Stannis is NOT a hypocrite

[Draco_Dracul]

I would say any of 1-3 would fulfill his duty. The funny thing about 1 is that even if Robert doesn't actually believe Stannis, he hates Cersei and 3 million in debt to the Lannisters. Acting as if it were true both lets him remove Cersei and gives him an excuse to render half the Realm's debt void.

During a Clash of King's no one not on Dragon Stone swore Stannis an oath of fealty meaning by definition they weren't traitors. A broken oath and a complete lack of an oath are no different to deny that Stannis is a traitor to Aerys is to deny that Renly was a traitor to Stannis.

[Lord Nightstalker]

I will admit Stannis behaved inexcusably by running away to Dragonstone and sulking.

And declaring so late was unbeleivably stupid.

[BKev]

Do we know for sure Renly would have had Stannis killed? It sounds very extreme, and I don't think Renly would have gone so far. It is kinslaying after all. It's true though, Renly was a rebel and a traitor, and treason is punishable by death. That is the reasoning given by Stannis in his conversation with Davos, but it's also awfully convenient. He comes up with the right example with.. Visenya I think? Rhaenys? I don't remember the exact name of the Targaryen woman who was executed by her king for committing treason. But the circumstances are drastically different. For one, Stannis did not execute Renly so much as he had him murdered.

If a real battle had happened, and Stannis had somehow come out victorious, then he most likely would have had a trial for his brother and would have had him sentenced to death for high treason. In the end, with Stannis victorious, Renly was dead either way. However the means of his death with the shadow baby is far from justice, so I think he justifies himself a little too easily, although it is very clear he feels a lot of remorse for it.

Renly was a total douchebag though. He was loved, but I couldn't tell you why. He was incredibly arrogant, conceited and just believed he was the next best thing. His reign would have been pretty damn awful too, Robert 2.0 for sure. I doubt he would have cared for the people at all and he would have just sailed along enjoying his power while not doing a damn thing.

[Winter's Knight]

Thing is, Renly's already trying to remove Cersei no? He'd have gladly welcomed any excuse to remove Cersei, so I don't know why Stannis didn't tell him. Sure, Renly may not believe him, but like the court of Henry VIII in the case of Anne Boleyn, I doubt he'd have any scruples about using said accusation.

[LuisDantas]

Thing is, Renly's already trying to remove Cersei no? He'd have gladly welcomed any excuse to remove Cersei, so I don't know why Stannis didn't tell him. Sure, Renly may not believe him, but like the court of Henry VIII in the case of Anne Boleyn, I doubt he'd have any scruples about using said accusation.

Renly would hardly care about the incest/bastardy accusations. His claim is based on more pragmatical matters, as is his opposition to Cersei.

For all his posturing, Stannis does not care a lot about the bastardy either, except as a pretext to lend his claim a veneer of credibility and pseudo-legitimacy.

[Rhymes with Weak]

Renly would hardly care about the incest/bastardy accusations. His claim is based on more pragmatical matters, as is his opposition to Cersei.

For all his posturing, Stannis does not care a lot about the bastardy either, except as a pretext to lend his claim a veneer of credibility and pseudo-legitimacy.

Well he does have legitimacy, not that it really did him much good.

[Lord Nightstalker]

Do we know for sure Renly would have had Stannis killed? It sounds very extreme, and I don't think Renly would have gone so far.

yes. See what he told his soldiers after his parley with Stannis.

[Stanerys Snow]

Would that be the same Ned who rebelled against Aerys? Or someone else by that name?

Yeah, the same Ned that rebelled against The Mad King. The same Ned that would have needed a valid reason to go against Joffrey, the same as his valid reason to go against The Mad King. Ned's execution did not help the Lannister cause, and would give anyone pause that looked into the reasoning behind Ned's supposed treason. You know what Lord Nightstalker was inferring, so stop being a jerk. :P

I agree. I am only pointing out that Stannis is consistent in his worldview, and not a hypocrite. Stannis has a worldview that is not in consonance with the realities of politics. But we need people like him, both in real life and in westeros.

:agree:

Stannis' views may be weird and unsupported by the law, but he is consistent in his views. His view on his kingship is why he is NOT a hypocrite. If a character's own personal views are not used when judging their actions, there's really no point in discussing the characters.

