A Balanced Review of Show Stannis [Book Spoilers]

[jarl the climber]

Hmm so their infidel logic wouldn't work on Davos, which is good.

So why the hell go on the "Infidel" route? Makes zero sense, unless ofcourse character assassination at its finest, which D&D excel in for Stannis.

Yeah, they really do not get some of his subtleties, I was watching inside the episode and they were saying that he wants to be King because he sees at his birthright, which is nonsense. When he was born he was Roberts heir to Storms End, he wasn't born into the royal line. Supporting Robert over his King was a very difficult decision and he choose Robert out of love, becuse he was family, that and he seemed convinced that Aerys was insane, its not clear what he thought of Rhaegar. He then serves his brother loyally for years, despite there being problems between them, which have not been shown in the TV show as of yet, Robert giving Storms End to Renly as one example. Then he finds out that Cerseis kids are not Roberts, he can not go to Robert himself because of their estrangement, Jon Arryn is killed and he is forced to flee the capital. With Roberts death it becomes his duty to take the throne, there is no reason to think he would do this if Cerseis kids were indeed Roberts.

Having said all that I do think the Stan critics make some fair points, that there is part of Stannis that does thirst for power, now that it is within reach and that it could and is corrupting him. I also think that it is about his duty and honor, he can either take the throne or die, he could flee for Essos but that is not in his character. Cerseis kids are not Roberts true heirs, as long as Renly and Stannis live they are a threats which must be eliminated,

As far as the religious aspect goes I do not see Stannis as an aetheist at this point, he is a skeptic. Clearly he has rejected the seven but he has had true religious experiences with the Lord of Light. He has seen two visions in the fire that we know of, one of the attack on the Fist of the First Men and the one with a king being consumed by a crown of fire. These visions do guide his actions to an extent. Asha tells us that she constantly see him staring into the flames. I sort of see him as actually trying to become pious and religiously observant, clearly its the power he perceives in it that drew him to it in the first place but he is falling away from his atheism.

This is actually kind of proof positive Stannis would do it, isn't it?

After all, if he ordered everyone to convert, it's treason not to.

What he did was burn a Sept and later the Godswood on Storms End, so he himself has publicly refuted the Old Gods and the New ones. I think many hold to the Gods of the their Fathers in private but being seen as publicly going against this new God that Stannis follows would be seen as disloyalty, ecspecially from men who serve him directly. There is no open worship of other Gods within his own camp only the Red God.

Okay, in the show all of his men are shown as following the Lord of Light.

Davos is an atheist in the show.

And I can't imagine for a second Stannis leaving anyone not converted when he's ruler of the Seven Kingdoms. He's not going to betray his new religion that way. He's burning all of the idols and while he's not forcing immediate conversion, he's done his best to break the hold of the Seven on the populace and looks like he's going to phase it out.

I think if Stannis did become King, he would advocate for his religion and maybe show some favor to people who also espoused it. Still I do not think that worshipping the Red God really blinds Stannis to a mans faults. I do not think he will ever get the throne or be able to hold it if he adopts this very rigid philosophy and I think he knows this.

Its funny, if Stannis became King, I do think people would convert to gain his favor, at the same everything I see of him makes me think that he despises people like this. Its hard to predict how the other faiths would fare if Stannis actually does become the King.

[Nyrhex]

Okay, in the show all of his men are shown as following the Lord of Light.

Davos is an atheist in the show.

And I can't imagine for a second Stannis leaving anyone not converted when he's ruler of the Seven Kingdoms. He's not going to betray his new religion that way. He's burning all of the idols and while he's not forcing immediate conversion, he's done his best to break the hold of the Seven on the populace and looks like he's going to phase it out.

So in the show Stannis does not burn Davos and won't convert his daughtrer by force because... He is a hypocrite who does not believe in it yet burns "infidels"?

In the books he won't convert people now, but will later, because... That would be a good time and people woulld not be able to resist thier king and his <500 followers of the Red God?

.

.

.

And you honestly can't see why people find you and D&D making shit up like this fucking annoying? Especially when other characters are shown as good while/for doing the same/worse?

