Relative atrocities

[Fearsedge]

I should be in bed, but I think I have a good idea for a thread. (hey, it rhymed)

One of the most interesting things to me about ASoIaF is the greyness of the characters, and the conflicting principles at work regarding most of the decisions the characters make.The idea is to name some horrible acts, crimes or atrocities, that a character(s) committed. Divide into two lists(as many as you want, could be just one on each list) one list is for ones you can come up with at least one decent reason to justify, mitigate, or otherwise explain and then second list ones that you can't justify or mitigate, no matter which way you look at it.

I'm going to do it for characters I like, stay away from obvious ones like the Red Wedding, and avoid cultural relativism for my justification. You don't have to do it that way, but it's a matter of taste for me.

The point is firstly of course to encourage discussion, but specifically to see what is on the opposite list for some people. I think it'll be fun. Maybe some of you will too :)

Forgivable (or let's say understandable or sympathetic)

1. Firstly, I think Cat killing Jinglebell can be considered pretty horrible. The man was a half-wit, no danger to anyone and guilty of nothing but bearing the name Frey and being present. Cat holds him hostage, hoping to get Walder Frey to spare her son's life. Frey says he would trade the half-wit for a son, and Robb is killed before her eyes. She then murders Jinglebell with a dagger, after she knows he isn't useful for leverage.

That's a pretty despicable act, yet as I typed it I was already excusing her, really. Cat's husband was publicly murdered and labeled a traitor, their ward had forcibly taken their home and murdered her 2 young sons. Her daughters were either hostages or missing/dead. The weight of guilt and doubt had been heavy on her for some time. She was watching people she had known for years, her loyal subjects and retainers and friends, being butchered around her in act of despicable treachery. And of course, her last living son was killed by one of his own subjects right in front of her. Cat simply couldn't take any more, and she was likely insane at that point.

2. Jaime throwing Bran from a tower. That's pretty horrible to throw a kid to his death for being guilty of catching you at something you shouldn't be doing in the first place.

However I can't help but think that he was not just saving himself, but his sister and 3 innocent children. Well, 2 innocent children(Joffrey is a monster, albeit he hasn't done anything too horrible yet to my knowledge). To me, that means something.

Unjustifiable

1. Theon killing the 2 (farmer's? butchers?) millers boys. I think Theon is a great character and very interesting to read about. I can understand a lot of the terrible things he does, but there is just no way this was necessary or justifiable to me. The boys were no threat to anyone, were guilty of nothing, and were only killed so Theon could hopefully save face.

(By the way, Ramsay is a sick maniac. I know it's obvious and not really relevant , but I am just bringing it up now because he was involved. Hate that guy.

I hope no one picks ANYTHING that guy did for their first list, but HEY, you never know, I've seen some pretty funny justifications for things on this forum XD Picking him for the second list would be kind of silly though because, well, he's Ramsay.)

2. Cersei throwing Melara down a well. Well, we don't know for certain she did it, though I think it is rather obvious. It's not in the series proper, and it seems obvious since it's Cersei, but I can actually justify some of what Cersei does, so I am putting it on here as being bad even for Cersei, which says A LOT. She murders a child for hearing some crone spout prophecies, and perhaps because the girl wanted Jaime. That's just horrible, and the fact that she's a child herself doesn't actually help in my eyes.

3. Robb forsaking his promise to the Freys, and marrying Jeyne Westerling. SOOOO STUPID!!!!1!!!2!!

Sorry, couldn't help it. Last one was obviously a joke, but I really need to sleep, so I can't do anymore real ones for either list like I would like to do. If this thread takes off, I'll add some more later. Have fun, and I hope there's some interesting replies and discussion when I check tomorrow. :)

edit: did anyone else laugh at the term "relative atrocities"? I thought that was a hilarious phrase. Could be a Metal Band.

Also Butterbumps pointed out the word "justifiable" isn't the best one for what I'm getting at here so I made it a little more clear.

I should be in bed, but I think I have a good idea for a thread. (hey, it rhymed)

One of the most interesting things to me about ASoIaF is the greyness of the characters, and the conflicting principles at work regarding most of the decisions the characters make.The idea is to name some horrible acts, crimes or atrocities, that a character(s) committed. Divide into two lists(as many as you want, could be just one on each list) one list is for ones you can come up with at least one decent reason to justify, mitigate, or otherwise explain and then second list ones that you can't justify or mitigate, no matter which way you look at it.

