King Ned Stark

Jaime Lannister, a hypocrite and criminal?

117 posts in this topic

Many readers seemed to be invested in Jaime's redemption arc, and all in all, he seems to be a very popular character within the SoIaF series.  Very well-liked.  So this topic may very well be controversial, and I may be in the minority here, as I never liked the character from the beginning, or even after multiple re-reads.  However, I will attempt to approach this subject in an unbiased and logical manner.

I'll preface things by saying I care not for his witticisms, his good looks, or his general badassery.  Mainly because I was introduced to the character in 1997 and my oldest child was less than a year old, and immediately in GoT he throws a seven year old boy out of a tower window.  So, admittedly, my opinion was skewed from then on.  As for his so-called redemption, I'm still waiting, so far I've seen nothing remotely close.  I feel his redemption, if in fact there is one, is either; a retcon, poor writing, or complete sleight of hand by the author.

Sorry for the lengthy disclaimer, on to my questions/proclomomations.  I feel, through five books, that Jaime is a criminal of nearly the highest order, by virtually any societies standards, and a hypocrite to boot.  However, let's progress under Westerosi standards.

1. Jaime is introduced as an oathbreaker (killing his king), complicit in high treason, having an incestuous relationship, breaking guestright, and a willful murder of children. Essentially, he defiled the gods, the faith, and the laws of Westeros very early on.

2. I may be wrong on this, but iirc, Jaime thinks to himself that he would've maimed Arya if he'd been the first to find her.  Again, with the children.

3. He has three men murdered, to chasten Ned (by the way, does anyone have a bigger Ned complex than Jaime?).

4. He swears to Cat that he will not take up arms against Stark or Tully, and with his release will return her daughters (albeit at swordpoint) but on his way to Kingslanding, he understands that Roose means to betray Robb, and gives one of his flippant remarks, thus breaking his oath to Cat (because he had to agree to absolve Roose of blame for hand to Tywin to be freed).  Then upon arrival at KL, he knowingly allows some girl (Jeyne) to be taken by the Boltons knowing full well that it is kidnapping and coercion (this shows his true character, despite his dialogue to Cat and Brienne that you can't follow all the vows, he could follow a very important knights vow right then with minimal to no consequence, but he lets her be taken).

5. Then he DOES take up arms against Stark and Tully by breaking the siege of Riverrun (by threatening to murder women and children, it's poignant to me that the first thing the Blackfish asks is he has he returned to resume his captivity).

He also lied to his little brother and had a child gang-raped to appease his father.  It's almost ironic that he tried to murder one child and maim another of a man who risked his life for Jaime's own children.

In summation, my bias aside, is Jaime a hypocrite and a criminal?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand he also saves Brienne on several occasions despite the danger to himself, peacefully resolves the siege of Riverrun, keeps his vow of finding Sansa and Arya, kills a king he was vowed to protect to save thousands of lives, knowingly branding himself dishonorable, the only one to treat his brother with kindness and respect, and let's not forget - doesn't cheat on his lover ( xD ).

The art of writing grey, interesting characters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Yes, Jaime is an oathbreaker. Yes, he killed his King. Yet I do not see why we should be chastising him for this. Ned Stark, Jon Arryn and Robert Baratheon, on the whole considered 'honourable' people, would've done no less had they been there. Many, many people in the realm rose up against King Aerys, all of whom were honour bound to serve their King. Should they be chastised, too? Sure, but they never are. Before we even know what Aerys was planning to do, we have to assume that Jaime killed the King to save his father's life. Which is the very same reason that the rebellion started in the first place, Jon Arryn attempting to save the life of his family (by which I mean Ned and Robert). So, if we can absolve Jon Arryn from killing Aerys, we can absolve Jaime, too. Though perhaps you don't think we should absolve Arryn or Jaime; they are all oathbreakers, to be fair, though I don't think either of them did a particularly bad thing.

I really don't see the issue with the incestuous relationship. How is it anyone's business if they're together? They're in love, let them be, I say. Sure, it's treason; though Jaime and Cersei were in a relationship long before Robert came into the picture, and it wasn't exactly Cersei's choice to marry him. Still treason, sure, but I'm sure most people would continue a relationship after one party was forced to marry someone else, or would want to, at least. His treason here is still a crime, though it doesn't bother me at all. Jaime is breaking his oath of celibacy, though, that's true. No excuses for that, I suppose.

