Jump to content

Why is Stannis an Appealing Character?


AugustusTheGreat

Recommended Posts

I am not a Stannis fan.  I don't hate him, but he's nowhere near my favourite character either.

I have to say though, of the 2 versions of Stannis we have (and I do consider book and show Stannis to be separate entities), I prefer the book version to the one we got in the show.  Not because Stephen Dillane is a bad actor, but because the show version - after a certain point just went downhill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

I think he might technically be an "anti-villain" (the guy who is placed in the role of a villain but actually has some heroic intentions or actions).  But it's all silly tropes at some point.  

Anyway, Complex character FTW! 

I dont mean to be that guy, but dont intentions / actions define the "good guys" from "bad guys"? 

However, the one thing that I really dont understand about Stannis is how can he be the best commander (according to Davos), when he doesnt even follow the fundamental rules of the art of war? He seems to make some boneheaded decisions. One of which is not allying himself with Robb Stark in the war of the 5 kings, and the 2nd is to keep attacking even when his forces have been badly compromised, twice. I understand that he has some character flaws, but damn, he is a gawd awful commander. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because his character in the book is great. 

" I was trying to win the throne to save the kingdom, when I should have been trying to save the kingdom to win the throne. " says it all for me.

 

Stannis is the best commander in Westeros. That being said, it goes to show how D&D really butchered his character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just wanted to separate show Stannis from book Stannis before I reply.  Show Stannis was a travesty.  His character was completely ruined for me when he plowed Melisandre on the painted table because he told her she could "give him a son".  Essentially all of the reasons I like Stannis in the books were removed from the show to make him more villainous.  Here are the main reasons I came to like him in the books.

1. His dry humor.  I think he may actually be the funniest character in the books.  The only aspect the show retained of this was his grammar correction, which we got in a total of two scenes.

2. He is very skeptical of Melisandre in the books and only uses her for her power and because men fear her.  He is actually an atheist.  This is explained very well in a conversation he has with Davos regarding Proudwing.  In the show, he just lets Melisandre do whatever she wants without any consequences, and he actually refers to another person as an "infidel".

3. Making Davos Hand of the King after Davos points out that Stannis is being a hypocrite.  Stannis respects honesty, even if it is difficult to hear.  The show tries to illustrate this part of him in Season 2, but from then on it is gone.

4. He can admit when he is wrong.  The "cart before the horse" speech being the best example

5. He doesn't hold people's births or social status against them.  He respects and actually listens to counsel from both Davos and Jon, despite their "low births".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Book Stannis is a well written character, show stannis is an egg. As is, he represents someone of a high ideological mind which he tries to enforce on people, and which lies his problem. He also has little faith in other people, which is also a problem. That being said, he's a great character because of it. He tries to make the world a better place after his failure at blackwater, and he tries to winover a group of people who have no cause to like him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎03‎/‎08‎/‎2016 at 4:22 AM, A spoon of knife and fork said:
1 hour ago, Marcus Agrippa said:

Book Stannis is a well written character, show stannis is an egg. As is, he represents someone of a high ideological mind which he tries to enforce on people, and which lies his problem. He also has little faith in other people, which is also a problem. That being said, he's a great character because of it. He tries to make the world a better place after his failure at blackwater, and he tries to winover a group of people who have no cause to like him.

I don't know about you but Stephen Dillane / Stannis staring at anything is very far from villainous in fact it's so complex that I can't stop staring. He conveys like 10 emotions at once, brilliant actor.

George may change his mind of course, but as far as the show runners go they say George told them how he intended Shireen to go.  I really doubt they'd lie and say that if it wasn't true.  

could also be seen as an act of desperation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is unintentionally hilarious in his sheer lack of humour or charm -  like refusing to call Robert his 'beloved' brother in those letters he sent out.

I feel a bit sorry for him too - he's courageous, honest, not a bad man in many ways, probably would make a better ruler than either of his brothers but no one likes him.  And it seems that no one ever liked him.  That's really sad.

Shame about his willingness to burn people including children.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Especially in the books that Shireen is not yet an issue, Stannis can be seen as an ideal good guy - he´s unwavering in his attempt to apply the law, he´s bluntly honest and a great father, things we all wish we could be (and many of us like to think that we are), and he has a moral scapegoat in the Red Woman for all his latest questionable acts (to the point that, to some, that makes him an even "better" person since he´s "just being manipulated by a woman").

