Lord Bronn Stokeworth Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 You got a point there, although his crimes were arguably far worse than those of the cannibals and the books leave no doubt that he deserved it - he tasted his own medicine because he wanted the dragons to do what Dany does to him. But yes, correct, maybe not Dany's finest hours either (though I guess most readers cheered for here in that scene more than ever before), but it's still a step away from burning people who commited a crime out of desperation . In my book, being merciless to the most cruel of slavers is more excusable than sacrificing humans to a fire god. Still, I agree that Dany's use of dragon fire doesn't make her much better than Stannis and Mel. 1. I agree. I'm not arguing they shouldn't be punished. I'm arguing they shouldn't be burnt. 2. Again, you're right, that's not nice either. I guess she kind of gets away with it a bit because she pays back villains in the same coin ('I punish you how you saw fit to punish others'). However, you both argue that Stannis and Dany are quite similar. I tried to make the point that Stannis gets away with crimes that are often held against Dany (not rarely by Stannis' supporters). So while I've probably gone to far in saying that Dany is still better than Stannis, I think I still have a point that she is certainly not worse in that respect. Their storyline are pretty identical anyway: both have noble goals, both are using fire in questionable ways, both are making morally questionable decisions to restore order, both justify their actions by pointing out their hereditary claim, both do at least one pretty admirable thing (saving the NW, freeing the slaves) and struggle with the aftermath of those deeds, etc ... Oh boy have we come far off-topic ;) Wait. Why is it better to burn people to death with a dragon than as a sacrifice? Does the dragon hurt less? Does being a sacrifice hurt more? The difference is the targets. Stannis has only executed people he knew were guilty. Dany ordered a massacre because a free slave army is better than a paid for slave army and/or she decided slavery was bad right then. She ordered the death of 163 (I think) people for the crime of crucifying children. What's the chances those 163 each chose to crucify a child? I am not defending them. They were probably slaver scum, but they were being executed for a crime they didn't commit (nor was Dany particularly interested in actually finding the guilty parties). I should note that I don't blame Dany for burning MMD any more than I blame Stannis for his burnings even though I think MMD has sympathetic reasons for her actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gargarax Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 Wait. Why is it better to burn people to death with a dragon than as a sacrifice? Does the dragon hurt less? Does being a sacrifice hurt more? You're right that both are cruel. I tried to make the point above that whenever ritual comes into the killing of people, things are getting dangerous, because the manner of death should not be chosen because of beneficiary side-effects (for reasons see above). I agree though that this is a difficult argument to make, because the book takes place in a fictional medieval world and we can therefore not expect certain moral standards. I used that argument merely to explain why to me as a modern world reader the ritual character of the burnings was the main reason why I condemn them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gargarax Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 The benefit that Stannis wanted to get from the burning was an end to the blizzard, so that they wouldn't starve and freeze to death. So essentially it comes down to a debate similar to that of the Edric Storm Incident: is it okay to kill a few to save the many? In this case, Stannis refused to burn innocents, even when considering the possibility that it might appease the Red God and end the blizzard, but burnt the guilty to kill two birds with one stone and increase the likelihood of saving the rest of his men. That's very different from Aerys' "benefit." In my book, it makes all the difference. I'm pretty sure it would to Davos as well. Agree to disagree? How exactly would beheading or hanging them mean that he retained his moral integrity? He killed them as a punishment but wouldn't abuse their death for something else. The moral dilemme comes with the burning, not with the killing. Bran seems to think the beheading of the NW deserter to be pretty terrible. Nor was the beheading of Karstark considered a noble or just deed either. Robb himself is troubled by it and the Karstark men desert him. I didn't say they were noble deeds. The Starks just seem to take capital punishment pretty seriously, trying to make it as "human" (terrible word in that context) as possible by doing it themselves, by granting a quick death and by not desecrating the bodies as is done elsewhere. To me it seems pretty clear that in matters of justice, the Starks are pretty progressive. The NW deserter and Karstark both committed their crimes out of desperation too. Oh come on :-) Are you really making that argument? Every crime, even modern day high school massacres are acts of desperation. Does that mean, though, that eating a dead human body when you're nearly starved is the same as killing the children of your enemy? Seriously ... But how do Aerys' or Dany's actions have any bearing on Stannis'? Does the fact that Ned's and Robb's beheadings were done by sane people after much consideration somehow make Joffrey's less motivated by delusions of grandeur and insanity? No, but as I tried to point out before, death by fire has a history in the books. At least to me, such precedents influence how I judge new incidents of the same kind. Thus, I find it hard to read about the burnings without having the mad king in mind, whose fascination for fire was pretty similar to Mel's and the queen's men. I am not comparing Stannis to Aerys, but I'm saying it makes sense from a story-telling point of view to make this link. I do share your criticism to Dany to a degree. I don't know why I'm sure you're wrong about the weird woods (because you probably are not :-)), but I'll read that one up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cubicz Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I have another take on crowning Cressen that came to me upon my third reread. A Hypothesis: Melisandre saw a vision of Cressen trying to kill her at the gathering and told Stannis of the plot. Stannis, who was raised by Cressen (and is the closest person in his