|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 22, 2017 18:13:46 GMT
shinnicknethI spelled your name wrong. Right. That was the coup part. This was his big mistake. He thought he could handle the throne while Stannis got there simply on the news that Joffrey was illegitimate and having City soldiers as his military back-up. Although his actions also helped his brother, Stannis was definitely correct about announcing everywhere although that wouldn't have helped Ned since he chose to stay in the city. He & his family could have fled with Renly but his support of Stannis left him alone in the city with only Littlefinger as an ally. In short he was doomed if he didn't immediately bend the knee.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 22, 2017 18:25:48 GMT
shinnickneth The story is deep in it but it's always done as a justification for actions. The reality is they throne has not followed this pattern since Robert took the throne. The one who had the power kept the throne. The whole story is about usurping or upending that order of things because it's all about the person in power. For example Stannis was the heir to Storms End and Stormlands. He gets Dragonstone. Tyrion is the rightful heir to Casterly Rock. Tywin instead looks to Jaime to break his vows. Sam's dad literally threatens him with death unless he joins the Night's Watch because he likes his younger brother better. Succession is used as an automatic conflict for what creates the drama in the show.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 22, 2017 18:52:43 GMT
I don't really believe in the significance of ascension rights. The only ones who followed it were Targaryens and even they fought for power. Robert didn;t even follow that rule with his own family, giving the Stormlands to Renley.It's all well and good that Ned wanted Stannis, it just means that he also wanted a fight with the Lannisters. Brienne isn't so much honorable as she is loyal.She is the better representation of what people claim Ned is. She would always want Renley to be anything because that is who she was in love with. That's too bad because the story is deep in it. It isn't just with business to do with the Iron Throne either. We hear time in again how the first born son or a daughter of a character will carry on as the Lord or Lady of a castle after the parent is dead. i.e. Sam is forced to give up his title so he won't inherit lands/titles, sweet little Robin will be in charge when he comes of age, Sansa will be queen when she weds Joffrey (under the lie that he's Robert's true son), blah, blah, blah.  Sure, backstabbing happens but the line of how things are meant to go is clear at least...that's all I'm saying. Yeah...well, Robert was king and he didn't give a damn haha. He was going to do what he wanted. I believe he says in several episodes, "I'm the King! I get what I want!" Robert never cared or liked Stannis, which plays heavily into his decision to overlook Stannis and give to Renly instead. Robert never liked Renly very much either but Stannis he almost detested. No one loved Stannis. i.e. Even peasants mock him calling him "The Crab King" in the books. Stannis never got credit for anything from the other characters - not before the show's setting or during. I think that's one of the reasons why I always liked him so much. He goes on doing his duty without any recognition for his bravery that many of the other characters get lavished with (even if they only get it temporarily). He doesn't get anything. Not gold. Not lands. Not titles.  For a world that sets the illusion of tradition, most people even steal away his rightful place as king just because they don't like him. Hell, I didn't even like Stannis when I first started reading the books. The tipping point for me was when I read the part where Stannis turns away from King's Landing and goes to save the Night's Watch instead. Had Stannis went to King's Landing instead, he would have won. He had the numbers and the Lannister forces were scattered around trying to fight all their enemies at the time. It was the perfect opportunity, but Stannis put duty first and went for the Wall instead. This leads to his forces getting stuck in the snow and his eventual demise (in the show at least for he's alive in the books). It makes him such an unappreciated, tragic character. I can't but feel for him. As Stannis says about saving the Nights' Watch:  The act made me realize what a brilliant character Stannis is. He really follows through with what he says. It isn't just bullshit words with him, like it is with so many other characters in the story. Yes, loyal is a better word for Brienne. I detest how the show always makes a point of trying to portray her as honorable though. They have all these characters describe her as such and give her dialogue going on about it, but she isn't honorable for she doesn't support the one man she should be supporting by right. It irks me. Call the sword, Loyalkeeper goddammit!  