Was Jaime right to push Bran?

[Drogon'sWrath]

Which would be relevant if not for the fact that Jaime didn't give a fuck about his children. "Joff was no more to me than a squirt of seed in Cersei's cunt". His motivation had nothing to do with them. Cersei said "he saw us", and Cersei gets what she wants. Let's not turn Jaime Lannister into a responsible pater familias, that's all kind of ridiculous.

However, this is where my sympathy for Jaime's situation ends. We don't have his POV of the incident, but I'm not convinced he actually was thinking of his children but was just thinking of what would happen to himself and Cersei if they were to get caught.

I agree with you that he didn't care much about his children. I even indicated as much in the rest of my post. Granted, he would probably be a bit upset at the deaths of Tommen and Myrcella, given that they are good kids, and he does show warmth to Tommen when he's in KL. But I agree he wasn't thinking of them at the time. He was only thinking of himself and Cersei. That's why I say I can only understand the act, not justify it. And I surely can't forgive it. Even with his current redemption arc, I can't completely look past what he did to Bran.

[KingslayerHodor]

I agree with you that he didn't care much about his children. I even indicated as much in the rest of my post. Granted, he would probably be a bit upset at the deaths of Tommen and Myrcella, given that they are good kids, and he does show warmth to Tommen when he's in KL. But I agree he wasn't thinking of them at the time. He was only thinking of himself and Cersei. That's why I say I can only understand the act, not justify it. And I surely can't forgive it. Even with his current redemption arc, I can't completely look past what he did to Bran.

Judging from GRRM's interview, I think it's safe to say he was considering the lives of the children too, even if he personally didn't care much for them.

[complexphoenix]

I agree with you that he didn't care much about his children. I even indicated as much in the rest of my post. Granted, he would probably be a bit upset at the deaths of Tommen and Myrcella, given that they are good kids, and he does show warmth to Tommen when he's in KL. But I agree he wasn't thinking of them at the time. He was only thinking of himself and Cersei. That's why I say I can only understand the act, not justify it. And I surely can't forgive it. Even with his current redemption arc, I can't completely look past what he did to Bran.

I can. The way I see it, nobody's perfect and almost everybody is going to do whatever they need to do to keep themselves and those they care about alive and secure. If you insist that only moral paragons are worthy of being liked, you're going to be limiting yourself to only liking 5% of the population at most - and that 5% won't include you, because real saints never hold others to the same standards they hold themselves.

[Drogon'sWrath]

Judging from GRRM's interview, I think it's safe to say he was considering the lives of the children too, even if he personally didn't care much for them.

I'll be honest, I never got that impression from reading the books. And even if he was thinking about them, he was mostly concerned with himself and Cersei, which I guess is natural. But still, the fact that he put himself in this situation makes the whole thing hard to swallow.

[KingslayerHodor]

I'll be honest, I never got that impression from reading the books. And even if he was thinking about them, he was mostly concerned with himself and Cersei, which I guess is natural. But still, the fact that he put himself in this situation makes the whole thing hard to swallow.

This was addressed to. See here:

Many people have argued that Jaime was wrong in pushing Bran out of the window simply because he was risking an affair with Cersei, since they were risking the lives of their family and themselves. Now, I don't want to deny that Jaime and Cersei were foolish in doing this. But I think this is wholly irrelevant. It doesn't matter if they were having an affair, because it doesn't change the value of Jaime's action at that very moment. That is, his having a risky affair with Cersei doesn't make his family's lives any less valuable.

[I'll pay the iron price]

Was Jaime right to push Bran?

No.

Even by Medieval standards, shoving a kid from a tower is pretty horrendous.

If Bran had told on them, Cersei could have bullshitted and claimed she felt ill and not wanting anyone to see a queen ill she fled to a tower for some peace and her brother went to her aid.

Who would have believed a kid anyway?

Not Robert

If Bran had told Ned that he saw Jaime and Cersei together, would Ned dare tell Robert "Oh by the way, my boy reckons he just saw your wife being porked by her own brother".

[TheButcherCrow]

No.

Even by Medieval standards, shoving a kid from a tower is pretty horrendous.

