The Mad Genius Of Petyr Baelish

[estrellas]

I've been wondering what happens to Rickon if LF discovers he is still alive. Bran and Rickon's continual existence means Sansa isn't truly the heir of Winterfell, right? She is older, but as I understand it, lands pass only to the daughter if there are no sons? Bran is too far away for LF to assassinate, but what happens to Rickon? Could Petyr have been involved in what he thought was their demise, to begin with? There seems to be nothing even remotely connecting him to the Iron Islands or Theon, but it seems to me that if he wanted to bring the Starks to their knees, he would have known about that plot.

I feel like Sansa will be involved in Petyr's downfall, and I think it will have to do with the other Winterfell heirs somehow. She will discover a plot against them and set her own plot in motion, perhaps. Of course, that might be too easy an assumption, and as we all know GRRM never leads us down the path we assumed he was taking.

Petyr's ultimate motive depends entirely on whether he truly ever loved Cat or not, IMO. If he is capable of love he is not a sociopath as we typically define it, and he would have motives that are far more difficult to guess at than that he is simply a chaotic evil uberspy who plays with pawns for the fun of it. Then again, maybe that's exactly what he's doing.

[YouKnowNothingJonSnow]

Regarding the OP, wow, a pot worthy of War and Peace. You put a ton into that.

Personally, I hate Littlefinger. He basically kills indiscriminately to serve his own ends, and it willing to start wars to get there. Even ones that weaken the realm at a time when all can see Winter is Coming. So far all his evil genius, his vision is still far too narrow (as are most characters in the series, even Ned, if truth be told). Only the NW and the wildlings seem to get the magnitude of what is coming.

Regardless, though Petyr's skill is impressive (perhaps only matched by Varys), I have no sympathy towards him. He has little/no redeeming qualities whatsoever in my book. I believe he is consumed by rage towards nobles and great houses in general and is seeking to bring them all down, and rise at the same time. Sansa could be an exception, but I doubt it. If she'd have said the wrong thing, then the singer would have been accused of 2 murders, not one.

One last thing, does Petyr know now he didn't take Catleyn's virginity? I can't remember, but it seems Lysa told him at some point, or certainly should have if we didn't see it on screen.

[Todd Sand bastard of AZ]

I'm surprised by most of the first page of replies to this thread, since the majority of the posters I've seen here are mature. You didn't want to read a long post, so you still trolled by offering nothing more than complaints about the length? You've read all four books in the series and you're complaining about having to read alot? Really?

http://www.nihongogo.com/jet/photos/PicardFacepalm.jpg

[Lord Damian]

damn, that was thrilling.

[Timbits]

lmao I'm pretty speechless.

Sometimes I'll write a post and then forget about, go to post it and it turns out I've been automatically logged out:. Thankfully I usually write a sentence. I can only think that you wrote this in advanced on Microsoft Word. But I somewhat hope this wasn't the case and that you lost your first version and had to rewrite it.

Also I don't think Littlerfinger is as smart as he'd have as believe.

[Ser Camaris]

I always thought that his motivation was pretty simple and self evident. When he was young he was the child of a nothing House and the other nobles looked down on him and didn't take him seriously. He was amusing enough to have around and tolerated (even affectionately so), but when he forgot his place and dared set his sights too high he was slapped down, hard.

His machinations are a form of revenge against those who looked down on him, but most importantly they are about him being given the status he feels he deserves and being treated with respect by the likes of the Starks and the Tully's and the Lannisters, who always thought they were better than him. Having thmem come to him for help is the ultiate validation.

[Flit]

Yes we can all agree that The Mountain is an extremely violent, sadistic and terrifying man, but what in my opinion makes LF worse is that he is all of these things, yet he manages to hide them behind that "superficial charm". He has this veneer of respectability which conceals a literal madman. He may be able to carefully plan his take overs and take downs and we can never fault him for being able to keep a job or being impulsive, but certainly when we speak of genuine emotion being short-lived and glib and egocentric, this is classic LF.

