The true writer, and fan bias (SPOILERS FOR BOOKS AND TV)

[Wouter]

Well look for 4chan spoilers on Winter is Coming and you might get what I am talking about.

I prefer to watch the actual final episode, which is only days away. I haven't seen those spoilers on 4chan; they may be true or may be false. After sunday we'll know for sure what happens.

[BalerionTheCat]

I think I read somewhere GRRM said the reason he didn't write any episodes in Season 5 (unlike in the previous 4 seasons) was so he could focus on finishing Winds of Winter.

GRRM, in Not a Blog said

GRRM is credited as co-executive producer of the show. I'm sure that there is a contract somewhere forbidding him from saying anything derogatory about the show or the people involved in it. However, between the lines in his blog, there are a few interesting remarks:

To me, it is somewhat clear that he is not happy with the consequences of the show overcoming the books and neither with the core story changes. However, he cannot openly state such thing.

Hopefully, it will be completely clear when WoW comes out, if it ever will.

Yes, that is telling a lot. I start wondering if there is not another motive for him to not write or participate in this season, and if so, for the remaining ones.

Anyway GRRM couldn't refute anything. Both because of his contract with HBO (he is still co-executive producer). And because telling anything would be spoilers. He already did too much when he said didn't write that (Shireen) yet.

[nicole_snow]

No, they haven't - actually, the only "arguments" are actually against what they think they are. And I've answered them fully, only to get gibberish back.

Have you watched Game of Thrones? Because honestly, if you have to ask these questions again, I don't think you have - or you didn't pay attention.

Were you not there when Stannis became a kin-slayer when he used sorcery to dishonorably kill his brother because he knew he couldn't face him in battle?

Did you miss as he progressively started to sacrifice people closer to him by burning them alive for this Red God?

Did you miss when the Red Witch told him that he would sacrifice all he held dear?

Did you not watch the week that the Red Witch insisted they bring Shireen along because she had a part to play? Or did you think she just needed her to serve drinks while on the road?

As to my "conclusion" - let's see, I have given a quote from an article supporting it (I can go find more), the writers of the show support it (or they wouldn't have written it), and outside of this website there are people making fun of the fact that people are flipping out over this because to everyone else it was plainly the entire point of the Stannis character, this was his story arc. To go from a man who defied everyone to save his daughter, to the man who took his daughters life because he was under the religious delusion that it would save "everyone".

But the Mannis fans here are the experts. You are asking the person who agrees with the rest of the world for evidence, when in fact it's those who disagree that this burden falls on - but even so, here I have done, explained it one more time.

You are mad because you misread the character if you didn't see this is someone who clearly has been murdering people for quite some time as a religious zealot.

As GRRM said this morning that he hasn't even written that scene in the books yet, I'm not going to argue about the books - pointless, since even he hasn't written it yet. But I can say that if Stannis somehow doesn't pull the trigger in the books as well, that's bad writing, because the signs have all been there, too.

What did you guys think the point of Stannis was? That he was actually going to win the throne? That murdering people by burning them alive (even if in the book they are "criminals") to appease a Red God was the noble thing and he was going to ride on his horse into King's Landing and take over?

But I realize, no matter what I say - the religious fervor around Stannis that some fans have is just that - no one can say anything to convince you. Because you know Stannis, he'd never betray you...I mean his daughter.

I actually think CerseiStark has a point. According to that evidence there is a progression of Stannis leading up to burning Shireen.

Do I personally think it is a good adaptation of Stannis' story arc from the novels? Not really. It is rushed and over-simplified. In the novels it is a long, hard march with so much detail about the deep snow, the storming, beginning of winter, trying to fish, the starving, cannibalizing each other, despair. Instead we get Ramsay coming in undetected with 20 men? Lol, okay. (Show Ramsay is so ridiculous but that's another story.) Yes, I know the show has time constraints, but there had to be some better way to do it.

Show Stannis doesn't even seem concerned that nobody saw anything? He really sucks as a military leader imo.

D&D have time and time again pandered to the lowest common denominator.

[Duckface]

The problem with this particular scene and many others is not the scene itself, it's complete lack of any build up to it.

[Facebookless Man]

The lack of build up and character development is not even the worst issue with this. Nothing those hacks write makes the slightest shred of sense.

They're starving as they look at a pile of dead horses.

They burned an actual king, and, what, a month later all they have to show for it is starvation and defeat.

Balon is alive.

And so on and so forth.

[Bran17]

The problem with this particular scene and many others is not the scene itself, it's complete lack of any build up to it.

:agree:

[TheKitttenGuard]

The lack of build up and character development is not even the worst issue with this. Nothing those hacks write makes the slightest shred of sense.

They're starving as they look at a pile of dead horses.

They burned an actual king, and, what, a month later all they have to show for it is starvation and defeat.

Balon is alive.

And so on and so forth.

Jon putting an arrow in Mance's heart means Mance was not burned alive. He negated the ceremony.

The leeches were not for Stannis. He was willing to go through Gendry's sacrifice. It only happen after his conversation with Davos in the cell. It just does not mean on TV what it means in the books.

[Facebookless Man]

1. What ceremony?

2. What?

[TheKitttenGuard]

1. What ceremony?

2. What?

The burning is a religious ceremony. Mance was to be burn as sacrifice to Rh'llor. When Jon pit the arrow in Mance's he did not die by burning so it was not the sacrifice. Point is Mance was not burned to death.

I made an error on your point of Balon's death. It is problematic but it is more on Davos than Stannis since the Leeches where not related to Stannis on the show.

[Facebookless Man]

The burning was an execution, no mention of kingsblood or offerings were made, but okay, that's mild honeypotting compared to the gymnastics needed to make sense of, um, almost everything else. It could even be kind of good if there was some kind of hint that it actually happened that way and Jon Snow doomed Shireen by robbing the LoL of his sacrifice.

