Is the High Sparrow really a villain?

[Frejac]

50 minutes ago, illinifan said:

Of course the Queen committing adultery was a crime in medieval Europe.  On top of which, Cersei also killed the king, which was another crime.  And yes, Cersei dumbly gave the HS power but he is shrewdly manipulating people.  

I think the main point is that while he is shrewdly manipulating people, that's not the only thing he's doing.

[illinifan]

1 hour ago, Frejac said:

I think the main point is that while he is shrewdly manipulating people, that's not the only thing he's doing.

Of course, like all the other forces in Westros..

[Iron Mother]

17 hours ago, illinifan said:

Okay then..  I was pointing out that unlike the violent religious extremists in today's world, the High Sparrow manipulates people to get power.  He spent quite a bit of time this season working on Tommen to get him to change sides.  That is different from violent acts of terrorism.  I was actually contrasting how religious fundamentalists like the High Sparrow and something like the Christian Coalition work to achieve their goals (mainly through peaceful means) vs. how terrorists act.

I feel you.  I meant when does posters and facebook recruitment videos turn into violence and terror?  It can only happen when someone authentic gives them power.  I think it was the classic movie New Jack City when Nino Brown said "do you see a machine gun factory down here in the projects?  Where do they come from?  How do they get here and why?" 

HS could never have elevated to terror and violence without Cercei's assistance.  And you never see the HS WITH one of those spiked clubs himself.  Never once I don't think.  He stands there as holy and consecrated and the armed thugs are the ones carrying out "gods' will" based on the HS.

There was an interesting moment in the last episode where HS mentions "yielding to the Mother's mercy" or something...... and he stood up as if it was HIM.  Like HE was the gods' incarnate.  Christian or Muslim or Judah, that concept alone is  when EVERYTHING goes wrong.  Originally I thought the Sparrow drama was lame but it tries to make valid points for real world relevancy.

 

[Maid So Fair]

6 hours ago, illinifan said:

Of course the Queen committing adultery was a crime in medieval Europe.  On top of which, Cersei also killed the king, which was another crime.  And yes, Cersei dumbly gave the HS power but he is shrewdly manipulating people.  

I don't think she ever admitted to killing Robert though. And I thinkmD&D screwed up by not having her quality her affair with Lancel as only happening after Roberts death like she does in the books. Everybody seems to have known about Loras and had no issue with it and there's plenty  plausible deniabikity. Marg lying seems very much a non-crime. It's all just a pretext for HS's coup.

[MoreOrLess]

1 hour ago, Maid So Fair said:

I don't think she ever admitted to killing Robert though. And I thinkmD&D screwed up by not having her quality her affair with Lancel as only happening after Roberts death like she does in the books. Everybody seems to have known about Loras and had no issue with it and there's plenty  plausible deniabikity. Marg lying seems very much a non-crime. It's all just a pretext for HS's coup.

Isnt the issue with Lancel incest? adultery is referring to the allegation against her and Jamie isn't it?

[Maid So Fair]

17 minutes ago, MoreOrLess said:

Isnt the issue with Lancel incest? adultery is referring to the allegation against her and Jamie isn't it?

She never admits to the incest with Jaime (that would be too moronic even for Cersei) - if she does her head ends up on a spike and her children lose their claim to the IT. She merely admits to having taken lovers. It's not incest with Lancel because he's merely a cousin and Westerosi (as well as a lot of people IRL) don't see that as  incestuous.

[MoreOrLess]

14 minutes ago, Maid So Fair said:

She never admits to the incest with Jaime (that would be too moronic even for Cersei) - if she does her head ends up on a spike and her children lose their claim to the IT. She merely admits to having taken lovers. It's not incest with Lancel because he's merely a cousin and Westerosi (as well as a lot of people IRL) don't see that as  incestuous.

She doesn't admit to it but as with killing Robert the charge is still there isn't it? at least until Tommen is converted after which it wouldn't make sense for them to press it anymore.

[illinifan]

3 hours ago, Maid So Fair said:

I don't think she ever admitted to killing Robert though. And I thinkmD&D screwed up by not having her quality her affair with Lancel as only happening after Roberts death like she does in the books. Everybody seems to have known about Loras and had no issue with it and there's plenty  plausible deniabikity. Marg lying seems very much a non-crime. It's all just a pretext for HS's coup.

Cersei, at least in TV world, did admit to killing Robert.  And sleeping with Jaime and passing off her children with Jaime as Robert's would have definitely been a capital crime in medieval Europe.  They didn't have instant DNA tests and it was important to ensure bloodlines.  And Cersei is the one who used LF to set a trap for Margaery using Loras and then LF being the good manipulator went running to Olenna and helped her set a trap of her own.