Also, I think his ownership of the brothel houses speaks not only to good business sense, but also to a certain view of and disconnect from women. They are to be used as Lysa was and then discarded. This is why I fear for Sansa and hopes she finds a way to get out of his hold.

See, I just cannot go by the madman claims. It's the same sort of debate I get into about Cersei. Sure, from the outside we see them as being devoid of something because their actions go so far against our own, but does this make them evil/psychopathic. As to the whore house ownership being a mark of his disrespect for women, he ran some of the best whore houses in Kings Landing. Ones that were good enough to house the Lady of Stark, someone he did want to protect. There is a general consensus in Westeros about the role of women and whores, and I see LF as simply taking advantage of that. But he could have run horrible places and still made money, there doesn't seem to be any sadist qualities there.

I see LF as being the guy who is instigating a corporate take down. Though, in Westeros, it's accepted that people will die when these things happen. Life has a cheaper quality to it, and LF is just a product of that. He's doing what he can to survive with what skills he has, and that is spinning money and a gift of the gab. Does this make him sociopathic or psychopathic... I don't think so.

Take another character example that is less extreme than Gregor and Hoat. As I mentioned before, there is Stannis. Now, Stannis is displaying clear signs of anti-social behaviour. He has his created sense of the world as it relates to him, and no other. He does not feel empathy for other people, nor understand mercy in its truest sense. He does not cope when spanners are thrown into the works and he spends an awful lot of time laying the blame for everything on everyone else's doorstep. He cannot attach to anyone else, and keeps people around only if they appeal to that sense of righteousness that he has. Hence why Davos stays, though he speaks the truth. Everything Davos says to Stannis is still said while backing up Stannis' world view. Stannis just simply cannot understand people who don't fit into his world view, and when they don't he blames them for not fitting and for him not understanding.

LF isn't like that. He's stable, he thinks, and if there's a callousness to his thinking, it is more because the world he is functioning in is callous. The same way Tywin makes his decisions. Yes, they are brutal, but they served a purpose and were (while horrific to us modern westerners) appropriate for the society they are in. People die. Women get raped. Fields of harvest are put to the torch. Babies are killed. If anything this story shows that all sides are as bad as each other, and if you can't play to the game, you'll end up dead.

And as for lack of empathy, I really think it's his ability to empathise with others that has given him clear insight into how to maniplate people to his own ends. Just like any politician or lobbyist does in our world, just without the death (most of the time.)

[darrylzero]

Thank you for your post. Teasing out the Littlefinger thread from the novels for presentation was awesome effort! I've just recently completed the first four books and I have to say that I am pretty convinced that Petyr Baelish will be revealed to be Hoster Tully's bastard son. Lord Hoster's dream of having his secret son grow up in Riverrun with his siblings probably seemed like a great idea until Petyr developed romantic notions about his sisters. Suddenly the dream turns into a nightmare and then the overreation of Petyr's banishment.

If what I think is true, then Peytr will now be cursed as a kinslayer for having shoved his half sister out the moon door and that Lysa Arryn's son, Robert, is likely his natural child. What delicious irony it would be for us to see this Machiavelli, who prides himself on knowing the intimate details of everyone around him, discover that he has been ignorant of his own self.

That certainly has a poetic/mythic elegance to it, and it has the ring of possible truth if you ask me. It's the first new piece of speculation I've read in a while that really jolted me awake. Bravo.

However, I see two potential issues:

1) More incest? There's so much already! It's certainly a different presentation, but part of me feels like we've seen as much already as we're likely to.

2) How would this possibly be revealed at this point? What living characters might know? The Blackfish? Do we have any idea who he was close to in the Vale during his time as Knight of the Gate?

Now that I'm talking about the Blackfish, it makes me wonder if something like this could resolve some of the mystery of his never being wed. It would be interesting if some old feud with Hoster surrounding Littlefinger's parentage and fostering. Probably not, though, because Catelyn seems to know all about why the Brynden will never marry, though she doesn't actually say as much, and I think we can be pretty sure she doesn't know about this. You know, if it's true.

