The DU Lounge
In reply to the discussion: Game of Thrones 4.2 "The Lion and the Rose" (spoilers) [View all]TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)He let Melisandre fry up scads of people in the book, but he didn't seem to actually believe in her red god. He didn't seem to believe in any god or gods really in the book, and I got the impression that he was only using her for what she could do with her blood magic. In the book he's also always described as constantly extremely physically tense always clenching his jaw and grinding his teeth. It also seems like in the book that it was Stannis' idea to kill Renly his own brother, and just uses her to get it done, but in the show it seems a lot more like it's some odd fascination he has with Melisandre (a lot of which is sexual), and it's her that just leads him around by the nose. All in all I think this makes his book character even worse than the character in the show.
Actually, in the books Stannis gets rid of everyone in his army and court that refuse to accept the Lord of Light... remember Melisandre's mass burnings? Not wanting to be a spoiler for others, but also recall what he insisted of a... um... group of people at a... er... certain place in the north in order for them to be allowed to do... ahem... something in particular that was a matter or life or death for that certain group of people.
Melisandre bugs the hell out of me, and I just want to smack her with all the gazillion times she says "for the night is dark and full of terrors". I'd rather have 10 Stannis' if she would just disappear. There's something about her voice, too, that just ravages my nerves like a cheese grater. It's also annoyed the hell out of me that Martin still doesn't give any hints to what she's really all about and why on earth she jumped on Stannis of all people. I've always thought she was as phoney as a three dollar bill, but for what we get no clue of. I think it's obvious that what she does is strictly for her own gain, but for what?
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):