Interesting perspective on Stannis. I was never a fan of his in the books or the show, and it'll be interesting to see what's in store for him when Winds of Winter finally comes out. I have a feeling it will be drastically different from what we got on the show. Something about Stannis always rubbed me the wrong way. I used to think it was GRRM constant reminding us how uncharismatic he was, but I think it has more to do with his motives. You make a compelling argument that he's unselfish, but I wouldn't say that's entirely true. I don't know that he cares as much about saving the Night's Watch as he does about rallying the northerners to his cause. His religious fanaticism never sat well with me, either. The Mad King burned people alive as punishment-- Stannis does it because he thinks it fuels his cause. Not sure how that makes him morally superior. I'd like to think he'd make a just king, but what happens when a red priest or priestess starts whispering in his ear? He preaches fairness yet is completely ruthless when it suits him. After all, he conspired with Melisandre to murder Renly, Robb, and anyone else calling himself a king. He had Renly murdered simply because he knew it was the most expedient way to defeat him. Tywin Lannister would be proud of that strategy. I believe Stannis does not covet the throne for the same reasons others do, but that does not mean he himself isn't corrupt on a spiritual/moral level. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 22, 2017 19:06:53 GMT
Why exactly does that make him different than the Lannisters exactly? I say its because you like him better. Motive and intent. The Lannisters want the throne for themselves for personal gain and prestige. Ned wants the proper heir to sit the throne and is literally guarding it with his life until the heir-- whom Ned has already summoned-- comes to claim it. He has zero interest in the crown. You seriously need that explained to you? |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 22, 2017 19:43:44 GMT
Why exactly does that make him different than the Lannisters exactly? I say its because you like him better. Motive and intent. The Lannisters want the throne for themselves for personal gain and prestige. Ned wants the proper heir to sit the throne and is literally guarding it with his life until the heir-- whom Ned has already summoned-- comes to claim it. He has zero interest in the crown. You seriously need that explained to you? You did not need to explain the reasons that Ned deceived his friend and king.
I never said he was interested in the crown. I agree that Stannis & Ned were made for each other.
He would probably still be alive if that were his goal. Ned's biggest weakness is that he played the game always as a subordinate to someone else.
If he had wanted it more, he'd be on the throne and, since he didn't, he should have went back home to continue lying to his family.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 22, 2017 19:57:42 GMT
Motive and intent. The Lannisters want the throne for themselves for personal gain and prestige. Ned wants the proper heir to sit the throne and is literally guarding it with his life until the heir-- whom Ned has already summoned-- comes to claim it. He has zero interest in the crown. You seriously need that explained to you? You did not need to explain the reasons that Ned deceived his friend and king.
I never said he was interested in the crown. I agree that Stannis & Ned were made for each other.
He would probably still be alive if that were his goal. Ned's biggest weakness is that he played the game always as a subordinate to someone else.
If he had wanted it more, he'd be on the throne and, since he didn't, he should have went back home to continue lying to his family.
I'll never understand your type of troll. Deliberately making yourself look stupid in order to continue a conversation. I guess I'm just not that bored with life. Carry on. |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 22, 2017 20:00:40 GMT
You did not need to explain the reasons that Ned deceived his friend and king.
I never said he was interested in the crown. I agree that Stannis & Ned were made for each other.
He would probably still be alive if that were his goal. Ned's biggest weakness is that he played the game always as a subordinate to someone else.
If he had wanted it more, he'd be on the throne and, since he didn't, he should have went back home to continue lying to his family.
I'll never understand your type of troll. Deliberately making yourself look stupid in order to continue a conversation. I guess I'm just not that bored with life. Carry on. I'll never understand "smart" people who say things not even remotely related to the conversation.
But keep at it. The more you do it, the more I know you don't really have anything to say.
