142 replies to this topic

[Batman]

Is there any way for Jaime Lannister to change the perception of him in the eyes of the people of Westeros. The 7 kingdoms believe him to be an amoral, sociopathic oathbreaker. Whether he is or not is not what I am asking, I am asking if he can do anything to change this perception.

[Milcov]

I don't think he's known as a sociopath, but to answer your question no.

Jaime broke his oath, undoubtedly the moral thing to do but many in Westeros see it as an irrevocable stain upon his honour. He'll always be the Kingslayer. Jaime isn't very honourable or dutiful (ala Ned or Stannis) but he is quite aware of morals and certainly after his loss of hand is deserving of his self bestowed semi-mocking title 'Goldenhand the Just'.

[STANN1SBARATHEON]

part of me wants to feel bad for Jaime and say that he's not really such a bad guy because he killed the mad king in order the save the city from being burned and thousands of people being killed, and I could only imagine how hard it must be to know the truth behind your actions but to never be able to prove it to anyone else in the realm, and always be looked upon as an oathbreaker and a kingslayer, a man who can't be trusted,

however,

then I think to myself, he's been sleeping with his twin sister his whole life, and tried to conceal this fact by throwing Bran Stark out of a tower window, that poor little boy, he'll never walk again, the last greenseer said so, so sad

so i'm conlficted I don't know how to feel about him,

other thoughts, anyone?

[Thunderfist]

If the truth about how Jaime stopped Aerys from burning Kings Landing and killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people ever becomes public knowledge. I'm almost certain that Jaimes reputation will improve. He'll probably never be seen as a paragon of virtue but I'm sure that the citizens of Kings Landing would at least appreciate what he did.

Edited by Thunderfist, 06 May 2012 - 05:42 PM.

[Milcov]

STANN1SBARATHEON, on 06 May 2012 - 05:36 PM, said:

part of me wants to feel bad for Jaime and say that he's not really such a bad guy because he killed the mad king in order the save the city from being burned and thousands of people being killed, and I could only imagine how hard it must be to know the truth behind your actions but to never be able to prove it to anyone else in the realm, and always be looked upon as an oathbreaker and a kingslayer, a man who can't be trusted,

however,

then I think to myself, he's been sleeping with his twin sister his whole life, and tried to conceal this fact by throwing Bran Stark out of a tower window, that poor little boy, he'll never walk again, the last greenseer said so, so sad

so i'm conlficted I don't know how to feel about him,

other thoughts, anyone?

I'm of the opinion that saving Kings Landing outweighs Bran and failing Elia. The twincest is a victimless crime by itself, if a bit reckless but if you get caught you would reasonably expect Jaime and Cersei to die and no one else, a risk Jaime took.

[TheFlayedMan]

Damn good horse.

[Queen Cersei I]

Jaime's honor?

Nonexistent, then as now.

[Per128]

STANN1SBARATHEON, on 06 May 2012 - 05:36 PM, said:

then I think to myself, he's been sleeping with his twin sister his whole life, and tried to conceal this fact by throwing Bran Stark out of a tower window, that poor little boy, he'll never walk again, the last greenseer said so, so sad

Jaime made the right choice in that situation. I believe the TV series clouds people's judgement here as it shows him being extremely nonchalant about it; but even that does not much more than paint him as an apparent a**hole. The siblings made every effort not to be seen - it's not as if they invited the situation. Sometimes we have to choose between two evils - does that make us evil?

[Sxxman]

I don't think that Jaime could regain his honor while he is alive but if he ends up dying doing something noble, he could become a martyr and get his honor back.

[STANN1SBARATHEON]

yes but later on cersi says that they could have brow beaten the boy into saying he say nothing, or just call him a lair, and jaime even agreed that yeah that was probably true.  he threw the boy from the window because he wasn't a smart man, he always acted too quickly, impatient, impulsive, the same kind of behavior that got him captured in the whispering Woods and his army smashed and scattered at the battle of the camps

[Currawong]

Yes, he's condemned as Kingslayer, with people like Ser Barristan Selmy condemning him for breaking his oath (see the scene where Selmy is dimissed from the KG). But in ADWD, it was interesting to read Selmy's own thoughts about the murders of Rhaegor's children - and Selmy says that if he had ever found out that Robert Baratheon had laughed at their deaths, he would have murdered Robert himself. So even the 'honourable' Ser Barristan might have been driven to kingslaying, and he didn't seem upset about the thought of breaking his own KG oath.   Interesting double standard.

