Game of Thrones Season 6 Discussion Thread *No Spoilers*

[bran]

Stannis killed one of his brothers, had no love for the other, and chopped off the fingers of his best friend. Burning Shireen was par for the course.....it was in his nature.

Well in fairness he did feel bad about it in ACOK . They were about to battle the next day and if you accepted Robert as King via his rebellion victory, Stannis was the true heir.

He was annoyed by Robert's antics, but he accepted them. He didn't conspire to kill him. Obviously these details are excluded from the TV show and any scene that humanized Stannis.

As for Davos, well Davos was a smuggler. Davos did end up pretty well afterwards thanks to Stannis as well.

The fact is his characterization was driven by a man who believed in his duty to the realm and to his daughter as he states multiple times later on in the story including at the start of "The Winds of Winter".

Why would you want it, then?" Davos asked him.

"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." He ran three fingers lightly down the table, over the layers of smooth hard varnish, dark with age. "I am king. Wants do not enter into it. I have a duty to my daughter. To the realm. Even to Robert. He loved me but little, I know, yet he was my brother.

yeah exactly, especially supplying wildlings with weapons which is a big no no and even davos said his punishment was fair and just. he is lucky it was just his fingers and not his head in all reality.

when it comes to renly, stannis offered him everything to just step aside and lay down his weapons, even offering to name him heir. renly knew stannis was the heir to the kingdom and he decided to rebell against his brother and kill him. stannis really had no alternative and did what he had to do.

burning shireen was so far away from his character, even the fucked up version we got on the tv show. the guy would have never had his daughter burned it makes 0 sense even from the show perspective.

[Georgy Zhukov]

Ramsay burns his supplies? Better burn Shireen!

I got that from wikipedia, I still did not watch this episode.

This means Stannis will get killed next week and "fans" will celebrate.

[downzy]

In terms of all the "tender" moments this season leading up to the decision - I think that was kind of the point. We thought and hoped Stannis would do the "right" thing - but that's not who he is.

He made the ultimate sacrifice in the pursuit of what he felt was his duty/destiny. What choice did he have? What fate was left for his men out there? They were already fucked, Ramsay destroyed whatever hopes they had left.

I'm not saying I liked it, or that I particularly like Stannis after the choice he made - but he felt he was left with no other option and that he had a path to follow. Doesn't mean he had to like making that choice - it's not such an incomprehensible about-face in my view. As a non-reader, I kind of thought it was inevitable that he'd eventually be pushed to do it.

Totally agreed. Once again, i think those who read or are familiar with the books are finding it hard to enjoy the show for what it is. As someone who has never read the books, very little of the show is hard to explain (though difficult to watch is another matter). Only issue I have is that the tone of the show sometimes makes things a little too predictable. It sometimes spends a little too much time or lingers on a certain character that's about to meet their doom. Anyone familiar with the show should have picked up on the fact that Stannis was eventually going to kill his daughter. Weiss and Beinoff seem to love manipulating their viewers emotions: endearing a character more than necessary only to devastate the audience when they're inevitably put down. In that sense they're simply amplifying the primary reason people love the series: no one is safe.

I was reading a couple of reviews of the most recent episode over at Slate and they seem to drive home the point you're making. Stannis sees the iron throne as his destiny, everything else can and will be sacrificed for this end. As Jamelle Bouie writes over at Slate:

Stannis may love his daughter, but she—like everything else in his life—is subordinate to his mission, which is reuniting the Seven Kingdoms under the rightful king. What’s more, he lives his life through abstractions and rigid rules—Davos, remember, doesn’t have his fingers, because of Stannis’ sense of “justice.” When given a choice between the humane thing and the thing that furthers his mission, he will always take the latter. Always. And so he killed his brother. And he killed his daughter.

I get that people who are familiar with who Stannis is in the books have a hard time with who he is on the television show, but for me, as someone who's only familiar with the latter, everything has worked out pretty well.

Ramsay burns his supplies? Better burn Shireen!

I got that from wikipedia, I still did not watch this episode.

This means Stannis will get killed next week and "fans" will celebrate.

Oh man, I fucking hate it when others question the sincerity of others. No offense, but who the fuck are you to decide who is a fan? Am I not a fan of the series simply because I haven't read the books and enjoy the show for what it is?

