathic killers judge that they have the right to take the lives of their victims. They don't always make an elaborate judgment of course, sometimes their lack of empathy simply prevents them from seeing others' lives as having any worth.

My point is, behaving like an executioner is definitely not proof you are not a psychopath, and saying that it would be is quite hilarious.
 

25 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

When we're talking about psychopathy we're taling about "pervasive" symptoms... For example when it says that a psychopath has low affective empathy (they have cognitive empathy), then that means that they don't feel no or low empathy for everyone, not just for a selection fo people. A psychopath would not care about what happens to the dwarf actor. A psychopath would not care about what happens to the another 14 year old girl being ogled and lied to by a selfish jerk. When it says they don't feel remorse and take no responsibility then that is with regards to anything they might have done wrong. Arya feels remorse and guilt over the stable boy, the HH guard, the squire. If she were a psychopath, or "turned" into one (which is total BS), then she would not feel remorse for them either. Since Arya does feel strong affective empathy for a great many people, including strangers, as well as guilt for those she wronged in self defense, and also takes responsibility for her actions, even when she feels justified, we're not talking about a psychopath at all. Another symptom is a psychopathic liar. While Arya learns to lie, she does not lie just for the sake of lying. Pathological liars lie even when it's not necessary. They enjoy lying over big and small stuff all the time, of harmful and harmless stuff. If you say it's raining outside, a psychopath will say the sun is shining, even if you can both see with your own eyes it's pouring cats and dogs. They lie just to lie.

You're saying three things here: i) That Arya feels remorse and guilt for some of her killings.  ii) That Arya feels a strong empathy for a great many people, including strangers. iii) That Arya doesn't lie for the sake of lying like psychopaths do.
Assertion i) is the one I'm most curious about, because it's always possible I missed a small expression of guilt or two somewhere ; I would be curious to see how it is worded however, before drawing any conclusions from this. ii) Arya identifies at times with other people, but you'll find it difficult to say the least that it has to be "strong empathy." And seeing that I can't re-read every Arya chapter tonight, I re-read the Mercy chapter and can state that at no moment is it explicit that she has any concern for Bobono or Daena (this would be your own personal interpretation of the text, without any textual support). Lastly iii), I've never read anywhere that psychopaths are necessarily mythomaniacs. There have been studies attempting to link the two, but I am not aware of any that conclusively showed or proved this. Psychopaths lie (a lot) in order to manipulate, but certainly not "for the sake of lying" as you suggest. I would say this is your weakest argument by far.

Anyway, funnily enough, I was only proving to INCBlackbird that I judge all characters in the same way (not just Theon). That Arya exhibits clear psychopathic tendencies is so obvious to me that I don't care a fig about convincing anyone about it. I participated in such a thread a year or so ago and it was an utter loss of time, because no one was even trying to read the other side's arguments.

56 minutes ago, Little Scribe of Naath said:

By this logic, shouldn't Dany be a psychopath 10 times over for her killing of people whom she "felt" deserved it -  Mirri Maz Duur, the entire over 13 tokar-wearing population of Astapor, 163 crucifixions in Meereen, so on and so forth?

Certainly. But when such people reach positions of power we tend to call them other names like "conquerors," "tyrants," or "politicians."  ;)

This being said, I would be careful before labeling Dany a psychopath... She's unhinged yes, but in a slightly different way imho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

Of course it's an accurate judgement! The murdered family member and the rest of the family had a crime committed against them! The victim(s) of a crime are the whole point of the judgement!

It's like you're saying that a criminal should be judged without reference to the crime that he committed.

Jeepers.

I probably didn't make myself clear, let me try again. When you are judging a killer you are judging "him" right? not his victims. that is my point. So you shouldn't be looking at it from the victim's point of view, they were the victims, they didn't do anything, they aren't the ones who should be judged (obviously) what they think/feel tells you nothing whatsoever about why the person you are judging did what they did. Only the perpetrator can tell you that.

