Jon Targaryen Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 I believe he will be the shadowless king leading the Other/dead army Danerys dreams about. It fitted nicely with Melisandre's stealing of Staniss' shadow That would fit nicely with the Stannis=the new Night's King theory. Except that it doesn't seem Stannis would lead an army of the Others but an army of fire-worshippers. I'm not sure but it seems the new Night's King is an opposite to the old one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urizen Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Where is Ghost during this chapter? During a re-read I noticed that Ghost is nowhere to be seen "on stage" The white wolf padded along the man trail beneath the icy cliff.[.........] The white wolf ran from it, a white arrow flying past the ice, racing toward the cave of night where the sun had hidden, his breath frosting in the air This qoute made think that ghost is maybe, for some reason or another, Ghost is heading for he Nightfort, seeing how Ghost refers to Summer smelling of, well, summer and sun and the Nightfort is where Summer and Bran passes through the Wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roi Woodt Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Ran, There's nothing about his being the alleged Prince Who Was Promised that makes him ineligible for helping his own cause, I dare say. My only problem with this is, how does Mel know that the enemy isn't going to attack at those particular moments when she just stole the Hero's strength? But ofcourse, she could have seen that in her flames as well. She and her flames... Urizen, This qoute made think that ghost is maybe, for some reason or another, Ghost is heading for he Nightfort, seeing how Ghost refers to Summer smelling of, well, summer and sun and the Nightfort is where Summer and Bran passes through the Wall. I like it, nice, sounds very reasonable to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaston de Foix Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 I believe he will be the shadowless king leading the Other/dead army Danerys dreams about. It fitted nicely with Melisandre's stealing of Staniss' shadow Shadowbinding, IIRC Dany's dream is not about a shadowless King leading a dead army, but about a King who cast no shadow (obviously Stannis) fighting against the Others. I agree with the commentators upthread who think Stannis is doomed but I have always felt Stannis will fall fighting the Others and Lightbringer will break or be destroyed. If for no other reason, then Stannis having come to save the realm, he deserves a death in battle. There is clearly going to be a battle for the Wall and if I were plotting ASOIAF I would end one of my books with the fall of the Wall and Stannis' death. In any event I suspect Stannis will die before Dany sets foot on Westeros, perhaps at the end of ADWD or in the middle of the TWOW. There is some interesting foreshadowing in the Jon chapter GRRM has placed on his website when Jon and Stannis engage in verbal sparring, including Stannis' suggestion that Lightbringer is the sword in the darkness, his calling 'Snow' an ill-omened name, and Melisandre's claim that Stannis is the true King of Westeros, and without him the realm is doomed. All of this clearly sets up two different sets of comparisons Stannis as Warrior vs. Jon as Warrior and Stannis as King v Danaerys as Queen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaston de Foix Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Where is Ghost during this chapter? During a re-read I noticed that Ghost is nowhere to be seen "on stage" This qoute made think that ghost is maybe, for some reason or another, Ghost is heading for he Nightfort, seeing how Ghost refers to Summer smelling of, well, summer and sun and the Nightfort is where Summer and Bran passes through the Wall. Hmm... interesting. We know Grey Wind sniffed out a hidden trail that allowed Robb to take Ser Stafford Lannister by surprise. Could it be that Ghost becomes a semi-detachable part of Jon that he sends on scouting missions first subconsciously and then deliberately? The trouble is that he won't be around to defend Jon if necessary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaston de Foix Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 As usual, I find myself half agreeing with HE, even though I doubt that he fully believes his argument himself. I do like the comparison of Melisandre to Gandalf though. So a post to stop it looking like everyone is ganging up on him. Saying that Stannis should not have opposed Renly, and that once he had chosen to, his followers were justified in killing people to ensure that his attempt failed, is highly debatable at best. Stannis is the rightful king, as pointed out by Ned, Robb, and the Queen of Thorns. What sort of precedent does it create if Renly is allowed to grab the Throne by mere force of arms? Consider the