Jump to content

Did Stannis even have a chance? (Spoilers)


The Grey Wolf

Recommended Posts

I understand and appreciate that you are trying to see things in the imbecilic black and white that D&D write the show with but try to understand, think a little, and use some perspective. Renly was 100% expecting his men to have killed stannis that morning. It's hard to believe there was any point in which renly didn't accept stannis dying as part of renlys becoming king plans. Stannis got to him first. It was an ugly moment but war is hell. We don't spend all of our time harassing soldiers that go off to wars and kill or be killed. There is nothing worse here

^Thank you! I just wished D&D understood this and didn't hold it against Stannis when it came to their writing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand and appreciate that you are trying to see things in the imbecilic black and white that D&D write the show with but try to understand, think a little, and use some perspective. Renly was 100% expecting his men to have killed stannis that morning. It's hard to believe there was any point in which renly didn't accept stannis dying as part of renlys becoming king plans. Stannis got to him first. It was an ugly moment but war is hell. We don't spend all of our time harassing soldiers that go off to wars and kill or be killed. There is nothing worse here

Sometimes people who just half-attentively watch the show, while maybe mashing buttons on their smart phone and talking to their boyfriend completely fail to understand the basics of how killing renly was self defense and not some sort of complicated moral balance

Let's be realistic on Renly's motives. He is an example of one of GRRMS many really really poorly written cliches. At the heart of this kind of gay stereotype is narcisim. You see it with him choosing the lover that of the millions of people in the kingdom is the most like himself. Renly really loved himself that's why he could love Loras. He would love himself as king even more and that's pretty much it for his motiviation.

Firstly, you are the one seeing things in D&D's "imbecilic perspective" by erroneously claiming:"Renly was 100% expecting his men to have killed stannis that morning.." There was nothing in the show pointing to that at all, so you're just speaking on supposition. Did Renly know Stannis might die, yes, but he did not have the bloodthirsty desire to kill Stannis for denying his claim as Stannis had for Renly for denying his. Sometimes people who just mash their buttons on their smartphone talking to their mommy fail to understand how killing Renly wasn't just "self-defense," it was a hateful action to punish Renly for denying him and for being--with Robert--one of two popular sons who got the approbation and rewards--like Storm's End--he never got.

Secondly, the only one ascribing Gay stereotypes is you. There are many narcissistic straight characters, too--Jamie Lannister among them--and Renly wasn't narcissistic, just a bit of a dilletante. And you're saying he only loved Loras--which he did--because he "loved himself" is the worst type of Gay stereotype, labelling Gay love itself as inherently narcissistic. So, i suggest you avoid making any more cultural criiticisms.

And if you don't think Stannis wouldn't love himself as king, you haven't been following all the actions he's taken to get there, like venomously murderng his brother and sacrificing his own daughter...just so he could be king. Utter narcissism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing to do with narcissism. Desperation, for sure. But he did not want to do the things he did, nor enjoy it. "I hate a good many things but I suffer them all the same."And he is the furthest person from being in love with himself than anyone else I can think of. He doesn't want to be king, but it is his duty and it is law. "We do not get to choose our destinies. But we must do our duty, no? Great or small, we must do our duty." And he sacrificed his daughter to stop the wight walkers and the night that never ends, not to win the throne. Winning the throne just comes with saving the world, so says the prophecy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing to do with narcissism. Desperation, for sure. But he did not want to do the things he did, nor enjoy it. "I hate a good many things but I suffer them all the same."And he is the furthest person from being in love with himself than anyone else I can think of. He doesn't want to be king, but it is his duty and it is law. "We do not get to choose our destinies. But we must do our duty, no? Great or small, we must do our duty." And he sacrificed his daughter to stop the wight walkers and the night that never ends, not to win the throne. Winning the throne just comes with saving the world, so says the prophecy.

Actually, it has a lot to do with Narcissism. He's the younger brother of a usurper of the throne; so it's not like he was following a lineage or responsibility with which he was raised. And he is definitely in love with himself as he bought all of Melissandre's garbage about him being this great mystically-suipported king. Only someone with a high self-image (authentic or no) could believe that. He does want to be king, as it affirms him as the great man he believes himself to be. And for you to ascribe his sacrifice of his daughter to solely good motives is as abhorrent as it is wrong. Like a classic narcissistic family annhilitator, he didn't see his daughter as her own person, but an extension of himself that could be easily extinguished to serve his desires.

Stannis, unlike his cocky, self-assured younger brother, Renly, was a definite narcissist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it has a lot to do with Narcissism. He's the younger brother of a usurper of the throne; so it's not like he was following a lineage or responsibility with which he was raised. And he is definitely in love with himself as he bought all of Melissandre's garbage about him being this great mystically-suipported king. Only someone with a high self-image (authentic or no) could believe that. He does want to be king, as it affirms him as the great man he believes himself to be. And for you to ascribe his sacrifice of his daughter to solely good motives is as abhorrent as it is wrong. Like a classic narcissistic family annhilitator, he didn't see his daughter as her own person, but an extension of himself that could be easily extinguished to serve his desires.

Stannis, unlike his cocky, self-assured younger brother, Renly, was a definite narcissist.

In the prologue of A Clash of Kings, Master Cressen describes Renly more or less as an attention whore:

It was just the sort of notion that would appeal to Renly Baratheon; a splendid new order of knighthood, with gorgeous raiment to proclaim it. Even as a boy, Renly had loved bright colors and rich fabrics, and e loves his games as well. "Look at me, I'm a dragon." or "Look at me, I'm a wizard." or Look at me, look at me, I'm the rain god."

"The bold little boy with wild black hair and laughing eyes was a man grown now, one-and-twenty, and still he played his games: Look at me, I'm a king. Cressen thought sadly. Oh Renly, Renly, dear sweet child, do you know what you are doing? And would you care if you did? Is there anyone who cares for him but me?

Renly recognizes he is in the wrong but justifies it in his offer to Ned, and later his talk with Catelyn.