No we know the crime they commited. We're talking about someone is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt so we're aware of the crime already with all the details, but now we're making a judgement of the criminal of why they did what they did, what lead them to doing it and so on.

I don't really know how else to explain it, this is also why I said that the empathy we feel to the victim is irrelvant. It's irrelevant to the judgement we are making because we are not judging the victims, we are judging the perpetrator.

3 hours ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

That is exactly what you seem to think, considering the number of times you bring up how readers try to make things black-and-white, leave out context, are not self-aware (and how exactly can you know that? Let me emphasize the word "self"), and constantly simplify the situation in order to reduce Theon to a caricature because he's too hard to understand otherwise..... and so on and so forth ad nauseum.
 

I don't understand how that would make a person simple? Humans have the tendency to simplify things though, that is just a fact. Most people are also not very self-aware that's just a fact. I can't know who in this conversation is and isn't self-aware of course but I also never said about someone else that they aren't. I just said about myself that I am for several reasons, i've been going to therapy for years to better understand myself and I've started focussing on that even more since I got my autism diagnosis because my therapist told me that that is often a good way to deal with problems for autistic people and specifically for me because I tend to analyse everything. So I have learned to be self-aware, if you haven't learned that in most cases you aren't. Just today I read an article on how few people even acknowledge that there is a subconcious and if they acknowledge it they think it's irrelevant while the subconcious affects most of our actions. Also, I never said Theon couldn't understand, I said he's complex (which is what makes him realistic) and that everything is connected, his identity crisis can be traced back to his childhood and it affects everything he does in clash (and too a certain extend also in dance) just like real people he is shaped by his experiences, which is what makes him so realistic. I don't see how that is reducing him to a caricature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Certainly. But when such people reach positions of power we tend to call them other names like "conquerors," "tyrants," or "politicians."  ;)

This being said, I would be careful before labeling Dany a psychopath... She's unhinged yes, but in a slightly different way imho.

By the definition you are using for Arya,

-  Dany has to be a psychopath 10 times over.

-  Robb has to be a psychopath because he ordered Rickard Karstark to be killed for taking the lives of those Lannister kids.

- Tyrion is a psychopath for murder of the singer and turning him into a bowl of brown

- Ned is a psychopath because he executed the deserter Gared at the beginning of the story 

- Sandor Clegane is a psychopath for murdering Mycah

- Jaime is a psychopath for trying to kill Bran

- Oberyn is a psychopath because he saw it fit to kill the Mountain

- Manderly is a psychopath because he killed the Freys

- Robert Baratheon is a psychopath because he killed Rhaegar and many others

I could go on.

None of these people showed remorse for any of these deaths. All of them felt these deaths were "justified" from their POV. So, according to you:

" All psychopathic killers see themselves as executioners and many of them think they are justice incarnate (or death, or a daemon, or whatever bullshit they use to justify their killing lust). The ability to kill easily and without remorse is the best symptom of psychopathy you can find! "

 

And I'm not the one labeling Dany or Arya a psychopath here. You are. I was just using your own (ridiculous) definition, sir.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

From the scientific literature, where else?

Can you give me a reference please?

 

31 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Psychopaths lie (a lot) in order to manipulate, but certainly not "for the sake of lying" as you suggest. I would say this is your weakest argument by far.

I lived with one for 2 years (well luckily also partially long distance). BTW I said "pathological liar" not "mythomaniac". There's actual a motive behind the pathological lying of a psychopath: creating a fog-mind for the target. The target spends so much energy wondering why the psychopath is lying and whether this or that is a lie that they cannot see the forest for the trees anymore. It destabilizes the target's perceptiveness and confidence. It's part of the gaslighting tactics. Meanwhile psychopaths also have a sense of grandiosity, so much that they feel they can alter reality, that reality is what they say it is.  

