Born To Be Psychopaths?

[SeanF]

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I'm sorry, but Ned espousing this thing, Robb botching it, and it being simply an afterthought to Jon Snow some reader actually had to remember George to include when he put it out as a sample chapter all indicates that isn't something the author thinks is the best way to do justice in this shitty world.

And I'd also expect that George the man isn't in favor of the death penalty, especially not as practiced in the US (I could be wrong there).

Also, George has a lot of empathy with oathbreakers or would-be oathbreakers. We can relate to Chett's frustration when it starts snowing at the Fist, for example, to Jaime, to Theon, to Jon, etc.

Hell, I daresay he didn't have much of an issue with Dareon's conduct. The guy is free now, finally being able to live his own life and make money off his talent. Prostitution is perfectly legal not just in Westeros but in Braavos, too, so there is no problem with that.

Chett was an utterly unsympathetic character.  Nor is there any sympathy for the Freys or Boltons.

But, the author does call out the way that oaths are used to justify evil, or to stand by, while evil is done.

[SerDuncan]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Prostitution is perfectly legal not just in Westeros but in Braavos, too, so there is no problem with that

 How far are we letting this guy go? That girl is a just a kid and here we have him defending the right to fuck (a child) for money!?

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Hell, I daresay he didn't have much of an issue with Dareon's conduct.

We have more than one with yours mister and  I've had enough

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

The guy is free now, finally being able to live his own life and make money off his talent

I'm at a loss for words, you cannot be real

[SaffronLady]

1 minute ago, SerDuncan said:

I'm at a loss for words, you cannot be real

So much of Dareon's backstory is a noodle case that I prefer just not thinking about it.

[Craving Peaches]

What is going on?

[Craving Peaches]

3 hours ago, SerDuncan said:

It was consensual right? I can't believe some of the comparisons. 

It depends. My issue with it is that Jon was really pressured into doing it since he was ordered to do everything he could to integrate himself with the wildlings and he ran a high risk of dying if he didn't. Without these 'pressure factors', I don't see Jon sleeping with Ygritte...

[Craving Peaches]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Hell, I daresay he didn't have much of an issue with Dareon's conduct.

Of course he does because multiple other characters take issue with it for good reason.

If Dareon's story is true, then I don't fault him so much for deserting, but the way he treats Maester Aemon and Sam is needlessly cruel and callous. It wasn't their fault he was falsely accused (assuming his story is true). Do I think he deserved to die for it? No. But downplaying his bad behaviour isn't helpful.

[Craving Peaches]

Are people seriously defending Chett of all people? If Chett existed today he'd be an incel.

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Craving Peaches said:

Are people seriously defending Chett of all people? If Chett existed today he'd be an incel.

Chett fantasises about claiming Craster’s wives for his own.  He’s a wicked man.

[Nevets]

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

As I keep saying - pointing out that Arya has 'psychopathic traits' and shows a concerning lack of empathy in her kills isn't 'an insult' but an analysis of her actions and state of mind as given in her chapters. As I said, George wants us to see and acknowledge her lack of empathy by making her a scavenger in the case of Dareon and having her only focusing on this disposal of Raff's corpse after the deed. He could have portrayed that differently.

What is concerning, however, is actual grown-up (?) people talking about insidious murders as if they approve of such actions. Yes, in a Westerosi war zone you can justify some of Arya's actions. Say, while I'm concerned about Arya's violent spree at the in when she stabbed the Tickler, it is understandable why the violence there happened.

I certainly find myself concerned about her behavior, but don't think it qualifies as psychopathic, nor do I think she is past the point of no return, so to say.  I don't care for the idea of an 11-year-old killing people, especially those who aren't any kind of threat.  If she were real, I would be a lot more worried about her.  As it is I think George has other plans for her that don't involve being a totally lost cause.  But I don't expect it to be an easy ride, although I do think that he is paving the way for her departure from the Faceless Men and Braavos in the preview chapter.

