Game of Thrones

[Jmacq1]

Stannis is a harsh,lawful neutral character.He is a much more flawed version of Eddard Stark.Of all the contenters for the Iron Throne,he is by far the most intriguing and just of the Kings of the saga.It's the execution from the TV show that makes Stannis looking like a dick,rather than a harsh,but just man.

Stannis is harsh, but he isn't by any stretch of the imagination "just." Justice must be tempered with compassion, and applied fairly. Stannis grabs people to burn basically at random because the Red Priestess says she needs a sacrifice and they're 'infidels." He would've killed his nephew purely because he shared his blood and the Red Priestess said she needed it. Stannis lulls himself to sleep at night with the belief he's just, but he's really just a hypocrite, and in his own way just (no pun intended) as poor a choice to rule as any in the Seven Kingdoms. Hell, the Kingdoms would be better off with Tywin Lannister on the throne uncontested. He might place his own family above all, but at least he's not going to kill half or more of the Seven Kingdoms in a holy crusade once he's king (and if you think that isn't exactly what would happen, you haven't been paying attention...it's probably the whole reason Melisandre is with Stannis at all...to convert Westeros to the faith of the Red God).

I've heard Stannis described as "Ned Stark without Compassion" which would be true...if Stannis wasn't a hypocrite who'd kill anyone the Red Priestess tells him to kill if he thought it'd help make him king.

Sorry, I am so not on the Stannis bandwagon. I think some book readers have been so shell-shocked by the books that they start building up the "least undesirable option" in their heads as being less undesirable than they really are. When they said in Season 1 that Stannis would be a terrible king, they were right. I also think some readers identify with the idea of "never getting what their due" and so they sympathize with Stannis' motivations while ignoring the methods he uses to try to achieve his goals. Yeah, he's the "rightful" King if you accepted Robert Baratheon's rule as legitimate...but that doesn't at all mean he's the best man (or woman) for the job.

[Legato]

Stannis is harsh, but he isn't by any stretch of the imagination "just." Justice must be tempered with compassion, and applied fairly. Stannis grabs people to burn basically at random because the Red Priestess says she needs a sacrifice and they're 'infidels." He would've killed his nephew purely because he shared his blood and the Red Priestess said she needed it. Stannis lulls himself to sleep at night with the belief he's just, but he's really just a hypocrite, and in his own way just (no pun intended) as poor a choice to rule as any in the Seven Kingdoms. Hell, the Kingdoms would be better off with Tywin Lannister on the throne uncontested. He might place his own family above all, but at least he's not going to kill half or more of the Seven Kingdoms in a holy crusade once he's king (and if you think that isn't exactly what would happen, you haven't been paying attention...it's probably the whole reason Melisandre is with Stannis at all...to convert Westeros to the faith of the Red God).

I've heard Stannis described as "Ned Stark without Compassion" which would be true...if Stannis wasn't a hypocrite who'd kill anyone the Red Priestess tells him to kill if he thought it'd help make him king.

Quoted for truth

[7thangel]

Stannis would be a terrible king, they were right.

and that was before he became a true believer in the red god.

[PwrdOn]

Stannis is nothing more than a stubborn, unimaginative reactionary who takes the divine right of kings far too seriously and has no talent for any of the tasks required of a ruler. He could have conceivably presented himself as a firm hand and direct, no-nonsense leader, but his reliance on Melisandre completely undermines all of that.

Ultimately, I wonder if the grand lesson in Game of Thrones won't just be that feudal governments are inherently unstable and incapable of dealing with the petty conflicts between noble clans that keep the country in chaos and prevent any kind of sustained development. I would actually love to see a medieval fantasy series that actually embraces ideas of modernization, where the White Walkers and Daenerys combine to kill off a large number of people while at the same time introducing the survivors to unfamiliar Eastern goods and ideas, accelerating the downfall of the traditional landowning class just as the Black Death and the Crusades did in real life.

[Legato]

Stannis is many things. Heroic and just he is not.

[byc]

Loras claims that no-one would support Stannis for the crown because he "has the personality of a lobster".

[Angelo2113]

I was hoping to see Gendry this season and find out what happened to him after Davos helped him escape. I feel that was one of the few things that's been a constant from Seasons 1 - 3 but didn't happen this season.

[Angelo2113]

I've been watching the first few seasons of the series again and noticed that Theon Greyjoy seems to be a man without a banner. He's not a Stark and wasn't a true ironborn Greyjoy, he just seems to be collateral damage. I really want to see him gain back his courage, well courage in general actually since he seemed to never really have any, and take out Bolton and his bastard but he seems too far broken.

[Jmacq1]

Stannis is nothing more than a stubborn, unimaginative reactionary who takes the divine right of kings far too seriously and has no talent for any of the tasks required of a ruler. He could have conceivably presented himself as a firm hand and direct, no-nonsense leader, but his reliance on Melisandre completely undermines all of that.

Ultimately, I wonder if the grand lesson in Game of Thrones won't just be that feudal governments are inherently unstable and incapable of dealing with the petty conflicts between noble clans that keep the country in chaos and prevent any kind of sustained development. I would actually love to see a medieval fantasy series that actually embraces ideas of modernization, where the White Walkers and Daenerys combine to kill off a large number of people while at the same time introducing the survivors to unfamiliar Eastern goods and ideas, accelerating the downfall of the traditional landowning class just as the Black Death and the Crusades did in real life.

