Jump to content

Archived

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

Othersrcute

The Starks will Rise

Recommended Posts

Now what is with Stannis being a good guy? The guy is already half- mad if not more and he is going madder with every chapter. He is utterly spiteful, has no compassion, and if he is a good tactician which leaves to be desired in my opinion. He is definitely not a good leader. Stannis does not inspire men, he commands them and expects them to obey.

In a nutshell, he was an unlikeable fool from the start and now he is a mad unlikeable fool. If he lives through TWOW he won't live through ADOS.

Stannis is a just man. People follow him because they fear him rather than because they love him, but he is far from a fool and far from unlikable.He simply follows the law, and law need to remain emotionally aloof. Davos, who might be the "best" character in the series love Stannis and would follow him to the end of the world. He is also far from mad, in fact he is one of the most rational characters in the entire series. Stannis is also a righteous man who put the realm first, something that none of the other kings did.

Do you think that Tywin was a terrible leader too? Or Aegon the Conqueror? These people led through fear rather than love. It has long been argued historically that a good king should be feared not loved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stannis is a just man. People follow him because they fear him rather than because they love him, but he is far from a fool and far from unlikable.He simply follows the law, and law need to remain emotionally aloof. Davos, who might be the "best" character in the series love Stannis and would follow him to the end of the world. He is also far from mad, in fact he is one of the most rational characters in the entire series. Stannis is also a righteous man who put the realm first, something that none of the other kings did.

Do you think that Tywin was a terrible leader too? Or Aegon the Conqueror? These people led through fear rather than love. It has long been argued historically that a good king should be feared not loved.

Ok I definitely don't see how you can like Stannis. The man burns people alive, he was even considering burning his own nephew (although a bastard)! It's said in the book that he looks at women as if they were of another species.

Tywin was a good leader who ruled through fear true, but he never claimed he was "good". People who followed him knew who he was, what he stood for and mainly they followed him for the money and because he was a powerful and shrewd lord who was unlikely to fail (that which Stannis his obviously not).

As for Aegon the conqueror we know he conquered through violence but we know precious little of how he actually ruled after being recognized as king.

The difference with Stannis is that Stannis claims to be "good" (as in the moral attribute good) but at the same time rules through fear. Now the truth is Stannis is not a "good" guy. He will go to any extreme just because of his spite at being relegated behind his brothers, he's not trying to do good by the realm or anything. He doesn't follow the law otherwise he would be supporting Daenerys as he should have done since the start. He really just wants the throne for himself, the guy is the shadow of a great guy, who when you look at him seems like a just man who does good by the realm but the truth is the great man is standing by his side. Davos is a great man, Jon is a great man but Stannis isn't. The blacksmith at the Wall said it Stannis is Iron he is hard, too hard to do more than follow I think. Look at the atrocities he's done and tell me that him being a king will end at least partially well. He will go as mad as Aerys eventually. Stannis is a soldier like Victarion, born to follow but never to lead on a great scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I definitely don't see how you can like Stannis. The man burns people alive, he was even considering burning his own nephew (although a bastard)! It's said in the book that he looks at women as if they were of another species.

You have to like everything Stannis does to realize that he is generally a "good" guy who believes in doing the right thing. I don't agree with the burning, but I'm with him other than that. When he considers burning his nephew he is working on the understanding that burning one person could save the world and that, otherwise, everyone is going to die anyway. So purely in utilitarian terms, a good leader should at least consider it.

Tywin was a good leader who ruled through fear true, but he never claimed he was "good". People who followed him knew who he was, what he stood for and mainly they followed him for the money and because he was a powerful and shrewd lord who was unlikely to fail (that which Stannis his obviously not).

Well Tywin is dead and so he has failed whereas Stannis has not. Stannis actually has done more to validate his reputation that Tywin has. In fact, Tywin didn't really do anything particularly proficiently during ASOIAF. He agreed a deal with the Freys, and he rubber-stamped Tyrion's plans, but the two battle Tywin actually wins were a) a feint that he was supposed to win; and b )actually won by the Tyrells. Pray tell, what has Tywin done that is so successful?

As for Aegon the conqueror we know he conquered through violence but we know precious little of how he actually ruled after being recognized as king.

And we don't know that about Stannis. Stannis however, doesn't conquer people using a dragon named "the Black Dread." Stannis only means to uphold the law. Aegon wanted to conquer and burned thousands of people.

