|
SPOILER WARNING If you only watch the show, this thread will spoil you of future events in HBO's Game of Thrones. Thread contains discussion of all books of the series A Song of Ice and FireClick Here for the spoiler-free thread. |
On June 10 2013 21:24 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 13:32 Yhamm wrote:
--Shae & Varys. That was a weird scene. True love? I never saw Varys being so wrong Wrong? He was absolutely right. TV Shae really does love TV Tyrion. Pretending that we're going to get exactly the same ending for Shae in the show as it is in the books is just silly, and y'all should stop trying to figure out how TV Shae is going to end up exactly like Book Shae. That's not what will happen. It will be different. And - hopefully - it will make as much sense on TV as it made in the books. The writers know exactly where they're going with all of that, and we don't. We just know how it happened in the books, and we see that the book ending makes absolutely no sense given what we've seen in the show so far. So that means that a) the writers are drooling idiots that write themselves in a corner, or b) the writers significantly changed the story to make it work anyhow. Call me crazy, but I consider the writers of the show to be quite competent. The show will deviate more and more from the books with every season, to the point where directly comparing the books to the show just doesn't make any sense any more. By now, TV Shae is a vastly different character from Book Shae. TV Shae genuinely loves Tyrion, Book Shae did not. The sooner we accept that the better.
It makes perfect sense: Shae is a really skillful and smart prostitute.
Your point about the writers of the show does ring true if you (a person who has read the books) truly believe that Shae really does love Tyrion in the show. It'll be a huge blow to non-readers (I can already taste the tears) when they see Shae walking into the courtroom to testify against Tyrion or when he finds her in Tywin's bed.
I particularly like how they've started exploring the history again (ie. mentioning Rhaegar). They've got 10 episodes for the last ~1/3 of the third book, so they'll probably go a little more into detail for the story instead of cutting corners like they did this season.
|
On June 10 2013 20:16 Redox wrote:I am totally confused by how people dont like the Stannis portrayal. I think the actor is perfect, and its overall very much on point. Yeah Renly's portrayal was weak, but Stannis not at all. edit: Maybe its this? Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 19:11 TheRealPaciFist wrote:On June 10 2013 18:53 Vindicare605 wrote:
But that conflict is what makes Stannis such an intriguing character and its completely dumbed down in the show.
He's a lot like Eddard Stark in the way that his core values are so stone solid that it's actually a fault of his. It's a trait they managed to do well with Ned's character that they just completely neglect in the show. That's the whole reason Davos is important as a character in the first place, because he helps to balance Stannis and remind him of his humanity, something Stannis acknowledges that he needs him for. I've always thought of Stannis as a harder, smarter, definitely less likable but definitely more capable version of Ned. People desperately want him to be the good guy or something?
The actor is fine. They're just writing him completely wrong.
|
On June 10 2013 21:07 sickle wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 20:34 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 20:28 Doctorbeat wrote:On June 10 2013 20:21 Redox wrote:
Other than that, I am surprised people are not bitching about the biggest plot change so far. Shae is confirmed for truly loving Tyrion, and not the common whore she was in the books. So most probably she will not betray Tyrion, there will be no scene with Tyrion killing her etc. It will all be very different. It's not better than the original, but it can work and it's nowhere near as much of a big deal as the character assassination of Stannis. Holy shit, I am so much disagreeing with this I am literally getting angry. I think I will read the Davos chapters of the first half of Storm again because I cant believe my perception would be this wrong. I really feal like the show absolutely mirrors my perception of Stannis. Go re-read the chapters. Stannis is in no way Melisandre's lapdog. Many many times she and the other fanatics try to persuade Stannis to sacrifice the boy but he doesn't. He is also an outspoken atheist who always made japes about being surrounding by fanatics. Always being sceptical and conflicted about the Lord of Light and its powers. And only after the THIRD usurper died Davos sent the boy away, and then persuaded Stannis himself of his duty - by in-depth discussion, of his duty, Davos said that by killing the boy Stannis would be in breach of the duty of the King to protect his subjects. In the show you get none of that, absolutely nothing. Instead only one usurper falls and already Stannis wants the boy killed. All Stannis does is puppet what Mel says, which is a spit in the face of his book counterpart. This is how it went down in the show: Stannis: Davos, I sentence u to die Davos: no we must go north Stannis: no u die Mel: no hes right Stannis: ok u live This is extremely patronizing. Why shit all over such a pivotal scene instead of using the wealth of GOOD dialogue and material from the books? Nor in the book does he ever get angry like he does in that scene. If anything he just gets perpetually more aggravated and grinds his teeth. In a rage, ordering Davos to death is the complete opposite of Stannis. Davos says it when he had his fingers cut off all Stannis had was an iron look of justice.
I now reread the Stannis chapters. And I still say differences between book and TV Stannis are rather small. Ok he struggled a little more with killing Gendry/Edric and he needed 3 leech kills instead of 1 to be convinced. But thats just a result of limited time on TV, and the end result is still the same. Stannis was still always listening to what Melisandre told him, except for taking her to the Blackwater battle. Stannis never was an "atheist" as someone here claimed. He followed the Red God. For what other reason would he forsake the Seven and introduce the Red God as the new religion if not for belief? Its not like Melisandre had anything else to offer. And the TV series doesnt even show how they burn non-believers alive. If they had done hat people would probably really get a negative opinion about Stannis.
The scene with Davos bringing the message from the Night's Watch you are complaining about here happened almost exactly the same in the books. Stannis wants to kill Davos because of letting Edric escape. Then Davos gets out the letter and reads it. The scene is cut then but from what we learn later and before its obvious that Melisandre is in favor of fighting the Others (or "the Other") and convinces Stannis to go north.
|
On June 11 2013 02:04 hzflank wrote:
There is a post in the other thread about racial overtones but I cannot think of a way to talk about it there without getting a ban. IIRC the slaves should not all be black. Only summer islanders are black and most of the people in the slavers bay should be white. Am I wrong?
Most of them should have been copper-colored skin like Dothraki and the Lhazareen.