 

32 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

That Arya exhibits clear psychopathic tendencies is so obvious to me that I don't care a fig about convincing anyone about it.

And it's so obvious to me that she isn't that I will challenge you on your outrageous claims about them, whether I can convince you or not. At least those reading my answers may be convinced

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BlueBard said:

Empathise does not just mean standing in someone's shoes, its more than that. It involves agreeing with their actions to a certain degree. Very few people can empathise with a child killer thankfully. Your premise here is incorrect, you don't need to empathise with somebody to understand them. It may make you more likely to understand a person's character but its not essential.

You don't have to agree if you empathise with them where did you get that? There are certainly a lot of subcathegories of empathy but none of them require agreement. And yes you do, because if you don't empathise with a person how exactly will you understand them? what will you base your conclusions on? your own assumptions. In order to understand a person you need to put yourself in their shoes and that is what empathy is.
 

3 hours ago, BlueBard said:

The action of killing children so you don't lose face tells us an awful lot about a person's character, none of it is good.

All it tells you is that they were able to do it, which is not a whole lot of information. Lots of people would be able to do it given the right circemstances but I know that's a hard pill to swallow so it's easier to stay en denial.
 

3 hours ago, BlueBard said:

It is patently untrue that anyone is capable of torture- if you are referring to Milgram and the Stanford experiment its totally incorrect to say that every participant inflicted mild physical and moderate psychological violence on the other participants, never mind claiming anyone can be child murderer. 
 

That's why I said most people, I never said everyone.
 

3 hours ago, BlueBard said:

Your arguments would be more acceptable if you just claimed you love Theon as character and are prepared to forgive him anything, your insistence that he is a good person despite his horrible deeds and the excuses you make for him whilst insulting those that disagree with you by saying they cannot empathise because they don't have self awareness is uncomfortable to read now so I'm out too. Its unfair and very rude of you to ask for opinions and then denigrate the people who take the trouble to reply to you imo. 

I didn't say that other people have no self awareness, I can't know that. I said that I have self awareness. I also didn't say that others can't empathise, I asked someone if they could because I had the feeling that they weren't empathising with Theon, then a lot of people started to say themselves that they turned off their empathy for him or that they felt less empathy for him. you yourself just said this: "Very few people can empathise with a child killer thankfully." I'm assuming that you are referring to yourself as well here. So it seems like my assumption that some people here who don't understand Theon do so because they don't empathise with him seems to be correct by all of your own admissions.

Also, like I said in another post, the problem is not people's opinions. The problem is that people say incorrect things about Theon (like that he is cruel, doesn't feel guilty and so on) and when they do I have to reply to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LordManderlyAsDragonRider said:

Seriously?? A trial about a child murder is not about the murdered child? The murders stands accused of child murder, that is the whole point of the trial. In most violent crime trials there are also victim impact statements, to make the judge/jury emphatic to them. They are judging the accused of the crime he committed, they are not just at random judging his personality and life-story.

 

And if anyone in this discussion is not objective when it comes to Theon, it is you! The rest of us are quite objective about Theon, but you seem to only put yourself in his shoes, not in the shoes of anyone around him. That is subjectivity, not objectivity. 

The point is that you are not judging the murdered child, you are judging the killer. I would think that most people are automatically empathic towards someone who got murdered and their family. Yet, as this thread proves, people have the tendency to turn off their empathy (or reduce it) towards the killer, and judge them from their own perspective, rather than the perspective of the killer. which is wrong because that means you not being objective in your judgement. And the crime they commited didn't come out of nowhere, there are reasons behind it, those reasons are important.

Perhaps you think you guys are you being objective, yet several people have said things about Theon that are simply incorrect. I don't remember what you said but I know that someone said he is cruel, several people said he doesn't feel guilt and so on... that is not being objective. You can only be objective about a character if you understand them, yet a lot of you by your own admission don't want to empathise with him, than it's no wonder that you don't understand him. That is why i've been trying to explain him to you all, but that explanation is falling on deaf ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Presented this way, I could agree with you.