The difference with Stannis is that Stannis claims to be "good" (as in the moral attribute good) but at the same time rules through fear. Now the truth is Stannis is not a "good" guy. He will go to any extreme just because of his spite at being relegated behind his brothers, he's not trying to do good by the realm or anything. He doesn't follow the law otherwise he would be supporting Daenerys as he should have done since the start. He really just wants the throne for himself, the guy is the shadow of a great guy, who when you look at him seems like a just man who does good by the realm but the truth is the great man is standing by his side. Davos is a great man, Jon is a great man but Stannis isn't. The blacksmith at the Wall said it Stannis is Iron he is hard, too hard to do more than follow I think. Look at the atrocities he's done and tell me that him being a king will end at least partially well. He will go as mad as Aerys eventually. Stannis is a soldier like Victarion, born to follow but never to lead on a great scale.

Stannis doesn't talk about good, he talks about "right," and "law." He is following the law and hasn't really gone to any "extremes" as you say. Stannis does what he does because he believes it is right for the realm and there are quotes to support this. Furthermore, GRRM himself described Stannis as a "righteous" man, even if he is a harsh man.

Dany doesn't have a better claim than Stannis because House Targaryen lost the throne and House Baratheon won it by right of conquest. From the laws of Westeros, Stannis has the best (and only, really,) claim.

Davos is a great man too, and Davos is supremely loyal to Stannis, and that ought to tell you something. Even Jon recognizes that Stannis is a decent enough person, as Ned did.

Stannis is iron, and iron is what the North needs. What atrocities has Stannis committed, exactly, other than the burnings, which are relatively few in number?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than the burnings? The shadow that killed his brother maybe? Ok he didn't create the shadow but he knew what Melissandre was gonna do and he still let her do it. He would do anything to get his hands on the throne and let's Melissandre commit those. And personnaly I'm pretty sure that Melissandre is mistaken in her visions of Stannis being AAR. The last book hints at the fact that she is but an interpreter.

Stannis is iron and iron is brittle is what the blacksmith says.

Tywin did prove himself to be shrewd and ruthless moreover Tywin was part of the battle of the Blackwater the Tyrells weren't alone. And in the end it wasn't on the battlefield he was killed but by his own son? It says nothing of how bad a leader he was, it says something of how bad a father he was.

Once more we know nothing of why Aegon decided to conquer the seven kingdoms for all we know he saw that in the future the others would come back and that his family's dragons would be needed.

Moreover I'm sorry but all those quotes about Stannis saying he is doing something for the realms doesn't mean he is, he's just saying it. GRRM said Stannis was a just man but Stannis right now in the book isn't who he used to be I think.

Jon and Ned recognize that Stannis is a just if harsh man but you can clearly tell that they wouldn't (and Jon isn't) be comfortable with Stannis over their head.

And I'm sorry but this whole utilitarian way of thinking isn't what I would call right, but this is going into philosophy and less about the book so I'll drop that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Wrong, he definitely had a choice to ignore the call of the Night's Watch just like all the other Southron lords, yet he knew the stakes and knew what would happen if the Wildings won that battle, and knew it was his duty to save the Night's Watch. I see no selfish motive here.

2. Yes, he lost on the Blackwater only because he was led to believe he would win by Melisandre, and when he realized it was a lost cause once Tywin arrived, what choice would he have than to retreat. At least he was one of the only southron lords to take up a stance against Cercei and her lies. Stannis was the true heir to the throne and he was not going to die on the Blackwater just to die a noble death. He knew that if he died, the realm would be left to the hands of Cercei and her lies, therefore he retreated in a tactical move, not in cowardice.

Stannis is probably one of the most honourable characters in the novel, and is also one of my favorite characters. I just hate to see him being used by Melisandre for her other motives.

You've convinced yourself that if Stannis won the black water he still would have gone to the Wall out of "honour"? Sorry but not a chance. Stanislaw cares about 1 thing and one thing only and that's the Iron Throne. He was upset that Jon became Lord Commander because it didn't suit his personal vendetta. He's a narrow minded fanatic doing whatever he can to sit on the throne nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than the burnings? The shadow that killed his brother maybe? Ok he didn't create the shadow but he knew what Melissandre was gonna do and he still let her do it. He would do anything to get his hands on the throne and let's Melissandre commit those.