That bothered me too. They haven't exactly been going for completely accurate visual portrayals though to be fair (Targs/Daario/etc)
|
On June 11 2013 02:31 D10 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 20:21 Redox wrote:
Other than that, I am surprised people are not bitching about the biggest plot change so far. Shae is confirmed for truly loving Tyrion, and not the common whore she was in the books. So most probably she will not betray Tyrion, there will be no scene with Tyrion killing her etc. It will all be very different. I didnt got away from her scenes thinking for a moment she loves him, if anything shes as petty and bitchy as ever
Thats because you have read the books. I cant imagine a single non-reader having the same thoughts.
|
On June 11 2013 03:12 craz3d wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 21:24 Conti wrote:On June 10 2013 13:32 Yhamm wrote:
--Shae & Varys. That was a weird scene. True love? I never saw Varys being so wrong Wrong? He was absolutely right. TV Shae really does love TV Tyrion. Pretending that we're going to get exactly the same ending for Shae in the show as it is in the books is just silly, and y'all should stop trying to figure out how TV Shae is going to end up exactly like Book Shae. That's not what will happen. It will be different. And - hopefully - it will make as much sense on TV as it made in the books. The writers know exactly where they're going with all of that, and we don't. We just know how it happened in the books, and we see that the book ending makes absolutely no sense given what we've seen in the show so far. So that means that a) the writers are drooling idiots that write themselves in a corner, or b) the writers significantly changed the story to make it work anyhow. Call me crazy, but I consider the writers of the show to be quite competent. The show will deviate more and more from the books with every season, to the point where directly comparing the books to the show just doesn't make any sense any more. By now, TV Shae is a vastly different character from Book Shae. TV Shae genuinely loves Tyrion, Book Shae did not. The sooner we accept that the better. It makes perfect sense: Shae is a really skillful and smart prostitute. Your point about the writers of the show does ring true if you (a person who has read the books) truly believe that Shae really does love Tyrion in the show. It'll be a huge blow to non-readers (I can already taste the tears) when they see Shae walking into the courtroom to testify against Tyrion or when he finds her in Tywin's bed. I particularly like how they've started exploring the history again (ie. mentioning Rhaegar). They've got 10 episodes for the last ~1/3 of the third book, so they'll probably go a little more into detail for the story instead of cutting corners like they did this season.
Sometimes I wonder if people even follow this topic at all when they post stuff, you can miss stuff or a prediction or explanation or 2. But I've read in the topic alone already that next season includes part of book 4 and 5. So they don't have 10 episodes for 1/3 book.
Also about your Shae thing, it's highly unlikely what u said is true like multiple people talked about that if they do it the book way, that it makes no sense. I made my self a prediction 1 page ago while we were talking about Shae, and it seems someone agreed with me (well he made the same prediction 2 months ago).
|
On June 11 2013 03:18 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 21:07 sickle wrote:On June 10 2013 20:34 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 20:28 Doctorbeat wrote:On June 10 2013 20:21 Redox wrote:
Other than that, I am surprised people are not bitching about the biggest plot change so far. Shae is confirmed for truly loving Tyrion, and not the common whore she was in the books. So most probably she will not betray Tyrion, there will be no scene with Tyrion killing her etc. It will all be very different. It's not better than the original, but it can work and it's nowhere near as much of a big deal as the character assassination of Stannis. Holy shit, I am so much disagreeing with this I am literally getting angry. I think I will read the Davos chapters of the first half of Storm again because I cant believe my perception would be this wrong. I really feal like the show absolutely mirrors my perception of Stannis. Go re-read the chapters. Stannis is in no way Melisandre's lapdog. Many many times she and the other fanatics try to persuade Stannis to sacrifice the boy but he doesn't. He is also an outspoken atheist who always made japes about being surrounding by fanatics. Always being sceptical and conflicted about the Lord of Light and its powers. And only after the THIRD usurper died Davos sent the boy away, and then persuaded Stannis himself of his duty - by in-depth discussion, of his duty, Davos said that by killing the boy Stannis would be in breach of the duty of the King to protect his subjects. In the show you get none of that, absolutely nothing. Instead only one usurper falls and already Stannis wants the boy killed. All Stannis does is puppet what Mel says, which is a spit in the face of his book counterpart. This is how it went down in the show: Stannis: Davos, I sentence u to die Davos: no we must go north Stannis: no u die Mel: no hes right Stannis: ok u live This is extremely patronizing. Why shit all over such a pivotal scene instead of using the wealth of GOOD dialogue and material from the books? Nor in the book does he ever get angry like he does in that scene. If anything he just gets perpetually more aggravated and grinds his teeth. In a rage, ordering Davos to death is the complete opposite of Stannis. Davos says it when he had his fingers cut off all Stannis had was an iron look of justice. I now reread the Stannis chapters. And I still say differences between book and TV Stannis are rather small. Ok he struggled a little more with killing Gendry/Edric and he needed 3 leech kills instead of 1 to be convinced. But thats just a result of limited time on TV, and the end result is still the same. Stannis was still always listening to what Melisandre told him, except for taking her to the Blackwater battle. Stannis never was an "atheist" as someone here claimed. He followed the Red God. For what other reason would he forsake the Seven and introduce the Red God as the new religion if not for belief? Its not like Melisandre had anything else to offer. And the TV series doesnt even show how they burn non-believers alive. If they had done hat people would probably really get a negative opinion about Stannis. The scene with Davos bringing the message from the Night's Watch you are complaining about here happened almost exactly the same in the books. Stannis wants to kill Davos because of letting Edric escape. Then Davos gets out the letter and reads it. The scene is cut then but from what we learn later and before its obvious that Melisandre is in favor of fighting the Others (or "the Other") and convinces Stannis to go north.
You're wrong to say Stannis forsake the seven for the Red God.
It's made clear in the epilogue of ACOK that Stannis stopped believing in the gods the day his parents died outside Storm's End as their ship sank to the sea upon returning home from Essos. He is very cynical about it and doesn't believe any gods could be so cruel as to do that. I might not call him an "atheist", maybe an "agnostic" but that's not really an important argument here and you get the point.
Stannis doesn't follow the Red God, he finds Melisandre useful. It's a pragmatic decision. He values her council as a consequence but definitely doesn't follow her blindly. He even goes so far as to make death threats if she is wrong (and why else if he isn't still skeptical). A large portion of his power comes from soldiers and vassals who DO believe in the Red God and so he needs her. Even if he doesn't necessarily believe himself, he knows he must play some minor courtesies of the Game of Thrones even if he hates them. Throughout Davos chapters it's made pretty clear Stannis is surrounded by yes-men and he despises it, but he needs them.
Perhaps you should read the Davos chapters from ACOK as well because show-Stannis is definitely a completely different character than book-Stannis.
Stannis is intelligent, skeptical, cynical, just, hard, merciless, and committed to his duty.
In the show, he's portrayed as desperate, ambitious, selfish, fanatical, and pussywhipped.
