193 replies to this topic

[Budj]

Well-written character.  Verdict is still out on actual redemption, but I think the books will offer us plenty of opportunity to test him and see how he fairs...

[Anwar]

Currawong, on 02 August 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

Ah - so it's " justice" if Ned or Robert would have done it following the rebellion, but it was a terrible crime for Jaime to take it upon himself.  What you are suggesting is that it's quite OK for two men who have sworn loyalty to their king to break their oaths and turn rebel, killing the king's rightful heir in the process, but it's not OK for Jaime to break his oath?   Such wonderful double standards. That is precisely the hypocrisy which Jaime sees and rightly objects to.

Ned and Robert didn't betray Aerys, Aerys betrayed them by calling for their heads for little to no reason than to serve his own paranoia.

[larrytheimp]

Antonius Pius, on 02 August 2012 - 01:55 AM, said:

What really sums Jaime up for me is his own line (paraphrasing): the boy that wanted to be the next Arthur Dayne became the Smiling Knight instead.



I think his skill as a swordsman is actually something you can take for granted. He thinks to himself that Arthur Dayne was better, and some others were stronger, but even Barristan admits he's a great fighter. It's part of his story to be too good too young.




Unacceptable. Try again with quotes.



There's something very callous about Jaime. One could argue his kindness towards Tyrion is simply another kind of indifference. When you think about it, all we really know about their youthful relationship is that he wasn't cruel to Tyrion. The one kindness Tyrion specifically remembers is the whole Tysha-debacle.



This was definitely a good instinct, to his credit.



Not really. It all comes down to Aerys. Jaime couldn't stomach Ned's judgement, and he still can't stomach the fact that Westeros at large won't honour him for killing murderous Aerys, while at the same time being to petulant to actually come forward with Aerys' mad plans. By the time AGOT begins, he's so consumed with his own particular brand of "fuck the world" that he's completely lost to honour. He admits to himself that he might have killed Mycah for no other reason than that Cersei fucked him like crazy and she wanted him dead.




Not really... He has shown no remorse. He's constantly harping on the raw deal he's got. He may show remorse yet, but as it is, he's only felt sorry for himself.

He does try to win some redemption, but only because he has been forced to acknowledge the truth that Cersei's lying and evil, and that he's not so great himself. He's trying to edge back towards the Sword of the Morning.



QFT.

Jaime's pissed that Cersei cheated on him and that she doesn't want to acknowledge their relationship.  I don't at all think he blames her for anything other that fucking other people, and he doesn't seem to think she's evil.  I think she's got her issues, but I wouldn't call her evil.  The Others are evil.

Elder Sister, on 02 August 2012 - 11:59 AM, said:

Jaime was a member of the Kingsguard.  He swore an oath to protect Aerys with his life.  He broke that oath.  Neither Ned nor Robert ever swore the oath that Jaime did.

This is not a double standard; the knights of the Kingsguard swear over their lives to serve and protect the king.

They also swear to protect all innocents.  Was Meryn Trant being honorable when he slapped Sansa around because he was under oath to obey the King?

Yeah, technically Jaime broke THAT oath, but isn't that a good thing?  I mean, Rob and Ned committed treason and everyone loved them for it.  But kill the guy they wanted to kill?  No, you say, that's just wrong.  Would you rather that Jaime let the whole city burn?  Is that what a 'good guy' would do?  When the Hound said "enough" when Sansa was being beaten, was he being dishonorable since he was defying his King he swore an oath to?  I think a major theme in the novels is that oath's don't mean shit and have absolutely NOTHING (yeah, kind of shouting) to do with right and wrong or 'good' or 'evil.l

Anwar, on 02 August 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

Ned and Robert didn't betray Aerys, Aerys betrayed them by calling for their heads for little to no reason than to serve his own paranoia.

So leading armies against your King isn't betrayal, or wanting to kill him because he's a psycho, but the guy that actually does it is the bad guy?  


And in general on the quote unquote "redemption arc" - the only way Jaime could 'redeem' himself for the Bran toss would be to go around Westeros catching all the other noble children being tossed from towers to save them.  It's a moot point.  It was a crazy violent incident early in the books to build the plot and set up that Lannisters as one of the first antagonistic families in the series.  Later, the author clearly makes Jaime's assault more of a tough decision or reaction caused by a conflict of interests:  be a 'good guy' and let the kid go tell his parents (who already hate you) that your banging the Queen on the side and have your entire family killed, or save your family and kill the kid.  No one wants to have to make that choice, so unless you've had to do that, why does that make it wrong?