Feel free to stop your sense of superiority at any time.

[highvoltage]

In terms of all the "tender" moments this season leading up to the decision - I think that was kind of the point. We thought and hoped Stannis would do the "right" thing - but that's not who he is.

He made the ultimate sacrifice in the pursuit of what he felt was his duty/destiny. What choice did he have? What fate was left for his men out there? They were already fucked, Ramsay destroyed whatever hopes they had left.

I'm not saying I liked it, or that I particularly like Stannis after the choice he made - but he felt he was left with no other option and that he had a path to follow. Doesn't mean he had to like making that choice - it's not such an incomprehensible about-face in my view. As a non-reader, I kind of thought it was inevitable that he'd eventually be pushed to do it.

Totally agreed. Once again, i think those who read or are familiar with the books are finding it hard to enjoy the show for what it is. As someone who has never read the books, very little of the show is hard to explain (though difficult to watch is another matter). Only issue I have is that the tone of the show sometimes makes things a little too predictable. It sometimes spends a little too much time or lingers on a certain character that's about to meet their doom. Anyone familiar with the show should have picked up on the fact that Stannis was eventually going to kill his daughter. Weiss and Beinoff seem to love manipulating their viewers emotions: endearing a character more than necessary only to devastate the audience when they're inevitably put down. In that sense they're simply amplifying the primary reason people love the series: no one is safe.

I was reading a couple of reviews of the most recent episode over at Slate and they seem to drive home the point you're making. Stannis sees the iron throne as his destiny, everything else can and will be sacrificed for this end. As Jamelle Bouie writes over at Slate:

Stannis may love his daughter, but she—like everything else in his life—is subordinate to his mission, which is reuniting the Seven Kingdoms under the rightful king. What’s more, he lives his life through abstractions and rigid rules—Davos, remember, doesn’t have his fingers, because of Stannis’ sense of “justice.” When given a choice between the humane thing and the thing that furthers his mission, he will always take the latter. Always. And so he killed his brother. And he killed his daughter.

I get that people who are familiar with who Stannis is in the books have a hard time with who he is on the television show, but for me, as someone who's only familiar with the latter, everything has worked out pretty well.

Bingo. We've seen him do awful shit week-in, week-out, yet we've been sort of allowed to cling to some kind of hope he might be one of the good guys. Why? Because of his unfailing sense of duty, no matter the situation. That's the aspect of his character people sympathise with.

There have been so many times you could see he wasn't comfortable with blindly following Melisandre, but he still did anyway, every single time. He was pushed to what we thought was his limit when it came to burning his men alive. If it hadn't been for Davos, it would have happened to Gendry too. By the time he had to make the decision on Shireen, he'd already come too far to make any other choice. If he didn't go through with it, he was either

- abandoning his duty (unacceptable for Stannis, as we know), or

- faced with admitting that all the crazy shit he'd already done up to this point was for nothing.

Every time he's been faced with a horrible decision, he chose to continue believing in his "destiny" and following his duty over showing someone mercy (the "weaker" route). This was no different.

Kind of agree with you, they made it a little too predictable with the extra Shireen-Davos-Stannis scenes the last few episodes... but it did make it all the more uncomfortable to watch.

[OmarBradley]

In terms of all the "tender" moments this season leading up to the decision - I think that was kind of the point. We thought and hoped Stannis would do the "right" thing - but that's not who he is.

He made the ultimate sacrifice in the pursuit of what he felt was his duty/destiny. What choice did he have? What fate was left for his men out there? They were already fucked, Ramsay destroyed whatever hopes they had left.

I'm not saying I liked it, or that I particularly like Stannis after the choice he made - but he felt he was left with no other option and that he had a path to follow. Doesn't mean he had to like making that choice - it's not such an incomprehensible about-face in my view. As a non-reader, I kind of thought it was inevitable that he'd eventually be pushed to do it.

What? What sort of king would you be if you're willing to burn your own daughter alive to obtain the throne? This makes Stannis no better than Aerys, which from everything we've seen in the series, is contrary to the character. Like I said earlier, Stannis ridiculed Melisandre 2 episodes ago, he didn't say no kindly, he ridiculed her and told her to "get out."

