Jump to content

Archived

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

Stannis Iron Baratheon

[Book Spoilers] Stannis

Recommended Posts

the same Kevan who was cool with setting the Hound, the Brave Companions, and Ser Armory out on the peasants to rape, pillage, and burn all of their food?

I can see how Kevan shouldn't have been so passive towards Tywin's excesses, but do we know that he "was cool" with that?

Tyrion is pretty honorable.

Look, I'm fond of Tyrion, but honorable isn't a word very well suited to him.

Renly has no claim on the throne other than his number of allies.

Yep.

I can't take you seriously on the whole Theon and Stanins being remarkably similar.

But they are; both live in that unconfortable region where they see the pomp and circunstance of highborn heirs from up close, yet keep being reminded that they are not supposed to be such heirs. And they so resent that.

Stannis was lucky enough to be favored by his family to a far greater extent than Theon. Other than that, their psychological resemblance is uncanny.

Because Stannis used a Shadow assassain?

That was the first inequivocal sign, yes.

what other King went north to protect their realm?

No one yet.

Not coincidentally, no other self-proclaimed King saw the North as his best best towards actually attaining a throne, either.

One should consider that Stannis is being anything but altruistic in his northern campaign.

If anything, he has regressed, taking the Night's Watch resources for himself and even pointing out in a letter to Jon that he will only spare the Highborn in Deepwood Motte. He is in a bid for power, not a campaign for justice.

Stannis is fighting a holy war against the Other as well as claiming the throne which is his by all rights and customs.

That is his propaganda, for sure. The truth is somewhat less endearing.

we can tit for tat on Thoen v Stannis' honor all day and you'll lose that one.

It may well be. Odds are that it will take all day, however. And then it comes to a coin toss, or rather to some very arbitrary calls.

Please remember, that I said Stannis' honor is overrated, he's just more honorable that all these guys- ESPECIALLY Theon. Can you see Stannis threatening to hang Ser Rodrick's daughter?

Why yes, I can. Rather easily in fact.

He did slay Renly in a very treacherous way, after all. And then there is Courtney Penrose, and he almost sacrificed Edric Storm. And he did not hesitate to kill Mance Rayder either, or the smallfolk at Deepwood Motte. For that matter, he is risking his own supporters rather recklessly on his way to Winterfell.

The Greyjoy's are not honorable on GP alone. What they do, taking from people weaker than them isn't honorable.

Victarion is fairly honorable, as is Theon when one allows for the extreme alienation that he has been through.

So explain what that has to do with making it an honorable claim? Sure it can be a claim, nothing to do with honor.

Certainly nothing makes a claim more honorable than actually being wanted as a King?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so that has what to do with honor again (since that's what spawned the conversation....or are you ignorig that again to suit your opinions?

Is it?

Having support makes one's claim honorable (note that the same applies to Robb, incidentally), while just being the one pointed by the law doesn't really.

Particularly in Stannis' case, since he doesn't even have proof for his claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just watched the Inside the episode on youtube .... and I am crushed!! :( Dan Weiss thinks Stannis would make a horrible king, and as far as I see it, he hates the character.... Very bad news for the future :(, especially when the changes to the book are bigger and bigger :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stannis grows into a very understandable character. Certainly not likeable, but you get why he is how he is and what is sort of going on in his head. He has become one of my favorite. The show's Stannis is not the same guy. Where GRRM's writing makes a real character, this actor shows that he is just an actor. Dinklage is Tyrion because he conveys the character so well. Bean was Ned. Dillane is not Stannis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stannis grows into a very understandable character. Certainly not likeable, but you get why he is how he is and what is sort of going on in his head. He has become one of my favorite. The show's Stannis is not the same guy. Where GRRM's writing makes a real character, this actor shows that he is just an actor. Dinklage is Tyrion because he conveys the character so well. Bean was Ned. Dillane is not Stannis.

I agree 100% though much of the problem is also the writing. In the book A Clash of Kings, Stannis's feelings and motives are well documented. We know why he is the way he is and why he is taking the action

1. He saw his parents destroyed in a horrific shipwreck right outside of his own castle: "I stopped believing in gods the day I saw the Windproud break up across the bay. Any gods so monstrous to drown my mother and father would never have my worship, I vowed." (ACOK 172)

2. He felt slighted by Robert for a number of reasons. The first was his love for Stark and lack of appreciation for Stannis, despite all he did. He thanked Stark for breaking the siege, not Stannis for holding the castle. He blames Stannis for allowing Viserys to escape from Dragonstone. He is mad that he named Ned Stark hand of the king.

3. He wanted Storm's End, his ancestral home. He held it for over a year under siege. Sure he also took Dragonstone from the Targaryens, but what he wanted was Storm's End: "I never asked for Dragonstone. I never wanted it...Storm's End belong to House Baratheon for three hundred years; by rights it should have passed to e when Robert took the Iron Throne." (ACOK 24)

I also don't like that they made it so Ned told Stannis about Joffrey's true parentage. He already knew, he found out with Jon Arryn and when he died he left. Its like they are making Stannis to be less than he should be to make Ned seem more heroic or something, when in fact it was Stannis who even brought his theory to Lord Arryn.