[C.T. Phipps]

Stannis knows the good a person does, doesn't cancel the bad. The reverse is true, however. Davos is unconverted to the Lord of Light but has made numerous personal shows of loyalty to Stannis. The people who have refused to convert have obviously made far less in the way of pledges to him as far as Stannis is concerned. As for his daughter, Stannis knows she's a child and there's plenty of time to bring her around.

What he did was burn a Sept and later the Godswood on Storms End, so he himself has publicly refuted the Old Gods and the New ones. I think many hold to the Gods of the their Fathers in private but being seen as publicly going against this new God that Stannis follows would be seen as disloyalty, ecspecially from men who serve him directly. There is no open worship of other Gods within his own camp only the Red God.

Yeah, he can't tolerate public displays of disobedience like refusing to take down his "idols."

I think if Stannis did become King, he would advocate for his religion and maybe show some favor to people who also espoused it. Still I do not think that worshipping the Red God really blinds Stannis to a mans faults. I do not think he will ever get the throne or be able to hold it if he adopts this very rigid philosophy and I think he knows this.

Its funny, if Stannis became King, I do think people would convert to gain his favor, at the same everything I see of him makes me think that he despises people like this. Its hard to predict how the other faiths would fare if Stannis actually does become the King.

That's the contradiction of Stannis, I think. He's an "honest" man but the halls of power in Westeros are born from corruption. He's like Ned Stark in that he follows his code but he doesn't even have Ned Stark's flexibility. If Stannis were King, he'd be the guy who punished people without regard to position or peace or favoritism because that's the law.

He's Judge Dredd converted to Zorastrianism.

So yeah, even he would know converting everyone by force would be a disaster but, yeah, that's what he's going to do because that's what his new religion demands.

[C.T. Phipps]

So in the show Stannis does not burn Davos and won't convert his daughtrer by force because... He is a hypocrite who does not believe in it yet burns "infidels"?

In the books he won't convert people now, but will later, because... That would be a good time and people woulld not be able to resist thier king and his <500 followers of the Red God?

.

And you honestly can't see why people find you and D&D making shit up like this fucking annoying? Especially when other characters are shown as good while/for doing the same/worse?

I find your claims to be without logic, wrong, and kind of insulting but it's a set of books and they're subject to different interpretations by different fans.

If you post in a forum, expect disagreement and let discussion settle the issue.

Stannis isn't a hypocrite for sparing Davos. He's made his decision based on the fact Davos is an exception for exceptional behavior. His daughter is also a child, not an adult.

As for converting people now, Stannis is not unaware of political expediency. He accepted the Onions from the Onion knight.

He just cut off his knucklebones after.

[Ran]

Nyrhex,

Both in the books and on the show, Stannis burns people for disobeying him.

His initial dismissive answer to Davos that they were "infidels" is followed by the much more significant point that he didn't command them to change religion, he commanded them to remove their idols of the Seven, and they refused him. This is pretty much what happens when he burns the Rambtons for refusing to allow his command to burn the idols of the Seven in the sept at Dragonstone to be carried out -- they're allowed to worship what gods they please, but they can't stand in the way of Stannis's orders.

It's not terribly unlike religious laws in medieval Europe regulating worship by Jews/Christians/Muslims (depends on who was in charge wherever you were) so as to prevent offense to the dominant religion and keep the minority religions present (and their worshippers taxable).

[Nyrhex]

Nyrhex,

Both in the books and on the show, Stannis burns people for disobeying him.

His initial dismissive answer to Davos that they were "infidels" is followed by the much more significant point that he didn't command them to change religion, he commanded them to remove their idols of the Seven, and they refused him. This is pretty much what happens when he burns the Rambtons for refusing to allow his command to burn the idols of the Seven in the sept at Dragonstone to be carried out -- they're allowed to worship what gods they please, but they can't stand in the way of Stannis's orders.

It's not terribly unlike religious laws in medieval Europe regulating worship by Jews/Christians/Muslims (depends on who was in charge wherever you were) so as to prevent offense to the dominant religion and keep the minority religions present (and their worshippers taxable).

The difference is that in the show Stannis burns the "infidel", who refused to perform Stannis' order and tear down "his" idols, meaning to convert himself and destroy his own sept. In the books the Rambtons kill Stannis' men as they are performing thier orders to destroy Stannis' sept. The Sept at Dragonstone is Stannis' private property, it is not the Rambtons' sept. The show has Stannis kill men who refused Stannis' forced conversion, while in the books Stannis does not try to force convert them. More than half his army still follows the Seven. His Hand, his castellan, all the men he names to Davos as those he can trust. In the show we have non of that.