The child killing; he tried to kill Bran because of what Bran saw. Bran would have told his father eventually, who would have told Robert. How he'd take it is anyone's guess, but badly isn't a poor guess. The lives of the woman he loves and his three children are at stake. Would anyone do differently? Ideally, he could've talked Bran into not saying anything; but it's pretty likely that Bran would've done what children do and talked. The life of one child against the life of the most important person to him (and their children). Jaime made a pragmatic choice, and in my opinion, the correct one. The honourable one. Debatable, but that's all opinion.

2. I don't think your recollection is entirely correct; Jaime believes that Cersei wants Arya maimed or dead, and Jaime doesn't say what he'd have done if he'd found Arya first.

"As I was fucking her, Cersei cried, 'I want.' I thought that she meant me, but it was the Stark girl that she wanted, maimed or dead." The things I do for love. "It was only by chance that Stark's own men found the girl before me. If I had come on her first . . ."

So, maybe he's saying he'd have killed her, but that sounds to me as if he knows that he might have done so, had he found her. But, he never did so, and I feel that blaming someone for something they never did, or for their idle thoughts, isn't the best way to go about things. Although, Joffrey is royal blood, and Arya's wolf certainly attacked him. Not unprovoked, but there it is. Either way, he never did anything to Arya, so that's hardly something to despise the man for.

I do, also, have some issue with the whole "children are more important than others" thing. I've never understood why taking the life of a child is worse than taking the life of any other person. Crimes against children are the same as crimes against anyone else, in my opinion. When does someone stop being a child, exactly, and why are they less important all of a sudden? I just... don't understand it. That's rather a side issue, though.

3. Ned confessed to ordering the kidnapping of Jaime's brother.

"Your brother has been taken at my command, to answer for his crimes," Ned Stark said.

By all rights, Ned should've been punished. Yet, Ned was untouchable, as the life of his brother was in the balance. Catelyn should never have kidnapped Tyrion, and Ned never should've said it was his order, and Jaime shouldn't have killed Ned's men. I would say that the blame is on Catelyn. The kidnapping of Tyrion couldn't go unanswered, yet she did it anyway, all based on very flimsy evidence. Jaime thought it was Ned's idea, therefore he thought he should punish him. Yet he couldn't be punished directly. Not the nicest thing to do, I admit, though nor was the kidnapping. Eye for an eye, and three extra body parts, as vengeance so often becomes.

4. What was Jaime going to do about Jeyne? I don't really think there's anything he could've done. That particular deal was already struck, Jaime had no way to change that. He couldn't uphold any vows with "minimal to no consequences", because there's nothing at all he could've done, vows or no. I really don't know what you think Jaime should've or could've done.

But Jaime's dealings with Roose in no way broke the oath he swore to Catelyn. Here's the oath he swore:

"Swear that you will never again take up arms against Stark nor Tully. Swear that you will compel your brother to honor his pledge to return my daughters safe and unharmed. Swear on your honor as a knight, on your honor as a Lannister, on your honor as a Sworn Brother of the Kingsguard. Swear it by your sister's life, and your father's, and your son's, by the old gods and the new, and I'll send you back to your sister. Refuse, and I will have your blood."

Through his dealings with Roose, did he take up arms against Stark or Tully, or somehow make an attempt to not deliver Catelyn's daughters to her? The answer is no. Roose may well have been taking up arms, but Roose Bolton is not Jaime Lannister. His dealing had nothing at all to do with Catelyn's children. So, no broken oath here.

5. I really don't think he took up arms against the Tully's at Riverrun. To the letter of the oath, he certainly didn't actually wield arms against any Tully's, but in the spirit of the oath, he didn't bring harm to any Tully's either. He was very specifically looking for a way to end the siege at Riverrun peacefully, which he did, through his threats. But,even though he didn't break the oath, the oath was made under threat of death! Who cares if he broke such an oath? If someone forces you, under threat of death, to swear (and only that, after you've sworn, you're free from any threats) that tomorrow you'll sell your house to them for a dollar, you aren't a terrible person for not fulfilling your oath.