|
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 1,785
|
Post by shinnickneth on Sept 22, 2017 22:02:09 GMT
Interesting perspective on Stannis. I was never a fan of his in the books or the show, and it'll be interesting to see what's in store for him when Winds of Winter finally comes out. I have a feeling it will be drastically different from what we got on the show. Something about Stannis always rubbed me the wrong way. I used to think it was GRRM constant reminding us how uncharismatic he was, but I think it has more to do with his motives. You make a compelling argument that he's unselfish, but I wouldn't say that's entirely true. I don't know that he cares as much about saving the Night's Watch as he does about rallying the northerners to his cause. His religious fanaticism never sat well with me, either. The Mad King burned people alive as punishment-- Stannis does it because he thinks it fuels his cause. Not sure how that makes him morally superior. I'd like to think he'd make a just king, but what happens when a red priest or priestess starts whispering in his ear? He preaches fairness yet is completely ruthless when it suits him. After all, he conspired with Melisandre to murder Renly, Robb, and anyone else calling himself a king. He had Renly murdered simply because he knew it was the most expedient way to defeat him. Tywin Lannister would be proud of that strategy. I believe Stannis does not covet the throne for the same reasons others do, but that does not mean he himself isn't corrupt on a spiritual/moral level. Thanks. Based on the Reek preview chapter from Winds of Winter that GRRM posted to his website years ago (it's really just a chapter that got omitted from the previous book due to length), Stannis is in a much different position than he finds himself in the show: For one thing of course, he's alive. Secondly, he holds Reek and Asha (Yara in the show) prisoner. Both of those characters have king's blood, so no need to burn his daughter. He of course left Shireen behind at Dragonstone, so it's obvious he has no plans to burn her. He also told his men if he, Stannis, should die in battle, they are to seat Shireen on the Iron Throne. Or die in the attempt. Again, no plans to burn her. I always had problems with how they portrayed Stannis to love burning people in the show. In the books, he really doesn't burn that many people. He mostly burns those who won't bend the knee, child murderers/pedophiles, rapers, and thieves. The one exception is when he's willing to burn one of Robert's bastards named Edric Storm (replaced with Gendry in the show). I also don't like how they portray Stannis to be a religious fanatic in the show. He isn't. He's very skeptical of the whole Lord of Light business. In the show, he should be even more so due to the fact that Balon Greyjoy is still alive come the Battle of Winterfell. In the books, Balon dies (along with the other 2 names connected to the leeches) long before and Stannis is still alive. It seems Melisandre had proven herself true. This leads Stannis to want to believe her, but he's nonetheless still weary of her beliefs. I don't know if Stannis is so much "morally superior" than everyone else.  He's just honest and to the point (much like the free folk in the show). When he says he'll do something, he does it. Crimes are punished, loyalty is rewarded. He would have brought justice to Westeros. I always liked this quote from the books by him: I agree. I don't think Stannis ever wanted or coveted the Iron Throne. Stannis never wears a crown, he never instructs Davos to introduce everyone he meets with ridiculously long titles (i.e. Dany and her "endless" titles), and he never sits on the throne at Dragonstone. He never even goes into the throne room. He spends his time around the table plotting with his advisors, and when he isn't doing that, he's with his daughter or wife. Stannis knows he will die going for the Iron Throne. When he looked into the fire, he saw himself being burned/melted by the crown. He knows he will die. He does it anyway because it's his duty as the rightful king to take up the title. Otherwise, why go for it? He doesn't love the people, and the people don't love him. Nor does he care for being royalty. As Stannis says about himself, "I hate a great deal of things, but I suffer them all the same." You mentioned Renly. Stannis had to have Renly killed. It wasn't what Stannis wanted for his brother. He offered Renly the chance for forgiveness if his little brother would only strike his banners and bend the knee. He even generously offered to make Renly a part of his Small Council and would name Renly his heir until a son was born to him. Renly refused him. Renly would have led a lot of men to their deaths to usurp a throne that didn't belong to him. Those men rightfully belonged to Stannis. Renly also intended to specifically look for Stannis on the battlefield to kill him. Viewers like to chastise Stannis for killing Renly, but Renly was actually excited and motivated by the thought of killing Stannis. Why have thousands die for a usurper, when you can just kill the usurper and be done with it? It made sense. It wasn't so much ruthless, as it was necessary. Melisandre definitely was Stannis' weakness. If not in the books, she at least destroyed the man in the show along with the whole Baratheon line. She destroyed a good man. I can't wait to see her death in season 8. It's the only death I will actually take joy in watching. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 23, 2017 3:47:54 GMT