So, no, it is not the same. To disobey Stannis' orders, and to kill his men as Stannis is converting in person and destroying his own property are two different things. To burn Alester for refusing to follow the red god and to burn him for treason and trying to sell Shireen to the Lannisters are two very different things on a fundamental level. The show sets the tone for Stannis being a very darker shade of grey than the books, to the point that it can almost be called black. What does it serve to burn this person for not converting, if you let Davos live? Had Davos converted in the show and I did'nt noticed?

[roxWolfox]

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.

Fascinating insight. :)

My favourite part of the dinner scene was Mel absorbing Stannis' and Selyse's 'discussion'. Which made the Shireen/Mel conversation all that more powerful. Shireen's dialogue not only shows that she is more her father's daughter than mother's, it also may have been a hint to the viewers that Stannis is not so easily 'converted' as Mel or Selyse would like to believe.

[C.T. Phipps]

The difference is that in the show Stannis burns the "infidel", who refused to perform Stannis' order and tear down "his" idols, meaning to convert himself and destroy his own sept. In the books the Rambtons kill Stannis' men as they are performing thier orders to destroy Stannis' sept. The Sept at Dragonstone is Stannis' private property, it is not the Rambtons' sept. The show has Stannis kill men who refused Stannis' forced conversion, while in the books Stannis does not try to force convert them. More than half his army still follows the Seven. His Hand, his castellan, all the men he names to Davos as those he can trust. In the show we have non of that.

Given G.R.R Martin wrote this episode, it's more likely this is simply an aspect of his character which hasn't come up much. That the Red God will reign once Stannis is King of the Seven.

[Nyrhex]

Given G.R.R Martin wrote this episode, it's more likely this is simply an aspect of his character which hasn't come up much. That the Red God will reign once Stannis is King of the Seven.

The scene was not written by GRRM, it was written for episode 1, and was moved to episode 2. You are grasping at straws here.

[Colonel Green]

Given G.R.R Martin wrote this episode

No, Martin didn't write the Stannis scenes. And in any event, the showrunners are the ones who plot the show, not Martin.

[johndance]

I love how this thread title is 'A balanced review of show Stannis'. Clearly, there is nothing balanced about the review of him here. It should be titled 'A place for those of us who disagree with the portrayal of show Stannis can vent and complain'. I'm totally fine with that, too. There are a lot of people for some reason who think his character is being 'butchered' on the show so have at it.

I really don't see what all the fuss is about. The way he is being portrayed in the show is pretty much spot on to how I pictured him while reading the books. He is a cold, serious, battle hardened man. He does his duty and expects others to do theirs, while serving justice to those who do not.

He has seen Mel do some things he cannot explain, i.e. birth a shadow child who killed Renly, and show him visions of his future victories when he stares into the fire. He really has no choice but to believe what Mel is preaching and take on the lord of light. He's seen the power of this religion and has to believe in it. He clearly doesn't like it. He doesn't like burning people or forsaking his 'old' gods, but Stannis is the type of man that if you tell him something and have proof to back it up, he will put practicality ahead of his emotions and believe it. This is exactly what I get out of show Stannis as well. They have made it very clear on several occasions in the show that Stannis is morally against many of the things Mel wants to do. However, he's seen proof that backs up Mel's claims so he is going a long with it.

I don't get the claims that he is being portrayed as a villain or a bad guy or anything of that non sense. The biggest villains from a portrayal standpoint were the Lannisters. ESPECIALLY Cersei and Joffrey. These two were clearly made out to be the biggest villains of the show, and Stannis actually went to war AGAINST them and is still planning on taking over the IT.

And let's not forget, one of the biggest heroes or 'good guys' Ned Stark, actually supported Stannis and is the one that wrote a letter to him letting him know he is the rightful King in the first place. This is why it amazes me that so many people think he is being 'butchered' in the show. I really think they are spot on with him and D&D are actually doing more favors for him and making him more of a protagonist than he is in the books.

