Stannis isn't a religious zealot

[Miodrag]

“I stopped believing in gods the day I saw the Windproud break up across the bay. Any gods so monstrous as to drown my mother and father would never have my worship, I vowed. In King’s Landing, the High Septon would prattle at me of how all justice and goodness flowed from the Seven, but all I ever saw of either was made by men.”

Thanks for the quote. That's what I'm talking about: he vows never to worship the gods ever again, e.g. he'll deny them his respect for them. He's clearly angry at them. Somehow I find it hard to see that as atheism.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

I think it's borderline whether we want to call it 'true' atheism- but that's kind of what I love about it. Even if he we read it as him leaving room for gods to exist, the orientation of his statement is that he would refuse to worship them anyway. Which is something I really appreciate about the man.

[AintNoStark]

Btw, point to be noted; recognizing Rhllor exists doesn't really mean he recognizes him as a god; could be he thinks Rhllor is some magical spell or creature. Like white walkers.

[Miodrag]

Btw, point to be noted; recognizing Rhllor exists doesn't really mean he recognizes him as a god; could be he thinks Rhllor is some magical spell or creature. Like white walkers.

Theoretically, yeah, it doesn't necessarily mean Stannis views him as a deity. But, given that Westeros didn't taste any divine intervention for ages, and previous interventions - like The Wall - are usually attributed to gods, it's more probable that everyone, Stannis included, recognizes R'hllor as a deity, especially because the lady that uses the said powers claims so.

That's not to say that Stannis is a fanatic, or a zealot. By no means. I don't think he's an atheist at the beginning of the story (though that stance is somewhat shaken by the possibility that GRRM, Elio and Linda can claim the opposite), and the very fact he accepts Mel's powers without initiating some personal transition possibly testifies to that. For comparison, a Lannister couldn't help but be shocked and thoroughly transformed if exposed to Mel's wonders. Stannis doesn't seem surprised even. Like, he knew all along that gods do exist in some form and on some level, but after his parents death he didn't want to loose any time/energy on even thinking on them, let alone worshiping them. He realized they have no duties, and duty is, as someone noted in this thread, Stannis' main religion. Anyone and anything that isn't subjected to duties, gods included, is of no interest to Stannis. And then, just as he was desperate for some help, one of those gods shows willingness to cooperate with Stannis, which Stannis naturally accepts - that's what I got from the Proudwings story, at least. But, it makes him a zealot in no way. And I fully agree with you that Stannis' 'religious fanaticism' is largely the product of the TV show, for which I blame HBO, not the viewers, of course.

[Mayura]

Stannis doesnt believe in the gods but he is not stupid either. He noticed Melisandre is calling to some real power or magic and he is planning to use that at his advantage, no matter what it is.

It doesn't mean, however, that he has adopted the faith of R'hllor or that he believes in the God. He can just see that whatever Mel is doing is working for him so it would be stupid not to use that to his advantage.

[Nictarion]

None of the other POVs don't even much think about Dany until book 5.

Ned did. She was a major focal point between him and Robert in the 1st book.

[Guard of the Rainking]

Ned did. She was a major focal point between him and Robert in the 1st book.

I said POVs don't much think about Dany. Not POVs don't think about Dany.

[AintNoStark]

Yeah because thinking about Dany (credit going ofcourse to Viserys and Drogo waging war on Westeros) for a few pages means she's constantly on peoples minds lol

[Nictarion]

Yeah because thinking about Dany (credit going ofcourse to Viserys and Drogo waging war on Westeros) for a few pages means she's constantly on peoples minds lol

The issue was over Dany and her unborn child being killed, not Viserys or Drogo. If Dany wasn't part of the equation, I doubt Ned would object so much to sending assassins after Viserys.

[Antler's Fury]

It will never cease to amaze me how far are some people willing to go in abusing a thread, just so they can prove some ridiculous misconception they forged for god knows what reason. Is it really that hard to see how valuable Storms End actually is, and certainly much more valuable than Dragonstone? Didn't the very events in the books prove how shorthanded Stannis was in that deal? Put Mel out of the equation, and you can clearly see how big an advantage Renly has over Stannis at the start of the war. Is it then that hard to comprehend why did Martin write Stannis as someone who is still bitter about his brother's decision? How would you feel in Stannis' shoes? Better yet, how did you feel when you were shorthanded in school, or in family affairs, or in business - even though, the chances are you've never been nearly as shorthanded as Stannis was?