2 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

He also lied to his little brother and had a child gang-raped to appease his father.

Tywin had Tysha raped, Jaime had nothing to do with it, until he was told to lie to Tyrion about Tysha being a whore. You shouldn't blame a man for his father's crimes.

2 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

It's almost ironic that he tried to murder one child and maim another of a man who risked his life for Jaime's own children.

This line boggles me. Ned risked his life for Jaime's children after he tried to kill Bran and the Arya situation. Should Jaime have somehow known that Ned was going to do this? How could that have influenced anything Jaime did? But if you aren't saying it should have influenced Jaime, I'm not sure what your point is.

Now, all of that said, yes, Jaime is absolutely a criminal. He has broken laws, without any doubt. It's not lawful to push someone out a window. But so many people are criminals; Catelyn unlawfully kidnapped Tyrion, Ned unlawfully went to war against the King, Davos is unlawfully in open rebellion against the King. Criminals aren't necessarily all bad people, and they're certainly not bad people for the simple act of being a criminal.

Though, I'm not certain what you think makes him a hypocrite, exactly.

Though, on the point of his redemption; I haven't seen it either. The whole Aerys situation isn't redemption. You can't be redeemed for something by your actions in the past. I believe that the Jaime we see in Dance, is the same Jaime we see in A Game of Thrones, though a little less bold and reckless due to the loss of his hand; less prone to rash action. I think, if he was in the same position at the end of Dance, he'd push Bran again. But quite honestly, I don't think he's really in need of redemption. On a scale from Complete Good to Complete Evil, he sits somewhere in the middle, where most people do. I wouldn't say most people need redemption. He's done things he's not proud of, he's done things he is proud of. "Bad" things and "good" things, if you will. As has everyone, as will everyone.

So, criminal? Yep, without doubt. Hypocrite? I don't really see it, and nothing in your post seems to insinuate anything hypocritical. But I don't think he's a particularly bad person, all in all. Just a person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

1. Jaime is introduced as an oathbreaker (killing his king), complicit in high treason, having an incestuous relationship, breaking guestright, and a willful murder of children. Essentially, he defiled the gods, the faith, and the laws of Westeros very early on.

While I think it isn't quite as cut and dried as this (especially in regards to his oathbreaking and relationship with Cersei), that is pretty much how he's introduced. Which makes sense, if he's ultimately going to redeem himself. He can't have a meaningful redemption arc if he starts the story off as an all around great guy who has done no wrong. Honour is a big part of his arc as well - we're introduced to him as the dishnourable Kingslayer, the man who stabbed his king in the back. But that's not really the whole story, is it? I don't think anyone's arguing Jaime is their favourite character within the first few chapters of AGoT anyways, so I don't think this is particularly relevant.

4 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

2. I may be wrong on this, but iirc, Jaime thinks to himself that he would've maimed Arya if he'd been the first to find her.  Again, with the children.

@cyberdirectorfreedom touched on this nicely, but at any rate, this is pretty much just an extension of your first point. It also serves to highlight how deep of a hold Cersei has over him. Her offhand comment during sex would have been enough for him to kill Arya, and it has obviously burrowed itself into his mind.

4 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

3. He has three men murdered, to chasten Ned (by the way, does anyone have a bigger Ned complex than Jaime?).

He meets Ned with armed forces in response to the kidnapping of his brother - Ned says it was on his order, to answer for Tyrion's crimes. Maybe he didn't need to actually fight with Ned (although he isn't exactly the sort of man to back down). It doesn't really matter, though, because this is still all before Jaime's arc actually kicks off, and we're still learning what kind of person he is.

I don't think you quite understand Jaime's arc if 3/5 of your points are criticisms of his character within the first half of AGoT. Either that, or you just refused to change your initial opinion of him, despite everything.

