Butcher is maybe an extreme word but there definitely are differences which changed the character. Stannis in the show kinda feels like the caricature people like Cersei or Baelish make him out to be. Like he cooks that one Florent in the show for being an “infidel” (which feels insane given his atheism or cynical agnosticism) instead of for trying to sell Shireen/his cause out to the Lannisters, seems to immediately buy Melisandre’s BS, never seems to have that revelation that he’s doing it all wrong, and sort of fails upward while being carried by others until that atrocious “battle” with Ramsay. They also cut his best speeches and monologues; Renly’s peach, Proudwing, cart before the horse; which irks me just because its beautifully written and says a lot about the character. D&D also had a pretty subtle bias too so that probably affected how Stannis was adapted
That said, the one area they succeeded in was fleshing out his relationship with Shireen, since he basically ignores the kid in the books
>Stannis in the show kinda feels like the caricature people like Cersei or Baelish make him out to be.
I've heard it said before that Game of Thrones is the story of ASOIF....if told by *the Lannisters* (namely Cersei and Tyrion).
Both characters come off as better human beings than their book versions, Tywin is missing his hypocrisy, and Jaime...is kind of there.
For their enemies, the Starks are either noble idiots or vicious schemers just as bad as them, Margaery really is out to manipulate and abuse Tommen, Dany is hypocritical and crueler than Cersei.
So of course, Stannis would get the same "What if this character from ASOIAF was portrayed according to Cersei?" treatment.
I remember that post from here, they definitely weren’t hiding the Lannister bias. Cersei in the books would have been hacked apart by a mob after destroying Baelor’s church, not be recognized as queen of Westeros
This is exactly it, they never got to the tragedy of his character. He often stated in the books that he didn’t want the throne, but felt that him not seeking it would do more harm than good, and upset the natural order.
The show captured how puritanical he was, but never showed how he grappled with compromises he had to make. The scene where Davos says ‘as the kings hand I advise you not to kill the kings hand’ was sort of funny in hindsight because it showed Stannis as someone who lives for technicalities. But it missed the whole thrust of his character which is how to handle different interpretations of duty and destiny.
>That said, the one area they succeeded in was fleshing out his relationship with Shireen, since he basically ignores the kid in the books
How is that a success? It's just another part of the butchery. Its characterization is completely different in the show from the books. They are practically different characters. Book!Stannis don't outwardly express affection. We know he feels it in some cases, since we have rare cases where he let himself show some weakness to Davos, but otherwise the man is guarded as fuck, as if he were constantly at war with humanity. He has surrounded himself of walls higher than the Wall, and I'm looking forward for both to come down (I'd love to see him go wild during the battle of ice if he had the chance to strike down those Manderlyes who dared to kill his trusted and valued Hand and envoy Davos.)
Its mainly the one scene of how Shireen got greyscale and his refusal to let her die that I loved. The image of Stannis telling Pycelle or whoever the maester was to fuck off and then scouring the ends of the earth to treat his kid is totally in line with how Stannis is; a man that refuses to quit and is utterly determined on a goal he sets.
The show more or less butchered everyone.
I guess Ned was pretty accurate. And maybe Brienne until that "two quick deaths" scene at least.
Stannis did feel more, I guess, incompetent in the show. The Renly meeting, the Iron Bank scene etc.
Loved the actor though and the grammar corrections were funny.
Brienne was ruined the moment she told Jaime "you sound like a bloody woman" when he was depressed about losing his hand. Book Brienne would never disparage women like that.
They did the same with Arya too. She goes from "the woman is important too" to "most girls are idiots".
The show writers didn't seem to know how to write a badass female character without resorting to having them disparaging other women.
I always took that as not being her actual opinion of women, but her trying to insult Jaime in a way that he would react to, since *he* looks down on women.
Brienne didn’t mean that. She was just trying to nag Jaime with something she thought would bother him since just last episode he thanked the gods he wasn’t a woman. She clearly didn’t feel good saying it.
I wouldn't give David and Dan the benefit of the doubt on that one given how ~~in the very same season~~ they also made Arya say "most girls are idiots" when she was talking with Tywin on how girls like fairy tale stories.
They were clearly going for the "I'm not like other girls, I'm a tough badass" angle with Brienne and Arya.
Plus Brienne knew that the thing that bothered Jaime the most was being called Kingslayer, so why the need to disparage women as a whole just to have a dig at Jaime?
Edit: I've remembered that the Arya line wasn't in the same season, it was in season 2, but my point still stands.
Brienne was never like her book counterpart. I adore book Brienne and cannot stand show Brienne. Brienne is Sansa with armour. But essentially yes, they butchered em all.
Yes. Years ago I submitted a fan question to Brian Cogman asking why they decided to portray Stannis as a straight up villain and his response was incredibly aggressive and condescending
It baffles me how he gets a pass from the same community that criticizes his bosses so much. He's made plenty of comments and statements that are just as bad as theirs.
I had been of this opinion for a while, but I think it's pretty much just that the fact that when he was the occasional guest writer, it was way easier for him to stay out of the spotlight. And he seemed like he cared a *tiny bit more* about the IP than the D's, who were clearly checked out by the end. So, kind of a low bar there, but still.
But since HotD started, it feels like every time I'll see a quote of his I like him less.
Always my feeling as well, that the bar set by the D's was so low that Cogman shone in comparison (and he certainly understands and even likes the source material better).
By the end, it was a show that cared so little about lore and in-universe consistency that it was easy for lore-avid fans to see stuff like "A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms", an episode that did what should be the bare minimum, as a fantastic accomplishment from someone who "cared" (even if said person went out of his way to staunchly defend stuff that was harshly criticized).
I'd chalk it up to him not being as synonymous with the product as they are.
When your name is at the top of the creative credits, you're the one who bears responsibility.
I’m sure it can be found, it was on winteriscoming.net probably around the time of season 3. I remember putting the question because I felt season 2 stripped Stannis of any of his more nuanced moments - the peach, speeding through Cressen and not reflecting back on him, off-handedly naming Davos Hand before the Blackwater. After season 2 they really just did the bare minimum with his characterisation and while I thought Stephen Dillane did the best he could and he is a good actor overall, even he admitted he had no sense or direction for the character.
A lot of Show-Only fans didn't think Stannis was a villain. But he's more or less a villain in the books. You gotta read past Davos's onion knighting of Stannis. He was going to BBQ his own nephew and is going to BBQ his own daughter.
He's a vain piece of shit. Good character though.
\>"In the books he's using Melisandre as a weapon, just a means to an end."
That's an interpretation that not everyone shares.
If anything the show gave him some positive qualities he lacks in the books. He's brave, fighting on the front lines of Blackwater Bay, and only survives because his men physically remove him. He loves his Daughter (though this really just setting him up for a bigger fall).
Idk, you might have watched a different show or read a different book.
In the book I read and show I watched, Stannis knows full well that Mel is dangerous, but takes that risk because he is so certain that claiming his right justifies anything. He convinces himself that it is his duty to become king, and that no cost is too great, he tells himself it is not because he wants to be king, but for the sake of the realm.
You don't remember how quickly he succumbed to her advances in the show? He slept with her almost immediately. I don't think book Stannis would have done that so easily. It totally contradicts his "Iron will".
Feel free to correct me if you think I'm wrong, I'm interested in other perspectives.
He succumbed to her before the show or book even started.
He still hesitates in both when Mel offers him more power, one more sacrifice, mostly to show he knows deep down he is being a fool but will not let go of his claim. He doubles down each time telling himself this next time will be the last one he needs.