[Laeif]

Holy balls, did you write that whole thing out yourself?

[Arthanis]

It's extremely hard to determine LFs role in future books.

- Many characters have predictions, visions etc. showing possible future difficulties, dangers and important characters. None of these visions is related to LF. Conclusion - He is not enough important to be mentioned in dream/vision world OR he has some kind of magic_world_stealth_mode. While things like Red Wedding are mentioned in visions, the creator of entire War of Five Kings and on of the most dangerous players is not even mentioned... Why?

- His goal is unknown. It may be anything from taking Sansa_and_lord_title up to ruling the entire seven kingdoms (or even entire world). How can he go so far without support of any magic-related major wasteros power? Yes, he is outplaying major houses, kings and lords completely, but how can he confront his skills with dragons, Others, Faceless Man or Red Priests powers? If he want to get more then he already have, he need "magic-related allies" or his own magic-like powers on his service. Or maybe he already have/serve major power?

- LF is man with no past. There is no major house behind him, his history is relatively short. On top of that it's hard to say who his enemies are. Yes, he may do not like House Tully (because of Cat's father), House Stark (because of taking his Cat) and House Arryn (because of Lysa killing his unborn child to marry Jon Arryn), but he already control everything belonging to these houses and has Cat's newer version (Sansa). What else he may want to do?

LF already is winner of all, he have everything he ever wanted and all man he don't liked are dead. If he want to go any further (conquer the world, become the king of 7 Kingdoms etc.) he actually has no jet known way of confronting major magic powers, and no known reason of fighting against anyone.

IMO:

LFs kingdom will start to collapse soon, and he will not do much more in further books. His story is almost finished, he cannot go any further and Sansa is his curse and obvious reason of his future death. LF was supereffective because he do not trusted anyone, turning Sansa into his apprentice is probably biggest and only mistake he ever made. Sansa have family she love (even if she think they all are dead), she has good heart and believe in better world, there is no way to turn her into Machiavelli character, able to sacrifice everything and everyone just to achieve your goal. LF will learn it soon, and he will IMO die before last book...

[Kalzakath]

I wonder what LF opinion on the others is? Could his end result be that he is in power when they attack so that someone who cares can do something...nah he just wants power, but it would be interesting to see himhave interaction with, or proof of the others.

[brashcandy]

See, I just cannot go by the madman claims. It's the same sort of debate I get into about Cersei. Sure, from the outside we see them as being devoid of something because their actions go so far against our own, but does this make them evil/psychopathic. As to the whore house ownership being a mark of his disrespect for women, he ran some of the best whore houses in Kings Landing. Ones that were good enough to house the Lady of Stark, someone he did want to protect. There is a general consensus in Westeros about the role of women and whores, and I see LF as simply taking advantage of that. But he could have run horrible places and still made money, there doesn't seem to be any sadist qualities there.

I see LF as being the guy who is instigating a corporate take down. Though, in Westeros, it's accepted that people will die when these things happen. Life has a cheaper quality to it, and LF is just a product of that. He's doing what he can to survive with what skills he has, and that is spinning money and a gift of the gab. Does this make him sociopathic or psychopathic... I don't think so.

Take another character example that is less extreme than Gregor and Hoat. As I mentioned before, there is Stannis. Now, Stannis is displaying clear signs of anti-social behaviour. He has his created sense of the world as it relates to him, and no other. He does not feel empathy for other people, nor understand mercy in its truest sense. He does not cope when spanners are thrown into the works and he spends an awful lot of time laying the blame for everything on everyone else's doorstep. He cannot attach to anyone else, and keeps people around only if they appeal to that sense of righteousness that he has. Hence why Davos stays, though he speaks the truth. Everything Davos says to Stannis is still said while backing up Stannis' world view. Stannis just simply cannot understand people who don't fit into his world view, and when they don't he blames them for not fitting and for him not understanding.

