Why do people keep assuming that Stannis will be the big villain of the story?

[frenin]

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

just that he does actually care for his daughter

How can you tell? Because of the attention he gives her?

 

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

He certainly does not treat her the way Tywin treats Tyrion.

Indeed, he simply neglects her.

 

 

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Is there another character Stannis does not want to upset?

Why do you think not wanting to upset someone ->caring -> love? Robert certainly didn't want Cersei upset because she annoyed him to death and that's why he caved in so many times. I would be hard pressed to define that relationship as loving or caring.

 

 

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Is there a character Stannis loves more?

Robert, his parents, Cressen, ¿Melisandre?...

 

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Davos knows this, which is why he uses Shireen to appeal to Stannis' humanity.

Does he? If so he would have used her far more times. 

 

 

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

And when things get desperate, Stannis will sacrifice what he cares about most in his misguided attempt to get what he wants, and that will be Shireen.

Yeah, he will sacrifice what he cares the most... Which is the conyinuation of his line.

 

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

If Stannis doesn't care about her, then it won't be a true sacrifice, according to what he and Mel believe about sacrifice.

Hmmm, Stannis ought to be a sociopath oif he didn't find hard sacrificing his own infant daughter, regardless of whether he actually loves her or not. 

Stannis clearly doesn't give a shit about Edric and he still find it hard to kill the kid.

 

 

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

No one in the books ever attempts to claim Stannis does not love his daughter.

Why would they? Shireen is an afterthought to Stannis.

 

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Stannis might not be a good father in terms of spending time with his daughter, but many houses send their children away as wards and that does not mean those parents do not love their children.

Those houses send their chlldren away to build alliances, which is in turn benefitial for the children themselves.

Stannis leaves her daughter behind because he doesn't want her around him. There's no other rational other than Shireen is a woman and thus Stannis is uncomfortable around him and doesn't want him nearby.

 

 

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

More like he left Selyse at home and thought Shireen was better off with her mother than in a vipers nest like King's Landing.

That's not what Cressen says or implies, Stannis doesn't even interact with her in three books. Where's this caring coming from?

 

 

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Do you think he said it to them when they were alive?  Do you think he said it to them when they were alive? Do you think he would expose a vulnerability like that if they were still around to exploit it? Stannis hides his vulnerability, but Davos knows him well and knows what card to play when trying to persuade his king.

Robert? Absolutely, Renly? No, his resentment and jealousy cosumed him, He also killed Renly and is aware of that.

There's no such barrier with Shireen tho, no jealousy over possesions like Renly, nor resentment over creepy fatherly  brotherly love denied like Robert. No such thing exists where Stannis can't claim to love his daughter. 

 

 

3 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

The public perception is that Stannis and Robert had no love for each other, yet as you say, Stannis now admits that he loved his brother. So Stannis is very capable of loving Shireen in a way that is hard to perceive on the surface but is present in the subtext.

Stannis is the one who makes clear that he loved Robert, he's obsessed with him and he's even more obsessed with the fact that Robert denied him the love and affection he thought he had earned. There's absolutely nothing subtextual about Stannis relationship with his brothers, Stannis is defined by that resentment and petty jealousy and lack of love and he carries those feelings like a bright mark on his forehead. He literally cannot shut up about them.

Hell, Asha didn't know nothing about Stannis relationiship with Robert and she still was capable of figuring him out.

 

Shireen doesn't seem to provoque Stannis any feeling.

 

 

 

27 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

They just paint him as this tyrannical fanatic.

Stannis doesn't personally order people to be burned because of fanatism but he absolutely doesn't punish Melisandre or Selyse when they do so and he allows to happen... Which is.

 

[James Arryn]

41 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

I have to disagree. It is obvious d&d had a bias dislike for stannis. One of the scenes I remember is where lord Florent arrived with some more men to aid stannis (after blackwater). And stannis had him burnt at the stake for refusing to tear down his idols or whatever. We know he was burnt in the books, but in the show it legit dosent say anything about his plot for shireen. Not to forget how he said “he was an infidel” like what is this a crusades or something?
They just paint him as this tyrannical fanatic. 

Meanwhile they whitewash characters like Cersei and Tywin. Which really makes you worry about the state of mind of these producers..

 

Well, first that’s a pretty minor quibble considering that he did burn Guncer Sunglass and the Rambtons* for religious disagreement and imprisoned others. And looked to sacrifice his nephew. And he does [i]burn[/i] people to death for religious reasons. 
 

But compare that with:

*Do you agree they turned him into a MUCH more loving father?

*Do you agree they significantly toned down his whinging?

*In the books when he meets recently widowed Cat, he harangues her for Ned being Hand instead of him and for not being sufficiently dutiful, in the show he just credits Ned…do you agree? How people are shown acting/thinking towards beloved characters is one of the biggest tools they can use to make them more or less sympathetic. 

*Do you agree that Stannis is MUCH more cordial and respectful to Jon in the show than in the books? (See above)

I could go on. 
 

[quote]They even admitted in interviews that they werent big fans of stannis.[/quote]
 

Wasn’t this literally said within the context of their trying to make him more human/sympathetic?

 

*to be fair his clearly fanatic wife does, whom he empowers and does not revoke/rebuke for same.

[The Young Maester]

17 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

Well, first that’s a pretty minor quibble considering that he did burn Guncer Sunglass and the Rambtons for religious disagreement and imprisoned others. And looked to sacrifice his nephew. And he does [i]burn[/i] people to death for religious reasons.