And Ramsay with his 20 "good men" destroyed all of Stannis's siege equipment in a 3 minute period and no one saw them enter the camp? Yeah, okay.

Totally agreed. Once again, i think those who read or are familiar with the books are finding it hard to enjoy the show for what it is. As someone who has never read the books, very little of the show is hard to explain (though difficult to watch is another matter). Only issue I have is that the tone of the show sometimes makes things a little too predictable. It sometimes spends a little too much time or lingers on a certain character that's about to meet their doom. Anyone familiar with the show should have picked up on the fact that Stannis was eventually going to kill his daughter. Weiss and Beinoff seem to love manipulating their viewers emotions: endearing a character more than necessary only to devastate the audience when they're inevitably put down. In that sense they're simply amplifying the primary reason people love the series: no one is safe.

I was reading a couple of reviews of the most recent episode over at Slate and they seem to drive home the point you're making. Stannis sees the iron throne as his destiny, everything else can and will be sacrificed for this end. As Jamelle Bouie writes over at Slate:

Stannis may love his daughter, but she—like everything else in his life—is subordinate to his mission, which is reuniting the Seven Kingdoms under the rightful king. What’s more, he lives his life through abstractions and rigid rules—Davos, remember, doesn’t have his fingers, because of Stannis’ sense of “justice.” When given a choice between the humane thing and the thing that furthers his mission, he will always take the latter. Always. And so he killed his brother. And he killed his daughter.

I get that people who are familiar with who Stannis is in the books have a hard time with who he is on the television show, but for me, as someone who's only familiar with the latter, everything has worked out pretty well.

That's the thing downzy, it's become so routine at this point, it's no longer really effective.... and I still maintain that this move was so contrary to Stannis's character, book or show. Think about it..... the entire point of making Stannis seem like a good father this season was to juxtapose it with him murdering his daughter..... that's seems trendy and cutting edge and emotionally jarring, but it's really just dumb. It's the same repetitive formula the show has been doing each season, except it's getting old, especially when the rest of the storytelling is generally mediocre.

As bran pointed out earlier, Stannis was more than fair with Davos - he was generous, not cruel, even though the show portrays it that way. He killed Renly because Renly ignored the law of the realm and aimed to kill Stannis..... yeah I can see why that would cause Stannis to be aggressive towards a brother he already didn't like to begin with. I thought everything with Stannis in the show worked well on its own not knowing the differences from the books, but the burning of Shireen IMO is not at all supported by the Stannis we've seen on the show.

Even though he hasn't been portrayed as he is in the books, Stannis is not a cruel man in the show - he obeys the law so fervently unlike any other character that it makes him seem cold and lackluster. If DB/David were thinking that portraying Stannis as a great father for most of the season would make it even more gut-wrenching to see Shireen burned alive - they were wrong. Instead it made it seem forced and uncharacteristic of Stannis.

They should have had him being cold and rude to Shireen all season, reverse reverse psychology, we would have never seen it coming. And what, since we saw Stannis burn his daughter with disgust on his face we're supposed to say, "Oh Stannis, what a tough position you find yourself in, I'm really sorry that you're in this position that you have to burn your daughter alive." Like I said earlier it's the same mental game they're playing with the viewer, and it's becoming redundant and less effective each time it's used.

Bingo. We've seen him do awful shit week-in, week-out, yet we've been sort of allowed to cling to some kind of hope he might be one of the good guys. Why? Because of his unfailing sense of duty, no matter the situation. That's the aspect of his character people sympathise with.

There have been so many times you could see he wasn't comfortable with blindly following Melisandre, but he still did anyway, every single time. He was pushed to what we thought was his limit when it came to burning his men alive. If it hadn't been for Davos, it would have happened to Gendry too. By the time he had to make the decision on Shireen, he'd already come too far to make any other choice. If he didn't go through with it, he was either

- abandoning his duty (unacceptable for Stannis, as we know), or

- faced with admitting that all the crazy shit he'd already done up to this point was for nothing.

Every time he's been faced with a horrible decision, he chose to continue believing in his "destiny" and following his duty over showing someone mercy (the "weaker" route). This was no different.