As for the other point...what?

[Davos is King]

Dude was burned for treason, may have given them fair winds though :P

"Not treason. Never treason. I love His Grace as much as any man. My own niece is his queen, and I remained loyal to him when wiser men fled. I am his Hand, the Hand of the King, how can I be a traitor? I only meant to save our lives, and... honor...yes." He licked his lips

"I penned a letter. Salladhor Saan swore that he had a man who could get it to King's Landing, to Lord Tywin. His lordship is a...a man of reason, and my terms...the terms were fair...more than fair."

[Davos is King]

Also not all show main characters have A Feast and Dance things to do this season. Like Sansa,Brieene,Jamie,Theon. You cannot expect for them to get a paycheck and do nothing for a whole season, and then cast some new characters for the new arcs in the two books?

The show is 7 seasons. Do you want them to cram Winds and A Dream in 2 seasons and get it wrong, because of time constraints?

Sansa, Brienne, Jaime and Theon have pretty much done fuck all this entire so I find your comment pretty funny.

Sansa: Go to Winterfell, mope about, get abused.

Theon: Go to Winterfell, mope about, get abused.

Brienne: Go to Winterfell, mope about.

Jaime: PORNE SEX PARTY WITH BEST BUD BRONN LOLZ

I think maybe production costs could be a big factor though, having Brienne and Sansa in Winterfell saves cost on not having the Vale and the Riverlands storylines .

[TheKitttenGuard]

The burning was an execution, no mention of kingsblood or offerings were made, but okay, that's mild honeypotting compared to the gymnastics needed to make sense of, um, almost everything else. It could even be kind of good if there was some kind of hint that it actually happened that way and Jon Snow doomed Shireen by robbing the LoL of his sacrifice.

As for the other point...what?

If it is an execution he can have his head. He is being burned because it is a sacrifice to the Red God. Your statement of burning a King is wrong because Jon killed Mance before he was burned to death.

When I saw many posts on Balon death it is due to the three leeches being burned. The leeches in the show are not the same reason as in the books. Any problem with Balon still being alive on the show is not tied to Stannis's characterization as it is on the show. It is more with Davos not bringing up Balon being alive to Stannis in their last scene.

[WhitewolfStark]

You are mad because you misread the character if you didn't see this is someone who clearly has been murdering people for quite some time as a religious zealot.

As GRRM said this morning that he hasn't even written that scene in the books yet, I'm not going to argue about the books - pointless, since even he hasn't written it yet. But I can say that if Stannis somehow doesn't pull the trigger in the books as well, that's bad writing, because the signs have all been there, too.

What did you guys think the point of Stannis was? That he was actually going to win the throne? That murdering people by burning them alive (even if in the book they are "criminals") to appease a Red God was the noble thing and he was going to ride on his horse into King's Landing and take over?

But I realize, no matter what I say - the religious fervor around Stannis that some fans have is just that - no one can say anything to convince you. Because you know Stannis, he'd never betray you...I mean his daughter.

It also references back to the book series that GRRM said inspired him to write ASOIAF: Les Rois Maudit (aka: The Accursed Kings). Which is a book series which examines how Medieval France descended from stability in the Capet Dynasty, only to fall apart and fracture when a succession crisis is created when an Aunt and her Nephew manipulate the monarchy fighting for who really owns one single county.

It starts out with the King of France having exterminated the Knights Templar (except for the final five), and the first king from the first book, Philip IV, always marked me as a proto-Stannis and a proto-Tywin (mostly with how Philip interacts with his children, especially his daughter Queen Isabella of England) all mixed together. The curse starts when Philip burns the remaining Knights Templar at the stake, with the Grandmaster calling out in the flames to God to put a curse on Philip IV and all his descendants to the 13th Generation, and that God should come to take Philip, the Avignon Pope, and their jailer to be judged for their crimes before the year is out. And they all die before the year is out, with one of them being poisoned by the antics of the Aunt and her Nephew's power struggle, another dying suddenly (but most likely naturally), and the third essentially worrying himself to death.

The idea taken from that being that this entire mess starts with people burning at the stake and only gets worse from there. Burning people doesn't solve anyone's problems, but only compounds the issue.

If anything that's what I expect out of Stannis' plot--burning people alive only brings more problems. Which makes me wonder when Dany is going to have karmic issues with Mirri's death. One could argue that Dany having trouble controlling her growing children is that karmic payoff for that, and if she looses Rhaegal and Viserion, most definitely so. Burning Mirri may have birthed dragons, but it birthed dragons which are as much a problem as they are a solution. That ought to be enough IMO, nothing more needed.

[breakthewheel]

Just on a side note, while I've loved reading this thread, as a Lawyer I find it difficult to believe that D&D, no matter your opinion of them personally, would be saying that GRRM told them that Shireen would burn if he didn't.

I've worked in Litigation long enough to see people's lives fall apart over someone saying something untrue on a personal Facebook, nevermind something like that on a business level to a mass audience of a show. I have little doubt if it was untrue GRRM would have gone mad by now. People love to sue each other. Whether GRRM goes on another tangent remains to be seen but I don't doubt he told them that was the gist of it.

[The Human Abstract]

They're questioning that Stannis burns her... Not that she burns.

[arijit the dragon]

stannis is killed by briene of tarth, what is your reaction?

[VeraAgnes]

I don't think she ended Stannis.....He told the truth and spoke of duty which touched her sense of right and wrong. Let me guess here...Stannis will end his days serving on the Wall.

[Stormland's Fury]

Didn't GRRM also say that they could have Aliens invade Westeros and he can't do anything about it? I mean he must have given them really, really broad strokes.