 

I really like him for his sheer humanity, but I give him a lot more credit for his mistakes and atrocities than many do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fandom comes from the books. He is extremely lawful in the Judge Dredd sense - and while he looks merciless, he is not fully. Yes, he burned few people - though mostly those who were deserving - but so does Dany and nobody bats an eye.

In books, Selyse is the religious fanatic. I guess that in books, she will be the one to put Shireen to flames (though she may hang herself when it does not work). Maybe when she gets first news of the battle of the Ice, to try to thwart the disaster? Him putting Shireen to flames is against his book nature, unless that will be the moment when the lawful guy breaks after defeat.

Dunno. Book Stannis would be the perfect first absolutist monarch, dragging Westeros kicking and screaming into the Age of Enlightment. Terminally lawful, not giving a damn about birth for the office (unless politically necessary). unfortunately... We know he won't get there. He will die. How?

Well, in books there is no Brienne at hand. Plus even if he loses the Battle of ice, other people in his entourage (Asha, Theon, Northern lords etc.) should survive - so maybe he just gets killed. Or he gets captured and Boltons send him as a present South (meaning he may meet Brienne along the way)? 

In any case, Brienne should not have any case against him apart from her oath. She should have taken lesson from Jamie about oaths and when to break them - after all she was sworn to an usurper.

 

And in any case, yes, TV Stannis is not too appealing person. Book one is far more complex and human.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎03‎/‎08‎/‎2016 at 4:22 AM, A spoon of knife and fork said:

I don't know about you but Stephen Dillane / Stannis staring at anything is very far from villainous in fact it's so complex that I can't stop staring. He conveys like 10 emotions at once, brilliant actor.

I think that Stannis more than most was a character where the show runners left in the hands of the actor. Just going by what there is in the script Stannis would be neither an especially likeble or charismatic character yet I think Dilane's performance manages to make him both of those things.

Personally I actually thought Stannis  grew as the show progressed, he obviously had some big moments during season 2 but really the character became a lot more interesting to me post Blackwater(that scene with Mel in the S2 finale is still my favourite) as Dilane brought more to him.

Killing his daughter is a classic example of that, its a horrible act but Dilane sells it not as coming from an uncaring monster ala Joffery, Walder, etc but from someone locked into a path even though he loaths where its taking him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the killing off of show Stannis was down to the lack of interest from the actor... he has shown in many occasions not to be all that into the character or show... and they just decided to put him out of his misery.

Maybe book Stannis had it not been for show Stannis may have lived a lot longer and been a contender for the throne but show Stannis has sealed book Stannis's fate.

Anyways disliking or not, Dillane still gave a fantastic performance and he was a character like no other on the show, I always got the impression he has middle brother syndrome.. his older brother was always better than him at everything, and his younger brother was more adored/flashy and with it.

He was obviously Duped by a religious nut, and in the space of one episode lost everything wife,kid and with the red witch any hope of taking what he felt was rightfully his... with all the shame/guilt/feeling incredibly stupid, He probably seen the battle with the Boltons as a way out with some honour.. he knew he was beat before riding to battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, House_Of_Fraser said:

Maybe the killing off of show Stannis was down to the lack of interest from the actor... he has shown in many occasions not to be all that into the character or show... and they just decided to put him out of his misery.

Maybe book Stannis had it not been for show Stannis may have lived a lot longer and been a contender for the throne but show Stannis has sealed book Stannis's fate.

Anyways disliking or not, Dillane still gave a fantastic performance and he was a character like no other on the show, I always got the impression he has middle brother syndrome.. his older brother was always better than him at everything, and his younger brother was more adored/flashy and with it.

He was obviously Duped by a religious nut, and in the space of one episode lost everything wife,kid and with the red witch any hope of taking what he felt was rightfully his... with all the shame/guilt/feeling incredibly stupid, He probably seen the battle with the Boltons as a way out with some honour.. he knew he was beat before riding to battle.

Honestly this just seems like its getting into justifying fans theories about Stannis, that he was actually planned to be the AA, etc but that the show has actually caused this to be changed by Martin.

I suspect the big issue has always been to try and avoid things becoming too cluttered, all of Stannis in season 5 and then all of Bran in season 6 rather than both potentially running at the same time.

I would say that really the drama from Stannis comes from the fact that he's not "duped", he's not taken in by the religion in the way his wife is, he's a sceptic and mostly believes what he see's in results from Mel plus of course confirmation from the NW that the Walkers are a real threat. His questioning of Mel about the vision before killing his daughter I think makes it pretty clear he doesn't have 100% faith in it

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the laws of the land, he is the true King of the iron Throne. He fights the people we hate the most, the lannisters and the Boltons an Freys. This, despite him death cursing Robb etc. Stannis, personally is not likeable, he is a rigid asshole but he is just in many ways, however Mel has a very bad influence on him and drives him into cruel actions.