Kind of agree with you, they made it a little too predictable with the extra Shireen-Davos-Stannis scenes the last few episodes... but it did make it all the more uncomfortable to watch.

This is the best support I've seen yet of why Stannis burned Shireen. But I still take issue with the fact that Stannis went from 0% liking the idea to doing it 2 episodes later without us seeing a scene of convincing......

So Stannis burns his daughter alive because 20 men infiltrated his camp of (what? 500+, 1000+) men and burned all of their siege equipment....... that progression of events is so mindbogglingly illogical.

Edited June 9, 2015 by OmarBradley

[ZoSoRose]

I think I have more of an issue with Ramsay's OP super villain, invincible bullshit. "20 good men" lol

[downzy]

@ Omar

But the issue central to the character of Stannis in the show is that he sacrifices everything and anything when circumstances dictates it. He could afford to be a loving and supportive father a few episodes ago because the condition of his army was not what it was in Episode 9. As Davos says, if they can't go forward and unwilling to go backward, what was there left to do? The only out left for Stannis, as he saw it, was to follow the advice of Melisandre. Considering where Stannis' army now finds itself and the dire situation going forward, what choice did he have all things considered? He will not bow down to the path ahead. It's not about being cruel or being evil, it's about duty to his own destiny. In the most recent episode, we see Stannis at his most desperate. I'm not trying to justify the murder of his daughter, but I do think in his mind it was the necessary evil to pursue his goal of sitting on the iron throne. There is no going back and he's willing to make the ultimate sacrifice if need be. That is what that scene, and the lead up to it, was suppose to make clear.

You're not suppose to feel any sympathy for Stannis, not sure why you would think anyone would. Stannis made a decision he hated making and he should be judged by that, regardless of how upset he looked while he watched his own daughter burn.

Agreed, they at times tip their hat as to what's to come, but I think charges that the scene was unnecessary or without merit are false and are made by those who wishes for a different narrative. But the tone and themes of the show have remained fairly consistent. The difference now is that we're a little more prepared for them. For those unfamiliar with the story, the deaths of Eddard, Rob, and Catelyn were shocking and as unexpected as could be. But their deaths and the deaths of others has conditioned the audience to be a little more cynical as we all become more familiar with the show. I think it would be wrong to change the tone and rhythm of the show simply to fuck with the audience. Yeah, the deaths are a little less surprising, but I wouldn't want the show to become something different just to make future deaths less foreseeable. What we lost in the surprise element we gained in some very powerful scenes. Watching Stannis talk and hug his daughter for the last time was, in my opinion, one of the most powerful scenes of the season. As painful as it was, I still found it gripping and compelling television.

[OmarBradley]

@ Omar

But the issue central to the character of Stannis in the show is that he sacrifices everything and anything when circumstances dictates it. He could afford to be a loving and supportive father a few episodes ago because the condition of his army was not what it was in Episode 9. As Davos says, if they can't go forward and unwilling to go backward, what was there left to do? The only out left for Stannis, as he saw it, was to follow the advice of Melisandre. Considering where Stannis' army now finds itself and the dire situation going forward, what choice did he have all things considered? He will not bow down to the path ahead. It's not about being cruel or being evil, it's about duty to his own destiny. In the most recent episode, we see Stannis at his most desperate. I'm not trying to justify the murder of his daughter, but I do think in his mind it was the necessary evil to pursue his goal of sitting on the iron throne. There is no going back and he's willing to make the ultimate sacrifice if need be. That is what that scene, and the lead up to it, was suppose to make clear.

You're not suppose to feel any sympathy for Stannis, not sure why you would think anyone would. Stannis made a decision he hated making and he should be judged by that, regardless of how upset he looked while he watched his own daughter burn.

