why does everyone blame Renly for Stannis's mistake

[Darkstream]

2 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

No doubt she wanted him dead, but Pycelle says he deduced it from her reactions, not a silent command. We also have Cersei's POV when she thinks about him dying. Guess what, she never thinks she signaled or told Pycelle he needed to die. She thinks about murdering Robert and his brothers but doesn't mention Jon's death and her desire to see him killed. So yes, some things can reasonably be extrapolated from the text. This is not one of them.

For reference:

“She wanted to slap him again for that. I must have been mad to think he could be Hand. She would sooner abolish the office. When had a Hand ever brought her anything but grief? Jon Arryn put Robert Baratheon in her bed, and before he died he’d begun sniffing about her and Jaime as well. Eddard Stark took up right where Arryn had left off; his meddling had forced her to rid herself of Robert sooner than she would have liked, before she could deal with his pestilential brothers. Tyrion sold Myrcella to the Dornishmen, made one of her sons his hostage, and murdered the other. And when Lord Tywin returned to King’s Landing . . ."

I'm not sure why you think Cercei would think about that, or that her not thinking about it, would be in anyway evidence that she didn't have anything to do with it.

Besides, you're reading that passage incorrectly, only what I have bolded is Cercei's thoughts, the rest is the narrator.

[Darkstream]

3 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

He did bring it to Jon Arryn. That was the smart play. Then when Jon Arryn was murdered (by Lysa) he should have told Ned. He did not. He stayed behind and raised an army and hired mercenaries well before Robert died. Nothing was stopping him from coming to KL in relative force or summoning Ned to DS for a meeting. A trip there and back would take a week. Once again a baffling decision given that Ned would have been believed like Jon and Ned was planning on bringing it to Robert before he died, with Stannis standing to receive reward for his leal service and become heir to the throne again. Stannis has literal months to do this and does nothing with it. His safety is definitely something to be wary of, but he if he has the means and authority to assemble an army while the king still lives, I think he can show up to KL to talk with Ned.

When should he have told him? Stannis was gone before Ned ever arrived at King's Landing. And why would Stannis think that he could, or should trust Ned? They have never been close, or had a relationship at all. And it's not like Stannis had even the slightest notion that Ned knew anything about what was going on. These are  Stannis' only thought regarding Ned.

A Dance with Dragons - Jon I

Quote

"Lord Eddard was no friend to me, but he was not without some sense. He would have given me these castles."

A Clash of Kings - Catelyn III

Quote

 

"He was never your enemy, my lord. When the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne held you prisoned in that castle, starving, it was Eddard Stark who broke the siege."

"At my brother's command, not for love of me," Stannis answered. "Lord Eddard did his duty, I will not deny it. Did I ever do less? I should have been Robert's Hand."

 

Why in the Seven hells would Stannis confide in Ned?  That's just ridiculous. 

And you're making a lot of unfounded assumptions regarding Stannis' intentions. We have no information on what he was up to untill aCoK, long after Robert's death. How do you know that prior to Robert's death, Stannis wasn't planning to build his strength, and then bring his concerns to Robert? And once Robert was murdered, it would be completely asanine of him to sail back to King's Landing, right into the Lions den, just to talk to Ned, a stranger, who he had no reason to trust.
 

[ravenous reader]

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

@ravenous reader

I whole heartedly concur with the entirety of your post, with one exception. I must take issue with your use of the adjective mingy, when referring to any of the faithfully loyal and noble direwolves. I understand the point that you're making, but I'm sorry, I just can't except that.

Sweet darkling Darkstream, there is a simple explanation for my folly:  I thought 'mingy' was a more elegant turn of phrase than 'fecking'...

[Universal Sword Donor]

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

I'm not sure why you think Cercei would think about that, or that her not thinking about it, would be in anyway evidence that she didn't have anything to do with it.

Besides, you're reading that passage incorrectly, only what I have bolded is Cercei's thoughts, the rest is the narrator.

It's a POV of Cersei, written with her voice and mind. Clearly I am reading it incorrectly. It seems as if the narrator, who is either GRRM or Cersei, wants us to think exactly what I explained in my post.