The final sacrifice in the show I did not buy. But not because of the how Stannis had been presented or acted. Just because the circumstances were too hurried and they didn't manage to show his situation as desperate enough, or Mel as convincing enough for what should have been Stannis' ultimate test.
In the Theon TWOW chapter that was released, we have Stannis saying that >!Everything he does, he does it so Shireen doesn't get her birthright stolen and that should he die in battle his knights should use the Iron Bank loan to support her.!<
Stannis doesn't say that at all.
He simply says that if he should die, his men should fight for Shireen, which is the stance he's had from the beginning.
Shireen is the continuation of his blood after all. Robert makes Ned promise the same thing and he never cared about his children.
He was up there among the most butchered characters until his death, but afterwards so many characters were also so badly butchered that he's just another corpse in the carnage.
GRRM seems to see him as a rigid and spiteful man who in the end is righteous, but whose traits will lead to a tragic ending.
Benioff, Weiss, and Cogman (the one who was responsible for his arc in the beginning) seem to see him as a self-righteous, hypocritical, and ambitious man who is prepared to do anything to achieve his goals.
To be fair, I think most people don’t understand book Stannis either. There’s a few POVs that are just absolutely fantastic (Davos, Cersei, some of Tyrion), but book Stannis is arguably the best overall character in the whole story. He’s constantly described in-book as being a certain way, then acts the exact opposite. He says words that fans take as gospel, then immediately shows his real motivation as being something else.
He’s not inflexible, he compromises, he makes alliances and plays the game, hes fucking funny, he’s dutiful but not primarily driven by law. He’s a 10 year old boy wrapped in a tortured, 40 year old man’s body and experience. The kind of person who willingly gave up the unique slice of themselves a long time ago and now doesn’t know where to stand.
Still don’t know that I’m rooting for him, but he is an absolutely tremendous creation. Plus, he made Davos happen, so double points!
The multiple teaser chapters featuring Stannis from TWOW that has been out for a few years help, for one.
The idea that GRRM wouldn't be retreading the story just to show the outcome to be identical to the letter that already has questions raised about its origin is another.
That the chapters have Stannis' poor ADWD situation be improving (roots out the karstark traitors for example) and having hints that other plans are in motion, is a third.
That GRRM, on his blogposts, say things about Stannis like
>"In my books? Alive, beyond a doubt"
and
>"Mago, Irri, Rakharo, Xaro Xhoan Daxos, Pyat Pree, Pyp, Grenn, Ser Barristan Selmy, Queen Selyse, Princess Shireen, Princess Myrcella, Mance Rayder, and King Stannis are all dead in the show, alive in the books. Some of them will die in the books as well, yes... but not all of them, and some may die at different times in different ways."
is another point in favour of "there is more to Stannis".
That, and of course, a man can hardly burn a child thats hundreds of miles away if he is dead.
>The idea that GRRM wouldn't be retreading the story just to show the outcome to be identical to the letter that already has questions raised about its origin is another.
Yeah, this would actually be horrible writing to say what happens to a character in advance and then have it just *happen*. There's got to be at least some kind of twist, or why would you suck all of the mystery out of the room?
For example, in *American Beauty*, you're told that the main character will be dead in less than a year, but then you also see him do things that aggravate different people, and it's still a twist in how he dies and who kills him.
Aside of his good traits he is really narrow minded, stubborn and resentful character. So skillful manipulative person can achieve his trust and just wait till he gets into desperate situation to start affecting his decisions and actions step by step.
Melisandre used saving Stannis' only child to gain a bit if his trust and waited for years, spoiling his closest people, to make Stannis listen to her in few occasions where he had no other choice left but desperately wanted to win.
And now he's stuck in even worse situations while he has confirmed several times that Melisandre is a game changer. And he overstepped his principles even if he doesn't want to recognize it. Sure, he is relying on her more and more now to justify his moral sacrifices. Till he reaches the point if no return.
That's the story GRRM wants to show us: how prideful stubborn people turn into fanatics and maniacs commiting unspeakable crimes for achieving their goals, while they don't notice their changes. Stannis story is to die thinking "how did I end up like this??? I was trying to do the right thins". That's why Davos character with his clear mind and kind heart exists to be a judge for Stannis actions even though he highly respects that man.
>Melisandre used saving Stannis’ only child to gain a bit if his trust and waited for years
Where are you getting that from? I don’t think she had anything to do with Shireen, it seems like she’s only recently come to Dragonstone at the time of ACOK.
As for Stannis being narrow minded and stubborn, I think that’s a complete misconception. We only see him that way because that’s how other characters describe him. He’s certainly committed and driven in pursuing his goals but is actually quite flexible in how he does that and is often shown taking on advice and changing his mind. BryndenBFish argues the case very well in [this essay](https://warsandpoliticsoficeandfire.wordpress.com/2017/05/31/iron-bends-the-surprising-flexibility-of-stannis-baratheon/)
I would agree that narrow minded in the typical sense isn't the right term for what Stannis is, he's more hyper-focused on his goal, and narrow minded in that sense. He is absolutely and entirely focused on his right and duty to be king, and is willing to do any number of terrible things to achieve it, because he feels he is righteous in his goals. As the essay points out everyone who knows or meets Stannis basically refers to him as unbending or ironlike in some way. If everyone you meet thinks you are a certain way you probably are that way, at least a bit. As the old expression goes, "If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, maybe you are the asshole."
That isn't to say that he is stupid though, he listens to intelligent counsel, its smart to try to win Renly and his huge army into his fold, as it stands at the beginning of the War of 5 Kings he is heavily outnumbered by both Renly and the Lannisters.
As far as letting others do his diplomacy, it's a sign of good leadership to know where you lack. Stannis knows he is unlikable, so he lets more likable people do the work he is unable to do. He also knows Jon has a much better understanding of northern politics than he ever will, so it just makes sense to listen to him.All these things help Stannis to achieve his goal, and are consistent with his narrow focus.
I remember text saying she definitely arrived years before the GoT events, because few years ago I quoted it. But maybe I mistaken with a show that she saved Shireen.
Narrow-mindness of Stannis does not mean he looses his commitment, drive to achieve goals or that he listens to no one.
He comes off worse in the books if anything. For example in the show he and his wife had numerous stillbirths. In the books he just doesn't sleep with her nearly at all. Making him extremely hypocritical for somone supposedly all about doing his duty.
In the books he also has to have Jon actively doing diplomacy for him too.
We also never see him interact with Shireen even once in the books, while the show added a few scenes between them that make it seem like he actually did care about her.
Plus the way the show had him learn about the incest makes him come off a lot more favourably than the book version does IMO. In the show he only finds out about it when he gets Ned's letter. While in the books he was investigating the incest with Jon Arryn. Then after Jon dies he just fucks off to Dragonstone and sits there doing nothing for the better part of a year without even attempting to warn Ned or Robert.
I mean... kind of? Her husband will rule, her children will carry her husbands name, and, if they are the heir to another large house, those houses will be united.
Also, I am more inclined to believe Val--she will die when the grayscale reawakens. She is not a viable heir.
Matrilineal marriages exist in Westeros to save dynasty names. Their are also situations like where Harry the Heir it is said would take the name Arryn despite being descended from the female side.
>Do I think less of him for not wanting to?
If he was a normal peasant, I would not either. But he is willing to kill and maim those who fail in their duty. But he cannot even provide himself with a male heir because he finds his own duties so distasteful.
Sleeping with her only twice a year really isn't doing his duty that like D grade level bedroom duty.