LF isn't like that. He's stable, he thinks, and if there's a callousness to his thinking, it is more because the world he is functioning in is callous. The same way Tywin makes his decisions. Yes, they are brutal, but they served a purpose and were (while horrific to us modern westerners) appropriate for the society they are in. People die. Women get raped. Fields of harvest are put to the torch. Babies are killed. If anything this story shows that all sides are as bad as each other, and if you can't play to the game, you'll end up dead.

And as for lack of empathy, I really think it's his ability to empathise with others that has given him clear insight into how to maniplate people to his own ends. Just like any politician or lobbyist does in our world, just without the death (most of the time.)

I've always seen Stannis as the victim of a world view that honour is strictly black and white and there is little room for debate. This is why even after Davos rescued him from the siege on his castle he rewarded him by cutting off his finger joints. Rather than coming across as a bit psychotic or irrational, he actually struck me as quite the opposite, until at least the start of his interaction with Melissandre. He just doesn't seem to be the type of man who entertains fools and flatterers and the other sycophants that populate Kings Landing. This strict sense code of honour might make him seem brutal and anti-social, but I always found him to be a lot like Ned. This is why he cannot understand Renly's aspirations to be King because pure and simple Renly is younger than him and not eligible.

As I said, his interaction with Melissandre is having some negative impacts on him, but we see that he is trying to fight her influence somewhat and stand up for what is right, as evidenced by his hiring of Davos as his hand. Stannis seems to truly believe in the rightness of his cause as Robert's legitimate successor. I don't think it's fair to say he doesn't feel empathy or sympathy for others at all.

He never came across as a wicked man out for his world domination or intent on fitting others into his world view. In fact, he has a grudging respect for Davos because Davos tells him outright many things that he doesn't want to hear. He seems to feel true sadness when his brother dies, and he takes pity on Robert's bastard son. Yes, he is not a likeable character, and he is now taking a hard line in order to ensure his kingship, but he is by no means comparable to LF.

I don't think that just because LF is stable, able to plan and implement his strategies successfully that it doesn't mean he isn't sociopathic or psyhopathic. And the argument that he is merely functioning and responding to a callous world is amusing given that he is the one responsible for creating much of this callous environment. There is something distasteful about the man despite his obvious brilliance as a political player, and I do think he has been clearly sociopathic in his behaviour throughout the series. He has no compunction when it comes to doing away with anyone that stands in his way. His talks with Sansa about pieces and players shows just how little he views people. It may strike others as something to be admired, but I just see him as a sign of the corruption that pervades the entire society.

Finally, I have to agree that I never saw Cersei as being psychotic either. Her behaviour is certainly despicable, but I don't see her as being inherently evil. I guess it's because there always seemed to be a method to Cersei's madness. She is callous, cruel and lacks empathy but she is also operating under the idea that she is the Queen Regent. LF's lack of a clear motive is what makes him in extremely dangerous.

[David Selig]

I don't see Littlefinger as completely lacking in empathy - then he wouldn't have been able to understand what make people tick and predict their reactions so well as he does throughout the series. He's ruthless and extremely ambitious, but really doesn't seem to be a sociopath or psychopath to me.

[LadyBirdJohnson]

I Loved this post, Thank You! I picked up on a few things that I did not notice initially.

I am a huge Little Finger fan. Honestly, I have a hard time understanding why more people are not fans of Petyr Baelish.

I believe the reason we have not seen a Baelish POV recap is because he is one of the few overall players in the game, the rest being pieces. I would say the same of Tywin Lannister and perhaps Varys?

Without hearing his inner thoughts I think it is easy to classify him as a monster and before people start hating on my opinion yes, he is far from innocent ( who in this story is completely innocent though?)