Rambton fought against the kings men (more like the queens men but they are still in service of stannis). Killed a couple which is considered a crime in stannis textbook.

Sunglass retracted his support. Stannis expecting blind obedience and so he threw him in a cell. Stannis did the same thing robb threatened to do to the greatjon. Only difference greatjon retracted his statement and remained loyal.

Not to forget both sunglass and rambton were burnt on the orders of selyse whilst stannis was at the blackwater. So it wasnt under his orders. But the fact no one was punished tells you he didn’t care. Especially since it was a low point in his life since he lost the blackwater and everything looked lost. Hencewhy he also agreed with burning other lords like florent (for treason), and was close to having his own kin killed.

He never did punish davos for spiriting edric. A man like stannis wouldve had davos executed. He dosent tolerate disobedience, but the fact he didnt tells you enough to know he knew killing his own nephew was fucked.

28 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

But compare that with:

*Do you agree they turned him into a MUCH more loving father?

*Do you agree they significantly toned down his whinging?

*In the books when he meets recently widowed Cat, he harangues her for Ned being Hand instead of him and for not being sufficiently dutiful, in the show he just credits Ned…do you agree? How people are shown acting/thinking towards beloved characters is one of the biggest tools they can use to make them more or less sympathetic. 

*Do you agree that Stannis is MUCH more cordial and respectful to Jon in the show than in the books? (See above)

I could go on. 
 

[quote]They even admitted in interviews that they werent big fans of stannis.[/quote]
 

Wasn’t this literally said within the context of their trying to make him more human/sympathetic?

They gave him some good manners and that’s it. Honeyed words are nothing compared to the unjust killings he committed throughout the show.

Firstly the whole killing florent because he was an infidel is fucked up. In season 2 they introduce him as this guy that is clearly lusting after Melisandre. Which already gives the viewers an image that this man is a predator. Follow it up with him burning mance, not because he was a deserter and he deserved to die. No because he refused to bend the knee. Although stannis was justified in killing mance (not burning), in the show stannis never sentenced him for desertion. The producers made it seem as if he did it for his own selfish ambitions.

Than you have him burning his daughter which is arguable whether it will happen. My guess is that selyse burns her at the recommendation of Melisandre. Probably in an attempt to rescue stannis and revive Jon snow. The producers admitted that Martin said shireen dies but they never specify that stannis does the deed. Had Martin said stannis burns her, we wouldve heard them say it during the interview.

Quote

Benioff: I think in a final moment, though, it’s not relief, because she was expecting this monster, and what she finds is Stannis, who has certain monstrous qualities

They call him a monster whilst Tywin gets a pass.

Quote

"Does it worry you to lose your two best villains in the show this season? 

Benioff: Absolutely. 

Weiss: Who’s the second? 

Benioff: Joffrey. 

Weiss: Well, I don’t think Tywin is a villain. 

Benioff: That’s a fair point. If you read the story from the Stark point of view… 

Weiss: …then I guess he would be a villain. 

Benioff: But Tywin isn’t torturing prostitutes for pleasure. He’s not a sadist. He’s ruthless, for sure. But there’s an argument to be made that Westeros needs ruthlessness."

Now I don’t personally think Tywin is a villain. Just a product of his time. In a way is he good a hand for the realm? Yes if you as king can keep him in check.

But back on topic the fact that they call stannis a monster and Tywin just gets a pass is fucked. 

[The Young Maester]

49 minutes ago, frenin said:

Stannis doesn't personally order people to be burned because of fanatism but he absolutely doesn't punish Melisandre or Selyse when they do so and he allows to happen... Which is.

Oh I agree it’s basically the same as doing the deed itself. The martells hate Robert for the very same reason. He wasnt there but he didnt punish the culprits.

But the difference between show and book. Is that stannis only sanctions the burnings of traitors and criminals. Whilst in the show he just goes in some religious bloodthirsty spree.

[frenin]

15 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

In season 2 they introduce him as this guy that is clearly lusting after Melisandre.

In the books Stannis clearly desires Melisandre and is in a relationship with her tho.

 

14 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

But the difference between show and book. Is that stannis only sanctions the burnings of traitors and criminals. Whilst in the show he just goes in some religious bloodthirsty spree.

There's nothing traitorous of rejecting a king who doesn't respect your religion tho, feudal contracts and all that. He was even warned about that.

 

17 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

Than you have him burning his daughter which is arguable whether it will happen.

I have bad news for you.

 

Spoiler

Martin has stated that he told them Stannis was going to burn Shireen.

 

 

[The Young Maester]

8 minutes ago, frenin said:

In the books Stannis clearly desires Melisandre and is in a relationship with her tho.

Yes but in tv show its fucking weird the way it’s done. He seems like a predator and it rubs off wrongly on the viewer.

8 minutes ago, frenin said:

There's nothing traitorous of rejecting a king who doesn't respect your religion tho, feudal contracts and all that. He was even warned about that.

Lord sunglass retracted his support for stannis. In stannis eyes he is an oathbreaker. Dont think a lords oaths include respecting religion. And nonetheless stannis never had him executed. Its likely stannis wouldve postponed any sentencing after he took kings landing.

11 minutes ago, frenin said:

I have bad news for you.

 

Well that’s an interesting premise. Sad it led to nothing and made it meaningless. It’s obvious that Melisandre’s power works (or it might be a deception). Hopefully in the books it will be more rewarding for us readers.