Edited by Currawong, 06 May 2012 - 06:37 PM.

[Milcov]

Currawong, on 06 May 2012 - 06:18 PM, said:

Yes, he's condemned as Kingslayer, with people likeSer Barristan Selmy condemning him for breaking his oath (see the scene where Selmy is dimissed from the KG). But in ADWD, it was very interesting to read Selmy's own thoughts about the murders of Rhaegor's children - and Selmy says that if he had ever found out that Robert Baratheon had laughed at their deaths, he would have murdered Robert himself. So even the 'honourable' Ser Barristan might have been driven to kingslaying ...

Barristan is an interesting case as he himself can't really claim much honour from the end of the rebellion, no matter what Ned says. The only Kingsguard that kept their honour were Lewyn Martell, Arthur Dayne, Oswell Whent, Gerold Hightower and Darry. Barristan knelt to a usurper while his King still lived, he has some nerve berating Jaime about it.

[bloodymime]

Per128, on 06 May 2012 - 06:10 PM, said:

Jaime made the right choice in that situation. I believe the TV series clouds people's judgement here as it shows him being extremely nonchalant about it; but even that does not much more than paint him as an apparent a**hole. The siblings made every effort not to be seen - it's not as if they invited the situation. Sometimes we have to choose between two evils - does that make us evil?

I think what you meant to say there was that they made every effort... except not engaging in incest.

But that's  me. I hear about a guy throwing a little boy out of a window to die because that child, in his own home where he has every right to be, saw him fucking his sister who is married to another man I don't really try to squint hard enough to see some moral gray area. I just consider him a shitstain.

[Currawong]

Wonder what they will all think of him if he ends up killing Cersei ?

[Stop Rhaegar HAMMERTIME!]

Jaime will never be seen as honorabe by others, I think that he will prove his honor to himself ( and the readers) in the end saving sansa/kiling cersie! The twinsect altho discusting is a victimless crime, when Bran found out , if he had let him live and speak the truth it would mean that robert would have killed him and cercie .Still a hideous crime but I can see his side. Killing Aerys was the best thing he ever did and thank god his honor failed him!

[Per128]

STANN1SBARATHEON, on 06 May 2012 - 06:16 PM, said:

yes but later on cersi says that they could have brow beaten the boy into saying he say nothing, or just call him a lair, and jaime even agreed that yeah that was probably true.  he threw the boy from the window because he wasn't a smart man, he always acted too quickly, impatient, impulsive, the same kind of behavior that got him captured in the whispering Woods and his army smashed and scattered at the battle of the camps

The benefit of hindsight, eh? If Jaime hadn't pushed, Cersei would have told him to. Of course she claims otherwise in retrospect; she's Cersei, and of course he apparently agrees with her; she's Cersei. That doesn't make it any less affected. It's easy for her to take the "high ground" and lay troubles on Jaime after the fact. That's the kind of power-play she's always engaged in.
On second thought, Cersei wouldn't have told her brother to push Bran - she would have told him to snap the boy's neck first.
Does anyone truly believe that either sibling would be comfortable with letting Bran go and just "hope" that nothing would come of it, as opposed to taking charge of a situation and assure the most predictable and beneficial outcome?

bloodymime, on 06 May 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

I think what you meant to say there was that they made every effort... except not engaging in incest.

Some may drop the woman they love because their culture or family do not approve of the coupling, but to other people that's not an option, and I'll tend to have more respect for the latter, especially as I'm familiar with how such conventions can tear people apart in some regions of the world.
Consider this: It is the social stigma that puts Bran at risk, not the love Jaime has for Cersei. If you wish to put the blame for that entirely on Jaime's shoulders, well then you are thinking in black and white, which is a shame as so much of GRRM's quality as a writer is how he explores complex grey zones and moral dilemmas.

bloodymime, on 06 May 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

But that's  me. I hear about a guy throwing a little boy out of a window to die because that child, in his own home where he has every right to be, saw him fucking his sister who is married to another man I don't really try to squint hard enough to see some moral gray area. I just consider him a shitstain.

