The Northern Scholar Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Quote is extremely vague. Nothing along these lines is proven, and even if the OP turns out to be right, they don't know that they're right at this moment in time.Yup. D&D's quote was pretty vague. And context is really important. I don't mind Shireen's death so much as the absolutely atrocious way D&D handled it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Bronn Stokeworth Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Stannis was burning men or allowing men to be burned as sacrifice since his introduction. Stannis slew is brother with a shadow baby and was willing to sacrifice his nephew. Stannis burned Mance (Rattleshirt). It's not much of a leap to believe he will one day burn his daughter if it's necessary to claim his throne. Are we talking about book or show Stannis? That makes a difference. Book!Stannis burns people he would have executed anyways. He hasn't burned anyone innocent. He struggled deeply with sacrificing his nephew and was relieved when Davos took the choice from him. Show!Stannis.... well, OK. Totally in line with his character. Though I do want to point out that Renly (in both cases) was actually a traitor who took up an army to steal it from the rightful king because he wanted to be king. That prick needed to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jasta11 Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 I'd be annoyed if it happens in the books too. Stannis as he is, is not a good buy by any means, but he's not a truly bad one either, and that's what makes him interesting. But burning his daughter at the stake turns him into a villain. No ifs, no buts. ''but Renly'' isn't really an argument, the situations are vastly different. At best, in the books (if D&D can be believed and Stannis does burn Shireen), it means she gets burned because Stannis really thinks it will help turn the tide vs the Others, but since he's not a prophecy-laden special snowflake it will inevitably fail. Some might like the ironic twist, but I think it turns an interesting, dark grey character into a clueless moron at best, a child-burning villain at worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 To be fair there is a reason why a lot of people were willing to support Renly and not Stannis, and I think that's lost on a lot of people because of Stannis having the better claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hallam Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Quote is extremely vague. Nothing along these lines is proven, and even if the OP turns out to be right, they don't know that they're right at this moment in time. Ah so maybe Stannis lovers will STFU for the next ten years while we wait for the next book then. It was rather obvious that book Shireen is Iphigenia from book two. Suck it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Météores D Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 People are in denial. Go re-watch The Lion and the Rose please, written by guess who... GRRM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King in the Narrow Sea Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Ah so maybe Stannis lovers will STFU for the next ten years while we wait for the next book then. It was rather obvious that book Shireen is Iphigenia from book two. Suck it up. Well we have the except which kind of contradicts this, but yeah, we ought to wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkbringer Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Absolutely and I bet that George will have Stannis do it for the exact same reason - to take Winterfell. Book Stannis has been caught in a snowstorm and his army is slowly starving to death. They look set to burn Theon and Jeyne Poole. The pyres have been built for fucks sake. Nah, no need. Dead simple. Book Stannis is trapped, his army will starve to death without food. Read the books, it is already happening. I expected Stannis to have another burning to get Winterfell and I read the books before I watched any of the show. Book Stannis has Theon and Jeyne to burn. So he has to send for Mel to burn them. Mel arrives with Shireen. She then points out that Theon's best parts are missing and Jeyne is a fake. It is only hard to imagine if you have no imagination. Of course book Shireen gets burned by her dad for the Iron throne. Burn Jeyne Poole? What on earth are you talking about? Stannis just sent her back to Jon. Are you trolling? Shireen is hundreds of miles away, and there is a comms blackout. Also "no more burnings, Pray harder". You obviously hate Stannis, just try not to go overboard in your glee, OK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makk Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 You can see how easily this is misinterpreted. George : And Shireen will be burned by Melisandre in an attempt to advance Stannis's causeD&D : COOL!!! < 2 months later > D : Hmmm we don't have the Karstarks, Manderlys, the Freys, or Mance. HTF is Stannis going to take Winterfell.D : Hmmm we can move the burning of Shireen up to this point.D : That will mean Stannis sacrifices his own daughter!!!! Awesome shock value!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Szal Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Ouch. Seriously.Initally I'd thought that this was just the showrunners screwing up Stannis' character, but now that I know George was behind it...yikes.Still, this is NOT something Stannis would do. Someone else, like the rapists/cannibals in the books, sure, but his own freaking daughter?Just...no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realitybytes Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 I'm sorry, but some of you are seriously in denial. "What D and D said was vague." How was it vague? They said, "When George told us about this.." What do you think they are really talking about? Stannis throwing a barbecue for his men? No, they are talking about Stannis burning Shireen.Some of you really need to wake up. We are going to be getting George's ending from the show long before the final book is finished. That will include major events like this a long the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Blind Cookie Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 I cannot believe book!Stannis would sacrifice his own daughter in that situation. It just doesn't fit with how GRRM has written him in any way. When was the last time Stannis sacrificed a purely innocent person in the books? - Renly: was contesting Stannis' claim to the throne in an illegit way.