What is the overall motivation, where does he stop, what does he want? Those are questions I can't wait to hear the answer to. I theorize that the hurt of unrequited love from catelyn motivated him to prove himself, defy the odds that held him back from getting what he wanted. I think he is the kind of guy who won't stop till he fills that void and even then he'll stay in protection mode.

Also, in my opnion he and Sansa are a pretty good match. She is also selfish and at her core ambitious I don't think she has learned enough of her own nature to embrace that at Littlefingers level but they make a good team. If and I hope this doesn't happen, he meets his end I think it will be reanimated Catelyn Stark to do the deed.

[LadyBirdJohnson]

Hi is it just me or is Petyr Baelish some sort of medieval/westorosi type of investment banker? In that I mean a person who creates value where there out of nothing...? agree or not?

I totally agree. In reading through Tyrion trying to make sense of Petyr's ledgers and the descriptives of paying people back with promises etc... I totally think he pulled a Madoff on Westeros.

[Flit]

I've always seen Stannis as the victim of a world view that honour is strictly black and white and there is little room for debate. This is why even after Davos rescued him from the siege on his castle he rewarded him by cutting off his finger joints. Rather than coming across as a bit psychotic or irrational, he actually struck me as quite the opposite, until at least the start of his interaction with Melissandre. He just doesn't seem to be the type of man who entertains fools and flatterers and the other sycophants that populate Kings Landing. This strict sense code of honour might make him seem brutal and anti-social, but I always found him to be a lot like Ned. This is why he cannot understand Renly's aspirations to be King because pure and simple Renly is younger than him and not eligible.

As I said, his interaction with Melissandre is having some negative impacts on him, but we see that he is trying to fight her influence somewhat and stand up for what is right, as evidenced by his hiring of Davos as his hand. Stannis seems to truly believe in the rightness of his cause as Robert's legitimate successor. I don't think it's fair to say he doesn't feel empathy or sympathy for others at all.

He never came across as a wicked man out for his world domination or intent on fitting others into his world view. In fact, he has a grudging respect for Davos because Davos tells him outright many things that he doesn't want to hear. He seems to feel true sadness when his brother dies, and he takes pity on Robert's bastard son. Yes, he is not a likeable character, and he is now taking a hard line in order to ensure his kingship, but he is by no means comparable to LF.

I don't think that just because LF is stable, able to plan and implement his strategies successfully that it doesn't mean he isn't sociopathic or psyhopathic. And the argument that he is merely functioning and responding to a callous world is amusing given that he is the one responsible for creating much of this callous environment. There is something distasteful about the man despite his obvious brilliance as a political player, and I do think he has been clearly sociopathic in his behaviour throughout the series. He has no compunction when it comes to doing away with anyone that stands in his way. His talks with Sansa about pieces and players shows just how little he views people. It may strike others as something to be admired, but I just see him as a sign of the corruption that pervades the entire society.

Finally, I have to agree that I never saw Cersei as being psychotic either. Her behaviour is certainly despicable, but I don't see her as being inherently evil. I guess it's because there always seemed to be a method to Cersei's madness. She is callous, cruel and lacks empathy but she is also operating under the idea that she is the Queen Regent. LF's lack of a clear motive is what makes him in extremely dangerous.

I think we're going to have a differing opinion on what makes someone with anti-social tendencies. I can say story-book and movie bad guy, yeah, LF fits that bill more than Stannis. But in meeting the criteria, Stannis has more traits than LF. Movies and books generally get people with anti-social tendencies really damn wrong. They're not at all like what you think they are. They're not as cool-calm-and collected as what shows like Criminal Minds and CSI tell us they're like, those versions simply do not exist. Look at every serial killer, even those that are tightly controlled and able to lead double lives, fall apart when their plans go awry (if they were able to plan to begin with). They can't think cleverly on their feet because they are generally lacking that ability. They don't understand people at all, because they only understand themselves and think everyone else is like that.