Firstly, you are the one seeing things in D&D's "imbecilic perspective" by erroneously claiming:"Renly was 100% expecting his men to have killed stannis that morning.." There was nothing in the show pointing to that at all, so you're just speaking on supposition. Did Renly know Stannis might die, yes, but he did not have the bloodthirsty desire to kill Stannis for denying his claim as Stannis had for Renly for denying his. Sometimes people who just mash their buttons on their smartphone talking to their mommy fail to understand how killing Renly wasn't just "self-defense," it was a hateful action to punish Renly for denying him and for being--with Robert--one of two popular sons who got the approbation and rewards--like Storm's End--he never got.

Secondly, the only one ascribing Gay stereotypes is you. There are many narcissistic straight characters, too--Jamie Lannister among them--and Renly wasn't narcissistic, just a bit of a dilletante. And you're saying he only loved Loras--which he did--because he "loved himself" is the worst type of Gay stereotype, labelling Gay love itself as inherently narcissistic. So, i suggest you avoid making any more cultural criiticisms.

And if you don't think Stannis wouldn't love himself as king, you haven't been following all the actions he's taken to get there, like venomously murderng his brother and sacrificing his own daughter...just so he could be king. Utter narcissism.

Show Stannis is poorly adapted but whatever. Renly is much closer to the book version. Nevertheless, again in the book:

"That was amusing, if not terribly profitable," he commented. "I wonder where I can get a sword like that? Well, doubtless Loras will make me a gift of it after the battle., it grieves me that it must come to this."

"You have a cheerful way of grieving," said Catelyn, whose distress was not feigned.

Do I?" Renly shrugged. "So be it. Stannis was never the most cherished f brothers, I confess. Do you suppose this tale of his is true? If Joffrey is the Kingslayer's get-"

"-your brother is the lawful heir."

"While he lives," Renly admitted. "Though it's a fool's law, wouldn't you agree? Why the oldest son , and not the best-fitted? The crown will suit me, as it never suited Robert and would not suit Stannis. I have it in me to be a great king, strong yet generous, clever, just, diligent, loyal to my friends and terrible to my enemies, yet capable of forgiveness, patient-"

"humble?" Catelyn supplied.

Renly laughed. "You must allow a king some flaws, my lady."

Sorry, that doesn't strike me as someone who had much qualms about killing his brother or not liking the smell of his own dung.

I just think it is hypocritical of Renly in trying to remove the Lannisters from power because Joffery isn't Roberts trueborn son and therefor not the rightful heir, when he is just as guilty of being a usurper, if not even more guilty, seeing as how Joffery atleast has gone hia entire3 life being Roberts son, so. He genuinely believed he was the legitimate king. Renly knew he was in the wrong and would rather steal the throne from his brother than be the bigger man and accept that Stannis is king. If he declared for Stannis as he should have, he could have given Stannis counsel and could have been much more successful in defeating the Lannisters. Stannis offered that to his youger brother and Renly mocked him. Someone that immature has no business being king anyways.

.

Aemon turned down the throne and conceded to his younger brother,and turned his life to the citadel and became a maester. Becoming a maester was never on Stannis' agenda, and Aemon probably genuinely thought his younger brother would do well as king and do good for the realm, where as Stannis knew Renly and that his desire to be king was a popularity contest and a lust for power and glory. Unless you are trying to be a holyman,, no okder brother would ever bend his knee to his younger brother, especially if he usurped his position. People would have less respect for Stannis if he conceded to Renly than they had with him when he conjured a shadow to assassinate his brother.

.

But the whole Stannis vs Renly dispute is a lot like Republican vs Democrat or Christianity vs Atheism. Each side strongly believes they are right and have good reasons to support their beliefs, but will never convince the other side that they are wrong. Its just the way of the world. I appreciate hearing both sides of the argument though :)

Stannis is the bigger egomaniac of the two. He knows that he has no definitive proof of Joffrey's bastardy. Yet he expects the lord of the realm to support his claim anyway. Renly's did not initially desire to be king. However, if that was the price for removing Lannister influence and gaining the support of the reach, he was willing to pay it. Stannis believes he can beat the Lannister-Tyrell alliance with the power of the lords of the stormlands and the narrow sea. He fails at blackwater, most of his men go over to "Renly" and he loses control of the ancestral Baratheon homelands. Stannis could have renounced his claim as Aemon did but instead he chose to doom his house.

Book Stannis was involved in the investigation and part of the reason of their battle was Stannis trying to secure Edric Storm, one of Robert's bastards to supply proof. The point Renly makes is: "Hey, well that's nice and all but I got this kickass large army and I'm super awesome therefore I should be king."

And renouncing his claim was not a guarantee of survival. Did Joffrey/Cersei not just kill Ned Stark even though they promised him mercy should he recant?

No. And this is what makes Stannis the hero. Stannis would risk his life to save people who despise him, and sacrifice the one and only thing he loves, all in order to save the realm from the wight walkers and their army of the dead , a threat that 99% of Westeros doesn't even acknowledge or even believe is real. But a hero will do what needs to be done, no matter how difficult or painful.

Ned and Jon would put their vanity before all else. They are more concerned of what people think of them and what may one day be written about them, and would have zombies devour all the men, women and children in Westeros before they ever let themselves be labeled "kinslayer".

Stannis would desecrate his honor and soil his reputation, and live with the burden of losing all that he loved, if that's what it costs to save the realm. It is his duty as Protector of the Realm after all.

**In the ancient prophecy of The Last Hero, the hero, Azor Ahai, forged his legendary sword by sacrificing his greatest love. His wife, Nissa Nissa.. Shireen was Stannis' greatest love and he put his faith in The Lord of Light and did what had to be done to fulfill the prophecy. If The Lord of Light IS real, and the prophecy is real, then Stannis sacrificing his daughter isn't bad at all, but rather a sad thing that had to happen to achieve something great (which in this case, is life continuing to live)

"Sometimes severity is the price we pay for greatness."