Stannis also gets perpetually blamed for not telling Robert about twincest: as if Martin didn't establish how hard it was for anyone to speak hard truths to Robert. We're talking about a guy who for 13 years goes on and deludes himself that his fiancee loved him and was forcibly taken away from him. A guy who, as strongly suggested multiple times, disregarded many advices from his mentor and father figure Jon Arryn. A guy whose best friend Ned Stark - possibly the only person that dares to speak any truth to Robert, mind you - couldn't manage to inform him about the twincest. Yeah, the circumstances were not the same at all, at the very end Robert was dying and Ned understandably wanted to spare him from the poisonous truth, but it does speak a lot that even before that, informing Robert right away was never the first option on Ned's mind. And of course we do know how much closer Robert was to Ned than to his brothers: Robert himself says so. Is it then that hard to understand why Stannis decided against telling Robert? I don't even think it's necessary to analyze how endangered Stannis would've been had he told Robert. Chances are he would, just as anyone who stumbled on the truth about twincest was and is, but Stannis doesn't strike me as someone who'd step back from such a challenge. It's more probable, and supported by the text itself, that informing Robert on the biggest and darkest truth in his entire life had to be tough as hell, tough enough for Stannis to delay and delay and delay, until it was too late. Granted, we don't know for sure why exactly Stannis didn't inform his brother, but if we consider Stannis' character (he's a guy who'd rather have Gilly and her baby taken far away than deal with them in any way, for example), it's hardly a stretch to conclude that he just couldn't see the right way to tell his estranged brother what he knows. Robert choosing Ned as his new Hand definitely didn't help, hence Stannis decided to distance himself from all that business for the moment.

It probably wasn't the right decision, because, had he informed Robert, Lannisters would probably be castamered and Westeros would be better off. But guess what: ASOIAF is a story about drastic consequences of bad decisions made by realistic characters. The story is full of decisions gone wrong, or proved bad in hindsight. And those decisions are never without causation, and the dynamics between three Baratheon brothers is as powerful a causation as any. And Martin never neglects to remind readers of that dynamics: he does so as late as in ADWD, when Asha realizes how troubled Stannis still is by the fact he's a younger brother to Robert. Not to mention the death of their parents, a traumatic event that, not surprisingly, made the biggest impact on the middle brother - Renly was too young, and Robert had to take care of the house and didn't have the time to process it, but Stannis was profoundly affected by it. In fact, all three Baratheons are a brilliant creation, in that nobody among them is to be exclusively blamed for and all three of them suffered from the bloody mess they found themselves in, a mess largely designed by two traumatic events they themselves contributed to in no way: the death of their parents, and Aerys' order for Robert to be executed. And among three of them, Stannis is obviously the most complex one. He is really hard to love or even like, as he himself would probably be the first one to admit; and yet, the love and devotion Cressen and Davos feel and show for him is practically unparalleled in ASOIAF. Starks inspire remarkable, magnificent loyalty, but I think we're still to encounter anyone who's willing to risk for them as much as Cressen and Davos were/are for Stannis. As a character that gets absolutely no love from the vast majority of people he encounters, but inspires the deepest possible love and loyalty from the precious few, Stannis is just a brilliant literary creation that is never to be subjected to formulaic analysis and hateful simplification (not to mention how insane the very concept of hating a fictional character actually is).

Sorry for a post this long, but I was really enjoying the discussion about Stannis' attitude toward deities, and then it was interrupted by some silly accusations and ignorance. Yeah, I probably should've got used to that kind of ignorance by now. It looks like every thread is destined to derail into some futile forum war, started by posters that just don't seem to get the very first thing about Martin's writing: he based this story on relationships that are 'perfect storms', e.g. tragedies nobody involved has seen coming and nobody is to be exclusively blamed for. This obviously doesn't apply to characters like Littlefinger and Varys (though, their schemes are still too mysterious to be taken as purely intentional, I believe), and there are developments initiated by nothing other than malice (though there's often depth even to those cases, as we're usually presented with more or less subjective causes and reasons behind the said malice - Cersei's bloody coup is a prime example). But, everything else Martin's characters go through, and they all go through a lot, was the result of humans acting as humans, and, even more importantly, thinking and feeling as humans: shortsighted, disturbed, scared, hurt... The basic fiber of ASOIAF is conflicts like the one between Stannis and Renly: none of those two desired to destroy the other one, but, even more so, both of them were willing to destroy the other one rather than to step down. And both of them were well-intended actually: once the Lannisters seized the throne Renly acted against them the best way he thought (just like it's suggested he was long trying to separate Robert from Cersei), just like Stannis did all the while being fully aware he actually has the strongest claim to the throne. However, circumstances and their character flaws led them not into a coalition, but into a conflict from which only one could emerge alive. So, in essence, Stannis and Renly ended up harming one another much more than they'd ever desire: the same can be said for any number of relationships in ASOIAF; and still, in almost every discussion, someone comes along and starts the juvenile "Let's Blame This Character" game, which is really frustrating, to say the least. (Just like moral relativism, another frequent side-product of misreading of ASOIAF, tends to be.)