I've never seen Theon as particularly cruel. I don't think I would even say he lacks empathy.
I've always seen him (before his capture by Ramsay) as an arrogant prick with a feeling of entitlement hiding a complex of inferiority and a minor identity crisis. Nothing particularly shocking for a young noble who was a ward/hostage of another family whom he grew to genuinely like.

Yep, I fully agree with that description.
 

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

The problem here is that not everyone who is going through an identity crisis ends up murdering children...

I think I (and others) understand the situation Theon found himself in. We simply refuse to condone in any way his killing children.

No of course not, most people don't, also because an identity crisis has little to do with killing children. But I mean, even if people have the same disorder they still experience it differently because everyone is unique. But more importantly, most people don't end up in Theon's situation. The point I'm trying to make is not that he killed children because he has an identity crisis but that his identity crisis is what got him into that situation in winterfell, it was what made him so desparate to belong somewhere so afraid of abandonment also because he defines himself through what society thinks of him and his search for a home is directly linked to his inability to find himself. His unique situation in combination with his unique issues is what lead him to do several horrible things (which is the case with every person who commits a crime) and I think that it is important to understand those issues and that situation in order to make a judgement, because otherwise you're judging without the full knowledge needed to make an accurate judgement. (which again is the case with every single crime commited, that's why we have trials and while they often go on for days).

I don't condone his actions either but I think that if you hate Theon because you misunderstand him, or you misunderstand Theon because you hate him you're missing out.
 

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Jon chooses not to kill the old man and thus puts himself in mortal danger (and actually takes a arrow for this shortly thereafter).

And yet, Jon would have had so many excuses to kill the old man... The old man's age (as he reflects), his duty to the Night's Watch (to remain undercover), his love for Ygritte... I could even argue that at this point Jon has an identity crisis of his own to deal with...
But he doesn't do it.
He isn't even in control in this situation. He is barely trusted by the Thenns, he doesn't get to give orders, he knows the old man will die anyway, he knows his rectitude won't change anything except put him in danger.
But he doesn't do it.
This is why Jon is a hero -and Theon is not.
 

Ah yes jon, the exception to my rule tbh. I do really love Jon, he's one of the most empathic characters in these books (along with Davos I think) And yes, Theon is definitly not a hero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, INCBlackbird said:

You are again talking about taking sides, Theon gets a small amount of empathy while his victims get a big ammount of empathy. That is picking a side. That's like if someone murdered someone's family member and the judge judges from the perspective of the family members only when they are not judging them but they are judging the killer. That's not an accurate judgement.

Empathising with his victims is irrelevant as you are not judging them, you are judging Theon.

Firstly, let me underscore that understanding someone using empathy is different to understanding that person intellectually, so I would caution you not to equate them.  For example, a psychopath may have an extremely shallow capacity for empathic identification with another, but may nevertheless have an extremely well-honed intellectual capacity for zeroing in on someone's hidden weaknesses, followed by pressing on those buttons for all they're worth.  Crudely using the metaphor of 'ice and fire,' one might say that true empathy is a 'hot' kind of understanding, in which one would actually feel emotionally for the person under consideration, versus the intellectual type which is a more distant, 'cold' kind of comprehension, in which, however, famously the feeling does not come to pass.  Jon Snow is capable of the former; Littlefinger only of the latter.  Both have a deep understanding of human nature.

It seems you are entreating the reader to extend understanding to Theon's predicament, with reference to all the biopsychosocial history that has gone into making him what he is.  In other words, you seem to be implying that every person should have a right to be understood and therefore on a certain level also accepted for whom s/he 'naturally' is, and moreover tolerated as such by society, considering that from a certain perspective each person can not help who s/he is and/or has become.  For argument's sake, can a psychopath really be accused of being deficient in a faculty (e.g. 'empathy') with which he has not been naturally endowed and in which it has been shown traditional therapies fail to make a significant impact (scans are showing that certain brains are simply 'wired' differently to the majority, and there is suggestive evidence that these personality discrepancies may even stem from early childhood)?  

