So You're In Love With A Controversial Character...

[Overlord of Skagos]

I think that's certainly a part of it, but I also believe that as readers we need to remember that the characters certainly have some level of agency in how the respond to their circumstances and consequently some agency in how they are shaped by them. Let's take Dany for an example - she went through much of the same childhood as Viserys, yet instead of growing bitter, she responded by growing strong and (early in her arc) flexible/adaptable to Dothraki culture. Sansa similarly experiences the ruination of her house in addition to very public humiliation and abuse, but she still retains her ability to empathize and care about other people.

I'm not saying it's wrong to feel compassion or pity for Viserys, but I do think it's flawed to excuse him completely on the basis of "circumstances." (Ditto any characters - i.e. I don't excuse Cersei's behavior on the grounds of her abuse in the hands of Robert)

ETA: I think my contributions are so much more meaningful when I've had sleep =D Otherwise I usually just sound like an inane stream of consciousness mess

IT was easy for Dany to adapt to dothraki culture because she didnt belong anywhere before that..she was never a Westerosi...Viserys was born and brought up as the Prince of 7 kingdoms for atleast 10 years...he knows about the destruction of his entire house..he knows Aerys,Rhallea,Rhaegar,his mother...and he has lost them all one by one...all Dany ever knew of targaryens or Westeros was through Viserys alone ..(and we all know how she likes to stay deaf to bad things) ..For Viserys, vengence was a major motive..kinda like Arya..too bad he didnt have great people to guide him..only power greedy men like Illyrio and Doran Martell...

[Fish Swim]

Mine is Edmure Tully. Yes, he is a bit brash and immature ("more gallant than wise," as Ned puts it) and he might not be the sharpest sword in the armoury, but I really think people are being a bit too hard on him. I don't think he'd act quite as brashly if people around him (including, but not limited to, his still-wet-behind-the-ears nephew - and don't even get me started on the Blackfish) wouldn't treat him like he's just the stupid little brother. Yes, if Edmure had stopped to think about why Robb wanted him to "hold Riverrun" instead of just barging ahead to "bloody Lord Tywin's nose" at Stone Mill, then he might have seen what Robb was trying to do (there's no doubt in my mind that Lord Hoster would have), but as it is I don't think it's the least bit strange that he wants to show his mettle in battle. And then Robb and the Blackfish get angry when he doesn't stick to a plan they didn't see fit to let him in on. <_<

Having said that, given that he is brash and immature and not the sharpest tool in the shed, I'm quite surprised that he has survived five books when pretty much everybody around him has met with all kinds of gruesome ends. Not quite sure how that happened. :P (I have no illusions about his surviving WoW, though.)

[ab aeterno]

Mine is Edmure Tully. Yes, he is a bit brash and immature ("more gallant than wise," as Ned puts it) and he might not be the sharpest sword in the armoury, but I really think people are being a bit too hard on him.

I still consider this one of the most ironic observations in the entire series.

[Winter's Knight]

I did not expect this much discussion!

Re: cultural relativism.

I find I am much more likely to be forgiving of people following the law rather than the social norms. That is, Ned executing a deserter is Ned following the law-if he didn't, chances are he'd be up against the court himself.

A husband forcing himself on his wife (or vice versa) on the other hand is not going to win any empathy from me, see?

[Éadaoin]

I can never un-see that picture of Euron.

But why would you want to?

[sightofthesun]

However, one character I never quite dare to admire in these forums is Littlefinger. *peers around suspiciously* Now, I know he's horribly immoral human being who gets off causing damage and destruction and doesn't care much for anyone or anything, but... butbut! He makes the plot! Everything that happens in the books is thanks to LF! He's witty and unflappable and unwholesomely clever. People get loved for less! I blame the sheer amount of ambiguous characters in the book who get all the guilty love so there is nothing left for LF.

I'm with you on this! "Only Cat" is definitely one of my favourite lines in the books.

I absolutely love Roose Bolton, I sometimes feel bad because he is absolutely horrid in so many ways, but you know what? I still think he's a fabulous, whispering, majestic bastard.

It's his lack of emotion that gets me :lol:

[space]

I'd have to go with cersei, euron, and above all...my boy littlefinger.... I dont see the need to justify liking/rooting for these characters...I realize they are horrible fucking human beings that in the world of 2013 earth would deserve gruesome horrible deaths...but they are pretty damn entertaining and make the story that much more fun to read! Imagine gladiator without commodus or no country for old men without chigurh... assholes, but great characters!

[Fish Swim]

I still consider this one of the most ironic observations in the entire series.

Gods, yes! And I absolutely love it. :)

[ab aeterno]

A husband forcing himself on his wife (or vice versa) on the other hand is not going to win any empathy from me, see?

I agree with this!

I did not expect this much discussion!

Re: cultural relativism.

I find I am much more likely to be forgiving of people following the law rather than the social norms. That is, Ned executing a deserter is Ned following the law-if he didn't, chances are he'd be up against the court himself.

The issue for me though is that it seems morally worse for someone to do something they know to be morally wrong in order to follow the law than if they don't know that it's wrong.