[frenin]

1 hour ago, The Young Maester said:

Yes but in tv show its fucking weird the way it’s done. He seems like a predator and it rubs off wrongly on the viewer.

Eh, the only reason it doesn't rub  you the wrong way is because in the books their relationship is barely hinted. Stannis is canonically a man who is very weird around women and who doesn't get the attention of beautiful women unlike his two brothers. I'd say that they'd actually nailed how Stannis would react. 

 

 

1 hour ago, The Young Maester said:

Lord sunglass retracted his support for stannis.

Because Stannis messed with religion. Which he was warned not to do.

 

 

1 hour ago, The Young Maester said:

Dont think a lords oaths include respecting religion. And nonetheless stannis never had him executed. Its likely stannis wouldve postponed any sentencing after he took kings landing.

Lord's oaths include respecting their traditions and laws tho. Stannis was obviously shitting on his Lords, he knew that but he believed that since no Lord liked him anyway he lost nothing. There's a reason why he behaves more appropriately around the Northmen.

 

 

[The Young Maester]

21 minutes ago, frenin said:

Eh, the only reason it doesn't rub  you the wrong way is because in the books their relationship is barely hinted. Stannis is canonically a man who is very weird around women and who doesn't get the attention of beautiful women unlike his two brothers. I'd say that they'd actually nailed how Stannis would react.

You say they nailed how he acts but this from the same producers that butcher characters at a whim. Not to forget how obsessed they were with all these sex scenes and the rapes.

If anything this just them recreating their weird fantasies.

24 minutes ago, frenin said:

Because Stannis messed with religion. Which he was warned not to do.

Yes he spat on the religion of his forebears. It will likely cause him to lose more support. But sunglass is directly sworn to dragonstone. From what I can see he never forced sunglass nor his knights to convert. Stannis isnt forcing men to worship some fire god. He is insulting them no doubt but it isn’t a crime.

26 minutes ago, frenin said:

Lord's oaths include respecting their traditions and laws tho. Stannis was obviously shitting on his Lords, he knew that but he believed that since no Lord liked him anyway he lost nothing. There's a reason why he behaves more appropriately around the Northmen.

As I said he never broke any of his lords traditions or laws.

He burned the seven statues in Dragonstone. And he IS lord of that island, he can do what he wants with it. If Ned were to tear down the sept, it wouldnt be a crime of traditions and laws since it is his castle to do as he wishes. Manderlys might see it as a slight but they have no grounds to rebel because Ned didnt force them to tear down their own seven statues.

By the time he arrives north he learned his lesson. Try to not do unpopular things, like burning places of worship. This is just a technique to prevent them from defecting.

If stannis we’re to burn the weirwood in winterfell. Most of the lords would be compelled to defect since winterfell isnt his to do as he wishes.

Sunglass shouldve never died like that. But trying to reason he didnt commit treason falls flat. Atleast he was honest about it, and for that stannis had him arrested.

[Jon-Snow]

8 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

Jon betrayed Westeros. Arya joined a cult of homicidal people. Bran is getting darker because he so badly wants to walk. He will be morally compromised because of his disability and his desire to be a whole man.  

Pretty sure Bran will be the ultimate bad guy, I don't really get that vibe from Arya, nor Jon... but interesting nonetheless

[CorlysTheSeaSnake]

So I am have not heard ANYTHING of this ilk  but granted I am not super expert nd havent been on these much or long...could you sum up any of the arguments for this or point me to any?
Because i cannot for the life of me see it- i think he's a great character exactly because he is sooo very grey...

And the thing is while likes of me and you may like him i just can't believe that anyone else either hates or loves him enough for his arc to end up being the ultimate monster?
In fact his LACK of heroism and yet LACK of villainy I think it would be both more of a shock & more emotive if he turned out to be the ultimate vanquisher?? almost actually was the prince who was promised- though maybe I am letting the shows vibe get me there...
Like i say no expert but emotionally I just can't see it- Jamie Jon, Bran, Arya, Tyrion,Brienne, Dany...anyone of  them it would be more of a tragedy or a loss...
I can only think it is as you say- people speculating out of them  not liking Stannis...which makes me much more likely to think he'll  be closer to a hero than a villain & reverse tropes...It sounding more and more convincing he as talisman for good....and JON...i mean if we are going by Night's King legend has that not lind of been foreshadowed???
Holy SHIT...i can't believe i could come up with anything that hasnt been thought of already...but has anyone opined that Jon to have the fate you describe above for stannis

[three-eyed monkey]

16 hours ago, James Arryn said:

It doesn’t work, though. I’m not saying it’s made explicit that he does not care for her, but it is never made explicit that he does in spite of several opportunities. 

Well, the great thing about the books is that there's a lot in the subtext. It's not all out in the open and obvious. However, I do expect there to be a more explicit expression of his love for Shireen in the same novel in which he burns her.

16 hours ago, James Arryn said:

There’s nothing to show that’s true or untrue. I like your idea about the value of sacrifice, but I don’t think we ever see anything to suggest that he loves Shireen and you’d think it would be made explicit if it’s being set up as his great sacrifice.

If Stannis does have to make a great sacrifice, and what he mistakenly believes is a true sacrifice, who do you think his Nissa Nissa will be?