Renly was an open and avowed traitor. The penalty for treason is death. Therefore Renly's life was forfeit. Killing Renly also saved thousands of lives as it avoided a battle. There is also the question of whether Stannis actually understands how Renly died. Stannis seems to believe that he wasn't involved, or doesn't want to believe that he was involved, and even points out that Melisandre told Stannis to give Renly a final chance.

And personnaly I'm pretty sure that Melissandre is mistaken in her visions of Stannis being AAR. The last book hints at the fact that she is but an interpreter.

She may well be, but she can see the future. It's not Stannis' fault that Mel isn't great at interpretation.

Stannis is iron and iron is brittle is what the blacksmith says.

This is what Noye says:

"Stannis is pure iron, black and hard and strong, yes, but brittle, the way iron gets."

And in the very next chapter, this is what Cat says:

"...an open circlet of hammered bronze incised with the runes of the First Men, surmounted by nine black iron spikes wrought in the shape of longswords. Of gold and silver and gemstones, it had none; bronze and iron were the metals of winter, dark and strong to fight against the cold."

Having said that, I don't deny that Stannis may break before he bends. It is a central flaw of his character.

Tywin did prove himself to be shrewd and ruthless moreover Tywin was part of the battle of the Blackwater the Tyrells weren't alone. And in the end it wasn't on the battlefield he was killed but by his own son? It says nothing of how bad a leader he was, it says something of how bad a father he was.

He came with the Tyrells but Tyrion and LF arranged the Tyrell alliance and the Tyrells led the army. Tywin just hasn't done anything majorly creditable during the period of ASOIAF. Unless you would like to provide an example of where he has?

Once more we know nothing of why Aegon decided to conquer the seven kingdoms for all we know he saw that in the future the others would come back and that his family's dragons would be needed.

For all we know Westeros spontaneously combust in the next book.

Moreover I'm sorry but all those quotes about Stannis saying he is doing something for the realms doesn't mean he is, he's just saying it. GRRM said Stannis was a just man but Stannis right now in the book isn't who he used to be I think.

Stannis is actually probably more just now than he was in AGoT. Of course, we cannot trust anyone entirely, but Stannis is the only king who listened to the NW. Cersei and Tywin didn't care, Renly didn't care, no-one else cares, only Stannis went. Even Jon points out that Stannis was "a king who still cared." Stannis could have gone to any number of places. Even if he still chose to go to the North, he didn't need to go beyond the Wall. If you look at Davos' own chapter, where Davos attests to Stannis' sincerity and fear after seeing the NW being routed from the First, you can see that Stannis isn't just lying to Davos for no reason. There would be no reason, by the way, because he only says these things to Davos and Jon, two people who wouldn't really care either way.

Jon and Ned recognize that Stannis is a just if harsh man but you can clearly tell that they wouldn't (and Jon isn't) be comfortable with Stannis over their head.

Jon wouldn't be comfortable with any king staying with the Night's Watch. Ned died trying to seat Stannis on the throne.

And I'm sorry but this whole utilitarian way of thinking isn't what I would call right, but this is going into philosophy and less about the book so I'll drop that.

Well the philosophy is important if you want to judge characters as not being good.

Answer me this, if you will. If you do not burn Edric Storm everyone dies, including Edric Storm. If you do burn Edric Storm, everyone else lives. What do you do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stannis is definetly a good guy. He is the only king in the game of thrones that actually cares for the people of westeros, the throne is his by rights and he is fighting to get it so he can save westeros from the long night. He has burned very few people and all of them criminals, such a thing matters little. He is saving the north from the boltons and freys and this is after he defeated the wildlings. It annoys the shit out of me when people say satannis is a bad guy because he really isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came up with a new possibility for Arya id like to post here. Izembaro is in Pentos, and thus that is where Arya is heading. While there she hears/ sees Ilyrio and thanks to her improved hearing and observational skills remembers that she has heard his voice before in the depths of the red keep. She decides to investigate and through an Arya POV we learn some very interesting truths from Ilyrio. After she finds out some juicy details, she kills Ilyrio and heads back to westeros having been reminded about her father, John, and Sansa by Ilyrio. This thought came to me when I was pondering how we could find out info on "Aegon" and Varys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came up with a new possibility for Arya id like to post here. Izembaro is in Pentos, and thus that is where Arya is heading. While there she hears/ sees Ilyrio and thanks to her improved hearing and observational skills remembers that she has heard his voice before in the depths of the red keep. She decides to investigate and through an Arya POV we learn some very interesting truths from Ilyrio. After she finds out some juicy details, she kills Ilyrio and heads back to westeros having been reminded about her father, John, and Sansa by Ilyrio. This thought came to me when I was pondering how we could find out info on "Aegon" and Varys.