I'm going to do it for characters I like, stay away from obvious ones like the Red Wedding, and avoid cultural relativism for my justification. You don't have to do it that way, but it's a matter of taste for me.

The point is firstly of course to encourage discussion, but specifically to see what is on the opposite list for some people. I think it'll be fun. Maybe some of you will too :)

Justifiable(or let's say understandable or sympathetic)

1. Firstly, I think Cat killing Jinglebell can be considered pretty horrible. The man was a half-wit, no danger to anyone and guilty of nothing but bearing the name Frey and being present. Cat holds him hostage, hoping to get Walder Frey to spare her son's life. Frey says he would trade the half-wit for a son, and Robb is killed before her eyes. She then murders Jinglebell with a dagger, after she knows he isn't useful for leverage.

That's a pretty despicable act, yet as I typed it I was already excusing her, really. Cat's husband was publicly murdered and labeled a traitor, their ward had forcibly taken their home and murdered her 2 young sons. Her daughters were either hostages or missing/dead. The weight of guilt and doubt had been heavy on her for some time. She was watching people she had known for years, her loyal subjects and retainers and friends, being butchered around her in act of despicable treachery. And of course, her last living son was killed by one of his own subjects right in front of her. Cat simply couldn't take any more, and she was likely insane at that point.

2. Jaime throwing Bran from a tower. That's pretty horrible to throw a kid to his death for being guilty of catching you at something you shouldn't be doing in the first place.

However I can't help but think that he was not just saving himself, but his sister and 3 innocent children. Well, 2 innocent children(Joffrey is a monster, albeit he hasn't done anything too horrible yet to my knowledge). To me, that means something.

Unjustifiable

1. Theon killing the 2 (farmer's? butchers?) millers boys. I think Theon is a great character and very interesting to read about. I can understand a lot of the terrible things he does, but there is just no way this was necessary or justifiable to me. The boys were no threat to anyone, were guilty of nothing, and were only killed so Theon could hopefully save face.

(By the way, Ramsay is a sick maniac. I know it's obvious and not really relevant , but I am just bringing it up now because he was involved. Hate that guy.

I hope no one picks ANYTHING that guy did for their first list, but HEY, you never know, I've seen some pretty funny justifications for things on this forum XD Picking him for the second list would be kind of silly though because, well, he's Ramsay.)

2. Cersei throwing Melara down a well. Well, we don't know for certain she did it, though I think it is rather obvious. It's not in the series proper, and it seems obvious since it's Cersei, but I can actually justify some of what Cersei does, so I am putting it on here as being bad even for Cersei, which says A LOT. She murders a child for hearing some crone spout prophecies, and perhaps because the girl wanted Jaime. That's just horrible, and the fact that she's a child herself doesn't actually help in my eyes.

3. Robb forsaking his promise to the Freys, and marrying Jeyne Westerling. SOOOO STUPID!!!!1!!!2!!

Sorry, couldn't help it. Last one was obviously a joke, but I really need to sleep, so I can't do anymore real ones for either list like I would like to do. If this thread takes off, I'll add some more later. Have fun, and I hope there's some interesting replies and discussion when I check tomorrow. :)

edit: did anyone else laugh at the term "relative atrocities"? I thought that was a hilarious phrase. Could be a Metal Band.

Also Butterbumps pointed out the word "justifiable" isn't the best one for what I'm getting at here so I made it a little more clear.

[ab aeterno]

2. Stannis wanting to Burn Edric Storm. Stannis is one of my favorite characters, he's awesome. However, being willing to burn an innocent child alive so you can sit on the Realms Most Uncomfortable Chair is just beyond any justification, for me. If I am not mistaken, this is even before he takes up shop in the North, where his mission is more selfless.

Unfortunately I do not have the time to debate this properly at present, but Stannis' wasn't considering burning Edric Storm to win the throne per se, he considered it because Mel was telling him that it was necessary to save the realm from the Others. At this point Stannis had already seen the Night's Watch being routed in the fires, and Davos attests to Stannis' sincerity.

There is also this:"I never asked for this crown. Gold is cold and heavy on the head but so long as I am the king, I have a duty … If I must sacrifice one child to the flames to save a million from the dark … Sacrifice … is never easy, Davos. Or it is no true sacrifice."