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Arya becoming a Faceless Girl months later after been given multiple different options by the Kindly Man, being okay with murdering people she is told to kill as well as people she wants to murder is deeply concerning. Whoever 'likes' the character of Arya should not actually defend that questionable career and actions but actually criticize her for her choices.

Make no mistake in context - even if she were not finishing her training she already killed a lot of people and got a lot of assassin training. She effectively is a Faceless Girl already, even if she has yet to learn how to cut off faces and wear them as her own. What might set her apart from the likes of Jaqen might simply be her not swearing some vow to the Many-Faced God, etc. ... but not a lack of skill or magical knowledge.

Arya is not a Faceless Man, and I don't think she is ever going to be one.  If the FM, or Martin for that matter, were intent on making her an assassin they're going about it in a roundabout and dilatory way; she should be a lot further along in her training than she is.    She knows little more about killing people than she did when she arrived in Braavos.   What training she has gotten seems more geared to being an undercover agent than an assassin.

And she wasn't all that OK with murdering the insurance man, which is the only person she's been ordered to kill.  She asked a lot of questions, probably too many.  If they haven't figured out she would be a poor candidate for an assassin, due to her inability to give up her identity and her still extant moral compass, however wobbly, I would be very surprised.

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

But my point was more that Littlefinger does have a tantalizing and tragic backstory that helps to explain why he is on the path that he is now. And while clearly has strong psychopathic tendencies there is some genuine love in the guy, too. Sansa is not just a game piece to him, she is also the daughter he thought he and Catelyn should have had. He wants to fuck her, he wants to use her ... but he also wants to protect her.

Putting Arya in the same neighborhood as Baelish is simply ridiculous.  He may be obsessed with Sansa, and may even care about her enough to keep her safe, but I seriously doubt if he really cares about her. If he would decide that he is better off without her, or if he perceives her as some kind of threat, she's toast.  I also think he may ultimately arrange Sweetrobin's death, and blame Sansa for it, giving him a hold over her, similar to the Joffrey affair.  Littlefinger is bad news, pure and simple. 

If Arya starts killing more people, especially less culpable ones, then I will start getting seriously worried.  As for now, I am merely watchful and cautiously optimistic. 

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

Chett was an utterly unsympathetic character.  Nor is there any sympathy for the Freys or Boltons.

Chett is an unsympathetic but if you reread his chapter you should feel sad for him when it starts snowing because the way it is written it fucks everything up for him. Yes, we don't want him to succeed, etc. ... but we also do understand why his life at the Wall sucked. I relate to his desire to leave this fucked up place.

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

But, the author does call out the way that oaths are used to justify evil, or to stand by, while evil is done.

Oaths and promises, etc. are usually ways to create conflict, so if we have, for instance, a 14-year-old moron like Jon swear a vow of celibacy then the same moron falling in love and having sex isn't something the author faults him for.

1 hour ago, Craving Peaches said:

Of course he does because multiple other characters take issue with it for good reason.

Who actually has problems with Dareon? He is a nice enough fellow and actually one of Jon's and Sam's close friends during their training days, unlike the genuine rapists that show up at the Wall.

1 hour ago, Craving Peaches said:

If Dareon's story is true, then I don't fault him so much for deserting, but the way he treats Maester Aemon and Sam is needlessly cruel and callous. It wasn't their fault he was falsely accused (assuming his story is true). Do I think he deserved to die for it? No. But downplaying his bad behaviour isn't helpful.

Seriously, Samwell is a grown man and neither Dareon's brother nor his real family. The guy doesn't have to care for him as if he was. What is Sam (and Gilly) stopping from (trying to) find a job and work for their living? Sure enough, it might be not as easy for them as it was for Dareon ... but there should be work for them somewhere in Braavos.

Also - Jon condemned Aemon to death when he sent him on the journey. I agree that abandoning him - not so much Gilly and Sam - was not nice of Dareon. But if you consider that he wasn't at the Wall of his own free will you have to concede that neither of the people there were his real friends. Prince Aemon Targaryen, Samwell of House Tarly, and Jon Snow would never given a fig about the common-born singer's apprentice Dareon had they met if neither of them had (been forced to) take the black.

