[Book Spoilers] Stannis the Mannis

[Harrad]

Hail King Stannis! Our king of the Seven Kingdoms and the rightful heir to the throne!

You mean because his brother rebelled and usurped the throne fair and square, it goes to Stannis on succession. How about Dany, the heir of the King that Robert unlawfully rebelled against. How about the heirs of the kings that Aegon the Conqueror unlawfully dethroned? Rightful heir? It is too laugh.

[Kobayashi Maru]

I love Stanis more and more with each page but I don't want him to be a king.He killed his brother IMO it's just to much.I am no Renly

fan,to me he's just..meh,but I don't think a man who is ready to kill his blood to become a king is the one who deserves it.

BTW in this episode Stanis was perfect.What a bad ass.Loved him on the wall fighting in the first lines.They had to drag him out of the battle.

:bowdown:

[Sorlain]

Arguing about succession in a series, with a central theme of promotion and rise based on merit rather than blood strikes me as a bit pointless. As stated above, Aegon wasn't a lawful king, he just set fire to everyone who would tell him otherwise. The Mad King -was- the rightful king, but his actions showed plainly that he wasn't fit to rule and Robert took over. How many of the kings in the War of the Five Kings had any claim to the throne? Joffrey and Stannis and that's about it, with the former being a spoiled, cruel child in the books and even worse in the show.

[StarkWard]

I loved how they had to drag Stannis away while he was shouting "stand and fight". that was one of the episodes best scenes

You forgot the profanity in the end. "Stand and fight, damn ye!"

Word!

[DurararaFTW]

Except that Renly thought that Stannis too was just trying to usurp the throne from the rightful heir. When Renly fled King's Landing he didn't know that Joffrey wasn't Robert's trueborn son. So Stannis suddenly claiming himself king also looks just like someone trying to usurp the throne. I wouldn't exactly call that someone who just dislikes his family and is trying to stick it to his older brother.

He rebelled against Joffrey AND Stannis when he went and declared himself King. And he was the first to declare for himself, it's not like he saw Stannis crown himself in spite of Joffrey and then decided to follow the example. That's more what Robb did.

That's right. I hold virtues in low regard. The rule of law as in GoT (as irl):

1. The golden rule: he who has the gold, rules

2. Might makes right

Aegon the Conqueror, the rule of law.

The Andals wiping out the forest people, rule of law

Robert Barantheion, the rule of law

Stannis Barantheion, exectuing Renley with his concubine sorceress shadow demon, the rule of law

I just need instruction from the virtuous like this guy to tell me when to apply the rule of law and when to apply the virtues.

Robert didn't just go for the crown because he felt like it (like Renly did), Aerys already declared him and Ned outlaws and demanded his head before he even did anything. They were just hanging out at the Vale, being good lawful citizens and then they had a deathsentence on their heads. Even Joffrey was more reasonable then that.

You mean because his brother rebelled and usurped the throne fair and square, it goes to Stannis on succession. How about Dany, the heir of the King that Robert unlawfully rebelled against. How about the heirs of the kings that Aegon the Conqueror unlawfully dethroned? Rightful heir? It is too laugh.

Again, Aerys declared against Robert, not the other way around, second Dany is not heir of Aerys, they don't do Queens anymore ever since Dance of Dragons and yeah, you can believe in right of conquest or you don't. Either way Dany has no rightful claim to the throne whatsoever. WHEN they sit on the Iron Throne, or conquered most of the Seven Kingdoms, their word is law, until then they can hardly complain that Stannis considers them his enemy.

[Leto Atreides]

It looked like he was still on top of the wall at the end of the battle. How is he going to escape?

[The Monkey]

Arguing about succession in a series, with a central theme of promotion and rise based on merit rather than blood strikes me as a bit pointless. As stated above, Aegon wasn't a lawful king, he just set fire to everyone who would tell him otherwise. The Mad King -was- the rightful king, but his actions showed plainly that he wasn't fit to rule and Robert took over. How many of the kings in the War of the Five Kings had any claim to the throne? Joffrey and Stannis and that's about it, with the former being a spoiled, cruel child in the books and even worse in the show.

Actually, I'd say Robb has the best "claim", if such a thing can even be said to exist. The Kings of Winter have been of House Stark for 8000 years, a far more ancient royal linage than the Targaryens or Baratheons (or the Greyjoys, I seem to recall that they only because Lord Paramount of the Iron Islands after the conquest).

[Ferrous]

Actually, I'd say Robb has the best "claim", if such a thing can even be said to exist. The Kings of Winter have been of House Stark for 8000 years, a far more ancient royal linage than the Targaryens or Baratheons (or the Greyjoys, I seem to recall that they only because Lord Paramount of the Iron Islands after the conquest).

Except Robb also claims the Riverlands.

House Stark has no right to claim the Riverlands.

[Brucolac]

After reading the last book, I thought GRRM was drawing some inspiration from George Washington during the American Revolution for Stannis. The scene of Stannis on the landing boat was a reenactment of the painting 'Crossing the Delaware.' I think Stannis is a character that GGRM has grown fond of and has probably grown in scope and impact since he first brought him into the series. Having a chance to change his past for the show as compared to the books was probably a perk for Martin.