Something largely omitted from the show is how the "good guys" struggle with their decisions. Book Stannis agonizes over what to do with Edric Storm (the show having Gendry take his place). He is the one that demands proof from Melisandre that it will work and actually laughs at her when she tries to persuade him to go ahead with the sacrifice when Robb Stark and Balon die because she promised 3 deaths, not 2 from the leeches. He attributes Robb's death to the "palsied had of Walder Frey".

The closest we see Stannis to embracing her religion is when he is back on Dragonstone after the defeat on the Blackwater after witnessing the vision in the flames. He states:

"R'hllor chooses queerly, then." The king grimaced, as if he'd tasted something foul. "Why me, and not my brothers? Renly and his peach. In my dreams I see the juice running from his mouth, the blood from his throat. If he had done his duty by his brother, we would have smashed Lord Tywin. A victory even Robert could be proud of. Robert..." His teeth ground side to side. "He is in my dreams as well. Laughing. Drinking. Boasting. Those were the things he was best at. Those, and fighting. I never bested him at anything. The Lord of Light should have made Robert his champion. Why me?"

The conversation continues on a debate on what to do with Edric and Stannis argues against sacrificing him because he is innocent, he is of his own blood, and Shireen has taken him as a friend. In that specific order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the prologue of A Clash of Kings, Master Cressen describes Renly more or less as an attention whore:

It was just the sort of notion that would appeal to Renly Baratheon; a splendid new order of knighthood, with gorgeous raiment to proclaim it. Even as a boy, Renly had loved bright colors and rich fabrics, and e loves his games as well. "Look at me, I'm a dragon." or "Look at me, I'm a wizard." or Look at me, look at me, I'm the rain god."

"The bold little boy with wild black hair and laughing eyes was a man grown now, one-and-twenty, and still he played his games: Look at me, I'm a king. Cressen thought sadly. Oh Renly, Renly, dear sweet child, do you know what you are doing? And would you care if you did? Is there anyone who cares for him but me?

Renly recognizes he is in the wrong but justifies it in his offer to Ned, and later his talk with Catelyn.

Show Stannis is poorly adapted but whatever. Renly is much closer to the book version. Nevertheless, again in the book:

"That was amusing, if not terribly profitable," he commented. "I wonder where I can get a sword like that? Well, doubtless Loras will make me a gift of it after the battle., it grieves me that it must come to this."

"You have a cheerful way of grieving," said Catelyn, whose distress was not feigned.

Do I?" Renly shrugged. "So be it. Stannis was never the most cherished f brothers, I confess. Do you suppose this tale of his is true? If Joffrey is the Kingslayer's get-"

"-your brother is the lawful heir."

"While he lives," Renly admitted. "Though it's a fool's law, wouldn't you agree? Why the oldest son , and not the best-fitted? The crown will suit me, as it never suited Robert and would not suit Stannis. I have it in me to be a great king, strong yet generous, clever, just, diligent, loyal to my friends and terrible to my enemies, yet capable of forgiveness, patient-"

"humble?" Catelyn supplied.

Renly laughed. "You must allow a king some flaws, my lady."

Sorry, that doesn't strike me as someone who had much qualms about killing his brother or not liking the smell of his own dung.

Firstly, Maester Cressen's avowed favorite was Stannis, and he didn't describe him as an "attention whore." you in your bias did. He did describe him as "copper" though which was an apt description. And Cressen doesn't describe him as narcissistic but immature and loving of splendor, which was absolutely true. But, again, that's not narcissistic. And Renly wasn't in the wrong, nor did he have to justify his pursuit of the throne. He knew he would be a more caring king than Stannis, one who wouldn't burn his own people, and he was right.

And whether or not Stannis is poorly adapted--and he is not--the Stannis in the show is a loathsome mass murderer who burned many of his own faithful citizens alive, including his own daughter. And I never said book Renly woudn't have problems with killing his brother, I said he didn't have the drive to necessarily do so, and he wouldn't. And TV Renly definitely made it clear he would have accepted Stannis' surrender, and was not as driven to kill Stannis as Stannis was to kill him. And try to lose that puerilely scatological phrase about "dung." It doesn't help your argument, and it doesn't describe Renly. He knows his cocky and even admits it ti Catelyn; it's part of his charm. However, he's also aware he's not someone who would burn his own people or cut off their fingers even after they saved the kingdom, and that's not arrogance; its truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Book Stannis was involved in the investigation and part of the reason of their battle was Stannis trying to secure Edric Storm, one of Robert's bastards to supply proof. The point Renly makes is: "Hey, well that's nice and all but I got this kickass large army and I'm super awesome therefore I should be king."

And renouncing his claim was not a guarantee of survival. Did Joffrey/Cersei not just kill Ned Stark even though they promised him mercy should he recant?

Something largely omitted from the show is how the "good guys" struggle with their decisions. Book Stannis agonizes over what to do with Edric Storm (the show having Gendry take his place). He is the one that demands proof from Melisandre that it will work and actually laughs at her when she tries to persuade him to go ahead with the sacrifice when Robb Stark and Balon die because she promised 3 deaths, not 2 from the leeches. He attributes Robb's death to the "palsied had of Walder Frey".

The closest we see Stannis to embracing her religion is when he is back on Dragonstone after the defeat on the Blackwater after witnessing the vision in the flames. He states:

"R'hllor chooses queerly, then." The king grimaced, as if he'd tasted something foul. "Why me, and not my brothers? Renly and his peach. In my dreams I see the juice running from his mouth, the blood from his throat. If he had done his duty by his brother, we would have smashed Lord Tywin. A victory even Robert could be proud of. Robert..." His teeth ground side to side. "He is in my dreams as well. Laughing. Drinking. Boasting. Those were the things he was best at. Those, and fighting. I never bested him at anything. The Lord of Light should have made Robert his champion. Why me?"

The conversation continues on a debate on what to do with Edric and Stannis argues against sacrificing him because he is innocent, he is of his own blood, and Shireen has taken him as a friend. In that specific order.