4 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

4. He swears to Cat that he will not take up arms against Stark or Tully, and with his release will return her daughters (albeit at swordpoint) but on his way to Kingslanding, he understands that Roose means to betray Robb, and gives one of his flippant remarks, thus breaking his oath to Cat (because he had to agree to absolve Roose of blame for hand to Tywin to be freed).  Then upon arrival at KL, he knowingly allows some girl (Jeyne) to be taken by the Boltons knowing full well that it is kidnapping and coercion (this shows his true character, despite his dialogue to Cat and Brienne that you can't follow all the vows, he could follow a very important knights vow right then with minimal to no consequence, but he lets her be taken).

He doesn't take up arms against Stark or Tully. I'm confused as to what he should have done instead upon picking up a few hints that Roose would betray Robb? Cut Roose down right there? Tell Tywin it was Roose's fault that he lost his hand? There wasn't really anything he could've done to stop the Red Wedding. He had no part in planning or executing it, I don't think it really counts against him.

What was he supposed to do about Jeyne? Just call everyone associated with this marriage (which includes the crown and Tywin, IIRC) a liar? I'm sure that would be 'minimal to no consequence'. And, technically, if she is being lawfully betrothed/wed, then is it really kidnapping? As far as everyone else knows, the Boltons are simply bringing Ramsay's new bride to him. Jaime could have broken it up and gallantly rode off with Jeyne - but it wouldn't make a difference, unless he literally disappeared. If he was caught, he would be punished and Jeyne would return to the Boltons. If he really did disappear forever, well, they could probably find a replacement for their fake Arya, and simply claim to have recaptured the 'real one' on their way back to the North. Again, nothing Jaime really could have done.

5 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

5. Then he DOES take up arms against Stark and Tully by breaking the siege of Riverrun (by threatening to murder women and children, it's poignant to me that the first thing the Blackfish asks is he has he returned to resume his captivity).

Despite his methods, he doesn't take up (personally or in spirit) arms against Stark or Tully. He peacefully ends the siege. 

5 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

He also lied to his little brother and had a child gang-raped to appease his father.  It's almost ironic that he tried to murder one child and maim another of a man who risked his life for Jaime's own children.

In summation, my bias aside, is Jaime a hypocrite and a criminal?

No, Tywin had Tysha raped. Jaime did lie to Tyrion at Tywin's command, but I don't see what that really has to do with Jaime now? No son of Tywin would disobey him like that, and Jaime obviously feels terrible about it to this day (see: confession to Tyrion in the black cells).

If we discount that Ned's action here came after Jaime's, again, this is from the beginning of AGoT. Jaime is not likable at this point; he's not redeeming himself, and we have very little insight to his thoughts on any of these matters. You're either completely misinterpreting Jaime's arc or stubbornly refusing to change your opinion of him by focusing so heavily on events so early in the first book of the series. You've almost completely ignored Jaime in the four books that came after, only mentioning that he picked up on Roose's hints about the wedding, saw Jeyne being carted out of KL, and broke the siege at Riverrun. He's done a hell of a lot more than that. If Jaime wasn't a crummy character at the beginning, he couldn't really redeem himself. It's totally fine to not like a character, but you're really misreading the reasons that other people like him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

1. Jaime is introduced as an oathbreaker (killing his king), complicit in high treason, having an incestuous relationship, breaking guestright, and a willful murder of children. Essentially, he defiled the gods, the faith, and the laws of Westeros very early on.

I'm fine with the first three, and the others - yes, bad, but he was introduced as a baddie. About the Bran incident - GRRM himself made an interesting comment, saying that Jaime did it because of knowledge what would happen to his family had ever Bran told what he saw; basically attempting to murder one child to protect his own.

5 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

2. I may be wrong on this, but iirc, Jaime thinks to himself that he would've maimed Arya if he'd been the first to find her.  Again, with the children.

3. He has three men murdered, to chasten Ned (by the way, does anyone have a bigger Ned complex than Jaime?).

Yes, evil.

5 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

4. He swears to Cat that he will not take up arms against Stark or Tully, and with his release will return her daughters (albeit at swordpoint) but on his way to Kingslanding, he understands that Roose means to betray Robb, and gives one of his flippant remarks, thus breaking his oath to Cat (because he had to agree to absolve Roose of blame for hand to Tywin to be freed).  Then upon arrival at KL, he knowingly allows some girl (Jeyne) to be taken by the Boltons knowing full well that it is kidnapping and coercion (this shows his true character, despite his dialogue to Cat and Brienne that you can't follow all the vows, he could follow a very important knights vow right then with minimal to no consequence, but he lets her be taken).