Agreed, they at times tip their hat as to what's to come, but I think charges that the scene was unnecessary or without merit are false and are made by those who wishes for a different narrative. But the tone and themes of the show have remained fairly consistent. The difference now is that we're a little more prepared for them. For those unfamiliar with the story, the deaths of Eddard, Rob, and Catelyn were shocking and as unexpected as could be. But their deaths and the deaths of others has conditioned the audience to be a little more cynical as we all become more familiar with the show. I think it would be wrong to change the tone and rhythm of the show simply to fuck with the audience. Yeah, the deaths are a little less surprising, but I wouldn't want the show to become something different just to make future deaths less foreseeable. What we lost in the surprise element we gained in some very powerful scenes. Watching Stannis talk and hug his daughter for the last time was, in my opinion, one of the most powerful scenes of the season. As painful as it was, I still found it gripping and compelling television.

Sacrificing your daughter is not like giving up your car because you can walk to work and your brother can't, or letting your friend take a gig that you're more qualified for because you know he needs the cash. It's not a thing that a sane person does even in dire straits. It's the mark of insanity IMO, while they were showing Stannis this whole season to be sane. Sanity doesn't lead to insanity naturally, nor is it realistic for someone's moral character to be changed by the burning of siege equipment, or the (supposed, we didn't see it) convincing it would take one to do sacrifice their child.

That character Stannis in the show has always been problematic, they have tried to portray him as having a mix of honor, duty, and religious zeal (that peaks and troughs depending on the situation), but they've never quite mixed in a way that made sense or felt natural. Especially in this most recent case. You guys are acting like Stannis is the victim in this with such a "difficult situation" he was forced into, thus having to make a "difficult decision." You may not consciously mean to do so, but that's how it's coming across to me - that there is a empathetic quality to what Stannis did, because it was a dire situation.

Like I said earlier, who wants a king who burns his own daughter alive on the unconfirmed belief that it will somehow bring him victory? Even if he does win it all, would you want that guy as your king? It's the same shit Aerys Targaryen pulled. It's not really that I'm upset that show Stannis doesn't make sense given book Stannis, it's that show Stannis doesn't seem to make sense in his own right.

If the choice is burning your daughter alive vs. temporarily (or long term, or altogether) abandoning the campaign - you fucking abandon the campaign. Just like when she was born, he had the choice to kill her, but instead he summoned every healer he knew of to try to heal her.

Also, story/writing aside - Stephen Dillane is great.

EDIT: Missed your last paragraph, part of what makes those deaths (Ned, Cat, Robb, Oberyn) make sense is that they were taken pretty much word for word from the source material, so they fit the the character development that the show had done (because it followed the books pretty closely for the early seasons). Shireen's death was not taken from detailed source material. And I know, I know, the book and show are two different things...... but they sort of aren't..... I said this earlier, it's the same world, same characters, more or less everyone has the same goals/is on the same side that the book describes - if they were going to burn Shireen, they should have had Mel do it at Castle Black behind Stannis's back, they could still show it - fine, but the notion that Stannis would be supportive or even the driving force behind it, is ludicrous to me (and I haven't even met Stannis in the books yet).

*** I've gotta actually do some work today, between this and the politics thread I've skipped 2 hours of work or so , I'm enjoying this though and I think the debate is important, so I'll be back later tonight.

Edited June 9, 2015 by OmarBradley

[Nosaj Thing]

I think I have more of an issue with Ramsay's OP super villain, invincible bullshit. "20 good men" lol

Definitely. I think AtariLegend described the situation perfectly by calling him "Joker level invincible." If he doesn't die in the season finale, I will freak out just like the "in the books" people are freaking out right now.

[downzy]

@ Omar

But the issue central to the character of Stannis in the show is that he sacrifices everything and anything when circumstances dictates it. He could afford to be a loving and supportive father a few episodes ago because the condition of his army was not what it was in Episode 9. As Davos says, if they can't go forward and unwilling to go backward, what was there left to do? The only out left for Stannis, as he saw it, was to follow the advice of Melisandre. Considering where Stannis' army now finds itself and the dire situation going forward, what choice did he have all things considered? He will not bow down to the path ahead. It's not about being cruel or being evil, it's about duty to his own destiny. In the most recent episode, we see Stannis at his most desperate. I'm not trying to justify the murder of his daughter, but I do think in his mind it was the necessary evil to pursue his goal of sitting on the iron throne. There is no going back and he's willing to make the ultimate sacrifice if need be. That is what that scene, and the lead up to it, was suppose to make clear.

