Why is Euron's capacity for evil underestimated?

[eddard of the house stark]

Sounds positively tame compared to Gregor's or Ramsay's records.

Exactly. It is not that Euron isn't evil, but Gregor and Ramsay are both far more twisted.

[Fire Eater]

Euron doesn't engage in the outright brutality and malevolence of Ramsay and Gregor, how can he match raping and killing a woman after killing her infant or skinning people alive.

He raped his younger brother Aeron, had Lord Blacktyde cut into seven pieces, fed a man to his compatriots and laughed when recounted disemboweling a Myrish hedge wizard, but that doesn't even match Gregor or Ramsay.

[AdXRoss]

We've certainly heard plenty about the 'black' reputation of Euron, and we have seen a couple of things, such as him selling his Arbor captives into slavery, and of course we get a few hints from the Greyjoys that he has done evil things, but we haven't really witnessed him do anything directly to a beloved or at least sympathetic character. In comparison, the Mountain is presented as a threat to Arya and is heavily involved in some of the worst excesses of Tywin's war against the Starks and Tullys in the Riverlands. We've seen Ramsay do all sorts of things to Theon, and even if you don't care about him, he does plenty to the remaining citizens of Winterfell.

Similarly, both Gregor and Ramsay have very much been villains to the Starks, whereas Euron hasn't gotten into the middle of the action yet.

[the Scorpion Knight]

Euron is certainly cruel, unforgiving, cold and calculating, but I wouldn't call him evil. He does what he does to achieve something, while people like Ramsay and Gregor like hurting people, and can't control their bloodlust.

tell that to the warlocks who were forced to eat another warlock, Aeron, and Vic's wife

Euron has done very little other than the usual ironborn stuff

Balon kicked him out. now let that linger for a moment

we haven't seen enough of him. And what we have seen was through the eyes of his family who were "privileged" enough to avoid his worst excesses. He wasn't really free to do whatever he wished to them.

Meanwhile we're seen Gregor and Ramsay through the eyes of Theon and Arya, people who had absolutely no recourse against them. Had we seen Euron through the eyes of one of his victims or lowborn subordinates, we might have a different idea of him.

IMO Gregor isn't really as evil or depraved as the Brave Companions or the High Sparrow.

that 's because gerogor has something that ramsay lacks: a bit of selfcontroll

[Light a wight tonight]

This is Euron tread and i would hate to hijack it in the name of Littlefinger but i would say that he said that so that he can earn Sansa's trust even more.

This is a thread comparing Euron's evil to that of others. I say that Littlefinger is evil. He's not merely out for gain but to revenge himself on society for a host of slights, real or imagined. He engineers Ned's death, Joff's death, Dontos's death, Jon Arryn's death, carries out Lysa's death, gets Tryion blamed for the assasination arrempt on Bran, kidnaps Jeyne Pool and sets her up in one of his brothels, then gives her to Ramsay, and a number of other despciable deeds. These are the acts of a truly evil man.

[Ororo727 Jon Snow Fangirl]

Euron has done very little other than the usual ironborn stuff

Which is evil.

[The Red Hand]

I think Euron is definitely on the same level as Ramsay and Gregor. He has one brother killed, molested another, has men eat each other, has one guy drowned for supporting Theon as king, etc.

Most of Euron's savagery is off-screen, not narrarated in vivid detail like like Ramsay and Gregor. Also, he's funny.

[sifth]

Euron is a bit of a mixed bag if anything, he's both crazy and smart. Which probably makes him closer to being like Roose Bolton, than it does Joffery, The Mountain, or Ramsay

If anything he's a wild card, which probably makes him the most dangerous villain in the series

[Lion of Judah]

I don't think it's underestimated we just don't have first hand evidence of it, but Theon sort of gave us insight into just how wicked Euron can be.

[Fire Eater]

I don't think it's underestimated we just don't have first hand evidence of it, but Theon sort of gave us insight into just how wicked Euron can be.

I guess every family has its creepy uncle.

If anything he's a wild card, which probably makes him the most dangerous villain in the series

I think Cersei can challenge that claim.

[Lion of Judah]

I guess every family has it's creepy uncle.