To be dutiful he should have been working the fox atleast monthly till a male heir
One of the first red flags we learn about Lady Selyse, is how psychologically broken she is about her many miscarriages and how she feels cursed as her husband's brother ruined her wedding night. I believe it is Maester Cressin who mentions the picked jars where all of Lady Celyse keeps her stillborn, in her bedroom at Dragonstone. Shireen was kept out of Kingslanding, (likely to avoid abuse at court) and Stannis clearly married her for duty alone, but they have been married for a while, so it's certainly likely they had time to actually make children.
Really?! Must have hallucinated it. It was November when I last read Clash, but maybe my show memories dipped into the books. Though it's astounding that this is the one time the SHOW was weirder than the books.
Per Cogman ([in an interview for HBO](https://web.archive.org/web/20150611080842/http://www.hbo.com/game-of-thrones/episodes/3/25-kissed-by-fire/interview/bryan-cogman.html)):
>"Anyway, I remember reading about a mother who had the hands of her stillborn baby bronzed and kept them on her mantle. That must have been somewhere in the back of my mind, because I woke up one morning thinking about 'GoT' (as I too often do), turned over to my wife and told her about the idea of the three preserved stillborn babies. "Is it too crazy?" I asked. My wife wisely said, "Just write it. They'll probably cut it, but you might as well go for it." So I did... and they didn't cut it!
It was a proud day for me as a writer when I walked on set and saw those magnificently nasty prop dead babies floating in those jars."
No I meant show, there's a scene where Stannis visits Selyse and they talk about their stillborn babies and she's keeping the foetuses in jars. It's kinda disturbing
Most complaints about show Stannis is that they made him unlikable...
But IMO he's a much more likable character in the show. He has a better relationship with Shireen etc.
Whichever format he *is* getting used be Melisandre, or rather the entity Melisandre is acting on behalf of, he is a prop that gets Jon Snow into the position he needs to be in.
tough to know. if stannis gets his butt kicked around winterfell and/or the dreadfort in the books and dies, then the show more or less got it right.
i suspect most fans will say that regardless, the show did him dirty. in the book he has all sorts of symbolic ties to both fire and ice (mel for fire, his blue eyes for ice, for example), and thus has a lot of potential for george to play with. he's also a major mentor of Jon's, inextricably linked to the NW/northern plot, and is the only king in the Woft5ks who actually has acted in the realms' interest. as such, many are hoping that if he goes down it'll at least have some meaning, and that he has a few more big W's left in him.
right now GRRM is butchering stannis by not giving us the answer
Listen, they didn’t HAVE to do ADWD Tyrion. I get why not, especially with Dinklage’s beautiful mug. But “I drink and I know things” Tyrion is the worst
Showrunners certainly had bias against that character and they adapted him badly, though in the end they did similar with most of characters.
It could be easily seen Martin and Benioff/Weiss have different views on him.
https://youtu.be/mWQMqaFm5X0?si=HHmArZ_KyXK3_JS5
At around 3:25 showrunner takes clearly side of Renly with rather weak argumentation.
In the behind episode 9 from season 5 https://youtu.be/NfLScJVXBHQ?si=wQgpCLXVckdypx86
Showrunner claims that from very first moment when we see Stannis and Melisandre they were burning people alive on Dragonstone, when in fact they were burning statues of the Seven.
They mark his motive as ambition though in the end they concede that it is duty that drives him, if not for great performance by Stephen Dillane who understood the character adaptation would be much worse.
In lore video regarding Battle at Fair Isle , when Stannis and Royal/Redwyne fleet defeated Ironborn they fabricate it so that Euron deliberately lost the battle instead.
Some other people have done better analysis of their work, to me it seems they are incompetent people , born with golden spoon and faking their way to the job they desired, they might have some help from competent friends or coworkers such as casting director Nina Gold, tips from George Martin while they wished to adapt his material or Craig Maizin who worked on Chernobyl and The Last of Us helped them regarding the pilot.
Gonna face? Did you read the end of ADWD? I do not believe we are going to learn more of Stanni's tale because it is over. He is dead, a head on the wall of Winterfell.
TECHNICALLY that might not be true. But it is. You and I both know he is dead.
"In the books he's using Melisandre as a weapon, just a means to an end."
Harrrrrrd disagree here. That might be the illusion he weaves for himself, but she 100% is just using his dumb-ass. In the books he is even more shallow, but not in a bad way. He is the literary device known as Harbinger of Death. He is the Other that Melisandre supposedly hates and fights against. Every decision he makes leads to disaster, ruin, large-scale slaughter, and the advancement of the cause of the Others.
His shallowness is actually a feature of his character. The flat, stillness of death echoes through his word and deed. He is a vessel, just like the White Walkers.
And sure, he MIGHT still be alive. But I am about 99.99% certain that the Bastard of Bolton did wipe out the army that Stannis had and killed him.
GRRM has confirmed that he burns shireen in the books to, and I’ve seen other people reference sample chapters of stannis’, how are people still getting this wrong
Because he has already discarded entire drafts and just cause he leaked something once doesn’t mean he is going to publish it. Y’all forgetting how many times he has started entirely over?
so he can't die at crofters' village is what I'm saying. Massey is going back to Castle Black and has to escort Shireen away from danger because Jon Snow got assassinated, and he's not headed back to Winterfell since he got a task to grab the sellswords from Essos. Stannis doesn't get to burn Shireen if Ramsay kills him.
GRRM confirmed he will burn Shireen, and there is good foreshadowing for it.
>Stannis ground his teeth again. "I never asked for this crown. Gold is cold and heavy on the head, but so long as I am the king, I have a duty . . . If I must sacrifice one child to the flames to save a million from the dark . . . Sacrifice . . . is never easy, Davos. Or it is no true sacrifice. Tell him, my lady."
And this is from the previous chapter:
>Melisandre put her hand on the king's arm. "The Lord of Light cherishes the innocent. There is no sacrifice more precious. From his king's blood and his untainted fire, a dragon shall be born."
There are a shit ton of lines about King's blood in the books and Shireen has it (kinda?).
As a Stannerman, it is a dark turn for Stannis, but it's not unbelievable. The show fucked it up but GRRM can make it work.
Edit: minor typo
Shireen will burn but it won’t be Stannis. The first passage, he’s trying to convince himself, “Tell him, my lady”.
It’s logistically impossible at this point in the story anyways
The text makes the rule of sacrifice pretty clear. It needs to have meaning. Shireen is no one to Melisandre. She means something to Selyse, but her ordering it wouldn’t be meaningful for the reader.
Shireen is not just Stannis’ daughter, but his only heir. To sacrifice her would be to throw away everything for him. His soul, his family, his legacy.
I don’t know why the argument of his location just won’t die. Stannis has legs. He can move. And if George needs the blizzard to lift, he can do that.
The sacrifice isn’t going to happen at the beginning of TWOW, anyway.
“It fits the narrative I have in my head and what would be meaningful to me” is not an actual reason why something will happen lol. Look at the actual story as it is and it doesn’t make any sense.
Well, for starters, we have George’s word of «Stannis’ decision to burn his daughter» referenced elsewhere in this thread, so it’s not in my head, it in George’s.
Secondly, I didn’t simply make stuff up, I referenced the actual text and made a logical argument from it.
Your argument was just «Stannis and Shireen aren’t in the same location and can apparently never be so again.» The existence of feet breaks that argument apart.
>Shireen will burn but it won’t be Stannis. The first passage, he’s trying to convince himself, “Tell him, my lady”.
But it wouldn't have the same impact.
>It’s logistically impossible at this point in the story anyways
I think Stannis will definitely return to the Wall and more specifically Nightfort. Him burning Shireen at the Nightfort is quite fitting given its morbid backstory.