[Elder Sister]

larrytheimp, on 02 August 2012 - 09:23 PM, said:

They also swear to protect all innocents.  Was Meryn Trant being honorable when he slapped Sansa around because he was under oath to obey the King?

Yeah, technically Jaime broke THAT oath, but isn't that a good thing?  I mean, Rob and Ned committed treason and everyone loved them for it.  But kill the guy they wanted to kill?  No, you say, that's just wrong.  Would you rather that Jaime let the whole city burn?  Is that what a 'good guy' would do?  When the Hound said "enough" when Sansa was being beaten, was he being dishonorable since he was defying his King he swore an oath to?  I think a major theme in the novels is that oath's don't mean shit and have absolutely NOTHING (yeah, kind of shouting) to do with right and wrong or 'good' or 'evil.l



So leading armies against your King isn't betrayal, or wanting to kill him because he's a psycho, but the guy that actually does it is the bad guy?  


And in general on the quote unquote "redemption arc" - the only way Jaime could 'redeem' himself for the Bran toss would be to go around Westeros catching all the other noble children being tossed from towers to save them.  It's a moot point.  It was a crazy violent incident early in the books to build the plot and set up that Lannisters as one of the first antagonistic families in the series.  Later, the author clearly makes Jaime's assault more of a tough decision or reaction caused by a conflict of interests:  be a 'good guy' and let the kid go tell his parents (who already hate you) that your banging the Queen on the side and have your entire family killed, or save your family and kill the kid.  No one wants to have to make that choice, so unless you've had to do that, why does that make it wrong?

The Kingsguard's first loyalty is to the King, hence their name.  And I didn't say Jaime was wrong; I said he broke his oath.  Which he did.

Your argument regarding Jaime's attempted murder of Bran does not hold water.  There is no possible set of criteria that can make the act of throwing Bran out of the window less of an evil.  Jaime is one of my favorite characters, but I will be the first to say this was just wrong, wrong, wrong.  And he knows it, and it doesn't really trouble him.

But I agree with you totally about his redemption arc.  The act of tossing Bran out the window is Jaime's low point.  We get to see him slowly begin to redeem himself after that.

[Anwar]

larrytheimp, on 02 August 2012 - 09:23 PM, said:

So leading armies against your King isn't betrayal, or wanting to kill him because he's a psycho, but the guy that actually does it is the bad guy?  

If leading armies or trying to kill him is your only way to survive, and the King already betrayed his own Feudal system by abusing his power and thus is no longer worthy of his Crown? No, it's not betrayal.

[larrytheimp]

Elder Sister, on 02 August 2012 - 09:43 PM, said:

The Kingsguard's first loyalty is to the King, hence their name.  And I didn't say Jaime was wrong; I said he broke his oath.  Which he did.

Your argument regarding Jaime's attempted murder of Bran does not hold water.  There is no possible set of criteria that can make the act of throwing Bran out of the window less of an evil.  Jaime is one of my favorite characters, but I will be the first to say this was just wrong, wrong, wrong.  And he knows it, and it doesn't really trouble him.

But I agree with you totally about his redemption arc.  The act of tossing Bran out the window is Jaime's low point.  We get to see him slowly begin to redeem himself after that.

I don't really get what a redemption arc means, is what I was saying, in regards to Jaime.  I don't think for him the Bran thing was his 'low point' or even a big deal for him:  it might have been a tough thing to do, but Jaime doesn't regret ANYTHING he's done.  You can say he has a big "ego" or whatever, but that doesn't change the things he's done and hasn't done.  He's an existentialist, and therefore some kind of 'redemption' doesn't even apply to him - it has no meaning to him and doesn't fit in with his individual view of the world.  If he was a devotee of the Seven and felt like he had strayed down some wayward path and needed to be welcomed back into the grace of the gods, then maybe you could talk a bout a redemption arc.  The thing I said about catching all the gravity-stricken noble lads and lasses was to point out that for Jaime, his life is a sequence of actions, and none cancels any other out or 'makes up for' another.  Kind of like Davos, and how Stannis took his fingers for the smuggling, but gave him a knighthood for the onions.  That's how it is with Jaime - he's the guy that saved the kingdom - by 'murdering' the king.  The guy that protected his family - by murdering an innocent kid.  The guy that saved Brienne from a psycho and a bear, even though he had nothing to gain from it personally.  Jaime's life is absurd and he knows it.  There is no redemption to talk about, it's not even a concept he'd understand or that has anything to do with him.  He's not some guy that decides he's a Born Again / Damphair type that gave up the drugs and hookers to berate other people about what's holy and what isn't.  He just tries to live his own life in a way that he can be okay with.