That's not why he pushed Bran. Have you considered that letting Bran live could lead to all-out war and countless deaths? And then Jaime could sit there on a pile of corpses claiming to somehow have made the right decision?

Unfortunately it's too easy to judge people and clutch to extremes, which is exactly one of the topics that GRRM deals with so expertly. It's possible to get more from his books than just high adventure. He deals with complex issues which should be treated with some finesse, not clumsily chopped in two with a Valyrian blade.

Edited by Per128, 06 May 2012 - 07:42 PM.

[talk2dhand]

I think he not only has the honor but courage too. To do the things he has done.

[LuisDantas]

Batman, on 06 May 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

Is there any way for Jaime Lannister to change the perception of him in the eyes of the people of Westeros.

Without commiting a heroic (fatal) sacrifice of some sort?  No.

He was a sworn member of the Kingsguard and he killed his King personally.  No way out of that reputation, particularly since he kept his reasons a secret for so long.  People would never believe him.  Brienne was a very specific exception.

While I feel that he had good justifications, he is still a Kingslayer and will have to deal with that detrimental reputation for life.

Quote

The 7 kingdoms believe him to be an amoral, sociopathic oathbreaker. Whether he is or not is not what I am asking, I am asking if he can do anything to change this perception.

Amoral, yes.  Sociopathic I don't think he is or has a reputation for being.

His reputation, remarkably, wasn't all that off the mark.  It was that of an amoral oportunist (which he was).  He got much better after traveling with Brienne and he is now only spoiled rotten (not really honorable yet, but the potential for redemption is there still).

His reputation, however, can't really be saved except perhaps after he dies.

[Chalkius Stark]

The only ways he could regain his honour, would be to firstly have the truth about Aerys come out, and then also have him dying to save someone important, perhaps even doing a sort of Boromir style death in public(you know, coming back and not giving up several times).

Hope he does regain it, but if he doesn't, no biggy.

[Currawong]

I would certainly never call him "amoral" - he does have a clear sense of what he believes to be right and wrong.   If he was completely amoral, he would not have been at all bothered by things such as Aerys's brutality to his wife, or the terrible death of Brandon Stark.   Or indeed, the potential deaths of thousands in KL if mad Arys's scheme had come to pass.  A completely amoral KG person would not have been worried by these things and would have said it was none of his business.   The very fact that Jaime was upset and worried about these things to me show that he should not be seen as "amoral".

As for shoving Bran out the window, I agree with per128 above - realistically, there would have been no chance of Bran keeping quiet and the secret not coming out somehow, especially as Jaime and Cersei would havebeen far away in KL and not around as an ever-present reminder of their threats to a young child.  In the security of his own family, Bran would have let 'something'slip, even just a casual reference.  Jaime is also a soldier, trained to react quickly to danger.  Soldiers in general don't have the luxury of standing round to debate morals and honour when under threat - they react fast or they are usually dead.    Jaime was very quick to weigh up the potential dangers to Cersei, himself and the three kids posed by what Bran had seen, and he reacted.  

Oddly, he is also very like Ned in one way.  Ned is seen as 'honourable' for doing his own killing and executions, as we see with the deserter at the start of AGOT.   And many readers are torn about the rights and wrongs of that action.     As Jaime later tells Catelyn in ACOK when they are talking about Bran and the dagger asssassin, Jaime also does his own killing and would not have stooped to using an assassin against Bran.

I think that there are some interesting double standards in the world of Westeros, and questions about Jaime's honour throw this up very clearly.   People don't want to admit that he did a good thing in killing Aerys, because assassinations can't be good, can they?   So it is much easier for most people to hang their hats on the "he broke his oath" peg, rather than get down to some fundamental issues about what do do when faced with conflicting oaths, or issues of 'the greater good'.   And of course, it perfectly suited people like Robert and Tywin and others involved in the rebellion to have Jaime blamed - much simpler to have a convenient scapegoat than having people wonder about whether they would have done exactly the same thing, despite their own oaths of fealty to the king