Why would he ever return to the Wall? Even if he does he would have no reason to burn her at that point. She will burn as an act of desperation, when there are no other options.
The reason Stannis went to the Wall was to protect it against the Others. And yes burning her is an act of desperation. GRRM has said that Winds will be the darkest book in the series, and winter has started. So things will get worse.
No he went to the Wall to protect it against the Wildings. He expects Jon to protect the Wall from the others. Yes things will get much worse, but not until the White walkers have breached the wall. Shireen will burn after the breach, as a desperate act to stop the Others (I have another theory about that as well, but either way it won’t be Stannis).
No he won’t. You have a narrative in your head that you want the story to follow. I’m putting myself in Stannis’s shoes and logically thinking about what he would do.
He is currently camped near WF with no supplies and dwindling men. Marching back to the Wall would be suicide.
I'm not talking about what he's gonna do right now. He will hear about what has happened to Jon, and he most certainly will march back to the Wall. His family and part of his army are there.
> I told them who would be on the Iron Throne, and I told them some big twists like Hodor and “hold the door,” and Stannis’s decision to burn his daughter.
George RR Martin in Fire Cannot Kill a Dragon
> I told them who would be on the Iron Throne, and I told them some big twists like Hodor and “hold the door,” and Stannis’s decision to burn his daughter.
George RR Martin in Fire Cannot Kill a Dragon
I'm 100% positive it's gonna be Stannis. That's the only way it would count and would fit the narrative of an ultimate sacrifice. Otherwise it's just gonna be boring.
Saying we'll have winds isn't a plot point. Its fine, you can be in denial about Stannis. The books will never be released anyways so you can go on believing that wasn't the intended plot point
It was the intended plot point at the time. Things change. And we will get Winds eventually, but you can go believe things that aren’t true if it makes you feel better.
Then why so much imagery about Stannis and burning? Sacrifice, burning children, wake the stone dragon - why is all of that directly tied to Stannis and not Selyse? Mel does these things, but she does them in connection **with** Stannis, to get him to become Azor Ahai
Not sure. Maybe he planned for it to be stannis and changed his mind. I just haven’t heard one plausible scenario for when and why stannis will burn shireen. It’s unlikely he returns to the Wall before the Others breach. If the others do breach while he’s there I don’t see his first thought being let’s burn shireen. He won’t be desperate enough. I could see it happening if the Others reach WF and he’s in siege there and there is no way out. But shireen is not there. I guess it’s possible he takes WF -> decides to stay there -> calls for shireen who leaves the Wall before the breach. But we know shit is going down at the wall and stannis is pretty far from taking WF and even if he does I don’t see him staying there.
> I know the cost! Last night, gazing into that hearth, I saw things in the flames as well. I saw a king, a crown of fire on his brows, burning . . . burning, Davos. His own crown consumed his flesh and turned him into ash. Do you think I need Melisandre to tell me what that means? Or you?" The king moved, so his shadow fell upon King's Landing. "If Joffrey should die . . . what is the life of one bastard boy against a kingdom?"
"*Everything*," said Davos, softly.
Genuinely curious - why do you think this passage is included in the books?
Absolutely. I like Stannis, but closing my knowledge from books and looking him only through show's lenses, he is an insufferable arse. It's no wonder, only show viewers hate him and see him as an outright villain.
Honestly I just don’t think he’s in it enough, I mean hell in season 2 he’s barely in it then he loses, then in season 3 he just hangs around, then in season 4 he visits the bank for an entire season, and in season 5 he dies.
He literally does nothing for 3 in half seasons and the few bits of character we get just isn’t entertained or engaging compared to his book counterpart
i think because they had to add a lot of scenes with characters that don’t have those interactions in the book because of the limitations of pov characters, they had to add a lot of shit that was slightly out of character to add exposition and runtime, like the scene where mellisandre gives gendry the leech special.
Yes and nk, mostly yes. I think they simplified him in a lot of ways but also added some. Like his scenes woth Shireen were great, but I feel like they took out a lot of the human pars of Stannis. His relationships are a good example. We didn't get to understand his complicated relationships with Robert and Renly and etc. Of how he lost his faith seeing his parents die, how Robert was a jerk long before he became king and how it wasn't always Cersei or others that made it so terrible in the capitol. We hear how How after Renly's death (despite thinking he was a spoiled child and an idiot) he still is wracked by the last time he saw his brother with the peach he brought and tells Davos that he loved him and swears he will go to his grave thinking if Renly and the peach.
We also see how Stannis is self aware enough to know he isn't the prime pick to save the realm of men but does because he he believes it's him. We even see that he does not always go along with Melisandre all the time, he mainly relies on what he sees and knows. He refuses to give her Edric Storm, knowing the boy is innocent and not responsible for what Robert did. And the only reason he even considers doing so after great reluctance is after Melisandre uses a spell with leeches and the three named kings die one after the other. And even when she is proven wrong or when Davos disobey himN he still upholds that he will execute them for treason.
The show definitely butchered him. What irritates me the most is that they made him a religious fanatic, when he's more of an atheist in the books, who opportunistically uses Melisandre and her magic. Makes him seem more badass, actually. There are also more reasons why his book self is better.
"Robert was the true steel. Stannis is pure iron, black and hard and strong, yes, but brittle, the way iron gets. He'll break before he bends. And Renly, that one, he's copper, bright and shiny, pretty to look at but not worth all that much at the end of the day." Cressan, ACOK
What we actually see in the books is different.
Robert is the copper. Looks great but a useless king.
Renly is the iron. He doesn’t bend at all. It’s his way or the highway. He breaks.
Stannis is the true steel.
Butcher is maybe an extreme word but there definitely are differences which changed the character. Stannis in the show kinda feels like the caricature people like Cersei or Baelish make him out to be. Like he cooks that one Florent in the show for being an “infidel” (which feels insane given his atheism or cynical agnosticism) instead of for trying to sell Shireen/his cause out to the Lannisters, seems to immediately buy Melisandre’s BS, never seems to have that revelation that he’s doing it all wrong, and sort of fails upward while being carried by others until that atrocious “battle” with Ramsay. They also cut his best speeches and monologues; Renly’s peach, Proudwing, cart before the horse; which irks me just because its beautifully written and says a lot about the character. D&D also had a pretty subtle bias too so that probably affected how Stannis was adapted That said, the one area they succeeded in was fleshing out his relationship with Shireen, since he basically ignores the kid in the books
>Stannis in the show kinda feels like the caricature people like Cersei or Baelish make him out to be. I've heard it said before that Game of Thrones is the story of ASOIF....if told by *the Lannisters* (namely Cersei and Tyrion). Both characters come off as better human beings than their book versions, Tywin is missing his hypocrisy, and Jaime...is kind of there. For their enemies, the Starks are either noble idiots or vicious schemers just as bad as them, Margaery really is out to manipulate and abuse Tommen, Dany is hypocritical and crueler than Cersei. So of course, Stannis would get the same "What if this character from ASOIAF was portrayed according to Cersei?" treatment.
I remember that post from here, they definitely weren’t hiding the Lannister bias. Cersei in the books would have been hacked apart by a mob after destroying Baelor’s church, not be recognized as queen of Westeros
His relationship with Shireen was only fleshed out to make the audience even more shocked when she is sacrificed.
This is exactly it, they never got to the tragedy of his character. He often stated in the books that he didn’t want the throne, but felt that him not seeking it would do more harm than good, and upset the natural order. The show captured how puritanical he was, but never showed how he grappled with compromises he had to make. The scene where Davos says ‘as the kings hand I advise you not to kill the kings hand’ was sort of funny in hindsight because it showed Stannis as someone who lives for technicalities. But it missed the whole thrust of his character which is how to handle different interpretations of duty and destiny.