He doesn't break his oath here. He swore not to take up arms, not to change sides.

About Jeyne, yes, but I call it prioritizing. Jaime is not a wandering knight, but the Kingsguard. Tyrion also allowed some atrocities, when he had more pressing duties.

5 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

5. Then he DOES take up arms against Stark and Tully by breaking the siege of Riverrun (by threatening to murder women and children, it's poignant to me that the first thing the Blackfish asks is he has he returned to resume his captivity).

Yes, he does. He is no Ned. But it's worth noting that he does it in attempt to actually resolve the conflict without bloodshed, manages to do so, and does good on his promise to show mercy to the defeated, right?

5 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

He also lied to his little brother and had a child gang-raped to appease his father.  It's almost ironic that he tried to murder one child and maim another of a man who risked his life for Jaime's own children.

Nope, Tywin.

Jaime definitely is a criminal and an oathbreaker - the second he has to be, if he does not plan to die for his honor, like Brienne and Ned were willing. However you omitted his good deeds, appreciating and finally saving Brienne, getting inspired by her, trying to reform the Kingsguard and convince Cersei to hold her shit together, saving his brother, trying to work around his conflicting loyalties to clean the Riverlands without making harm, and prior to that yeah - sacrificing his honor to save KL. Jaime wasn't and will never be Jesus of Westeros, it's about making change where he can, and trying at least to do lesser evil when you can't do good - much like Tyrion.

And I would actually list as a hypocrisy one of his 'awesome' moments - the letter burning, abandoning the mother of his children and effectively his children to danger and letting Cersei to take fall for the action they both committed together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the standards presented in the OP, everyone in the books is a hypocrite and a criminal.

Jaime is one of the few we see/hear in his own head debate and question that hypocrisy and criminality of the mentality of 'nobles' in Westeros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who is not a completely blind Jaime fan should realize that some things Jaime did were actually really evil.  Like Bran, Neds men, and saying he would have murdered Arya.  There's a similar litmus test for Dany, which is whether you accept that torturing the wine sellers daughters was evil.

but in the case of both characters (and others as well) I personally prefer to look at the whole to make a judgement.  For me, that judgement is that both characters are heros, who have also made mistakes, and done some actually evil things.  

I think Jaime was a decent person as a kid.  He was horrified by the stuff he saw in KG.  Pretty much the worst thing he did was have sex with Cersei which is squicky but I Don't consider immoral.  He's a hero for killing Aerys.   

He became cynical and jaded in Roberts court. Doesn't excuse what he chose to do at all but that's why he did it.  He decided if even the KG had no honor then well it would just be "us vs them" morality.  He buried any qualms he'd have.  

Losing his hand taught him some humility.  Brienne taught him that decent people still exist.  Now he's struggling with both of his old selves.  And j think his mental process (compare early asos to late AFFC) clearly shows the way he's going.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ser Leftwich said:

By the standards presented in the OP, everyone in the books is a hypocrite and a criminal.

Jaime is one of the few we see/hear in his own head debate and question that hypocrisy and criminality of the mentality of 'nobles' in Westeros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pushing Bran seems like the least defensible deed. You can say that he did it because otherwise Bran would have talked and Robert would have had him, Cersei and the kids all killed, but obviously there were other choices. They could have simply grabbed the kids, ridden for the nearest port and sailed to the Free Cities. If you don't think you can convince Bran to keep quiet for a few days, roll him in a carpet and take him with you, and let him go when you're safe enough. Not exactly rocket science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'And when Lord Umber, who was called the Greatjon by his men and stood as tall as Hodor and twice as wide, threatened to take his forces home if he was placed behind the Hornwoods or the Cerwyns in the order of march, Robb told him he was welcome to do so. “And when we are done with the Lannisters,” he promised, scratching Grey Wind behind the ear, “we will march back north, root you out of your keep, and hang you for an oathbreaker.” ' AGoT - p. 574

So when Robb gives a similar threat as Jaime did to the Blackfish, he is a hero and Jaime a monster?