[Arkash]

Justifiable :

Brotherhood hanging Freys.

Oberyn not being fair-play and using poison.

Tyrion slaying his father.

Jinglebells of course.

The mutinery at Craster's... I know this one is a bit ambiguous and I hesitated myself, but, well, we're talking about starved, abstinent, hopeless, frozen and lost blokes... it is easy to see how their nerves did loose... but it's still is atrocious : murders, rapes, stealing...

I actually wonder if the women did survive after their passage, or what happened next there afterwards, really curious.

Unjustifiable :

- Gregor, Ramsay, Joffrey are obvious.

- People in Meereen throwing kids at bears.

- Sam killing the WW : heck, maybe he just wanted a little chat !

(this one was a joke !).

I too do enjoy the "Relative atrocities" name ! Let's do a Trash Metal band of it !

[eggs]

1. Firstly, I think Cat killing Jinglebell can be considered pretty horrible. The man was a half-wit, no danger to anyone and guilty of nothing but bearing the name Frey and being present. Cat holds him hostage, hoping to get Walder Frey to spare her son's life. Frey says he would trade the half-wit for a son, and Robb is killed before her eyes. She then murders Jinglebell with a dagger, after she knows he isn't useful for leverage.

That's a pretty despicable act, yet as I typed it I was already excusing her, really. Cat's husband was publicly murdered and labeled a traitor, their ward had forcibly taken their home and murdered her 2 young sons. Her daughters were either hostages or missing/dead. The weight of guilt and doubt had been heavy on her for some time. She was watching people she had known for years, her loyal subjects and retainers and friends, being butchered around her in act of despicable treachery. And of course, her last living son was killed by one of his own subjects right in front of her. Cat simply couldn't take any more, and she was likely insane at that point.

i dont even think you need to say that much. its an eye for an eye. she promised to kill Walder's son if he killed Robb and she kept her word.

[Fearsedge]

Unfortunately I do not have the time to debate this properly at present, but Stannis' wasn't considering burning Edric Storm to win the throne per se, he considered it because Mel was telling him that it was necessary to save the realm from the Others. At this point Stannis had already seen the Night's Watch being routed in the fires, and Davos attests to Stannis' sincerity.There is also this:"I never asked for this crown. Gold is cold and heavy on the head but so long as I am the king, I have a duty … If I must sacrifice one child to the flames to save a million from the dark … Sacrifice … is never easy, Davos. Or it is no true sacrifice."

Ah, you got me there. I am convinced. Stupid imperfect memory. I'll have to remove it from the list, then go to sleep.

[Fearsedge]

i dont even think you need to say that much. its an eye for an eye. she promised to kill Walder's son if he killed Robb and she kept her word.

This is the kind of difference of opinion I hoped for :)

That reason doesn't do it for me. If she didn't have all that other stuff going on, and lets compare it to Dany's hostages in Mereen, I couldn't justify it. It's not okay to murder a kid just because you have already threatened to. That's my opinion.

Dammit, I really need to go. This series(and forum) can be addicting. Hopefully leaving for reals this time.

[Lady Sansa Stark]

Justifiable:

1. Cat killing Jinglebell. She was far beyond the point of any common sense there. Watching Dacey Mormont get murdered, watching how Roose Bolton killed her son, who had been struck with arrows before and just the whole situation.

2. Ned killing the Night Watch deserter. He deserted the Night's Watch, desertion is punishable by death and that is exactly what Lord Eddard Stark did. No one can expect him to invite him for a cup of tea and to tell about all those monsters and stuff. He was a deserter, simple as that.

3. MMD's behavior towards Drogo. She explained it herself, really, so no need to do that here. And well, he wasn't really dead, after all, Daenerys murdered her husband herself.

4. Robb Stark killing Rickard Karstark. They needed to get punished, they were endangering Robb's cause by murdering Lannister hostages. No one would ever try to do such a thing again.

Unjustifiable:

1. Tywin sending Gregor Clegane to ravage the Riverlands. The heck, Tywin. Or his gang-rape of Tysha. I've heard some people say here that was in one way or the other ''good punishment'' but don't get me started on that please.

2. Anything Gregor Clegane or Ramsay Snow have done.

3. Tyrion being so... angry with the whole of the Vale. Arming the Mountain Clans for example. I can understand his hatred for Lysa, but that doesn't mean the whole Vale should get punished for that.