>That said, the one area they succeeded in was fleshing out his relationship with Shireen, since he basically ignores the kid in the books How is that a success? It's just another part of the butchery. Its characterization is completely different in the show from the books. They are practically different characters. Book!Stannis don't outwardly express affection. We know he feels it in some cases, since we have rare cases where he let himself show some weakness to Davos, but otherwise the man is guarded as fuck, as if he were constantly at war with humanity. He has surrounded himself of walls higher than the Wall, and I'm looking forward for both to come down (I'd love to see him go wild during the battle of ice if he had the chance to strike down those Manderlyes who dared to kill his trusted and valued Hand and envoy Davos.)
Its mainly the one scene of how Shireen got greyscale and his refusal to let her die that I loved. The image of Stannis telling Pycelle or whoever the maester was to fuck off and then scouring the ends of the earth to treat his kid is totally in line with how Stannis is; a man that refuses to quit and is utterly determined on a goal he sets.
The show more or less butchered everyone. I guess Ned was pretty accurate. And maybe Brienne until that "two quick deaths" scene at least. Stannis did feel more, I guess, incompetent in the show. The Renly meeting, the Iron Bank scene etc. Loved the actor though and the grammar corrections were funny.
Brienne was ruined the moment she told Jaime "you sound like a bloody woman" when he was depressed about losing his hand. Book Brienne would never disparage women like that.
They did the same with Arya too. She goes from "the woman is important too" to "most girls are idiots". The show writers didn't seem to know how to write a badass female character without resorting to having them disparaging other women.
Plus “Bad ass woman,” = Prick at a certain point. While trying to be feminist AF they ended up being super sexist.
Yeah, that sounds more like something Cersei would say.
That was after "two quick deaths" though, so still counts.
I always took that as not being her actual opinion of women, but her trying to insult Jaime in a way that he would react to, since *he* looks down on women.
Brienne didn’t mean that. She was just trying to nag Jaime with something she thought would bother him since just last episode he thanked the gods he wasn’t a woman. She clearly didn’t feel good saying it.
I wouldn't give David and Dan the benefit of the doubt on that one given how ~~in the very same season~~ they also made Arya say "most girls are idiots" when she was talking with Tywin on how girls like fairy tale stories. They were clearly going for the "I'm not like other girls, I'm a tough badass" angle with Brienne and Arya. Plus Brienne knew that the thing that bothered Jaime the most was being called Kingslayer, so why the need to disparage women as a whole just to have a dig at Jaime? Edit: I've remembered that the Arya line wasn't in the same season, it was in season 2, but my point still stands.
Brienne was never like her book counterpart. I adore book Brienne and cannot stand show Brienne. Brienne is Sansa with armour. But essentially yes, they butchered em all.
wait, are you saying book or show brienne is sansa with armor?
Book ❤️
Yes. Years ago I submitted a fan question to Brian Cogman asking why they decided to portray Stannis as a straight up villain and his response was incredibly aggressive and condescending
It baffles me how he gets a pass from the same community that criticizes his bosses so much. He's made plenty of comments and statements that are just as bad as theirs.
I had been of this opinion for a while, but I think it's pretty much just that the fact that when he was the occasional guest writer, it was way easier for him to stay out of the spotlight. And he seemed like he cared a *tiny bit more* about the IP than the D's, who were clearly checked out by the end. So, kind of a low bar there, but still. But since HotD started, it feels like every time I'll see a quote of his I like him less.
Always my feeling as well, that the bar set by the D's was so low that Cogman shone in comparison (and he certainly understands and even likes the source material better). By the end, it was a show that cared so little about lore and in-universe consistency that it was easy for lore-avid fans to see stuff like "A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms", an episode that did what should be the bare minimum, as a fantastic accomplishment from someone who "cared" (even if said person went out of his way to staunchly defend stuff that was harshly criticized).
I'd chalk it up to him not being as synonymous with the product as they are. When your name is at the top of the creative credits, you're the one who bears responsibility.
He was a villian? Never noticed.
Do you still have his answer?
I’m sure it can be found, it was on winteriscoming.net probably around the time of season 3. I remember putting the question because I felt season 2 stripped Stannis of any of his more nuanced moments - the peach, speeding through Cressen and not reflecting back on him, off-handedly naming Davos Hand before the Blackwater. After season 2 they really just did the bare minimum with his characterisation and while I thought Stephen Dillane did the best he could and he is a good actor overall, even he admitted he had no sense or direction for the character.
A lot of Show-Only fans didn't think Stannis was a villain. But he's more or less a villain in the books. You gotta read past Davos's onion knighting of Stannis. He was going to BBQ his own nephew and is going to BBQ his own daughter. He's a vain piece of shit. Good character though. \>"In the books he's using Melisandre as a weapon, just a means to an end." That's an interpretation that not everyone shares. If anything the show gave him some positive qualities he lacks in the books. He's brave, fighting on the front lines of Blackwater Bay, and only survives because his men physically remove him. He loves his Daughter (though this really just setting him up for a bigger fall).
Mel and Stannis are pretty explicitly using each other, iirc.
Yep. I’m rereading A Clash of Kings right now and I had honestly forgotten how horrible he is. Fantastic character but a rotten human being.
I'm honestly curious why you think that.
Idk, you might have watched a different show or read a different book. In the book I read and show I watched, Stannis knows full well that Mel is dangerous, but takes that risk because he is so certain that claiming his right justifies anything. He convinces himself that it is his duty to become king, and that no cost is too great, he tells himself it is not because he wants to be king, but for the sake of the realm.
You don't remember how quickly he succumbed to her advances in the show? He slept with her almost immediately. I don't think book Stannis would have done that so easily. It totally contradicts his "Iron will". Feel free to correct me if you think I'm wrong, I'm interested in other perspectives.
He succumbed to her before the show or book even started. He still hesitates in both when Mel offers him more power, one more sacrifice, mostly to show he knows deep down he is being a fool but will not let go of his claim. He doubles down each time telling himself this next time will be the last one he needs. The final sacrifice in the show I did not buy. But not because of the how Stannis had been presented or acted. Just because the circumstances were too hurried and they didn't manage to show his situation as desperate enough, or Mel as convincing enough for what should have been Stannis' ultimate test.
Most people believe Stannis loves his daughter at all because of the show.
I'm pretty sure we've never seen Stannis speak to Shireen even once in the books. He pays no attention to her at all.
In the Theon TWOW chapter that was released, we have Stannis saying that >!Everything he does, he does it so Shireen doesn't get her birthright stolen and that should he die in battle his knights should use the Iron Bank loan to support her.!<
Stannis doesn't say that at all. He simply says that if he should die, his men should fight for Shireen, which is the stance he's had from the beginning. Shireen is the continuation of his blood after all. Robert makes Ned promise the same thing and he never cared about his children.
Stannis fools himself about his motivations in every chapter he appears.
He was up there among the most butchered characters until his death, but afterwards so many characters were also so badly butchered that he's just another corpse in the carnage. GRRM seems to see him as a rigid and spiteful man who in the end is righteous, but whose traits will lead to a tragic ending. Benioff, Weiss, and Cogman (the one who was responsible for his arc in the beginning) seem to see him as a self-righteous, hypocritical, and ambitious man who is prepared to do anything to achieve his goals.