Firstly, Renly isn't Joffrey. Considering, if he won, he would have no problem drawing Stannis' men--who didn't love Dragonstone--to his sid, Stannis would have no choice but to accept Renly's assignment for him. And if he couldn't accept it, his lost head wouldn't be on Renly. And Stannis isn't one of the good guys. Good guys don't burn their own loyal citizens of burn their children. The love some of you have for this cold-blooded, funless, Marcia Brady of the Baratheons is beyond me. And the closest he got to embracing that religion was actually when he burned his own loyal citizens. You keep forgetting that. And his equivocation over killing Edric Storm only shows he wasn't entirely inhuman like Ramsay or sadistic like Joffrey; it didn't establish him as a big guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





Firstly, Maester Cressen's avowed favorite was Stannis, and he didn't describe him as an "attention whore." you in your bias did. He did describe him as "copper" though which was an apt description. And Cressen doesn't describe him as narcissistic but immature and loving of splendor, which was absolutely true. But, again, that's not narcissistic. And Renly wasn't in the wrong, nor did he have to justify his pursuit of the throne. He knew he would be a more caring king than Stannis, one who wouldn't burn his own people, and he was right.



And whether or not Stannis is poorly adapted--and he is not--the Stannis in the show is a loathsome mass murderer who burned many of his own faithful citizens alive, including his own daughter. And I never said book Renly woudn't have problems with killing his brother, I said he didn't have the drive to necessarily do so, and he wouldn't. And TV Renly definitely made it clear he would have accepted Stannis' surrender, and was not as driven to kill Stannis as Stannis was to kill him. And try to lose that puerilely scatological phrase about "dung." It doesn't help your argument, and it doesn't describe Renly. He knows his cocky and even admits it ti Catelyn; it's part of his charm. However, he's also aware he's not someone who would burn his own people or cut off their fingers even after they saved the kingdom, and that's not arrogance; its truth.






Daniel Noye is the one who compares Renly to copper, not Cressen. However, we can't discount Cressen's thoughts on the Baratheon brothers as he was likely the character who knew all three as a whole the best. Or at the least, one of the few who had some form of positive relationship with all three as he had to raise all three to some extent as maester to House Baratheon and after the death of their parents. Maybe Jon Arryn might fall in that category, but we don't truly know the nature of his relationship with Renly or Stannis really. Renly and Jon Arryn are never mentioned together at all in the text. All we know of Arryn's relationship with Stannis is the two were investigating the legitimacy of Cersei's children, they were both on the small council so had a working relationship, and they were both involved in Robert's war councils when Stannis was not under siege.



As for your contention Stannis is not poorly adapted, I disagree. When comes time for the leeches, the show has Davos be the one who pushes for it rather than Stannis as a sign of proof. In aCoK, Stannis describes himself as agnostic or a deist (depending how you wish to interpret it) to Davos. The showrunners themselves state he is fanatical in devotion and besides the scene we see him choking Melisandre and during her seduction of him, we see none of his questioning of the power of her faith. When Davos was in prison, Stannis questions Davos' skepticism. This could also mean to say he is projecting his doubts through Davos and looking for validation. Which could certainly be what they were going for. But Dillane played him as being resolute and certain when he speaks of the vision he saw in the flames.



He is described in the books, and the show by Littlefinger, as among the best commanders in Westeros. Now, Littlefinger might not know anything about warfare, but what have we seen in the show to indicate Stannis is a competent commander? The closest I can think of is the pincer attack on the wildlings. Show Stannis is portrayed as a weak willed man when the books keep describing him as hard, unwilling to bend, harsh, etc.



The showrunners go on to describe him as ambitious. In the books, he tells Davos he does not want the throne, but he pursues it because of the laws and he wants to mete out justice. Now, one can interpret this as utter bullshit (oh no! more puerile scatological words!) and he is trying to justify his ambition under better pretenses. However, if ambition was truly his sole motivation, why deny alliance with the Starks? He could just as easily make common cause and then betray them later.



And something a lot of his fans point out, none of his scathing humour is ever portrayed in the show.



As for describing Renly as an attention whore, the way he is described in the chapters of other characters heavily implies his desire to be the centre of attention. At the small council meetings, he interrupts often to make jokes. During the tourney he wears a garish armour to call attention to himself. Littlefinger jokes Renly spends more on his wardrobe than at least half the ladies at court. In his procession towards King's Landing, he is feasting and having tournaments the entire way for his glory. As Catelyn states, these are the knights of Summer.






Firstly, Renly isn't Joffrey. Considering, if he won, he would have no problem drawing Stannis' men--who didn't love Dragonstone--to his sid, Stannis would have no choice but to accept Renly's assignment for him. And if he couldn't accept it, his lost head wouldn't be on Renly. And Stannis isn't one of the good guys. Good guys don't burn their own loyal citizens of burn their children. The love some of you have for this cold-blooded, funless, Marcia Brady of the Baratheons is beyond me. And the closest he got to embracing that religion was actually when he burned his own loyal citizens. You keep forgetting that. And his equivocation over killing Edric Storm only shows he wasn't entirely inhuman like Ramsay or sadistic like Joffrey; it didn't establish him as a big guy.






Stating Renly would have no problem drawing Stannis' men to his side is speculation. Now, in light of the huge numerical advantage at the battle near Storm's End, they would be coerced into it certainly. However, as is often described Stannis' vassals were formerly direct vassals to the Targaeryens. Robert did not think Renly was apt at his age to take them under his banner. Catelyn is right when she says she would lock the two in a room until they remembered they were brothers. They were both acting improperly although for different reasons. Stannis as he later admits Davos pointed out to him, was focused on claiming his rights to save the kingdom (in this case from the Lannisters) than saving the kingdom first. He had little patience with his brother but offered better terms to Renly than the other way around (Renly did not promise Stannis seat on the Small council nor made mention of inheritance for the Iron Throne).