If book Stannis had watched tonight's episode, he would have executed show Stannis for injustice. It's horrible. On a side note, I also hate how they seem to portray Davos as having only one son. Davos lost three sons but still has his wife and two or three living sons after the Battle of the Blackwater.
|
I agree to a large extend with Templar, the book-Stannis deserves much, much more respect, which is why I would literally puke if it turned out that + Show Spoiler +Ramsay actually killed him
The re-forging of Ice and the Red Wedding were both hard to digest and left me with anger and grief, but that would just go too far. I'm not sure I could finished reading the series if it turned out to be true.
|
Shae deceives Tyrion.
We all believe Shae loves Tyrion
Possibilities:
1. We are all deceived ( perfect ) and Shae goes on betraying Tyrion. ( Considering Tyrion should be somekind of a genius and if he is fooled by Shae than we should be too )
2. Shae tries to protect him but she draws Tywins attention . Tywin then deceives Shae that if she sleeps with him ( and arranges so that Tyrion sees that ) she will save Tyrion or something. So. Tyrion think Shae betrayed him, kills her, kills his father... even bigger tragedy.
As for Stannis:
- A bit weird but tbh not a big deal. As far as I remember there are also talks to burn Mance's kid at the wall so... ( not gonna go in a discusion here, can't really remember the chain of event from the book )
|
On June 11 2013 03:29 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2013 03:18 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 21:07 sickle wrote:On June 10 2013 20:34 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 20:28 Doctorbeat wrote:On June 10 2013 20:21 Redox wrote:
Other than that, I am surprised people are not bitching about the biggest plot change so far. Shae is confirmed for truly loving Tyrion, and not the common whore she was in the books. So most probably she will not betray Tyrion, there will be no scene with Tyrion killing her etc. It will all be very different. It's not better than the original, but it can work and it's nowhere near as much of a big deal as the character assassination of Stannis. Holy shit, I am so much disagreeing with this I am literally getting angry. I think I will read the Davos chapters of the first half of Storm again because I cant believe my perception would be this wrong. I really feal like the show absolutely mirrors my perception of Stannis. Go re-read the chapters. Stannis is in no way Melisandre's lapdog. Many many times she and the other fanatics try to persuade Stannis to sacrifice the boy but he doesn't. He is also an outspoken atheist who always made japes about being surrounding by fanatics. Always being sceptical and conflicted about the Lord of Light and its powers. And only after the THIRD usurper died Davos sent the boy away, and then persuaded Stannis himself of his duty - by in-depth discussion, of his duty, Davos said that by killing the boy Stannis would be in breach of the duty of the King to protect his subjects. In the show you get none of that, absolutely nothing. Instead only one usurper falls and already Stannis wants the boy killed. All Stannis does is puppet what Mel says, which is a spit in the face of his book counterpart. This is how it went down in the show: Stannis: Davos, I sentence u to die Davos: no we must go north Stannis: no u die Mel: no hes right Stannis: ok u live This is extremely patronizing. Why shit all over such a pivotal scene instead of using the wealth of GOOD dialogue and material from the books? Nor in the book does he ever get angry like he does in that scene. If anything he just gets perpetually more aggravated and grinds his teeth. In a rage, ordering Davos to death is the complete opposite of Stannis. Davos says it when he had his fingers cut off all Stannis had was an iron look of justice. I now reread the Stannis chapters. And I still say differences between book and TV Stannis are rather small. Ok he struggled a little more with killing Gendry/Edric and he needed 3 leech kills instead of 1 to be convinced. But thats just a result of limited time on TV, and the end result is still the same. Stannis was still always listening to what Melisandre told him, except for taking her to the Blackwater battle. Stannis never was an "atheist" as someone here claimed. He followed the Red God. For what other reason would he forsake the Seven and introduce the Red God as the new religion if not for belief? Its not like Melisandre had anything else to offer. And the TV series doesnt even show how they burn non-believers alive. If they had done hat people would probably really get a negative opinion about Stannis. The scene with Davos bringing the message from the Night's Watch you are complaining about here happened almost exactly the same in the books. Stannis wants to kill Davos because of letting Edric escape. Then Davos gets out the letter and reads it. The scene is cut then but from what we learn later and before its obvious that Melisandre is in favor of fighting the Others (or "the Other") and convinces Stannis to go north. You're wrong to say Stannis forsake the seven for the Red God. It's made clear in the epilogue of ACOK that Stannis stopped believing in the gods the day his parents died outside Storm's End as their ship sank to the sea upon returning home from Essos. He is very cynical about it and doesn't believe any gods could be so cruel as to do that. I might not call him an "atheist", maybe an "agnostic" but that's not really an important argument here and you get the point. Stannis doesn't follow the Red God, he finds Melisandre useful. It's a pragmatic decision. He values her council as a consequence but definitely doesn't follow her blindly. He even goes so far as to make death threats if she is wrong (and why else if he isn't still skeptical).
Ok so he stopped following the Seven even earlier, doesnt exactly change my point. And he does clearly not listen to Melisandre only for pragmatic reasons. He adopted the Red God, burned the Seven and went against all the advice of his Maester, Davos and others before Melisandre did anything for him.
I always understood that as Melissandre influencing him with magic or whatever, because that's the only explanation for a rational and dry man like Stannis to believe all this god stuff without having seen any proof.
