I truly don't get the Stannis apologisits...

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Well, I like reading about the rebel, devil-may-care bad boys who play by their own rules...so obviously that explains why I married a careful engineer who has never committed a crime in his life.

As you can see, our fantasies automatically equate to real life interests.

I do believe that. But we should be careful with the assumptions. For example, many people have very odd fascinations. Some like gore. Some are into violent sex. That doesn't mean they will go and act in that way in every aspect of their lives.

[James Arryn]

Renly balked at Stannis because he had "all the chivalry of the south" and Stannis had five thousand or fewer guys who were ragtag and poorly equipped. If Renly and Stannis had faced off on the field and Renly had wiped Stannis out due to superior miltiary force, you'd probably be crowing about it and praising his tactical genius and yada yada yada.

Instead, Stannis uses Melisandre to create a shadowbaby and kill Renly before any battle is fought. All that military power, and it didn't end up amounting to shit. And I dare say that's really what irks you about this, when in fact, it's just another lesson of the story: You can have the biggest army and the most money, and still lose.

Honestly, you believe this?

For what it's worth, yes. I agree, I find the reasoning that Renly failed to account for the unheard of seriously lacking in reasoning, and I'm amazed you don't. And, I wouldn't say genius, but yes, if they'd fought and the militarily inevitable happened I wpuld think that reflects practical reason. Again, amazed you wouldn't.

Renly's political skill is the basis of feudal power. The belief that harsh medieval history is very different from high school politics in that it emphasizes what's really deep down important is a complete misunderstanding of medieval history.

As for what really irks me, I'll be honest, it's these kind of empty tautologies about Stannis and morality that completely disappear as soon as the mirror is raised, but you're wrong about the books. Renly was a smarter politician leading a stronger army and would have made a better king, but I don't read these books to find out about effective government. I want chaos and battles and betrayals and stupidity and heroism and tragedy and loss and all that. I'd much rather read about a kingdom of Stannis Baratheons than Renly's, who would have been rather boring.

[And Stannis Laughed]

Renly is far more pragmatic than Stannis, in that Renly understands Robert won the Throne through force and strong alliances, and so attempts to imitate that success story by wedding himself to Margaery.

[James Arryn]

Yeah, but less abstract. Specifically, there's no way the rebels would've crowned one of the younger Targs after having killed Aerys and Rhaegar. That's just asking for one's head to adorn a spike once Rhaenys/Aegon/Viserys grow up.

Right.

And Renly thought that Joff was a Baratheon.

Now you feeling me?

[James Arryn]

And what made Renly suitable besides the fact he and his clique THOUGHT he was suitable? What great military victories has he won? What reforms had he made in the small council that were applauded by the nobles and commoners alike? What made him a good leader besides the fact he looked pretty and fancied him self charismatic?

He was popular.

There's more, but speaking from a feudal perspective, that's all the argument needed. If you don't know this, well...I'll just say we've read different history books.

[Fat Mac]

Can I ask what evidence there is for Renly having great political acumen, other than him being popular?

Being popular isn't enough. Robert was popular, and Robert was shit. I realize it's important, definitely. No way you're going to survive as King if no one likes you. But other than being popular, what evidence was there that Renly was a good politician.

[sj4iy]

I do believe that. But we should be careful with the assumptions. For example, many people have very odd fascinations. Some like gore. Some are into violent sex. That doesn't mean they will go and act in that way in every aspect of their lives.

Oh, I completely agree. One thing I've always disliked is when people use fictional fantasies to determine real-life behavior. I find it reprehensible, to tell the truth, because I've seen people accuse writers of beating their wives and all sorts of shit simply because they wrote about it in a story or a tv episode. It's ridiculous.

[Stannatic]

Another point I think alot of people are missing here is; Assassination IS a legitimate military tactic. It has been since time immemorial. Renly was backed by an insurmountable force, but he still lost the game. Quite the accomplishment really.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Honestly, you believe this?

For what it's worth, yes. I agree, I find the reasoning that Renly failed to account for the unheard of seriously lacking in reasoning, and I'm amazed you don't. And, I wouldn't say genius, but yes, if they'd fought and the militarily inevitable happened I wpuld think that reflects practical reason. Again, amazed you wouldn't.