Interesting perspective on Stannis. I was never a fan of his in the books or the show, and it'll be interesting to see what's in store for him when Winds of Winter finally comes out. I have a feeling it will be drastically different from what we got on the show. Something about Stannis always rubbed me the wrong way. I used to think it was GRRM constant reminding us how uncharismatic he was, but I think it has more to do with his motives. You make a compelling argument that he's unselfish, but I wouldn't say that's entirely true. I don't know that he cares as much about saving the Night's Watch as he does about rallying the northerners to his cause. His religious fanaticism never sat well with me, either. The Mad King burned people alive as punishment-- Stannis does it because he thinks it fuels his cause. Not sure how that makes him morally superior. I'd like to think he'd make a just king, but what happens when a red priest or priestess starts whispering in his ear? He preaches fairness yet is completely ruthless when it suits him. After all, he conspired with Melisandre to murder Renly, Robb, and anyone else calling himself a king. He had Renly murdered simply because he knew it was the most expedient way to defeat him. Tywin Lannister would be proud of that strategy. I believe Stannis does not covet the throne for the same reasons others do, but that does not mean he himself isn't corrupt on a spiritual/moral level. Thanks. Based on the Reek preview chapter from Winds of Winter that GRRM posted to his website years ago (it's really just a chapter that got omitted from the previous book due to length), Stannis is in a much different position than he finds himself in the show: For one thing of course, he's alive. Secondly, he holds Reek and Asha (Yara in the show) prisoner. Both of those characters have king's blood, so no need to burn his daughter. He of course left Shireen behind at Dragonstone, so it's obvious he has no plans to burn her. He also told his men if he, Stannis, should die in battle, they are to seat Shireen on the Iron Throne. Or die in the attempt. Again, no plans to burn her. I always had problems with how they portrayed Stannis to love burning people in the show. In the books, he really doesn't burn that many people. He mostly burns those who won't bend the knee, child murderers/pedophiles, rapers, and thieves. The one exception is when he's willing to burn one of Robert's bastards named Edric Storm (replaced with Gendry in the show). I also don't like how they portray Stannis to be a religious fanatic in the show. He isn't. He's very skeptical of the whole Lord of Light business. In the show, he should be even more so due to the fact that Balon Greyjoy is still alive come the Battle of Winterfell. In the books, Balon dies (along with the other 2 names connected to the leeches) long before and Stannis is still alive. It seems Melisandre had proven herself true. This leads Stannis to want to believe her, but he's nonetheless still weary of her beliefs. I don't know if Stannis is so much "morally superior" than everyone else. He's just honest and to the point (much like the free folk in the show). When he says he'll do something, he does it. Crimes are punished, loyalty is rewarded. He would have brought justice to Westeros. I always liked this quote from the books by him: I agree. I don't think Stannis ever wanted or coveted the Iron Throne. Stannis never wears a crown, he never instructs Davos to introduce everyone he meets with ridiculously long titles (i.e. Dany and her "endless" titles), and he never sits on the throne at Dragonstone. He never even goes into the throne room. He spends his time around the table plotting with his advisors, and when he isn't doing that, he's with his daughter or wife. Stannis knows he will die going for the Iron Throne. When he looked into the fire, he saw himself being burned/melted by the crown. He knows he will die. He does it anyway because it's his duty as the rightful king to take up the title. Otherwise, why go for it? He doesn't love the people, and the people don't love him. Nor does he care for being royalty. As Stannis says about himself, "I hate a great deal of things, but I suffer them all the same." You mentioned Renly. Stannis had to have Renly killed. It wasn't what Stannis wanted for his brother. He offered Renly the chance for forgiveness if his little brother would only strike his banners and bend the knee. He even generously offered to make Renly a part of his Small Council and would name Renly his heir until a son was born to him. Renly refused him. Renly would have led a lot of men to their deaths to usurp a throne that didn't belong to him. Those men rightfully belonged to Stannis. Renly also intended to specifically look for Stannis on the battlefield to kill him. Viewers like to chastise Stannis for killing Renly, but Renly was actually excited and motivated by the thought of killing Stannis. Why have thousands die for a usurper, when you can just kill the usurper and be done with it? It made sense. It wasn't so much ruthless, as it was necessary. Melisandre definitely was Stannis' weakness. If not in the books, she at least destroyed the man in the show along with the whole Baratheon line. She destroyed a good man. I can't wait to see her death in season 8. It's the only death I will actually take joy in watching. I completely agree that book Stannis is far superior to show Stannis. Speaking strictly about the books (since show Stannis is dead), I just don't trust him. He burned people alive, criminals or not. He conspired to murder his own brother because it was more convenient than joining forces with him. He can't claim it was in the realm's best interest while also admitting he would not be the people's choice. He should've ceded the kingdom to Renly and become his field marshal. Renly had the support of the Reach and Stannis himself had no wish to rule; his singular focus on the rules of succession are borderline madness, and that's not even factoring in the religious aspect. (And it isn't that I think Renly would've made a great king, but together with Stannis they'd be a political/military force to be reckoned with.)
Uncompromising men are easy to admire, but in the end I feel he would've had one key similarity with Robert (albeit in a very different way): He'd be much better at chasing the crown than he ever was at actually ruling. Stannis only sees the world in black and white, and politics at any level cannot function this way.
