Redemption - Only for Guys?

[Brienne the Beauty]

There aren't really that many female villains with major roles. Cersei is the biggest. Lysa is dead.

Melisandre is redeemable

. Lady Stoneheart is mostly hunting Freys. After that we are down to minor baddies like Maggie the Frog, or Mirri Maz Duur - both dead as I recall.

Perhaps the lack of redeemable female villains is due to a lack of female villains, full stop.

[Zanzibar]

There aren't really that many female villains with major roles. Cersei is the biggest. Lysa is dead.

Melisandre is redeemable

. Lady Stoneheart is mostly hunting Freys. After that we are down to minor baddies like Maggie the Frog, or Mirri Maz Duur - both dead as I recall.

Perhaps the lack of redeemable female villains is due to a lack of female villains, full stop.

Agree.

Its like if I decided to make a thread with the title "Redemption - Only for Whites?" And then rage about GRRM being racist. Sorry, but focusing on gender equality in a fictional fantasy story is a little bit stupid. [/dick button off]

[ICE CROW]

Cersei is beyond redemption there is no saving her. Ladystone heart well she is dead so what she does know doesn't count. Ithink Asha probablt is the one female who has a chance at redempion, if hr story keps going down the path it is.

[NotSoSilentSister]

Im sorry that it's not the kind of character development you wanted to talk about, but I think you need to consider that often a thread raises questions that cannot be limited to the precise ideas that the OP wanted to elicit.

I'm sorry for the inflammatory wording. I just wanted convey my impression that we were not talking about the same thing, because I thought you might have had the impressiont that we were indeed talking about the same thing and that kind of constellation makes for unproductive arguments.

Except that I now think that we might have been talking about the same thing after all, because your last post has clarified some things for me and I might now finally get at least parts of it. I agree that the proviesion of a morality pet shoud not be considered as a necessary or sufficient condition for redemption. (One of the reasons why I love, love, love Jane Eyre for instance is that she refuses to become rochester's morality pet. He only redeems himself after she's already gone and he makes the redeeming sacrifice for insane, brutal, murderous bertha, not for pure, kind, innocent Jane. his desire to redeem himself precedes his falling in love with her - only after having redeemed himself without her help, he is capable of meeting her on an equal level, no longer trying to instrumentalize her for his salvation. I could see a similiar dynamic between sansa and the hound and I like that his final transformation might be induced by his time on the quiet isle, not necessarily by sansa ). this morality-pet-reliant template for redemption is indeed hugely problematic, but I think it's as problematic for men as it is for women. yet we continue to apply it to men. I think it's interesting that redemption is gendered in that way and I don't really see I good reason why it should be. why can't men be expected to find some internal catalyst for their transformation?

I do maintain that redemption involves more than just a rebirth - the re-invented self has to meet certain requirements, it has to be capable of self-sacrifice. (cersei can't redeem herself without some sort of sacrifice). that's the element you neglect in my view. the sacrifice however does not have to be made for the morality pet. the conventional template has the love and affection of the morality pet as the reward for the sacrifice which is actually way too convenient. the truly redemptive sacrifice is unrewarded. why should men need that kind of incentive when women are expected to go without it?

as to the suggestion of someone (sorry can't find the quote right now) that the lack of redeemable villains is merely due to the lack of female villains in general (which is of course only due to lack of female characters of any substance in general, which of course in no way reveals any gendered preference, because the marginalization of women in a narrative of course only serves to relflect the marginalization of women in a faux-feudalistic fantasy society, so 3 cheers for versissimilitue): Okay, point taken.

and yet, even if you have only one female villain in your story, you always have the choice between redeemable and iredeemable. and to me it seems that no one ever goes for redeemable. coincidence? (of course i have not read all fiction that was ever written, so I can easily be proved wrong. In fact, i would really like some pointers to some properly redeemed female villains in any form of fiction, because I really like that kind of storyline).

