A Balanced Review of Show Stannis [Book Spoilers]

[Thelastactionhero]

aye, once stannis went north and left behind melisandre, there was a noticeable change in him which we will most likely see in the show.

The thing is, he never burns anyone for lack of belief in Rhillor to begin with, so this is a shift that shouldn't be there in the first place. Though we never see how the voyage actually goes, his praise and acknowledgment of Davos' wisdom when he finally saves the Wall indicated for me that he gained back a fair bit of autonomy as soon as he's shown the letter from the Night Watch, because it was at that moment he remembered what a king's duty actually is. In this interpretation this fidelity towards duty has been cast aside in favor of pure lust for power. We might see a shift eventually, as you suggest, but I think much of the arc is permanently tainted now.

[juanml82]

My reading of his character in this episode was that he was coerced into the sacrifice by Melisandre. He takes no pride in, nor gives the burning souls much attention. Whereas his wife and Melisandre are positively delighted.

It may seem so. He's upset about the burnings. But if that's the way it works and he can't even rule his own keep, who does he pretend to rule the Seven Kingdoms?

[Good Guy Garlan]

The thing is, he never burns anyone for lack of belief in Rhillor to begin with, so this is a shift that shouldn't be there in the first place. Though we never see how the voyage actually goes, his praise and acknowledgment of Davos' wisdom when he finally saves the Wall indicated for me that he gained back a fair bit of autonomy as soon as he's shown the letter from the Night Watch, because it was at that moment he remembered what a king's duty actually is. In this interpretation this fidelity towards duty has been cast aside in favor of pure lust for power. We might see a shift eventually, as you suggest, but I think much of the arc is permanently tainted now.

The Sunglasses and Rambtons would disagree :cool4:

But yeah, I see your point. They've been with this thing of burning infidels since the beginning of season 3, and not one mention that Alester Florent wanted to go all Operation Valkyrie on Stannis' ass. That would make Team Dragonstone more sympathetic and would provide a bit more intrigue on that storyline, which it sorely needs.

[Gannicus]

He's clearly been molded by D&D to be more fanatical. I wish we could just ask them why. With so many characters being made more sympathetic, WHY do they need to turn him into a darker religious figure??

I think Dillane does a great job with the material he's given. Much of Stannis' character comes through but it's hard to argue that he hasn't been made more of a villain.

The coolest thing about Stannis is that he does not bend. Well in the show he bends for Mel every damn episode. WTF.

[hiemal]

Stannis didn't burn them for their beliefs, he burnt them for disobeying his order to remove their shrines to the Seven; or at the very least that is the face he has put on it. He's as pragmatically hard-arsed as ever.

[Good Guy Garlan]

Stannis didn't burn them for their beliefs, he burnt them for disobeying his order to remove their shrines to the Seven; or at the very least that is the face he has put on it. He's as pragmatically hard-arsed as ever.

True, but they're the only ones that openly defy him for his beliefs. But yeah, of all the people's he's burned, they were the only ones who one could argue really didn't deserve it, and even Mel burned some of them while Stannis was away, but in the show everyone he's burned are infidels

[Russo]

I thought the "sometimes you must do things you despise" or whatever it was probably referred to the burnings.

[Cold Crashing Waves]

"Explain to me why it is more noble to kill 10,000 men in battle than a dozen at dinner."

Same concept exists here. Robb Stark 'sacrifices' 2,000 men to capture Jaime Lannister, no one cares. Stannis burns a few men for his cause and he's the most evil man in Westeros.

What Stannis did this episode wasn't so far gone from what he'd do in the books (and he was reluctant about it). People just like to complain.

[The Abominable SnowOther]

"Explain to me why it is more noble to kill 10,000 men in battle than a dozen at dinner."

Same concept exists here. Robb Stark 'sacrifices' 2,000 men to capture Jaime Lannister, no one cares. Stannis burns a few men for his cause and he's the most evil man in Westeros.

What Stannis did this episode wasn't so far gone from what he'd do in the books (and he was reluctant about it). People just like to complain.