I think Cersei can challenge that claim.

Tell me about it!

[thewingedwolf]

I think it mostly has to do with us witnessing much more of the evil done my Ramsay and Gregor Clegane since Euron is a much more recent character than the other two. However, when it is all said and done, I would put my money on Euron topping the list of evil.

[Pod The Impaler]

Euron's not some drooling sicko in the style of Ramsay of Joffrey, but it is the fact he is combines a lot of things which increase his capacity for large-scale villany:

- Extreme ambition (wants all of Westeros)

- clearly dabbles in black magic, dubious travel to / escape from demonic sorts of places

- god complex / megalomania ("I am the first storm and the last", etc.)

- treats family as just more victims

- extreme callousness

- foreshadowed in prophecy (this isn't a personality trait, but still bad news)

So he's not the sort to personally go out to torture and rape every hapless peasant (too mundane and lowly for him), but he would have no problem ordering it done.

Perfect husband for Cersei really.

New flag-ship of Evil: Cerson

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

While Euron might not be as downright sick as Gregor or Ramsay, I would argue that his intelligence, ambition and power make him nonetheless a more formidable villain than either of them. I absolutely do think that he's evil, and not one of his family members (and we have four Greyjoy POVs, quite a few for a seemingly second-tier house) says anything to challenge that. If anything, they corroborate it.

[NotSoSilentSister]

... but we haven't really witnessed him do anything directly to a beloved or at least sympathetic character.

That's pretty much it, I agree.

Ramsay, Roose, Gregor, the Mountain, Littlefinger are all fairly sociopathic in their own right, so I don't see much use in a ranking of their evilness. None of them seems ever harmstrung by something like a conscience in their pursuits (at least it's difficult to envision any of them every experiencing remorse for screwing someone else over; if they should ever be sorry for something, they'll only be sorry that they got caught), so if their cacapcity for evil is limited in any way, it's certainly not by something like morals or standards.

But some people apparently like to make a distinction between Roose/LF-style ruthlessness and Gregor/Ramsay style sadism, with the former for some reason registering as less evil, and we can't quite say yet which category Euron falls in.

While someone like Gregor would certainly see the fun in Ramsay's version of hunting and happily join should he get an invitation, Roose and LF would probably find that they have better things to do, more likely to further their greater ambitions. The idea is that they are certainly cruel, but not "needlessly" so (although I'm not sure it's that big of a difference; it's trivally easy to rationalize cruelity and I do suspect that LF, and maybe Roose too, take a certain amount of pleasure in the suffering they cause that goes beyond mere satisfaction in a plan coming together, but it's certainly not as blatant as with Ramsay and Gregor, usually avoiding to get their own hands dirty. Largely that probably amounts to a question of intelligence rather than morals). So we assume that Roose and LF's evilness is limited in some way after all: not by morals, no, but by reason. Gregor and Ramsay will hurt you whenever they have the opportunity. LF and Roose will only hurt you if it benefits them in some additional way, beyond mere sadistic glee at your suffering. So it's technically possible to imagine a scenario where LF and Roose are not causing all that much damage to others - namely when everything is going their way anyway - while Ramsay and Gregor types will always be pox on the earth. (Again, I think the distinction is rather academical. It's pretty impossible to a design a scenario in which things are always going the way of the LFs and Rooses, and since those types tend to have the frustration tolerance of a toddler - not immediately throwing a tantrum of course; they can be patient in their vengeance, but they remember every slight - neutralizing them by keeping them satisfied is not a realistic opition).

[The Storm Queen]

While Euron might not be as downright sick as Gregor or Ramsay, I would argue that his intelligence, ambition and power make him nonetheless a more formidable villain than either of them. I absolutely do think that he's evil, and not one of his family members (and we have four Greyjoy POVs, quite a few for a seemingly second-tier house) says anything to challenge that. If anything, they corroborate it.

Exactly; If the Ironborn, and especially the Greyjoys, think that you are the worst, well, then you probably are.

That's pretty much it, I agree.