With husbands forcing themselves on wives and vice versa, there is a fair amount of evidence that they know that it is wrong - heck, even Tyrion knows it - so I wouldn't give them any empathy based on the social context.

On the other hand, because the people in Westeros (for the most part) don't have any social context other than their Feudal-ish system, I'm somewhat more empathetic towards them when they take actions that uphold that system. They mostly don't know that it is wrong, I would say.

[Father of Hosts]

But why would you want to?

There's something about the Gentleman Pirate Hooker thing hes got going on, that is slightly unnerving.

On topic, Jaime. All day, every day. And twice on Sundays. You have to take the good with the bad and not get too hung up on the defenestration of children. If we hated every character who committed an atrocity or wronged someone, we would be left with like 3 characters to love. Totally unacceptable.

[space]

I agree with this!

The issue for me though is that it seems morally worse for someone to do something they know to be morally wrong in order to follow the law than if they don't know that it's wrong.

With husbands forcing themselves on wives and vice versa, there is a fair amount of evidence that they know that it is wrong - heck, even Tyrion knows it - so I wouldn't give them any empathy based on the social context.

On the other hand, because the people in Westeros (for the most part) don't have any social context other than their Feudal-ish system, I'm somewhat more empathetic towards them when they take actions that uphold that system. They mostly don't know that it is wrong, I would say.

well they know its wrong but to what extent? bit of a bad example but I, like most people here...if I see a roach or spider inside my house, I kill it...I know its wrong and I have no reason to hurt an innocent insect just looking for a place to survive...but fuck em...I dont put that much emphasis on it, but i'm still taking an innocent life...I'm sure thats how many of the highborn characters feel about killing/raping/slaughtering the "smallfolk"

[Lala]

Yeah, it is kind of astounding to me that people with crucify her character completely for what she said to Jon. As for starting the war... there are some other people who I'd rather point fingers at for that one.

Cat and Sansa are two of my favorite characters. I was amazed to see how much hate they get when I started exploring the Internet world of ASOIAF, lol. I think one of the worst things to me, though, is when people outright dismiss their characters by saying Sansa is just a stupid, shallow teenage girl and that Cat is just a boring wife/horrible mother. Way to miss out on two of the best (imo) characters in the series. ;)

I know right! Also how anyone gets "horrible mother" from Cat I shall never understand - she faced the risk of execution for treason by releasing Jaime (even if the risk was small, it was possible - Robb did execute a loyal bannerman for killing the Lannister boys) yet she still did it because she loved her girls. After all the risks she takes for every one of her children, there are still people who think she's a horrible mother, I don't even.

Sansa is my baby girl and I will love her to the end *glares at everyone on the thread & GRRM* If Martin dares to torment her any more I will write literal novels of fanfiction and spam him with them until his hatred for fanfiction slowly drives him insane :)

I love plenty of controversial characters, which is not much of an issue most of the time, because I'm hardly alone in my love. The most difficult thing to bear is the absolutistic black and white insanity those characters tend to ignite... But hey, more awesomeness for me.

However, one character I never quite dare to admire in these forums is Littlefinger. *peers around suspiciously* Now, I know he's horribly immoral human being who gets off causing damage and destruction and doesn't care much for anyone or anything, but... butbut! He makes the plot! Everything that happens in the books is thanks to LF! He's witty and unflappable and unwholesomely clever. People get loved for less! I blame the sheer amount of ambiguous characters in the book who get all the guilty love so there is nothing left for LF.

//Basing on the principle that only unforgivable thing a character can do is to be boring. :D

You're not alone! I dislike him so much as a smarmy sorry excuse of a human being, but he is so amusing. So I basically struggle with this internal conflict where I want him to die, but know I'll miss him so much when he is dead. *twirls imaginary fictional villain mustache* ={D

IT was easy for Dany to adapt to dothraki culture because she didnt belong anywhere before that..she was never a Westerosi...Viserys was born and brought up as the Prince of 7 kingdoms for atleast 10 years...he knows about the destruction of his entire house..he knows Aerys,Rhallea,Rhaegar,his mother...and he has lost them all one by one...all Dany ever knew of targaryens or Westeros was through Viserys alone ..(and we all know how she likes to stay deaf to bad things) ..For Viserys, vengence was a major motive..kinda like Arya..too bad he didnt have great people to guide him..only power greedy men like Illyrio and Doran Martell...

Yet Dany was still trying to protect and make excuses for a brother who said he'd let an entire khalasar rape her if he could get an army ;)

There's no way we can ever do direct comparisons, ceteris paribus and all that, and playing the oppression olympics for characters is pretty unproductive (though I admit I tend to do that sometimes too). What we do know, though, is that there are characters who have been put in terrible situations and still managed to retain their core morality and ability to care about other people. Which isn't to say Viserys is a terrible, no-good human being for succumbing as he did, but he certainly is as much to blame for what he became as his environment.