A flower naturally does flower things; a gazelle does what comes naturally to a gazelle; a lion innocently follows its nature; an avalanche indifferently seeks the ground; a cancer cell feels the natural urge to replicate itself and take over your body; and a psychopath may just naturally not only not care about having an adverse effect on the lives of other people, but on the contrary derive great satisfaction out of harming another -- all of these are 'natural' phenomena which can be understood according to a number of paradigms.  Given their 'nature,' does that mean we as a society should treat all of them the same?  I'm sure if you developed cancer, you would be less eager to extend it your 'empathy,' since we usually tend to reject things which hurt us, even if they are 'natural' and comprehensible.  

What you seem to be taking exception to is that society would judge the behavior of certain people as 'unnatural' or 'abnormal' or 'undesirable,' although we live in a world where people -- even those classified as 'antisocial' -- are beholden, whether they like it or not, to a social system of which they are part.  In order for society to function, we naturally seek to curb, punish, and moderate the actions of those who would harm the social fabric, even if harming others is what 'comes naturally' to their innate sense of self-expression.  The collective consciousness of a community, finding consensus in codified laws, decides what will not be tolerated as 'natural' and 'acceptable' within that particular group, even if this means that conflicts might arise between the individual and group over where the 'cut-offs' should be drawn on the spectrum of human diversity between 'normal' and 'abnormal.'  It's not 'perfect justice,' I'll give you that -- but then, what is?

So, regardless of how sensitively we may appreciate the particularities of the contributing circumstances, Theon's behavior should obviously be judged, and he needs to be held to account for the harm he's inflicted.  By his society's standards and by our own, he is guilty.  He killed two children, and was responsible for harming multiple other innocents, something which he comes to regret.  Moreover, although you've impressed that GRRM likes painting 'grey' characters, avoiding 'black and white' dichotomies, with which I agree (his language deconstructing itself reflects as much); on the other hand, there is nothing 'grey' about the punishments he metes out to his characters.  Jaime extended his hand to Bran in bad faith; later, he loses his hand.  Robert Baratheon focused on his own appetites; he was gored in the stomach by a boar.  Ned failed to use his head when it came to Robert and Cersei; he loses his head.  Sansa failed to stand by her 'wolf' pack; she loses her wolf, and her pack.  Robb violated his promise to wed, thinking he could sweet-talk Walder Frey; he was violated at a wedding by Frey who fed him a lot of sweet-talk, but words are wind...;  Tywin's credo was shaming others ; he was caught with his pants down on the privy by the person he'd most shamed; and Tyrion...well, GRRM lets him get off lightly (one of the reasons I find A+J=T so disappointing is that I don't believe Tyrion should be let off the 'kinslaying' hook that easily!) Note, that GRRM insinuates that Theon is the biological father of the selfsame miller's boys he kills, making him a kinslayer, of whom he says no-one is more 'accursed in the eyes of the gods.'  Was adding that detail to the murder of the children really necessary, unless GRRM didn't on some level intend to express his utter disapproval about Theon's choices, condemning him in the strongest terms?  In the name of being heir to the Iron Islands, Theon killed his own kin, symbolically cutting off the fruit of his loins; then his loins are cut off and he loses his name, essentially disqualifying him from inheriting the Iron Islands.