Ramsay, Roose, Gregor, the Mountain, Littlefinger are all fairly sociopathic in their own right, so I don't see much use in a ranking of their evilness. None of them seems ever harmstrung by something like a conscience in their pursuits (at least it's difficult to envision any of them every experiencing remorse for screwing someone else over; if they should ever be sorry for something, they'll only be sorry that they got caught), so if their cacapcity for evil is limited in any way, it's certainly not by something like morals or standards.

But some people apparently like to make a distinction between Roose/LF-style ruthlessness and Gregor/Ramsay style sadism, with the former for some reason registering as less evil, and we can't quite say yet which category Euron falls in.

While someone like Gregor would certainly see the fun in Ramsay's version of hunting and happily join should he get an invitation, Roose and LF would probably find that they have better things to do, more likely to further their greater ambitions. The idea is that they are certainly cruel, but not "needlessly" so (although I'm not sure it's that big of a difference; it's trivally easy to rationalize cruelity and I do suspect that LF, and maybe Roose too, take a certain amount of pleasure in the suffering they cause that goes beyond mere satisfaction in a plan coming together, but it's certainly not as blatant as with Ramsay and Gregor, usually avoiding to get their own hands dirty. Largely that probably amounts to a question of intelligence rather than morals). So we assume that Roose and LF's evilness is limited in some way after all: not by morals, no, but by reason. Gregor and Ramsay will hurt you whenever they have the opportunity. LF and Roose will only hurt you if it benefits them in some additional way, beyond mere sadistic glee at your suffering. So it's technically possible to imagine a scenario where LF and Roose are not causing all that much damage to others - namely when everything is going their way anyway - while Ramsay and Gregor types will always be pox on the earth. (Again, I think the distinction is rather academical. It's pretty impossible to a design a scenario in which things are always going the way of the LFs and Rooses, and since those types tend to have the frustration tolerance of a toddler - not immediately throwing a tantrum of course; they can be patient in their vengeance, but they remember every slight - neutralizing them by keeping them satisfied is not a realistic opition).

I get what you are saying. To me LF and Roose are on the one hand less frightening because they do not attack blindly and I get at least the feeling that one might be able to negotiate with them in some way or the other if you have something that benefits them. Ramsay and Gregor on the other hand are pure id.

Yet, LF and Roose are more dangerous. In their calculated way they are more likely to cause wide-spread destruction and suffering.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I get what you are saying. To me LF and Roose are on the one hand less frightening because they do not attack blindly and I get at least the feeling that one might be able to negotiate with them in some way or the other if you have something that benefits them. Ramsay and Gregor on the other hand are pure id.

Yet, LF and Roose are more dangerous. In their calculated way they are more likely to cause wide-spread destruction and suffering.

A few weeks ago I suggested that someone with rational or even "good" intentions with the capability of causing widespread harm was worse than a sociopath only capable of spreading small-scale harm. You'd think I was advocating puppy-kicking. :dunno:

[NotSoSilentSister]

But frankly, for me the main difference between Ramsay/Gregor and LF/Roose is that the latter seem to have a better grasp of what they can get away with, without attracting too much opposition, when that can be avoided. Euron seems to be more in the class of Ramsay and Gregor in that regard, not caring about the enemies he makes with his blatant abuses of his power. To those who'd argue that his antics are in line with general Ironborn awfulness, I'd like to point out that even Victarion, who's certainly nobody's idea of a humanitarian, feels somewhat icky about Euron's transgressions at the Shield Islands.

Regarding the criterion "awareness of what you can get away with", I'd rank them with Ramsay clearly at the bottom, followed by Gregor, Euron and Roose tied for second place and certainly LF at the top.

[Nick Baratheon]

He gained nothing out of telling Lysa he only ever loved Cat before killing her. That was pure malevolence.

that bitch deserved it

[NotSoSilentSister]

A few weeks ago I suggested that someone with rational or even "good" intentions with the capability of causing widespread harm was worse than a sociopath only capable of spreading small-scale harm. You'd think I was advocating puppy-kicking. :dunno:

But none of them is as bad as the sociopath capable of causing widespread harm.

Misguided idealists with global power do certainly more damage than petty sadists with only local power; put petty sadists can attain global power as well, if they are elegant and sublte enough about their pettiness not to be taken out to soon in their ascension to power.