Mikkel Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Burning men alive for the crime of eating isn't cruel? Why not just take their heads? Just because Stannis says (and wants to believe) "I am not a cruel man" doesn't make it true. I say this as a big fan of the Mannis, BTW It's damn cold in the North, he was just warming them up before they go :P But no, I don't think it's cruel. It's borderline though, and definitely merciless, yes. He's also not doing it for the crime of eating, but for cannibalism - two sides of the same coin, perhaps, but quite an important distinction in my world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EstEst Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Y'know, it's similar to Robert not standing up against Cersei during the Lady incident. I guess spinelessness is a Baratheon trait? No, I'd say it's rather similar to Arya chasing Nymeria away, to keep her from harm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 It's damn cold in the North, he was just warming them up before they go :P But no, I don't think it's cruel. It's borderline though, and definitely merciless, yes. He's also not doing it for the crime of eating, but for cannibalism - two sides of the same coin, perhaps, but quite an important distinction in my world. I'd try people if it was socially acceptable to do so... I know it's weird, but my roommate in college and I had a lengthy discussion about it and we came to the conclusion that we'd both do it and that cannabalism in and of itself is not inherently evil... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Ro Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 I'd try people if it was socially acceptable to do so... I know it's weird, but my roommate in college and I had a lengthy discussion about it and we came to the conclusion that we'd both do it and that cannabalism in and of itself is not inherently evil... Its not about cannibalism being "evil," its about maintaining discipline in a starving army in dire conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco_Dracul Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Its not about cannibalism being "evil," its about maintaining discipline in a starving army in dire conditions. Almost any culture will say that in such dire conditions cannibalism is acceptable so long as murder is not involved. I mean it is only because of Davos that Stannis ins't a cannibal himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikkel Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Its not about cannibalism being "evil," its about maintaining discipline in a starving army in dire conditions. Exactly. I agree that under certain circumstances, it's not evil per se. But as Stannis himself says, it's a short step from eating the dead, to helping those you judge to be dying "on their way" if you get hungry enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Ro Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Almost any culture will say that in such dire conditions cannibalism is acceptable so long as murder is not involved. I mean it is only because of Davos that Stannis ins't a cannibal himself.Yes, so long as murder is not involved. The problem is, its an army of men that can collapse at any time. Keeping discipline and control is of PARAMOUNT importance. Once this cannibalism starts its only a matter of time before men are killing each other for food, and then everyone is on edge over it and the army collapses as men desert. Simply put, allowing the cannibalism to happen is impossible if he wants to keep his army intact, and any other commander would have executed or SEVERELY punished those men as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco_Dracul Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Yes, so long as murder is not involved. The problem is, its an army of men that can collapse at any time. Keeping discipline and control is of PARAMOUNT importance. Once this cannibalism starts its only a matter of time before men are killing each other for food, and then everyone is on edge over it and the army collapses as men desert. Simply put, allowing the cannibalism to happen is impossible if he wants to keep his army intact, and any other commander would have executed or SEVERELY punished those men as well. And even then a quick painless decapitation would accomplish that just as well without the cruelty (and cruelty risks a breakdown of a military group just as much, it was the primary cause of mutinies on naval ships after all). By the standards of both Westeros and our own world of the time it is a cruel and unusual punishment (in our own world it was almost universally reserved for people both heavily despised by the crown and convicted of heresy, and even then they were usually strangled before the fire was started.