To be frank, Stannis primary hypocrisy is that he has the gall to declare anyone a traitor when he betrayed two sitting kings. One by ;supporting a rebellion, and one by aiding a traitor to the realm by hiding her secret from the King. His was not the hand that killed Robert, but he played his part by abandoning his king in a city flooded with Lannister men and not telling him or Ned why he fled.

Stannis struggled with his decision to rebel against The Mad King. In the end he chose to serve his brother and his liege lord out of a sense of duty to his brother. Stannis never betrayed a king for personal glory or power, which is what he accuses others of doing.

Stannis left King's Landing after seeing what happened to Jon Arryn and knowing that he could be next. He had good reason to believe that Robert wouldn't believe him, and his feelings towards Ned clouded his judgement on whether Ned would listen to him. Stannis did not assist Cersei in her treason, nor did he support her actions.

To be frank, Stannis is not a hypocrite for the actions you listed. Context is important when discussing hypocrisy. You can debate the morality or rationality of his actions, but neither is an example of hypocrisy.

I will admit Stannis behaved inexcusably by running away to Dragonstone and sulking.

And declaring so late was unbeleivably stupid.

It depends on how you interpret his actions,

Was Stannis sulking on Dragonstone, or was he plotting?

Did Stannis have a good reason to declare late, like ensuring that he had enough power to support his declaration?

Do we know for sure Renly would have had Stannis killed? It sounds very extreme, and I don't think Renly would have gone so far. It is kinslaying after all.

“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 of 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. “

“My brother has not changed,” their young king told them as Brienne unfastened his cloak and lifted the goldand-jade crown from his brow. “Castles and courtesies will not appease him, he must have blood. Well, I am of a mind to grant his wish.”

“Your Grace, I see no need for battle here,” Lord Mathis Rowan put in. “The castle is strongly garrisoned and well provisioned, Ser Cortnay Penrose is a seasoned commander, and the trebuchet has not been built that could breach the walls of Storm’s End. Let Lord Stannis have his siege. He will find no joy in it, and whilst he sits cold and hungry and profitless, we will take King’s Landing.”

“And have men say I feared to face Stannis?”

“When my brother falls, see that no insult is done to his corpse. He is my own blood, I will not have his head paraded about on a spear.”

“Let the three of you call for a Great Council, such as the realm has not seen for a hundred years. We will send to Winterfell, so Bran may tell his tale and all men may know the Lannisters for the true usurpers. Let the assembled lords of the Seven Kingdoms choose who shall rule them.”

Renly laughed. “Tell me, my lady, do direwolves vote on who should lead the pack?” Brienne brought the king’s gauntlets and great helm, crowned with golden antlers that would add a foot and a half to his height. “The time for talk is done. Now we see who is stronger.”

It's true though, Renly was a rebel and a traitor, and treason is punishable by death. That is the reasoning given by Stannis in his conversation with Davos, but it's also awfully convenient. He comes up with the right example with.. Visenya I think? Rhaenys? I don't remember the exact name of the Targaryen woman who was executed by her king for committing treason. But the circumstances are drastically different. For one, Stannis did not execute Renly so much as he had him murdered.

If a real battle had happened, and Stannis had somehow come out victorious, then he most likely would have had a trial for his brother and would have had him sentenced to death for high treason. In the end, with Stannis victorious, Renly was dead either way. However the means of his death with the shadow baby is far from justice, so I think he justifies himself a little too easily, although it is very clear he feels a lot of remorse for it.

Execution is defined a being put to death for a crime, so in Stannis' view Renly was executed for treason against his king. The reader's view of Renly's actions against Stannis and Stannis' actions against Renly is subjective, but Stannis' view is quite clear, so his Targaryren comparison makes perfect sense.

Rhaenyra Targaryren was executed by her brother Aegon II, whom had her eaten by his dragon. Rhaenyra was condemned as a traitor for rebelling against her brother who considered himself the rightful king.

It comes down to personal belief in terms of the justice and Renly's death. As you stated, the end result would have been the same if Stannis were victorious.

Renly was a total douchebag though. He was loved, but I couldn't tell you why. He was incredibly arrogant, conceited and just believed he was the next best thing. His reign would have been pretty damn awful too, Robert 2.0 for sure. I doubt he would have cared for the people at all and he would have just sailed along enjoying his power while not doing a damn thing.

:agree: People loved him because he was flashy and handsome, plus he seemed to be great for having a good time.

[David Selig]

Stannis struggled with his decision to rebel against The Mad King. In the end he chose to serve his brother and his liege lord out of a sense of duty to his brother. Stannis never betrayed a king for personal glory or power, which is what he accuses others of doing.