destabilising consequences of having two people around with better claims to the throne than the king - what are the chances of Stannis and Shireen regretfully having to be killed? Stannis has far more justification for his actions than, say, Robb has in defying the Iron Throne. Also this decision was clearly Stannis'es alone, not one he was pushed into by Melisandre. Melisandre and Stannis'es assassination of Renly is hardly that heinous an act. Renly was an usurper and a rebel in arms, and his assassination could be considered an attempt to save bloodshed. We know that Tywin, for example, would have had no hesitation in assassinating Robb, given the chance. You might find Melisandre's magic repulsive, but this is not objective. Incidentally Dany has also burnt people. Sure one can see where Cressen and Davos were coming from in their attempts to kill Melisandre. But their reasons are mitigations, not justifications. In the end, much of the case against Melisandre rests solely on assumptions as to her motives. These assumptions may be right, but they may equally be wrong. I am on Happy Ent's side too in this debate but I wanted to clear Gandalf's name. If Melisandre were in the LOTR she would have taken the ring from either Bilbo or Frodo and set herself as a Dark Queen. At the very least she would have given the ring to Aragorn, asked him to take the throne of Gondor, and set him up as a rival to fight the Dark Lord. The parallels with Stannis are...revealing. What I take away from this fascinating debate over Melisandre and Stannis is that many people condemn Melisandre because she is willing to do whatever it takes including shadow magic, assassination, leeches, seducing Stannis etc. etc. in order to help Stannis win the throne and fight the Others. I agree that plenty of characters who encounter Melisandre have been men (interestingly female perspectives on Melisandre have been absent) of honour such as Davos, Cressen, Jon, Ser Cortnay Penrose etc. who disagree profoundly with the decision to sacrifice an innocent person in order to save the realm. Clearly the moral dilemma here could not be set up more explicitly and Stannis is the character drawn with charcoal with an angel on one shoulder (read Onion Smuggler) and a devil (Melisandre) on the other. I've admitted that I admire Tywin Lannister as a character and there's no doubt as to how he would react in Stannis' position. GRRM disagrees with me though, and insofar as Tywin is Machievelli's ideal Prince, his assassination by Tyrion shows that ruthlessness, pride, cunning and ambition are not enough. Melisandre is a doomed character and neither her shadow magic, King without a shadow or shadow dragon (whenever she produces one) will save her. Nonetheless she'll help Jon before the end. Incidentally the question as to whether Stannis is the rightful King is very much an open one. Eddard Stark certainly thought so, and so did the Queen of Thorns but they both accepted Robert's claim on the throne as genuine. Stannis' claim derives from Robert and on the assumption that Robert has no legitimate heirs. Danaerys and the Targaryaens never did and are unlikely to see Stannis as the Rightful King. Moreover since Stannis made his choice in Robert's rebellion to choose blood over duty to the King, he's unlikely to go back now. Robb Stark might have said that he had a right to secede from a Kingdom in which his father was unjustly tried for treason and executed and where the Iron Throne did nothing to stop Tywin Lannister harrying the riverlands. He would have a point too. There are some interesting perspectives on legitimate Kingship in ASOIAF, whether blood, the hereditary sword of Aegon the Conqueror, right of conquest, legitimate descent, the assent of the great nobles or the possession of hulking great flame-breathing flying lizards confers legitmacy depends (very appropriately) on your POV. In any event Stannis thinks himself the legitimate King and so thinks his assassination of Renly justified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaston de Foix Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 A wonderful chapter, and Jon shines in it as commander IMO. His resistance to Stannis in particular is admirable. The last line is one of the most powerful endings of a chapter over all the books; like Jon Targaryen, I think it signifies mostly that Melissandre wants to show Jon she really can see stuff in the flames. It can be a coincidence too or Melissandre could have picked up on things through more mundane means (allthough very few people know much about Ygritte and Jon; perhaps some of the Wildling captives have an inkling), but this is sure to have an effect on Jon. It's a chilling line, coming from her. Melissandre herself could be one of those people "who smile when you are looking and sharpen their knives when you turn your back", but perhaps she is sincere in this case. Or just trying to sow doubt and distrust. I suppose