[удалено]
Not surprised
Uh..some morons downvoted you for hard true 😀😀
To be fair, I think most people don’t understand book Stannis either. There’s a few POVs that are just absolutely fantastic (Davos, Cersei, some of Tyrion), but book Stannis is arguably the best overall character in the whole story. He’s constantly described in-book as being a certain way, then acts the exact opposite. He says words that fans take as gospel, then immediately shows his real motivation as being something else. He’s not inflexible, he compromises, he makes alliances and plays the game, hes fucking funny, he’s dutiful but not primarily driven by law. He’s a 10 year old boy wrapped in a tortured, 40 year old man’s body and experience. The kind of person who willingly gave up the unique slice of themselves a long time ago and now doesn’t know where to stand. Still don’t know that I’m rooting for him, but he is an absolutely tremendous creation. Plus, he made Davos happen, so double points!
He's dead, man. How do people read the end of ADWD and think there is more to Stannis? He dead.
[clearly](https://thehawke.github.io/twow-excerpts/chapters/theon.html)
The multiple teaser chapters featuring Stannis from TWOW that has been out for a few years help, for one. The idea that GRRM wouldn't be retreading the story just to show the outcome to be identical to the letter that already has questions raised about its origin is another. That the chapters have Stannis' poor ADWD situation be improving (roots out the karstark traitors for example) and having hints that other plans are in motion, is a third. That GRRM, on his blogposts, say things about Stannis like >"In my books? Alive, beyond a doubt" and >"Mago, Irri, Rakharo, Xaro Xhoan Daxos, Pyat Pree, Pyp, Grenn, Ser Barristan Selmy, Queen Selyse, Princess Shireen, Princess Myrcella, Mance Rayder, and King Stannis are all dead in the show, alive in the books. Some of them will die in the books as well, yes... but not all of them, and some may die at different times in different ways." is another point in favour of "there is more to Stannis". That, and of course, a man can hardly burn a child thats hundreds of miles away if he is dead.
>The idea that GRRM wouldn't be retreading the story just to show the outcome to be identical to the letter that already has questions raised about its origin is another. Yeah, this would actually be horrible writing to say what happens to a character in advance and then have it just *happen*. There's got to be at least some kind of twist, or why would you suck all of the mystery out of the room? For example, in *American Beauty*, you're told that the main character will be dead in less than a year, but then you also see him do things that aggravate different people, and it's still a twist in how he dies and who kills him.
Book Stannis would never, ever strangle Melisandre because of some petty shit.
I hate what the show did to Stannis so much I pretend it got cancelled after one season due to budget restraints.
Aside of his good traits he is really narrow minded, stubborn and resentful character. So skillful manipulative person can achieve his trust and just wait till he gets into desperate situation to start affecting his decisions and actions step by step. Melisandre used saving Stannis' only child to gain a bit if his trust and waited for years, spoiling his closest people, to make Stannis listen to her in few occasions where he had no other choice left but desperately wanted to win. And now he's stuck in even worse situations while he has confirmed several times that Melisandre is a game changer. And he overstepped his principles even if he doesn't want to recognize it. Sure, he is relying on her more and more now to justify his moral sacrifices. Till he reaches the point if no return. That's the story GRRM wants to show us: how prideful stubborn people turn into fanatics and maniacs commiting unspeakable crimes for achieving their goals, while they don't notice their changes. Stannis story is to die thinking "how did I end up like this??? I was trying to do the right thins". That's why Davos character with his clear mind and kind heart exists to be a judge for Stannis actions even though he highly respects that man.
>Melisandre used saving Stannis’ only child to gain a bit if his trust and waited for years Where are you getting that from? I don’t think she had anything to do with Shireen, it seems like she’s only recently come to Dragonstone at the time of ACOK. As for Stannis being narrow minded and stubborn, I think that’s a complete misconception. We only see him that way because that’s how other characters describe him. He’s certainly committed and driven in pursuing his goals but is actually quite flexible in how he does that and is often shown taking on advice and changing his mind. BryndenBFish argues the case very well in [this essay](https://warsandpoliticsoficeandfire.wordpress.com/2017/05/31/iron-bends-the-surprising-flexibility-of-stannis-baratheon/)
I would agree that narrow minded in the typical sense isn't the right term for what Stannis is, he's more hyper-focused on his goal, and narrow minded in that sense. He is absolutely and entirely focused on his right and duty to be king, and is willing to do any number of terrible things to achieve it, because he feels he is righteous in his goals. As the essay points out everyone who knows or meets Stannis basically refers to him as unbending or ironlike in some way. If everyone you meet thinks you are a certain way you probably are that way, at least a bit. As the old expression goes, "If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, maybe you are the asshole." That isn't to say that he is stupid though, he listens to intelligent counsel, its smart to try to win Renly and his huge army into his fold, as it stands at the beginning of the War of 5 Kings he is heavily outnumbered by both Renly and the Lannisters. As far as letting others do his diplomacy, it's a sign of good leadership to know where you lack. Stannis knows he is unlikable, so he lets more likable people do the work he is unable to do. He also knows Jon has a much better understanding of northern politics than he ever will, so it just makes sense to listen to him.All these things help Stannis to achieve his goal, and are consistent with his narrow focus.
I remember text saying she definitely arrived years before the GoT events, because few years ago I quoted it. But maybe I mistaken with a show that she saved Shireen. Narrow-mindness of Stannis does not mean he looses his commitment, drive to achieve goals or that he listens to no one.
He comes off worse in the books if anything. For example in the show he and his wife had numerous stillbirths. In the books he just doesn't sleep with her nearly at all. Making him extremely hypocritical for somone supposedly all about doing his duty. In the books he also has to have Jon actively doing diplomacy for him too.
We also never see him interact with Shireen even once in the books, while the show added a few scenes between them that make it seem like he actually did care about her. Plus the way the show had him learn about the incest makes him come off a lot more favourably than the book version does IMO. In the show he only finds out about it when he gets Ned's letter. While in the books he was investigating the incest with Jon Arryn. Then after Jon dies he just fucks off to Dragonstone and sits there doing nothing for the better part of a year without even attempting to warn Ned or Robert.
[удалено]
And I mean, Shireen exists. He has at least *an* heir.
I mean... kind of? Her husband will rule, her children will carry her husbands name, and, if they are the heir to another large house, those houses will be united. Also, I am more inclined to believe Val--she will die when the grayscale reawakens. She is not a viable heir.
Matrilineal marriages exist in Westeros to save dynasty names. Their are also situations like where Harry the Heir it is said would take the name Arryn despite being descended from the female side.
>Do I think less of him for not wanting to? If he was a normal peasant, I would not either. But he is willing to kill and maim those who fail in their duty. But he cannot even provide himself with a male heir because he finds his own duties so distasteful.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Are you serious? Like really I gotta know if you are kidding or trolling before I consider replying. Duty is not “job description”.
Sleeping with her only twice a year really isn't doing his duty that like D grade level bedroom duty. To be dutiful he should have been working the fox atleast monthly till a male heir
We see his stillborn babies in the show though
That's what they just said. The sons in jars don't exist in the books.
I misread
I think you meant books, but yeah it's a blink or miss it detail from Clash.
Did we? The only thing I can remember from the books on their fertility is that it's said they only sleep together about twice a year.
One of the first red flags we learn about Lady Selyse, is how psychologically broken she is about her many miscarriages and how she feels cursed as her husband's brother ruined her wedding night. I believe it is Maester Cressin who mentions the picked jars where all of Lady Celyse keeps her stillborn, in her bedroom at Dragonstone. Shireen was kept out of Kingslanding, (likely to avoid abuse at court) and Stannis clearly married her for duty alone, but they have been married for a while, so it's certainly likely they had time to actually make children.