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

When should he have told him? Stannis was gone before Ned ever arrived at King's Landing. And why would Stannis think that he could, or should trust Ned? They have never been close, or had a relationship at all. And it's not like Stannis had even the slightest notion that Ned knew anything about what was going on. These are  Stannis' only thought regarding Ned.

A Dance with Dragons - Jon I

A Clash of Kings - Catelyn III

Why in the Seven hells would Stannis confide in Ned?  That's just ridiculous. 

And you're making a lot of unfounded assumptions regarding Stannis' intentions. We have no information on what he was up to untill aCoK, long after Robert's death. How do you know that prior to Robert's death, Stannis wasn't planning to build his strength, and then bring his concerns to Robert? And once Robert was murdered, it would be completely asanine of him to sail back to King's Landing, right into the Lions den, just to talk to Ned, a stranger, who he had no reason to trust.
 

Why would he tell Jon Arryn? It's not as if he and Jon were besties. Your own quotes tell you why he should have:

"Lord Eddard was no friend to me, but he was not without some sense.

"At my brother's command, not for love of me," Stannis answered. "Lord Eddard did his duty, I will not deny it. Did I ever do less? I should have been Robert's Hand."

He's sensical and does his duty, which means things like Davos' hard truths. I'm honestly floored this is even a debate, especially since we know how everything played out for Stannis and Stannis himself admitted he fucked up badly. I want to point out, once again, that Ned wanted Stannis to come to KL to talk about the exact thing Stannis wanted Robert to know.

We know for a fact Stannis left not long after Robert went north to WF.

“Lord Stannis took himself to Dragonstone not long after the king went north,”

We also know that ships have been commandeered at DS and closed off the island for six months prior to ACOK. How do I know? Cressen tells us

“Last year when he took ill, the Citadel had sent Pylos out from Oldtown, mere days before Lord Stannis had closed the isle ”

“No craft that had come within sight of Dragonstone this past half year had been allowed to leave again.”

We know that Stannis is gathering troops while Robert is still alive, thanks to Arya overhearing Varys.

“This is no longer a game for two players, if ever it was. Stannis Baratheon and Lysa Arryn have fled beyond my reach, and the whispers say they are gathering swords around them.”

Well bringing an army to KL is going to be received rather badly right, and he doesn't want to approach Robert directly because it's self-serving and Robert doesn't like him. It would have been asinine to sail back after Robert was murdered. That's why he never should have left or met with Ned on DS or came to KL before Robert died to meet with Ned or any of a half dozen options that made more sense than his hostile passivity. Ned is not wholly blameless but the impetus is really on Stannis. He abandons his position as master of ships, closes off DS, commandeers ships, calls his banners, and refuses to communicate to anyone not named Melisandre. 

What do you think Stannis should have done? Everything he did failed miserably.

[Darkstream]

18 hours ago, devilish said:

@Darkstream

Part A

You’re underestimated the extremely serious slights the two houses had been inflicting to one another. Lets make a quick list of them

a-      The crown prince get assaulted by one of Lord Ned’s direwolves (a direwolf is around twice the size of a common wild wolf)

But this isn't the full story, and Robert is quite aware that Jofrey is lying. Yet, instead of dealing with the situation in a fair and diplomatic manner, he cowers and folds to Cercei's demands, and escalates the tensions between the two parties.

18 hours ago, devilish said:

b-      Cat Tully kidnaps Cersei’s brother, accusing him of a very serious crime and then she takes him to the Vale (rather than KL) to be executed erm judged

c-       Jamie assaults and wounds Ned then flee

Both serious offences, and again, instead of dealing with the situation as is his responsibility and duty, he does nothing, and expects that the tensions between these two parties are just going to go away, instead of escalating as they did.

18 hours ago, devilish said:

d-      Ned sends an army to capture Gregor Clegane and orders Tywin to come to KL to answer for his knight’s crime or else be judged as a traitor

And justly so, but Robert couldn't be bothered to deal with these atrocious war crimes being committed, as it would have interfeared with his ever so important hunting trip.