[aceluby]

What I find humorous is that during the battle of the blackwater there couldn't be more gush about how Stan should have lead from the front and the show was 'more right', but anything that could possibly be construed as a negative, despite the fact that he is a very flawed character, all of a sudden it's a character assassination. Classic whitewashing.

[Konradsmith]

We don't know that D and D wrote the Stannis scenes. If someone wants to go comment on Notablog or Bryan Cogman's twitter, we could potentially find out. For all we know Carice received the first script as a formality. It is also possible that they did write the scene and it was shifted but until we know we shouldn't go into this level of freak-out over just this. You have to prep yourselves for the possibility that GrrM had Stannis say "infidel". Also, it is likely that Bryan Cogman mapped out Stannis's arc again, as he did last year. You have to prepare yourselves to accept that it may have been Bryan's idea for Stannis to go "full Melisandre."

I suppose it was only a matter of time before Stan the Man joined this "balanced thread". Did he read any of my defences of the scene as written? Or anyone else's? Most importantly, Ran's posts because he may actually know Stannis's fate because of certain TWOW chapters that would have been in ADWD. Did he not hear the brilliant Stan quips: "A good deal more than you." "I hate good many things but I suffer them all the same." "Of course I remember." It was a good scene goddamnit!

Once more, D and D are not insulting Stannis in that inside the episode video and they do not "hate him", that would do them no good. As a character with dramatic potential, they probably like him quite a lot. Let's not be silly, unless we want to call this thread something else other than "balanced".

[aeu]

I'm amazed at how people come on to this forum to take part in an intelligent debate but are to blind to see how Stannis is clearly being portrayed badly. I guess everyone likes arguing when they are on the internet and the trolls in this post are no exception. If you don't see it you really shouldn't be posting about it.

Lol...I chuckled at this.

I wonder how much ad-libbing the actors are allowed to do. I assume they would be asked to stick to script word by word, but it would have been so funny if the actor actually blurted "infidel" on his own...

[Ran]

The difference is that in the show Stannis burns the "infidel", who refused to perform Stannis' order and tear down "his" idols, meaning to convert himself and destroy his own sept.

I'm not sure that this means he intended him to convert. It means he's outlawed public worship, I suppose, but I would not construe it as meaning he's forcibly converting people until someone in the production, or a future episode, confirms this.

[Bronn Urgandy]

"Fuck me, looks like we're getting Ostannis Bin Laden after all" was my first reaction after hearing him say infidel. If I look at it more balanced, then yes, it looks like a much more pitiful version of what happened to Sunglass, but since Sunglass was sympathetic enough anyway, and Stannis was apparently burning peeps in Season 3 according to Saan, it just looks a million times worse coming now especially, this should have happened as it does in the books. Sunglass withdrew his support, which is exactly what Robb threatened to hang the Greatjon for, and the Rambtons physically fought against Stannis, its the same situation, but making Stannis' reasons as pitiful as possible and dropping the line in after a bombshell like "infidel". Trying to confuse "too just for his own good" (book Stannis) with "religious nutjob/Mels slobbering lapdog" (show Stannis). It should have come last season, and Alistair should've been executed for treason.

These are controversial enough decisions anyway, especially as Florent is a freaking blood sacrifice who actually might have been trying to end a lost war and saving lives, but these people died for the sake of law, not for their Gods, but no, they really had to try to kick his legs out from under him before we've even began this season.

I find your claims to be without logic, wrong, and kind of insulting but it's a set of books and they're subject to different interpretations by different fans.

If you post in a forum, expect disagreement and let discussion settle the issue.

Stannis isn't a hypocrite for sparing Davos. He's made his decision based on the fact Davos is an exception for exceptional behavior. His daughter is also a child, not an adult.

As for converting people now, Stannis is not unaware of political expediency. He accepted the Onions from the Onion knight.

He just cut off his knucklebones after.

Doesn't prove much except for that age old claim that he's too just for his own good, we all know what Davos got for the onions, it was a Knighthood, but if he wanted to accept the Knighthood he must pay for his years of illegal smuggling. We must assume that sneaking food to a starving garrison in wartime is as legal an act as gutting an enemy during battle.