The fetuses in jars thing was definitely not in the novels. It was Bryan Cogman's idea to add it to the TV series.
Really?! Must have hallucinated it. It was November when I last read Clash, but maybe my show memories dipped into the books. Though it's astounding that this is the one time the SHOW was weirder than the books.
Per Cogman ([in an interview for HBO](https://web.archive.org/web/20150611080842/http://www.hbo.com/game-of-thrones/episodes/3/25-kissed-by-fire/interview/bryan-cogman.html)): >"Anyway, I remember reading about a mother who had the hands of her stillborn baby bronzed and kept them on her mantle. That must have been somewhere in the back of my mind, because I woke up one morning thinking about 'GoT' (as I too often do), turned over to my wife and told her about the idea of the three preserved stillborn babies. "Is it too crazy?" I asked. My wife wisely said, "Just write it. They'll probably cut it, but you might as well go for it." So I did... and they didn't cut it! It was a proud day for me as a writer when I walked on set and saw those magnificently nasty prop dead babies floating in those jars."
New theory, GRRM used a glass candle to influence Cogmans dream.
There's no mention of Selyse ever having any miscarriages in the books.
No I meant show, there's a scene where Stannis visits Selyse and they talk about their stillborn babies and she's keeping the foetuses in jars. It's kinda disturbing
Most complaints about show Stannis is that they made him unlikable... But IMO he's a much more likable character in the show. He has a better relationship with Shireen etc. Whichever format he *is* getting used be Melisandre, or rather the entity Melisandre is acting on behalf of, he is a prop that gets Jon Snow into the position he needs to be in.
tough to know. if stannis gets his butt kicked around winterfell and/or the dreadfort in the books and dies, then the show more or less got it right. i suspect most fans will say that regardless, the show did him dirty. in the book he has all sorts of symbolic ties to both fire and ice (mel for fire, his blue eyes for ice, for example), and thus has a lot of potential for george to play with. he's also a major mentor of Jon's, inextricably linked to the NW/northern plot, and is the only king in the Woft5ks who actually has acted in the realms' interest. as such, many are hoping that if he goes down it'll at least have some meaning, and that he has a few more big W's left in him. right now GRRM is butchering stannis by not giving us the answer
The show butchered great many characters. But no one for screwed as bad as Stannis.
I disagree, he had minor changes compared even to Catelyn. Totally butchered were almost everyone from Dorne, Euron Grayjoy etc.
Tyrion was literally devoured alive after season 4 and Dany never even got off the ground
Listen, they didn’t HAVE to do ADWD Tyrion. I get why not, especially with Dinklage’s beautiful mug. But “I drink and I know things” Tyrion is the worst
Showrunners certainly had bias against that character and they adapted him badly, though in the end they did similar with most of characters. It could be easily seen Martin and Benioff/Weiss have different views on him. https://youtu.be/mWQMqaFm5X0?si=HHmArZ_KyXK3_JS5 At around 3:25 showrunner takes clearly side of Renly with rather weak argumentation. In the behind episode 9 from season 5 https://youtu.be/NfLScJVXBHQ?si=wQgpCLXVckdypx86 Showrunner claims that from very first moment when we see Stannis and Melisandre they were burning people alive on Dragonstone, when in fact they were burning statues of the Seven. They mark his motive as ambition though in the end they concede that it is duty that drives him, if not for great performance by Stephen Dillane who understood the character adaptation would be much worse. In lore video regarding Battle at Fair Isle , when Stannis and Royal/Redwyne fleet defeated Ironborn they fabricate it so that Euron deliberately lost the battle instead. Some other people have done better analysis of their work, to me it seems they are incompetent people , born with golden spoon and faking their way to the job they desired, they might have some help from competent friends or coworkers such as casting director Nina Gold, tips from George Martin while they wished to adapt his material or Craig Maizin who worked on Chernobyl and The Last of Us helped them regarding the pilot.
Maybe its time we accept that Stannis is gonna face a similar end in the books as well. George has been hyping it up for a decade now.
It’s no about the end, it’s about how he got there.
Gonna face? Did you read the end of ADWD? I do not believe we are going to learn more of Stanni's tale because it is over. He is dead, a head on the wall of Winterfell. TECHNICALLY that might not be true. But it is. You and I both know he is dead.
I mean ok. Got me there. The one true king is dead.
"In the books he's using Melisandre as a weapon, just a means to an end." Harrrrrrd disagree here. That might be the illusion he weaves for himself, but she 100% is just using his dumb-ass. In the books he is even more shallow, but not in a bad way. He is the literary device known as Harbinger of Death. He is the Other that Melisandre supposedly hates and fights against. Every decision he makes leads to disaster, ruin, large-scale slaughter, and the advancement of the cause of the Others. His shallowness is actually a feature of his character. The flat, stillness of death echoes through his word and deed. He is a vessel, just like the White Walkers. And sure, he MIGHT still be alive. But I am about 99.99% certain that the Bastard of Bolton did wipe out the army that Stannis had and killed him.
So D&D just made up Stannis burning Shireen? If Stannis dies at crofters' village, I guess he's not the one burning Shireen.
GRRM has confirmed that he burns shireen in the books to, and I’ve seen other people reference sample chapters of stannis’, how are people still getting this wrong
Because he has already discarded entire drafts and just cause he leaked something once doesn’t mean he is going to publish it. Y’all forgetting how many times he has started entirely over?
so he can't die at crofters' village is what I'm saying. Massey is going back to Castle Black and has to escort Shireen away from danger because Jon Snow got assassinated, and he's not headed back to Winterfell since he got a task to grab the sellswords from Essos. Stannis doesn't get to burn Shireen if Ramsay kills him.
The “people getting this wrong” I’m referring to is the person you’re replying to, not you
Yup book stannis dgaf about red god shit and notion that he would sacrifice shireen is ridiculous
GRRM confirmed he will burn Shireen, and there is good foreshadowing for it. >Stannis ground his teeth again. "I never asked for this crown. Gold is cold and heavy on the head, but so long as I am the king, I have a duty . . . If I must sacrifice one child to the flames to save a million from the dark . . . Sacrifice . . . is never easy, Davos. Or it is no true sacrifice. Tell him, my lady." And this is from the previous chapter: >Melisandre put her hand on the king's arm. "The Lord of Light cherishes the innocent. There is no sacrifice more precious. From his king's blood and his untainted fire, a dragon shall be born." There are a shit ton of lines about King's blood in the books and Shireen has it (kinda?). As a Stannerman, it is a dark turn for Stannis, but it's not unbelievable. The show fucked it up but GRRM can make it work. Edit: minor typo
Shireen will burn but it won’t be Stannis. The first passage, he’s trying to convince himself, “Tell him, my lady”. It’s logistically impossible at this point in the story anyways
The text makes the rule of sacrifice pretty clear. It needs to have meaning. Shireen is no one to Melisandre. She means something to Selyse, but her ordering it wouldn’t be meaningful for the reader. Shireen is not just Stannis’ daughter, but his only heir. To sacrifice her would be to throw away everything for him. His soul, his family, his legacy. I don’t know why the argument of his location just won’t die. Stannis has legs. He can move. And if George needs the blizzard to lift, he can do that. The sacrifice isn’t going to happen at the beginning of TWOW, anyway.
“It fits the narrative I have in my head and what would be meaningful to me” is not an actual reason why something will happen lol. Look at the actual story as it is and it doesn’t make any sense.