16 hours ago, James Arryn said:

Instead all he ever talks about are his duty and others’ duty to him, how he is perceived, his rights and all the ways he’s been wronged by everyone. That’s literally what he talks about ALL the time. Himself and his grievances. Only Cersei rivals him in terms of constant self-absorption, but to be fair to her we only know that from seeing inside her head via POV, whereas with Stannis it’s is explicit. Can you imagine how his internal POV would read? Which imo suggests what his true sacrifice will ultimately be.

I'd love his POV, but I fully understand why we don't have it. His POV would strip away the perception many people have that he never lies or that he's all about his duty and the law. It would shatter the whole facade he presents to the world, and reveal him as the power hungry player he really is.

16 hours ago, James Arryn said:

What if, instead, the vehicle of sacrificing his daughter to get what he wants ends up sacrificing [i]what he wants itself[/i]. What if it sacrifices his duty, his self-image as a just and dutiful king, the respect of his men, his line and any chance he had to become king? Would that not be an even greater example of conflict within oneself, to sacrifice your desired goal in an effort to achieve it? Instead of thinking ‘I killed my daughter for my rights’…which, btw, Jung would call just 2 manifestations of Stannis’ ego…he will think ‘I have destroyed everything to achieve nothing.’

Well I think Stannis will choose incorrectly and become a villain, so I'm going for the "I have destroyed everything to achieve nothing" ending for Stannis. That's basically my point. Stannis will destroy himself. His shadow will consume him. If he sacrificed his goal for Shireen then it would be a turn towards salvation but I'm saying he will sacrifice Shireen for his goal and it will lead to his destruction.

His shadow is where his deepest desires reside, and for Stannis that is the Iron Throne. The battle between Stannis and his shadow manifests in his struggle between saving the kingdom or winning the throne. Part of Stannis wants to be that true king who puts his duty ahead of his rights, by putting defending the realm ahead of winning the throne. Stannis talks about the true enemy and the Great Other and defending the realm, but as Aemon says, doing the honorable thing is easy when there is nothing at stake. There comes a day when every man must choose, and Stannis is no exception. But deep down, Stannis wants to win the throne, and we know this because his shadow did not kill Renly to save the kingdom.

I'm not saying Stannis will choose correctly when the day comes, I'm saying he will choose incorrectly. Jon and Dany will face the same questions in their arcs and they are the ones who must choose correctly, but first Stannis will demonstrate where choosing incorrectly leads, with both this question and the question of true sacrifice. That is the purpose of his arc in the story.

17 hours ago, James Arryn said:

He wasn’t that vulnerable; he knowingly left Robert alone and unaware with his assassins because he was pissed about Ned and he assassinated Renly.

An expression of love is often considered a moment of vulnerability unless you are certain that the love is going to be reciprocated. But my point is he never expressed his love for his brothers while they lived, yet he admits he loved them. Why wouldn't he love Shireen?

17 hours ago, James Arryn said:

I remember when Stannis killed Shireen on the show the Stanstans went absolutely apeshit about this being more of the show’s agenda/bias against Stannis, about them clearly just trying to ruin his character, etc. but I was not posting when it was confirmed that it’s actually from GRRM. How did they deal with it?

edit: I ask because the Stanstans pretty much ruined Stannis for me. I originally found him interesting and I’m a huge fan of Richard III and even defend King John a bit, 2 Stannis models, but the Stanstans endlessly glossing over all his faults and inflating his virtues (while often including vaguely alt-right/incel commentaries on society) without any new material to drown it out eventually turned him into that song you can’t stand to hear because your co-workers insist on blaring it over and over and over again. 

I personally thought the show humanized Stannis a lot and downplayed his constant whinging to make him more likeable. The Baratheon brother they truly changed for the worse was Renly, though in fairness that rant in the woods did give him more altruistic depth than he showed in the books, but he was otherwise diminished in every way. 

I'm a fan of the character, because of it's depth and complexity. I don't know I'd go as far as saying that I'm a Stanstan. I enjoy the character, but I enjoy most of the characters. I'm certainly not trying to downplay his atrocities or pretend he's got some good in him that will be redeemed. I'm saying he's making bad choices, his darkside is consuming him, he will burn his last shred of humanity on his quest for the throne, and ultimately he will burn in dragonfire. Does that make me a Stanstan? I don't know.

My only problem with show Stannis is that they didn't really do his arc justice because they cut it short and made it sort of pointless. But no different than the High Sparrow, Dorne, the Others, and lots more. I've got no problem with shows changing source material, it's almost inevitable that will happen. As such a different canon is created, but the story on screen has to make sense and have a point, otherwise it's weak and unsatisfying.

 

[three-eyed monkey]

17 hours ago, frenin said:

How can you tell? Because of the attention he gives her?

No, because Davos knows him and plays the Shireen card. It's subtle, not meant to be obvious, but it will make sense when he goes to burn her, that she is the one he cares about most, besides himself of course.

17 hours ago, frenin said:

Indeed, he simply neglects her.

I'm not saying he's a good father.

17 hours ago, frenin said:

Why do you think not wanting to upset someone ->caring -> love? Robert certainly didn't want Cersei upset because she annoyed him to death and that's why he caved in so many times. I would be hard pressed to define that relationship as loving or caring.

The glimpse of humanity can be as simple as an act of kindness. It's called a glimpse for a reason. I don't think not wanting to upset someone equates to love but I think it's common to not want to upset people we love. Stannis has no problem upsetting anyone else. He doesn't care about people's feelings, except on this occasion.