As a reader, I too started to appreciate his character more once he headed north, but as the story has progressed, I only find myself rooting for him as more likeable characters are eliminated or unable to contribute in ways that Stannis can. So it's appreciation by default, I suppose. I can't say I ever disliked the character (as you pointed out, he didn't sacrifice his daughter in the books!), on the page, I just think his tunnel vision is ill suited for kingship. As Donal Noye put it:
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 23, 2017 4:00:12 GMT
I'll never understand your type of troll. Deliberately making yourself look stupid in order to continue a conversation. I guess I'm just not that bored with life. Carry on. I'll never understand "smart" people who say things not even remotely related to the conversation.
But keep at it. The more you do it, the more I know you don't really have anything to say.
Well shit, man. You misquoted me the other day and it caused you to misunderstand my post entirely. Until you learn how to read, you're always going to think the other side doesn't 'have anything to say.'
This time you asked how it made Ned different than the Lannisters, I explained it, and you replied by telling me I didn't have to explain it. Again, you can't make a coherent argument because you've already proven yourself incapable of following the narrative of other posters, let along ASOIAF.
Good luck with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 23, 2017 5:44:14 GMT
Stannis: "It is not a question of wanting. The throne is mine, as Robert's heir. That is law. After me, it must pass to my daughter, unless Selyse should finally give me a son. I am king. Wants do not enter into it. " Stannis is written as the antithesis of individual freedom. He is the extreme Ned. In the show, he will tell Shireen, just before sacrificing her, "when a man knows what he is, the choice is no choice at all" and feel comfort in it. Viewers are mostly feeling fools. Renly was smiling at them so they liked him. The show made him look tolerant so they loved him. Stannis avoided a battle in the way he killed him. It was good. |
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Sept 23, 2017 9:00:26 GMT
A man in a precarious situation who was simply out of his league both politically and socially.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 23, 2017 12:24:23 GMT
@reyhauka
I acknowledged the error, had tno reason to add value to the rest of your dialogue, and you are the one that won't let it go. That makes it a personal issue for you to deal with.
You gave me a reason why he was the same as the Lannisters, you just didn't know it.
Besides I responded to what you said anyway since I'm a nice guy.
But please continue wasting time by making this about how I offend you with my presence.
|
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 1,785
|
Post by shinnickneth on Sept 23, 2017 16:15:05 GMT
Stannis is written as the antithesis of individual freedom. He is the extreme Ned. In the show, he will tell Shireen, just before sacrificing her, "when a man knows what he is, the choice is no choice at all" and feel comfort in it. Viewers are mostly feeling fools. Renly was smiling at them so they liked him. The show made him look tolerant so they loved him. Stannis avoided a battle in the way he killed him. It was good. Uh...what? Ned was a fool. He was a fool who loved his family and that's admirable, but a fool nonetheless. He wasn't privy to the game at all. I just don't see the comparison. The only thing they may have in common is their sense of justice/honor, but even then, they're quite different. Stannis was able to separate a person's good acts from the bad (as if completely different acts). i.e. He punished Davos for smuggling by taking his fingers, but rewarded him for his courage in saving Baratheon men at Storm's End. As Stannis said, "A good act does not wash out the bad, nor the bad the good." On the other hand, Ned is never able to distinguish between the two once he had "marked a man" as beneath him. i.e. Right at the end of Robert's rebellion when Ned enters the throne room to find Jaime sitting there. All he could do is call Jaime, "Kingslayer." He never listened to what Jaime had to say about it. Stannis would have listened, just like he allowed Davos the opportunity to explain why he snuck Gendry away from Dragstone. Stannis never lies in the series. Never. Even when Brienne comes to him at the end, he doesn't dispute that he killed Renly. Ned is willing to forgo honor/honesty, when it comes to the safety of his family. i.e. Lying to secure the safety of Jon, lying for Sansa's life, lying that Cat took Tyrion prisoner on his orders, etc. Ned was a believer in the Old Gods. Stannis was a skeptic at best and denied the Old Gods. Ned was close with his family. Stannis was a cold man and could never bond with anyone. i.e. the Cressen chapter from the books. Ned was showered with praise from the other characters. i.e. Warden of the North, Hand of the King, Lord of Winterfell, etc. Stannis wasn't ever given any recognition for his courage or lineage from anyone (especially not from Robert) because no one loved or liked him. Ned wasn't willing to do what was necessary (like striking King's Landing while the castle slept to get rid of the Lannisters), while Stannis used blood magic to eradicate a usurper who would have gotten a lot of men killed for a false cause. I just don't see the comparison between Stannis and Ned at all. They even grew up different in parts of Westeros, with Ned in the North at Winterfell and Stannis in the South at Storm's End. I suppose it can be said that they're both tested men in battle, but so were a lot of characters in the series. I wouldn't say that makes them extremes of each other. |