Perhaps you ought to specify why you consider that these characters need redemption (and what constitutes redemption)?

as I've already stated, I personally think that only woman in real need of redemption is cersei, but I made the obersvation that many people lay a lot of blame for bad things on the moral failings of other female characters as well and I was (still am) interested in their perspective. If you look at the thread about the moral spectrum of asoiaf characters you will find female characters quite towards the evil-end of some lists.

[NotSoSilentSister]

Its like if I decided to make a thread with the title "Redemption - Only for Whites?" And then rage about GRRM being racist. Sorry, but focusing on gender equality in a fictional fantasy story is a little bit stupid. [/dick button off]

Oh, I think that you can have very rewarding debates about ethno-centrism in Asoiaf (eg. orientalism w/r/t to dany's exploits). it's not about labelling someone a racist or a sexist, I wish people wouldn't always take these things so personally. the reflexive defensiveness often kills any hope for productive discussion. Narratives always reveal interesting things about implied worldviews, they are inevitably biased, they are the chief vehicle of any kind of ideology, the provide the scripts and schemata and role models we use to make sense of the world, they colour our perception of things. "it's just fiction" simply doesn't cut it as an argument.

If you don't consider these considerations worth your time you are very welcome to abstain from participating in the discussion.

[Tyroshi Sellsword]

Re: Cersei in ADWD

That section is really confusingly written. First she says she is not going to do it, then, all of a sudden, she's doing it. She gets 2 choices: trial by combat, or the Walk of Shame. She doesn't think she'll necessarily win a trial, so sShe has one line about "Tommen needs me" but mostly it's all about Jaime and self-righteousness. In the chapter with the trial, she thinks that Tommen will pardon her if she asks him. I do think she wants to be with Tommen, though all her thoughts about her children seem imbued with her narcissism. She loves them inasmuch as they reflect her. If she was really made to choose, my life or Tommen's, or my life or Jaime's, I wonder what she'd pick.

[Alexia]

Re: Cersei in ADWD

That section is really confusingly written. First she says she is not going to do it, then, all of a sudden, she's doing it. She gets 2 choices: trial by combat, or the Walk of Shame. She doesn't think she'll necessarily win a trial, so sShe has one line about "Tommen needs me" but mostly it's all about Jaime and self-righteousness. In the chapter with the trial, she thinks that Tommen will pardon her if she asks him. I do think she wants to be with Tommen, though all her thoughts about her children seem imbued with her narcissism. She loves them inasmuch as they reflect her. If she was really made to choose, my life or Tommen's, or my life or Jaime's, I wonder what she'd pick.

That scene was terribly written, IMHO, but what do I know? However, Cersei still has to go through a trial -- Ser Kevan makes this clear in the Epilogue. Cersei chose trial by combat with Ser Robert and Margaery is going for a trial based on the evidence.

However, you forgot that that she specifically thinks that she is doing it for Tommen at one point, and as soon as she gets through the gates she asked for him. I do believe Cersei would willingly sacrifice her life for her children, just as Catelyn would have. Mother love is a strong component of both storylines, and how it expresses itself.

[Tyroshi Sellsword]

I'm going to try to start a separate thread on this Cersei trial topic in the ADWD forum. Hopefully it gets approved.

[Alexia]

I'm going to try to start a separate thread on this Cersei trial topic in the ADWD forum. Hopefully it gets approved.

Haha, okay. If it gets approved, PM me or buzz at me in this thread and I'll join the fun...

[cripples and broken things]

Great post NotSoSilentSister. It seems like there is so much more acceptance for whatever the male characters are doing, hey it's even Cersei's fault that poor sweet Jaime pushed Bran out of the window. Not to mention Cat. This whole war is only Cat's fault… and she is a bitch for not favouring the idea of having her husband's bastard in her face.

Cersei is queen bitch of the universe with Cat as her crown princess.

Agreed. I always wondered what people would think if it had been the other way around and Cersei pushed Bran. Very curious. Don't get me wrong, I like Jaime's redemption arc, but I think it's valid to wonder how it would have been accepted in reverse.

I don't understand that either. The war was most certainly not her fault. It was Joffrey's. For cutting off Ned's head. When Ned was killed, that's when shit hit the fan. Neither Cat nor Robb always made particularly bright choices, but ultimately, I do not consider them the cause of the war.