WAY more than ten died that night but i get your point

Uhh, if you think Robb sacrificed 2,000, just, for Jaime than your wrong. You may have been sarcastic but im not sure

why you felt the absolute need to come and say that, idk but thanks for your opinion

[Konradsmith]

What they've done is delay Stan's softening to Davos from late season 3, where it would have been placed according to book canon, to the mid-season of s4. They've done this to give him something more to do this year, not out of spite towards the character.

Gran de Lys, the critic who answered questions about the first 3 episodes she'd seen as screeners, said that its Davos who comes up with the idea of going to the Iron Bank. We know the trailers that they DO go. Instead of having the Wall letter being Dave's victory, they've made this be.

We know that he appears less this season, or at least Mel does, than in previous seasons according to an interview with the lovely Carice van Houten. We also know however that he appears next episode and in episode six. It is likely that he will also appear in episode four because Bryan Cogman wrote it and he was in charge of the Stannis storyline last year. This leads me to believe that Stan will open up do Dave in these appearances and that this will mark the movement away from Mel's ways that many of you expected to be at the end of last season. I don't know if we'll hear Dave say the "cart before the horse" speech to Stan or if we'll simply hear it via Stannis to Jon, but if only to give Liam Cunningham and Stephen Dillane something to do in their next two to three appearances, we will have that "thaw" between the bros.

I hope this allays some of your fears about the adaptation. I still defend the effect that these sorts of plot mechanics have on his characterization, but obviously you all won't as eagerly "buy" the changes.

[bent branch]

The show is an adaption and many of the characters are going to be different than their book versions. Show Jorah and Book Jorah are so different that I had to simply accept that there were two different Jorah's and be done with it. However, there is one aspect of Stannis' storyline that bothers me.

In the books, Stannis is aware of the greater threat that the others pose to Westeros. In fact, I can't think of any other group of people besides Stannis' and those at the Wall who are aware of this threat. After Blackwater, Melisandre shows Stannis in the flames what the true threat is because Stannis just wants to give up on taking the throne. Stannis continues trying to get the throne because he thinks that he needs to take the throne so that he can rally Westeros to meet this threat. After Stannis receives the letter from the Nightswatch he realizes that the threat is here now and not something that is coming in the future. It is at this point he heads straight to the Wall. Once at the Wall, the actions that Stannis takes are designed to calm the North so that he doesn't have an enemy at his back to that he can face the threat coming from the North.

Yes, Stannis is a prickly, difficult man. How he is presented is probably going to be controversial, but I don't think his storyline is being revealed very well. I wonder how many people who only watch the show are aware of how Stannis' motivations have changed. Hell, I wonder how many people who have read the books understand how Stannis' motives change after Blackwater. Sometimes in the arguments about if Stannis is a good or bad person, I think the storyline is lost.

Just my two cents.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

After I rewatched the scene in question, I guess the burning was the less important things to be noticed, really. It's the catalyst, yes, but the next scene is the important one and it's not there just for us to see the Baratheons enjoying a very awkward meal. The whole scene is about Stannis and Shireen. Look.

- Stannis is clearly disgusted by everything around him, including Davos. Shireen is not there, though. He probably doesn't want her around the whole mess that it's his life. Shireen's absence means to me that for Stannis, the world now is divided in two things: everything he hates and Shireen. And Shireen doesn't mix with the things he hates.

- Selyse also disgusts him. He didn't say it with words, but he's pretty much implying that she might be his wife but that's all. She even tries to recall what she might perceive as a caring act of Stannis, but he barely reacts to the memory: "of course I remember", like "well, duh, I was there".

- She changes the conversation to the lord of light and Stannis is all "meh". He pays attention when Selyse baits him with something she knows he cares: Shireen, and then she calls her a "stubborn little beast". That doesn't sound like something she would say simply because Shireen refuses to "convert". To me, it looks like she actually dislikes the girl, maybe because of the greyscale, maybe because she's a girl. Or maybe...

- Selyse states that Stannis thinks Shireen's sweet because she smiles at him. While in the previous dialogue is clear that Stannis barely pays attention to his wife besides his marital duties of feeding her and keeping her safe, Shireen doesn't need to do anything but to smile to have Stannis' attention and love, something Selyse doesn't have.