You're not suppose to feel any sympathy for Stannis, not sure why you would think anyone would. Stannis made a decision he hated making and he should be judged by that, regardless of how upset he looked while he watched his own daughter burn.

Agreed, they at times tip their hat as to what's to come, but I think charges that the scene was unnecessary or without merit are false and are made by those who wishes for a different narrative. But the tone and themes of the show have remained fairly consistent. The difference now is that we're a little more prepared for them. For those unfamiliar with the story, the deaths of Eddard, Rob, and Catelyn were shocking and as unexpected as could be. But their deaths and the deaths of others has conditioned the audience to be a little more cynical as we all become more familiar with the show. I think it would be wrong to change the tone and rhythm of the show simply to fuck with the audience. Yeah, the deaths are a little less surprising, but I wouldn't want the show to become something different just to make future deaths less foreseeable. What we lost in the surprise element we gained in some very powerful scenes. Watching Stannis talk and hug his daughter for the last time was, in my opinion, one of the most powerful scenes of the season. As painful as it was, I still found it gripping and compelling television.

Sacrificing your daughter is not like giving up your car because you can walk to work and your brother can't, or letting your friend take a gig that you're more qualified for because you know he needs the cash. It's not a thing that a sane person does even in dire straits. It's the mark of insanity IMO, while they were showing Stannis this whole season to be sane. Sanity doesn't lead to insanity naturally, nor is it realistic for someone's moral character to be changed by the burning of siege equipment, or the (supposed, we didn't see it) convincing it would take one to do sacrifice their child.

That character Stannis in the show has always been problematic, they have tried to portray him as having a mix of honor, duty, and religious zeal (that peaks and troughs depending on the situation), but they've never quite mixed in a way that made sense or felt natural. Especially in this most recent case. You guys are acting like Stannis is the victim in this with such a "difficult situation" he was forced into, thus having to make a "difficult decision." You may not consciously mean to do so, but that's how it's coming across to me - that there is a empathetic quality to what Stannis did, because it was a dire situation.

Like I said earlier, who wants a king who burns his own daughter alive on the unconfirmed belief that it will somehow bring him victory? Even if he does win it all, would you want that guy as your king? It's the same shit Aerys Targaryen pulled. It's not really that I'm upset that show Stannis doesn't make sense given book Stannis, it's that show Stannis doesn't seem to make sense in his own right.

If the choice is burning your daughter alive vs. temporarily (or long term, or altogether) abandoning the campaign - you fucking abandon the campaign. Just like when she was born, he had the choice to kill her, but instead he summoned every healer he knew of to try to heal her.

Also, story/writing aside - Stephen Dillane is great.

I can't speak for others, but I certainly would not label Stannis as a victim. His situation is the result of his own decisions, and the weight of what he has done and the situation he now finds himself are all on him. I'm not defending the character, I'm defending the show runners for the narrative they've chosen for Stannis. Personally, I don't accept the arguments that Weiss and Beinoff have been inconsistent with the character. They have a very succinct understanding of how they want to portray him and I think they've done a good job for the most part. He's a man of duty and destiny and sees everything else as secondary, including family. That doesn't mean that family isn't important to him, but he's willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to fulfill what he feels is his destiny. No, it's not the same as sacrificing a car or material possession, but that's what makes what transpired that much more arresting and haunting, for the lack of a better way to describe it.

You, myself, and almost 99 percent of everyone else would end the military campaign. But that's not Stannis. He has never given up his desire for the throne. And in his mind, this is his only chance. There is no going back. There is no temporary reprieve. Putting a hold on the campaign is the equivalent of ending the campaign. In his mind he can't afford spending years, maybe decades held up in Castle Black waiting for winter to subside. It's now or never.

And I agree that Stannis is failing to see the problems he's creating himself by pursuing the path he's on. But he's so focused on it he seems incapable of perceiving future troubles. While watching his daughter get burned, my fiancé asked me why his soldiers would still want to fight for him? And to be honest, I'm not sure either. Moreover, should he eventually recapture the iron throne, he'll have no heir to leave it to. Those are answers the show will hopefully address going forward, but I'm not ready to judge the totality of the character or the show before the whole thing wraps. Much like what's going on with Ramsay and Sansa, I'll hold judgement until we see where the chips fall. Weiss and Benioff know how the story is suppose to end accord to GRRM. Why they'd maneuver pieces into certain places for no valid reason is assigning them less credit than they deserve at this point.