Doesn't matter. Stannis himself claims treason is treason, no excuses, it should be punished by death, period.

what is the penalty for treason under the law?”

Davos had no choice but to answer. “Death,” he said. “The penalty is death, Your Grace.”

“It has always been so. I am not . . . I am not a cruel man, Ser Davos. You know me. Have known me long. This is not my decree. It has always been so, since Aegon’s day and before. Daemon Blackfyre, the brothers Toyne, the Vulture King, Grand Maester Hareth . . . traitors have always paid with their lives . . . even Rhaenyra Targaryen. She was daughter to one king and mother to two more, yet she died a traitor’s death for trying to usurp her brother’s crown. It is law. Law, Davos. Not cruelty.”

But as always, despite his words, Stannis only sticks to the law when convenient to him.

[Stanerys Snow]

Doesn't matter. Stannis himself claims treason is treason, no excuses, it should be punished by death, period.

But as always, despite his words, Stannis only sticks to the law when convenient to him.

If Robert had lost the rebellion, I'm sure Stannis was prepared to take the penalty for his crime. Acknowledging the penalty for his crime against The Mad King was no doubt apart of his decision to align with Robert.

Is it your argument that Stannis should have killed himself for rebelling against The Mad King and winning?

[David Selig]

My argument is that Stannis only follows the law when it benefits him, and all his speeches what a lawful man he is are total BS and blatant hypocrisy. When he needed the Stormlords who according to him committed treason, he pardoned them all despite all his talks how traitors must die, that's the law, period. He himself committed treason and got away with it. His claims that he must kill traitors like Renly and Alester, he has no choice, etc, are obvious nonsense.

[Sullen]

My argument is that Stannis only follows the law when it benefits him, and all his speeches what a lawful man he is are total BS and blatant hypocrisy. When he needed the Stormlords who according to him committed treason, he pardoned them all despite all his talks how traitors must die, that's the law, period. He himself committed treason and got away with it. His claims that he must kill traitors like Renly and Alester, he has no choice, etc, are obvious nonsense.

Agreed.

Stannis is no longer a "just man" when he forgoes justice/the law in the name of utilitarianism...

[Stanerys Snow]

My argument is that Stannis only follows the law when it benefits him, and all his speeches what a lawful man he is are total BS and blatant hypocrisy. When he needed the Stormlords who according to him committed treason, he pardoned them all despite all his talks how traitors must die, that's the law, period. He himself committed treason and got away with it. His claims that he must kill traitors like Renly and Alastair, he has no choice, etc, are obvious nonsense.

When has Stannis given a speech about being a lawful man? When has Stannis claimed to be a completely lawful man devoid of personal shortcomings and mistakes?

The quote you listed above shows him discussing the law as it relates to a man that he had entrusted as his Hand. A man that betraying that trust conspired against the ultimate goal of his king without his king's instruction. Stannis is obviously thinking about the punishment for his Hand's crime, which is why he consults Davos to reiterate the punishment for treason. Stannis is not saying that he doesn't have a choice, only that he has made a choice that is valid under the law. He then proceeds to further discuss treason and his views on treason with Davos. He then concedes to Davos when Davos challenges his beliefs.

Where is this obvious blatant hypocrisy?

The Stannis Baratheon of the novels is a different man than the Stannis Baratheon created on this forum by his fans and detractors. The Stannis of the novels is far more complex.

Agreed.

Stannis is no longer a "just man" when he forgoes justice/the law in the name of utilitarianism...

GRRM states that Stannis is a just man because he went to the Wall, not for his former actions.

[Sullen]

GRRM states that Stannis is a just man because he went to the Wall, not for his former actions.

Going to the Wall was indeed a just action, but as Stannis himself says "The good doesn't wash out the bad, nor the bad the good."

Stan's obsession with "justice" despite his pragmatic dismissal of it whenever it profits him makes him very much a hypocrite.

[Rhymes with Weak]

Can someone please point out the great injustice that Stannis loosed upon the world?

[Sullen]

Can someone please point out the great injustice that Stannis loosed upon the world?

Forgiving traitors because he needed their swords, for one.

Leaving his King in the viper's nest that is King's Landing to save his own skin.

Ignoring the Hand's summons, which was his duty as subject to Robert.

Considering burning Edric Storm, an innocent boy... about as unjust as you can go.