|
On June 11 2013 03:45 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2013 03:29 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 11 2013 03:18 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 21:07 sickle wrote:On June 10 2013 20:34 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 20:28 Doctorbeat wrote:On June 10 2013 20:21 Redox wrote:
Other than that, I am surprised people are not bitching about the biggest plot change so far. Shae is confirmed for truly loving Tyrion, and not the common whore she was in the books. So most probably she will not betray Tyrion, there will be no scene with Tyrion killing her etc. It will all be very different. It's not better than the original, but it can work and it's nowhere near as much of a big deal as the character assassination of Stannis. Holy shit, I am so much disagreeing with this I am literally getting angry. I think I will read the Davos chapters of the first half of Storm again because I cant believe my perception would be this wrong. I really feal like the show absolutely mirrors my perception of Stannis. Go re-read the chapters. Stannis is in no way Melisandre's lapdog. Many many times she and the other fanatics try to persuade Stannis to sacrifice the boy but he doesn't. He is also an outspoken atheist who always made japes about being surrounding by fanatics. Always being sceptical and conflicted about the Lord of Light and its powers. And only after the THIRD usurper died Davos sent the boy away, and then persuaded Stannis himself of his duty - by in-depth discussion, of his duty, Davos said that by killing the boy Stannis would be in breach of the duty of the King to protect his subjects. In the show you get none of that, absolutely nothing. Instead only one usurper falls and already Stannis wants the boy killed. All Stannis does is puppet what Mel says, which is a spit in the face of his book counterpart. This is how it went down in the show: Stannis: Davos, I sentence u to die Davos: no we must go north Stannis: no u die Mel: no hes right Stannis: ok u live This is extremely patronizing. Why shit all over such a pivotal scene instead of using the wealth of GOOD dialogue and material from the books? Nor in the book does he ever get angry like he does in that scene. If anything he just gets perpetually more aggravated and grinds his teeth. In a rage, ordering Davos to death is the complete opposite of Stannis. Davos says it when he had his fingers cut off all Stannis had was an iron look of justice. I now reread the Stannis chapters. And I still say differences between book and TV Stannis are rather small. Ok he struggled a little more with killing Gendry/Edric and he needed 3 leech kills instead of 1 to be convinced. But thats just a result of limited time on TV, and the end result is still the same. Stannis was still always listening to what Melisandre told him, except for taking her to the Blackwater battle. Stannis never was an "atheist" as someone here claimed. He followed the Red God. For what other reason would he forsake the Seven and introduce the Red God as the new religion if not for belief? Its not like Melisandre had anything else to offer. And the TV series doesnt even show how they burn non-believers alive. If they had done hat people would probably really get a negative opinion about Stannis. The scene with Davos bringing the message from the Night's Watch you are complaining about here happened almost exactly the same in the books. Stannis wants to kill Davos because of letting Edric escape. Then Davos gets out the letter and reads it. The scene is cut then but from what we learn later and before its obvious that Melisandre is in favor of fighting the Others (or "the Other") and convinces Stannis to go north. You're wrong to say Stannis forsake the seven for the Red God. It's made clear in the epilogue of ACOK that Stannis stopped believing in the gods the day his parents died outside Storm's End as their ship sank to the sea upon returning home from Essos. He is very cynical about it and doesn't believe any gods could be so cruel as to do that. I might not call him an "atheist", maybe an "agnostic" but that's not really an important argument here and you get the point. Stannis doesn't follow the Red God, he finds Melisandre useful. It's a pragmatic decision. He values her council as a consequence but definitely doesn't follow her blindly. He even goes so far as to make death threats if she is wrong (and why else if he isn't still skeptical). Ok so he stopped following the Seven even earlier, doesnt exactly change my point. And he does clearly not listen to Melisandre only for pragmatic reasons. He adopted the Red God, burned the Seven and went against all the advice of his Maester, Davos and others before Melisandre did anything for him
A large portion of his power comes from soldiers and vassals who DO believe in the Red God and so he needs her. Even if he doesn't necessarily believe himself, he knows he must play some minor courtesies of the Game of Thrones even if he hates them. Throughout Davos chapters it's made pretty clear Stannis is surrounded by yes-men and he despises it, but he needs them. Those yes-men happen to believe in the Red God.
Remember "Queen's Men"? After the Battle of the Blackwater, they clearly outnumber the "King's Men".
He stopped listening to his Maester regardless though because his Maester was useless to him and had no real council to provide. He confides this in Davos and wishes that the Maester could have just lived the remainder of his days peacefully because he had been a good servant his whole life and earned his rest.
|
@ Macheji: Regarding Shae, option 2 seems rather...contrived, since there was no indication that Tywin knew of the escape attempt or anything, and that it doesn't seem to fit his character at all.
Then again, I've been skeptical of the whole scene to begin with given Tywin's character (and grief over his wife's death), but eh. I've always been of the opinion that Varys did it.
|
On June 11 2013 03:47 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2013 03:45 Redox wrote:On June 11 2013 03:29 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 11 2013 03:18 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 21:07 sickle wrote:On June 10 2013 20:34 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 20:28 Doctorbeat wrote:On June 10 2013 20:21 Redox wrote:
Other than that, I am surprised people are not bitching about the biggest plot change so far. Shae is confirmed for truly loving Tyrion, and not the common whore she was in the books. So most probably she will not betray Tyrion, there will be no scene with Tyrion killing her etc. It will all be very different. It's not better than the original, but it can work and it's nowhere near as much of a big deal as the character assassination of Stannis. Holy shit, I am so much disagreeing with this I am literally getting angry. I think I will read the Davos chapters of the first half of Storm again because I cant believe my perception would be this wrong. I really feal like the show absolutely mirrors my perception of Stannis. Go re-read the chapters. Stannis is in no way Melisandre's lapdog. Many many times she and the other fanatics try to persuade Stannis to sacrifice the boy but he doesn't. He is also an outspoken atheist who always made japes about being surrounding by fanatics. Always being sceptical and conflicted about the Lord of Light and its powers. And only after the THIRD usurper died Davos sent the boy away, and then persuaded Stannis himself of his duty - by in-depth discussion, of his duty, Davos said that by killing the boy Stannis would be in breach of the duty of the King to protect his subjects. In the show you get none of that, absolutely nothing. Instead only one usurper falls and already Stannis wants the boy killed. All Stannis does is puppet what Mel says, which is a spit in the face of his book counterpart. This is how it went down in the show: Stannis: Davos, I sentence u to die Davos: no we must go north Stannis: no u die Mel: no hes right Stannis: ok u live This is extremely patronizing. Why shit all over such a pivotal scene instead of using the wealth of GOOD dialogue and material from the books? Nor in the book does he ever get angry like he does in that scene. If anything he just gets perpetually more aggravated and grinds his teeth. In a rage, ordering Davos to death is the complete opposite of Stannis. Davos says it when he had his fingers cut off all Stannis had was an iron look of justice. I now reread the Stannis chapters. And I still say differences between book and TV Stannis are rather small. Ok he struggled a little more with killing Gendry/Edric and he needed 3 leech kills instead of 1 to be convinced. But thats just a result of limited time on TV, and the end result is still the same. Stannis was still always listening to what Melisandre told him, except for taking her to the Blackwater battle. Stannis never was an "atheist" as someone here claimed. He followed the Red God. For what other reason would he forsake the Seven and introduce the Red God as the new religion if not for belief? Its not like Melisandre had anything else to offer. And the TV series doesnt even show how they burn non-believers alive. If they had done hat people would probably really get a negative opinion about Stannis. The scene with Davos bringing the message from the Night's Watch you are complaining about here happened almost exactly the same in the books. Stannis wants to kill Davos because of letting Edric escape. Then Davos gets out the letter and reads it. The scene is cut then but from what we learn later and before its obvious that Melisandre is in favor of fighting the Others (or "the Other") and convinces Stannis to go north. You're wrong to say Stannis forsake the seven for the Red God. It's made clear in the epilogue of ACOK that Stannis stopped believing in the gods the day his parents died outside Storm's End as their ship sank to the sea upon returning home from Essos. He is very cynical about it and doesn't believe any gods could be so cruel as to do that. I might not call him an "atheist", maybe an "agnostic" but that's not really an important argument here and you get the point. Stannis doesn't follow the Red God, he finds Melisandre useful. It's a pragmatic decision. He values her council as a consequence but definitely doesn't follow her blindly. He even goes so far as to make death threats if she is wrong (and why else if he isn't still skeptical). Ok so he stopped following the Seven even earlier, doesnt exactly change my point. And he does clearly not listen to Melisandre only for pragmatic reasons. He adopted the Red God, burned the Seven and went against all the advice of his Maester, Davos and others before Melisandre did anything for him A large portion of his power comes from soldiers and vassals who DO believe in the Red God and so he needs her. Even if he doesn't necessarily believe himself, he knows he must play some minor courtesies of the Game of Thrones even if he hates them. Throughout Davos chapters it's made pretty clear Stannis is surrounded by yes-men and he despises it, but he needs them. Those yes-men happen to believe in the Red God. Remember "Queen's Men"? After the Battle of the Blackwater, they clearly outnumber the "King's Men". He stopped listening to his Maester regardless though because his Maester was useless to him and had no real council to provide. He confides this in Davos and wishes that the Maester could have just lived the remainder of his days peacefully because he had been a good servant his whole life and earned his rest.