[Raksha the Demon]

Stannis is an intriguing character; but I would not want to live under his rule; he's in thrall to a religious fanatic; burning starving men for cannabilism (with dead bodies, not people they'd killed) or contemplating burning his young nephew for some cranked prophecy, just being a bit too content to burn people alive for a religion in which he may not even believe. If Stannis became king of Westeros, there would be a war of religions; which the place doesn't need. I distrust religious fanatics and those who follow them.

[Clariana]

I think Stannis is a derivation of "Stalin" or "man of steel", and come to think of it the Stannis of ASoLaF does resemble the Russian dictator in a great many ways personality-wise: determination, fanaticism, the imposition of a rigid adherance to doctrine and certain codes of behaviour, valuing loyalty above all else, plus the slight whiff of hypocrisy...

As a character he certainly grows on you...

[BigBucket]

Would it have more noble of Stannis if he butchered everybody else but spared Renly solely cause he is his brother.

This is something I can't understand either. Stannis killed the only brother he loved in order to spare thousands of lives. Yet people suggest it would have been more honourable, noble and 'good' if he'd killed thousands so he could spare his brother.

I thought this was a great episode, really well written and really well acted. The scene on Stannis' ship with "Hundreds will die", "Thousands" and the small speech was superb, absolutely my favourite scene of either series so far. The lighting, music and acting from Dillane really gave me goosebumps. There was a nice contrast between Tyrion and Stannis in the speeches as well. Tyrion is completely new to this sort of thing and his speech is somewhat rambling and jokey but he manages to wing it and its still very good. Stannis, the no nonsense leader of men, says exactly what he needs to and no more. "Come with me and take this city!"

[Lord Manwoody]

"But your Grace, hundreds will die!"

"Thousands."

Loved that line. I love Stannis in the books and I love him in the show.

I thought Varys' reason for not wanting Stannis on the throne was interesting.

[StannisandDaeny]

Varys was lying ^^ He's terrified of 'a truly just man' (there's actually a quote of him saying that somewhere) and knows Stannis wanted to do away with him and his corruption. I wonder how, if and when the show is going to let Varys' mask drop and fully reveal his part in Ned's death. They pretty much already have but I think a lot of viewers have already forgotten his little conversation with Illyrio.

Stannis is an intriguing character; but I would not want to live under his rule; he's in thrall to a religious fanatic; burning starving men for cannabilism (with dead bodies, not people they'd killed) or contemplating burning his young nephew for some cranked prophecy, just being a bit too content to burn people alive for a religion in which he may not even believe. If Stannis became king of Westeros, there would be a war of religions; which the place doesn't need. I distrust religious fanatics and those who follow them.

It's a case of keeping your camp from falling into total anarchy really. If you allow cannibalism, before you know it hungry men would be cutting each other's throats just to get a bite - 'cos there's no way the rate of the dying was high enough to feed the entire army. He didn't burn his nephew and accepted Davos' choice, so you can't really hold that against him either. That said I do think it was very unfortunate as well, but then the situation was extremely severe and not something someone had seen coming, as opposed to for instance Ramsay murdering that shepherd for no real reason or Cersei giving innocent people to Qyburn for his experiments. Under equal circumstances, I would always prefer Stannis out of those 3... So far Stannis has managed to bring and keep together a host of believers in the Red God and believers of the 7, the latter being the more dangerous (and useless) in my impression because of the High Sparrow who has an army of zealot lowlifes just swarming out uncontrolled across the countryside doing nothing useful (Jaime even referred to them as 'useless mouths', and I think he's correct in his assessment) and threatening people like Jaime with a club (happens in AFFC) simply because he wants to see his cousin. I don't think Stannis would allow followers of R'hllor to commit such crimes.

The Mad King -was- the rightful king, but his actions showed plainly that he wasn't fit to rule and Robert took over. How many of the kings in the War of the Five Kings had any claim to the throne? Joffrey and Stannis and that's about it, with the former being a spoiled, cruel child in the books and even worse in the show.

Joffrey had no claim at all. Aerys lost his claim when he failed his task as a King which is protecting his subjects, high and low, he even did the complete opposite. Robert was right in removing him - he was not a good King either but he didn't kill his subjects for sport or out of madness either, so his heir, Stannis, takes over after the Lannisters murdered his brother.

[TheEvilKing]

"But Your Grace... the fire... their archers... hundreds will die..."

"Thousands."

*CUE STANNIS THEME MUSIC*

Stannis turns to address his men, as you anticipate a stirring and inspirational speech.

"LET'S TAKE THIS CITY!"

[Lyana]

Loved the way Stannis was represented in this episode.

It had a bit of a Hollywood-touch, but it was fine by me. I was glad they finally made him, or perhaps tried to make him more likeable to the viewers.

His determination and his fearless attack were great moments. But the scene that got tears in my eyes (and one of my favourite moments) was him showting: "Stand up and fight! Stand up and fight, damn you!" It was really heartbreaking, but I loved it.