I agree with you that Theon is a character from which most readers would prefer to avert their eyes.  He's painful to look on, and offensive to smell.  It's more fun to get behind kick-ass Arya meting out her version of vigilante 'justice' or glammy Dany eviscerating the slavers for that matter!  Just as there's no stanza dedicated to 'the Stranger' in the 'Song of the Seven,' the omission of which represents 'repression' and 'denial' to use psychological terminology, likewise Theon -- that hooded figure, neither male nor female, half human-half animal (dog/raven) -- represents the Stranger or the Shadow side in all of us, insofar as we are all human and given to various degrees to vanity, frailty and brutality.  I like @sweetsunray's idea of Theon as GRRM's 'Gollum' equivalent, who, despite all his shortcomings, will nevertheless be instrumental in assisting to shift the outcome in a harmonious direction.

Perhaps you ought to be accusing GRRM of having minimal empathy for Theon -- he certainly has taken pains to put him through the ringer!  Joking aside, from a certain perspective I actually think GRRM has way more empathy for Theon than he does for Theon's victims.  @BlueBard suggested something interesting, namely that 

4 hours ago, BlueBard said:

Empathise does not just mean standing in someone's shoes, its more than that. It involves agreeing with their actions to a certain degree.

In other words, empathy requires a certain 'suspension of disbelief,' basically an identification, even if temporary, with the other person.  I might argue, therefore, that the amount of time and effort spent turning ones attention towards something or someone implies a corresponding level of 'empathy.'  In contrast to Theon's 'boring' victims, Theon is given his own POV chapters, some of the most richly imagined material in the books, elevating his perspective over that of others who have lost their voice and/or whose psyches do not interest GRRM, using the latter rather as expendable cyvasse pieces in his own game.  Of John Milton, William Blake famously commented:

Quote

William Blake voiced a thought that had been troubling readers almost since the poem's publication, and has dogged it ever since. Noticing that Books I and II are rather more absorbing than Book III, Blake concluded: 'The reason Milton wrote in fetters when he wrote of Angels and God, and at liberty when of Devils and Hell, is because he was a true Poet and of the Devil's party without knowing it'. 

From http://darknessvisible.christs.cam.ac.uk/critics.html

One might suspect the same of GRRM!

Finally, let me say that I do not believe Theon is a psychopath (as far as it's possible to diagnose a fictional character).  Although he's done many heinous things, he nevertheless retains a certain capacity for empathy and remorse.  The more Theon displays these characteristics, for example when he's kneeling at the heart tree expressing as much, the more empathy reciprocally I have for him.  GRRM would like to believe in redemption, for his two 'smiling knight' characters Theon and Jaime.  Both of them are on the way to better things, and I predict the Starks and Westeros will be better for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rippounet

Psychopathy is a disorder diagnozed by the PCL-R test, created by Robert Hare. We're not talking about Anti-social personality disorder (DSM-5), but "psychopathy". All psychopaths would be diagnozed as ASPD but not all with ASPD would be diagnozed as psychopaths. Hence the definition for a psychopath is scoring 30/40 on the following list of traits:

  • glibness, superficial charm
  • extreme sense of self-worth (bragging), narcissistic
  • need for stimulus, easily complaining of being bored: always going somewhere, cannot sit still, if there is anything a psychopath hates it's feeling bored. Since they have such shallow emotions, their internal life is negligible, hence they have a constant hunger for outside stimuli (this is one of the first thigns I ever noticed about the ex)
  • pathological lying: they are not even perturbed if caught in a lie
  • deceptive and manipulative (including partners, family, own children, colleagues and boss)
  • lacking guilt and remorse
  • superficial affect (superficial emotional receptivity): emotional display is dramatic, of short duration and coming across as fake (from love-bombing to devaluation and discarding)
  • callous and lacking affective empathy: regard other people as prey or losers that are easily to manipulate
  • parasitic lifestyle: lives on the money of family, partners, friends, company (fraude)
  • low self-control over behavior: their anger can easily flare, in an aggressive, destructive manner, but ends as abruptly
  • licentious sexual behavior, cheating (multiple) partners
  • behavior issues in youth (lying, stealing, fighting, arson, hurting animals and other people)
  • no realistic long term goals
  • impulsive
  • irresponsible/reckless behavior (without consideration of family, partners, children, no loyalty)
  • incapable of taking responsibility for one's own actions/choices (blaming, or pity-play)
  • multiple relationships/marriages that only last for a short time
  • youth criminality (during teen years the anti social behavior takes criminal proportions and they end up in a youth facility for robbing, fighting, violence, drugs)
  • breaking probation
  • multi-faceted criminal

