Grey Characters

[Richard Rivers]

True but ask yourself why is he loyal? Gold and titles surely means nothing to a man like Gregor. Fear and respect? Hardly. I think Gregor knows that to do what he wants he needs the protection Tywin can give him. Under a normal lord he would be hunted down but Tywin enables him to indulge in his practices. Its not loyalty, more like a symbiotic relationship between two parasites.

I was actually running the scenario in my mind of Tywin and Gregor coming to laggerheads and seeing what the result would be. I definitely agree the situation lends itself to the benefit of both parties. But an interesting comparison is the difference between Gregor and Ramsay. Taking out the real possibility of a mental disability in Ramsay. Ramsay exudes little desire to fulling be contain by his father, and would and probably will contend he does not need his father's protection. Which may lend to the question, whether Ramsay is capable or desirous of ever maintaining loyalty. Granted, Gregor adheres to his loyalty for his own private aims, but alas so do all that are loyal. Now there can be no doubt, so of the private aims are more noble that others, i.e. I am loyal because I am following what can be termed as a good cause or I am loyal because you are my friend. Those these last two seem altrusitic, they are still self serving in the thought of ahering to a personal ethos.

[Richard Rivers]

I don't think it's quite "loyalty" that he displays, not in the sense we usually think of loyalty. Gregor doesn't change sides because he never has to. Lannisters gave him everything he has, they pay him very well, and let him do anything he likes, no questions asked. It's not really loyalty out of love or respect or fear, nor is it loyalty through good times and bad. It's interest. He never has any reason to think he'd be better off serving someone else.

Even Sandor who likes to think of himself as very loyal changes sides and wants to go over to the Starks when he sees that he'd be better off away from the Lannisters.

You make a great point, and I think we may be lacking any evidence to support my idea from the text, i.e. does Tywin truly control Gregor. Because, I cannot recall in the books, if they ever had an argument. And yes, depending on our idea of loyalty, it being a noble cause, then Gregor would not fit the bill. But, if we remove the beauty of loyalty, and simply stamp it as unwavering adherence to something, I believe I may have some footing.

[Frey Pie]

I was actually running the scenario in my mind of Tywin and Gregor coming to laggerheads and seeing what the result would be. I definitely agree the situation lends itself to the benefit of both parties. But an interesting comparison is the difference between Gregor and Ramsay. Taking out the real possibility of a mental disability in Ramsay. Ramsay exudes little desire to fulling be contain by his father, and would and probably will contend he does not need his father's protection. Which may lend to the question, whether Ramsay is capable or desirous of ever maintaining loyalty. Granted, Gregor adheres to his loyalty for his own private aims, but alas so do all that are loyal. Now there can be no doubt, so of the private aims are more noble that others, i.e. I am loyal because I am following what can be termed as a good cause or I am loyal because you are my friend. Those these last two seem altrusitic, they are still self serving in the thought of ahering to a personal ethos.

Theres a interesting parallel between Tywin/Gregor and Ned with his he who swings the sword line. Ned plays both parts all be it in a different way. Wev seen Tywin pass the sentence, but Gregor swings the sword for him. In any case this is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

This is becoming like a conversation i had with my gf about the book the selfish gene. If in fact all things that we do are inherently self serving, if not in direct effect at least in our feelings i.e. it makes us feel better to do it even though we get nothing material from the act, then there is still a very real distinction between different acts, both good and evil. Therefore i see a huge difference in say Hotahs loyalty to Doran and Gregors to Tywin.

Are they both what i term evil? I would have to say yes, although Tywin himself might disagree

[Lady Lea]

Granted, Gregor adheres to his loyalty for his own private aims, but alas so do all that are loyal. Now there can be no doubt, so of the private aims are more noble that others, i.e. I am loyal because I am following what can be termed as a good cause or I am loyal because you are my friend. Those these last two seem altrusitic, they are still self serving in the thought of ahering to a personal ethos.

Interesting point. Perhaps one could argue that initially the bond can be formed through personal interest or affinity. But true loyalty remains, even through the bad times. For example, Roose Bolton betrays Robb Stark when things start looking down. But the Mormont women stay true, even when Dacey (and others? I don't remember) is killed, and even after the Starks are pretty much vanquished. JonCon remains faithfull to Rhaegar even after he is dead! But Barristan changes loyalties when Robert Baratheon becomes king.

If House Lannister suddenly lost their power, money and influence, would Gregor really stay with them? I wouldn't bet on it.

You make a great point, and I think we may be lacking any evidence to support my idea from the text, i.e. does Tywin truly control Gregor. Because, I cannot recall in the books, if they ever had an argument. And yes, depending on our idea of loyalty, it being a noble cause, then Gregor would not fit the bill. But, if we remove the beauty of loyalty, and simply stamp it as unwavering adherence to something, I believe I may have some footing.

Hmm yes it would be nice if we knew more about their relationship. Tywin saw who exactly Gregor was with the Targaryen incident. I don't think Tywin really controls him or tells him what to do but he knows what to expect. He sends Gregor to do the dirtiest work and gives him free rein. My guess is that when he's not needed he just goes back to the Clegane keep. But I think that if Tywin said specifically "do not do X" that Gregor would obey.

[998]

Barristan allows Sansa to be beaten. Not that great.

[Lady Lea]

Barristan allows Sansa to be beaten. Not that great.

He isn't there, he was already fired.

[Winter is cumming]

Theon is an EXTREMELY grey character mabey the most grey in the entire book. The Hound is another great example of a really grey character. Ramsay is really the only pure evil character I can think of, I wouldn't go that far with even Gregor.