18 hours ago, devilish said:

Those actions alone could easily lead to a civil war. Yet Robert was able to calm tempers down.

Tempers weren't calmed, Robert just turned a blind eye to them, and a civil war did ensue.

18 hours ago, devilish said:

Things went south very quickly only when Ned dropped the mother of all threats right on Cersei’s laps without first informing Robert. Ned’s irresponsible action caused the king’s death

This is not true. If you take a close look at the time line of events, Cercei's plan had already been implemented, and Robert was already victim to the boar attack before Ned had approached Cercei.

[Darkstream]

18 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

It's a POV of Cersei, written with her voice and mind. Clearly I am reading it incorrectly. It seems as if the narrator, who is either GRRM or Cersei, wants us to think exactly what I explained in my post.

Well you're the one that claimed that Cersei was thinking about something that she wasn't. There is a reason that GRRM uses italics to note what are the actual thoughts of the characters.

What a ludicrous claim. You think that the point of that passage - which doesn't mention a single thing about who murdered Arryn - is suppose to make us think that Cercei had not implied to Pycelle that she wanted Arryn dead? What a joke!! Do you know the insurmountable amount of verified facts that I could deny, just on the basis that a character doesn't think about it?

Tell me, what was the point in GRRM having Pycelle say what he did, if it wasn't to inform the readers that Cercei wanted Arryn dead, and that she interfered with his recovery?

And to be honest, not only is this an inappropriate thread to be having this debate, but I really couldn't care less if Pycelle's statement is proof or not to implicate Cercei in Arryn's death. It's heavily implied that this is the case, and it really has no bearing on anything at all. The whole point of me bringing it up was to demonstrate the fact that Robert was clueless to all the scheming and corruption happening right under his nose; whether it be Cercei or Littlefinger really doesn't make a difference.

[Prof. Cecily]

6 hours ago, ravenous reader said:

We are in no mood for irony on this thread Prof!  If you're looking for 'charitability', I'm afraid popping in on a titanic debate on who was the lesser of the evils among the Baratheon bros is not the right place!

@ravenous reader I beg to differ. If ever there's a place for irony, it's in a discussion of the usurping Baratheon brothers. However, if I've offended, please accept my apology!

6 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Ha, well one can never be sure with some of the comments made in sincerity on these forums.

Besides, I can never resit the urge to share my disdain for Pycelle.

@Darkstream no-on ever shows more disdain for Pycelle than GRRM himself. The beard. Such a symbol and condemnation of the man.

In any case, I rude interrupted a discussion on the Baratheon brothers, one I'd been following with deep interest, actually,  and my irony was  distracting and out of place.

[ravenous reader]

1 minute ago, Prof. Cecily said:

I beg to differ. If ever there's a place for irony, it's in a discussion of the usurping Baratheon brothers. However, if I've offended, please accept my apology!

I was actually joking and being ironic myself!  Sorry if I offended!  

[Prof. Cecily]

1 minute ago, ravenous reader said:

I was actually joking and being ironic myself!  Sorry if I offended!  

Gods be good, we're all on the same page then!

I'm new and probably didn't catch that here, any reference to Pycelle is going to be ironic. In any case, for the record, I was interrupting the flow of the discussion and that IS something worthy of apology.

Anyway, back to those brothers!

[ravenous reader]

Just now, Prof. Cecily said:

I was interrupting the flow of the discussion and that IS something worthy of apology.

Anyway, back to those brothers!

Please interrupt away.  The 'flow' was in sore need of some refreshing comic relief!

[Darkstream]

1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Why would he tell Jon Arryn? It's not as if he and Jon were besties. 

Well, he actually knew Arryn, he wasn't half way across the continent, and they obviously had some sort of relationship - as they served together in the small council - which apparently gave Stannis reason enough to trust him.

And this is an extremely weak argument; The reason he should trust Ned, is because he trusted Jon. Give me a break.