Now about Jon, this is the only thing that really burns me about Cat. Ok, so she doesn't like the constant reminder that Ned slept with another woman. I get that. It is human nature. But pettiness and utter unkindness to an innocent child by a grown woman that should know better is not acceptable. Jon did not do anything wrong. And what she said to him at Bran' s bedside was cruel. Ned did the wrong, so if she must take out her anger on someone why not him? Because Jon is safe. Taking out her spite on Ned is not. And I always felt bitter towards her character for that. But that's me.

I also want to add for the sake of the general public: I like the female characters for the most part. I didn't like Sansa in the beginning but I do now. As well as Brienne(one of the few people who do), Arya,Asha,Cersei(even though she is undeniably and evil witch),Melissandre(she's a nutty fanatic, but it makes her fun;I sure as hell like her better than Damphair)the Sand Snakes...

If there's anyone I want to throttle it's Dany for how she's botching things. (Still reading ADWD).

[Tyroshi Sellsword]

I reread the Cersei chapters in ADWD and

Cersei does not specifically think that she's "doing it" (the walk) for Tommen. Among her many thoughts are "I'll be back with Tommen," and she also thinks that she has to get to Tommen so he can get her off the accusations of treason. "He loves me. He will not refuse his own mother. Joff was stubborn and unpredictable, but Tommen is a good little boy, a good little king. He will do as he is told." So *that* is the sum of her thoughts about Tommen. She wants to be with him (half a sentence), and how can she use him to exonerate herself. She spends WAY more time thinking about Jaime than Tommen.

[Raksha the Demon]

Im sorry that it's not the kind of character development you wanted to talk about, but I think you need to consider that often a thread raises questions that cannot be limited to the precise ideas that the OP wanted to elicit.

I still don't think you quite understand what I'm saying. It's not some cliched idea of female empowerment. I'm stating that in the case of female villains, or more largely females who have been misunderstood by readers or within the narrative, they do not require morality pets. So far, GRRM has shown them arriving at their own redemption through their own means.

Obviously, one cannot specify what will happen because all the novels have not been written yet, but in the case of someone like Cersei, we may never find her "Brienne". If she follows the pattern GRRM has shown so far, her redemption may be sparked by some internal awakening. If not, then maybe yes she is unredeemable. (Although I do not think so).

IMO, what happens is that females begin a process of redemption that leads them or may lead them to do something honorable/worthy. They are literally "reborn". Their redemption involves casting away old thoughts, habits, etc. In the case of males, their redemption is sparked by these so called "morality pets". They come to an awakening via these female characters. What I'm saying is saying is that the "villainous" female characters come to an awakening through a rebirth. This begins the process of their redemption. They do not seek to rely on men, but rather, if possible, seem to make a forcible break from them, or are separated in the course of the narrative. I would argue that in Sansa's case the Hound begins her awakening, but her redemption arc really belongs with her. She must determine how she will both atone and avenge.

Obviously there is room for both. I'm sure we will see some females having morality pets, but as of this time in GRRM's writing, he has not shown them.

I don't regard Jaime as redeemed; and I don't think Cersei will be redeemed. She's even worse than her brother, in that she tosses people to Qyburn to torture/vivisect/; and has arranged the murder of at least three infants and is an accessory to the murder of one of the infants' mothers. She may well have also murdered her best friend when they were both about 12; and, as a child, she seems to have been arrogant (in her own flashback) and downright vicious (in Oberyn Martell's story about her torturing baby Tyrion). I haven't seen Jaime indicate any regret for trying his best to kill Bran; though he does get points for saving Brienne if only because rescuing her doesn't benefit him at all.

There aren't that many evil women in ASoIaF; at least I don't remember anyone other than Cersei. I like the Queen of Thorns tremendously; but she did one thing that was pure evil in making Sansa an involuntary accessory to murder (in that, she shared the blame with Littlefinger and Dontos). She was part of the plot to murder Joffrey not to kill a vicious young king before he destroyed them all, but to gain power for her family and a younger, more compliant king for her grand-daughter. Of course, there is the argument that Olenna had to kill off Joffrey; since her son "Lord Puff-Fish" was determined to make his daughter Joffrey's queen and wouldn't listen to Olenna; but we don't know if Olenna ever tried to persuade Mace to break the betrothal (which also could have hurt the family; Tywin and Cersei would have been furious over the insult).