In order to be diagnozed a psychopath one would at least need to get a score of 15x2, with 2 meaning "certainly applicable". The score of 1 means "somewhat present", and 0 = "NA". You barely get to 4 with Arya, and 0-4 is the score of "normal people". When Arya is willing to fuck over the cook of the HoBaW and get her into trouble for what she did herself, screw over Bran/Jon Snow/Rickon on purpose, is caught in the barn cheating on her bf while proclaiming he's the love of her life, and crunches a cat's skull under her boot while not feeling pity for those she assassinates then I'll take her up on a review for psychopathy. And if you insist on diagnozing her to be a psychopath because she assassinates utter lowlifes (who fit the profile better than she) without remorse while ignoring everything else, then you're inventing your own definition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Little Scribe of Naath said:

And I'm not the one labeling Dany or Arya a psychopath here. You are. I was just using your own (ridiculous) definition, sir.

Only because you are using less than half of what I wrote (two sentences) in a childlish attempt to twist my own words, while deliberately ignoring the fact that I actually posted a definition of psychopathy taken from scientific literature, madam.

1 minute ago, The Sleeper said:

@Rippounet You are aware that the definition of psychopath you quoted covers a significant proportion of all teenagers.

Yes, but what can I do about that? Cleckley and Hare have much longer lists of symptoms, but you don't need to check all their boxes so...

I'm generally cautious with psychological definitions. And I was. I originally said that she had the "makings" of a psychopath but was at least an assassin. Then I said it depended on how you defined a psychopath (Hare himself spoke of it being a "clinical construct" IIRC). I only lost my cautiousness after sweetsunray opposed the mindset of an executioner to that as a psychopath, although they are obviously not mutually exclusive at all.

24 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Can you give me a reference please?

If I had to give one? Without Conscience, by Hare. (it's funny since while I was typing this message you posted his test)

24 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

I lived with one for 2 years (well luckily also partially long distance). BTW I said "pathological liar" not "mythomaniac".

You also said "lying for the sake of lying." Now you say there is actually a motive. On the latter I will agree.

24 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

And it's so obvious to me that she isn't that I will challenge you on your outrageous claims about them, whether I can convince you or not. At least those reading my answers may be convinced

Your best argument is Arya's nightmare in ADwD, which is exactly the type of textual support I was asking you for and which I will check.

Anyway, I'm not particularly attached to the specific label of psychopath for Arya. An 11-year old kid who starts serial killing people without suffering from massive emotional disorders of some sort is a monster. Anyone who decides they can judge other human beings and kill those they find wanting clearly has psychopathic tendencies, or sociopathic, or something-ic, whichever definition you want to use (obviously I dislike killer vigilantes). I'm not qualified to say whether Arya can be clinically declared a psychopath, but as a reader I am perfectly entitled to believe she is turning into a psychopath, and that being trained by the FM is just making it worse.
Also, definitions and labels aside, I strongly believe that anyone who doesn't see Arya as a grey character at this point may have a problem of their own somewhere... ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

I only lost my cautiousness after sweetsunray opposed the mindset of an executioner to that as a psychopath, although they are obviously not mutually exclusive at all.

I did not say they were mutually exclusive. But an executioner is not by definition a psychopath.

 

30 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Yes, but what can I do about that? Cleckley and Hare have much longer lists of symptoms, but you don't need to check all their boxes so...

PCL-R test was developed by Hare. It's the narrowest definition. Hare is in the process of developing another one for the "snake in suit" type. The original is based on his research with people in prison, and does not account for those who stay out of prison, but have no problem screwing the global economy.