Renly's political skill is the basis of feudal power. The belief that harsh medieval history is very different from high school politics in that it emphasizes what's really deep down important is a complete misunderstanding of medieval history.

As for what really irks me, I'll be honest, it's these kind of empty tautologies about Stannis and morality that completely disappear as soon as the mirror is raised, but you're wrong about the books. Renly was a smarter politician leading a stronger army and would have made a better king, but I don't read these books to find out about effective government. I want chaos and battles and betrayals and stupidity and heroism and tragedy and loss and all that. I'd much rather read about a kingdom of Stannis Baratheons than Renly's, who would have been rather boring.

If Renly had fought Stannis on the field and Stannis had lost, you'd chalk it up to superior force winning. Fair enough. But don't shout "not fair!" that Stannis found a way to circumvent that force using the methods at his disposal. Again: The story is saying that having the bigger army is not necessarily always the way to win. So Renly didn't see the shadowbaby coming. So?

I also disagree that Renly would have been a better king. I find him to be basically an empty suit who talked a good game but not much else. For whatever reason, you don't, and that's fine. Kind of a moot point anyway given that he's dead.

He was popular.

It's easy to be popular when 1. the citizens you're starving don't know that you're the one starving them and 2. apart from a token seat on the council as the king's brother, you're free from having to make the sort of tangible decisions for the realm that would require any risk and responsibility.

[And Stannis Laughed]

Right.

And Renly thought that Joff was a Baratheon.

Now you feeling me?

Renly couldn't possibly care less about Joff's ancestry, because Renly understood Robert had won the IT by force, and intended to do the same.

[James Arryn]

If Renly had fought Stannis on the field and Stannis had lost, you'd chalk it up to superior force winning. Fair enough. But don't shout "not fair!" that Stannis found a way to circumvent that force using the methods at his disposal. Again: The story is saying that having the bigger army is not necessarily always the way to win. So Renly didn't see the shadowbaby coming. So?

Well, for starters, where exactly do you see me shouting "not fair!"?

I don't think I've broached the subject of fairness, nor do I particularly have an opinion on the matter. My arguments about this are:

1) It's consequentialism to the Nth degree to argue that a shadow baby assassin shows Renly's flaw as a King, or to argue that without it he probably is King. It's un-reason.

2) It's hypocritical to afford Stannis pragmatism in pursuit of self-interest, but condemn others for doing likewise, and no argument for Stannis' actions can be offered without a retreat to pragmatic self-interest. And when considered from that POV, Renly basically made every correct decision.

That's pretty much it, really. All the noise that's built off those 2 very problematic foundations will draw me in, but those are them.

I also disagree that Renly would have been a better king. I find him to be basically an empty suit who talked a good game but not much else. For whatever reason, you don't, and that's fine. Kind of a moot point anyway given that he's dead.

Yeah, true. Joff won, so there's that lesson to learn, I suppose.

It's easy to be popular when 1. the citizens you're starving don't know that you're the one starving them and 2. apart from a token seat on the council as the king's brother, you're free from having to make the sort of tangible decisions for the realm that would require any risk and responsibility.

Actually, if Renly managed a blockade with zero awareness, I up my nomination of him as President of Everything, because that would be a pretty remarkable political feat.

As for how easy it is for a King's brother to be popular, don't talk to me, talk to Stannis.

As for making tangible decisions, yeah. One brother stuck around and kept making them, the other bailed and waited for his brother to die. That's a risk or responsibility, I guess.

[James Arryn]

Can I ask what evidence there is for Renly having great political acumen, other than him being popular?

Being popular isn't enough. Robert was popular, and Robert was shit. I realize it's important, definitely. No way you're going to survive as King if no one likes you. But other than being popular, what evidence was there that Renly was a good politician.

1. He identified the Lannisters as the primary threat to Baratheon power.

2. As soon as Cersei made her move, while Ned and everyone else were trying to find their footing, he immediately suggested a plan that addressed that threat and secured Baratheon power.