A case study I read on global neglect had this wrapped up beautifully. A teenage boy who sexually assaulted two girls under ten, for no other reason then he claimed that he wanted to. When he was sentenced, the families of the children cried. The teenager turned to his lawyer and said, "Why are they crying? I'm the one going to jail." Stannis would respond that way. And has. You've stated that you think it's an over-blown sense of honour, but just have a look at how he approaches situations. Yes, Mel is having an influence, but Stannis was cold before then. He cannot really relate to his friend Davos, shows no emotion towards his daughter or his wife, and constantly blames everyone else for his problems. He doesn't understand people so does not know how to get them to follow him. Tywin is a good comparrison for this, Tywin does have his honour and his code, but understands how to make people follow him. Stannis can't even interpret how to get people to fear him. He just fails at people.

LF understands people, he understands how they react and why they feel the way they feel. That requires a level of sophistication and empathy that someone who is psychopathic just cannot have. Not the real life version of a psychopath rather than the glorified TV/Movie/Book version.

I'm not saying LF isn't more dangerous than Stannis, but dangerous doesn't mean psychopathic. I've worked with rehabilitating violent offenders, and I can tell you I've had conversations with more Stannis-like people than I've had with LF type ones. (actually more Gregor and Hoat, but they are different type of this behaviour). While I'm not a psychologist, so cannot diagnose, I'm a social worker and worked closely with the psychologist who did do the diagnosis. And the Stannis-type personality is more likely to have sociopathic traits than the LF types. The LF types are the bright people who take advantage of situations.

But I don't think we're going to agree on this, and that's okay. We've got a whole 'nother book coming and we haven't seen a heap of LF in comparrison to Stannis. If he starts showing me some real signs he's a psychopath I'll happily retract. But Stannis is totally a sociopath, and that's going to take a lot for me to retract that statement.

[Valamway]

Pah i read it all :3 missed a few of those points :/

[Delta1212]

I can see how people can admire LF in the "badass villain" angle, but I don't understand the notion of actually thinking he's awesome. He's clearly one of the most sociopathic men in the series. Big time evil, like Ser Gregor lvl evil, just in a hands off kind of way.

My own personal theory is that he has a connection to the others, and is just causing chaos so the others can win. Yes, i think he's that evil. I don't have much evidence to back that up, its just my hunch based on how disturbingly evil he is.

This is why: Count up the number of awesome characters in this series. Now compare the number of those characters that have outright murdered people with the number who haven't.

In a world where the baseline of the society would probably be slightly sociopathic from a modern real world perspective, Peyr Baelish is the Vetinari of sociopaths. Yeah, he does a lot of things despicable things, but they're generally not... gratuitously evil, and he's so incredibly successful that he's hard not to admire. ASoIaF is like a great big sport match, and Petyr is a star player. He may not be someone you'd like to be involved with in your personal life, but that doesn't quite stop you from rooting for his talent.

[Raksha the Demon]

Finally, I have to agree that I never saw Cersei as being psychotic either. Her behaviour is certainly despicable, but I don't see her as being inherently evil. I guess it's because there always seemed to be a method to Cersei's madness. She is callous, cruel and lacks empathy but she is also operating under the idea that she is the Queen Regent. LF's lack of a clear motive is what makes him in extremely dangerous.

I am not sure whether Cersei is psychotic, paranoid, or otherwise mentally ill; but she does seem to emotionally deteriorate in AFFC. As for being evil, I think she's as close to it as possible.

She had a vicious streak at the age of eight or nine - torturing her helpless baby brother.

It's implied that a couple of years later, Cersei threw her friend Melara down a well to drown.

Raising a sociopathic, or at least especially cruel child who will one day wield great power as the King of Westeros; Cersei doesn't seem to even try to discipline him or put the brakes on Joffrey's desires, until it is too late.

The incident with Joffrey, Arya, Sansa, Mycah and the girls' wolves. Deprived of the punishment of Arya, Cersei demands the life of one of the wolves; not caring that the wolf is her future daughter-in-law's pet and it's not proven that the animal touched Joffrey. She could have just as easily demanded that Lady be sent back to Winterfell.