17 hours ago, frenin said:

Robert, his parents, Cressen, ¿Melisandre?...

Robert and his parents and Cressen are dead so he's not going to sacrifice them. Melisandre is a case of lust at best. Davos maybe. But look at these names you give, Robert, his parents, a long-serving member of the house hold. You admit Stannis is capable of love and name family as the likely people he loved. Why would he not love Shireen?

17 hours ago, frenin said:

Does he? If so he would have used her far more times. 

Why bring her up at all if he doesn't? As I said, subtext, read between the lines.

17 hours ago, frenin said:

Stannis leaves her daughter behind because he doesn't want her around him. 

Citation?

17 hours ago, frenin said:

Yeah, he will sacrifice what he cares the most... Which is the conyinuation of his line.

There's more to it than that. Conflict of the human heart. The political implications are secondary to the fact she is his daughter and, despite his inability to show it openly, he loves her. You admit he's capable of loving family, so why not? Far more powerful storytelling, and GRRM is good at making powerful storytelling choices in my opinion.

17 hours ago, frenin said:

That's not what Cressen says or implies, Stannis doesn't even interact with her in three books. Where's this caring coming from?

Father loves daughter is hardly an uncommon idea.

17 hours ago, frenin said:

Robert? Absolutely, Renly? No, his resentment and jealousy cosumed him, He also killed Renly and is aware of that.

His shadow killed Renly. Conscious Stannis doesn't fully understand what his shadow was. He was sleeping, and when he woke his hands were clean. But the progression here is that he will be fully conscious and aware when he murders Shireen for the same reason, to win the throne. That's because his shadow is taking over, more and more with everyone he burns along the way.

I doubt Stannis expressed much love for Robert while he was alive.

17 hours ago, frenin said:

There's no such barrier with Shireen tho, no jealousy over possesions like Renly, nor resentment over creepy fatherly  brotherly love denied like Robert. No such thing exists where Stannis can't claim to love his daughter. 

I don't get any sense from Shireen that her father doesn't love her.

17 hours ago, frenin said:

Stannis is the one who makes clear that he loved Robert, he's obsessed with him and he's even more obsessed with the fact that Robert denied him the love and affection he thought he had earned. There's absolutely nothing subtextual about Stannis relationship with his brothers, Stannis is defined by that resentment and petty jealousy and lack of love and he carries those feelings like a bright mark on his forehead. He literally cannot shut up about them.

Yes I agree. He wants to emerge from Robert's shadow, where he can cast a shadow of his own. What's that got to do with the fact that he loves his daughter?

[frenin]

14 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

You say they nailed how he acts but this from the same producers that butcher characters at a whim. Not to forget how obsessed they were with all these sex scenes and the rapes.

If anything this just them recreating their weird fantasies.

A person who's acknward around other should act ackward around others. One of Stannis's major traits is his extreme discomfort around women. I don't really expect Stannis's facing his sexual desires as anything other than extremely awkward.

 

14 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

Yes he spat on the religion of his forebears. It will likely cause him to lose more support. But sunglass is directly sworn to dragonstone. From what I can see he never forced sunglass nor his knights to convert. Stannis isnt forcing men to worship some fire god. He is insulting them no doubt but it isn’t a crime.

He didn't force them to convert, he just insulted their gods in a middle age setting.

 

48 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

No, because Davos knows him and plays the Shireen card. It's subtle, not meant to be obvious, but it will make sense when he goes to burn her, that she is the one he cares about most, besides himself of course.

• Davos playing that card can mean multiple things at once, you're simply choosing one of them and refusing to entertain any other possibility.
• Stannis caring about his daughter should be meant to be obvious.
• Why is she the one he cares about the most? See, this is the type of questions one vaguely phrased sentence do not answer.

 

54 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I'm not saying he's a good father.

You can care for someone and still being a bad parent. Stannis is a bad parent and he neglects his child. That's the opposite of caring.

 

 

56 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

The glimpse of humanity can be as simple as an act of kindness. It's called a glimpse for a reason. I don't think not wanting to upset someone equates to love but I think it's common to not want to upset people we love. Stannis has no problem upsetting anyone else. He doesn't care about people's feelings, except on this occasion.

He doesn't care about his daughter's feelings either, he was still going to burn Edric. 

You do not need to love someone to not want to upset someone. I do not need to love my boss to not want her upset. It's a bizarre rationalization.

 

 

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Robert and his parents and Cressen are dead so he's not going to sacrifice them. Melisandre is a case of lust at best. Davos maybe. But look at these names you give, Robert, his parents, a long-serving member of the house hold. You admit Stannis is capable of love and name family as the likely people he loved. Why would he not love Shireen?

 

I'm no talking about people he loved enough to sacrifice, nor do i think he needs to love his daughter to sacrifice her.

I know Stannis loves those three because Stannis says and displays affection, said affection is simply not displayed. Show Stannis didn't give a shit about any of his brothers or parents or Cressen (¿was there a Cressen in Got? Can't remember) but he proved time after time that he cared and loved his daughter.

So far we can tell, Stannis only sees his daughter as the continuation of his line and his line's bid for the throne. Maybe Stannis does prove that he loves his daughter in the future but that's not a conclusion we can take out of the books we material we have.

 

 

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Why bring her up at all if he doesn't? As I said, subtext, read between the lines.

