How is Melisandre misunderstood

[Daendrew]

GRRM has stated that Melisandre is the most misunderstood character.

How do you think she is misunderstood?

[Feliciano69]

Because as far as we know, she wants to save the world, she wants to help those in need from being eradicated by "The Great Other", yet her methods are ruthless and work under a completely pragmatic perspective, which is why people find her off-putting.

[rystine]

Melisandre is widely seen as one of the more evil characters in the series, particularly in the past couple of years since the show has pretty much shown her in that way.

When in reality, while she certainly has questionable methods and she often goes about things the wrong way, she is one of the few characters whose intentions are purely good. She was one of the very first characters that we see talking about the need to unite against he greater evil of the Others.

[Gertrude]

I think people were skeptical of her motives when she was introduced and saw her as using Stannis to further her own goals. She uses methods that most people would cringe from (shadowbabies, blood sacrifice) and seems ruthless and cold. First impressions stick with you.

Since we've seen a bit more of her and seen inside her brain, I do believe she is doing what she thinks is right and good. I also believe that what she is doing (fighting the great other, searching for Azor Ahai) are actually good things. I am still not convinced that the religion based on the Red God would be a good thing in general, so I'm conflicted about her. Then again, we don't know her whole story and how this will play out, so we're basing our understanding of her on speculation. If she's misunderstood, it's because GRRM wants it that way :)

[The Red Melli]

For anyone wondering where to find his statement.

[Fat Mac]

Melisandre is widely seen as one of the more evil characters in the series, particularly in the past couple of years since the show has pretty much shown her in that way.

When in reality, while she certainly has questionable methods and she often goes about things the wrong way, she is one of the few characters whose intentions are purely good. She was one of the very first characters that we see talking about the need to unite against he greater evil of the Others.

I agree with this. She is a fanatic, and has extreme methods, but wants to eradicate the evils of the world, or so she interprets them.

[WeaselPie]

I suppose that means GRRM intentionally wanted her to be misunderstood. So, if she comes across as a humorless, manipulating, delusional witch... she isn't?

"I'm not bad, I'm just written that way."

[Gneisenau]

I always thought it was the opposite, as in people think Mel is on the good side, but we don't really know since Stannis has the fake LB sword and Mel knows that. Plus Mel feels stronger when she is at the wall AKA when she is near the Others.

[Gertrude]

In that clip, he did say Meli, but it wasn't an emphatic answer. It was more like, 'well, if I had to name someone ...' He also went on to say that most of the viewpoint characters are pretty well understood because you're in their head. Anyone you just see from the outside is open to interpretation. We've had one PoV from Mel, and it helped, but one chapter isn't going to let us get to know her. We shall know her when GRRM wants us to.

[Gertrude]

I always thought it was the opposite, as in people think Mel is on the good side, but we don't really know since Stannis has the fake LB sword and Mel knows that. Plus Mel feels stronger when she is at the wall AKA when she is near the Others.

Who thinks Mel is on the 'good' side? Readers or characters? I'd say most of the readers have come around to the idea that Mel might not have bad intentions by this point. I don't really think Mel is drawing her power from being near the Others, but just that it's a place of great power.

Another thing we don't know in evaluating Mel is if fighting the Others is a just cause. Perhaps the Others have good intentions as well, we just don't know what they are. Perhaps the Great Other is imprisoned in the North and wages a war every thousand years or so to escape and bring great goodness to the world, and the Red God is stopping him. Mel might not even know her god is evil and believes his propaganda about the Great Other. So Mel could be a good woman fighting for an evil God - we just don't know at this point.

[Jessica Rogers]

I keep going back to her wanting to burn a little kid alive, I don't know if its because I'm pregnant, but I just can't get passed it. She will always be a villain.

I guess it just comes down to faith but I can't see having faith, and I can't see hers.

[Gertrude]

I keep going back to her wanting to burn a little kid alive, I don't know if its because I'm pregnant, but I just can't get passed it. She will always be a villain.

I guess it just comes down to faith but I can't see having faith, and I can't see hers.

I get that, and her methods are why she is generally viewed as villainous. But it you could sacrifice one child so that 1000 more could live, would it be evil? I'm not asking you specifically, but in general. Some people would absolutely call the death of one child the lesser of evils.

[E-Ro]

I get that, and her methods are why she is generally viewed as villainous. But it you could sacrifice one child so that 1000 more could live, would it be evil? I'm not asking you specifically, but in general. Some people would absolutely call the death of one child the lesser of evils.

:agree: Its a very hard choice, but I honestly do think mel has the worlds best interests at heart. She is trying to save everyone. thats why shes misunderstood, she isnt evil i dont think. Just extreme in her views.

[Darksnider05]

:agree: Its a very hard choice, but I honestly do think mel has the worlds best interests at heart. She is trying to save everyone. thats why shes misunderstood, she isnt evil i dont think. Just extreme in her views.

Well if being seen as an evil sack of shit is a price she's willing to pay to save the world so be it. No reason to sugar coat it.

Light the people grills she has.

[Jessica Rogers]

I get that, and her methods are why she is generally viewed as villainous. But it you could sacrifice one child so that 1000 more could live, would it be evil? I'm not asking you specifically, but in general. Some people would absolutely call the death of one child the lesser of evils.

Yeah but she's trying to burn this little kid for a stone dragon, what if she burns him and there's no stone dragon? than that mean she would've burned this child for nothing, also she isn't always right about what she see's in her fires.

Do you really believe that Stannis is AA? because I believe he's just a means to an end.

[A Man Has Said]

There are really only two possibilities.

She is either misunderstood because most readers think she's more good than she is, or because most readers think she's more evil than she is.