How do we know who, or where Izambaro is? Did I miss something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Id like to see Arya sent to kill someone in The Vale (Little Finger?) and whilst there somehow become reunited with Sansa, the 2 embrace and hear news of Rickon's survival, spurring on The Vales involvment in the conflict.

This seems almost too good to be true. Though I have to admit it would be a very touching moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with burning Edric Storm is that he knows that Melissandre isn't exactly a 100% oracle. So burning Edric might save everyone but it's also very likely that Melissandre is mistaken once again and that Stannis would burn his nephew for far less of a result if any. Which is why Davos (definitely a recognized good guy) smuggles Edric out of Stannis' reach. Davos himself sees that his lord which he trusts more than anyone is let's say... unstable.

Ned supported Stannis because he was the rightful heir of Robert not because he favors Stannis as king. True Jon wouldn't like any king on the wall but the only king that would and actually has dared to come to the wall and claim things which he has no right to claim is Stannis. Which I think makes him much more wary of him than of any other king.

I think it's pretty obvious that Stannis understands what happened with Renly. When Davos tries to inquire about what happened with Melissandre Stannis doesn't want to talk about it because he suspects that Melissandre used her magic to kill his own brother on his order. A king is expected to have mercy. The Stannis of the past showed such mercy with Davos but the Stannis of today wouldn't show mercy to his own brother.

Now i think that some people are misunderstanding. I'm not saying stannis is a bad guy I'm saying he's not the good guy you claim he is. Stannis is similar to Rand in The Wheel of Time. He is hard, too hard and that is driving him mad. The difference is that in The Wheel of Time Rand ends up learning wisdom by overcoming his madness while in ASOIAF such a happy thing is definitely not happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with burning Edric Storm is that he knows that Melissandre isn't exactly a 100% oracle.

Does he? From Stannis' point of view Melisandre has had a 100% success rate at this point. Everything she has predicted has come true. Stannis is also terrified after seeing the men of the NW fleeing the Others, something that Davos attends to.

So burning Edric might save everyone but it's also very likely that Melissandre is mistaken once again and that Stannis would burn his nephew for far less of a result if any.

This is true, but given the chance that it might save the world, a "good" guy should at least consider it, even if they decide against it. It certainly isn't something Stannis wants to do, and he says "no" to Mel many times.

Which is why Davos (definitely a recognized good guy) smuggles Edric out of Stannis' reach. Davos himself sees that his lord which he trusts more than anyone is let's say... unstable.

What Stannis sees is that Mel's influence is dangerous. He is serving his King.

Ned supported Stannis because he was the rightful heir of Robert not because he favors Stannis as king.

True, but Ned probably wouldn't have tried to seat Tywin on the throne even if Tywin had been the heir.

True Jon wouldn't like any king on the wall but the only king that would and actually has dared to come to the wall and claim things which he has no right to claim is Stannis. Which I think makes him much more wary of him than of any other king.

Jon invited him to come, and Stannis respects that Jon holds his ground. Jon is absolutely not more wary of Stannis than he would have been of the Lannisters and it seems, in fact, that they have quite a good working relationship. They respect one another.

I think it's pretty obvious that Stannis understands what happened with Renly. When Davos tries to inquire about what happened with Melissandre Stannis doesn't want to talk about it because he suspects that Melissandre used her magic to kill his own brother on his order.

Stannis talks about it a few times and maintains that he was asleep in his tent with Mel and that he dreamed Renly's death and that it haunts him. At least at the time he didn't believe that he could have played any role in it because he wasn't there.

A king is expected to have mercy. The Stannis of the past showed such mercy with Davos but the Stannis of today wouldn't show mercy to his own brother.

It is more important that a king be just than merciful. Mercy without justice is chaos. Stannis has shown much mercy. He forgave Renly's bannermen, he rejected Axel Florent's suggestion to take revenge on Celtigar's smallfolk.

He has not punished the Ironborn he captured, other than Theon, who doesn't really deserve any mercy other than a quick death.

Stannis is actually quite merciful to those who do the right thing in the end, he just doesn't forget their original crimes.