As for the burning people alive. It's cruel yes, callous even when a swift death would be merciful. Stannis is not a merciful guy but he's just. As for burning Shireen, it has not happened in the books and may not happen at all. Until it does, and the context of when it does occur comes to be known, can we accurately make an assessment. The way it played out in the show was terrible from both a character, plotline, and narrative point of view. It left the viewer having to choose between a stupid man who quickly did a 180 and sacrifice his daughter the direction of the show urged viewers to like or a monster in Ramsay Snow. Anecdotal evidence from my entourage of friends who watch the show ranged from distaste of the whole plotline among those who read the books to apathy for pure show viewers for the battle after that. The latter were left with no one to root for. The westeros.org admins were right in describing it as character assassination by the show runners in their review




What makes aSoIaF so compelling is most of the characters have flaws and are nuanced. Ramsay Snow and Joffrey are the two most prominent exceptions as being grotesquely evil. Renly is described as being the spitting image of Robert. Could he have been a good king? Maybe, but that was never in the cards in the author's mind. We don't see much of him to be frank. What we see is someone who in modern times might be a class clown. He does show moments of seriousness when he approaches Ned about acting against the Lannisters in the first book. These moments are far fewer than the ones of the laughing, smiling lord and later would-be king of Westeros. My take of the character was he sought affection he did not have when his parents died when he was very young. I would contend if he truly wanted to be just, he'd have marched against King's Landing to bring justice for the actions of the Lannisters. Instead, he chose to name himself king.



Stannis on the other hand is more flawed. He has two central flaws. The first is an inferiority complex towards Robert which we see hints of and Asha Greyjoy explicitly thinks when she fails to convince him to release her as a prisoner. The second is similar to Renly but his reaction is much different due to temperament. Where Renly sought affection he lost when his parents died, Stannis did the opposite and didn't value affection very much and so did not pursue it. The inferiority complex made him bitter when he did not get what he felt was his due (Storm's End). The lack of affection makes him someone harsh and cold. He has no sympathy for those who break the law grievously. With the exception of Renly, he is never described as having remorse for burning traitors alive. He shows no signs of enjoying the burnings unlike Aerys Targaeryen did or Joffrey and Ramsay might. If you wanted to be particularly generous, you could say he is following Ned's Stark "he who passes the sentence should swing the sword" motto and at least confronting the act instead of shying away. Or he is simply placating the Queen's men faction who are the true fanatics. There is some credence to this when during the blizzard, he tells the Queen's men: "pray harder" in his denial of their request for sacrifices. This could also mean he is self-serving in that regard by using Melisandre and her faith.



What makes the character likable is the struggle and in the end he does do the "right thing". He chooses to go to save the Wall when he is presented with the letter from the NW by Davos. He also chooses to go against his initial reaction of wanting to execute Davos. Unlike in the show where he looks for Melisandre for confirmation on the letter and spares Davos because of her. He wishes to bring Cersei to justice for the deaths of Robert and Jon Arryn. He does offer Catelyn the return of Arya and Sansa without her asking. He does the same to Jon Snow regarding "Arya" at Winterfell. The world of aSoIaF is a harsh place when you have men like Tywin, Joffrey, Ramsey and Roose Bolton, Walder Frey, etc who prevail because of their ruthlessness or cruelty. Stannis opposes these people, and we see him struggle and question himself when confronted with difficult decisions which makes him somewhat sympathetic. Dany or Tyrion are obviously more popular as they are able to overcome these struggles more easily and through cleverness and/or dragons. Is Stannis a white knight? Hell no. But he's one of the few non-POV characters pushing for a positive outcome in the story. Although, yes In ACOK he is the antagonist to Tyrion but also to Cersei.



As for myself, I value the characters at what we see them do during their low points. Tyrion becomes borderline suicidal, even more vindictive than he was before, casually thinks of murdering people out of spite or to live up to what they think of him, and a drunk. He does eventually get out of it. A lot of people dislike how his story meanders a while in aDwD. I didn't because it was a character driven story with the plot of the Mummer's Dragon introduced. Most of this is skipped in the show which leads to many feeling he is whitewashed (i.e. the whole Saint Tyrion). Jaime comes out of losing his hand as a better person because he was no longer invincible in his mind and his interaction with Brienne had a positive impact.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daniel Noye is the one who compares Renly to copper, not Cressen. However, we can't discount Cressen's thoughts on the Baratheon brothers as he was likely the character who knew all three as a whole the best. Or at the least, one of the few who had some form of positive relationship with all three as he had to raise all three to some extent as maester to House Baratheon and after the death of their parents. Maybe Jon Arryn might fall in that category, but we don't truly know the nature of his relationship with Renly or Stannis really. Renly and Jon Arryn are never mentioned together at all in the text. All we know of Arryn's relationship with Stannis is the two were investigating the legitimacy of Cersei's children, they were both on the small council so had a working relationship, and they were both involved in Robert's war councils when Stannis was not under siege.

As for your contention Stannis is not poorly adapted, I disagree. When comes time for the leeches, the show has Davos be the one who pushes for it rather than Stannis as a sign of proof. In aCoK, Stannis describes himself as agnostic or a deist (depending how you wish to interpret it) to Davos. The showrunners themselves state he is fanatical in devotion and besides the scene we see him choking Melisandre and during her seduction of him, we see none of his questioning of the power of her faith. When Davos was in prison, Stannis questions Davos' skepticism. This could also mean to say he is projecting his doubts through Davos and looking for validation. Which could certainly be what they were going for. But Dillane played him as being resolute and certain when he speaks of the vision he saw in the flames.

He is described in the books, and the show by Littlefinger, as among the best commanders in Westeros. Now, Littlefinger might not know anything about warfare, but what have we seen in the show to indicate Stannis is a competent commander? The closest I can think of is the pincer attack on the wildlings. Show Stannis is portrayed as a weak willed man when the books keep describing him as hard, unwilling to bend, harsh, etc.

The showrunners go on to describe him as ambitious. In the books, he tells Davos he does not want the throne, but he pursues it because of the laws and he wants to mete out justice. Now, one can interpret this as utter bullshit (oh no! more puerile scatological words!) and he is trying to justify his ambition under better pretenses. However, if ambition was truly his sole motivation, why deny alliance with the Starks? He could just as easily make common cause and then betray them later.

And something a lot of his fans point out, none of his scathing humour is ever portrayed in the show.