Still the amount of followers of the Seven by far outweighs the number of followers of the Red God, except for Dragonstone itself maybe. If he hopes to be King of all of Westeros its surely not practical to be seen as a the harbinger of a new, foreign belief.
Even for Dragonstone itself you would think letting both beliefs exist instead of creating friction by having the Seven burned, would be the better approach. Especially as news of this burning will surely spread elsewhere.
|
I still don't understand why more people don't think Shae is employed by Tywin in the first place. Tywin, knowing that his son has a love for whores, makes sure Shae runs into Tyrion at the war camp with the instructions of reporting to him whatever Tyrion does/says/writes/whathaveyou.
I felt like finding Shae in Tywin's bed was damn near proof of it.
So of course she wouldn't want to leave, she is in no danger at all if she is actually working under Tywin's orders.
|
On June 11 2013 03:55 N3rV[Green] wrote:
I still don't understand why more people don't think Shae is employed by Tywin in the first place. Tywin, knowing that his son has a love for whores, makes sure Shae runs into Tyrion at the war camp with the instructions of reporting to him whatever Tyrion does/says/writes/whathaveyou.
For one there is her general behaviour. But especially how she lobbies hard for Tyrion not bedding Sansa. Thats the exact opposite of what Tywin wants.
|
On June 11 2013 03:55 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2013 03:47 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 11 2013 03:45 Redox wrote:On June 11 2013 03:29 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 11 2013 03:18 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 21:07 sickle wrote:On June 10 2013 20:34 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 20:28 Doctorbeat wrote:On June 10 2013 20:21 Redox wrote:
Other than that, I am surprised people are not bitching about the biggest plot change so far. Shae is confirmed for truly loving Tyrion, and not the common whore she was in the books. So most probably she will not betray Tyrion, there will be no scene with Tyrion killing her etc. It will all be very different. It's not better than the original, but it can work and it's nowhere near as much of a big deal as the character assassination of Stannis. Holy shit, I am so much disagreeing with this I am literally getting angry. I think I will read the Davos chapters of the first half of Storm again because I cant believe my perception would be this wrong. I really feal like the show absolutely mirrors my perception of Stannis. Go re-read the chapters. Stannis is in no way Melisandre's lapdog. Many many times she and the other fanatics try to persuade Stannis to sacrifice the boy but he doesn't. He is also an outspoken atheist who always made japes about being surrounding by fanatics. Always being sceptical and conflicted about the Lord of Light and its powers. And only after the THIRD usurper died Davos sent the boy away, and then persuaded Stannis himself of his duty - by in-depth discussion, of his duty, Davos said that by killing the boy Stannis would be in breach of the duty of the King to protect his subjects. In the show you get none of that, absolutely nothing. Instead only one usurper falls and already Stannis wants the boy killed. All Stannis does is puppet what Mel says, which is a spit in the face of his book counterpart. This is how it went down in the show: Stannis: Davos, I sentence u to die Davos: no we must go north Stannis: no u die Mel: no hes right Stannis: ok u live This is extremely patronizing. Why shit all over such a pivotal scene instead of using the wealth of GOOD dialogue and material from the books? Nor in the book does he ever get angry like he does in that scene. If anything he just gets perpetually more aggravated and grinds his teeth. In a rage, ordering Davos to death is the complete opposite of Stannis. Davos says it when he had his fingers cut off all Stannis had was an iron look of justice. I now reread the Stannis chapters. And I still say differences between book and TV Stannis are rather small. Ok he struggled a little more with killing Gendry/Edric and he needed 3 leech kills instead of 1 to be convinced. But thats just a result of limited time on TV, and the end result is still the same. Stannis was still always listening to what Melisandre told him, except for taking her to the Blackwater battle. Stannis never was an "atheist" as someone here claimed. He followed the Red God. For what other reason would he forsake the Seven and introduce the Red God as the new religion if not for belief? Its not like Melisandre had anything else to offer. And the TV series doesnt even show how they burn non-believers alive. If they had done hat people would probably really get a negative opinion about Stannis. The scene with Davos bringing the message from the Night's Watch you are complaining about here happened almost exactly the same in the books. Stannis wants to kill Davos because of letting Edric escape. Then Davos gets out the letter and reads it. The scene is cut then but from what we learn later and before its obvious that Melisandre is in favor of fighting the Others (or "the Other") and convinces Stannis to go north. You're wrong to say Stannis forsake the seven for the Red God. It's made clear in the epilogue of ACOK that Stannis stopped believing in the gods the day his parents died outside Storm's End as their ship sank to the sea upon returning home from Essos. He is very cynical about it and doesn't believe any gods could be so cruel as to do that. I might not call him an "atheist", maybe an "agnostic" but that's not really an important argument here and you get the point. Stannis doesn't follow the Red God, he finds Melisandre useful. It's a pragmatic decision. He values her council as a consequence but definitely doesn't follow her blindly. He even goes so far as to make death threats if she is wrong (and why else if he isn't still skeptical). Ok so he stopped following the Seven even earlier, doesnt exactly change my point. And he does clearly not listen to Melisandre only for pragmatic reasons. He adopted the Red God, burned the Seven and went against all the advice of his Maester, Davos and others before Melisandre did anything for him A large portion of his power comes from soldiers and vassals who DO believe in the Red God and so he needs her. Even if he doesn't necessarily believe himself, he knows he must play some minor courtesies of the Game of Thrones even if he hates them. Throughout Davos chapters it's made pretty clear Stannis is surrounded by yes-men and he despises it, but he needs them. Those yes-men happen to believe in the Red God. Remember "Queen's Men"? After the Battle of the Blackwater, they clearly outnumber the "King's Men". He stopped listening to his Maester regardless though because his Maester was useless to him and had no real council to provide. He confides this in Davos and wishes that the Maester could have just lived the remainder of his days peacefully because he had been a good servant his whole life and earned his rest. Still the amount of followers of the Seven by far outweighs the number of followers of the Red God, except for Dragonstone itself maybe. If he hopes to be King of all of Westeros its surely not practical to be seen as a the harbinger of a new, foreign belief. Even for Dragonstone itself you would think letting both beliefs exist instead of creating friction by having the Seven burned, would be the better approach. Especially as news of this burning will surely spread elsewhere.