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikkel Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 And even then a quick painless decapitation would accomplish that just as well without the cruelty (and cruelty risks a breakdown of a military group just as much, it was the primary cause of mutinies on naval ships after all). By the standards of both Westeros and our own world of the time it is a cruel and unusual punishment (in our own world it was almost universally reserved for people both heavily despised by the crown and convicted of heresy, and even then they were usually strangled before the fire was started.) Agreed in so far as a quick decapitation would serve as well for the men involved. However, this is part of Stannis' sometimes overly pragmatic character: the men were going to die anyway, they might as well serve the dual purpose of appeasing the Queen's men too. That said, he earns no new friends by burning people, and it may end up costing him dearly in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aFeastForDragons Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 Nobody bats an eye when Tywin orders Amory Lock and the Mountain to burn the Riverlands, raping children, butchering innocents and torturing them for information. But Stannis mocks his Maester and everyone loses their minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsc Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 Nobody bats an eye when Tywin orders Amory Lock and the Mountain to burn the Riverlands, raping children, butchering innocents and torturing them for information. Actually, I am positive that a ton of people consider Tywin to be human scum and a highly evil man for his different actions during RR and WOT5Ks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter's Knight Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 Nobody bats an eye when Tywin orders Amory Lock and the Mountain to burn the Riverlands, raping children, butchering innocents and torturing them for information. But Stannis mocks his Maester and everyone loses their minds. What? People hate Tywin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikkel Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 What? People hate Tywin. It's a classic strawman, it's akin to the "why do everyone hate X" threads (despite the fact character X is generally liked). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
( Bloodraven ) Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 Nobody bats an eye when Tywin orders Amory Lock and the Mountain to burn the Riverlands, raping children, butchering innocents and torturing them for information. But Stannis mocks his Maester and everyone loses their minds.There's pretty much nothing to debate about Tywin :dunno: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aFeastForDragons Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 It was a joke about how everyones making such a big deal about a simple jape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roose The Weddingcrasher Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 It was a joke about how everyones making such a big deal about a simple jape. That he actually didn't want and brings to an end as soon as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 Awesome. Now Stannis is haunted by the gods of semantics in addition to the vascilting gods of duty and pragmatism (depending on the situation) and of course R'Hlor.Poor guy, can't stop doing shitty things he really really deep down doesn't want to do, but only because he's too good and dutiful (or pragmatic when dutiful doesn't suit) to not do them. And yet some people keep suggesting there's a connection between when he bows to duty and when he doesn't...ie, which one suits his agenda (another thing he really doesn't want, of course) at the given moment. He spends the entire prologue bitching. He literally complains about Robert's love for Ned, and bitches that Robert never said "Well done brother, what would I ever have done without you?" (Can you imagine any other male in the series outside of Joffrey or maybe Tyrion on his slf-pity tour actually talking like that?) He bitches about Storm's End and about Ned being named hand. He bitches about Renly and about having brothers at all...which is rich, considering that none of the crap he insists is due him would be due him if Robert had never lived...and he bitches about Cressen's council. He also PRECEDES the jokes he absolutely doesn't want to happen by publicly humiliating Cressn, calling him a useless old man, and jesting that he'd do better with Renly's Maester...I guess he REALLY saw the crown joke coming from far away and was trying to get an early start on defusing it...So, why did he do something ELSE bitchy in that chapter?Dunno, must require some seriously convoluted explanation involving semantics and duty, I guess. and of course Cressen mistakes it for cruelty because he doesn't understand Stannis as well as we do. And of course when his queen goes 'too far' it's suddenly ok to contradict her...the gods switched again, probably on a technicality. Stannis has several gods, but first and foremost is whatever he thinks is due HIM...everything else, including duty, fall in line well to the rear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tetrarch42 Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 Nobody bats an eye when Tywin orders Amory Lock and the Mountain to burn the Riverlands, raping children, butchering innocents and torturing them for information. But Stannis mocks his Maester and everyone loses their minds. Tywin is widely acknowlefged to be a disgusting human being. Stannis is a good deal greyer and people want to like him for the good that he does. Of course he does some pretty morally reprehensible things as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethermancer Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 can you show me any other incidents where he acts even remotely like this to someone that is loyal to him? Someone who requires that you be loyal to him so that he won't treat you like dirt... is kind of a dick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tetrarch42 Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 Someone who requires that you be loyal to him so that he won't treat you like dirt... is kind of a dick. There goes just about every lord, lady, and landed knight of the Seven Kingdoms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.