[Rockroi]

Arguing about succession in a series, with a central theme of promotion and rise based on merit rather than blood strikes me as a bit pointless.

This is not an accurate depiction of the history of Westeroes. Advancement is rarely based on merit. In fact advancement based on merit is so rare that it stands out with such striking contrast. Almost every single lord and lady we have ever encountered in the series got their position based upon being a direct decendent of the previously named lord or lady. Hereditery is more or less everything in Westeros.

As stated above, Aegon wasn't a lawful king, he just set fire to everyone who would tell him otherwise. The Mad King -was- the rightful king, but his actions showed plainly that he wasn't fit to rule and Robert took over.

Ughh... yeah but you skipped over the 300 year period in between Aegon I and Aerys II where it was "All Targaryens All the Time." That's a close to 300 year uninterrupted streak of all Targaryens, one right after the other. And when there was a "rebellion" or conflict it was always between two (or more) Targaryens. Hereditery is so paramount to ruling classes that its hardly ever ignored. Again, the exceptions only stand out because they are so rare.And its not just with the Iron Throne. Robb Stark is Lord of Winterfell not because he was so amazingly awesome but because he was born first. Same for all Lannisters, Arryns, Martells etc etc etc. In the case of the Starks it goes back thousands of years. Merit has almost nothing to do with that.

I am only pointing this out because Stannis' claim is legitimate based upon that 300 years of precedent. He's the King because his brother died without lawful issue. Period. The only reason Joff was King was because the other families ether a) wanted the Kingdom themselves or b ) were petrified of the idea of Stannis as King and Lannisters at war with him.

Actually, I'd say Robb has the best "claim", if such a thing can even be said to exist. The Kings of Winter have been of House Stark for 8000 years, a far more ancient royal linage than the Targaryens or Baratheons (or the Greyjoys, I seem to recall that they only because Lord Paramount of the Iron Islands after the conquest).

Ended when Torren knelt.

Stannis is an intriguing character; but I would not want to live under his rule ... If Stannis became king of Westeros, there would be a war of religions; which the place doesn't need. I distrust religious fanatics and those who follow them.

Agreed. Therefore, its a good thing Stannis is not - in any concievable way -a religious fanatic. He has in his counsel a red priest. That's it. He is no more or less religious than the Lannisters for having the High Septon around.

I think Stannis is a derivation of "Stalin" or "man of steel", and come to think of it the Stannis of ASoLaF does resemble the Russian dictator in a great many ways personality-wise: determination, fanaticism, the imposition of a rigid adherance to doctrine and certain codes of behaviour, valuing loyalty above all else, plus the slight whiff of hypocrisy...

I am not sure I entirely agree, but the descriptoion of Stannis as a "Man of Steel" is perfectly apt. I just don't see Stannis being dogmatic or a fanatic. He does have a ridgid adherence to justice, but that's hardly a doctrine like communism (and to point out, Ned Stark was also a ridgid adherent to a code). I think Stannis is also not immovable. As stated several times, he listens to wise counsel. Stannis also lacks that knee-jerk paranoia that Stalin had that no only cause Stalin to murder thousands of his followes, but to doctor photographs to remove those he had killed from history (ie- removing Trotsky from photos with Lenin). Stannis is many things but a ccold-blooded murderer is not one of them: case-in-point after the defeat on the Blackwater, one of his lords advises storming the Crack-claw shores and just killing people to show them that Stannis is still to be feared. Stannis enthusiastically rejects the plan when Davos shares his insights (insights Stannis obviously had all along).

And Stalin's paranoia also extended to himself: when the Germans attacked in 1941 the Russion losses were so staggering that Stalin was certain there would be a coup against him. When his generals- en masse and unannounced -went to appraise him of the newest rounds of losses, he looked up at them and said, "So, its come to this?" It took the generals a few hours to figure out what he had meant: he thought tthey had come to arrest him.

Now, I agree on the Iron Man attitude and the drivbe. But not the cult of personality that Stalin bred: fear, paranoia, and arbitrary and caporicious retribution. That's not Stannis.

(quick aside: in those YOUTUBE vids of the movie "Downfall" - where they put in fake sub-titles of Hitler raging against everything in the world- the ones that talk about GAme of Thrones all have Hitler saying "Stannis" when in the movie he says "Stalin." Intereting).

[StannisandDaeny]

Let the audience think Stannis is the bad guy and the Lannisters are on the road to victory right up to Tyrion's crossbow and Qyburn coming into play, muahahaha...

[Guest]

Stannis is an intriguing character; but I would not want to live under his rule; he's in thrall to a religious fanatic; burning starving men for cannabilism (with dead bodies, not people they'd killed) or contemplating burning his young nephew for some cranked prophecy

Cranked is right. And it seemed so urgent in Storm, but in ADWD it's on the back burner.

[Wjaykusuma]

King Stannis is my god! My favorite character on the books and now on the show.

I wonder what's gonna happen to him now... I hope we get to find out about this on the next episode.

Stannis is only a man :P