Quote

Your own quotes tell you why he should have:

Uh, no it doesn't. Stannis knowing of the reputation of someone who is essentially a stranger to him is definitely not reason enough to trust said person with such sensitive information; Basically trusting his life to him, yeah, I think not.

[Darkstream]

16 minutes ago, Prof. Cecily said:

@ravenous reader I beg to differ. If ever there's a place for irony, it's in a discussion of the usurping Baratheon brothers. However, if I've offended, please accept my apology!

@Darkstream no-on ever shows more disdain for Pycelle than GRRM himself. The beard. Such a symbol and condemnation of the man.

In any case, I rude interrupted a discussion on the Baratheon brothers, one I'd been following with deep interest, actually,  and my irony was  distracting and out of place.

Not at all. I'm one who can certainly appreciate a little irony or sarcasm. The gods know I dish out my fair share. And honestly, I'm a little ashamed that I didn't catch it at first.

And I can't express enough how overjoyed I was when he lost his beard and was trying to grow it back.

[Darkstream]

1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Well bringing an army to KL is going to be received rather badly right, and he doesn't want to approach Robert directly because it's self-serving and Robert doesn't like him. It would have been asinine to sail back after Robert was murdered. That's why he never should have left or met with Ned on DS or came to KL before Robert died to meet with Ned or any of a half dozen options that made more sense than his hostile passivity. Ned is not wholly blameless but the impetus is really on Stannis. He abandons his position as master of ships, closes off DS, commandeers ships, calls his banners, and refuses to communicate to anyone not named Melisandre. 

What do you think Stannis should have done? Everything he did failed miserably.

Yeah, you might be right. It's easy to make judgement in hindsight, and with all of the info we have as readers. But who's to say what would have happened if he never left, we will never know. I'm not defending Stannis' actions, but like I said, nobody knows what his initial intentions were, and it very well may have been to everyone's benefit had he stayed. However, I certainly cannot fault him for not reaching out to Ned. Should he have responded to Ned's attempts to contact him? Yes, I would say that was a grave mistake on his part.

[Ralphis Baratheon]

It's just too bad Renly and Stannis could never find common ground, what Stannis lacked Renly had and vise versa. I wonder how all of the Baratheon brothers relationships would have been different if their parents never died on that ship.

[Yucef Menaerys]

Let me just say on behalf of house Targaryen that actually united the seven kingdoms, created the iron throne and we're the first kings of westeros that the throne neither belongs to Stannis nor renly, the rightful owner of the throne is the last Targaryen whomever they maybe just like viserys said in AGOT

"Ours by blood right, taken from us by treachery, but ours still, oursforever. You do not steal from the dragon, oh, no. The dragon remembers."

Stannis is trying to take Roberts thrones which he stole from the targaryens, I agree that aerys was a bad guy but what Robert should have done after the rebellion was to crown the next in line to the iron throne who was Viserys and make sure he has good councilors and tutors so that he wouldn't end up like his father. So all your arguments are null because the throne belongs to Dany.

[Darkstream]

21 minutes ago, Yucef Menaerys said:

Let me just say on behalf of house Targaryen that actually united the seven kingdoms, created the iron throne and we're the first kings of westeros that the throne neither belongs to Stannis nor renly, the rightful owner of the throne is the last Targaryen whomever they maybe just like viserys said in AGOT

"Ours by blood right, taken from us by treachery, but ours still, oursforever. You do not steal from the dragon, oh, no. The dragon remembers."

Stannis is trying to take Roberts thrones which he stole from the targaryens, I agree that aerys was a bad guy but what Robert should have done after the rebellion was to crown the next in line to the iron throne who was Viserys and make sure he has good councilors and tutors so that he wouldn't end up like his father. So all your arguments are null because the throne belongs to Dany.

Your argument is null, because Aegon stole the seven plus thrones that belonged to the many Andel Kings that stole those thrones from the First Men, who created those thrones after stealing the land from the Children who ruled the Seven Kingdoms before that, all of whom ruled for thousands of years before the coming of the middle class Valaryians, whom call themselves the Targaryens, who only managed to hold onto their power for a meagre three hundred years.

So there.