We can say that Dareon may have perhaps deserved a lesson or some punishment for abandoning Aemon ... but most certainly he didn't deserve death for that.

[Craving Peaches]

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Who actually has problems with Dareon?

Arya, Sam...

4 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

What is Sam (and Gilly) stopping from (trying to) find a job and work for their living?

The fact that Sam was given a mission by Jon and would be betraying his trust? Plus his vows.

5 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

But if you consider that he wasn't at the Wall of his own free will you have to concede that neither of the people there were his real friends.

But you just said he was friends with Jon... Also, de didn't need to be so callous about it.

6 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We can say that Dareon may have perhaps deserved a lesson or some punishment for abandoning Aemon ... but most certainly he didn't deserve death for that.

Agree.

[Lord Varys]

12 minutes ago, Nevets said:

I certainly find myself concerned about her behavior, but don't think it qualifies as psychopathic, nor do I think she is past the point of no return, so to say.

Psychopathy - how silly a concept it might be - is a spectrum. So, please, don't pretend that saying somebody shows psychopathic traits is the same thing as saying them are a lost cause, a monster, or 'born evil' or other such crap.

Also, of course, nobody in this series is beyond redemption or beyond the (female) readership starting to think the likes of Jaime or Sandor deserve 'redemption' because they are good guys at heart.

Littlefinger could be a POV tomorrow and he could become the tragic hero of Westeros through such chapters.

12 minutes ago, Nevets said:

I don't care for the idea of an 11-year-old killing people, especially those who aren't any kind of threat.  If she were real, I would be a lot more worried about her.  As it is I think George has other plans for her that don't involve being a totally lost cause.  But I don't expect it to be an easy ride, although I do think that he is paving the way for her departure from the Faceless Men and Braavos in the preview chapter.

I don't think so, many people expected the same thing from many of her earlier chapters. Her mummer training is most likely over, so the next chapter will involve some more and a different kind of training. She will dispose of Raff's corpse successfully, so nobody will even know what she did. But even if she didn't - the House of Black and White didn't punish her for murdering Dareon, so they might be fine with Raff, too, if they were to learn his death was a commission by Arya Stark of Winterfell.

I'd not surprised to learn that many a Faceless Man behaved the way Arya did during their training. Especially if they had beef with people and came with such beef to the House of Black and White. It might also be okay to give yourself to the Many-Faced God in exchange for a commission of people you want to see dead, etc.

12 minutes ago, Nevets said:

Arya is not a Faceless Man, and I don't think she is ever going to be one.  If the FM, or Martin for that matter, were intent on making her an assassin they're going about it in a roundabout and dilatory way; she should be a lot further along in her training than she is.    She knows little more about killing people than she did when she arrived in Braavos.   What training she has gotten seems more geared to being an undercover agent than an assassin.

Obviously, for the Faceless Men role-playing and infiltration is as important as killing. Killing is pretty easy, though, if you can successfully transform yourself. And Arya was pretty good at it even before she got there. But, of course, we would view the efficiency in the murder of Raff as part of her refined Faceless Men training which would have happened between chapters.

12 minutes ago, Nevets said:

And she wasn't all that OK with murdering the insurance man, which is the only person she's been ordered to kill.  She asked a lot of questions, probably too many.  If they haven't figured out she would be a poor candidate for an assassin, due to her inability to give up her identity and her still extant moral compass, however wobbly, I would be very surprised.

Actually, the one good thing she can learn from the Faceless Men is that killing should not come easy to you and you actually shouldn't kill people you know. The notion that the people who are killed by the Faceless Men are not deserving of death by Arya's standards is a pretty big stretch. Death doesn't come cheap at the House of Black and White. You have to really want it, have to really pay a lot or make some other sacrifice to get a murder there. Insurance guy wronged certain people in a very bad way or else nobody would have wanted to see him dead. Not at the prices/sacrifices the House of Black and White demands.

