|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 11, 2017 3:37:06 GMT
GRRM describes King Stannis as seasoned battle commander. He is the only person described as giving chills to Lord Tywin Lannister. Renly was no king. He was a sweet faced boy who got some support because of his lover Ser Loras. Real traditionalists/conservatives such as Lord Stark knew that he was the claimant of iron throne based on inheritance rights. Of course the option to steal the iron throne was always open to everyone including to Renly. Stannis was not a king just because he was a commander. Really, he clearly sucked as a leader. Stannis may have sucked or may have been a bad leader or whatever but he was a king by inheritance.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 11, 2017 5:38:56 GMT
I've always found the debate about who was the "legal successor" of Robert a bit silly. Robert was the Usurper. No, he wasn't. Robert's rebellion overthrew a regime that had become illegitimate through the acts of the Mad King. Saying Robert's new order was illegitimate is like saying the current German republic is as well because Hitler was violently removed. I know some people do it but they rely on a self-defeating definition of legitimacy since the previous order they wish to support also replaced a former, "legitimate" order itself. In other words, there is no order which doesn't succeed to some violence, some disorder, some "original sin" which has to be absolved in order to restore some new legitimacy. The peaceful order which followed Roberts accession to the throne made him legitimate.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 11, 2017 5:44:20 GMT
As also-rans go he had a good run. I actually thought for a bit he might end up taking Westeros. Never liked him though - miserable self-righteous git who burnt his daughter and murdered lovely Renly. I don't care that he killed Renly, but I sure hate HOW he did it. It wasn't in any way honorable especially considering he was his brother. Stannis was funny in the books but still an ass. I loved how he did it. Killing the enemy general by drone is the best way not even to win but to avoid a battle. Honour is the value of fools.
|
|
|
Post by CynicalDreamer2 on Aug 11, 2017 5:53:39 GMT
I don't care that he killed Renly, but I sure hate HOW he did it. It wasn't in any way honorable especially considering he was his brother. Stannis was funny in the books but still an ass. I loved how he did it. Killing the enemy general by drone is the best way not even to win but to avoid a battle. Honour is the value of fools. Honor is the value of the honorable. Avoiding the battle can only be construed as cowardly after so much shit was spoken. I didn't like that move at all, either you can defeat your little brother or you can't and Stannis told us all he knew he couldn't and took the craven route because it would keep him in the game longer.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 11, 2017 6:16:03 GMT
I loved how he did it. Killing the enemy general by drone is the best way not even to win but to avoid a battle. Honour is the value of fools. Honor is the value of the honorable. Avoiding the battle can only be construed as cowardly after so much shit was spoken. I didn't like that move at all, either you can defeat your little brother or you can't and Stannis told us all he knew he couldn't and took the craven route because it would keep him in the game longer. Avoiding battle is away of saving lives. Maybe it's not something of value to you.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 11, 2017 10:39:32 GMT
Stannis was not a king just because he was a commander. Really, he clearly sucked as a leader. Stannis may have sucked or may have been a bad leader or whatever but he was a king by inheritance. He was king by usurper inheritance which means inheritance didn't matter a hoot when no one cared. Renly was just going to do what his brother did but in a populist way.
|
|
pk9
Sophomore
@pk9
Posts: 992
Likes: 152
|
Post by pk9 on Aug 11, 2017 16:03:20 GMT
Stannis may have sucked or may have been a bad leader or whatever but he was a king by inheritance. Actually, how was Stannis king by inheritance? He acted solely based on a letter from Ned. What proof did he have that Ned was telling the truth? Even if one were to accept that Ned was a trustworthy person (which was contradicted in the show, btw), as far as I recall, Ned's entire evidence was based on a completely flawed understanding of genetics.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 11, 2017 16:25:11 GMT
Stannis may have sucked or may have been a bad leader or whatever but he was a king by inheritance. Actually, how was Stannis king by inheritance? He acted solely based on a letter from Ned. What proof did he have that Ned was telling the truth? Even if one were to accept that Ned was a trustworthy person (which was contradicted in the show, btw), as far as I recall, Ned's entire evidence was based on a completely flawed understanding of genetics. Ned is most definitely an untrustworthy person and I think it's funny that Stannis talks of Ned as honorable when they both are massively deceptive although Stannis is by far the worse of the two.
Ned was merely OK with lying and tormenting his wife whereas Stannis was willing to burn people alive which includes his daughter in the show. Soomeone should have used a demon baby on him.