I know the show is super complicated and there are so many characters- too many really for 10 hours- but I think giving Stannis a proper introduction and back story would have really served the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never got why people thought Stannis was honourable. He's just, which is completely different. For him, there is a definite right and wrong way for an event to occur, Robert's sucession being the most obvious example. The right way is for the throne to pass to his eldest sibling (himself). However, even if Joffrey had been Robert's trueborn son, he still would've fought for him regardless of his sadism, as it was just that he had gained the throne that way.

EDIT: Am I the only person that sees Stannis as being deontological in his approach to things, with Renly being more utilitarian?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stannis grows into a very understandable character. Certainly not likeable, but you get why he is how he is and what is sort of going on in his head. He has become one of my favorite. The show's Stannis is not the same guy. Where GRRM's writing makes a real character, this actor shows that he is just an actor. Dinklage is Tyrion because he conveys the character so well. Bean was Ned. Dillane is not Stannis.

I agree, but I blame that far more on the writing. Clash is Stannis' novel -- there is no other way to explain it. The entire story of Westeros rests on his shoulders and march toward King's Landing and, of course, the effect of his siege.

Although we have six episodes to go, it's still worrying that I feel nothing for Stannis, Davos and Melisandre. I barely know them. I believe that Stephen Dilane is a terrific actor with the tools to actually portray Stannis effectively. The writing? Not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, but I blame that far more on the writing. Clash is Stannis' novel -- there is no other way to explain it. The entire story of Westeros rests on his shoulders and march toward King's Landing and, of course, the effect of his siege.

Although we have six episodes to go, it's still worrying that I feel nothing for Stannis, Davos and Melisandre. I barely know them. I believe that Stephen Dilane is a terrific actor with the tools to actually portray Stannis effectively. The writing? Not so much.

This is what really bothers me. The writing. In my post above I talked about how in the book we know so much about Stannis' past and how the death of his parents, constant slights at the hands of his brother, lack of loyalty from the stormlords- even his own grandfather goes against him at first while all of his wife's family does as well minus ser axell. In the show we get NONE of this.

The other thing is how Stannis invicts fear upon all the other characters. Catelyn knows he will not break, Tyrion and Cersei are both terrified, even Varys is a little bit. The presence of Stannis in the book goes far beyond his screen time. He is present even when he is hundreds of miles away, yet this show makes him almost unimportant. Tyrion has barely mentioned him (if at all) since the letter about Joff's death. Everything in the novel is very much dictated by Stannis' actions, not feeling that at all in this show

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the same Kevan who was cool with setting the Hound, the Brave Companions, and Ser Armory out on the peasants to rape, pillage, and burn all of their food?

That was Gregor and his lovely gang, not the Hound btw. And Tywin did so to get Eddard in the field, but Ned sent Beric Dondarrion instead.

Which btw would never had happened, had LF not inflamed the Stark - Lannister conflict, which made Cat abduct Tyrion.

Kevan may be a slightly milder version of Tywin, that doesn't make him perfect or flawless in any way. He was basically Tywin's Yes man at his side.

I just watched the Inside the episode on youtube .... and I am crushed!! :( Dan Weiss thinks Stannis would make a horrible king, and as far as I see it, he hates the character.... Very bad news for the future :(, especially when the changes to the book are bigger and bigger :(

Stannis' characer growth happens over several books though. In ACOK he is definitely more of a villain, and his only redeeming quality is Davos Seaworth. Stannis *would* make a horrible king, he is as unbening and brittle as iron. As much as I have come around to like Stannis, it's not because of him being an amazing king, it's because of his very flawed and interesting character, and his great bromance with Jon Snow. Even in ADWD, he is wholly on what the reader would call "the side of good", if we think of the Starks and Dany as unequivocally forces for "good".

The other thing is how Stannis invicts fear upon all the other characters. Catelyn knows he will not break, Tyrion and Cersei are both terrified, even Varys is a little bit. The presence of Stannis in the book goes far beyond his screen time. He is present even when he is hundreds of miles away, yet this show makes him almost unimportant. Tyrion has barely mentioned him (if at all) since the letter about Joff's death. Everything in the novel is very much dictated by Stannis' actions, not feeling that at all in this show

It probably makes more sense to go into that bit of exposition once Renly is dead since otherwise it will muddy the water for the TV viewers. Currently the conflict is Stannis/Renly, but once that has played out, it's time for Stannis/Kings Landing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They had better do Stannis justice

I agree, but I blame that far more on the writing. Clash is Stannis' novel -- there is no other way to explain it. The entire story of Westeros rests on his shoulders and march toward King's Landing and, of course, the effect of his siege.