Now i think that some people are misunderstanding. I'm not saying stannis is a bad guy I'm saying he's not the good guy you claim he is. Stannis is similar to Rand in The Wheel of Time. He is hard, too hard and that is driving him mad. The difference is that in The Wheel of Time Rand ends up learning wisdom by overcoming his madness while in ASOIAF such a happy thing is definitely not happening.

Well, first of all, whatever else Stannis may be, he isn't mad. There is no evidence to support that. Quite the opposite in fact, he is sometimes overly logical at the expense of empathy. He is also a good person, a righteous person. One of the few fighting for what is right. He may fail, perhaps he probably will, as he is a tragic hero of sorts, but he is still one of the "good" guys such as they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've convinced yourself that if Stannis won the black water he still would have gone to the Wall out of "honour"? Sorry but not a chance. Stanislaw cares about 1 thing and one thing only and that's the Iron Throne. He was upset that Jon became Lord Commander because it didn't suit his personal vendetta. He's a narrow minded fanatic doing whatever he can to sit on the throne nothing more.

I think you are missing a crucial series of events that led up to Stannis' decision to march to the Wall. Davos had just released Edric Storm and sent him away on a boat to save him from Melisandre's burning. The point of the burning was to wake the dragons and give Stannis a fair chance at winning back his rightful place on the throne. Now, right after Davos sent away Edric, he received the letter about help being needed on the wall to keep away the Wildlings, and even Others. If Stannis truly was a "narrow minded fanatic doing whatever he can to sit on the throne nothing more" then he would have put all his resources into finding Edric Storm to wake the dragons and take back the Iron Throne. That would be a much more sensible and logical position for someone whose only goal was to sit the iron throne. Yet, Stannis chose to march on the wall because he knew that as AA he was the only one to stop the Wildlings and the Others from invading the North, and perhaps even moving further south. That seems very unselfish. A narrow minded person could not think that far long term and realize that the Others are a bigger threat to peace in the realm than a petty argument over who is king, yet Stannis did just that. Did he have any alterior motives? Possibly, because there was the added bonus that he won the loyalty of the Nights Watch, but it was still a huge bet to lose Edric Storm for the loyalty of the NW, and defeating the wildlings. This seems very sensible and honourable to me, not fanatical or narrow minded at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, first of all, whatever else Stannis may be, he isn't mad. There is no evidence to support that. Quite the opposite in fact, he is sometimes overly logical at the expense of empathy. He is also a good person, a righteous person. One of the few fighting for what is right. He may fail, perhaps he probably will, as he is a tragic hero of sorts, but he is still one of the "good" guys such as they are.

I agree, and I feel like that is the purpose of Davos, as a foil for Stannis to help him see that sometimes you need to take a step back and look at the situation from other than just a logical point of view. Deep in his mind I feel like Stannis is relieved he didn't have to burn Edric, and is happy that Davos took him away from Mel. I often feel that rather than the stiff stick people think Stannis is, he is actually one of the characters who is developing a lot, especially after his arrival at the Wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stannis is a just man. People follow him because they fear him rather than because they love him, but he is far from a fool and far from unlikable.He simply follows the law, and law need to remain emotionally aloof. Davos, who might be the "best" character in the series love Stannis and would follow him to the end of the world. He is also far from mad, in fact he is one of the most rational characters in the entire series. Stannis is also a righteous man who put the realm first, something that none of the other kings did.

Do you think that Tywin was a terrible leader too? Or Aegon the Conqueror? These people led through fear rather than love. It has long been argued historically that a good king should be feared not loved.

ONLY when they cannot be loved i.e., charisma, a strong loved dynasty, stupor mundi. This is why people like and are loyal to THE STARKS, who this topic is suppos'd to be about. They are loved, but they can also be fierce. They wrestled the Iron King for Bear Island, and gave it to the Mormounts. They even let those weird Andal 7worshippin' Manderlys have the wealthiest real estate (concerning trade, exports, etal) because they were in exile. It is better to be loved, only if you cannot be should one resort to fear. This doesn't preclude a martial spirit, I would say the most just in honorable necessarily have a martial streak. They should also be jovial, the one quality Robert had, which he mistook for drunkness. JOVIAL, come from Jove = Zeus, the god of friends and strangers. The bridgebuiler, the pontifex (ponte - bridge; fex from - facere - make, do). The Starks are this way, despite seeming cold. They nordic, stoic types, but also are compassionate. Even Brandon (Ned's brother) was this way, tho he was overzealous. The wild wolf.