Because he doesn't want to see her upset. Now, does Robert loves Cersei?

One of the things woith reading between the lines is that we ended up reading what we want to read.

 

 

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Citation?

 

Quote

Stannis had always been uncomfortable around women, even his own wife. When he had gone to King’s Landing to sit on Robert’s council, he had left Selyse on Dragonstone with their daughter. His letters had been few, his visits fewer;

 

That and the fact that Stannis is literally never around his daughter for three straight books. Maybe his allergic to greyscale or something.

 

 

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

There's more to it than that. Conflict of the human heart. The political implications are secondary to the fact she is his daughter and, despite his inability to show it openly, he loves her. You admit he's capable of loving family, so why not? Far more powerful storytelling, and GRRM is good at making powerful storytelling choices in my opinion.

Then he should show it openly, Stannis has no inability to show he loves his daughter, he doesn't show it because he simply doesn't. And Martin is good at storytelling but basing Stannis's ultimate fall to disgrace in 

 

Quote

Davos persisted. "Your daughter takes her lessons with him, and plays with him every day in Aegon's Garden."

"I know that."

"Her heart would break if anything ill should—"

"I know that as well."

And that's it, no further additions is just bullshit.

When Stannis burns his daughter however, his facade will crumble irreversibly, that's enough drama on itself.

 

 

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Father loves daughter is hardly an uncommon idea.

 

When father and daughter are in the same place for three books but they never interact is in fact very uncommon.

 

 

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

His shadow killed Renly. Conscious Stannis doesn't fully understand what his shadow was. He was sleeping, and when he woke his hands were clean. But the progression here is that he will be fully conscious and aware when he murders Shireen for the same reason, to win the throne. That's because his shadow is taking over, more and more with everyone he burns along the way.

I doubt Stannis expressed much love for Robert while he was alive.

Eh, potato tomato to me. And Stannis didn'tt express love for Robert alive/ or dead tbf, he always expressed resentment over the fact that Robert didn't love him back and chose Ned as brother instead.

 

 

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I don't get any sense from Shireen that her father doesn't love her.

Shireen seems to think or talk about her father as much as her father thinks or talk about her.

 

 

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

What's that got to do with the fact that he loves his daughter?

There's absolutely nothing preventing Stannis from showing or displaying affection towards his daughter. .. Nothing but the fact that he might not actually feel that affection that is.

[Lord Lannister]

On 4/4/2022 at 6:55 AM, chrisdaw said:

I gave you quotes of how the text is framing Stannis. Do you have an example of the text framing Dany as something comparable to the most terrifying creature on earth?

The text is there if you want to look it up. I spend most of my time on mobile and I'm not here to write my dissertation with properly cited sources to get my PhD in nerddom from the University of Reddit. 

Dany has no problem burning people alive, subjectively punishing people at random via the same methods she punishes them for and so on. To say nothing of she's quite literally the mother of the most terrifying creatures on earth. 

She has just as much going against her narratively as a villain as Stannis easily. But typically is looked upon more favorably among the fans. It comes down to likability I think, which was my original point. She's the hot dragon queen so her dirt is more likely to be swept under the rug than Stannis.

[three-eyed monkey]

2 hours ago, frenin said:

Davos playing that card can mean multiple things at once, you're simply choosing one of them and refusing to entertain any other possibility.

I agree it means multiple things at once, one of which is that Davos knows Shireen's happiness means something to Stannis. It's the same when you base your claim that all Stannis truly cares about is the continuation of his line on what Stannis said to Massey, to seat Shireen on the throne. That could be because all he cares about is the continuation of his line. It could also want it for Shireen, as she is his daughter. I suggest it's both. You are the one refusing to entertain any other possibility.

2 hours ago, frenin said:

Stannis caring about his daughter should be meant to be obvious.

It's a glimpse of his humanity. It's meant to be subtle.

You are suggesting all Stannis cares about is the continuation of his line and that will be his Nissa Nissa. Then by the same measure, shouldn't it be obvious that's all Stannis cares about?

2 hours ago, frenin said:

Why is she the one he cares about the most? See, this is the type of questions one vaguely phrased sentence do not answer.

Because he is her father. Because she is his only daughter, his own blood. Why would he care about Mel more? Or Davos? Or any other character? Even by your own metric, when you say that what Stannis cares about most is the continuation of his line, then he should care more about Shireen than anyone else.

3 hours ago, frenin said:

You can care for someone and still being a bad parent. Stannis is a bad parent and he neglects his child. That's the opposite of caring.

He doesn't neglect her. He just doesn't spend time with her by modern fatherhood standards, but that's not so unusual in a medieval setting. He's no more neglecting Shireen than Davos is neglecting his own wife and youngest children, whom he left at home. Do you think Davos doesn't care about his children?

3 hours ago, frenin said:

Because he doesn't want to see her upset.

Davos doesn't want to see her upset, and he knows that neither would Stannis.

3 hours ago, frenin said:

 

Quote

Davos persisted. "Your daughter takes her lessons with him, and plays with him every day in Aegon's Garden."

"I know that."

"Her heart would break if anything ill should—"

"I know that as well."

And that's it, no further additions is just bullshit.

Stannis cuts Davos off abruptly when Davos mentions Shireen's heart breaking. He doesn't want to hear it. And he knows it already. He has already considered how it might impact his daughter, which is not something he would consider if he didn't care about her. It's a chink in the stone facade, a glimpse of his humanity. That's how I read that passage. You're suggesting that any addition to the words on the page is just bullshit, but if that's the case then all subtext is bullshit, and I strongly disagree with that.

