Jump to content

Archived

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

Uldra I

[Spoilers] Who's Cruelty is Worse, Ramsay's or Shae's?

Recommended Posts

Why is she a fairly stupid, irritating woman?

I think because the tv character seems to have no conception of her own danger, which would be stupid. Also she ignores the clear description of the danger she is in from someone who clearly loves her, more stupid. She ignores clear warning from a master of spies who has no emotional ties, that might protect her, extra stupid.

In a palace full of spies she shouts and postures and flounces about in a way that became very irritating to me because i find stupid irritating. Especially in myself, but also in this character that the actress made me like. Mostly it was like watching a headless chicken in a fox coop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shae is worse she is doing it for profit, but Ramsay although he seems wicked he cant be blamed. Ramsay does't fully understand how terrible his actions are because of his horrible childhood / upbringing, and he is a psychopath.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how the Lannisters got to her; did Bronn lie about sending her overseas?

Yes.

I don't think she came up with her testimony all on her own; was it all scripted for her by Cersei

Cersei and/or Tywin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shae is worse she is doing it for profit, but Ramsay although he seems wicked he cant be blamed. Ramsay does't fully understand how terrible his actions are because of his horrible childhood / upbringing, and he is a psychopath.

what? rough childhood is no excuse for his behavior. he knows right from wrong he just choses wrong because he enjoys it. he is fully aware that hunting innocent girls and feeding them to dogs is wrong, he just does it because that is what makes him happy. there are no excuses for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shae is worse she is doing it for profit, but Ramsay although he seems wicked he cant be blamed. Ramsay does't fully understand how terrible his actions are because of his horrible childhood / upbringing, and he is a psychopath.[/ sorry double post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shae is worse she is doing it for profit, but Ramsay although he seems wicked he cant be blamed. Ramsay does't fully understand how terrible his actions are because of his horrible childhood / upbringing, and he is a psychopath.

...Are you for real? :shocked:

Now that comparison would make sense if Shae was doing Ramsay-esque things for profit. Bearing false witness in order to save her own skin is a nasty, but understandable thing to do. Claiming that makes her worse than full-blown psycho who gets off mutilating people... :stunned:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the theme of responsibility, yes, Ramsay's cruelty might be inborn, because he is a psychopath, and as a sickness one might argue that it's not his fault. But no matter the cause, the level of cruelty of his action is unimaginably high.


Btw. how come Shae's childhood isn't taken into consideration? There could be some level of mental instability in her, too.



I doubt the thread question was an invitation toward a philosophical discussion on "who is worse: a sick person who commits unnameable atrocities, or a person considered sane who willingly commits crime X?". More likely it was resentment about being dumped by an ex-GF, because there are tons of people in Westeros whose intentions and behaviours are more scheming and hurtful than Shae's. Including book!Tyrion for enriching Bowls of Brown with a certain singer.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ramsay had a tough childood , that does not excuse his cruilty. he is a serial killer. he understands his actions.are wrong but choses to commit them due to the joy of commiting them. yes its sick but in no way if you tried him in a court could never obtain an insantiy plea. lots of peole have hard childhoods and go on to live perectly normal lives, ie not feed girls to dogs or chop off appendages from prisoners. it is complety his fault and there is no way to absolve him of his crimes due to insantiy.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.

Cersei and/or Tywin.

If that's the case then there will definitely be a change in how Bronn is viewed by Tyrion, right? In the books he merely declined to help Tyrion against the Mountain; if Bronn actually delivered Shae to the Lannisters, then that means that he was part of Cersei's conspiracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the theme of responsibility, yes, Ramsay's cruelty might be inborn, because he is a psychopath, and as a sickness one might argue that it's not his fault. But no matter the cause, the level of cruelty of his action is unimaginably high.

Btw. how come Shae's childhood isn't taken into consideration? There could be some level of mental instability in her, too.

I doubt the thread question was an invitation toward a philosophical discussion on "who is worse: a sick person who commits unnameable atrocities, or a person considered sane who willingly commits crime X?". More likely it was resentment about being dumped by an ex-GF, because there are tons of people in Westeros whose intentions and behaviours are more scheming and hurtful than Shae's. Including book!Tyrion for enriching Bowls of Brown with a certain singer.

Actually, yes, this was the intent of my OP. Can a psychopath/sociopath be held to the same degree of responsibility for their actions as someone with a conscience? I have conceded that what Ramsay has done is clearly worse ,on a purely physical level, than shae's betrayal of Tyrion. The moral ambiguity comes with the fact that Ramsay, even though knowing his actions are 'socially' unacceptable still believes he is right in what he has done. Shae otoh has callously deceived Tyrion from the beginning. She has essentially destroyed Tyrion emotionally and for all we know as TV viewers, physically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ramsay is 100 percent responsible for his crimes. Being a psychopath does not absolve him of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ramsay is 100 percent responsible for his crimes. Being a psychopath does not absolve him of that.

