2014-09-05, 01:18 AM
MasPan Wrote:[COLOR="#cc8899"]I agree with all of your points, but the argument still holds that he would be very bad for the realm. He is fixated on absolute black and white, right and wrong. He has no charisma or inter-personal skills with which to conduct politics and is unlikely to be able to make a hard decision in order to do good for the realm if it would violate his sense of legal ethics. He, Renly, and Robert are aptly contrasted at various moments. If anything, the three of them together would've made a powerful ruling authority, but each on an individual basis has a critical failing:
Robert is an excellent warrior and has the stubborn motivation necessary to pursue a goal, but quickly becomes bored and disinterested when he does not have a "battle" to fight.
Renly is charming and suave and has the confidence of youth. He is able to amass more followers than any other pursuant to the throne despite having the comparatively weakest claim and would have been a powerful political force when he grew into maturity.
Stannis is steadfast and rigid, willing to uphold the law first and foremost, even when it would hurt his political influence. He would make an excellent judge or arbiter, perhaps even a Hand or a traveling extension of the King's justice. However, he is a cold, bitter man with little interest in interpersonal relationships. He has a massive failing where politics is concerned, which would eventually erode his political support or allow a rival to gather influence during his reign.
Together they could each have worked to their strengths, with Renly promoting Robert's rule and garnering support and Stannis resolving disputes and enforcing justice. Robert as a figurehead becomes necessary during times of war and his brothers essentially mitigate his failings in times of peace.
[/COLOR]
Actually Stannis is much more flexible than people give him credit for. A lot of people refer to the quote about the Baratheon brothers, with Renly being copper, Stannis being iron, and Robert being the true steel, but he's changed his mind and indeed has gone against the strict word of law several times in the story. The first and foremost example of this is when he rebelled against Aerys, his rightful king, in order to support his brother. Here's a link that examines this in more detail and explains it far better than I actually can. http://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/...or/ch996a3
The show shows him as basically being Melisandre's puppet, but in the books he actually speaks against her and is basically only using her because she shows examples of real power which can help him win the throne. It's pretty debatable as to whether he actually believes in R'hllor, there's a reason the most fervent followers of R'hllorism in his army are called Queen's Men.
And the story would have been so, so different had Renly supported Stannis' rightful claim to the throne and combined their strength. The Lannisters would have been destroyed at the Blackwater, with the lords of the Reach, the Stormlands, and (some of) the Crownlands attacking King's Landing all at once. The Battle of the Blackwater was already a pretty close deal, had Tywin and Mace not shown up when they did, King's Landing would have fallen even with Tyrion's (admittedly excellent) trap with the wildfire.
Edit: Danaerys did a pretty decent job in Meereen of establishing and maintaining peace, at a great personal cost but
ADWD
.The thing I like about ASOIAF is that there is no clear protagonist, there's no clear good or evil. There are only humans trying to do the best for themselves. Tyrion was a pretty decent player when he was the Hand, but
ADWD
so I'm not sure if current Tyrion would be any good. We'll see what happens next book when he (presumably)
Spoiler