Now, please, can someone clarify this to me: does WOIAF really says Stannis is an atheist? I never thought of him as one. Lannisters are atheists, for example. They simply don't believe in gods, but they know better than to say it out loud. Stannis, on the other hand, looked more like someone who's angry at gods (over the death of his parents), than someone who denies their existence. And from the very beginning of his arc, he personally witnesses unnatural, higher powers, which means he couldn't deny their existence even if he wanted to. But, earlier in this thread, WOIAF was quoted as stating that Stanis "does not believe in gods". Given that WOIAF is written by the two biggest non-GRRM authorities on all things ASOIAF, and approved by GRRM himself, and also that I can't find WOIAF anywhere to verify the quote myself, can anybody elaborate some more on that, please? Not just the wording itself, cause I have no reason to doubt it was quoted properly, but the context, if there is one at all...

This. Absolutely spectacular, kudos! :cheers:

[A Man Has Said]

I'm not going to multiquote 50 different comments in this thread that all have to do with whether Robert would have trusted Stannis had the latter come to him with evidence of Cersei's incest, but it obviously strikes a lot of people as highly significant, so I'd like to weigh in.

Stannis only had to send to Storm's End for Edric Storm and ask Tobho Mott to send his apprentice to the castle. Then bring Renly into a room with both of Robert's bastards and a full-length mirror. Both Renly and Gendry are described at various points in the book as looking just like a younger Robert. Edric's description is a good match as well.

As Jon Arryn said, "The seed is strong." As is the evidence that Cersei's children are not Robert's, IMO. Stannis could have relied on the simple principle, "Who are you going to believe? Your own eyes or the lying Cersei?" (whom Stannis knew that Robert hated and mistrusted already.)

You might be able to make an argument that Robert didn't fully trust Stannis, but I don't think you can extend that to an argument that Stannis didn't have a damned good option that would have overcome any distrust that existed. You'd be clutching at rhetorical straws to try.

[Antler's Fury]

Stannis only had to send to Storm's End for Edric Storm and ask Tobho Mott to send his apprentice to the castle. Then bring Renly into a room with both of Robert's bastards and a full-length mirror. Both Renly and Gendry are described at various points in the book as looking just like a younger Robert. Edric's description is a good match as well.

Neither Stannis nor Renly trusted one another with their political maneuvering, and understandably so, considering their subsequent fight.

As is the evidence that Cersei's children are not Robert's, IMO. Stannis could have relied on the simple principle, "Who are you going to believe? Your own eyes or the lying Cersei?" (whom Stannis knew that Robert hated and mistrusted already.)

Stannis wouldn't be showing Robert anything he hadn't already seen. He'd seen his bastards and Cersei's children, and though he came close, did not come to the conclusion that Cersei was an adulteress. Stannis would have to count on Robert's taking his word for it when Stannis knew Robert had never taken anyone's advice not to trust the Lannisters.

[AintNoStark]

The issue was over Dany and her unborn child being killed, not Viserys or Drogo. If Dany wasn't part of the equation, I doubt Ned would object so much to sending assassins after Viserys.

And its just totally not a possibility Robert could send assassins after Viserys specifically and not Dany?

[Lord Voldemort's Toes]

I think it's pretty clear that he's not a zealot personally, though I'm not entirely sure the extent of his belief/non-belief (or perhaps worship/non-worship is a better word) in any god(s.)

Of course he promotes acts driven by Red Rahloo zealotry and carried out by zealots in order to gain something from them, but that's something different entirely. Like, I wouldn't call Karl Rove a religious zealot for courting the evangelical bloc. He's just a power hungry player.

I guess you could say that Stannis is a zealot for the IT.

[AintNoStark]

I think it's pretty clear that he's not a zealot personally, though I'm not entirely sure the extent of his belief/non-belief (or perhaps worship/non-worship is a better word) in any god(s.)

Of course he promotes acts driven by Red Rahloo zealotry and carried out by zealots in order to gain something from them, but that's something different entirely. Like, I wouldn't call Karl Rove a religious zealot for courting the evangelical bloc. He's just a power hungry player.

I guess you could say that Stannis is a zealot for the IT.

You need to reread his chapters if you think he's power hungry lol.

[Lord Voldemort's Toes]

Ugh.

You need to reread his chapters if you think he's power hungry lol.

You need to reread my comment if you think I was calling Stannis power hungry (hint: I said that Karl Rove was merely a power hungry fool cynically courting the evangelical bloc, much like Stannis is cynically courting Red Rahloo BS in order to help his campaign for the IT.)

And anyway I think there could be a case made that Stannis is indeed power hungry (and an unreliable narrator in this matter.) But that's not the case I was making at all, and I'm not going to do it now.

[AintNoStark]

There isn't a case for him being power hungry. And you did compare him to someone you consider power hungry.

[The Drunkard]

Seems first he says he doesn't believe they even exist, then it seems he's grudgingly accepting their existence and that he refuses them his worship. Perhaps he said this emotionally more than anything? Hard to tell.

I interpret his "I stopped believing in gods" the same way I would "I don't believe in the government" or "I don't believe in Christmas". People who say those things would acknowledge they exist (you'd hope) but they don't agree with them or don't think they live up to their reputation.