When Robb rampages across the Westerlands, that is fine because it is off camera?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaime is a criminal, and a very

6 minutes ago, Ser Leftwich said:

'And when Lord Umber, who was called the Greatjon by his men and stood as tall as Hodor and twice as wide, threatened to take his forces home if he was placed behind the Hornwoods or the Cerwyns in the order of march, Robb told him he was welcome to do so. “And when we are done with the Lannisters,” he promised, scratching Grey Wind behind the ear, “we will march back north, root you out of your keep, and hang you for an oathbreaker.” ' AGoT - p. 574

So when Robb gives a similar threat as Jaime did to the Blackfish, he is a hero and Jaime a monster?

When Robb rampages across the Westerlands, that is fine because it is off camera?

Welcome to the realm of Stark fanboys. It closely resembles Martins A Song of Ice and Fire, so be careful not to confuse these two worlds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're being too black and white about it. Yeah some of things Jaime did are evil on the surface, but when you look at them in depth it becomes more grey. For instance, pushing Bran. Pushing a child out of window is terrible. But when you think about why he did it how terrible is it? Had Bran told the love is life and his children probably would have been killed. Can you honestly say you wouldn't kill another kid if it meant saving the life of your own kid. Not an easy decision if you think about it like that. Even Ned questions how he would react if faced with this decision. It's easy to say he could have "this, that, and third" in hindsight, but in the moment what's is your immediate reaction.

As far as Aerys, it was either kill Aerys or let the whole city burn so that seems a pretty easy decision. Idc what vows you've sworn. And just Jaime points out he has taken a lot of vows. Which ones are he supposed to keep when they conflict.

He hasn't broken any vows he  made to Catelyn. Yeah he threatened Riverrun and Edmure but he didn't take up arms against them. In fact, the threats were made in an effort to keep the vows. He sent Brienne to look for Sansa and Arya since he obviously couldn't do it himself. And you can't blame Jaime for what Roose did.

Lastly, as someone above said, what was he supposed to do about Jeyne Poole. You're giving him way too much credit if you think he could have stopped this.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Maxxine said:

I think you're being too black and white about it. Yeah some of things Jaime did are evil on the surface, but when you look at them in depth it becomes more grey. For instance, pushing Bran. Pushing a child out of window is terrible. But when you think about why he did it how terrible is it? Had Bran told the love is life and his children probably would have been killed. Can you honestly say you wouldn't kill another kid if it meant saving the life of your own kid. Not an easy decision if you think about it like that. Even Ned questions how he would react if faced with this decision. It's easy to say he could have "this, that, and third" in hindsight, but in the moment what's is your immediate reaction.

 

I don't get why fanboys try and make Jaime trying to murder an innocent child into a more complex situation than it is. 

Jaime did not try to murder Bran to protect his kids we know he doesn't give a fuck about those kids. Nor did he do it to protect Cersei cause Jaime was more than willing to say "fuck it" and tell the world that him and Cersei have been screwing. 

He tried to kill Bran cause that's what he thought Cersei wanted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Wolves said:

I don't get why fanboys try and make Jaime trying to murder an innocent child into a more complex situation than it is. 

Jaime did not try to murder Bran to protect his kids we know he doesn't give a fuck about those kids. Nor did he do it to protect Cersei cause Jaime was more than willing to say "fuck it" and tell the world that him and Cersei have been screwing. 

He tried to kill Bran cause that's what he thought Cersei wanted. 

I basically agree.  And I'm a "Jaime fangirl".  Jaime was despicable at that point in time.  It was the easiest option a available and he took it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, The Wolves said:

I don't get why fanboys try and make Jaime trying to murder an innocent child into a more complex situation than it is. 

Jaime did not try to murder Bran to protect his kids we know he doesn't give a fuck about those kids. Nor did he do it to protect Cersei cause Jaime was more than willing to say "fuck it" and tell the world that him and Cersei have been screwing. 

He tried to kill Bran cause that's what he thought Cersei wanted. 

A) I'm not a Jaime "fanboy" so calm that down.