As for describing Renly as an attention whore, the way he is described in the chapters of other characters heavily implies his desire to be the centre of attention. At the small council meetings, he interrupts often to make jokes. During the tourney he wears a garish armour to call attention to himself. Littlefinger jokes Renly spends more on his wardrobe than at least half the ladies at court. In his procession towards King's Landing, he is feasting and having tournaments the entire way for his glory. As Catelyn states, these are the knights of Summer.

Firstly, I'm not discounting Maester Cressen's opinion; you're overvaluing it. Maester Cressen knew the brothers as children and admitted to a bias towards Stannis, which is why he felt so betrayed by him at his end. Secondly, his skills as commander, the leeches scene, or his relations with Davos do not reflect on his cold-blooded and narcissistic personality; they are extraneous to it. And Stannis was hardly a barrel of laughs in the book, either. And, again, being egotistical and immature is a lot different than being an "attention whore." That's just your unfortunate, immature, and inaccurate description of Renly showing your bias against him.

And "class clown" is a bad one, as well. He was exuberant and flamboyant, he didn't constantly make cracks for laughs. And he clearly wasn't the one lacking his parents' affection; Cressen made clear that was Stannis, who decidedly lacked Stannis' charm. And while Renly would have been far from a perfect king, he wouldn't have gone around burning people or cutting off fingers for saving the kingdom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it was pretty horrible writing to be honest and find the whole way it was done was completely laughable.

Linda made an excellent point of this in the episode review, there were so many tactical errors made by Stannis, it was pathetic. Clearly David and Dan were tired of Stannis and just wanted him to die. They always hated him and ruined him on TV.

1. No scouting party to see what was up ahead.

2. After desertations, horses should have been with the most loyal troops.

3. Should have had recon squads, especially after the covert attack by Ramsay and his 20 good men.

4. Burning Shireen made him seem MAD/INSANE, it is a wonder that anyone was left after that piss poor and non book decision.

5. Once his troops would have told him, Bolton has us by 700 men and all on horse, Stannis had one choice. Gurellia. You can't meet them out in the open, spread your forces out, and once the Boltons charge the woods, Ambush them, break up their numbers, and get them off those horses.

Stannis was done, as Sansa saw from the high walls of Winterfell. They got routed by horse, and outflanked. NEVER GET OUT FLANKED is the rule of warfare from King Hammurabi to General Jospehm Dunford.

Even with horse, Stannis still would have lost the battle. Bolton had him by 700 men, and in old school warfare from Sumer to the Crusades, numbers won the battle unless one force had the advantage of terrian, tactics, quality of troops and technology.

Based on the Wiki numbers mentioned, Bolton had a fortified large castle on high ground, and 700 more horse. Easy victory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stating Renly would have no problem drawing Stannis' men to his side is speculation. Now, in light of the huge numerical advantage at the battle near Storm's End, they would be coerced into it certainly. However, as is often described Stannis' vassals were formerly direct vassals to the Targaeryens. Robert did not think Renly was apt at his age to take them under his banner. Catelyn is right when she says she would lock the two in a room until they remembered they were brothers. They were both acting improperly although for different reasons. Stannis as he later admits Davos pointed out to him, was focused on claiming his rights to save the kingdom (in this case from the Lannisters) than saving the kingdom first. He had little patience with his brother but offered better terms to Renly than the other way around (Renly did not promise Stannis seat on the Small council nor made mention of inheritance for the Iron Throne).

As for the burning people alive. It's cruel yes, callous even when a swift death would be merciful. Stannis is not a merciful guy but he's just. As for burning Shireen, it has not happened in the books and may not happen at all. Until it does, and the context of when it does occur comes to be known, can we accurately make an assessment. The way it played out in the show was terrible from both a character, plotline, and narrative point of view. It left the viewer having to choose between a stupid man who quickly did a 180 and sacrifice his daughter the direction of the show urged viewers to like or a monster in Ramsay Snow. Anecdotal evidence from my entourage of friends who watch the show ranged from distaste of the whole plotline among those who read the books to apathy for pure show viewers for the battle after that. The latter were left with no one to root for. The westeros.org admins were right in describing it as character assassination by the show runners in their review

What makes aSoIaF so compelling is most of the characters have flaws and are nuanced. Ramsay Snow and Joffrey are the two most prominent exceptions as being grotesquely evil. Renly is described as being the spitting image of Robert. Could he have been a good king? Maybe, but that was never in the cards in the author's mind. We don't see much of him to be frank. What we see is someone who in modern times might be a class clown. He does show moments of seriousness when he approaches Ned about acting against the Lannisters in the first book. These moments are far fewer than the ones of the laughing, smiling lord and later would-be king of Westeros. My take of the character was he sought affection he did not have when his parents died when he was very young. I would contend if he truly wanted to be just, he'd have marched against King's Landing to bring justice for the actions of the Lannisters. Instead, he chose to name himself king.

Stannis on the other hand is more flawed. He has two central flaws. The first is an inferiority complex towards Robert which we see hints of and Asha Greyjoy explicitly thinks when she fails to convince him to release her as a prisoner. The second is similar to Renly but his reaction is much different due to temperament. Where Renly sought affection he lost when his parents died, Stannis did the opposite and didn't value affection very much and so did not pursue it. The inferiority complex made him bitter when he did not get what he felt was his due (Storm's End). The lack of affection makes him someone harsh and cold. He has no sympathy for those who break the law grievously. With the exception of Renly, he is never described as having remorse for burning traitors alive. He shows no signs of enjoying the burnings unlike Aerys Targaeryen did or Joffrey and Ramsay might. If you wanted to be particularly generous, you could say he is following Ned's Stark "he who passes the sentence should swing the sword" motto and at least confronting the act instead of shying away. Or he is simply placating the Queen's men faction who are the true fanatics. There is some credence to this when during the blizzard, he tells the Queen's men: "pray harder" in his denial of their request for sacrifices. This could also mean he is self-serving in that regard by using Melisandre and her faith.