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 1,785
|
Post by shinnickneth on Sept 23, 2017 16:28:51 GMT
Viewers are mostly feeling fools. Renly was smiling at them so they liked him. The show made him look tolerant so they loved him. Stannis avoided a battle in the way he killed him. It was good. Ugh! You're so right here. I had the pleasure of going to the Game of Thrones live concert series earlier this year. It pissed me off during the difference in reaction from when they showed Stannis vs. Renly on screen. When Renly was shown, everyone applauded and cheered for him. When Stannis was shown, everyone was silent (other than for my clapping). People can be easily tricked by a smile. There's no deeper analysis with most. They look only on the surface and are essentially shallow people. I like the one quote Donal Noye from the books that compares the three Baratheon brothers. Someone posted part of it above, but I'll post the whole quote in its entirety:
|
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 1,785
|
Post by shinnickneth on Sept 23, 2017 16:40:36 GMT
The story is deep in it but it's always done as a justification for actions. The reality is they throne has not followed this pattern since Robert took the throne. The one who had the power kept the throne. The whole story is about usurping or upending that order of things because it's all about the person in power. For example Stannis was the heir to Storms End and Stormlands. He gets Dragonstone.Tyrion is the rightful heir to Casterly Rock. Tywin instead looks to Jaime to break his vows. Sam's dad literally threatens him with death unless he joins the Night's Watch because he likes his younger brother better. Succession is used as an automatic conflict for what creates the drama in the show. Good points. I know you probably didn't come here to argue grammar ( ) but Stannis didn't "get" Dragonstone. He took it by force, which is the only way he ever got anything. He was never awarded or given anything by anyone: |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 23, 2017 18:25:25 GMT
The story is deep in it but it's always done as a justification for actions. The reality is they throne has not followed this pattern since Robert took the throne. The one who had the power kept the throne. The whole story is about usurping or upending that order of things because it's all about the person in power. For example Stannis was the heir to Storms End and Stormlands. He gets Dragonstone.Tyrion is the rightful heir to Casterly Rock. Tywin instead looks to Jaime to break his vows. Sam's dad literally threatens him with death unless he joins the Night's Watch because he likes his younger brother better. Succession is used as an automatic conflict for what creates the drama in the show. Good points. I know you probably didn't come here to argue grammar ( ) but Stannis didn't "get" Dragonstone. He took it by force, which is the only way he ever got anything. He was never awarded or given anything by anyone: He invaded Dragonstone under Robert. I think he was in charge of the Navy. Robert gave him Dragonstone as a reward for his efforts in the war, but it was actually a slight since Robert blames Stannis for the Targaryen kids' survival. His punishment was that he didn't get the Stormlands. |
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 1,785
|
Post by shinnickneth on Sept 23, 2017 22:00:33 GMT
He invaded Dragonstone under Robert. I think he was in charge of the Navy. Robert gave him Dragonstone as a reward for his efforts in the war, but it was actually a slight since Robert blames Stannis for the Targaryen kids' survival. His punishment was that he didn't get the Stormlands. Yes, Robert commanded him to take Dragonstone so he did so. Robert wasn't present for it. I suppose Robert did "give" Dragonstone to him, but it wasn't something Stannis ever wanted. Also, the option wouldn't even have been possible without Stannis. Storm's End should have been given to Stannis by right. As you said, it was a punishment. The Targaryen children fled before Stannis even arrived there. The fact Robert blamed him for that is preposterous. |
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Sept 24, 2017 1:03:04 GMT
Marv Your opinion on this topic is eagerly awaited. pk9 Your opinion as well is welcome. Thanks all people for participating in this interesting thread till now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Sept 24, 2017 12:43:49 GMT
Without reading through 5 pages...I'll just say I'm a fan of Ned's, but he made some very poor choices. His stubbornness in regard to what he perceived as 'right' is probably his greatest shortcoming. He was terrible at taking into consideration the consequences of his actions beyond those that were immediately affected. He spent so much time in the somewhat black and white world of the North that he was very much a fish out of water in the politic heavy, scheming world that was Kings Landing.
Personally and morally you can see that Ned is a good person. He's an endearing father to his children and serves as a mentor and loved figure for almost every point of view character in the first few books. It's those reasons I like Ned despite his lack of ability to adapt in this world of grey.
|
|