[illinifan]

2 hours ago, Maid So Fair said:

She never admits to the incest with Jaime (that would be too moronic even for Cersei) - if she does her head ends up on a spike and her children lose their claim to the IT. She merely admits to having taken lovers. It's not incest with Lancel because he's merely a cousin and Westerosi (as well as a lot of people IRL) don't see that as  incestuous.

Of course Cersei didn't admit to it.  Lancel accused her of it and that (along with killing Robert) was what she was on trial for.  She admitted to sleeping with Lancel in return for the Mother's Mercy (aka doing the naked slut walk) but obviously didn't admit to everything else.

[Maid So Fair]

2 hours ago, MoreOrLess said:

She doesn't admit to it but as with killing Robert the charge is still there isn't it? at least until Tommen is converted after which it wouldn't make sense for them to press it anymore.

The charge is still there which is why she still needs to stand trial (that she doesn't show up for) - the WOS was an atonement for her lesser sins that she confessed to - Lancel is too young for the children to be his. It's interesting to speculate what the High Septons plan was re: Tommen as if he finds Cersei guilty of the incest he loses the miable King. I've seen it speculated hat he wanted to absolve her of that while finding her guilty of regicide, which allows him to have his cake and eat it too, and this being the reason why he outlawed the trial by combat which would have cleared Cersei of ALL her crimes. Sadly we will never know as his plans literally went up in smoke.

@illinifan That's what I said as well?

[Lady Knows Nothing]

 

I don't consider the High Sparrow to be a villain. I would consider him more of a religious fanatic who was trying to motivate change. I loved the dynamic in the show in which Cersei at first tries to use him to her advantage but the moment she loses control over that advantage she ends up getting beat at her own game.

On 7/3/2016 at 4:36 PM, A Bong of Ice and Fire said:

I agree.  I loved the High Sparrow. First, the actor was fantastic.  The common people loved him.  He fed and cared for the poor. 

And he was right about the corruption and sinfulness of the high Lords.  Power went to his head, and got a little too overconfident, but fundamentally he was a good man. 

Remember, he never asked for the faith militant to return. 

I loved the High Sparrow too. I thought he was very genuine person and I agree with you that he got a little to big for his britches.

On 7/3/2016 at 5:40 PM, Madarjeen said:

Well, like most characters in Game of Thrones, he was ambiguous. There are very few real villains in the show.

He meant well in what he was doing. He used manipulation and brute force to accomplish what he wanted, but that doesn't mean he didn't genuinely care about the common people, or that his opposition to the corrupted nobles wasn't justified. However, if he can be considered a good person from this point of view (at least, not an evil one), of course we don't have to agree with his political ideas (homophobia, sexism...). And sometimes he was willing to do evil things for what he perceived was the greater good. Tyrion, Varys and Daenerys did similar things.

I do agree with you. He was a very genuine person but like all religions at some point he took it to the extreme.

On 7/3/2016 at 5:50 PM, Thia Stark said:

The question 'Is somebody a villain?' can be asked about literally any character of the books/show and different people would give various answers. 

But to answer the question, I personally found the High Sparrow a much more sympatethic character than Cersei and was rooting for him over her. Although it pained my heart to see Loras punished for being gay because homophobia is a problem that still exists in our world, most of the time I am able to distance myself morally shall we say, because I comprehend that GoT is set in medieval times. If we were to judge the High Sparrow for his sexism and homophobia, we would also have to judge everyone from Ned Stark to Sweetrobin for exploiting the smallfolk in a feudalist system that is little better than slavery.

As for the fanaticism on the other hand... That's an entirely different story.

I was rooting for the High Sparrow too over Cersei and I had to laugh when she got lock away until she confessed her sins and a lot the things he pointed out about her were true. In my opinion I thought Cersei was being a big baby and she didn't like it that someone bested her.

[Lord Lannister]

Well the High Sparrow did fall into the classic villain trope of being destroyed in what was supposed to be his hour of triumph.

[MoreOrLess]

On ‎06‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 1:29 PM, Maid So Fair said:

The charge is still there which is why she still needs to stand trial (that she doesn't show up for) - the WOS was an atonement for her lesser sins that she confessed to - Lancel is too young for the children to be his. It's interesting to speculate what the High Septons plan was re: Tommen as if he finds Cersei guilty of the incest he loses the miable King. I've seen it speculated hat he wanted to absolve her of that while finding her guilty of regicide, which allows him to have his cake and eat it too, and this being the reason why he outlawed the trial by combat which would have cleared Cersei of ALL her crimes. Sadly we will never know as his plans literally went up in smoke.

We don't get too much of it so as not to give it away too much but theres an obvious deal(probably done in an indirect "holier than thou" act between them as elsewhere) between the High Sparrow and Margery. He wants a route to Tommen though her and they both don't want Cersei not found guilty of incest with Jamie to keep Tommen in power but do want her found guilty of killing Robert and either exiled or executed.