did you even read the books? you're arguing from your own perspective which is a "little" weird to book readers..
stannis sees no way to become king without the help of melisandre. so it is just pragmatic... he even doesn't believe he is azor ahai despite melisandre telling him and giving him the "flaming" sword.
|
On June 11 2013 04:01 fleeze wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2013 03:55 Redox wrote:On June 11 2013 03:47 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 11 2013 03:45 Redox wrote:On June 11 2013 03:29 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 11 2013 03:18 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 21:07 sickle wrote:On June 10 2013 20:34 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 20:28 Doctorbeat wrote:On June 10 2013 20:21 Redox wrote:
Other than that, I am surprised people are not bitching about the biggest plot change so far. Shae is confirmed for truly loving Tyrion, and not the common whore she was in the books. So most probably she will not betray Tyrion, there will be no scene with Tyrion killing her etc. It will all be very different. It's not better than the original, but it can work and it's nowhere near as much of a big deal as the character assassination of Stannis. Holy shit, I am so much disagreeing with this I am literally getting angry. I think I will read the Davos chapters of the first half of Storm again because I cant believe my perception would be this wrong. I really feal like the show absolutely mirrors my perception of Stannis. Go re-read the chapters. Stannis is in no way Melisandre's lapdog. Many many times she and the other fanatics try to persuade Stannis to sacrifice the boy but he doesn't. He is also an outspoken atheist who always made japes about being surrounding by fanatics. Always being sceptical and conflicted about the Lord of Light and its powers. And only after the THIRD usurper died Davos sent the boy away, and then persuaded Stannis himself of his duty - by in-depth discussion, of his duty, Davos said that by killing the boy Stannis would be in breach of the duty of the King to protect his subjects. In the show you get none of that, absolutely nothing. Instead only one usurper falls and already Stannis wants the boy killed. All Stannis does is puppet what Mel says, which is a spit in the face of his book counterpart. This is how it went down in the show: Stannis: Davos, I sentence u to die Davos: no we must go north Stannis: no u die Mel: no hes right Stannis: ok u live This is extremely patronizing. Why shit all over such a pivotal scene instead of using the wealth of GOOD dialogue and material from the books? Nor in the book does he ever get angry like he does in that scene. If anything he just gets perpetually more aggravated and grinds his teeth. In a rage, ordering Davos to death is the complete opposite of Stannis. Davos says it when he had his fingers cut off all Stannis had was an iron look of justice. I now reread the Stannis chapters. And I still say differences between book and TV Stannis are rather small. Ok he struggled a little more with killing Gendry/Edric and he needed 3 leech kills instead of 1 to be convinced. But thats just a result of limited time on TV, and the end result is still the same. Stannis was still always listening to what Melisandre told him, except for taking her to the Blackwater battle. Stannis never was an "atheist" as someone here claimed. He followed the Red God. For what other reason would he forsake the Seven and introduce the Red God as the new religion if not for belief? Its not like Melisandre had anything else to offer. And the TV series doesnt even show how they burn non-believers alive. If they had done hat people would probably really get a negative opinion about Stannis. The scene with Davos bringing the message from the Night's Watch you are complaining about here happened almost exactly the same in the books. Stannis wants to kill Davos because of letting Edric escape. Then Davos gets out the letter and reads it. The scene is cut then but from what we learn later and before its obvious that Melisandre is in favor of fighting the Others (or "the Other") and convinces Stannis to go north. You're wrong to say Stannis forsake the seven for the Red God. It's made clear in the epilogue of ACOK that Stannis stopped believing in the gods the day his parents died outside Storm's End as their ship sank to the sea upon returning home from Essos. He is very cynical about it and doesn't believe any gods could be so cruel as to do that. I might not call him an "atheist", maybe an "agnostic" but that's not really an important argument here and you get the point. Stannis doesn't follow the Red God, he finds Melisandre useful. It's a pragmatic decision. He values her council as a consequence but definitely doesn't follow her blindly. He even goes so far as to make death threats if she is wrong (and why else if he isn't still skeptical). Ok so he stopped following the Seven even earlier, doesnt exactly change my point. And he does clearly not listen to Melisandre only for pragmatic reasons. He adopted the Red God, burned the Seven and went against all the advice of his Maester, Davos and others before Melisandre did anything for him A large portion of his power comes from soldiers and vassals who DO believe in the Red God and so he needs her. Even if he doesn't necessarily believe himself, he knows he must play some minor courtesies of the Game of Thrones even if he hates them. Throughout Davos chapters it's made pretty clear Stannis is surrounded by yes-men and he despises it, but he needs them. Those yes-men happen to believe in the Red God. Remember "Queen's Men"? After the Battle of the Blackwater, they clearly outnumber the "King's Men". He stopped listening to his Maester regardless though because his Maester was useless to him and had no real council to provide. He confides this in Davos and wishes that the Maester could have just lived the remainder of his days peacefully because he had been a good servant his whole life and earned his rest. Still the amount of followers of the Seven by far outweighs the number of followers of the Red God, except for Dragonstone itself maybe. If he hopes to be King of all of Westeros its surely not practical to be seen as a the harbinger of a new, foreign belief. Even for Dragonstone itself you would think letting both beliefs exist instead of creating friction by having the Seven burned, would be the better approach. Especially as news of this burning will surely spread elsewhere. did you even read the books? you're arguing from your own perspective which is a "little" weird to book readers.. stannis sees no way to become king without the help of melisandre. so it is just pragmatic... he even doesn't believe he is azor ahai despite melisandre telling him and giving him the "flaming" sword.