Not sure if you watched the recap, but I think Weiss and Benioff do a great job explaining why they set up the narrative as they did:

[AtariLegend]

There have been so many times you could see he wasn't comfortable with blindly following Melisandre, but he still did anyway, every single time. He was pushed to what we thought was his limit when it came to burning his men alive. If it hadn't been for Davos, it would have happened to Gendry too. By the time he had to make the decision on Shireen, he'd already come too far to make any other choice. If he didn't go through with it, he was either

- abandoning his duty (unacceptable for Stannis, as we know), or

- faced with admitting that all the crazy shit he'd already done up to this point was for nothing.

Every time he's been faced with a horrible decision, he chose to continue believing in his "destiny" and following his duty over showing someone mercy (the "weaker" route). This was no different.

Kind of agree with you, they made it a little too predictable with the extra Shireen-Davos-Stannis scenes the last few episodes... but it did make it all the more uncomfortable to watch.

For reference in the show, Stannis is actually the one that frees Davos and Davos picks up immediately that Stannis doesn't want Gendry to burn.

You can't adapt material AKA Stannis's troubled march to Winterfell as it is in the books with the snow storms as well and not expect people to criticize that adaption.

The fact assuming Shireen does get burned at the start of the next book, it'll probably be because of Mel and Shrieen's mother. It's geographically impossible for Stannis to decide to burn his daughter. Perhaps Stannis does eventually burn his daughter, but it won't be because of the supplies running low. In the books when the supplies run low, they set up camp and wait for the Boltons to attack them. Even if they didn't, even in the show it's referenced how big the North is, there's other towns/places nearby.

If Stannis dies on Sunday it's even worse. Heck I bet you they drop the "thing" that Mel specifically states in the show/books that she thinks will happen if Stannis burns someone of royal blood. I bet you can't remember what it is and I bet that's the way the producers want it.

[AtariLegend]

First thing they say is that once Stannis makes a decision he never changes his mind. In the "show" he changes his mind all the time.

[downzy]

First thing they say is that once Stannis makes a decision he never changes his mind. In the "show" he changes his mind all the time.

Not when it comes to what matters most to him. I forget what episode it's in, but he even states that "this is the time, and I will risk everything." It's one of the lines used in the trailer:

[AtariLegend]

Stannis changes his mind about Burning Gendry

Stannis changes his mind about killing Davos

Stannis changes his mind about Burning Shireen

There's been a few other times too in the show.

fyi Last time in the story Stannis's camp runs out of supplies they choose to eat rats and leather instead. When he held Storm's End during the rebellion and it gets mentioned in the show too.

You cannot use the show's the show, without ignoring this or that.

[downzy]

Stannis changes his mind about Burning Gendry

Stannis changes his mind about killing Davos

Stannis changes his mind about Burning Shireen

There's been a few other times too in the show.

fyi Last time in the story Stannis's camp runs out of supplies they choose to eat rats and leather instead. When he held Storm's End during the rebellion and it gets mentioned in the show too.

You cannot use the show's the show, without ignoring this or that.

But he doesn't change his mind when he's in battle. Look at him at the Battle of the Blackwater; he was carried away by his troops kicking and screaming as he couldn't bring himself to stop. Stannis the man can change his mind, but Stannis the general, the future king, cannot. I think that's the difference.

[AtariLegend]

Well to change the subject at least on my part since we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Martin just gave a rare answer relating to the show/books.

"As for the Night's King (the form I prefer), in the books he is a legendary figure, akin to Lann the Clever and Brandon the Builder, and no more likely to have survived to the present day than they have."