I can see your scenario coming about if Stannis is wilfully negligent with Melisandre's activities post wartime, but I can't recall one instance of him requiring conversion. I know Mel tells Jon to uproot the trees at WF, but Stannis is noticeably silent on that one, the Wildlings burn tree branches, but so what? Theres never any noticeable conversion, and Stannis' only demand to any future Wall crossers is that they kneel to him and keep the Kings peace.

Just right now I think its a huge stretch to say Stannis is going to be burning non-converts on a large scale, he might try to make R'hlorr the dominant religion, or at least be annointed under that particular faith and make it dominant in the capital, he'll probably end up with physical resistance (depending on how exhausted everyone is post wartime) these are things that are problematic, but Stannis up to this point has never made it a crime to follow another God(s), and there really is no reason for him to do a 180 on this stance unless the Seven followers react excessively violently to the change. But looking at the make-up of Stannis' followers pre and post Wall march, and that they know who he is and what to expect, it doesn't seem too likely. If anything it just seems like Stannis' whole arc seems to be kind of sacrificed to make way for an anti-monarchy/religious agenda, since D&D themselves seem baffled that the rightful King believes he's the rightful King.

[Konradsmith]

I'm glad you've stepped in, Ran. I don't always agree with you about the show (I defend it a heckuva lot more), but really that makes your arguments about their Stannis characterization more convincing than mine.

It is interesting to note that they've kindof merged Selyse with the actual Axell in a way. Didn't some at the Wall consider him a kinslayer for standing by while another Florent was burned?

[Nyrhex]

I'm not sure that this means he intended him to convert. It means he's outlawed public worship, I suppose, but I would not construe it as meaning he's forcibly converting people until someone in the production, or a future episode, confirms this.

1. Stannis in the books does not ban public worship.

2. If Stannis banned public worship in the show, and burns a person to death over it, than the show is changing Stannis for the worse.

3. If by burning him the man's soul is "cleansed" and he joins R'hllor (as Selyse is happy to tell Davos), than it is not execution over disobeying, it's forced conversion dead or alive.

[Konradsmith]

Well, they've certainly made changes but the point is that they don't "ruin" the character. He is still compellingly written and acted. They've made him go to lengths he never quite went to, but if it makes for good TV and works with the plot mechanics of his s4 arc then I don't mind.

[Lord Varys]

I've no issues with the portrayal of Stannis in that episode. He most certainly allows people close to him (i.e. Mel and Selyse) to burn people for crimes he would not have punished this way before his conversion to R'hllor, and he must also be aware of the fact that these people would not have given him cause to execute them had he openly converted to R'hllorism and allowed Melisandre to create her theocracy under/beside his own administration.

This is bad, especially if (book) Stannis has only chosen 'a red falcon' and does not exactly believe in god. If Mel is just a powerful sorceress in his eyes, then going along with her demands and wishes is actually worse than it would be if he actually believed that her god was real. In the books Stannis eventually accepts that he is as Azor Ahai and/or that he is supposed to fight the war against the Others, but we don't really know if he really believes in Mel's god.

Show Stannis seems to be converted in the sense that he takes Mel's power and his vision as a sign that Mel speaks the truth and that her god is real.

But one can make a case that this thing should have happened in season 3, directly after the Blackwater, not now. It would have been a much more introduction of Shireen and Selyse if the Florents had tried to sell Shireen to the Lannisters as Tommen's bride, while Stannis was brooding in isolation.

The relationship between Stannis and Selyse seems to be much better in the show than in the books: Stannis is now disgusted by Selyse, but that was not always so. I guess he could not get along with the woman she became, after she dealt with her grief the way she did. He really seemed disgusted by the dead children in the jars, and I guess he was also not exactly turned out by her flight into religion.

His talk with Davos in season 2 as well as Selyse's memory this week strongly suggests that he once cared for her (deeply). They repeatedly tried to have children, and Stannis did everything he could to save Selyse during the siege of Storm's End. That's much more than book Stannis ever did for his wife. And TV Stannis apparently really loves his daughter. We don't know if book Stannis really cares all that much for Shireen. He does nothing to groom her for the succession.

It would be interesting if the family story on Dragonstone ended with Stannis publicly announcing that Shireen is his heir. The show has made it clear that women come way behind men in the succession to the Iron Throne, so that could be an interesting development, especially since Selyse hates her daughter in the show. It seems that she considers her a rival for Stannis' affection...