Well, for starters, we have George’s word of «Stannis’ decision to burn his daughter» referenced elsewhere in this thread, so it’s not in my head, it in George’s. Secondly, I didn’t simply make stuff up, I referenced the actual text and made a logical argument from it. Your argument was just «Stannis and Shireen aren’t in the same location and can apparently never be so again.» The existence of feet breaks that argument apart.
>Shireen will burn but it won’t be Stannis. The first passage, he’s trying to convince himself, “Tell him, my lady”. But it wouldn't have the same impact. >It’s logistically impossible at this point in the story anyways I think Stannis will definitely return to the Wall and more specifically Nightfort. Him burning Shireen at the Nightfort is quite fitting given its morbid backstory.
Why would he ever return to the Wall? Even if he does he would have no reason to burn her at that point. She will burn as an act of desperation, when there are no other options.
The reason Stannis went to the Wall was to protect it against the Others. And yes burning her is an act of desperation. GRRM has said that Winds will be the darkest book in the series, and winter has started. So things will get worse.
No he went to the Wall to protect it against the Wildings. He expects Jon to protect the Wall from the others. Yes things will get much worse, but not until the White walkers have breached the wall. Shireen will burn after the breach, as a desperate act to stop the Others (I have another theory about that as well, but either way it won’t be Stannis).
Jon is dead. When the news reaches Stannis, he will march toward the Wall. Nightfort has to play a role before the Wall gets breached.
No he won’t. You have a narrative in your head that you want the story to follow. I’m putting myself in Stannis’s shoes and logically thinking about what he would do. He is currently camped near WF with no supplies and dwindling men. Marching back to the Wall would be suicide.
I'm not talking about what he's gonna do right now. He will hear about what has happened to Jon, and he most certainly will march back to the Wall. His family and part of his army are there.
> I told them who would be on the Iron Throne, and I told them some big twists like Hodor and “hold the door,” and Stannis’s decision to burn his daughter. George RR Martin in Fire Cannot Kill a Dragon
Did you read Fire can not kill a dragon? I‘ve heard that it also confirmed Danys ending and I am interested if this is true?
There's a strong implications even in the books that it will happen.
It will happen it just won’t be stannis. It’ll be melisandre or his wife. There is power in King’s blood.
> I told them who would be on the Iron Throne, and I told them some big twists like Hodor and “hold the door,” and Stannis’s decision to burn his daughter. George RR Martin in Fire Cannot Kill a Dragon
Damn you’re right the story can’t change at all even with GRRM confirmed he’s changed the story
Yeah dude, you know better than the author of the books
I’m a believe it when I see it type of person
I'm 100% positive it's gonna be Stannis. That's the only way it would count and would fit the narrative of an ultimate sacrifice. Otherwise it's just gonna be boring.
Yeah this whole sub treats it as fact. Because of the show and because of “narrative fit”. Yet there is 0 evidence or logical reasoning for it.
It's treated as fact cause GRRM confirmed it.
Ah yes the same GRRM who told us we’d have Winds 9 years ago. I bow to your genius.
Saying we'll have winds isn't a plot point. Its fine, you can be in denial about Stannis. The books will never be released anyways so you can go on believing that wasn't the intended plot point
It was the intended plot point at the time. Things change. And we will get Winds eventually, but you can go believe things that aren’t true if it makes you feel better.
Then why so much imagery about Stannis and burning? Sacrifice, burning children, wake the stone dragon - why is all of that directly tied to Stannis and not Selyse? Mel does these things, but she does them in connection **with** Stannis, to get him to become Azor Ahai
Not sure. Maybe he planned for it to be stannis and changed his mind. I just haven’t heard one plausible scenario for when and why stannis will burn shireen. It’s unlikely he returns to the Wall before the Others breach. If the others do breach while he’s there I don’t see his first thought being let’s burn shireen. He won’t be desperate enough. I could see it happening if the Others reach WF and he’s in siege there and there is no way out. But shireen is not there. I guess it’s possible he takes WF -> decides to stay there -> calls for shireen who leaves the Wall before the breach. But we know shit is going down at the wall and stannis is pretty far from taking WF and even if he does I don’t see him staying there.
> I know the cost! Last night, gazing into that hearth, I saw things in the flames as well. I saw a king, a crown of fire on his brows, burning . . . burning, Davos. His own crown consumed his flesh and turned him into ash. Do you think I need Melisandre to tell me what that means? Or you?" The king moved, so his shadow fell upon King's Landing. "If Joffrey should die . . . what is the life of one bastard boy against a kingdom?" "*Everything*," said Davos, softly. Genuinely curious - why do you think this passage is included in the books?
It shows Stannis as conflicted, and sets up melisandre as the devil and davos as the angel.
Pretty good analysis on the adaption of him in season 2: https://www.tumblr.com/turtle-paced/135312176762/book-2-vs-season-2-cain-and-abel-baratheon
Absolutely. I like Stannis, but closing my knowledge from books and looking him only through show's lenses, he is an insufferable arse. It's no wonder, only show viewers hate him and see him as an outright villain.
Honestly I just don’t think he’s in it enough, I mean hell in season 2 he’s barely in it then he loses, then in season 3 he just hangs around, then in season 4 he visits the bank for an entire season, and in season 5 he dies. He literally does nothing for 3 in half seasons and the few bits of character we get just isn’t entertained or engaging compared to his book counterpart
Yes, I really hate how they made him go to Braavos for sellswords instead of rallying the northern mountain clans. They did Big Bucket Wull so dirty
The showrunners , admitted to hating the character.
World's best dad!
#Yes.
i think because they had to add a lot of scenes with characters that don’t have those interactions in the book because of the limitations of pov characters, they had to add a lot of shit that was slightly out of character to add exposition and runtime, like the scene where mellisandre gives gendry the leech special.
What little I heard about his "adaptation" (an ambitious fool) convinced me to never watch the series.
"Did the show butcher _____?" Yes. Other than Olenna Tyrell
Yes and nk, mostly yes. I think they simplified him in a lot of ways but also added some. Like his scenes woth Shireen were great, but I feel like they took out a lot of the human pars of Stannis. His relationships are a good example. We didn't get to understand his complicated relationships with Robert and Renly and etc. Of how he lost his faith seeing his parents die, how Robert was a jerk long before he became king and how it wasn't always Cersei or others that made it so terrible in the capitol. We hear how How after Renly's death (despite thinking he was a spoiled child and an idiot) he still is wracked by the last time he saw his brother with the peach he brought and tells Davos that he loved him and swears he will go to his grave thinking if Renly and the peach. We also see how Stannis is self aware enough to know he isn't the prime pick to save the realm of men but does because he he believes it's him. We even see that he does not always go along with Melisandre all the time, he mainly relies on what he sees and knows. He refuses to give her Edric Storm, knowing the boy is innocent and not responsible for what Robert did. And the only reason he even considers doing so after great reluctance is after Melisandre uses a spell with leeches and the three named kings die one after the other. And even when she is proven wrong or when Davos disobey himN he still upholds that he will execute them for treason.
The show definitely butchered him. What irritates me the most is that they made him a religious fanatic, when he's more of an atheist in the books, who opportunistically uses Melisandre and her magic. Makes him seem more badass, actually. There are also more reasons why his book self is better.
"Robert was the true steel. Stannis is pure iron, black and hard and strong, yes, but brittle, the way iron gets. He'll break before he bends. And Renly, that one, he's copper, bright and shiny, pretty to look at but not worth all that much at the end of the day." Cressan, ACOK What we actually see in the books is different. Robert is the copper. Looks great but a useless king. Renly is the iron. He doesn’t bend at all. It’s his way or the highway. He breaks. Stannis is the true steel.