Exactly which pragmatic things did she give to him when he originally adopted her belief?
Also, he did believe that Melisandre could create a dragon if he gave her Edric. You have to be gone pretty far from reality to believe that.
|
On June 11 2013 03:59 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2013 03:55 N3rV[Green] wrote:
I still don't understand why more people don't think Shae is employed by Tywin in the first place. Tywin, knowing that his son has a love for whores, makes sure Shae runs into Tyrion at the war camp with the instructions of reporting to him whatever Tyrion does/says/writes/whathaveyou.
For one there is her general behaviour. But especially how she lobbies hard for Tyrion not bedding Sansa. Thats the exact opposite of what Tywin wants.
There's another idea to follow then - what if Shae just wants to see Tyrion suffer?
Think of it this way: She despises Tyrion for keeping her around but hiding her, for calling her his lady while still treating her like a whore he needs to hide. He basically sells her into slavery to Sansa, she's used as a spy for however many people and thrust into an insane and potentially dangerous life in Kings Landing, as compared to her relatively normal life as a camp follower. And who is to blame for all that?
That's right, Tyrion, because he wanted to drag her along to spite his father. That's why she's sticking around. Varys wants her to leave so Tyrion can survive and do what needs to be done, Shae wants to stay and fuck up his life as much as he fucked up hers. That's why she betrays him during his trial, and ultimately ends up in Tywin's bed - as a final slap to Tyrion's pride.
I don't think Book!Shae was this manipulative, but considering what we've seen about Show!Shae, she could very well end up as a conniving woman who just wants revenge of a sorts.
|
On June 11 2013 04:04 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2013 04:01 fleeze wrote:On June 11 2013 03:55 Redox wrote:On June 11 2013 03:47 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 11 2013 03:45 Redox wrote:On June 11 2013 03:29 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 11 2013 03:18 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 21:07 sickle wrote:On June 10 2013 20:34 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 20:28 Doctorbeat wrote:
[quote]
It's not better than the original, but it can work and it's nowhere near as much of a big deal as the character assassination of Stannis. Holy shit, I am so much disagreeing with this I am literally getting angry. I think I will read the Davos chapters of the first half of Storm again because I cant believe my perception would be this wrong. I really feal like the show absolutely mirrors my perception of Stannis. Go re-read the chapters. Stannis is in no way Melisandre's lapdog. Many many times she and the other fanatics try to persuade Stannis to sacrifice the boy but he doesn't. He is also an outspoken atheist who always made japes about being surrounding by fanatics. Always being sceptical and conflicted about the Lord of Light and its powers. And only after the THIRD usurper died Davos sent the boy away, and then persuaded Stannis himself of his duty - by in-depth discussion, of his duty, Davos said that by killing the boy Stannis would be in breach of the duty of the King to protect his subjects. In the show you get none of that, absolutely nothing. Instead only one usurper falls and already Stannis wants the boy killed. All Stannis does is puppet what Mel says, which is a spit in the face of his book counterpart. This is how it went down in the show: Stannis: Davos, I sentence u to die Davos: no we must go north Stannis: no u die Mel: no hes right Stannis: ok u live This is extremely patronizing. Why shit all over such a pivotal scene instead of using the wealth of GOOD dialogue and material from the books? Nor in the book does he ever get angry like he does in that scene. If anything he just gets perpetually more aggravated and grinds his teeth. In a rage, ordering Davos to death is the complete opposite of Stannis. Davos says it when he had his fingers cut off all Stannis had was an iron look of justice. I now reread the Stannis chapters. And I still say differences between book and TV Stannis are rather small. Ok he struggled a little more with killing Gendry/Edric and he needed 3 leech kills instead of 1 to be convinced. But thats just a result of limited time on TV, and the end result is still the same. Stannis was still always listening to what Melisandre told him, except for taking her to the Blackwater battle. Stannis never was an "atheist" as someone here claimed. He followed the Red God. For what other reason would he forsake the Seven and introduce the Red God as the new religion if not for belief? Its not like Melisandre had anything else to offer. And the TV series doesnt even show how they burn non-believers alive. If they had done hat people would probably really get a negative opinion about Stannis. The scene with Davos bringing the message from the Night's Watch you are complaining about here happened almost exactly the same in the books. Stannis wants to kill Davos because of letting Edric escape. Then Davos gets out the letter and reads it. The scene is cut then but from what we learn later and before its obvious that Melisandre is in favor of fighting the Others (or "the Other") and convinces Stannis to go north. You're wrong to say Stannis forsake the seven for the Red God. It's made clear in the epilogue of ACOK that Stannis stopped believing in the gods the day his parents died outside Storm's End as their ship sank to the sea upon returning home from Essos. He is very cynical about it and doesn't believe any gods could be so cruel as to do that. I might not call him an "atheist", maybe an "agnostic" but that's not really an important argument here and you get the point. Stannis doesn't follow the Red God, he finds Melisandre useful. It's a pragmatic decision. He values her council as a consequence but definitely doesn't follow her blindly. He even goes so far as to make death threats if she is wrong (and why else if he isn't still skeptical). Ok so he stopped following the Seven even earlier, doesnt exactly change my point. And he does clearly not listen to Melisandre only for pragmatic reasons. He adopted the Red God, burned the Seven and went against all the advice of his Maester, Davos and others before Melisandre did anything for him A large portion of his power comes from soldiers and vassals who DO believe in the Red God and so he needs her. Even if he doesn't necessarily believe himself, he knows he must play some minor courtesies of the Game of Thrones even if he hates them. Throughout Davos chapters it's made pretty clear Stannis is surrounded by yes-men and he despises it, but he needs them. Those yes-men happen to believe in the Red God. Remember "Queen's Men"? After the Battle of the Blackwater, they clearly outnumber the "King's Men". He stopped listening to his Maester regardless though because his Maester was useless to him and had no real council to provide. He confides this in Davos and wishes that the Maester could have just lived the remainder of his days peacefully because he had been a good servant his whole life and earned his rest. Still the amount of followers of the Seven by far outweighs the number of followers of the Red God, except for Dragonstone itself maybe. If he hopes to be King of all of Westeros its surely not practical to be seen as a the harbinger of a new, foreign belief. Even for Dragonstone itself you would think letting both beliefs exist instead of creating friction by having the Seven burned, would be the better approach. Especially as news of this burning will surely spread elsewhere. did you even read the books? you're arguing from your own perspective which is a "little" weird to book readers.. stannis sees no way to become king without the help of melisandre. so it is just pragmatic... he even doesn't believe he is azor ahai despite melisandre telling him and giving him the "flaming" sword. Exactly which pragmatic things did she give to him when he originally adopted her belief? Also, he did believe that Melisandre could create a dragon if he gave her Edric. You have to be gone pretty far from reality to believe that.