Look's like if someone takes on a similar role of the Night's King in the books, it won't be the same as the show.

http://grrm.livejournal.com/428790.html#comments

Edited June 9, 2015 by AtariLegend

[Strange Broue]

Holy fucking shit, i decided to look upon the book storylines on various GOTpedia's... (took me 8-9 hours to finally catch up with the REAL storyline)


Just realise how D &D ruined this show... Totally stupid decisions on plotlines, plus they just make these twists to please the non reader fan base and they are so cocky now, that they think GOT is better than the books

I just finally get this
Anyway i still not abandon this show (i tried once, but i failed miserably)

i just want to see GRRR writes a book about Sothoryos and far eastern parts of Essos... so much potential, imho but he will probably die before he could start write those stories, be cause he NEEDS to finish this series (his magnum opus)

Interesting theory (and don't know if anybody noticed this here)

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/130173-book-spoilers-ice-dragon-sighting/

Ice Dragons... Ice motherfucking dragons, my dream come true.
Interesting because the show makers NEVER do this before, actually HINT a major new creature

I just hope the Nights King can eradicate Stannis with this shit
Imagine the possibilites

Edited June 9, 2015 by Strange Broue

[Strange Broue]

I hope Drogon and his 2 bros join The Night's King and fuck everyone else up

Don't worry, it will be a lot of surprises with the dragons

I can see an epic battle, check my prev post spoiler

I think this season really shows how mediocre the last two books really are.

your comment is as edgy as your signature

keep this shit on pitchfork

Grrm is probably pretty happy about the story divergence because he can have it both ways now. He can kill characters in the show and keep them alive in the books and vice-versa. Everybody gets to die!

or ressurect them

interesting viewpoint, though

Edited June 9, 2015 by Strange Broue

[Strange Broue]

In terms of all the "tender" moments this season leading up to the decision - I think that was kind of the point. We thought and hoped Stannis would do the "right" thing - but that's not who he is.

He made the ultimate sacrifice in the pursuit of what he felt was his duty/destiny. What choice did he have? What fate was left for his men out there? They were already fucked, Ramsay destroyed whatever hopes they had left.

I'm not saying I liked it, or that I particularly like Stannis after the choice he made - but he felt he was left with no other option and that he had a path to follow. Doesn't mean he had to like making that choice - it's not such an incomprehensible about-face in my view. As a non-reader, I kind of thought it was inevitable that he'd eventually be pushed to do it.

Yeah, the dude didn't really have a choice, because word on the streets is: he is the man who could save the entire world so he MUST survive. His heir doesn't matter anymore at this point

well, at least that's what his bitch from Asshai thinks

Edited June 9, 2015 by Strange Broue

[Strange Broue]

http://ollynodsatthings.tumblr.com/post/121033790942

The worst character in GOT ever

[ZoSoRose]

reddit.com/r/fuckolly

I love the books, read them all. They aren't perfect, though. Crows and Dragons are flawed, I still think Winter and Spring will be amazing

[Georgy Zhukov]

Going to let that one go, Downzy.

However, Ramsay had a lot more guys in his force in the book. He had I think maybe 3,000 to attack Stannis and he depended on some of the Lords to betray Stannis in his own camp. Having 20 guys burn ALL their equipment is stupid. Ramsay is a psycho but he isn't The Joker.

[AtariLegend]

Spoiler in relation to Sunday and the end of ADWD

Looks like Jon is definitely getting a letter of some kind on Sunday according to the official HBO episode picture and the trailer, but it obviously won't be the same as the pink letter.

Obviously it has nothing to do with Mance and it's safe to say it isn't by Stannis either in the show at least. Not sure it makes sense to be from Davos.

That suggests it's probably from Sansa or appears to be, which is weird given I don't remember them interacting in the books or the show previously. In fact she basically looks down on him and he I think is aware of it? So that's a little thing that's lost if Jon thinks this is about Sansa and not Arya, not to say that it isn't enough though.

Trying to guess what she'd say that would make him break his vows, when he knows Stannis is marching on Winterfell and that this will be happening in the same episode.

I hope it isn't a letter from or written by Littlefinger in the show, that's just the easy way out.

[ZoSoRose]

Brb, going to Iraq. Gonna stop ISIS with 20 good men

[bran]

Going to let that one go, Downzy.

However, Ramsay had a lot more guys in his force in the book. He had I think maybe 3,000 to attack Stannis and he depended on some of the Lords to betray Stannis in his own camp. Having 20 guys burn ALL their equipment is stupid. Ramsay is a psycho but he isn't The Joker.

yeah i thought that was hilarious.