Yes what Ramsay did is wrong, and maybe the fact that he can't figure that out is reason enough to exterminate him. But, Unless Shea has no conscience like Ramsay, then she knew what she was doing is wrong. The portrayal of her lies on the witness stand, floored me. She didn't reveal a bit of guilt for what she was doing to her "Lion of Lannister."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also a matter of proportion vs. a matter of expectation. What you expect from Shae is not to horribly humiliate her former customer lover customer. Of course, when Ramsay Snow Bolton does (much more) horrible things, it is expected: he basically likes to kill and torture for his own entertainment. Expectation makes Shae's cruelty be more emotionally shocking to the viewer / reader, but having a sense of proportion makes one see her actions are not in the same league.



Look at it this IRL example:


Someone detonates a bomb in Boston and 3 people die - the world is shocked and appalled (at least from the media accounts); it is the front page of every paper, the lead story of every newscast, and people go through elaborate memorials and tributes and whatnot.


Someone detonates a bomb in Baghdad and 30 people die and in fact, there is such a death toll from bombings in Iraq every week. The world just shrugs, barely remembering that the bloodshed there never actually stopped. Nobody covers the funerals, and few people even go to them because a) there are so many, and b ) often the perpetrators will then bomb the victims' funerals.


Of course Boston's violence cannot match Baghdad's; even in terms of the same sort of violent act, proportionally it is just not in the same league.



What we expect matters more to us than any rational quantitative analysis of which is actually worse.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also a matter of proportion vs. a matter of expectation. What you expect from Shae is not to horribly humiliate her former customer lover customer. Of course, when Ramsay Snow Bolton does (much more) horrible things, it is expected: he basically likes to kill and torture for his own entertainment. Expectation makes Shae's cruelty be more emotionally shocking to the viewer / reader, but having a sense of proportion makes one see her actions are not in the same league.

Look at it this IRL example:

Someone detonates a bomb in Boston and 3 people die - the world is shocked and appalled (at least from the media accounts); it is the front page of every paper, the lead story of every newscast, and people go through elaborate memorials and tributes and whatnot.

Someone detonates a bomb in Baghdad and 30 people die and in fact, there is such a death toll from bombings in Iraq every week. The world just shrugs, barely remembering that the bloodshed there never actually stopped. Nobody covers the funerals, and few people even go to them because a) there are so many, and b ) often the perpetrators will then bomb the victims' funerals.

Of course Boston's violence cannot match Baghdad's; even in terms of the same sort of violent act, proportionally it is just not in the same league.

What we expect matters more to us than any rational quantitative analysis of which is actually worse.

Wow! Talk about gaining perspective. Yeah, expectations play a large role in my prejudice on this issue. I do know a couple people who I suspect may not have a fully developed conscience in rl. Sometimes their ethics blow my mind, but on the other hand, it seems like they are genuinely trying to do the best they know how. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also a matter of proportion vs. a matter of expectation. What you expect from Shae is not to horribly humiliate her former customer lover customer. Of course, when Ramsay Snow Bolton does (much more) horrible things, it is expected: he basically likes to kill and torture for his own entertainment. Expectation makes Shae's cruelty be more emotionally shocking to the viewer / reader, but having a sense of proportion makes one see her actions are not in the same league.

Look at it this IRL example:

Someone detonates a bomb in Boston and 3 people die - the world is shocked and appalled (at least from the media accounts); it is the front page of every paper, the lead story of every newscast, and people go through elaborate memorials and tributes and whatnot.

Someone detonates a bomb in Baghdad and 30 people die and in fact, there is such a death toll from bombings in Iraq every week. The world just shrugs, barely remembering that the bloodshed there never actually stopped. Nobody covers the funerals, and few people even go to them because a) there are so many, and b ) often the perpetrators will then bomb the victims' funerals.

Of course Boston's violence cannot match Baghdad's; even in terms of the same sort of violent act, proportionally it is just not in the same league.

What we expect matters more to us than any rational quantitative analysis of which is actually worse.

That makes sense. It also explains why Jon Snow, Ned, Catelyn, Dany, Sansa, etc. get way more criticism on a personal level than Cersei, Gregor, Ramsay, Vargo, and Aerys. No one really expects any better from the Bloody Mummers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




When I watched the scene with Shae at Tyrion's trial, all I could think of was that not only was she not rocket scientist material, but she was really dumb. All she was doing was reacting to how he blew her off. She never understood the threat Cersei and Tywin posed, she never got it at all. I don't think she was forced: I think she was just getting back at him for dumping her. She was just mad. I think she really cared for Tyrion, but also she cared for him because he was a Lannister. Her emotions are simple and straight forward because she is shallow. Even now she probably doesn't get it that what she did would cause Tyrion to lose his life.



Comparing her to Ramsey Snow is like comparing an owl hunting mice to a serial killer. He is evil incarnate, perhaps one of the most evil and fascinating characters in the series.