[Iron Mother]

On 7/3/2016 at 2:36 PM, A Bong of Ice and Fire said:

 

Eddie, we are friends.  Fly on your way like an eagle

[A Bong of Ice and Fire]

On July 9, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Iron Mother said:

Eddie, we are friends.  Fly on your way like an eagle

We'll fly as high as the sun, friend. 

[Iron Mother]

4 minutes ago, A Bong of Ice and Fire said:

We'll fly as high as the sun, friend. 

And die with your boots on.  That's a command.  Or just move along, son. 

[A spoon of knife and fork]

This is an interesting topic and led to one of the best conversations I had with my family members I watch the show with.  

In my view, the High Sparrow is a corrupt, power-hungry cynic.  I don't think he believes in anything he is saying about the seven and what they want.  Religion is the tool he uses to get power, nothing more.  There is no way he is getting "spoken to" by the seven every time he says he is.  How freaking convenient, the seven "speak to" him and tell him his political enemies should be arrested and tortured.  BUUUULLLSHIIIIIIT.  The Sparrow use The Seven as a bludgeon to bring down his political rivals and to increase his own power.  He brainwashed the King so he could be the power behind the throne.  At the point when he died, he was poised to have complete dictatorial control over King's Landing.  Perhaps Margaery could eventually have escaped or beaten him, but it would have been a war of attrition long fought.  And I think there was a chance she'd have lost.  

One of my brothers on the other hand said he believed the HS was totally sincere.  That he really believed what he was saying was for the good of the faith and the people, and what his religion told him was sinful (even if it's unlikely he really received direct commands from The Seven).  

Another of my brothers & my dad said he agreed that the HS was a little cynical and used underhanded means.  But that those means were justified if it gets rid of Cersei.  That removing her from power is worth it, no matter what.

I pointed out that Loras and Margaery did nothing that harmed anyone else.  And that basically the only people who he persecuted were the nobles and others - there is no equality of punishment. Commoners aren't being kidnapped and tortured into submission.  I pointed out that this is the start of the inquisition basically.   I pointed out that as bad as Cersei was, theocracy is worse. 

[illinifan]

6 hours ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

I pointed out that Loras and Margaery did nothing that harmed anyone else.  And that basically the only people who he persecuted were the nobles and others - there is no equality of punishment. Commoners aren't being kidnapped and tortured into submission.  I pointed out that this is the start of the inquisition basically.   I pointed out that as bad as Cersei was, theocracy is worse. 

I just thought that this was interesting and something that I would expand a bit more on.  (And I am basically of the opinion that the High Sparrow is a sincere fanatic and someone who might actually benefit the common folk more in the short term at least than the ruling nobles.)

First, have Loras and Margaery done nothing wrong?  As ruling families go, the Tyrells are benevolent.  Margaery understands unlike the Lannisters that having the love of the "mob" can be a source of power.  And as long as it benefits the Tyrells, the commoners will also benefit.  However, Margaery would run over the orphans she made such a big show of caring for in Flea Bottom if it got her a crown.  The Tyrells starved out KL so that they could gain political power during the War of the Five Kings and only switched sides when it could benefit them.  The commoners are useful pawns to the Tyrells, but pawns can be easily sacrificed.  

Second, the fact that we only see the High Sparrow go after the wealthy is the point.  The nobles have probably not faced the same consequences for their actions as the commoners before.  This is probably wonderful for commoner to see the high and mighty who he/she despises get what is coming to him/her.  It is the first time that the Queen Mother and others have been made to face consequences within a legal framework.  

Third, the High Sparrow situation has made me think about why people support religious fundamentalists like in Iran or even ISIS or the Taliban.  It is better than the "corrupt" elite for many people.  

[OldGimletEye]

8 hours ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

snip

Interesting. I’ve been always been under the impression that old boy might have saw Rienzi one too many times and developed some crazy notion that he was the savior of Westeros. In other words, he always struck me as a fanatical “true believer”, which are often, the most dangerous sort.

Of course, the fact, there might have might have been some positive aspects in his program, doesn’t change the fact that he was fanatical and tyrannical asshole.

[A spoon of knife and fork]

44 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Interesting. I’ve been always been under the impression that old boy might have saw Rienzi one too many times and developed some crazy notion that he was the savior of Westeros. In other words, he always struck me as a fanatical “true believer”, which are often, the most dangerous sort.

Of course, the fact, there might have might have been some positive aspects in his program, doesn’t change the fact that he was fanatical and tyrannical asshole.

True true, it's possible he convinced himself of his own bullshit.  But that doesn't make it smell any less.