Sending Goldcloaks to murder Robert's infant bastard daughter and older bastard son, despite the kids not having done anything but exist. Yes, I know she was afraid that their existence, with black hair and blonde mothers, might be used as evidence, but Cersei could have offered the whore a place for herself as a servant at Casterly Rock and had her bring the kid; and financed Gendry being apprenticed to a smith somewhere other than King's Landing.

Ordering Ser Ilyn to murder Sansa if Stannis & co. succeeded in capturing the palace/Maegor's Keep - that was quite nasty, since Cersei arranged to have herself killed to, why would it matter whether Sansa survived or not?

Giving the distraught Stokeworth woman to Qyburn to experiment on - that seems particularly ghastly, especially since she and her idiot husband had tried to do Cersei's dirty work for her. At least Cersei should have given the woman a quick death.

Oh yes, Cersei's scheme to destroy Margaery, not caring how many of Margaery's cousins/maids were also ruined and possibly executed, all because Cersei had a bad dream. If Cersei had any sense, she'd have realized that Margaery and the Tyrells had a strong motive to keep Tommen alive and in good condition, at least until he was old enough to sire an heir on Margaery. There was no need for that scheme; Cersei did it mainly out of jealousy because of Margeary's influence over Tommen.

If Cersei is not evil, then she is at least an extremely bitter, angry and mean lady.

[brashcandy]

Flit,

Yes we do have another book to read along with 2 more coming in the future so it will be interesting to continue this debate when we have more evidence for both men :)

I do respect your actual experience with these case types, and what you say concerning LF is persuasive. He may or may not degenerate further, but I think we can both agree that there will be no redemptive path for him along the lines of Jaime Lannister for instance.

I admit that I still cannot see Stannis as a sociopath. He is anti-social and cold but I don't think he would be able to inspire the loyalty and confidence of a man like Davos if he was truly sociopathic. Also remember old Maester Cressen who was actually willing to sacrifice his life to rid Stannis of Melissandre? Even though he is hard and seemingly merciless, he is obviously able to get others to love and want to protect him.

LF on the other hand is utterly friendless. Not that I think he wants friends mind you, but there is no one close to him on any level. Whilst we could argue that this is the way LF wants it, it still speaks volumes about the way others perceive him. The only woman he could get to love him is Lysa Arryn and that says it all.

Stannis' relationship with his family is often remarked upon by other characters as being cold and he seems to feel no sexual desire for his wife. But again, given Selsye's appearance, this might not be hard to understand, but he does seem to feel affection for his daughter Shireen. Even when he goes to the wall as far as I remember, the men there seem to respect him and he is able to foster a relationship with them.

There is an interesting passage from the ACOK right before Cressen dies. He says to himself:

" Stannis my lord, my sad sullen boy, son I never had, you must not do this, don't you know how I cared for you, lived for you, loved you despite all? Yes, loved you, better than Robert even, or Renly, for you were the one unloved, the one who needed me most."

Now Flit, don't use this as evidence to support your claims :) The way I see it is that Stannis was the brother that never really got any affection or support from his family. Robert was the warrior and Renly was the showman. He was caught in the middle literally and obviously suffered from feelings of neglect. Could this have produced a sociopath? Certainly it could, but I don't think in this case it did. Stannis seems to have retreated within himself and used coldness and harshness as an armor, but I don't think he is an amoral or remorseless man.

Contrast what we know of Stannis' upbringing with what we know of LF's and an interesting piture emerges. Here is a man who had all the luxuries afforded to him as a ward of the Tullys. He enjoyed a good relationship with both daughters. We can argue that the humialition he suffered when he fought Brandon Stark set him on his path to malice and mayhem, but who really knows? The fact is that he had a solid childhood, but yet something obviously went wrong somewhere. Or, the way I see it is that something was always wrong with LF. I think he was a deeply disturbed child and even then was able to hide it well.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, Flit.