[Winter is cumming]

The reason why Gregor is not 100 % pure evil is that most of the things he does serve a purpose, ( I know raping doesn't), it's just his methods that are out of line. Where as Ramsay will do a multitude of pure evil things for no purpose whatsoever

[Lady Lea]

The reason why Gregor is not 100 % pure evil is that most of the things he does serve a purpose, ( I know raping doesn't), it's just his methods that are out of line. Where as Ramsay will do a multitude of pure evil things for no purpose whatsoever

Some things Ramsay also does with a purpose, like killing Roose's trueborn son. Gregor does mindless cruel things all the time, and he enjoys it too. How did putting Sandor's face in the fire serve any purpose? Or that episode where he raped the innkeeper's daughter? Or killing his servants?

[Every]

Barristan did. He stood by when Aerys burned so many. When Aerys raped his wife. Barristan never once stood up to protect anyone.

He then bent the knee to the Usurper.

Exactly. He turned his back on the Targaryen heirs, and then when Joffrey dismissed him, he betrayed the Baratheon dynasty and ran back to the Targs. Selmy is a very grey character.

[Every]

Some things Ramsay also does with a purpose, like killing Roose's trueborn son. Gregor does mindless cruel things all the time, and he enjoys it too. How did putting Sandor's face in the fire serve any purpose? Or that episode where he raped the innkeeper's daughter? Or killing his servants?

In order for Gregor as a character to be morally grey (rather than black) it's not necessary for all of his atrocities to have been justifiable. All that's necessary is for one of his actions to be less than pure evil.

[Frey Pie]

Theon is an EXTREMELY grey character mabey the most grey in the entire book. The Hound is another great example of a really grey character. Ramsay is really the only pure evil character I can think of, I wouldn't go that far with even Gregor.

Theon is very grey and i would agree with Georges statement if all the characters had an arc simolar to him. His decision to betray Robb is a lose lose situation. Family or friends? I think he knows now he made the wrong choice. His greatest evil supposedly in the book is killing the Stark boys. We know he didnt do this but he did kill the two millers boys to cover up, which is just as great an evil. Yet hes been punished over and over and saved Bran, Robb and Jeyne. Hes a great character and i hope he has a great, redeeming death.

I also think Jaimes a grey character, along possibly with Catelyn. My point is i think there are grey, white and black characters and people who use Georges statement as creed are faulty in their thoughts

The reason why Gregor is not 100 % pure evil is that most of the things he does serve a purpose, ( I know raping doesn't), it's just his methods that are out of line. Where as Ramsay will do a multitude of pure evil things for no purpose whatsoever

Is anyone who rapes evil? Perhaps not in Westeros but to my eyes yes. Unless they somehw make ammends, which is nigh on impossible. He also cut up Vargo Hoat and served him cooked pieces of himself-needless violence. Attempting to kill Loras when he was beaten, killing his horse. Cruel and stupid. Id call him cruel, evil stupid and tortured

[BongSooHan]

I guess Ramsey is more intelligent then Gregor, I think Ramsey plans the things he does. Gregor is just primitive and violent. IMHO that makes Ramsey worse then Gergor. For me the 2nd place goes to Theon.

[Frey Pie]

In order for Gregor as a character to be morally grey (rather than black) it's not necessary for all of his atrocities to have been justifiable. All that's necessary is for one of his actions to be less than pure evil.

I for one cannot accept this. If someone does 99 bad things and 1 good thing they are a bad person. If its 60/40 perhaps it can be argued they are misguided.

Grey people are those who do both good and bad, some to a greater extent on either side. One good deed does not make black turn grey

[Lady Lea]

In order for Gregor as a character to be morally grey (rather than black) it's not necessary for all of his atrocities to have been justifiable. All that's necessary is for one of his actions to be less than pure evil.

Can you expand on this? What act of his can be seen as justifiable?

[Frey Pie]

I guess Ramsey is more intelligent then Gregor, I think Ramsey plans the things he does. Gregor is just primitive and violent. IMHO that makes Ramsey worse then Gergor. For me the 2nd place goes to Theon.

Why Theon?

[finishingmove]

Barristan did. He stood by when Aerys burned so many. When Aerys raped his wife. Barristan never once stood up to protect anyone.

He then bent the knee to the Usurper.

So,

1. Barristan = Tywin in terms of good : bad ratio ? :laugh:

2. Do you think Barristan could have possibly made all the right choices to be "100% white" in the end?

If Jaime's case reached you even remotely, you'd see it's not really possible in real scenarios.

[finishingmove]

Also, everyone seems be throwing this 'very grey' thing around lol.

Can you explain what something like that would mean ?

The logical thing to conclude is that the person who is 'very grey' is right in the middle between white and black, therefore having done an equal share of good and bad things. Somehow I don't think that's what you're implying, because Barristan and Theon are definitely not 'very grey' going by this.

[Lady Lea]

So,

1. Barristan = Tywin in terms of good : bad ratio ? :laugh:

2. Do you think Barristan could have possibly made all the right choices to be "100% white" in the end?

If Jaime's case reached you even remotely, you'd see it's not really possible in real scenarios.

Barristan unfortunately is part of a very contradictory system. See the "What would Ser Barristan do" thread. Some posters explain beautifully the hypocrisy of knighthood and of the Kingsguard. But it doesn't change the fact, for me, that he is a gray character, and not the epitome of goodness that most people around these parts seem to think he is

[finishingmove]

Barristan unfortunately is part of a very contradictory system. See the "What would Ser Barristan do" thread. Some posters explain beautifully the hypocrisy of knighthood and of the Kingsguard. But it doesn't change the fact, for me, that he is a gray character, and not the epitome of goodness that most people around these parts seem to think he is

Everyone is grey. In the real world and, since GRRM tries to keep his characters as real as possible, in ASOIAF as well. Some will naturally seem more foreign and distant to us, because of a lack of POV.