Book Shae! whilst not particularly bright, was atleast motivated by rational desires (financial security, ie the completely rational not desire to escape , not being a camp follower/professional rape victim/gonorrhoea, herpes, chlamydia and crab incubator), whilst book Shae's child hood abuse (her father wanted to turn her into his wife)and general impoverishment made her inability to experience empathy (for Sansa) much more explicable/sympathetic.


Which leads to...





I think the writers thought that making Shae a spurned love would add to her sympathy. Weirdly it is the opposite for me. I could at least respect her as a gold digging whore. She was just trying to further her lot in life and accepting herself. All show Shae did was bitch and moan and demand miracles from Tyrion.



But that's hardly as bad as cutting his penis off and sending it to his family with the promise of mutilated all of their countrymen.




Turning Shae into a silly, Jealous Woman makes her far less sympathetic. It turns her from the heroine of her own story (albeit a story that GRRM did not write) into a romantic attachment of the hero. Also I think Book Shae's! testimony was in part motivated by vengeance (as well as coercion): Tyrion was her client, yet he basically failed to pay her for all of book 3, she felt cheated and short changed(which would have made the disgusting sex (see above 'sexually abused by her own father') even more unbearable... can you imagine her turning that over inside her mind (I let him put his disgusting male body in mine, using me, I performed like a mummer, and yet he fails to pay me).... A woman can be motivated by money just as much as her heart and still be sympathetic.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, yes, this was the intent of my OP. Can a psychopath/sociopath be held to the same degree of responsibility for their actions as someone with a conscience? I have conceded that what Ramsay has done is clearly worse ,on a purely physical level, than shae's betrayal of Tyrion. The moral ambiguity comes with the fact that Ramsay, even though knowing his actions are 'socially' unacceptable still believes he is right in what he has done. Shae otoh has callously deceived Tyrion from the beginning.

What? That's not true about TV Shae at all.

Also psychopaths know that what they are doing is wrong, they just don't care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What? That's not true about TV Shae at all.

Also psychopaths know that what they are doing is wrong, they just don't care.

Just tried to follow a thread discussing the distinction between sociopath and psychopath, and never could quite figure it out. The one thing that I took from the conversation is that one or the other version could intellectually know what society viewed is right or wrong, but just didn't hold him/herself to the same mores. (guessing that was the sociopath :dunno: ) In other words, the sociopath knows what other people think is right and wrong, and accepts that he/she has a different view of things. They always operate on what they, themselves believe. They don't consider other people's opinions as relevant, important, or as wise as their own ideas about things, and make decisions accordingly. That means that even though they may know what other people think is right or wrong they may not agree, and simply don't have the inner moral compass to know the difference. As an example, just think about the times in the books when Roose wants to scold Ramsey for this or that extreme cruelty, but Ramsey honestly defends what he did as being the "right" thing for the Boltons. Creepily enough, Roose usually ends up agreeing with Ramsay's assessments. Not saying what Ramsay does is excusable. It is not. I wish Melisandre could get ahold of his ass. And Roose's too, for that matter.

Both book and show Shae may have loved Tyrion in that he was her first rung on the ladder to "the big time" crowd. At first she was star struck, in awe with her very own Lannister. Tyrion raised her from the mean life of a camp whore to lord's mistress, and soon became in love with her. Eventually she realized there are more rungs she could climb, above Tyrion, and she bided her time, refusing to leave KL in hopes of reaching the next rung. I think that the fact that she ends up naked and comfy in Tywin's bed verifies she was only waiting for the chance to move up. Shae's fully conscious and malicious treatment of another human being she had once loved (however shallowly), was the ultimate blow to Tyrion, a man who had opened himself and let himself become extremely vulnerable to her. In the sense that Shea worked so diligently over such a long a time to build her power play, and then was fully aware of the utter destruction her betrayal would cause Tyrion in the trial, her choices seem less forgiveable to me.

Have to admit, a lot of the posts before have softened me up enough to feel more wishy washy though. Guess by this point in the thread it is just interesting to note that there is very little to no empathy out there for the socio/psycho path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Book Shae! whilst not particularly bright, was atleast motivated by rational desires (financial security, ie the completely rational not desire to escape , not being a camp follower/professional rape victim/gonorrhoea, herpes, chlamydia and crab incubator), whilst book Shae's child hood abuse (her father wanted to turn her into his wife)and general impoverishment made her inability to experience empathy (for Sansa) much more explicable/sympathetic.

Turning Shae into a silly, Jealous Woman makes her far less sympathetic. It turns her from the heroine of her own story (albeit a story that GRRM did not write) into a romantic attachment of the hero.

I don't think show Shae is less sympathetic - probably more, since she was more fierce and willing to defend others and stand up to people. Book Shae, despite being more mercenary in motivations and indifferent towards Tyrion, in many ways book Shae is more "silly", and it shows. (Mind you, book Shae is also younger and less worldly.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ramsay, no contest. Shae was motivated by jealousy, heartbreak, etc (not to mentiom stupidity- by all accounts, Tyrion was right about all the things he did and said to her or so was his intention at heart, only to put her out of danger) while Ramsay is just pure psychopath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...