Do you think Stannis was a willing participant in creating the shadow babies, or do you think Melisandre just did it without letting him know what was going on?

As I suggest in my ACOK chapter essays, I think Melisandre told him that it was a necessary ritual (to prove his faith or to purify him or something), but didn’t tell him why it was necessary or what it would do. After all, “Melisandre has gazed into the flames, and seen him dead.” If R’hllor is the one true god and Melisandre’s visions are true – both propositions that Melisandre has gone to great lengths to try to convince Stannis of – then there’s no need to take action, much less to use black magic (which would seriously undermine those propositions) to kill him.

And after the fact, I think Stannis was in deep denial about what he had subconsciously experienced in the night – “I dream of it sometimes. Of Renly’s dying. A green tent, candles, a woman screaming. And blood….I was still abed when he died. Your Devan will tell you. He tried to wake me…Devan says I thrashed and cried out, but what does it matter? It was a dream. I was in my tent when Renly died, and when I woke my hands were clean.”

If Robb had declared for Stannis before being crowned, how would Stannis have rewarded him, longterm, assuming they crush the Lannisters? And if Stannis pushed his religion on the north, how would Robb have reacted? (I would assume he wouldn’t accept it).

Well, the timing doesn’t work there – Robb was acclaimed before Stannis put himself forward as a candidate – but…

I think Stannis would have rewarded Robb by A. punishing the Lannisters (because they’re lawbreakers), B. returning Robb’s sisters, family sword, and father’s body (because it’s the right thing to do) and C. recognized him in his ancestral titles (because that’s the law).

I don’t know if he’d be inclined to do more than that, because as Stannis sees it, Robb owes Stannis his allegiance as a matter of law, and you don’t get brownie points for obeying the law. Now, as a matter of practical politics, a Stannis who needs Northern swords to carry him to the Iron Throne knows that you also need to reward service in proportion, so if Robb does a good job as he’s likely to do, I think Stannis would be willing to grant a request he saw as within reason.

No, Robb is not going to accept R’hllorism as a state religion in the North. But in this scenario, I don’t see Stannis feeling that indebted to Melisandre, so…

Since there is so much evidence about what a scumbag Renly was why on earth would the show writers make him the best of the three Baratheon brothers? It makes no sense to me.

Because GRRM, in his tricksy wisdom, also made Renly intelligent, funny, and genuinely charming and then made his main opponents people who aren’t.

When we first encounter Renly in Sansa I and Eddard III, not only is he a young Robert without the alcoholism and Targ-murder-boner, but he’s also making fun of the Lannisters who we’re being primed to hate even more because they’re trying to execute dogs. (Although if you think about it, isn’t it interesting that Renly comes off so well despite not lifting a finger to actually help?)

Then when we encounter him again in ACOK, he’s being contrasted against Stannis, who we’re also primed to dislike (so that the face turn works in ASOS). Remember, Stannis is introduced allowing walking empathy magnet Maester Cressen to be humiliated, and the next image we have of him before he meets with Renly is him joining a scary cult (another example of how priming wrong-foots people: Melisandre). And again, look at their meeting:

Again, on the surface, Renly’s the one with the better japes, the peach, and he’s the one who’s going to get horribly murdered so there’s the sympathy factor as well.

The case for Renly falls apart when you step back, ignore all of the surface qualities, and ask yourself what has he actually done and what has he actually said. And that’s when you start to see all of the subtle thematic and character work GRRM has been doing in the background.

My guess? Benioff and Weiss aren’t very good at literary analysis and simply missed that second layer.

Since Renly didn’t talk about the incest did he give any excuse for his attempt to take the throne other than ”i will be a great king”.

Nope. Renly’s campaign pitch was: A. the glamour and magnificence of his person and his court, and B. the size of his battalions, while trying to get everyone to forget about the larger implications of any of it.

As usual, Stannis puts it best:

“Good men and true will fight for Joffrey, wrongly believing him the true king. A northman might even say the same of Robb Stark. But these lords who flocked to my brother’s banners knew him for a usurper. They turned their backs on their rightful king for no better reason than dreams of power and glory, and I have marked them for what they are.”

Stannis’ arcs

Stannis’ arc from ACOK to ASOS was to become from the king Westeros deserved for its stupidity in the nobles to the king Westeros desperately needs in the face of the Winter-creatures.
Now sadly Stannis’ arc from ADWD to TWOW will be to realize that being King of Westeros =/= Hero of the World, even though he is fit to be and will horrifyingly prove it, only for it to be worthless. However, I thought about something, and I know GRRM said he would not end it in “Westeros became a wasteland, but Essos got lucky, the end” to paraphrase it, but I thought on how much horrifyingly fitting would it be if Stannis has to sacrifice not only his only child, but ALL WESTEROS (supposed someone would give him the means) to decide “Kill Westeros to keep humanity alive”, it would be an interesting choice from a dramatic literary viewpoint where, to keep the role of hero, he has to commit the worst crime possible from the viewpoint of his original position, the position from which he accepted Melisandre’s service in the first place, to help him being the king, initially caring nothing for the hero thing, except as a little booster of self-esteem. Your thoughts?