Acting cruelly towards his old maester and foster parent, Maester Cressen,

Not exactly an injustice, but simply another example of Stan the Man's hypocrisy: When Stannis meets with Cat and Renly to parley, he mentions that once Jon Arryn dead, the position of Hand should have went to him, not Eddard. Cat replies that Ned simply did his duty, to which Stannis replies "He could have refused it."

Stannis says he doesn't want the Crown, that he is only doing his duty, yet he resents Ned for doing the same thing.

[Stanerys Snow]

Going to the Wall was indeed a just action, but as Stannis himself says "The good doesn't wash out the bad, nor the bad the good."

I concur.

Stan's obsession with "justice" despite his pragmatic dismissal of it whenever it profits him makes him very much a hypocrite.

What obsession? What has Stannis done that he staunchly condemns others of doing?

[Rhymes with Weak]

Forgiving traitors because he needed their swords, for one.

Leaving his King in the viper's nest that is King's Landing to save his own skin.

Ignoring the Hand's summons, which was his duty as subject to Robert.

Considering burning Edric Storm, an innocent boy... about as unjust as you can go.

Acting cruelly towards his old maester and foster parent, Maester Cressen,

Not exactly an injustice, but simply another example of Stan the Man's hypocrisy: When Stannis meets with Cat and Renly to parley, he mentions that once Jon Arryn dead, the position of Hand should have went to him, not Eddard. Cat replies that Ned simply did his duty, to which Stannis replies "He could have refused it."

Stannis says he doesn't want the Crown, that he is only doing his duty, yet he resents Ned for doing the same thing.

Has Stannis ever described himself as infallibly just? If he didn't than those actions would just be a tad dickish, not hypocritical

[SerStinger]

But GRRM claimed that he is a righteous man. That should be proof enough that he wants to defend the realm.

But remember, the while theme of the series is that righteousness can be as bad as -or worse than - hunger for power.

[Stanerys Snow]

Forgiving traitors because he needed their swords, for one.

Leaving his King in the viper's nest that is King's Landing to save his own skin.

Ignoring the Hand's summons, which was his duty as subject to Robert.

Considering burning Edric Storm, an innocent boy... about as unjust as you can go.

Acting cruelly towards his old maester and foster parent, Maester Cressen,

I won't go in depth about those points, because that is not the purpose of this thread. You have listed Stannis' perceived mistakes while forgoing their context, but either way it is true that he has made some mistakes. Those mistakes do not constitute hypocrisy.

Not exactly an injustice, but simply another example of Stan the Man's hypocrisy: When Stannis meets with Cat and Renly to parley, he mentions that once Jon Arryn dead, the position of Hand should have went to him, not Eddard. Cat replies that Ned simply did his duty, to which Stannis replies "He could have refused it."

Stannis says he doesn't want the Crown, that he is only doing his duty, yet he resents Ned for doing the same thing.

“Lady Stark,” Stannis Baratheon said with chill courtesy as he reined up. He inclined his head, balder than she remembered.

“Lord Stannis,” she returned.

Beneath the tight-trimmed beard his heavy jaw clenched hard, yet he did not hector her about titles. For that she was duly grateful. “I had not thought to find you at Storm’s End.”

“I had not thought to be here.”

His deepset eyes regarded her uncomfortably. This was not a man made for easy courtesies. “I am sorry for your lord’s death,” he said, “though Eddard Stark was no friend to me.”

“He was never your enemy, my lord. When the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne held you prisoned in that castle, starving, it was Eddard Stark who broke the siege.”

“At my brother’s command, not for love of me,” Stannis answered. “Lord Eddard did his duty, I will not deny it. Did I ever do less? I should have been Robert’s Hand.”

“That was your brother’s will. Ned never wanted it.”

“Yet he took it. That which should have been mine. Still, I give you my word, you shall have justice for his murder.”

Stannis feels that the position of Hand should have went to him, and that Ned should have refused out of respect for him. Stannis did not view the position of Hand as Ned's duty. Unknowingly to Stannis, Ned only accepted the position to protect Robert. Stannis' view of Ned and Robert's relationship is clouding Stannis' judgement. That is a one of Stannis' character flaws.

Stannis doesn't feel that he could have so easily turned down the crown, because he feels it is his duty by law; he does not feel that it was Ned's duty to be Hand.

Stannis' own thoughts and preconceived notions go a long way in accusing him of hypocrisy.