we'll find out in Dance (RAFO as Jordan would say). I agree that Jon comes across as intelligent, humane, and forceful and in the matter of Gilly, cunning. He's really maturing as a leader. His pre-occupation with the next Wilding attack is a little puzzling though, given the first Samwell chapter in AFFC where he is concentrating much more clearly on the Others as the 'true enemy'. That's he's worrying about Tormund instead here is a bad omen, and I find it curious that Melisandre does not choose to divulge what she knows about the Others to Jon. Perhaps it is unconvenient for plot purposes. I see an assassination attempt coming at Jon too. Bowen Marsh and Desmond Grell and Ser Robin Ryger seem to be the closest one can come to identifying the potential traitors (Slynt is openly an enemy) although it is hard to see why any of them would wish to kill him so much as to risk their skins and honour (with Slynt obviously we need not talk about honour). I find it troubling that he doesn't have guards with him in the chapter and Ghost is nowhere to be seen. Incidentally the blockage on magic which others have mentioned is similar to the spells that protect Storm's End in ACOK which raises the question as to whether it has something to do with the elusive magic of the children of the forest who presumably helped raise both Storm's End and the Wall. I'm going to stop posting on this forum now and go back to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tourmaline Dragon Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 One minor detail that bugs the hell out of me is that fact that she is so WARM all the time. What is up with that? That she can be at the Wall with no coat on, and feel unearthly warm is pretty creepy in and of itself. I wonder if this is a glamour Yes it’s certainly drummed into us that she is very warm, unnaturally so it seems, even at the wall. Maybe it has something to do with the red ruby she wears at her throat? Does she ever take it off? Would she be so warm and impervious to poison if she removed it? Is she helpless without that ruby choker? Is it magical? GRRM mentions it in practically all of her scenes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbigski Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 His pre-occupation with the next Wilding attack is a little puzzling though, given the first Samwell chapter in AFFC where he is concentrating much more clearly on the Others as the 'true enemy'. That's he's worrying about Tormund instead here is a bad omen, and I find it curious that Melisandre does not choose to divulge what she knows about the Others to Jon. Perhaps it is unconvenient for plot purposes. Perhaps he just uses his resources wisely, and leading well. Sam is pretty much useless against wildings, but he probably the best researcher Jon has available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eponine Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 What strikes me as particularly unjust about Stannis is that he regards all those who support the Lannisters as traitors. He believes that Joff was and Tommen is the product of incest, and we know it to be true, but most people have no certainty of it and still regard Joff as their rightful king. Sure Stannis said otherwise in the messages that he sent, but he's also the person who has the most to gain from it. So the only evidence they have is that Stannis said so and that the children look very much like Cercei and not like Robert. Even with "genetics" being different in Westeros, that's not really a convincing enough reason for most people to stop supporting the person they believe to be king. If people knew that Joff/Tommen weren't Robert's and still went against Stannis, it would be fair to condemn them the way he does, but it doesn't seem right to vow to execute people who are following the king they believe to be the rightful heir to the best of their knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Moss Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 I've admitted that I admire Tywin Lannister as a character and there's no doubt as to how he would react in Stannis' position. GRRM disagrees with me though, and insofar as Tywin is Machievelli's ideal Prince, his assassination by Tyrion shows that ruthlessness, pride, cunning and ambition are not enough. Melisandre is a doomed character and neither her shadow magic, King without a shadow or shadow dragon (whenever she produces one) will save her. Nonetheless she'll help Jon before the end. Why would Tywin be Michaivelli's ideal Prince? Mcahiavelli's princely ideal encompassed the ability to inspire both love and fear. If one lacked the capability of inspiring both, then the ruler should elect to inspire fear, not for his own sake but for the sake of maintaining the peace for the public good. The theory being that if one's people loved you, that nobles could still be moved to treason, either envisioning it for being for the