boltons are sick Posted February 3, 2023 Share Posted February 3, 2023 TV Tropes thinks that they are and are part of the list of ASOIAF characters who were approved as Complete Monsters (you can read more about this trope here). Here is their Complete Monster entry on TV Tropes: Sers "Hard" Hugh Hammer and Ulf (the) White, aka "The Betrayers", are dragon tamers descending from Targaryen bastards recruited by Queen Rhaenrya I Targaryen. Defecting to her rival-brother King Aegon II's side, Hugh and Ulf attack Tumbleton, scorching the town with their dragons and killing thousands in the burning and many more drowning in the river as they try to flee. Having Tumbleton's gates opened to sack it, women—and girls as young as eight—are raped, babies are impaled on spears, and Ulf personally makes a point of raping three maidens per night, feeding those who fail to satisfy him to his dragon. While Ulf demands Highgarden for his services, Hugh plans to depose Aegon and take the throne himself with his dragon, nailing horseshoes to the head of one man who angrily knocks off Hugh's self-made crown. The two of them are approved because they massacred their own allies after betraying Rhaenyra and then led a sack on the town of Tumbleton where thousands of innocent people were killed, women and girls (sometimes as young as eight) were raped and babies were impaled on spears. The two of them then rule the place as tyrants and Ulf specifically rapes three maidens per night and feeds those who displease him to his dragon while Hugh had three horsenails nailed to the head of a lord who knocked his self-made crown when Hugh demanded to be King and cut down anyone who tried to help said knight. So, reading the discription for the trope and knowing about Ulf and Hugh, do you agree that they are Complete Monsters or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craving Peaches Posted February 3, 2023 Share Posted February 3, 2023 19 minutes ago, boltons are sick said: So, reading the discription for the trope and knowing about Ulf and Hugh, do you agree that they are Complete Monsters or not? I don't think we need TV tropes to tell us that they were both a piece of work... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted February 3, 2023 Share Posted February 3, 2023 Honestly, I think they are pretty much GRRMs baseline. I think he thinks that evil follows opportunity for more people than not, and additionally what power does, let alone sudden extreme power. That’s stuff he looks at in WC, and I think these two are kinda his baseline ‘super hero origin moment, and then…?’ view on those dynamics. In other circumstances they’d be background, in terms of their characters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floki of the Ironborn Posted February 4, 2023 Share Posted February 4, 2023 I’d say that they’re products of the world that House Targaryen built. They’re opportunists who desire power and have no problem using death and destruction to get it. All the more easier for them to do it when they’re riding massive dragons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Peres Posted February 4, 2023 Share Posted February 4, 2023 They are not even the top 10 worst of their period. Rhaenyra, Daemon, Aegon, Aemond, Alyssane, Blood, Cheese, Criston, Corlys, Lady Misery, Larys, among others are all worse than the two. There were very few decent people during the dance, it was kind of off putting... than everyone started to die and it got fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boltons are sick Posted February 5, 2023 Author Share Posted February 5, 2023 21 hours ago, Arthur Peres said: They are not even the top 10 worst of their period. Rhaenyra, Daemon, Aegon, Aemond, Alyssane, Blood, Cheese, Criston, Corlys, Lady Misery, Larys, among others are all worse than the two. There were very few decent people during the dance, it was kind of off putting... than everyone started to die and it got fun. Rhenyra, Daemon and Aegon have some redeeming qualities, so they can't qualify for this trope. Blood and Cheese to my recollection only kill one child which is not enough to pass the heinous standard of ASOIAF. I read about Larys and Lady Misery on the wiki, but honestly Larys doesn't really sound that bad and the only really heinous thing Lady Misery has done is give Alicent to a brothel to be gang-raped which Hugh and Ulf easily surpass with their actions. I, personally, don't see how any of these people are worse than Ulf and Hugh considering that the two of them have no redeeming qualities and despite their extremely limited power, have a body count of thousands of thier allies as well as the people of Tumbleton where they had young girls raped and babies impaled on spears and then went on to rule what's remained of the town as tyrants, feeding anyone who defies them to dragons and Ulf raping three maidens per night while Hugh nails horsenails on the head of a dude who knocked his self-made crown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craving Peaches Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 14 minutes ago, boltons are sick said: Blood and Cheese to my recollection only kill one child which is not enough to pass the heinous standard of ASOIAF. It's not about the number of children killed but the way they did it. They forced the mother to chose which child was going to die... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Stonehearts Simp Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 They are evil no doubt, but I can’t put them over people like Ramsay and Euron. Euron is evil in every way imaginable. Even more so than Ramsay. There is a spiritual evil to Euron not present in any other character IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 3 minutes ago, Prince Rhaegar Targareyen said: They are evil no doubt, but I can’t put them over people like Ramsay and Euron. Euron is evil in every way imaginable. Even more so than Ramsay. There is a spiritual evil to Euron not present in any other character IMO. Old Nan. Somewhat more seriously, Patches. He’s creepy AF, and I think it’s sourced deeep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Stonehearts Simp Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 2 minutes ago, James Arryn said: Old Nan. Somewhat more seriously, Patches. He’s creepy AF, and I think it’s sourced deeep. He creeps me out, but Euron gives me Anti-Christ vibes you know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craving Peaches Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 Just now, Prince Rhaegar Targareyen said: He creeps me out, but Euron gives me Anti-Christ vibes you know If Euron is the Antichrist then who's Jesus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 4 minutes ago, Prince Rhaegar Targareyen said: He creeps me out, but Euron gives me Anti-Christ vibes you know I’ve never read Lovecraft, but I think Euron ticks most of those boxes from what I understand.. Though come to think of it, Patches is up there too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Stonehearts Simp Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 15 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said: If Euron is the Antichrist then who's Jesus? Jon duh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alester Florent Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 They are not great guys, but I'm not sure they are particularly bad by the standards of GRRM characters; they just had more opportunity than most. One thing worth noting about these two is that they were always something of a liability. Individually they were two of the three greatest military assets the Blacks possessed by the time of the Gullet (the third being Daemon and Caraxes), and combined, there was very little on either side capable of matching them. Their loyalty needed to be carefully managed. Daemon was at least aware of this, but Rhaenyra was reluctant to promise them rewards commensurate with their importance. Then they were allowed to go off on campaign together without meaningful supervision, maximising the potential for their going rogue. With better command, their story could have been very different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackLightning Posted February 7, 2023 Share Posted February 7, 2023 6 hours ago, Adelstein said: Rhaenyra was reluctant to promise them rewards commensurate with their importance I understand her reluctance To be honest, if I were her, I'd probably do the same thing. Stripping a noble house with a storied lineage of their lands and titles to give it ill-mannered bastards of dubious parentage and even more dubious skill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaegon the dragonless Posted February 7, 2023 Share Posted February 7, 2023 Will I agree both of them were most likely monster's, or at least bad people, I think that they might be something that overlooked about there story. They are the bad guys for both sides of the conflict, so both sides gain from making Ulf and Hugh particularly horrid, the Green because that justifies the fact they murdered them, and the Blacks, well because they betrayed them. So they're is a chance that the story's of Ulf raping 3 maiden's every night and Hugh nailing horseshoe's to people heads could be invention to justify the actions taking against them, because lets remember that the whole Green army was sacking Tumbleton, and most likely that most of the green commander's at least turned a blind eye to the atrocities. So while I would agree that the betrayer's are most likely evil, in universe, the way they are portrayed is most likely worse then they actually where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alester Florent Posted February 7, 2023 Share Posted February 7, 2023 14 hours ago, BlackLightning said: I understand her reluctance To be honest, if I were her, I'd probably do the same thing. Stripping a noble house with a storied lineage of their lands and titles to give it ill-mannered bastards of dubious parentage and even more dubious skill? I understand it too, but you have to offer them some kind of incentive to keep fighting. Dubious parentage is irrelevant at this point and as to dubious skill, so long as they can command their dragons, which they can, that's all you need. Daemon's suggestions of Casterly Rock and Storm's End were OTT, but giving them some kind of lordly estate? Sure. There must be some lordly family somewhere who you're happy to disinherit, or one which has been rendered extinct by the fighting (or which survives only in the female line so you can marry them in). That kind of thing happens all the time, and is how house Baratheon got started in the first place, of course (and possibly house Lannister too?) Even promising them some lordly estate on conclusion of the war with no real intention of following through would be better than nothing. The knighthood was all well and good, of course, but In the alternative, you deploy your dragons differently, and you don't group your two biggest liabilities together with no supervision. Had they paired, say, Hugh with Daemon in the Riverlands and Ulf with Nettles in the Reach, things might have played out very differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Stonehearts Simp Posted February 7, 2023 Share Posted February 7, 2023 55 minutes ago, Vaegon the dragonless said: Will I agree both of them were most likely monster's, or at least bad people, I think that they might be something that overlooked about there story. They are the bad guys for both sides of the conflict, so both sides gain from making Ulf and Hugh particularly horrid, the Green because that justifies the fact they murdered them, and the Blacks, well because they betrayed them. So they're is a chance that the story's of Ulf raping 3 maiden's every night and Hugh nailing horseshoe's to people heads could be invention to justify the actions taking against them, because lets remember that the whole Green army was sacking Tumbleton, and most likely that most of the green commander's at least turned a blind eye to the atrocities. So while I would agree that the betrayer's are most likely evil, in universe, the way they are portrayed is most likely worse then they actually where. They could’ve been just as self interested as the nobles were but because both sides gained from demonizing them, history remembers lies about them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.