The Starks possess this olympian quality, while having a certain humility. Do you notice the Starks never GO after honors or titles, but it is also thrust upon. (Perjaps Rickard, thru his maester, but that was a mistake!) This goes back to Bran the Builder. It was not Robb who crowned himself, nor did Ned go to KL seeking to be Hand. They are generally Good people, and that is why you have the Northern conspiracy, little lady Mormount saying only a Stark, Manderly sending Davos for Rickon, Wyalla recalling the debt, the Liddle saying

“When there was a Stark in Winterfell, a maiden girl could walk the kingsroad in her name-day gown and still go unmolested, and travelers could find fire, bread, and salt at many an inn and holdfast. But the nights are colder now, and doors are closed. There’s squids in the wolfswood, and flayed men ride the kingsroad asking after strangers.”

... in short THAT IS WHY THE NORTH REMEMBERS. The North doesn't just remember the RW or poor dead Ned, it remembers everything the Starks have done. Hell, even Tyrion is perceptive enough to recognize it. After Theon takes WF, he quips to himself to the effect, "that was silly, there would always be a stark in winterfell."

They could have destroyed the Boltons root and stem, time and time again (and some may argue that ought to have, since this is where it got them). Instead they granted them clemency, a magnanimous gesture - which many a reader n Westerosi mistakes for a gullibility.

These are some of the root principles as to why the Starks will rise.

(And also noodling into why Jon must be AAR, TPTWP, because of the above regality, which is in harmony and also in tension with the firey regality of the Targs.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are missing a crucial series of events that led up to Stannis' decision to march to the Wall. Davos had just released Edric Storm and sent him away on a boat to save him from Melisandre's burning. The point of the burning was to wake the dragons and give Stannis a fair chance at winning back his rightful place on the throne. Now, right after Davos sent away Edric, he received the letter about help being needed on the wall to keep away the Wildlings, and even Others. If Stannis truly was a "narrow minded fanatic doing whatever he can to sit on the throne nothing more" then he would have put all his resources into finding Edric Storm to wake the dragons and take back the Iron Throne. That would be a much more sensible and logical position for someone whose only goal was to sit the iron throne. Yet, Stannis chose to march on the wall because he knew that as AA he was the only one to stop the Wildlings and the Others from invading the North, and perhaps even moving further south. That seems very unselfish. A narrow minded person could not think that far long term and realize that the Others are a bigger threat to peace in the realm than a petty argument over who is king, yet Stannis did just that. Did he have any alterior motives? Possibly, because there was the added bonus that he won the loyalty of the Nights Watch, but it was still a huge bet to lose Edric Storm for the loyalty of the NW, and defeating the wildlings. This seems very sensible and honourable to me, not fanatical or narrow minded at all.

He didn't go after Edric because frankly he had no time. He couldn't spend weeks chasing after him because it was a matter of time before Dragonstone would be under seige and he would be without a base to work from. He went to the North because he saw it as an opportunity to win the north to his cause and replenish his army. I don't know why your arguing this because he actually says it all to Jon. He needed the North to win his crown. Do you honestly think if he wins the on the blackwater he still gives the slightest crap about the wall? Not a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't go after Edric because frankly he had no time. He couldn't spend weeks chasing after him because it was a matter of time before Dragonstone would be under seige and he would be without a base to work from.

Davos does this for him and he sees it as a burden lifted. Davos saves him from a terrible choice.

He went to the North because he saw it as an opportunity to win the north to his cause and replenish his army. I don't know why your arguing this because he actually says it all to Jon.

He tells Jon the same thing that he tells Davos. That he went North to save the realm. After saving the realm from the wildlings he then has the opportunity to add the north to his army. He is open about this and why not?

He needed the North to win his crown.

He needs the whole Seven Kingdoms but the North is the best opportunity.

Do you honestly think if he wins the on the blackwater he still gives the slightest crap about the wall? Not a chance.

Actually, given what we see from Davos and what Stannis saw in the fires, plus his attitude towards the NW, Stannis probably would. He is genuinely frightened by what he has seen, and considering Stannis' serious personality and attitude towards the realm he would probably see defending it against the wildlings as part of his duty. Tywin is the one who wants the North to fend for itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×