prince's "own good" or, if acting under duress or pressure, that prince's beneficent nature would result in a pardon or at least the worst of sanctions could be avoided in the event of discovery. An example would be Robb, a prince who inspired love but not fear. Fear, on the other hand, would keep people from acting in the first place, regardless of motivation. Tywin was, IMO, 3/4 the ideal prince. He clearly mastered acting the Lion and/or the Fox, as the situation dictated. He didn't inspire love but he did inspire fear. IMO, it is Dany (and maybe Jon) who is on the way to becoming the ideal Prince, though the Prince of Dorne may also qualify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Moss Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 If people knew that Joff/Tommen weren't Robert's and still went against Stannis, it would be fair to condemn them the way he does, but it doesn't seem right to vow to execute people who are following the king they believe to be the rightful heir to the best of their knowledge. It's not what they think, it's what they are doing. Action (and inaction), not belief, define treason in Stannis' mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anya, Vengeance Demon Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 What strikes me as particularly unjust about Stannis is that he regards all those who support the Lannisters as traitors. He believes that Joff was and Tommen is the product of incest, and we know it to be true, but most people have no certainty of it and still regard Joff as their rightful king. A Clash of Kings, US hardback, p. 460: "Good men and true will fight for Joffrey, wrongly believing him the true king. A northman might even say the same of Robb Stark." I'm not aware of Stannis executing anybody simply for supporting the Lannisters. Were you thinking of somebody in particular? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raymond III Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 That's true, for all the exposition that other characters make on how cruel or brutal Stannis' justice is he's never done anything (that he knows) that isn't the customary punishment for the crimes committed. In truth, the only thing that makes Stannis seem cruel is that other leaders sometimes decide to let people get away without punishment for their crimes. Stannis is the most just man on the entire continent; it's the other kings, barons etc. who are being unfair. Another thing that I noticed in the books is that, although Westeros has no Thomas Hobbes, Stannis is the only character vying for the throne who has ever seriously spoken about his obligations to the kingdom. He fights for power because he believes it to be his duty, not because it pleases his personal vanity, as is the case for Cersei (and on some level, I suspect, Dany), or the nationalistic fervor of the nobility, as with Robb Stark. I have liked many characters in ASoIaF, but Stannis is one of the few that I have admired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marwyn Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 That's true, for all the exposition that other characters make on how cruel or brutal Stannis' justice is he's never done anything (that he knows) that isn't the customary punishment for the crimes committed. In truth, the only thing that makes Stannis seem cruel is that other leaders sometimes decide to let people get away without punishment for their crimes. Stannis is the most just man on the entire continent; it's the other kings, barons etc. who are being unfair. Another thing that I noticed in the books is that, although Westeros has no Thomas Hobbes, Stannis is the only character vying for the throne who has ever seriously spoken about his obligations to the kingdom. He fights for power because he believes it to be his duty, not because it pleases his personal vanity, as is the case for Cersei (and on some level, I suspect, Dany), or the nationalistic fervor of the nobility, as with Robb Stark. I have liked many characters in ASoIaF, but Stannis is one of the few that I have admired. Stannis is, imo, not a man to be admired. I don't think that any kind of person who is as just, and therefore as rigid, as Stannis is a person to admire, more a person to pity. First off, he's one of the few characters who is constantly whining and complaining out loud, in front of other people. Sometimes he sounds more like a sullen child than like a king. Secondly, Stannis does not blunt the edge of his words. He does not compromise. He has never learned how to actually DEAL with people, to be a good ruler. Aerys was the king, but he still got dethroned by Robert cause he was so mad. So if Stannis would follow his own rules, then he should let himself get killed by Daenerys, still the ''rightful'' heir to the throne. Stannis is therefore inconsequent because he's executing his ''justice'' while, if you're as rigid as he is, he's still a traitor. Thirdly, Stannis is a man to pity because he takes no joy, no pleasure, from his life. His mind is set on what was taken from him, I don't think he really fights for his duty and obligation to the kingdom 100%, he wants to have back what was taken, he wants to have the respect denied to him by his brothers. That, and also partly his idea of justice, is what he's living for. I don't really think Stannis cares about people either. What he cares about is the world going by his own perfect laws, and that people live by those laws. He shows almost no emotion at all except for when he's whining, it's really the only thing he cares about. I can't really see how you can see him in such a positive light 0o but maybe that's just me.