I think the question gets more complicated when we consider what grounds we judge good and evil on.

To explain: Is a person good for the INTENT of their actions, or their result?

With Mel you could come to widely different conclusions depending on which standard you apply.

For instance, she intended to help Stannis win at Blackwater, but the result was that his troops were horribly slaughtered and many burnt to death.
(Or was that her real intent? Should we take her at her word every time? She does after all seem to like arranging to have people burnt to death.)

Melisandre is widely seen as one of the more evil characters in the series, particularly in the past couple of years since the show has pretty much shown her in that way.

When in reality, while she certainly has questionable methods and she often goes about things the wrong way, she is one of the few characters whose intentions are purely good. She was one of the very first characters that we see talking about the need to unite against he greater evil of the Others.

My point exactly.

But there is still the question of whether her stated intent is the same as her real intent.

Perhaps that is settled by her POV chapter in ADwD. She seems sincere enough.

I suppose that means GRRM intentionally wanted her to be misunderstood. So, if she comes across as a humorless, manipulating, delusional witch... she isn't?

"I'm not bad, I'm just written that way."

Of all the characters, she seems to be the one whose motives and actions are most subject to different interpretations.

That seems to be quite deliberate on GRRM's part.

In that regard she's a lot like Stannis - forum subjects about either of them seem to generate a lot of argument from people who see them in different lights.

I keep going back to her wanting to burn a little kid alive, I don't know if its because I'm pregnant, but I just can't get passed it. She will always be a villain.

I guess it just comes down to faith but I can't see having faith, and I can't see hers.

There's just no way IMO that burning a child can be seen in a good light, whatever the motive.

And BINGO, it really does come down to Mel's faith in herself, which seems to me to be way overblown since her track record is less than stellar.

Besides the aforementioned Blackwater, she was also far from the mark with respect to the 'Arya' fugitive fleeing on the horse, and a few other minor visions she's had have been well off the mark. And a lot of people think that she's ignoring the signs that Jon is the true AAR. I frankly don't know one way or the other. (I HOPE there is no AAR, and that it's just an empty ancient prophecy that's been distorted beyond recognition over centuries of retelling.)

The thing is, I think she does seem to have a true gift of seeing the future in her flames, but it's spoiled by the fact that she forces an egocentric interpretation on what she sees. She doesn't have the humility required to be good at it. Her actions always assume that she can get the outcome she wants, which is seldom true. Which brings up Mel's faith in R'hllor. Is it just me, or is her Red God decidedly different from the one that Thoros, Moquorro and others seem to follow? She seems to be forcing a unique and egocentric interpretation onto that too.

[Feliciano69]

Yeah but she's trying to burn this little kid for a stone dragon, what if she burns him and there's no stone dragon? than that mean she would've burned this child for nothing, also she isn't always right about what she see's in her fires.

Do you really believe that Stannis is AA? because I believe he's just a means to an end.

Good point, though her spells seem to be different from whatever interpretation she may get from the fires.

So far none of her shadowbabies have ever failed, nor any of her glamours.

[A Man Has Said]

Yeah but she's trying to burn this little kid for a stone dragon, what if she burns him and there's no stone dragon? than that mean she would've burned this child for nothing, also she isn't always right about what she see's in her fires.

Do you really believe that Stannis is AA? because I believe he's just a means to an end.

I totally agree with that. The biggest problem with Mel is that her belief that she's doing the right thing doesn't seem to be based on the results so far. And the fact that she's willing to commit atrocities just on the outside chance that she'll get a certain outcome doesn't on balance make her a good character.

[Jessica Rogers]

There are really only two possibilities.

She is either misunderstood because most readers think she's more good than she is, or because most readers think she's more evil than she is.

I think the question gets more complicated when we consider what grounds we judge good and evil on.

To explain: Is a person good for the INTENT of their actions, or their result?

With Mel you could come to widely different conclusions depending on which standard you apply.

For instance, she intended to help Stannis win at Blackwater, but the result was that his troops were horribly slaughtered and many burnt to death.

(Or was that her real intent? Should we take her at her word every time? She does after all seem to like arranging to have people burnt to death.)

My point exactly.

But there is still the question of whether her stated intent is the same as her real intent.

Perhaps that is settled by her POV chapter in ADwD. She seems sincere enough.

Of all the characters, she seems to be the one whose motives and actions are most subject to different interpretations.

That seems to be quite deliberate on GRRM's part.

In that regard she's a lot like Stannis - forum subjects about either of them seem to generate a lot of argument from people who see them in different lights.

There's just no way IMO that burning a child can be seen in a good light, whatever the motive.

And BINGO, it really does come down to Mel's faith in herself, which seems to me to be way overblown since her track record is less than stellar.

Besides the aforementioned Blackwater, she was also far from the mark with respect to the 'Arya' fugitive fleeing on the horse, and a few other minor visions she's had have been well off the mark. And a lot of people think that she's ignoring the signs that Jon is the true AAR. I frankly don't know one way or the other. (I HOPE there is no AAR, and that it's just an empty ancient prophecy that's been distorted beyond recognition over centuries of retelling.)

The thing is, I think she does seem to have a true gift of seeing the future in her flames, but it's spoiled by the fact that she forces an egocentric interpretation on what she sees. She doesn't have the humility required to be good at it. Her actions always assume that she can get the outcome she wants, which is seldom true. Which brings up Mel's faith in R'hllor. Is it just me, or is her Red God decidedly different from the one that Thoros, Moquorro and others seem to follow? She seems to be forcing a unique and egocentric interpretation onto that too.

I never even thought of the possibility, wow!

[Martini Sigil]

I think that when Mel realizes that Stannis is not AA, we'll get to see the "real" her.