What makes the character likable is the struggle and in the end he does do the "right thing". He chooses to go to save the Wall when he is presented with the letter from the NW by Davos. He also chooses to go against his initial reaction of wanting to execute Davos. Unlike in the show where he looks for Melisandre for confirmation on the letter and spares Davos because of her. He wishes to bring Cersei to justice for the deaths of Robert and Jon Arryn. He does offer Catelyn the return of Arya and Sansa without her asking. He does the same to Jon Snow regarding "Arya" at Winterfell. The world of aSoIaF is a harsh place when you have men like Tywin, Joffrey, Ramsey and Roose Bolton, Walder Frey, etc who prevail because of their ruthlessness or cruelty. Stannis opposes these people, and we see him struggle and question himself when confronted with difficult decisions which makes him somewhat sympathetic. Dany or Tyrion are obviously more popular as they are able to overcome these struggles more easily and through cleverness and/or dragons. Is Stannis a white knight? Hell no. But he's one of the few non-POV characters pushing for a positive outcome in the story. Although, yes In ACOK he is the antagonist to Tyrion but also to Cersei.

As for myself, I value the characters at what we see them do during their low points. Tyrion becomes borderline suicidal, even more vindictive than he was before, casually thinks of murdering people out of spite or to live up to what they think of him, and a drunk. He does eventually get out of it. A lot of people dislike how his story meanders a while in aDwD. I didn't because it was a character driven story with the plot of the Mummer's Dragon introduced. Most of this is skipped in the show which leads to many feeling he is whitewashed (i.e. the whole Saint Tyrion). Jaime comes out of losing his hand as a better person because he was no longer invincible in his mind and his interaction with Brienne had a positive impact.

Firstly, almost everything you have said about what would happen is speculation, too. That's what we've been doing in determining what might have happened. So, your saying my opinion is speculation is obvious and irrelevant. And whether or not he offered Renly a better deal, he was still pursuing his questionable "rights" to the throne--considering Robert was a usurper--and still murdered Renly instead of killing him in battle or rightfully killing him if Renly refused to bend the knee.

Secondly, you keep conveniently glossing over the fact Stannis burned loyal citizens alive who just refused to join his new committal to the Red God, or more aptly, Melissandre. That is callous, cruel, and pretty much evil. And his burning Shireen was as well, as it was all done for the purpose of him to be king. And whether you see his burning his daughter alive as 'character assassination" or not, it is part of the truth of TV Stannis' character now, and will probably be for his book character as well.

As to your paragraph beginning with "Stannis on the other hand," you do do an excellent job describing the root of Stannis' self-righteous, but narcissistic evil. It doesn't come from pure malice, as with Joffrey and Ramsay, but it comes nonetheless...just ask those loyal citizens of his who were burned alive. if that's not evil, then we should just stop using the word in GOT discussions. And if you like him, that's your prerogative. But even despie his evil actions, I don't particularly find self-righteous, rigid, humorless people to be that likable...even Euron Greyjoy has more charm and flair. Dany and Tyrion aren't just more likable because they're better people; they're more likable because they are more interesting and have more personality. And Stannis doing his duty just shows he's lawful evil, not chaotic evil. All lawful evil rulers do follow their duties when needed to establish or continue their reign; it doesn't take away from the evil of their other actions.

And I, too, value what characters do in their low points and how they grow afterward, which is why Jamie and Sansa are my two favorite characters in the book. However, Stannis kills people in horrific ways in his low points. That combined with the fact he's the Oliver Cromwell of the show, minus an semblance of Cromwell's minimal humor, he is far from the most likable character in show or book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only have a minor military background but the depiction of Stannis appeared particularly poor to me:


- Marching in formation onto a fortress in broad daylight


- No reconnaissance (he needs to know what awaits him, especially if Bolton send out forces to delay and distort his advance but even more so since over night all of a sudden several thousand cavalry men are missing [who, btw, would have been of limited use during a siege])


- No protection of the flanks while advancing? They were pretty much having a nice walk in the snow not a tactical march


- Seems to me that every decent commander having somehow lost his mercenary cavalry and a force consisting of infantry would have stayed in the woods


- Planning a siege while you just arrived? Did he study Winterfell and the territory in advance so well? Even if, you need leader recon to find out the details of the terrain


- He would have taken counter measures against a possible outbreak of Winterfell / attack


- The best military commander in Westeros would not just assume the Boltons to remain in their fortress, he would expect some sort of trick or so



I bet that Ramsay somehow “tricked”/ bribed the sellswords into switching sides to the Boltons (how else could they have so much cavalry all of a sudden?). Or are these the nights of the Vale? Has anybody identified any banners or so?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's certainly my guess and it really covers why Stannis gets caught out, even if he's sent scouts off screen it would be possible for the Boltons to keep a large mounted force out of sight within Winterfell or to the south of it then move them up quickly when there own scouts tell them Stannis has arrived. Without the sellswords switching sides Stannis thinks he's facing a 1 to 1 fight with infantry that cant supprize him like that and are unlikely to try anyway preferring a siege.



Honestly its hard to judge Renly against Stannis because he isn't put in nearly as many difficult positions so doesn't need to act ruthlessly as often. He does show a ruthless edge when trying to deal with Joffery whilst Robert is still alive and also of course in dealing with Stannis himself, at least Stannis offers him a position on the small council and the chance to be his heir.



Personally I would say as well that with Renly the impression is that he wouldn't have been nearly as effective a king as he believes he might. He's afterall grown up in a time of relative peace and whilst he might be a bit more savey of court politics than Ned he doesn't really seem ready for the kind of conflicts that will come before or after becoming king, not to mention the potential threat of the Walkers.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's certainly my guess and it really covers why Stannis gets caught out, even if he's sent scouts off screen it would be possible for the Boltons to keep a large mounted force out of sight within Winterfell or to the south of it then move them up quickly when there own scouts tell them Stannis has arrived. Without the sellswords switching sides Stannis thinks he's facing a 1 to 1 fight with infantry that cant supprize him like that and are unlikely to try anyway preferring a siege.

Honestly its hard to judge Renly against Stannis because he isn't put in nearly as many difficult positions so doesn't need to act ruthlessly as often. He does show a ruthless edge when trying to deal with Joffery whilst Robert is still alive and also of course in dealing with Stannis himself, at least Stannis offers him a position on the small council and the chance to be his heir.