- Selyse also calls Shireen "sullen, subborn and sinful". She's pretty much describing Stannis right there. It's Selyse the one who doesn't know Stannis.

The whole scene is quite symbolic because of the dialogue and the food scenery: Selyse is starving from Stannis' favour and she's unable to provide him with anything he likes ("the meat's off, get something else"). She even got him a women who promises him being King and he's still unhappy. Stannis complains about the food while Selyse simply eats it in silence and tries to do her best with the few she has: that's their marriage. And when Melisandre speaks of suffering hunger as a child until the Lord of Light found her, that's Selyse right there, being hungry of something else (love) until Melisandre found her.

[Señor de la Tormenta]

After I rewatched the scene in question, I guess the burning was the less important things to be noticed, really. It's the catalyst, yes, but the next scene is the important one and it's not there just for us to see the Baratheons enjoying a very awkward meal. The whole scene is about Stannis and Shireen. Look.

- Stannis is clearly disgusted by everything around him, including Davos. Shireen is not there, though. He probably doesn't want her around the whole mess that it's his life. Shireen's absence means to me that for Stannis, the world now is divided in two things: everything he hates and Shireen. And Shireen doesn't mix with the things he hates.

.

This doesnt go alon with the later scene of Mel "catechesis" with Shireen.

[chicagostatecougars]

Show Stannis is horrible. That 'infidel' line ruined last night's episode for me. It's sad that the show runners are deviating from the source material this much. If this continues I think I will stop watching.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

This doesnt go alon with the later scene of Mel "catechesis" with Shireen.

Stannis doesn't do it, but Melissandre.

[Stan the Man Baratheon]

*Sigh*

D&D apologists will always find some bs to talk down the Stannis' butchering, as usual. Every time this happens. D&D always fuck up Stannis and their apologists defend that how it makes sense and all other bs.

D&D's hatred for Stannis shouldn't be denied at this point, i mean that Inside Episode 2 says it all.

They should just kill him in the first episode next season and be done with this mockery.

One Realm. One King. One God.

Edit: A brilliant article for Stan-stans to check up on.

http://www.dailydot.com/fandom/stannis-baratheon-game-thrones/

[Stan the Man Baratheon]

Stannis goes full Melisandre???? WTF!

If this is not proof enough that D&D hate Stannis, then i am not sure what will be.

D&D apologists will defend this as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lNpyDpWX4CM

[Darkbringer]

Rambtons and Sunglasses were burnt by Selyse, while Stannis was away. he didn't order it.

[DemiNymph]

It's true that the show writers hate Stannis. It has been going on since Season 1. It's so unfair to him. I don't love Stannis but this is such a deliberate smear on his character. When I watch his part I feel like the writers are like tabloid writers in trashy newspapers out to deliberately change the context of what happened to smear someone, lol. Thumbs down.

[C.T. Phipps]

I don't understand anyone's objections to Stannis' portrayal in the show. Stannis Baratheon is a figure who has a very clear character arc in the books which is replicated in the show. Stannis is the unloved, unappreciated, unimportant Ultimate Middle ChildTM. No one loved him as much as Robert and Baby Brother Renly. Mel is the first person who ever shows Stannis the possibility of being something better, "Hey, you're actually the Second Coming (literally)." Combine this with the realization that he's the heir of the throne and he's all in.

The fact people are like, "Stannis shouldn't be burning people for being heretics" I think ignores the fact that Stannis isn't a guy who deals in half-measures. A major part of his characterization is that Stannis has adopted this religion and he's going to serve it because he's adopted the religion. There's not going to be any tolerance in the Seven Kingdoms for the Seven or the Old Gods because he's the King and as the King he's vowed to serve the Lord of Light.

Again, all in.

The idea Stannis is a Taliban figure is kind of a serious reach since George R.R. Martin is drawing from the fact religious conflicts are a major issue in dynastic struggles, especially during the Renaissance. While Henry VIII was way past the War of the Roses, we can see shades of this in the conflict. Stannis is not a secular figure uncaring about religion. He's a secular figure who uses religion as the justification for his rule. Religion is VERY important as a means of propping up himself as well as himself.

If you don't think his reign would result in thousands upon thousands of burnings, you're kind of missing some subtext.