3 hours ago, frenin said:

 

Quote

Stannis had always been uncomfortable around women, even his own wife. When he had gone to King’s Landing to sit on Robert’s council, he had left Selyse on Dragonstone with their daughter. His letters had been few, his visits fewer;

 

That and the fact that Stannis is literally never around his daughter for three straight books. Maybe his allergic to greyscale or something.

No one is disputing that he left Selyse and Shireen on Dragonstone. You said, in bold text, that he did that because he didn't want to be around Shireen. I said more like he didn't want to be around Selyse and left his daughter with her mother on Dragonstone rather than bring her to King's Landing, where she could potentially be at risk. If anything the quote you provide supports my case.

3 hours ago, frenin said:

Then he should show it openly, Stannis has no inability to show he loves his daughter, he doesn't show it because he simply doesn't.

I think Stannis is quite stunted emotionally, so I think he probably does have barriers to showing it openly, but like I say there is a glimpse. But I accept that you think it's bullshit.

3 hours ago, frenin said:

Eh, potato tomato to me. And Stannis didn'tt express love for Robert alive/ or dead tbf, he always expressed resentment over the fact that Robert didn't love him back and chose Ned as brother instead.

Yeah he did resent both Robert and Renly for different reasons, but I still think he did have some form of natural brotherly love for them as he claims.

3 hours ago, frenin said:

Shireen seems to think or talk about her father as much as her father thinks or talk about her.

Well we know Stannis considered how burning Edric might break her heart, so we know he does think about her. But my point was there is no suggestion from Shireen that she is the victim of neglect or holds any resentment towards her father, even though he's busy elsewhere.

4 hours ago, frenin said:

There's absolutely nothing preventing Stannis from showing or displaying affection towards his daughter. .. Nothing but the fact that he might not actually feel that affection that is.

We can go around on this but I don't think we'll agree on this particular point.

However, I do think we agree on some things here. It seems we both agree that Stannis will sacrifice Shireen. And whether we think he loves her or not, the point is that sacrificing another, no matter how hard that may be, is no true sacrifice because the only true sacrifice is self-sacrifice. Do we agree on that much?

 

In relation to the OP, my point is that Stannis is a character who could have made some different choices, like forgetting about the throne and genuinely defending the realm, which would have set him on a heroic path. Instead his bad choices, culminating in the burning of his own daughter, will make him a villainous character. As GRRM says, everyone has the potential to do good or bad things, it comes down to the choices we make.

I don't think Stannis will be the big villain of the story. In fact I would say he falls victim of the big villain in the story, which in my opinion is the darkside of man, as represented by the shadow. Stannis is a character who will lose, in fact sacrifice, his humanity on his quest to gain his deepest desire and it will only lead to his destruction, in contrast to the characters who will restore or preserve their humanity when resolving their arcs and prevail.

[chrisdaw]

8 hours ago, Lord Lannister said:

The text is there if you want to look it up.

I don't agree that the text positions Dany in a comparable way to Stannis as the most terrifying creature in existence. The hardest I would suggest the text goes at Dany (and I do look a lot and hard) is "monster" and that's in her inner POV voice. Most other moralistic judgements of Dany are given with a wink, be they laced with comedy because we know them to be nonsense (bathes in the blood of virgins) or because they come from ethically compromised slavers. There is no effort to portray Dany as merciless like there is Stannis, and the importance of mercy and the evils of being merciless is clearly a major theme (Stoneheart, Arya, the Mother, Sandor) within the text.

The text doesn't make the case that Dany is the most terrifying creature on earth, you have to reach for it here and there and piece together that case yourself. The text does state plainly that Stannis is the most terrifying creature on earth, that's why I can simply quote the text at you when you try and imply it's in our heads.

[three-eyed monkey]

21 hours ago, Lord Lannister said:

I'm not here to write my dissertation with properly cited sources to get my PhD in nerddom from the University of Reddit. 

With 6.5k posts your PhD in nerddom has already been secured.

21 hours ago, Lord Lannister said:

Dany has no problem burning people alive, subjectively punishing people at random via the same methods she punishes them for and so on. To say nothing of she's quite literally the mother of the most terrifying creatures on earth. 

She has just as much going against her narratively as a villain as Stannis easily. But typically is looked upon more favorably among the fans. It comes down to likability I think, which was my original point. She's the hot dragon queen so her dirt is more likely to be swept under the rug than Stannis.

I agree that there are huge parallels between Dany and Stannis.

To begin with they have similar goals. They both want the Iron Throne. Dany set out to remove the Usurper and his dogs, who had stolen the throne, and restore justice to the realm from her Targaryen perspective. Stannis set out to remove the Lannister usurper born of incest who stole what he perceives to be his throne, scour the court clean of the likes of Varys and Littlefinger, and restore justice to the realm.  They both want to be a better ruler than Robert.

The same question then arises for both. What will they pay to get what they want? The price of the Iron Throne is measured in the lives of innocent children. This theme began when Elia's kids were laid out at the foot of Robert's throne. For Dany it continued with Rhaego, then when she acquired the Unsullied, knowing that each spear in their phalanx represented a dead child (and a strangled puppy). But she needed an army. Then there was the children nailed to the mileposts as she approached Yunkai, and there were the charred bones brought to her throne room in Meereen. Meanwhile, Stannis is contemplating if he would burn one innocent child to save a million, thinking about burning Edric, and of course will eventually burn his own child.