Personally I would say as well that with Renly the impression is that he wouldn't have been nearly as effective a king as he believes he might. He's afterall grown up in a time of relative peace and whilst he might be a bit more savey of court politics than Ned he doesn't really seem ready for the kind of conflicts that will come before or after becoming king, not to mention the potential threat of the Walkers.

Renly isn't perfect. He's just the best of a bunch of bad options. Compared to Joffrey's sadism, Robert's irresponsibilty and Stannis' extremism, Renly's egotism is not too big of a detriment. He thinks highly of himself. However, he also shows that he understands that keeping your bannermen and allies happy are important. This is demonstrated by his actions concerning Brienne and the Tyrells. He recognizes and reacts to clear threats such as Cersei and Daenaeyrs. As for the White Walkers, I don't believe any king would be capable of dealing with them not even Stannis. He put his own personal ambition over his duty to protect the kingdom when he tried to convince Jon to leave the wall and wage war on the Boltons. His unwillingness to forgive past trangressions would ensure that he is not able to unite the realm as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly its hard to judge Renly against Stannis because he isn't put in nearly as many difficult positions so doesn't need to act ruthlessly as often. He does show a ruthless edge when trying to deal with Joffery whilst Robert is still alive and also of course in dealing with Stannis himself, at least Stannis offers him a position on the small council and the chance to be his heir.

Personally I would say as well that with Renly the impression is that he wouldn't have been nearly as effective a king as he believes he might. He's afterall grown up in a time of relative peace and whilst he might be a bit more savey of court politics than Ned he doesn't really seem ready for the kind of conflicts that will come before or after becoming king, not to mention the potential threat of the Walkers.

Renly showed an ambitious and a cunning side; he never showed Stannis' ruthless homicidal side. You can't blame Renly for not burning his own loyal citizens or daughter because he "never had the chance." Renly never showed the cold-blooded callousness to his fellow humans that Stannis did. I must say, though, you Stannis apologists will forgive him anything, even burning alive his own loyal citizens and daughter. That makes him one of the bad guys.

And I've never argued that Renly would be the ideal king. As I said before, he's a dilletante and quite the playboy, despite his apparent monogamous relationship. However, he was extremely more empathetic and sympathetic to other humans, including his followers, than Stannis was. As the poster above noted, he would have been much preferable to Stannis or Joffery. And if people think Stannis would have been this great king who would have been kind to his subjects and cared about his happiness, they're kidding themselves. And what do people think would have happened if Stannis' rule was going bad or some of his citizens displeased him...more burnings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what do people think would have happened if Stannis' rule was going bad or some of his citizens displeased him...more burnings.

If Stannis does become king, no citizen would dare displease him. They knew not to do that before he started burning people. Now, they wouldn't even question it. Everyone would be in line for a change. A guy who would burn his only daughter isn't fucking around. And even if Stannis survives, I think Shireen will be his last burning anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Stannis does become king, no citizen would dare displease him. They knew not to do that before he started burning people. Now, they wouldn't even question it. Everyone would be in line for a change. A guy who would burn his only daughter isn't fucking around. And even if Stannis survives, I think Shireen will be his last burning anyways.

Why would you possibly think it would be his last burning? He believes burnings are remedies for hard times, so there's no reason for people to think he won't burn people again. Again, I just don't understand the Stannis apologism. Secondly, a kingdom where citizens are terrified to displease their king is a nightmare kingdom, one similar to Joffrey's rule. And the people can't know if they would displease Stannis or not; that's up to Stannis, not them. His loyal citizens thought they were pleasing him while holding to their old religion; he burned them anyway. He would have been a terrible king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stannis does seem to have a PR issue, lots of higher ranking houses are weary of him because he doesn't give out favors and generally clamps down on their excesses (unlike renly and robert). But he does inspire loyalty from the ground up and if he does good in the north and beyond he could generate a substantial support base in the future.

He does seem to inspire a fierce devotion in his remaining common troops, Stannis' men die hard.

His reputation is not based on a few months in a land he doesn't know.

Even so, he is a wise commander, as he has the intellect to ask advice from more knowledgeable people.

While being fed false and misleading information... seriously, what an idiot! And agreed on the last part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say I'm a Stannis apologist, my point was that we see Stannis behaving ruthlessly when in a tight position, we don't see Renly in such a position or indeed in any position where he needs to make tough choices that will cost lives.



With reguards to Stannis and Jon theres a good argument to be made that the best way to help the defence of the wall is to push south and at the very least capture Winterfell. The Nights watch don't have the supplies to support Stannis's army, he doesn't have the gold to pay sellswords indefinitely plus of course theres the risk of attack from the south as long as he's there. If that's the case then asking Jon to join him to make the chances of success that much greater isn't really neglecting the wall and indeed we see in the show especially that the NW was never really fit for purpose anyway.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say I'm a Stannis apologist, my point was that we see Stannis behaving ruthlessly when in a tight position, we don't see Renly in such a position or indeed in any position where he needs to make tough choices that will cost lives.

With reguards to Stannis and Jon theres a good argument to be made that the best way to help the defence of the wall is to push south and at the very least capture Winterfell. The Nights watch don't have the supplies to support Stannis's army, he doesn't have the gold to pay sellswords indefinitely plus of course theres the risk of attack from the south as long as he's there. If that's the case then asking Jon to join him to make the chances of success that much greater isn't really neglecting the wall and indeed we see in the show especially that the NW was never really fit for purpose anyway.

But you are being a Stannis apologist when you keep saying Stannis only did what he did because he was in a tight position, as if everybody would burn their loyal citizens or their own chlldren alive when things get bad. They wouldn't. Renly wouldn't have; Robb Stark wouldn't have; Nedd Stark wouldn't have; Tyrion wouldn't have. So, if you don't want to be a Stannis apologist, stop apologizing for his terrible actions by making excuses for them.

And he wasn't exactly in a "tight positon" when he burned alive his loyal citizens who held on to their life-long religions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...