Chances are good that when she leaves she will have understood that - and thus stop murdering people on a whim.

12 minutes ago, Nevets said:

Putting Arya in the same neighborhood as Baelish is simply ridiculous.  He may be obsessed with Sansa, and may even care about her enough to keep her safe, but I seriously doubt if he really cares about her. If he would decide that he is better off without her, or if he perceives her as some kind of threat, she's toast.  I also think he may ultimately arrange Sweetrobin's death, and blame Sansa for it, giving him a hold over her, similar to the Joffrey affair.  Littlefinger is bad news, pure and simple.

We don't know Littlefinger's thoughts so that is all idle speculation. Littlefinger also doesn't have to blame Sansa for Lord Robert's poisoning - she is already complicit in that and did push Maester Colemon to give him another dose of the poison in her last chapter in AFfC of her own free will while Littlefinger was down at the Gates of the Moon.

What is not so idle speculation, though, is the simple fact that the Arya we have last seen is capable of murdering anyone who angers or otherwise displeases her. We cannot say she would be incapable of murdering a Jon Snow she encountered as Ygritte's deserting husband, say.

I daresay that at this person nobody is safe from Arya Stark of Winterfell if they raise her ire. And we don't really know what does that. Dareon shows that she is not sticking to her list and you can become her victim even if you did never wrong her, personally, or people she viewed as her friends.

12 minutes ago, Nevets said:

If Arya starts killing more people, especially less culpable ones, then I will start getting seriously worried.  As for now, I am merely watchful and cautiously optimistic. 

I really don't care much about who she kills, to be honest. It is the killing and the way she does it that is the problem, not the target. But Dareon definitely shows she likes to do some side killings to hone her skills and steal some boots. It is quite disgusting if you look at it that way.

23 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

The fact that Sam was given a mission by Jon and would be betraying his trust? Plus his vows.

But Sam needs money to buy for passage to Oldtown. It wouldn't be a betrayal of his vows to work to make money for himself, Gilly, the baby, and Aemon and to save enough to pay for the passage eventually ... it would be his way to fulfill his vows and his mission both, actually.

We can blame Dareon for leaving them but we also have to blame Sam for being Sam and being unable to make an attempt to actually be a man and take care of the people in his charge.

23 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

But you just said he was friends with Jon... Also, de didn't need to be so callous about it.

He was friends with them like you make friends with cellmates in a prison. He had no other choice. But he owed them little and less. Him making friends with Jon and Sam and Pyp and Grenn does show that he was a nice guy at heart, and not the rapist he was framed as - because neither Jon nor Sam made friends with the likes of Rast. At least that is my take on the character since there is literally no sign he was a bad guy at heart.

He was drunk and pissed that Sam actually wanted him to return to the shit hole that is the Wall and Westeros both.

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

Should I rename this topic : 

Arya killing Daeron : Was it right? 

lol

[SerDuncan]

8 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

It depends. My issue with it is that Jon was really pressured into doing it since he was ordered to do everything he could to integrate himself with the wildlings and he ran a high risk of dying if he didn't. Without these 'pressure factors', I don't see Jon sleeping with Ygritte...

How many times was that the first night? I agree about the pressure factors but he was a horny teen, she wanted to save him and was interested too, and they ended up in love

[sifth]

6 hours ago, SerDuncan said:

How many times was that the first night? I agree about the pressure factors but he was a horny teen, she wanted to save him and was interested too, and they ended up in love

Truth be told, I fully expect Jon would have remained a virgin, if not for his undercover mission. He doesn't seem like the type that would go to brothels to lose it. Part of it was his mission and part of it was biology, part of it was him just not understand what love is. I can't fault anyone for that; when I was in my first relationship, I thought it was love, but my partner felt otherwise.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, sifth said:

Truth be told, I fully expect Jon would have remained a virgin, if not for his undercover mission. He doesn't seem like the type that would go to brothels to lose it. Part of it was his mission and part of it was biology, part of it was him just not understand what love is. I can't fault anyone for that; when I was in my first relationship, I thought it was love, but my partner felt otherwise.