There are also many male characters who are as irredeemable as Cersei - Gregor, Amory Loach, Vargo Hoat, Euron Greyjoy, to name a few; and Ramsey Bolton.

[The Greatmatt]

Perhaps Sansa will redeem her complicity in Lysa's death, by saving Sweetrobin.

Y'know, Sansa's issue has been with accidentally letting bad people live. Robert Arryn is an awful little sadistic person who needs to die before he has any power. If she redeems herself, let it be by offing him and Littlefinger.

Honestly, it seems like people are taking the 'Sweetrobin' name literally here, when it was clearly meant to be terribly ironic.

[Tyroshi Sellsword]

I'm continuously surprised by how quickly fans of these books are willing to condemn children for being children.

[Lord Damian]

For Cersei to get redeemed, it would take someone she has completely wronged and her already know it. Sansa is the only one she might find sympathy for, especially if she ever found out it was the Queen of Thorns that poisoned Joff and that Sansa had nothing to do with it.

[brashcandy]

Y'know, Sansa's issue has been with accidentally letting bad people live. Robert Arryn is an awful little sadistic person who needs to die before he has any power. If she redeems herself, let it be by offing him and Littlefinger.

Honestly, it seems like people are taking the 'Sweetrobin' name literally here, when it was clearly meant to be terribly ironic.

I can assure you that every time I write 'Sweetrobin' I am doing it ironically, and I would bet every other writer is doing the same. Robert arguably has psychological problems; he's been coddled and excessively spoilt by a mother who was most definitely not well in the head herself. However, the idea that Robert is beyond redemption or that he should die is beyond me. All we've seen of him so far is a frightened, pathetic child, who struggles to function in the real world. He himself needs saving, not redeeming. Sansa may be able to do save him thereby redeeming herself in the process.

[brashcandy]

I agree that the proviesion of a morality pet shoud not be considered as a necessary or sufficient condition for redemption. (One of the reasons why I love, love, love Jane Eyre for instance is that she refuses to become rochester's morality pet. He only redeems himself after she's already gone and he makes the redeeming sacrifice for insane, brutal, murderous bertha, not for pure, kind, innocent Jane. his desire to redeem himself precedes his falling in love with her - only after having redeemed himself without her help, he is capable of meeting her on an equal level, no longer trying to instrumentalize her for his salvation. I could see a similiar dynamic between sansa and the hound and I like that his final transformation might be induced by his time on the quiet isle, not necessarily by sansa ). this morality-pet-reliant template for redemption is indeed hugely problematic, but I think it's as problematic for men as it is for women. yet we continue to apply it to men. I think it's interesting that redemption is gendered in that way and I don't really see I good reason why it should be. why can't men be expected to find some internal catalyst for their transformation?

You make a very good point here, one that has been expounded on in various San/San threads. GRRM separates them obviously in order for them to both find their redemptions elsewhere. If we think back to that BBB scene when he hesistantly suggests Sansa leave with him, he was obviously seeking redemption through the morality pet template :). He did not find it there, and so he moves on to Ayra, trying to get her back to her family. However, this too fails terribly, and we see his final, gut wrenching "confession" of sorts when he is dying. It is interesting here that Arya has the chance to redeem him, so to speak, through death, as he begs her to give him a mercy killing. However, she refuses and leaves him. So, the Hound is refused redemption by the two Stark sisters, and has to find it on the Quiet Isle. So, yes, I've now realised that there is a male character who achieves redemption through rebirth :). As the Elder brother says, the Hound is dead, but we know that Sandor is alive.