However, in the books, Stannis was the first one to suspect Robert's kids were bastards and clued Jon Arynn in on it. So he didn't have to trust Ned although he likely would have.
I'm not sure why they changed that in the show.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 13, 2017 9:41:34 GMT
Stannis may have sucked or may have been a bad leader or whatever but he was a king by inheritance. He was king by usurper inheritance which means inheritance didn't matter a hoot when no one cared. Renly was just going to do what his brother did but in a populist way. There is no such thing as usurper inheritance. Robert was a king and nothing less. if there is any such thing as usurper inheritance then it applied to all the kings of Targeryon dynasty. Robert siezed the throne for a perfectly legitimate reason. In any case, once you are crowned and accepted as a king then you are king.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 13, 2017 9:53:27 GMT
He was king by usurper inheritance which means inheritance didn't matter a hoot when no one cared. Renly was just going to do what his brother did but in a populist way. There is no such thing as usurper inheritance. Robert was a king and nothing less. if there is any such thing as usurper inheritance then it applied to all the kings of Targeryon dynasty. Robert siezed the throne for a perfectly legitimate reason. In any case, once you are crowned and accepted as a king then you are king. Acceptance is the key. Any fool can have himself crowned by a bunch of followers. Matilda was crowned but never accepted as Queen of England. Stephen, on the other hand, remains as "rightful" even though he grabbed power.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 13, 2017 10:01:12 GMT
There is no such thing as usurper inheritance. Robert was a king and nothing less. if there is any such thing as usurper inheritance then it applied to all the kings of Targeryon dynasty. Robert siezed the throne for a perfectly legitimate reason. In any case, once you are crowned and accepted as a king then you are king. Acceptance is the key. Any fool can have himself crowned by a bunch of followers. Matilda was crowned but never accepted as Queen of England. Stephen, on the other hand, remains as "rightful" even though he grabbed power. Agreed. Acceptance is a key component here. If we look at Robert then it is a fact that he was widely accepted from Vale and North to South and Westerlands. As long as he was living there were not many significant political oppositions against him.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 13, 2017 12:13:45 GMT
He was king by usurper inheritance which means inheritance didn't matter a hoot when no one cared. Renly was just going to do what his brother did but in a populist way. There is no such thing as usurper inheritance. Robert was a king and nothing less. if there is any such thing as usurper inheritance then it applied to all the kings of Targeryon dynasty. Robert siezed the throne for a perfectly legitimate reason. In any case, once you are crowned and accepted as a king then you are king. I know. i was playing with words. Robert was made king because he had the closest ties (An aunt I think) to the Targaryens he despised which would make for an easier transition.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2017 14:49:48 GMT
He helped pave the way for Jon's storyline to get to where it is now. I don't like how they killed him off screen though. That was dumb. I wish he had gotten a better ending.
|
|
pk9
Sophomore
@pk9
Posts: 992
Likes: 152
|
Post by pk9 on Aug 14, 2017 21:10:13 GMT
Robert was made king because he had the closest ties (An aunt I think) to the Targaryens he despised which would make for an easier transition. No, Robert was made king because it was his damn rebellion and he took the throne. He simply used his Targaryen blood to bolster his claim.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 14, 2017 23:39:29 GMT
Robert was made king because he had the closest ties (An aunt I think) to the Targaryens he despised which would make for an easier transition. No, Robert was made king because it was his damn rebellion and he took the throne. He simply used his Targaryen blood to bolster his claim. This is hair splitting so it's silly to say no as if there's actually disagreement. You are saying the same thing I am although it was not just his rebellion. It was named for him once he became king & legend. Jon Aryen began it and Ned had at least an equal role in it. So it wasn't just bolstering his claim, it's also that he had the strongest claim because of his Targaryen heritage.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Aug 15, 2017 4:41:08 GMT
No, Robert was made king because it was his damn rebellion and he took the throne. He simply used his Targaryen blood to bolster his claim. This is hair splitting so it's silly to say no as if there's actually disagreement. You are saying the same thing I am although it was not just his rebellion. It was named for him once he became king & legend. Jon Aryen began it and Ned had at least an equal role in it. So it wasn't just bolstering his claim, it's also that he had the strongest claim because of his Targaryen heritage. Of the three main rebels, the one with the Targaryen relation was chosen as king so acceptance would be easier. This is what is said somewhere in one of the books, I can't remember where and how. It is never mentioned in the show. Or maybe Robert was the only bachelor left and therefore the only one to whom Tywin could give his daughter. I wish Tywin had taken the crown instead.
|
|