Jon was clearly violated by Ygritte. She forces herself on him in a blatant way, and circumstances demand that he fuck her and be with her to save his very life ... she even makes that clear to him. In fact, the whole romance could be partially a setup, a seduction game Mance had Ygritte to do. Once Jon is Ygritte's pet he cannot possibly return to the Watch even if he wanted to. They wouldn't take him back, so that way they ensure his only future is with the wildlings.

Ygritte is also older and more experienced in romantic and sexual matters than Jon - who is not just a boy but a boy who took a vow of chastity.

When Jon looks at Ygritte at first she isn't attractive or sexy - he only finds pretty things about her after they fucked. And that is bonding hormones kicking in.

There certainly are real feelings there, but it is no great romance and no relationship among equal partners. Jon is Ygritte's pet, and he has to accept that status or risk losing his life.

[SeanF]

13 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Jon was clearly violated by Ygritte. She forces herself on him in a blatant way, and circumstances demand that he fuck her and be with her to save his very life ... she even makes that clear to him. In fact, the whole romance could be partially a setup, a seduction game Mance had Ygritte to do. Once Jon is Ygritte's pet he cannot possibly return to the Watch even if he wanted to. They wouldn't take him back, so that way they ensure his only future is with the wildlings.

Ygritte is also older and more experienced in romantic and sexual matters than Jon - who is not just a boy but a boy who took a vow of chastity.

When Jon looks at Ygritte at first she isn't attractive or sexy - he only finds pretty things about her after they fucked. And that is bonding hormones kicking in.

There certainly are real feelings there, but it is no great romance and no relationship among equal partners. Jon is Ygritte's pet, and he has to accept that status or risk losing his life.

Or vice versa.  Jon's the one who's doing the betrayal.

[Springwatch]

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

circumstances demand that he fuck her and be with her to save his very life

So circumstances forced him, not Ygritte. Being Ygritte's lover protected him from those who thought his change of loyalty was fake and wanted to kill him. It was a lucky opportunity for him, and he took it.

[SeanF]

16 minutes ago, Springwatch said:

So circumstances forced him, not Ygritte. Being Ygritte's lover protected him from those who thought his change of loyalty was fake and wanted to kill him. It was a lucky opportunity for him, and he took it.

Making Ygritte an abuser is a real stretch.

[Lord Varys]

6 hours ago, SeanF said:

Or vice versa.  Jon's the one who's doing the betrayal.

There is some betrayal there, to be sure ... but Ygritte is a savage who has no problem cutting the throat of an innocent old man. She has a side Jon doesn't exactly like.

And to be sure, Jon is actually a good little chaste boy. He wants to keep his vows of celibacy. We see this in ADwD when the Lord Commander has a very boring sex life. He is not likely to break his vows again soon.

1 hour ago, Springwatch said:

So circumstances forced him, not Ygritte. Being Ygritte's lover protected him from those who thought his change of loyalty was fake and wanted to kill him. It was a lucky opportunity for him, and he took it.

Of course Ygritte forced him. She lied about them fucking already and then she insisted on him making it true. She could have just pretended that they fuck without insisting that Jon actually break his vows.

You can compare it to Tyrion-Sansa - circumstances (the wedding) forced Sansa to offer herself to Tyrion. But Tyrion decided if he would rape her or not. Just as Ygritte did. Tyrion backed down in private, Ygritte did not.

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

Making Ygritte an abuser is a real stretch.

Ygritte is an abuser in the sense that a teacher abuses her student by way of telling them they would give them bad grades. Of course things are somewhat less obvious and kind of mediated by the fact that Jon is not totally opposed to things. But she does have all the power in their relationship while Jon has literally none. He has to please her, has to fuck her, has to like everything or else he risks that the wildlings kill him.