30 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

You also said "lying for the sake of lying." Now you say there is actually a motive. On the latter I will agree.

It's both.

30 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Hare himself spoke of it being a "clinical construct" IIRC

The feedback he got from victims, survivors and targets over time has convinced him otherwise. I met him at a reading :) But if you mean that the PCL-R test was constructed for research purposes rather than forensic criminal justice diagnostics, you're correct.

30 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Also, definitions and labels aside, I strongly believe that anyone who doesn't see Arya as a grey character at this point may have a problem of their own somewhere...

She is a grey character, and darkening, but she ain't no psychopath, nor is she a monster. On principal I agree with you about vigilante killers, at least in a society that has an imperfect, but working justice system. But when those who are supposed to uphold justice let loose mass murderers on innocent people and does nothing to hold them accountable, I do feel that principle is worthless. If politicians in my country become dictatorial and send death squadrons to burn houses, drag people onto the street and shoot them randomly, rape women and children, and torture them for their hidden belongings, I don't think I will think ill of vigilantes putting either those politicians as well as those men of the death squadrons on a death list. I will not be too hasty either to befriend them.

ETA: with regards instrumental violence (sometimes described as cold-blooded violence), which I think you seem to understand as including assassinating a target without guilt or remorse, it means something else. Just illustrating what it means with a personal anecdote. Ex never personally physically harmed me. He did however tipped of "mates" of his to rob me with assault (can't prove it, but I know), shortly after we had an argument and he believed I was walking out on him. It was planned punishment to manipulate me, cause drama-rama, the fog I mentioned. Another time he returned home saying nonsense how some people were after him, broke down his cousin's door (children without a parent) living next door, broke the phone, grabbed a shotgun and stood in readiness in the garden to shoot anyone coming. Nobody ever showed up. He just went to sleep shortly after. He kicked in the door once in anger, as well as a window, while I was sleeping. This was usually over within 5-10 minutes. Yes, somethign "upset" him, but it was "instrumental" in that he wanted me to know he was capable of violence to create a trauma-bond effect. Instrumental violence is not simply violence committed without empathy or guilt, but in order to manipulate someone.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

 

Yes, but what can I do about that? Cleckley and Hare have much longer lists of symptoms, but you don't need to check all their boxes so...
 

This is one major problem with personality disorders. Everyone appears to have their own definition. More than that it seems to me that they are part of an age long effort to attribute criminality and "abberant" behavior to illness. I detest this because it removes agency, responsibity and social factors and opens the door for preventative treatments and if you're feeling funky things like forced sterilizations. If they have scientific value then they should remain between health care professionals, the patients and their families and out of discussions of legality and morality.

 

17 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Anyway, I'm not particularly attached to the specific label of psychopath for Arya. An 11-year old kid who starts serial killing people without suffering from massive emotional disorders of some sort is a monster. Anyone who decides they can judge other human beings and kill those they find wanting clearly has psychopathic tendencies, or sociopathic, or something-ic, whichever definition you want to use (obviously I dislike killer vigilantes). I'm not qualified to say whether Arya can be clinically declared a psychopath, but as a reader I am perfectly entitled to believe she is turning into a psychopath, and that being trained by the FM is just making it worse.
Also, definitions and labels aside, I strongly believe that anyone who doesn't see Arya as a grey character at this point may have a problem of their own somewhere... ;)

 

You mean then anyone who has claimed judicial authority over the centuries and and sentenced people to death? Any lord in ASoIaF qualifies. They were decided by birth to hold that authority, but for the most part they willingly accept that role and with little thought given to it. Perhaps it is Martin's way of telling us that this kind of justice does not hold up to the standards of an earnest eleven year old. You know perfectly well that the term psychopath is prejudicial. Of course she is a cold-blooded killer. But that is not all she is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...