I like him so long as he attacks, Freys, Boltons, Lannisters and Tyrells. I do not want him touching the Stark kids or their lands.

I support the Great Northern Conspiracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Book Stannis makes me love the character.  He is one of the few characters that has ideals such as good governance, actual justice, and the duty of the ruler to the ruled.  While he is obsesses with his rights early on, he learns.  

For his notorious inflexibility, he is surprisingly flexible.  He is willing to consider an alliance with the Starks before Selyse insults his pride.  He offers to pass over Shireen in succession to make peace with Renly.  He listens to what Catelyn wants (her daughters back), and changes his offer to present her with Cersei's head to return her daughter's to her, showing that he actually listened. 

He's self aware.  He knows he isn't charismatic, and he doesn't try to be.  He is however committed to what he views as right, to the point that he is willing to continue along that path even though he knows it will consume him, costing him everything.  

Quote
Then Ser Richard Horpe, the knight with the ravaged face and the death's-head moths on his surcoat, turned to Stannis and said, "Your Grace, your brother—"
The king cut him off. "We all know what my brother would do. Robert would gallop up to the gates of Winterfell alone, break them with his warhammer, and ride through the rubble to slay Roose Bolton with his left hand and the Bastard with his right." Stannis rose to his feet. "I am not Robert. But we will march, and we will free Winterfell … or die in the attempt."
Quote
"Your Grace," said Davos, "the cost . . ."
"I know the cost! Last night, gazing into that hearth, I saw things in the flames as well. I saw a king, a crown of fire on his brows, burning . . . burning, Davos. His own crown consumed his flesh and turned him into ash. Do you think I need Melisandre to tell me what that means? Or you?" 

While I can understand not agreeing with him on certain philosophical issues (justice with regards to Davos, his opinion on 1 life vs many, etc.), I don't see how anyone cannot respect a man of such conviction.  

Anyway, the books really drive the love for the character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I'm sure many others have clarified by this poitn, most Stannis fans are people who read the books who loved the book version of the character.

For my part though, as someone who was turned onto the series after watching the first two seasons before reading the books, I was initially indifferent towards Stannis before his scene with Davos in Episode 8, where I grew to like him, and this was solidified by his actions in the Battle of Blackwater. Prior to that I had the misconception that he was a religious fanatic, which the show was inconsistent at best in their characterization of, and too swayed by Melisandre, which is definitely true of show Stannis. With those two episodes though, I began to see Stannis as someone who was essentially fed up with eating shit, and especially in regards to his interactions with Davos, judged a person by their character rather than their background, in stark contrast to the vast majority of the characters in the series. Those two traits, before I even read the books, were what initially sold me on Stannis.

Starting with Season 3 I had the book readers perspective on Stannis affecting my judgement, but I do feel like in a way, especially in the early half of Season 5, show Stannis is "nicer" than book Stannis but also more "evil" if that makes any sense. Like I couldn't imagine book Stannis essentially encouraging Sam Tarly to "keep reading", and obviously he was way softer on Jon in the show than in the books, but book Stannis also had a much harder time with the whole killing Renly thing.

Aside from that, Stannis is one of the most inconsistently written characters on the show, which is saying a lot, so its kind of hard to pin him down really. I definitely understand why show only fans don't like him, but I also feel like regardless Stephen Dillane deserves way more props for his acting than he gets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Show Stanis: I like him as a villain.  Like how one can read history and be fascinated with men such as Stalin, Hitler, Charlemagne.  From near the start he is a pos proselytiser.  Westros would be better ruled by Roose Bolton or Tywin Lanister.  Tywin, at the very least, truely did all that he did, for his family.  Which in a hierarchical, fuedal society, was the very core of duty. 

The Faith Militant are (were), nothing compared the horrors that would be inflicted on Westros with what would like become a theocracy.  

Protip: The kind of king a prince would make is shown in his persuit of the crown.  And Stannis did some truly horrible things in his attempt.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Blackphillip said:

Tywin, at the very least, truely did all that he did, for his family.

i´ll just point out this is highly debatable. The way I see, Tywin did everything he did for himself, while fooling himself and whoever wanted to hear that he was doing it for the family. If he had his family´s best interest in mind, he´d start by paying attention to his kids.

 

Not trying to start an off-topic debate, just giving you something to think when analyzing the charater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...