- Alester Florent: treason- Mance Rayder: Attacked the Wall, though I'm not entirely sure Stannis knew about Rattleshirt.- Edric Storm: admittedly, Stannis was about to burn him. He admitted to Davos though that he was innocent and he would have been at fault. Given that he learned this lesson, why would he suddenly burn his own daughter for the same reason? In the exact same situation as in the show, he even told his fanatic followers to bugger off and to pray harder when they asked for burnings. His camp was starving and he wouldn't let people who he didn't even knew in person get burned. GRRM may have said this event will happen in the books, but if it's Stannis who orders it I swear I will throw my book across the room multiple times. EDIT: Book!Stannis is still mourning about his decision to burn Renley, how on earth could he at the same time decide to burn Shireen when she's completely innocent? It's like killing Renley again, but this time for the heck of it while watching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King in the Narrow Sea Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 I'm sorry, but some of you are seriously in denial. "What D and D said was vague." How was it vague? They said, "When George told us about this.." What do you think they are really talking about? Stannis throwing a barbecue for his men? No, they are talking about Stannis burning Shireen.Some of you really need to wake up. We are going to be getting George's ending from the show long before the final book is finished. That will include major events like this a long the way.They were vague, and as far as we know there isn't a whole lot to support the suggestion that it was definitely Stannis. Regardless, I care more about how it's portrayed. Whether or not it happens in the books is irrelevant to how badly they did it in this episode. It was so abrupt and poorly done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattpeto Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 He was a prick in the books - you people are blind. "Ned Stark was no friend to me..." Yeah the guy died for your cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ovis alba Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 To me the problem - as with already several scenes before - is the narrative leading up to it. BookStannis to me is almost the very definition of pragmatic and he's doing things becaus they logically make sense, thereby being almost a mirror image to Dany, who's driven mostly by emotion. BookStannis never seemed to be portrayed as a religious fanatic, but as someone that was convinced that it works and "gets the job done". They burn 3 leeches to kill 3 competitors and all 3 drop dead within the next few month, so it makes sense to him that it works, maybe eventually enough sense to burn his own heir in what seems like a desperate situation. And it won't be any more morally right when he might do it in the books eventually, but I think it can make sense for the character that Stannis has been portrayed as, it to me just needs a much better leadup to it. Because the way I've always read Stannis as a character, who for this to happen needs to be in a situation where "the numbers add up" for him, almost like a checkmate in 4 turns if you don't sacrifice this piece right there. And in the show I just don't buy that 66,7% of leech success rate and already the prospect of provisions running out is enough to add up for him to sacrifice his only heir (...yet). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turdle Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 the thing i find annoying about all of this, is that on the tv show, the whole leech/kings blood thing has only worked for 2 out of the 3 usurpers. balon greyjoy is still alive. are you really going to burn your own daughter when this magic only works 2/3 times? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haus of Targaryen Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 I bet if Mel burns Shireen, w/ or w/o Stannis's permission, and it's to resurrect Jon... Not a single person will have anything to say about it. They'll go "aww she was a sweet innocent girl but whoops sorry bout it cuz Jon Snow AF!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scabbard Of the Morning Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 This is like defending the Sansa rape scene with "it was GRRM's idea for Ramsay to rape his bride on his wedding night". Just because something similarly horrible happens doesn't mean it's the same thing. Plots, characters, motivations, have all been altered beyond recognition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makk Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 I'm sorry, but some of you are seriously in denial. "What D and D said was vague." How was it vague? They said, "When George told us about this.." What do you think they are really talking about? Stannis throwing a barbecue for his men? No, they are talking about Stannis burning Shireen.Some of you really need to wake up. We are going to be getting George's ending from the show long before the final book is finished. That will include major events like this a long the way.Anything that happens in the show from now on is simply a good guess. A lot of stuff may happen, but a lot of stuff may not, or it may happen in a subtle but completely different way. As it stands we KNOW that it CAN'T happen exactly like that in the books because Shireen isn't there. We have already seen all sorts of changes, and we have been told that there will be bigger changes to come. It's not about denial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordi Nietos Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Gotta bring Stannis down to Ramsays level, otherwise the conflict is too black and white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.