The only reason I'm quite sure that Song of Ice and Fire is not designed as a condemnation/deconstruction of feudal society is because about 90 percent of the characters we view the story through are part of that structure, or working towards reinforcing it in some way. Literally NO ONE (of the noble class) thinks, "Maybe we should just do away with all this nobility business." Sure, the story recognizes the flaws in the system and uses them for dramatic purposes, but if the whole point was "do away with the nobility/feudal system!" then we'd have a lot more non-nobles as our Point-of-View characters.

And the "rule of the traditional landowning class" continued WELL beyond the Crusades and the Black Death. In many ways it still exists today. The families that are in control may have changed, but the bottom line always has been, and always will be that in the grand scheme of things, those with the gold make the rules.

[Guest81]

Every bad thing Stannis has done has been because of the red priestess. He didn't really want to kill his brother, and had deep regret over his death for pretty much no reason.

He's the only one who takes the white walker threat seriously

By all the laws of Westros, he really is entitled to be king, as stated by Ned himself

Sure he would be a boring ruler but, people like littlefinger are terrified about Stannis being king, because Stannis isn't into all the political games, and couldn't be swayed by any of it.

The freakin Iron Bank believes that Stannis would make the best ruler.


Pretty much his downfall is being convinced that he's suppose to be the Jesus of Westros. It's easy to justify anything to him with that hanging over his head.

[Guest81]

Loras claims that no-one would support Stannis for the crown because he "has the personality of a lobster".

To be fair, Loras was sleeping with the competition

[hulahulk]

Stannis is no villain. Well, to the Lannisters he is.

[PwrdOn]

And the "rule of the traditional landowning class" continued WELL beyond the Crusades and the Black Death. In many ways it still exists today. The families that are in control may have changed, but the bottom line always has been, and always will be that in the grand scheme of things, those with the gold make the rules.

Well I think a major difference between the old aristocracy and the current capitalist class is that the latter doesn't rely on the acquisition of land to accumulate wealth, so that petty disputes between them do not necessarily need to be settled in war, as they usually did under the warrior nobility. Sure the downfall of feudalism was a slow process, but it was already well underway by the late middle ages, as the landowners gradually lost power and influence to the new urban mercantile class whose growing wealth outweighed their lack of noble ancestry. Littlefinger is a good example of this, even if he is technically a noble, and with the shakeup of the social order in Westeros there are lots of opportunities for the smallfolk to improve their situation at the expense of the old families.

[Master Planner]

Stannis is harsh, but he isn't by any stretch of the imagination "just." Justice must be tempered with compassion, and applied fairly. Stannis grabs people to burn basically at random because the Red Priestess says she needs a sacrifice and they're 'infidels." He would've killed his nephew purely because he shared his blood and the Red Priestess said she needed it. Stannis lulls himself to sleep at night with the belief he's just, but he's really just a hypocrite, and in his own way just (no pun intended) as poor a choice to rule as any in the Seven Kingdoms. Hell, the Kingdoms would be better off with Tywin Lannister on the throne uncontested. He might place his own family above all, but at least he's not going to kill half or more of the Seven Kingdoms in a holy crusade once he's king (and if you think that isn't exactly what would happen, you haven't been paying attention...it's probably the whole reason Melisandre is with Stannis at all...to convert Westeros to the faith of the Red God).

I've heard Stannis described as "Ned Stark without Compassion" which would be true...if Stannis wasn't a hypocrite who'd kill anyone the Red Priestess tells him to kill if he thought it'd help make him king.

Sorry, I am so not on the Stannis bandwagon. I think some book readers have been so shell-shocked by the books that they start building up the "least undesirable option" in their heads as being less undesirable than they really are. When they said in Season 1 that Stannis would be a terrible king, they were right. I also think some readers identify with the idea of "never getting what their due" and so they sympathize with Stannis' motivations while ignoring the methods he uses to try to achieve his goals. Yeah, he's the "rightful" King if you accepted Robert Baratheon's rule as legitimate...but that doesn't at all mean he's the best man (or woman) for the job.

The main problem with TV Stannis is that pretty much botched his character,starting with his relation with Melissandre.In the books,Stannis use Melissandre as a mean to counter-balance his weakness in men and money against the other competitors and he is not a tool as TV show represent him.Also,some of the burnings were justified in the books.Alester Florent was burned in the books because he tried to sign a separate peace treaty with the Lannisters and giving them Shireen under Stannis nose and not because he is a believer of the Seven.

As for the religion of R'Hlor,pretty much,every red priest tried to expand their religion in Westeros.Thoros of Myr approached the court of Robert Baratheon in order to convert the new king into the religion of the Lord of Light.Mel tries the same,although she pretty much believes(for now) that Stannis is the Azor Ahai,the messianic warrior who would save the world from the eternal darkness and winter.

Back to TV Stannis,i feel that Weiss and Benioff play Stannis as a villainous anti-hero,which is shame,because Book Stannis is a far more intriguing character.My final verdict about TV Stannis would happen after seeing his certain heroic moment and how they translate it in the series.Till then,i have my hopes that TV Stannis will get better.

[Donald]

I'm not really sad that Ygriette died. The way I look at it she digged her own grave.

I have a little sympathy for her. I think she did fall in love with Snow and his betrayal of the Wildlings (and her) drove her over the edge. Dying from an arrow to the heart was a nice bit of symbolism, I thought.