[Yucef Menaerys]

11 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

Your argument is null, because Aegon stole the seven plus thrones that belonged to the many Andel Kings that stole those thrones from the First Men, who created those thrones after stealing the land from the Children who ruled the Seven Kingdoms before that, all of whom ruled for thousands of years before the coming of the middle class Valaryens, whom call themselves the Targaryens, who only managed to hold onto their power for a meagre three hundred years.

So there.

LOL if everyone stole the throne then why are you so viciously defending Stannis' right to the throne? 

Are you calling the targaryens middle class valyrian?  The targaryens were dragonlords who were in turn in the epitome of valyrian society at the highest social pyramid, granted they were not the most powerful family but they were still one of only 40 families that ruled more than half the known world, just like I saw someone on reddit say and I'm paraphrasing "being the weakest dragonlord family was like being the poorest billionaire"

At least they held it for 300 hundred years, the Baratheons held it for less, what 18 years? They couldn't keep it for just two decades and now the monarchs are the lannisters......what a shame. 

[Darkstream]

1 minute ago, Yucef Menaerys said:

LOL if everyone stole the throne then why are you so viciously defending Stannis' right to the throne? 

I'm defending the fact that he was the rightfull heir of Robert, by the laws of Westeros. If you want my honest opinion, nobody in the universe has a right to any throne; Monarchy and feudalism is complete

1 minute ago, Yucef Menaerys said:

Are you calling the targaryens middle class valyrian?  The targaryens were dragonlords who were in turn in the epitome of valyrian society at the highest social pyramid, granted they were not the most powerful family but they were still one of only 40 families that ruled more than half the known world, just like I saw someone on reddit say and I'm paraphrasing "being the weakest dragonlord family was like being the poorest billionaire"

Yes, I realize that. But they were the bottom of the barrel when it comes to dragon lords, and I'm just giving you a hard time.

1 minute ago, Yucef Menaerys said:

At least they held it for 300 hundred years, the Baratheons held it for less, what 18 years? They couldn't keep it for just two decades and now the monarchs are the lannisters......what a shame. 

Indeed.

[Yucef Menaerys]

17 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

I'm defending the fact that he was the rightfull heir of Robert, by the laws of Westeros. If you want my honest opinion, nobody in the universe has a right to any throne; Monarchy and feudalism is complete

Yes, I realize that. But they were the bottom of the barrel when it comes to dragon lords, and I'm just giving you a hard time.

Indeed.

Dragonlords are still dragonlords, doesn't matter that there were houses richer than them and I could even argue that the targs had more magical ability than the other houses in valyria since they were the only ones who had the prophetic vision of the doom.

Indeed? You have nothing more to say? Because you were just berating the targs for holding the throne for just 300 years, and if they  Baratheons had held it for 300 years you'd all be glorifying them for holding on to it as long as they did, you are just looking for any minor excuse to bash house Targaryen and I don't think it's working.

[Darkstream]

43 minutes ago, Yucef Menaerys said:

Dragonlords are still dragonlords, doesn't matter that there were houses richer than them and I could even argue that the targs had more magical ability than the other houses in valyria since they were the only ones who had the prophetic vision of the doom.

Indeed? You have nothing more to say? Because you were just berating the targs for holding the throne for just 300 years, and if they  Baratheons had held it for 300 years you'd all be glorifying them for holding on to it as long as they did, you are just looking for any minor excuse to bash house Targaryen and I don't think it's working.

Ha, defensive much. If in fact that was what I was trying to do, it clearly would be working. And believe me, if that were my desire, I could do a hell of a better job than that.

I told you, I'm just giving you a hard time; I was fucking around with you. You have no idea what my opinions on the Targaryens are, or the Baratheons for that matter. You want to come on this thread and attempt to derail it with the same old, tired, irrelevant argument that that is used to derail dozens of threads, fine, don't cry foul if you get a facetious response.

Fyi, usually when someone replies with 'indeed', that means they are agreeing with you.

And the real reason your precious Targ is not the rightful heir, is because her family lost it by rights of conquest. The same method they used to gain it.