I don’t think scale is necessary for the “worst crime imaginable.” Rather, I would argue that it’s intimacy that acts as an intensifier, while sadly scale often de-sensitizes.

Hence my theory as to where Stannis is ending up.

Chapter-by-Chapter Analysis: Davos II, ASOS

“Ser Davos, and undrowned. How can that be?”
“Onions float, ser.”
Synopsis: “Sing to me, oh muse, of the man resourceful, who, storm-buffeted far and wide…”
SPOILER WARNING: This chapter analysis, and all following, will contain spoilers for all Song of Ice and Fire novels and Game of Thrones episodes. Caveat lector.
(more…)

View On WordPress

Is there an essay out there that details your feelings on Stannis’s right to rule/morality? From what I’ve read in your CBC analysis you seem to like him but you don’t have the mindless worship mentality a some of the fandom has. His utilitarian views when it comes to blood magic really screw with my conception of justice so when he’s deemed a just King I don’t follow at all. I really like how you think he’s a deconstruction of the sacrifice theme of traditional fantasy btw.

If you’ve already read the relevant CBC essays from ACOK, then I guess this essay and this essay would be the only things left.

Also, you might want to read this tumblr piece on legalism.

My overall attitude is that early ACOK Stannis would be a horrible king, whereas post-ASOS Stannis is the king Westeros desperately needs.

As for blood magic, I think it’s important to carefully parse which instances we’re talking about. I’m in the camp that Stannis was genuinely ignorant about Renly’s death and probably Penrose’s too – Melisandre’s whole shtick is about convincing Stannis she can see the future, so telling him she can kill his enemies contradicts that.

But Stannis is, however reluctantly, on board for the leeches, equivocates over Edric Storm, and has zero problem burning traitors. In terms of how he sees it, Stannis is something of a consequentialist when it comes to justice – what matters most is the just outcome not the method, Melisandre is the new hawk, and killing someone is killing someone so why is blood magic less moral than any other method? Hence his whole thing about making use of Renly’s former supporters despite hating pardoning people he finds contemptible.

If there is an element of deconstruction, I think it also applies to justice. Fantasy readers especially, reared on a long tradition of fantasy grounded in epic clashes of Metaphysical Good vs. Metaphysical Evil, have a tendency to think that justice is a 100% unalloyed positive, because we think of ourselves as good people who would be fine in a just world.

Well, there’s a long tradition, seeing humanity as more sinful and frail and thus prone to come in for punishment in a purely just world, that argued “Use every man after his desert, and who should ’scape whipping?” or:

The quality of mercy is not strain’d,
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath: it is twice blest;
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes:
‘Tis mightiest in the mightiest: it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown;
His sceptre shows the force of temporal power,
The attribute to awe and majesty,
Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings;
But mercy is above this sceptred sway;
It is enthroned in the hearts of kings,
It is an attribute to God himself;
And earthly power doth then show likest God’s
When mercy seasons justice.

Or as GRRM puts it, “there is no creature on earth half so terrifying as a truly just man.”

I was refered to you by Goodqueenaly. “How exactly would Stannis go about repaying the Iron Throne’s debt to the Iron Bank, assuming he wins? Would he “nationalize” the Lannister’s assets as punishment for more or less making Westeros into hell on earth?”

Hi. You’re pretty much on the nose. As Stannis sees it, Cersei cuckolded and then murdered the King, which is treason twice over, Jaime is a kingslayer and a breaker of the King’s Peace, Tywin broke the King’s Peace and then attacked the King’s banner, and the rest of the family aided and abetted.

So the first thing that happens without a doubt is that the Crown’s debt to House Lannister is cancelled – not defaulted on, but as another form of seizure of assets. That takes care of half of the Crown’s total debt.

Next, Casterly Rock and its lands and incomes reverts to the Crown. It’s unlikely that Stannis holds it permanently – the Westerosi custom that one person should not have two great seats would probably sway him, as would the difficulty of governing two seats 800 or so miles away. Rather, I’m guessing Stannis would fine the Rock to clear the Crown’s debts to the Church and the Tyrells and the Bank, and then give the Rock to some loyal house.

But the Rock could easily withstand that kind of penalty. Short of complete confiscation, Casterly Rock is going to be a power in the land, no matter who holds it.

Chapter-by-Chapter Analysis: Davos II, ACOK