[Naathi Prince]

I kind of always wanted to like Jaime. The series starts by telling you how he murdered a king, then next you see him committing treason and incest with his sister and nearly murdering a child (a child presented as a sweet sweet child, his mother's favorite).

So he has to have redeeming qualities. Next we see him coming to the aid of his brother. That's one of the clues. Here's this little brother that everyone treats awfully and Jaime attacks the Hand of the King on his behalf. of course, since we're pulling for Honorable Ned at the time, we don't see it that way, but that's what he is doing. Next he beseiges Riverrun, but again, he's supporting his family and brother. Then, you find out why he killed Aerys, you realize his sister is a manipulative evil woman who has always had extreme power of him, and his father always expected and wanted more from him than he could give. All the while of course, he's pissed because everyone hates him for the best thing he ever did.

[larrytheimp]

Anwar, on 02 August 2012 - 10:03 PM, said:

If leading armies or trying to kill him is your only way to survive, and the King already betrayed his own Feudal system by abusing his power and thus is no longer worthy of his Crown? No, it's not betrayal.

Okay so that makes Jaime bad or wrong how?

[Elder Sister]

larrytheimp, on 02 August 2012 - 10:08 PM, said:

I don't really get what a redemption arc means, is what I was saying, in regards to Jaime.  I don't think for him the Bran thing was his 'low point' or even a big deal for him:  it might have been a tough thing to do, but Jaime doesn't regret ANYTHING he's done.  You can say he has a big "ego" or whatever, but that doesn't change the things he's done and hasn't done.  He's an existentialist, and therefore some kind of 'redemption' doesn't even apply to him - it has no meaning to him and doesn't fit in with his individual view of the world.  If he was a devotee of the Seven and felt like he had strayed down some wayward path and needed to be welcomed back into the grace of the gods, then maybe you could talk a bout a redemption arc.  The thing I said about catching all the gravity-stricken noble lads and lasses was to point out that for Jaime, his life is a sequence of actions, and none cancels any other out or 'makes up for' another.  Kind of like Davos, and how Stannis took his fingers for the smuggling, but gave him a knighthood for the onions.  That's how it is with Jaime - he's the guy that saved the kingdom - by 'murdering' the king.  The guy that protected his family - by murdering an innocent kid.  The guy that saved Brienne from a psycho and a bear, even though he had nothing to gain from it personally.  Jaime's life is absurd and he knows it.  There is no redemption to talk about, it's not even a concept he'd understand or that has anything to do with him.  He's not some guy that decides he's a Born Again / Damphair type that gave up the drugs and hookers to berate other people about what's holy and what isn't.  He just tries to live his own life in a way that he can be okay with.

Jaime is not aware of the redemption arc that GRRM has written for him; he's a character in a book.  

I think you've interpreted his character nicely; Jaime is all about action and doesn't really examine his motives or character.  I have noticed, though, in the last two books,how he is struggling to become a better man.  His contemplating the blank page of his in The Kingsguard's book is an excellent example of this.  Also, him giving Brienne the sword and sending her on the quest to find Sansa....I am very interested to see what happens to him.

[pitakon]

he never claimed he was great.

[Alex Baratheon]

He's a very well written character. I think he's one of the most developed characters in the whole series.

And I like him. He still hasn't redeemed himself, but he's on a good path.

[Scipio Africanus]

larrytheimp, on 02 August 2012 - 09:23 PM, said:

don't at all think he blames her for anything other that fucking other people, and he doesn't seem to think she's evil. I think she's got her issues, but I wouldn't call her evil.

Lady Falyse would beg to differ...
Probably Penny's brother as well. And that blue bard or something. Basically anyone who's come under the gentle care of our congenial friend Qyburn on Cercei's orders.

As for Jaime not finding Cercei "evil", well for one thing he was in love with her. The other thing is that he's just as evil. Unless you consider tossing 7-years-olds out of a window "good".

[Budj]

I would say Cersei is pretty close to evil.  May not always have been, but she is definitely slipping into a crazy place with seemingly malicious "punishments" for those she can't use, displease her, or work against her.

[Anwar]

larrytheimp, on 02 August 2012 - 10:46 PM, said:

Okay so that makes Jaime bad or wrong how?

He wasn't the one betrayed, he'd sworn an Oath to protect, and he didn't even have to kill Aerys in the first place to incapacitate him. His struggle was not the same as Robert and Neds'.