4. Daenerys torturing people and/or crucifying them. Come on, Daenerys. It's not because I really dislike you, it's just the fact that it is plainly wrong.

[TheBlackBard]

I2. Jaime throwing Bran from a tower. That's pretty horrible to throw a kid to his death for being guilty of catching you at something you shouldn't be doing in the first place.

However I can't help but think that he was not just saving himself, but his sister and 3 innocent children. Well, 2 innocent children(Joffrey is a monster, albeit he hasn't done anything too horrible yet to my knowledge). To me, that means something.

I'm glad to see some who has the same veiw as me on this, I actually posted something very similar in the "is Jaime evil" thread yesterday. I also saw something else that i didnt think of at the time that someone else mentioned. If Jaime didn' push Bran out of the window, it could of caused a war with the Lanisters and the crown once Rob starts lopping off heads. which would of ended with thousands dead.

It was a bad thing to do, but I think its hard to say that you wouldnt have done the same.

[butterbumps!]

Rather than the term "justifiable," which implies a moral rightness in the action, perhaps "degrees of sympathy in atrocity-committing" is more what you're after? I don't really think any "atrocity" is "justifiable" by nature, but I do think there's something compelling to the idea of sympathizing with some atrocities more than others.

[Kittykatknits]

Rather than the term "justifiable," which implies a moral rightness in the action, perhaps "degrees of sympathy in atrocity-committing" is more what you're after? I don't really think any "atrocity" is "justifiable" by nature, but I do think there's something compelling to the idea of sympathizing with some atrocities more than others.

I was going to say the same thing. Rather than justify the act, are there some we can better understand the reasoning behind a bit better?

Using that logic, my list is still pretty short:

1. Cat killing Jinglebell

2. MMD's actions

3. Ned killing the NW deserter

[Daphne23]

I'm afraid I see Jaime's actions and Theon's as par for par. Jaime's action is not as excusable, for me, because I don't read 'The things I do for love' as Jaime's claim that he is defenestrating Bran to save the lives of his own children; it's clear from the text that Jaime has little affection for his children until much later in the series (he actually reflects that he feels little after Joffrey's death and would rather have his hand back than his son). It's possible to read his statement as a claim that he is murdering Bran to save Cersei's life, rather than his own, but given the other options available to him in this situation, such as frightening Bran into silence (as Cersei notes later) I don't think even this reading is particularly mitigating. In Theon's defence, he doesn't just have the miller's boys murdered to 'save face', but because losing any more authority at this point will likely lead to his own death or, at the least, utter disgrace.

Personally, I think that both Jaime and Theon's actions are inexcusable and neither man has yet shown true remorse for his act (although Theon is further along this road than Jaime). Although I like both Jaime and Theon, I certainly can't see either of them as a 'good' person until they truly regret these acts.

I agree with butterbumps that the term 'justifiable' is a bit unfortunate.

[Arkantos]

Do you consider the annihilation of an entire species an atrocity?

I mean, you could say that wiping out the Others, CotF, dragons, direwolves, giants etc is justifiable because the the damage they've caused to humanity and the wide world.

To be honest, I don't see what the big deal is with most atrocities, sure I'd like to not be killed, but if I break rules whilst knowing the outcome would be death, then I should expect to die.

Just as if someone gives me an ultimatum and then I ignore them, I should expect them to do whatever they said they would.

EDIT: I'd also like to say that I don't have a problem with the word justifiable, you can clearly show how some 'atrocities' are a reasonable decision for that person.

[butterbumps!]

EDIT: I'd also like to say that I don't have a problem with the world justifiable, you can clearly show how some 'atrocities' are a reasonable decision for that person.

"Justifiable" implies a sense of moral rightness in addition to being reasonable, and I thought it might be more loaded than what's intended. "Reasonable" and "Sympathetic" removes the moral argument. I guess I've been in debates on here before where these three terms were used interchangeably, and sometimes "justifiable" was intended to negate the immorality of an enormity in question, so I didn't mean to nitpick or anything.

[eggs]

This is the kind of difference of opinion I hoped for :)

That reason doesn't do it for me. If she didn't have all that other stuff going on, and lets compare it to Dany's hostages in Mereen, I couldn't justify it. It's not okay to murder a kid just because you have already threatened to. That's my opinion.

Dammit, I really need to go. This series(and forum) can be addicting. Hopefully leaving for reals this time.