You keep saying he adopted her belief but he didn't. He's always been skeptical about it.
It's not so much that he believed it but that it was literally his only option available to him (until Davos offered him another). When you've only got one option, it doesn't matter how crazy it might seem, you'd be willing to give it a shot.
|
On June 11 2013 04:04 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2013 04:01 fleeze wrote:On June 11 2013 03:55 Redox wrote:On June 11 2013 03:47 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 11 2013 03:45 Redox wrote:On June 11 2013 03:29 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 11 2013 03:18 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 21:07 sickle wrote:On June 10 2013 20:34 Redox wrote:On June 10 2013 20:28 Doctorbeat wrote:
[quote]
It's not better than the original, but it can work and it's nowhere near as much of a big deal as the character assassination of Stannis. Holy shit, I am so much disagreeing with this I am literally getting angry. I think I will read the Davos chapters of the first half of Storm again because I cant believe my perception would be this wrong. I really feal like the show absolutely mirrors my perception of Stannis. Go re-read the chapters. Stannis is in no way Melisandre's lapdog. Many many times she and the other fanatics try to persuade Stannis to sacrifice the boy but he doesn't. He is also an outspoken atheist who always made japes about being surrounding by fanatics. Always being sceptical and conflicted about the Lord of Light and its powers. And only after the THIRD usurper died Davos sent the boy away, and then persuaded Stannis himself of his duty - by in-depth discussion, of his duty, Davos said that by killing the boy Stannis would be in breach of the duty of the King to protect his subjects. In the show you get none of that, absolutely nothing. Instead only one usurper falls and already Stannis wants the boy killed. All Stannis does is puppet what Mel says, which is a spit in the face of his book counterpart. This is how it went down in the show: Stannis: Davos, I sentence u to die Davos: no we must go north Stannis: no u die Mel: no hes right Stannis: ok u live This is extremely patronizing. Why shit all over such a pivotal scene instead of using the wealth of GOOD dialogue and material from the books? Nor in the book does he ever get angry like he does in that scene. If anything he just gets perpetually more aggravated and grinds his teeth. In a rage, ordering Davos to death is the complete opposite of Stannis. Davos says it when he had his fingers cut off all Stannis had was an iron look of justice. I now reread the Stannis chapters. And I still say differences between book and TV Stannis are rather small. Ok he struggled a little more with killing Gendry/Edric and he needed 3 leech kills instead of 1 to be convinced. But thats just a result of limited time on TV, and the end result is still the same. Stannis was still always listening to what Melisandre told him, except for taking her to the Blackwater battle. Stannis never was an "atheist" as someone here claimed. He followed the Red God. For what other reason would he forsake the Seven and introduce the Red God as the new religion if not for belief? Its not like Melisandre had anything else to offer. And the TV series doesnt even show how they burn non-believers alive. If they had done hat people would probably really get a negative opinion about Stannis. The scene with Davos bringing the message from the Night's Watch you are complaining about here happened almost exactly the same in the books. Stannis wants to kill Davos because of letting Edric escape. Then Davos gets out the letter and reads it. The scene is cut then but from what we learn later and before its obvious that Melisandre is in favor of fighting the Others (or "the Other") and convinces Stannis to go north. You're wrong to say Stannis forsake the seven for the Red God. It's made clear in the epilogue of ACOK that Stannis stopped believing in the gods the day his parents died outside Storm's End as their ship sank to the sea upon returning home from Essos. He is very cynical about it and doesn't believe any gods could be so cruel as to do that. I might not call him an "atheist", maybe an "agnostic" but that's not really an important argument here and you get the point. Stannis doesn't follow the Red God, he finds Melisandre useful. It's a pragmatic decision. He values her council as a consequence but definitely doesn't follow her blindly. He even goes so far as to make death threats if she is wrong (and why else if he isn't still skeptical). Ok so he stopped following the Seven even earlier, doesnt exactly change my point. And he does clearly not listen to Melisandre only for pragmatic reasons. He adopted the Red God, burned the Seven and went against all the advice of his Maester, Davos and others before Melisandre did anything for him A large portion of his power comes from soldiers and vassals who DO believe in the Red God and so he needs her. Even if he doesn't necessarily believe himself, he knows he must play some minor courtesies of the Game of Thrones even if he hates them. Throughout Davos chapters it's made pretty clear Stannis is surrounded by yes-men and he despises it, but he needs them. Those yes-men happen to believe in the Red God. Remember "Queen's Men"? After the Battle of the Blackwater, they clearly outnumber the "King's Men". He stopped listening to his Maester regardless though because his Maester was useless to him and had no real council to provide. He confides this in Davos and wishes that the Maester could have just lived the remainder of his days peacefully because he had been a good servant his whole life and earned his rest. Still the amount of followers of the Seven by far outweighs the number of followers of the Red God, except for Dragonstone itself maybe. If he hopes to be King of all of Westeros its surely not practical to be seen as a the harbinger of a new, foreign belief. Even for Dragonstone itself you would think letting both beliefs exist instead of creating friction by having the Seven burned, would be the better approach. Especially as news of this burning will surely spread elsewhere. did you even read the books? you're arguing from your own perspective which is a "little" weird to book readers.. stannis sees no way to become king without the help of melisandre. so it is just pragmatic... he even doesn't believe he is azor ahai despite melisandre telling him and giving him the "flaming" sword. Exactly which pragmatic things did she give to him when he originally adopted her belief? Also, he did believe that Melisandre could create a dragon if he gave her Edric. You have to be gone pretty far from reality to believe that.
again.... did you read the books? since the dragons grow with daenerys magic grows in effect in the world. especially the magic of the red priests (ressurection?)
melisandre can see the future and she did show stannis what she is capable of with her god. especially with king's blood.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