3. As soon as Ned dithered, he went out and built the most powerful claim to the throne out of thin air and himself...the same plan political wizard Littlefinger later copied, to much acclaim.

4. Then he conducted a faultless campaign that had strategic thinkers nodding in approval.

5. When Stannis declared war and trapped himself, he immediately followed the principles of wat and caught Stannis in a trap that only unheard of magic avoided.

But don't underrate popularity. It is the currency of feudal politics.

[James Arryn]

Renly couldn't possibly care less about Joff's ancestry, because Renly understood Robert had won the IT by force, and intended to do the same.

Agreed, but I think you're missing my point.

Robert rebel vs. X, silly to crown X2 instead of self.

Renly ". ". ". "

Now you getting me?

( If not, where X for Robert reads Targ, for Renly reads Baratheon.)

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

<snip>

Stannis is alive. Renly is dead. Stannis' shadowbaby trumped Renly's army and Renly's popularity and Renly's "correct decisions." That is literally all there is to say.

I'm sorry it pisses you off so much that GRRM wrote a scenario in which magic trumped the giant dick of military might, but he did. If you want to read about well-managed feudalism that yields the desired results, might I suggest some medieval non-fiction?

[James Arryn]

Stannis is alive. Renly is dead. Stannis' shadowbaby trumped Renly's army and Renly's popularity and Renly's "correct decisions." That is literally all there is to say.

I'm sorry it pisses you off so much that GRRM wrote a scenario in which magic trumped the giant dick of military might, but he did. If you want to read about well-managed feudalism that yields the desired results, might I suggest some medieval non-fiction?

Yeah, you're literally not reading what I'm writing, and I don't feel much of a need to defend positions that aren't mine. Fun chatting, we must do this again soon.

[Rouse Me Not]

I dunno. From Donal Noye's oft cited quote about Baratheons and metal, to Catelyn's thoughts at Storm's End and Bitterbridge, to Olenna's rather condemning barbs at the feast with Margaery and Sansa; the narrative really does seem to paint Renly as style over substance. While I don't think he's quite the prancing peacock some make him out to be( he was clearly a very charming and clever guy) , I'm not sold on him as king material.

[And Stannis Laughed]

Agreed, but I think you're missing my point.

Robert rebel vs. X, silly to crown X2 instead of self.

Renly ". ". ". "

Now you getting me?

( If not, where X for Robert reads Targ, for Renly reads Baratheon.)

...I admit, I'm lost. I actually have no beef whatsoever with Renly's claim; Loras is right when he says Renly would've been the best of the original five. But I maintain that if you rebel against the senior members of a House, you're an idiot not to somehow account for the junior members.

[Father of Hosts]

When did he catch Stannis in a trap? Stannis besieged Storm's End. Like out in the middle of broad daylight. Essentially begging Renly to come and face him.

If Renly didn't think something weird was going on then he was not that adept a military commander and neither were his councillors. You can't account for shadow babies but I might have liked him more if he was puzzled as to why Stannis put himself in that predicament. It doesn't make sense for a seasoned and undefeated commander like Stannis. If Renly weren't so concerned with his tournaments, he might have remembered that his brother had never lost a battle and favored traps.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Yeah, you're literally not reading what I'm writing, and I don't feel much of a need to defend positions that aren't mine. Fun chatting, we must do this again soon.

I am reading it. All the pragmatism and consequentialism and right to self-interest and popularity and yada yada yada that you keep going on about doesn't change the fact that Renly still ended up dead. Even if you want to argue might makes right, even if you want to argue he was within his right to do it because reasons, even if you think he would have been a good king, he still lost.

I must say that Renly Baratheon is hardly the hill I'd want to die on, but you do you.

[James Arryn]

...I admit, I'm lost. I actually have no beef whatsoever with Renly's claim; Loras is right when he says Renly would've been the best of the original five. But I maintain that if you rebel against the senior members of a House, you're an idiot not to somehow account for the junior members.

I'm saying Robert rebelling against Aerys to put Aegon on the throne is non-sensical in exactly the same way as the idea that Renly should have rebelled against the Baratheon throne to put another baratheon (than himself) on the throne.