I do maintain that redemption involves more than just a rebirth - the re-invented self has to meet certain requirements, it has to be capable of self-sacrifice. (cersei can't redeem herself without some sort of sacrifice). that's the element you neglect in my view. the sacrifice however does not have to be made for the morality pet. the conventional template has the love and affection of the morality pet as the reward for the sacrifice which is actually way too convenient. the truly redemptive sacrifice is unrewarded. why should men need that kind of incentive when women are expected to go without it?

I would agree with you here. I have neglected a sacrificial element of redemption mainly because I'm not sure it is a necessary component. If Sandor never meets back up with Sansa, will we argue that he has not been redeemed? Or does the sacrificial element only come into play when the villainy is particularly awful, in the case of Cersei's Qyburn alliance, or Jaime's pushing Bran through the window? However, I can see that some redemptions require a self sacrificing act, I'm just not sure that it is necessary in all cases.

and yet, even if you have only one female villain in your story, you always have the choice between redeemable and iredeemable. and to me it seems that no one ever goes for redeemable. coincidence? (of course i have not read all fiction that was ever written, so I can easily be proved wrong. In fact, i would really like some pointers to some properly redeemed female villains in any form of fiction, because I really like that kind of storyline).

Hmm, interesting question. I too would like to hear some examples of female villains redeemed. Perhaps we are not accustomed to recognizing it when it happens, maybe it is too subtle? Maybe a double standard is at work?

as I've already stated, I personally think that only woman in real need of redemption is cersei, but I made the obersvation that many people lay a lot of blame for bad things on the moral failings of other female characters as well and I was (still am) interested in their perspective. If you look at the thread about the moral spectrum of asoiaf characters you will find female characters quite towards the evil-end of some lists.

True. Within the narrative, Cersei for sure. But evidenced by these threads, no female character is spared from scorn or hate. We've questioned whether: Arya is psychotic, Sansa is dumb or mentally ill, Catelyn is a bad mother, Asha is arrogant, Melisandre is dangerous, Dany is an awful Queen etc etc. So whether they have to be redeemed within the narrative really has nothing to do with if they have to be redeemed in readers' eyes.

[Raksha the Demon]

I can assure you that every time I write 'Sweetrobin' I am doing it ironically, and I would bet every other writer is doing the same. Robert arguably has psychological problems; he's been coddled and excessively spoilt by a mother who was most definitely not well in the head herself. However, the idea that Robert is beyond redemption or that he should die is beyond me. All we've seen of him so far is a frightened, pathetic child, who struggles to function in the real world. He himself needs saving, not redeeming. Sansa may be able to do save him thereby redeeming herself in the process.

:agree:

Robert's what, all of eight years old? He hasn't tortured any cats either. Even Joffrey might have been redeemable at the age of eight, if he had been removed to a sensible environment instead of one where he was spoiled rotten by Mommy and bullied or ignored by Daddy. One of the reasons why Robert has been so coddled is that he has seizures when he has temper tantrums; and Lysa was inclined to magnify his neuroses by there-there-ing him and shielding him from everything instead of trying to calm him and gently discipline the child. Not that I've ever had to deal with a fragile, epileptic child with no modern medicines...I can't help but feel very sorry for that kid though; he's an orphan and his stepfather is planning to kill him and his new 'mother' is so far not stopping the process.

I do hope Sansa helps Robert and finds a way to save him; though I don't know if he would live to adulthood in any case, he seems to have been physically stunted and possibly damaged before she arrived...

[Raksha the Demon]

You make a very good point here, one that has been expounded on in various San/San threads. GRRM separates them obviously in order for them to both find their redemptions elsewhere. If we think back to that BBB scene when he hesistantly suggests Sansa leave with him, he was obviously seeking redemption through the morality pet template :). He did not find it there, and so he moves on to Ayra, trying to get her back to her family. However, this too fails terribly, and we see his final, gut wrenching "confession" of sorts when he is dying. It is interesting here that Arya has the chance to redeem him, so to speak, through death, as he begs her to give him a mercy killing. However, she refuses and leaves him. So, the Hound is refused redemption by the two Stark sisters, and has to find it on the Quiet Isle. So, yes, I've now realised that there is a male character who achieves redemption through rebirth :). As the Elder brother says, the Hound is dead, but we know that Sandor is alive.