life he could call a father figure) deliberately had not sent for Cressen (who slept through the gathering), to save Cressen from killing himself in an attempt to assassinate Melisandre. If he doesn't come to the gathering, her vision wont come true. Again, Stannis did not send Pylos to awken Cressen to join them. When Cressen does show up, Stannis (who now sees the vision coming true) calls him a fool and says he's too old to serve him, " I will not have you KILL YOURSELF IN MY SERVICE" and is crowned - perhaps to shame him out of his folly. In the end, Melisendre vision comes true, he does what Stannis was trying to save him from doing. And in the process, Stannis begins to believe in her abilities In conclusion: Stannis wasnt being a dick. He was dissapointed in Cressen thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuisDantas Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 can you show me any other incidents where he acts even remotely like this to someone that is loyal to him? What about ordering Davos to help Melisandre kill Cortnay Penrose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan the Man Baratheon Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 What about ordering Davos to help Melisandre kill Cortnay Penrose? Cortnay Penrose that hypocritical guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luddagain Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 One other explanation is that Melisandre had him under some kind of compulsion, which was the way I read it at first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skagosi High Chef Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 I have another take on crowning Cressen that came to me upon my third reread. A Hypothesis: Melisandre saw a vision of Cressen trying to kill her at the gathering and told Stannis of the plot. Stannis, who was raised by Cressen (and is the closest person in his life he could call a father figure) deliberately had not sent for Cressen (who slept through the gathering), to save Cressen from killing himself in an attempt to assassinate Melisandre. If he doesn't come to the gathering, her vision wont come true. Again, Stannis did not send Pylos to awken Cressen to join them. When Cressen does show up, Stannis (who now sees the vision coming true) calls him a fool and says he's too old to serve him, " I will not have you KILL YOURSELF IN MY SERVICE" and is crowned - perhaps to shame him out of his folly. In the end, Melisendre vision comes true, he does what Stannis was trying to save him from doing. And in the process, Stannis begins to believe in her abilities In conclusion: Stannis wasnt being a dick. He was dissapointed in Cressen thoughts? Nyrhex posted a very concise, thorough, and believable explanation of this theory. Its official. I am declaring for Stannis. I have never been a Stan-Stan, Stan-fan, Stan-man or whatever. I am now. Hail Stannis! Stannis! Stannis! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan the Man Baratheon Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Nyrhex posted a very concise, thorough, and believable explanation of this theory. Its official. I am declaring for Stannis. I have never been a Stan-Stan, Stan-fan, Stan-man or whatever. I am now. Hail Stannis! Stannis! Stannis! Welcome aboard! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Señor de la Tormenta Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Oh so this is the reason why Stannis is a dick then? Not because he, you know, burns people alive on a regular basis and sent shadow abominations to murder his brother and the honorable Ser Courtney Penrose?Ok. Next he is going to chuck a puppy down a well and like totally make the scales fall off the eyes of his rabid supporters who until now have conveniently turned a blind eye to his many far worse atrocities. honorable Conrad "I ll bend the knee and handle de castle to any pretender who takes Stannis of my back" Penrose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsc Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Cortnay Penrose that hypocritical guy? How is Penrose hypocritical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan the Man Baratheon Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 How is Penrose hypocritical? Umm by trying to ask for help from Cersei who was known to kill Robert's bastards under the pretext of protecting Robert's bastard, Edric Storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nictarion Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Umm by trying to ask for help from Cersei who was known to kill Robert's bastards under the pretext of protecting Robert's bastard, Edric Storm. Penrose would have no knowledge of any of Robert's bastards being killed by Cersei. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuem Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Stannis calling Gilly a whore, despite her doing nothing against him. But Gilly has never been Loyal To stannis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsc Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 But Gilly has never been Loyal To stannis What? How is the relevant to Stannis calling her a whore for being raped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Señor de la Tormenta Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Umm by trying to ask for help from Cersei who was known to kill Robert's bastards under the pretext of protecting Robert's bastard, Edric Storm. Or the Greyjoys, or Robb Stark. Anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan the Man Baratheon Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Penrose would have no knowledge of any of Robert's bastards being killed by Cersei. Well choose your allies carefully then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Señor de la Tormenta Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Umm by trying to ask for help from Cersei who was known to kill Robert's bastards under the pretext of protecting Robert's bastard, Edric Storm. Or by backing Renly against Joffrey, who as far as he knows is Bobby B's kid.Honourable...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuem Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 What? How is the relevant to Stannis calling her a whore for being raped? How is that being loyal to stannis though ???????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsc Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Or by fighying for Renly.against Joffrey, who as far as he knows is Bobby B's kid. Renly was his sworn liege lord, thus Penrose owed loyalty to Renly equally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.