Game of Thrones: Stannis’ Fate

One major potential shocker and something I did not expect to happen this season was the encounter between the Boltons and Stannis’ army. Perhaps, part of my shock was relying on the fact that the books have yet to deal with this encounter and book readers are currently awaiting the outcome. Obviously, the TV series has spoiled the results for book readers, but in truth there’s no practical way one could not infiltrate the other when it comes to ruining some level of the experience. Given that situation, I want to talk about the results of tonight’s encounter with Stannis and the Boltons.

Perhaps, you could see Stannis’ fate coming the moment he sacrificed his daughter, Shireen. Thus far, we have been led to believe that Melisandre does have real power and a connection to the Lord of Light, which is the same expectations that has lead Stannis to sacrifice everything he held dear. Melisandre herself foretells of these events beforehand in a previous episode and Stannis seems content at that point in time to fulfill his destiny.

However, that’s the cornerstone of what partly makes Stannis tick: his notion of destiny. Somehow Melisandre has tricked Stannis into believing far too much in her visions of what he was to become. However, anyone with half a brain could pick through the faulty and foundationless arguments that Melisandre provides. If anything it feels as though he uses the notion of destiny (perhaps the idea of Manifest Destiny) to justify his actions of deeper problems that the show attempts to flesh out with his character.

Remember what Stannis essentially is: the middle brother who received nothing. Are there any other famous middle siblings that you can recall who suffer the identity crisis of the forgotten child? Perhaps Fredo from the Godfather? And how did Fredo turn out?

Stannis claims to not outwardly desire the path that supposedly has chosen him, but I argue that Melisandre was simply baiting his true desires whenever he attempted to rationalize a saner path, especially when someone like Ser Davos Seaworth proposed something.

At the same time, Stannis is the type of person who believes in absolutes. Someone once described him as a lawful neutral type in the AD&D alignment universe. He is hard but fair and does not seek the moral right but only looks at what he describes as “the hard truths.” In that sense, he is an utterly determined person who uses anything as a tool to claim what he believes is rightfully his.

From a larger point of view, if we look at the show as, indeed, a large game involving “real” lives, then Stannis’ play is lost at this point. While he suffered a major defeat in King’s Landing, the loss against the Boltons wasn’t merely a military setback but a soul crushing one as everything that mattered to him was destroyed. You could say that at this point, Stannis is off the board, even if he was alive still.

But the question is what made him lose? Was it his utter determination and lack of balance? Certainly, he seemed like a smarter version of Ned Stark. Unlike Ned who had a moral compass, Stannis’ sternness allowed him to make the power plays and high risk moves that took Ned out quickly. If anything Stannis was simply someone who believed far too much in the hard truths and lacked the flexibility and patience. He was able to see the ultimate threat of the White Walkers but utilized that motive unrealistically in trying to seize the North by force rather than by diplomacy. He’s the type of person that reminds me of a zerg type of player in a game like Starcraft: build up as many forces as possible, create a slick formation then blindly charge in hoping to topple your enemy over by sheer numbers and brutal force.

However, he’s very short sighted and only makes snap decisions, leading him to lose the faith of his men. His idea of rule by brutal justice like a rigid cop or court system demoralized his men because only he had a sense of the ideal world. I think when you look at him, Robb Stark, Ned Stark and maybe even Jon Snow to a small degree, you realize that gaining favor with people does not mean stringent absolutes but exceptions need to be made as well as heeding council when the obvious situation is around you.

Will this be the end of Stannis the Mannis? Most likely, yes. In the incarnation of the person who fatefully believed too much in a vague destiny, that Stannis the Mannis is gone. Will the character be gone from the show/book? It’s hard to say. We did not see a true end to him but there’s little reason for us not to believe Brienne would not honor her vow to avenge Renly. Both are soldiers and mutually understand the price of war. That’s something Ned Stark had talked about prior to his beheading about his own character.

Should it be the end of Stannis? From the point of view of a player in this world, yes. His role is done. The idea of the stringent leader backed through blind destiny and rigid justice is a losing proposition. So figuratively and literally he ought to be dead.

From a character point of view, Stannis should be kept around. I’ve mentioned it before that the story partly is about breaking someone apart so that they have the ability to be rebuilt. We’ve finally seen some characters like Reek/Theon take a step for a positive change. Stannis is still a very relevant, important and fascinating character overall. With his army shattered, his family dead, his priestess abandoning him and the woman who swore revenge for the brother he helped murder, Stannis as the person we know is defeated. But he stands as a person that can be reborn as a changed person, seeing the things from his past and amending them for the future. It’s a dream story that makes sense for such a character. But as Ramsay Snow has emphatically stated, “If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven’t been paying attention.”

Comments

comments