Although we have six episodes to go, it's still worrying that I feel nothing for Stannis, Davos and Melisandre. I barely know them. I believe that Stephen Dilane is a terrific actor with the tools to actually portray Stannis effectively. The writing? Not so much.

Yeah, if I was a person just watching the show, I wouldn't really give a flying fuck about any of them. The introduction was poorly done - Stannis/Mel basically completely overshadows (ha ha) the character and his personality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree they are not fleshing Stannis out enough and I worry about the Battle of Blackwater. In the book I was torn between factions, I wanted Stannis to win and take KL from the Lannisters but wanted Tyrion to succeed in defending it. When the battle comes around all anyone's going to care about is Tyrion winning.

I said in another thread I think rather than the recap of everyone we got in episode 1 the bulk of it should have been introducing Stannis & his cause, really fleshing out the character like Ned & Jon were in AGOT.

This series should be devoted to Stannis, Tyrion and Arya. The rest are mainly backstories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I re-read the prologue of ACOK to compare and I do not understand why they didn't devote more time to doing the season intro like the book. It just introduces Stannis, Davos, and Mel way too perfectly while capturing the core of each character--Stannis suffering continuous slights and pains, Davos giving up his fingers for his knighthood and thanking Stannis, Melisandre's devotion to the Red God and the malevolent feeling she emits. The TV show instead decided to include a long scene of Joff ordering the killing of the bastards (which Cersei actually did) and featured Ros with some of the most screen time.

I think I have isolated the thing I hate most about the TV Stannis: control. Book Stannis feels the need to be in control of what is happening. He depends on Davos because he knows he can. But with the Mel sex scene, he would not let her off the hook after Renly dies, assuming he didn't know the consequences of the sex (shadow baby), as the show made it out to be. If Mel manipulated him and he found out, she'd be on a real short leash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EDIT: Am I the only person that sees Stannis as being deontological in his approach to things, with Renly being more utilitarian?

Sort of. Stannis claims to be deontological, but falls short. Ned would be a far better example.

Renly, however, is indeed utilitarian in posture. One more reason why he is so much better than his brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the shadowbaby and his conversation with Davos (yeah you saved me but you were still a smuggler) should have helped establish him a bit better. And the grammar nazi bit was fantastic too.

I swear I had thought they had ad libbed that!

I think it was written in, since Davos is illiterate and lower than low born (of course a very intelligent man), that was pretty subtle teleplay stuff, sure went over most peoples heads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He definitely seemed more like the Stannis I know. It also seemed like he was aware of exactly what was going to happen with the shadowbaby.

I thought that was an improvement on George who leaves it vague in the novel.

But reading between the lines and knowing his hopeless position he had to know what was happening.

When in the novel it happens again, ..., I could see what was going on. I am sure the 2nd shadow baby won't be done, it should have not appeared in the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dillane is doing a great job as Stannis.The viewers don't like him because they are not meant to.

They weren't in the books either.

In fact no one has a good word to say about him until the gift chapter.

Likeable no,plausible yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem is that D&D are trying to force book 5 Stannis to become book 1 Stannis. Basically, they know where the character/story is going and they are trying to create one static character. Not a character that grows/changes throughout the books(difficult with no internal PoVs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem is that D&D are trying to force book 5 Stannis to become book 1 Stannis. Basically, they know where the character/story is going and they are trying to create one static character. Not a character that grows/changes throughout the books(difficult with no internal PoVs).

I think the same about Dany. She has too much fire right now and not enough of the little girl who was not ready to rule yet. They've made her the ruler she is in ADWD, and ignored how she matures into the role.

Dillane is doing a great job as Stannis.The viewers don't like him because they are not meant to.

They weren't in the books either.

In fact no one has a good word to say about him until the gift chapter.

Likeable no,plausible yes.

I disagree. I re-read the prologue just to make sure that I was not doing something like that. They are different people. The mood you get off of them is just different completely. Stannis in the show seems to desire the throne and does not stand out from the other Kings. Stannis in the book did not want the throne, but it was his so he believed he must take it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the same about Dany. She has too much fire right now and not enough of the little girl who was not ready to rule yet. They've made her the ruler she is in ADWD, and ignored how she matures into the role.

I thought the opposite. I thought she was very immature in Quarthe scene, and from the scene in the preview for the next episode where she goes wide eyest it looks like they are definitely going to play up the but I am just a young girl angle. One thing I think they should have done is have XXD meet Dany in the waste in the prior scene where she had met with the rider. Would have given the writers a much easier time with exposition and could have added some intrigue to both scenes. For instance XXD could drop some expostion as well as tells Dany to do something to get her in Quarth, but she ignores him in the next scene as she is oft to do, and then they could let the rest of the scene play out as it did with Sumai. I think that would have been less akward and his reaction instead of being "that wierd" being more "hmm he really wants something from her"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×