NOT A TARG I SWEAR Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Ned had Cersei's confession. That's an extraordinarily higher degree of certainty. Ambition fits every decision Stannis makes. All other motives people attribute to him sometimes fit, sometimes don't. It's not that tricky once you treat his comments about duty with the same skepticism we treat every other non-POV's statements about themself and their motivations. (and it doesn't make him a bad guy, either.) Insecurity and feeling he is shortchanged also fits nearly every major Stannis action, which also does a better job of describing times of his inaction as well. Stannis believes strongly in being given what is earned whether that is a reward or punishment, which is one of the reasons he is one of the characters that has more of an emphasis of meritocracy in his ranks, because of all the times he has felt shortchanged and how that dictates his actions at this point. If Stannis was as ambitious as you exclaim, why hasn't he resorted to treachery and intentional undermining? I think he's perfectly able to do engage in these types of shenanigans if he was ambitious enough, but rule of law is too important to him. Rule of law is the somewhat rigid system of rewards and punishment he uses to gauge what people deserve. It's because while ambition probably plays a role, I think it's far less important than you are emphasizing for Stannis. Overall it pales to the role his insecurities and getting what you earn play. It just makes more sense based on his backstory and why he hasn't acted in the past when he had opportunities to increase his power. Stannis could have tried to side with the Mad King and possibly be granted Storm's End, but instead as far as we know any ambition didn't seem to play a large role in his decision making. He weighed law and duty and decided his duty to his family>duty to crown, the reward didn't seem to dictate his actions unless it veered from what he believed should have been given to him based on the rules of law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronn Urgandy Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I used to have strong opinions about these things, but this story is incredibly organic, some characters grow, others wilt and more still die, and Stannis Baratheon is one of the better growers (hurhur) we've had so far. So I really wouldn't like to say, at this point, circumstances change, what is may no longer be, etc, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOT A TARG I SWEAR Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 When the King dies without any true born children his brother inherits. That's the only Law Stannis gives a damn about. Ya, I agree with this somewhat. I think at times he ignores laws for sure. I think right now he is so focused on what he views as being screwed on this one law that he has been willing to be more flexible with others in order to enact what he views as justice in this instance. His middle child syndrome/past perceived oversights are definitely weighing heavily on a lot of his actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonSnow4President Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Insecurity and feeling he is shortchanged also fits nearly every major Stannis action, which also does a better job of describing times of his inaction as well. Stannis believes strongly in being given what is earned whether that is a reward or punishment, which is one of the reasons he is one of the characters that has more of an emphasis of meritocracy in his ranks, because of all the times he has felt shortchanged and how that dictates his actions at this point. If Stannis was as ambitious as you exclaim, why hasn't he resorted to treachery and intentional undermining? I think he's perfectly able to do engage in these types of shenanigans if he was ambitious enough, but rule of law is too important to him. Rule of law is the somewhat rigid system of rewards and punishment he uses to gauge what people deserve. It's because while ambition probably plays a role, I think it's far less important than you are emphasizing for Stannis. Overall it pales to the role his insecurities and getting what you earn play. It just makes more sense based on his backstory and why he hasn't acted in the past when he had opportunities to increase his power. Stannis could have tried to side with the Mad King and possibly be granted Storm's End, but instead as far as we know any ambition didn't seem to play a large role in his decision making. He weighed law and duty and decided his duty to his family>duty to crown, the reward didn't seem to dictate his actions unless it veered from what he believed should have been given to him based on the rules of law. To the bolded, two words. Shadow. Baby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallTyrion Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Your making Stannis look like a gangster. I think his an ass but not a hypocrite. He has a firm belief that order must be maintained and justice be served. Not at all. Stannis is the King by all laws of Westeros both in his mind and in fact. Ya, I agree with this somewhat. I think at times he ignores laws for sure. I think right now he is so focused on what he views as being screwed on this one law that he has been willing to be more flexible with others in order to enact what he views as justice in this instance. His middle child syndrome/past perceived oversights are definitely weighing heavily on a lot of his actions. I don't think he's ignoring the law when pressing his claim. There's no one codified law governing everything in Westeros. Customs and traditions largely dictate procedure and Stannis is Robert's heir by the customs of both his house and Westeros in general so him pushing his claim is perfectly in line with the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RainGhost Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Not at all. Stannis is the King by all laws of Westeros both in his mind and in fact. I don't think he's ignoring the law when pressing his claim. There's no one codified law governing everything in Westeros. Customs and traditions largely dictate procedure and Stannis is Robert's heir by the customs of both his house and Westeros in general so him pushing his claim is perfectly in line with the law. Haven't the Lannisters and the Tyrells successfully conquered the IT, though, making Tommen the rightful king? Bearing in mind Stannis's ravens have long been sent and people either don't believe it or don't care or are too scared of the Lannisters/Tyrells to do anything about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Blizzardborn Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Haven't the Lannisters and the Tyrells successfully conquered the IT, though, making Tommen the rightful king? Bearing in mind Stannis's ravens have long been sent and people either don't believe it or don't care or are too scared of the Lannisters/Tyrells to do anything about it. No, they have successfully usurped the throne. That's not the same thing. And no, it does not make Tommen the rightful king, unless you're operating on the idea that might automatically makes right. Bear in mind that people were caught up in the war of five kings for a while and that the people fighting for four of those kings were against the Lannisters ruling them. The question now is how many will