*shrug* I can get behind some calculated revenge from a sympathetic character. I get that its wrong, but i cant say i disprove of it. I guess it helps that the freys are so awful though.

Personally, I think that both Jaime and Theon's actions are inexcusable and neither man has yet shown true remorse for his act (although Theon is further along this road than Jaime). Although I like both Jaime and Theon, I certainly can't see either of them as a 'good' person until they truly regret these acts.

I can agree with this.

[Arkantos]

"Justifiable" implies a sense of moral rightness in addition to being reasonable, and I thought it might be more loaded than what's intended. "Reasonable" and "Sympathetic" removes the moral argument. I guess I've been in debates on here before where these three terms were used interchangeably, and sometimes "justifiable" was intended to negate the immorality of an enormity in question, so I didn't mean to nitpick or anything.

I don't see how justifiable implies any form of morality, that'd be "morally justifiable".

Things like Ned killing that NW deserter or Robb killing Rickard aren't even morally wrong imo.

[franko99]

First, I don't consider Ned, Robb or any of Illyn Payne's ejecutions atrocities, it was law, high treason and oath-breaking is punishable by death, I'm a bit like Stannis in that matter.

Justifiable, or reasonable or whatever you want to call it :P

- Cat killing jinglebell "a son for a son".

- Arya killing the stable boy, or the guard in Harrenhal.

- Stannis considering (he never truly wanted, it was a sacrifice) burning Edric Storm.

- Oberyn using poison against Gregor.

- Drogo killing Viserys, if someone treat my son and wife, I'll do the same...

Unjustifiable:

- Jaime throwing Bran: yes, I know you need to protect you're family, but wasn't any other option? Bran was 7-8 years old? I'm sure you can be smarter than a young boy. He dreamt to be a kingsguard, and he's going to live in Kings Landing, you can manipulate the boy to keep a secret. An even if he talk, is an 8 years old word against the Queen and his brother, a famopus knight...

-Tyrells killing Joffrey: Need to say why?

- Jaime killing Aerys: Again, need to explain?

- Stannis killing Renly by a shadowbaby: Killing a traitor, and saving thousands of lives.

[butterbumps!]

I don't see how justifiable implies any form of morality, that'd be "morally justifiable".

Things like Ned killing that NW deserter or Robb killing Rickard aren't even morally wrong imo.

I feel terrible being insufferable and posting definitions, so apologies, though this might help clarify.

According to OED, "Justifiable" means

"Capable of being legally or morally justified, or shown to be just, righteous, or innocent; defensible."

It does inherently imply "moral" rightness as part of the definition beyond "defensible," so I think it's a word that's caused confusion in the past.

[Arkantos]

I feel terrible being insufferable and posting definitions, so apologies, though this might help clarify.

According to OED, "Justifiable" means

"Capable of being legally or morally justified, or shown to be just, righteous, or innocent; defensible."

It does inherently imply "moral" rightness as part of the definition beyond "defensible," so I think it's a word that's caused confusion in the past.

To be honest, as far as i'm concerned, if you don't define it then it doesn't incorporate those two (legally/morally), otherwise the term 'morally justifiable' would be pointless wouldn't it?

I see it as an extension of justified, "having, done for, or marked by a good or legitimate reason:"

oxforddictionaries gives a different definition to justifiable too, "able to be shown to be right or reasonable; defensible:", as you can see, no morality involved.

EDIT: It would appear Cambridge agrees with me too.

[Fearsedge]

Justify just means "can be shown to be necessary". I was thinking in more general terms.for example, I can justify to my boss that we need to order some more toilet paper, using projected usage and such.Just an example of how morality need not be included though I edited thw original post to describe imultiple ways. Justify, explain, sympathise, whatever.

[The Red Pope]

Forgivable: Sansa keeping quiet about Lysa and the singer's murders. One tried to kill her and the other rape her and it was done by the very man who kept her safe.

Jamie threatening to throw Edmure's child over the walls and destroy Riverrun. It was a bluff and they wouldn't have surrendered just because he said "please".

Unforgivable: Arya killing the Black Singer. She has no right to judge criminals, and he had not broken the laws of Braavos. And she killed him because she just felt like it.

Tyrion killing Shae. She was forced to betray him and tried to benefit herself along the way when he was doomed. As if he wouldn't have done the same.