I would agree with you here. I have neglected a sacrificial element of redemption mainly because I'm not sure it is a necessary component. If Sandor never meets back up with Sansa, will we argue that he has not been redeemed? Or does the sacrificial element only come into play when the villainy is particularly awful, in the case of Cersei's Qyburn alliance, or Jaime's pushing Bran through the window? However, I can see that some redemptions require a self sacrificing act, I'm just not sure that it is necessary in all cases.

Hmm, interesting question. I too would like to hear some examples of female villains redeemed. Perhaps we are not accustomed to recognizing it when it happens, maybe it is too subtle? Maybe a double standard is at work?

True. Within the narrative, Cersei for sure. But evidenced by these threads, no female character is spared from scorn or hate. We've questioned whether: Arya is psychotic, Sansa is dumb or mentally ill, Catelyn is a bad mother, Asha is arrogant, Melisandre is dangerous, Dany is an awful Queen etc etc. So whether they have to be redeemed within the narrative really has nothing to do with if they have to be redeemed in readers' eyes.

I don't know if Arya is psychotic; though I think she has gone through serious h*ll and become emotionally scarred, and far too casual about killing. I don't see Sansa as stupid or mentally ill; or Catelyn as a bad mother. Asha strikes me as less arrogant than her brother and uncles, and more sensible. Melisandre is very dangerous; but not because she is a woman, but rather a religious fanatic who burns people alive and wants to burn more, including children (I think the High Septon is also dangerous, and he is male; and I dislike Aeron Damphair, another religious fanatic). I don't scorn Brienne; and I like the Mormont women, and Meera Reed, and Genna Lannister and the Queen of Thorns. I neither like nor dislike Margaery Tyrell. I liked what was seen of Myrcella.

Actually, I hope the Hound is not completely redeemed; who else can kill the Mountain for good but his brother, and he's got to be angry but smart to manage that....

[brashcandy]

I don't know if Arya is psychotic; though I think she has gone through serious h*ll and become emotionally scarred, and far too casual about killing. I don't see Sansa as stupid or mentally ill; or Catelyn as a bad mother. Asha strikes me as less arrogant than her brother and uncles, and more sensible. Melisandre is very dangerous; but not because she is a woman, but rather a religious fanatic who burns people alive and wants to burn more, including children (I think the High Septon is also dangerous, and he is male; and I dislike Aeron Damphair, another religious fanatic). I don't scorn Brienne; and I like the Mormont women, and Meera Reed, and Genna Lannister and the Queen of Thorns. I neither like nor dislike Margaery Tyrell. I liked what was seen of Myrcella.

Actually, I hope the Hound is not completely redeemed; who else can kill the Mountain for good but his brother, and he's got to be angry but smart to manage that....

Very true Raksha. In fact, I think GRRM is setting up the Hound to be redeemed by the very act of killing his brother. He's been reborn, but maybe it is only through killing Ungregor that he will complete the final stage of that redemption.

This is why I mentioned earlier that Sansa will decide whether or when she has to atone and avenge. Both are mixed up in her arc I think. I'm not sure if Sansa has ever quite dealt with her actions in KL that may have led to her father's death. (neither am i blaming her, just to be clear) But has she ever psychologically dealt with being fooled by the Lannisters, betrayed by Joffrey, beaten by the Kingsguard, and married to Tyrion. I always find it humorous that Arya's prayers at night include Cersei and Joffrey (before he died) etc. I'm like, girl, get your own enemies, those ones are Sansa's.

So she has to atone for what may be her own perceived complicity in her father's demise, also the fact that she doesn't reveal the truth about Lysa's death. She also has to avenge the hurt done to her and her family. All signs point to Littlefinger. So both Sansa and the hound may complete their redemption through revenge.

It seems like a simple pattern when you think about it:

Awful human being who made others suffer: redemption complete through self sacrifice - see Theon, Jaime, Cersei(?) and more to come maybe

Good human being who has suffered by awful people - redemption complete through vengeance - see Catelyn, Sansa(?), The Hound (?)