join Stannis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallTyrion Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Haven't the Lannisters and the Tyrells successfully conquered the IT, though, making Tommen the rightful king? Bearing in mind Stannis's ravens have long been sent and people either don't believe it or don't care or are too scared of the Lannisters/Tyrells to do anything about it. He's King in that he's sitting on the Throne. The Lannisters or Tyrells winning military victories isn't where his legitimacy derives from though. It's the (false) notion that he's Robert's son that makes him King. Given that we know he isn't Robert's son, he's only a usurper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of Vaes Tolorro Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 It's something of a Rorschach test for the fandom: People who like Stannis or believe the best of him think he may consider, compromise, maybe even submit People who don't just think he will at best simply refuse to compromise and at worst charge his horse down a dragon's mouth Stannis is iron. He will break before he will bend. Of course he will run his horse into the mouth of a Dragon. People who dislike will hope he will be digested. People who support him believe that he will charge out of the other end covered in the dragon's innards and blood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferocious Veldt Roarer Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Haven't the Lannisters and the Tyrells successfully conquered the IT, though, making Tommen the rightful king? Bearing in mind Stannis's ravens have long been sent and people either don't believe it or don't care or are too scared of the Lannisters/Tyrells to do anything about it. Focus. This is very simple. Once upon a time, Aerys was the king. Then Robert arose and kicked his ass and sat on the Iron Throne and accepted oaths of fealty from lords of the whole realm and became the lawful king. A little while later, after Robert's death... Joffrey sat on the Iron Throne and put a crown on his head and kicked Stannis' ass and accepted oaths of fealty from lords of the whole realm BUT THAT DOESN'T COUNT 'CAUSE UNFAIR! See? It is very simple. "The law" is defined as "any set of axioms leading to the conclusion that Stannis Baratheon is the lawful king". It doesn't actually need to be constant, or consistent, the important part is to know the correct result and work back from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSmith84 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Focus. This is very simple. Once upon a time, Aerys was the king. Then Robert arose and kicked his ass and sat on the Iron Throne and accepted oaths of fealty from lords of the whole realm and became the lawful king. A little while later, after Robert's death... Joffrey sat on the Iron Throne and put a crown on his head and kicked Stannis' ass and accepted oaths of fealty from lords of the whole realm BUT THAT DOESN'T COUNT 'CAUSE UNFAIR! See? It is very simple. "The law" is defined as "any set of axioms leading to the conclusion that Stannis Baratheon is the lawful king". It doesn't actually need to be constant, or consistent, the important part is to know the correct result and work back from there. The difference there, I imagine, would be that Robert won the IT as Robert Baratheon and crowned himself as such. Joffrey, on the other hand, claims to be King via his father being Robert Baratheon, he did not claim the throne as Joffrey Lannister (or Waters, as I suppose he actually is) and did not claim it as a result of conquest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferocious Veldt Roarer Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 The difference there, I imagine, would be that Robert won the IT as Robert Baratheon and crowned himself as such. Joffrey, on the other hand, claims to be King via his father being Robert Baratheon, he did not claim the throne as Joffrey Lannister (or Waters, as I suppose he actually is) and did not claim it as a result of conquest. I don't believe conquest is something that needs to be "claimed" in order to count. I don't see it as some sort of specific procedure one needs to follow with some specific keywords to say out loud. "Right of conquest" is just a convenient shorthand description of "kicking ass until it's obvious who the winner is". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronn Urgandy Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Its basically GRRM saying "what if those greedy jerks who called into question the legitimacy of the people ahead of them for the Throne were actually right, what then? Better yet, lets make it a brand new dynasty, but like all new dynasties it must have blood ties to the old one..." and then just let us common folk have at it. Its like civil wars but on the internet, each post snarkier than the last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stannis's birthright Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Dany might make a deal with Stannis but you can be certain He will never bend a knee to her .Never Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastTymor Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 "I built a fleet at Robert's command, took Dragonstone in his name. Did he take my hand and say, Well done, brother, whatever should I do without you? No, he blamed me for letting Willem Darry steal away Viserys and the babe, as if I could have stopped it." -ACOK Prologue Sounds like Stannis is still bitter at not getting the chance to merk Dany. I don't see him bending the knee any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nictarion Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Never mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry the Hair Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 This is a very interesting question... it would also be a nice way for GRRM to troll us; everyone is expecting a Dany vs Stannis showdown (if he is victorious against the Boltons) and then all we get is a paragraph about an argument he has with Dany at the end of which she manages to convince him that she is the rightful heir and he needs to go back to Storm's End. I think quite a bit of people will burn their books then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaworth'sShipmate Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What would he think? He would think the Targaryens are a defunct dynasty. Similar to how the Plantagenet heir would have no claim to the Tudor throne, or some grandson of the last Ming emperor would have no claim to the (then current) Chinese throne. He wouldn't think much of her, and would continue to make Westeros a nice happy place Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wavey Sauce Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 People have to realize that Dany does have a claim by right of conquest Also Stannis only went against the Mad king because there was a bounty on his brother and ned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wavey Sauce Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Sorry on the doublepost But Stannis being in the wall area he can for sure come to learn how real and dangerous the wights are, and will take camp there to really to protect kingdoms, but Stannis will come to see how the Iron throne super special Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.