B) Why does he think that's what Cersei wanted? Bc he knows what will happen if people find out. And what happens if people find out? Cersei and the kids (and Jaime) die. So at the end of the day it still comes down to choosing a child you don't know or you and sister/lover and her kids. I do agree Jaime was an asshole at that point in the story and pushing children out of windows is a terrible act, but that doesn't change the dynamics of the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Maxxine said:

A) I'm not a Jaime "fanboy" so calm that down.

B) Why does he think that's what Cersei wanted? Bc he knows what will happen if people find out. And what happens if people find out? Cersei and the kids (and Jaime) die. So at the end of the day it still comes down to choosing a child you don't know or you and sister/lover and her kids. I do agree Jaime was an asshole at that point in the story and pushing children out of windows is a terrible act, but that doesn't change the dynamics of the situation.

Jaime did not fear him or Cersei or their bastards dying to try to kill Bran he's to in love with himself to think that he and the Lannisters would lose a fight against Robert.  

Jaime pushed Bran because he thought that that was what Cersei wanted. He didn't think about his kids or Cersei's safety he never feared for them. He doesn't care if people found out like at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ser Leftwich said:

'And when Lord Umber, who was called the Greatjon by his men and stood as tall as Hodor and twice as wide, threatened to take his forces home if he was placed behind the Hornwoods or the Cerwyns in the order of march, Robb told him he was welcome to do so. “And when we are done with the Lannisters,” he promised, scratching Grey Wind behind the ear, “we will march back north, root you out of your keep, and hang you for an oathbreaker.” ' AGoT - p. 574

So when Robb gives a similar threat as Jaime did to the Blackfish, he is a hero and Jaime a monster?

When Robb rampages across the Westerlands, that is fine because it is off camera?

Nah, Robb had all right to punish Gretjonif he had not obeyed him. He was his vassal after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

Anyone who is not a completely blind Jaime fan should realize that some things Jaime did were actually really evil.  Like Bran, Neds men, and saying he would have murdered Arya.  There's a similar litmus test for Dany, which is whether you accept that torturing the wine sellers daughters was evil.

but in the case of both characters (and others as well) I personally prefer to look at the whole to make a judgement.  For me, that judgement is that both characters are heros, who have also made mistakes, and done some actually evil things.  

I think Jaime was a decent person as a kid.  He was horrified by the stuff he saw in KG.  Pretty much the worst thing he did was have sex with Cersei which is squicky but I Don't consider immoral.  He's a hero for killing Aerys.   

He became cynical and jaded in Roberts court. Doesn't excuse what he chose to do at all but that's why he did it.  He decided if even the KG had no honor then well it would just be "us vs them" morality.  He buried any qualms he'd have.  

Losing his hand taught him some humility.  Brienne taught him that decent people still exist.  Now he's struggling with both of his old selves.  And j think his mental process (compare early asos to late AFFC) clearly shows the way he's going.  

 

Thanks for that.

I believe some people do not understand how a person can change. Out attitudes, priorities, and purposes all determine our actions. They also determine the reasoning and, by extension, the severity of the action taken.

Throughout his POV chapters, his attitudes, priorities, and purposes have changed. This lead to different actions than would have been taken had he not changed.

He is not reformed completely, but it is a process. And when he meets up with the brotherhood in TWoW, I believe his attitudes and priorities will make a world of difference in how he responds to the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Criminal - yes

Hypocrite - no way. He is one of the few characters who admits (to himself, his friends and enemies) that he is a scumbag.

He wanted to be a hero, but failed (actually by doing the right, but dishonorable thing - nice paralell with Jon's "oathbreaking"). He faced an unsolvable moral dilema, as a consecvence became imoral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His fans blame Cersei for most of his misdeeds and he appears sympathetic because he lost his hand and we get his perspective. However, I view him as a second tier villain same as Theon. Like Theon, he was a selfish asshole until he was punished by people even worse than him. The only important characters that I consider worse are Tywin, Roose, Ramsay, Walder, Euron and Gregor Clegane. 

Sandor Clegane is a true knight while Jaime Lannister is a bad person pretending to be a true knight. Sandor did not need to be castrated or have his hand chopped off to start acting like a good person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now