[ab aeterno]

well they know its wrong but to what extent? bit of a bad example but I, like most people here...if I see a roach or spider inside my house, I kill it...I know its wrong and I have no reason to hurt an innocent insect just looking for a place to survive...but fuck em...I dont put that much emphasis on it, but i'm still taking an innocent life...I'm sure thats how many of the highborn characters feel about killing/raping/slaughtering the "smallfolk"

I don't think it's quite the same, and I don't think it's fair to compare squashing a bug to murder, rape or slaughter. Heck, whether killing a bug is wrong at all is debatable. The issue for me is that it doesn't matter whether what they do is accepted/acceptable in their social context, but whether they know it's wrong. If they know it's wrong they're culpable, in my opinion.

[Lala]

I agree with this!

The issue for me though is that it seems morally worse for someone to do something they know to be morally wrong in order to follow the law than if they don't know that it's wrong.

With husbands forcing themselves on wives and vice versa, there is a fair amount of evidence that they know that it is wrong - heck, even Tyrion knows it - so I wouldn't give them any empathy based on the social context.

On the other hand, because the people in Westeros (for the most part) don't have any social context other than their Feudal-ish system, I'm somewhat more empathetic towards them when they take actions that uphold that system. They mostly don't know that it is wrong, I would say.

Agreed!

There are also certain social contract considerations in upholding legality, like executing Oathbreakers, because these constructs are what allows society to function at all. It's the same reason why the violation of guest right is considered such a gross offense, even though the cook causing the King to eat his own son isn't taken as seriously - these ideas - oaths, guest right, promises - are what allows humans bound by a social contract to trust each other. In as sense, these ideas are the social contracts that hold a society together. So even if, strictly speaking, oathbreaking seems like a preemptive punishment to avoid the deserter's projected future crimes, it is in reality a punishment for oathbreaking itself because to break an oath is to undermine the very foundations of the society.

[Light a wight tonight]

I can't explain it, but I like Barbrey Riswell. Other than cozying up to Roose she hasn't done anything bad. Talking trash about The Ned and Starks in general is such an obvious smokescreen. I just sort of admire her general orneriness.

[ab aeterno]

Agreed!

There are also certain social contract considerations in upholding legality, like executing Oathbreakers, because these constructs are what allows society to function at all. It's the same reason why the violation of guest right is considered such a gross offense, even though the cook causing the King to eat his own son isn't taken as seriously - these ideas - oaths, guest right, promises - are what allows humans bound by a social contract to trust each other. In as sense, these ideas are the social contracts that hold a society together. So even if, strictly speaking, oathbreaking seems like a preemptive punishment to avoid the deserter's projected future crimes, it is in reality a punishment for oathbreaking itself because to break an oath is to undermine the very foundations of the society.

I alluded to this earlier in the thread, and yes, I agree. :)

[Theda Baratheon]

I did not expect this much discussion!

Re: cultural relativism.

I find I am much more likely to be forgiving of people following the law rather than the social norms. That is, Ned executing a deserter is Ned following the law-if he didn't, chances are he'd be up against the court himself.

A husband forcing himself on his wife (or vice versa) on the other hand is not going to win any empathy from me, see?

I completely agree.

This is why I dislike Tyrion so much, mostly for the rape of the sex slave, people argue it was okay because westeros doesn't have the morals of 21st cenntury world we live in, however, westeros band slavery, and rape is a crime, so looking at it anyway what Tyrion does is disgusting and it upsets me that so many Tyrion fans ignore it and try to defend it or argue it as 'ok' if they didn't and just accepted all his bad points aswell as his good I wouldn't be so opposed to him.

[Theda Baratheon]

I can never un-see that picture of Euron.

Why would you want to? :leer:

[The Great Walrus]

I completely agree.

This is why I dislike Tyrion so much, mostly for the rape of the sex slave, people argue it was okay because westeros doesn't have the morals of 21st cenntury world we live in, however, westeros band slavery, and rape is a crime, so looking at it anyway what Tyrion does is disgusting and it upsets me that so many Tyrion fans ignore it and try to defend it or argue it as 'ok' if they didn't and just accepted all his bad points aswell as his good I wouldn't be so opposed to him.

As a Tyrion fan, i fully accept that Tyrion is in fact a rapist, and if we didn't have access to his inner thoughts and if he wasn't interesting for so long, i would hate his guts. It genuinely sickens me when misguided Tyrion fans try to split hairs over the definition of Rape in the context of the books.

[Lala]

I alluded to this earlier in the thread, and yes, I agree. :)

="D

I really love how you worded why marital rape, for example, is something that shouldn't be excused regardless of the "cultural context." Even if everyone else in your society is doing it (i.e. Dothraki raping Lhazareen) - the reactions of the victim should be a fairly clear cue that this isn't okay.

I completely agree.

This is why I dislike Tyrion so much, mostly for the rape of the sex slave, people argue it was okay because westeros doesn't have the morals of 21st cenntury world we live in, however, westeros band slavery, and rape is a crime, so looking at it anyway what Tyrion does is disgusting and it upsets me that so many Tyrion fans ignore it and try to defend it or argue it as 'ok' if they didn't and just accepted all his bad points aswell as his good I wouldn't be so opposed to him.

Mhm~ I can understand where he's coming from. But simply because your actions are comprehensible does not make them justifiable.