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince of the North Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 ...Another thing that I noticed in the books is that, although Westeros has no Thomas Hobbes, Stannis is the only character vying for the throne who has ever seriously spoken about his obligations to the kingdom. He fights for power because he believes it to be his duty, not because it pleases his personal vanity, as is the case for Cersei (and on some level, I suspect, Dany), or the nationalistic fervor of the nobility, as with Robb Stark... Hmm...not so sure I agree with this. I think there is ample evidence that Dany has much concern for the common people. ...Aerys was the king, but he still got dethroned by Robert cause he was so mad. So if Stannis would follow his own rules, then he should let himself get killed by Daenerys, still the ''rightful'' heir to the throne. Stannis is therefore inconsequent because he's executing his ''justice'' while, if you're as rigid as he is, he's still a traitor. Thirdly, Stannis is a man to pity because he takes no joy, no pleasure, from his life. His mind is set on what was taken from him, I don't think he really fights for his duty and obligation to the kingdom 100%, he wants to have back what was taken, he wants to have the respect denied to him by his brothers. That, and also partly his idea of justice, is what he's living for... I'm not sure Stannis is obligated to believe Dany is the "rightful" heir to the Iron Throne or that her claim is necessarily any better than his. You see, there's still the matter of right of conquest. The Baratheons "took" the throne from the Targaryens and that's just the way it is. Dany isn't going to just show up one day and Stannis will say "oh yeah, your family had the throne before mine so you are the rightful queen". No, she'll have to "take" the throne back somehow for herself (whatever that entails). You do bring up an interesting parallel between Stannis and Dany, though. They are both completely obsessed with getting something (the Iron Throne) they feel is theirs by "right" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urizen Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 Another thing that I noticed in the books is that, although Westeros has no Thomas Hobbes, Stannis is the only character vying for the throne who has ever seriously spoken about his obligations to the kingdom. He fights for power because he believes it to be his duty, not because it pleases his personal vanity, as is the case for Cersei (and on some level, I suspect, Dany), or the nationalistic fervor of the nobility, as with Robb Stark. I have liked many characters in ASoIaF, but Stannis is one of the few that I have admired. Huh? Sure that's what he says, but his actions contradicts it. if you look at his actions, especially in this chapter but also earlier,you see that he first and formost care about his own rights. Beacuse he is King everybody else should sacrifice anything and everything because he want it. A king, or more to the point, a good king/leader should give something back to the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roza Ahai Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Hm, if Mel can see thru earth and stone, why she does not see Dany's dragons? R'hlor does not show her? She have dreamed about the Wall. Does it mean that her purpose before was to reach the Wall and she used Stannis as a vehicle. I think she could not directly go to the Wall coz it is not the place for women and she would be sent back to Asshai. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raif snow Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 good point, she would need a benefactor or at least a sponsor who could ensure her safety and provide her resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowbinding shoe Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 But she never suggested the Wall. It was Davos. Her suggestions were: -Burn the sept in Dragonstone. -Kill Renly. -Kill Castelan at Storm's End and take Edric Storm captive for nefarious magical rituals. -Use Edric Storm to get rid of rival contenders for the throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.