Jon, who generally has a good sense of right and wrong as instilled by Ned, tells us that only a monster would kill a child, something Ned also told Robert when he was contemplating sending assassins after Dany. That's something that I'm sure we'd all agree on, so I would say that both are monsters, at least by that definition.

The reason many readers are more likely to be forgiving towards Dany is because we see more of her humanity. It is the humanity of any character that allows us to relate and like or forgive that character. A character without humanity is beyond redemption, and we like redemption stories. That's why anti-heroes are given a glimpse of humanity, so there is still some hope of redemption, a last glowing ember of hope for the character. However, with Dany we get a lot more than a glimpse of her humanity, so we are far more forgiving.

Just look at how the arrival of Jaime's pov affected the readers perception of his character. That's because we started to see his humanity. We learned what he thought about killing Aerys, Aerys raping Rhaella, the murders of Rickard and Brandon, and began to see he has good in him. The smug asshole who pushed yet another child from a tower because of the game of thrones, which makes him a monster too, was suddenly on a redemption arc.

14 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

The text doesn't make the case that Dany is the most terrifying creature on earth, you have to reach for it here and there and piece together that case yourself. The text does state plainly that Stannis is the most terrifying creature on earth, that's why I can simply quote the text at you when you try and imply it's in our heads.

I have a different take on that.

While Varys says that about Stannis, it's his opinion, just as Dany considering herself a monster is her opinion. The text makes the case for there being nothing so terrifying than a truly just man, or simply true justice. That's because the game of thrones is so corrupt. The kings competing for the throne are false kings, who put their rights before their duty, and the realm bleeds as a result. A truly just man represents a true king, who puts his duty to the realm ahead of his rights as king, and brings true justice to the Seven Kingdoms, allowing it to begin to heal. Of course this scenario would be terrifying for the likes of Varys, Littlefinger, Cersei and other players who would have to answer for their multitude of crimes if true justice was ever to prevail in Westeros.

Stannis is terrifying and we see him doing terrible things, but he is not a truly just man, despite the image he tries to portray and even believes to some extent. His choices and actions will prove this before his arc ends. However, I think GRRM is using Varys to point us towards Stannis for a reason. Because there we are frequently reminded of the phrase, "the night is dark and full of terrors." The night in question is obviously the Long Night, and the terrors are the Others.

This suggests to me that the Others are the force that will bring true justice to the realm, albeit in a brutal and harsh manner that only the truly just characters will survive. Those truly just characters will prevail under the true king and/or queen, which is someone who puts saving the realm ahead of winning the throne. This way, the game of thrones strand of the story and the Others strand of the story can be resolved together, as they should be.

[Lord Lannister]

7 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

With 6.5k posts your PhD in nerddom has already been secured.

Could be, lol! Think that's just more I've been here awhile by this point. Still if my passionate hobby into nerddom warrants a PhD I definitely minored in being lazy then. But we all have our quirks in how we express our fun!

You make an excellent point on Jaime. I despised him to the point I groaned when I saw his first POV chapter. Yet once we actually got into his head he grew into my favorite character. Stannis comparisons could be similar and we never actually get to see his humanity outside of a few moments with Davos. 

And yeah, the double bladed sword about character viewpoints is they can't always be taken as fact. Especially when the author talks about unreliable narrators. (Though I half wonder if that's a smokescreen for continuity errors). Different characters are going to focus on different aspects and events. Varys is definitely going to have a negative viewpoint of Stannis due to his fear of magic and Stannis being inflexible about the corrupt environment Varys thrived in.

I'd love a Stannis POV to see who he really is inside. 

 

[chrisdaw]

7 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I have a different take on that.

I disagree. It's rather simple as the text gives it to us plain, unrelenting justice is mercilessness is Stannis of which the text is very concerned with rejecting.

[three-eyed monkey]

10 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

I disagree. It's rather simple as the text gives it to us plain, unrelenting justice is mercilessness is Stannis of which the text is very concerned with rejecting.

Justice is the concept that everyone gets what they deserve. Stannis certainly starts out with his version of that concept. He says the good should not wash out the bad, nor the bad the good. He demonstrates this, rewarding Davos for his heroics at Storm's End, yet still punishing him for being a smuggler. Davos got what he deserved for being a hero and he got what he deserved for being a criminal, so justice was served according to Stannis.

However, as Stannis progresses we get to burning people alive as the preferred form of punishment, an extremely inhumane form of death and a punishment that is really disproportionate to many of the crimes being punished. We can see the scales of justice becoming unbalanced and by the time we get to Stannis burning an innocent child, he will be contradicting the concept that everyone gets what they deserve, because innocent children clearly do not deserve to burn alive.

Stannis is merciless, and I agree that is a quality the text clearly rejects, but he is not a truly just man. I'm not sure what you mean by unrelenting justice. To me that means prevailing until such time that Westeros is a place where justice reigns and everyone gets what they deserve. I don't see how that equates to mercilessness because some people might deserve mercy. As Ned says, if you can't look him in the eye and hear his last words then perhaps he does not deserve to die. An unrelentingly just society would aspire to giving people a fair hearing, to ensure that innocent people are not being punished and the guilty are. As well as ensuring that the punishment is not disproportionate to the crime. That's not Stannis.