If Bran had told on them, Cersei could have bullshitted and claimed she felt ill and not wanting anyone to see a queen ill she fled to a tower for some peace and her brother went to her aid.

Who would have believed a kid anyway?

Not Robert

If Bran had told Ned that he saw Jaime and Cersei together, would Ned dare tell Robert "Oh by the way, my boy reckons he just saw your wife being porked by her own brother".

Bingo, murdering him at the very least rasies the possibility he saw something that he didn't. True, no one says anything about him not having fallen before until an assassin tries to kill him again, Joff totally screwed Jaime on that one.

[Drogon'sWrath]

I can. The way I see it, nobody's perfect and almost everybody is going to do whatever they need to do to keep themselves and those they care about alive and secure. If you insist that only moral paragons are worthy of being liked, you're going to be limiting yourself to only liking 5% of the population at most - and that 5% won't include you, because real saints never hold others to the same standards they hold themselves.

I've said that I don't blame Jaime for pushing Bran in the heat of that moment. What I do blame him for is having sex in the middle of the day in a relatively unknown place. The way I see it, he could have avoided the situation by not having sex with his sister at that time and place.

I'm also not one to insist that only moral paragons are worthy of being liked. There are plenty of times, both in the novels and real life, where I can say I like the person but dislike the act. And, dammit, I do like Jaime. Or at least, SOS on Jaime. I think he was a despicable person early in the series (mostly due to Cersei's influence), but I for one truly believe in his redemption. And while I like him now, I don't think I'll ever fully forgive him for what happened to Bran.

P.S. And let's be honest. 5% of the population is a gross overestimate. That kind of person would be limited to .05% at most.

[The hairy bear]

Yes, but only because of the constant grief he receives about the incident from Cersei. It had nothing to do with his feelings towards Bran or feeling bad about having crippled him. This idea that Jaime in someway feels guilty about the act beyond its effects on himself is simply reader projection undertaken as a defensive mechanism for liking a callous asshole.

:lmao:

Posts like these make me smile. Let me change it up a little bit:

I sincerely hope I never meet some of you people in real life. You're attempting to justify the eventual murder of 3 children. I don't know what I would do in that situation, but I definitely value my children's lives more than a stranger's child.

Just as you and others think we're ethically inferior, we think the same of you.

Murder it's not the same as risking three children's lives. And there's possible scenarios where neither Bran or Jaime's children die: They could have accused Bran of making things up. They could have fled to the Free Cities and have a quiet life there. Hell, he could have even challenge Robert to a duel for Cersei and the fool would have accepted.

Trying to kill Bran was the cowardly thing to do.

[Dofs]

Some people also say that Cersei didn't want Jaime to kill Bran. That's a huge misconception. That's the scene:

The queen. And now Bran recognized the man beside her. They looked as much alike as reflections in a mirror.

"He saw us," the woman said shrilly.

"So he did," the man said.

Bran's fingers started to slip. He grabbed the ledge with his other hand. Fingernails dug into unyielding stone. The man reached down. "Take my hand," he said. "Before you fall."

Bran seized his arm and held on tight with all his strength. The man yanked him up to the ledge. "What are you doing?" the woman demanded.

That's certainly not the behavior from someone who wanted Bran to be safe. And when Jaime remembers how Cersei was angry with him, he mentions that she started complaining when she had found out that Bran survived. She was perfectly fine before.

[KingslayerHodor]

Murder it's not the same as risking three children's lives.

This is a classic distinction in ethics, and you're right to make it. It's called "killing vs. letting die."

Though most ethicists accept that letting die is just as bad as murder. See the following example:

James Rachels (1975) provides a classic example of the first approach.He offers us a pair of cases—in one, Smith drowns his young cousin in the bathtub; in the other, Jones plans to drown his young cousin, but finds the boy already unconscious under water and refrains from saving him. The two cases are exactly alike except that the first is a killing and the second a letting die. Rachels invites us to agree that Smith's behavior is no worse than Jones's. He then concludes that killing per se is no worse than letting die per se, and that if typical killings are worse than typical lettings die that must be because of other factors.

[Faint]

She was perfectly fine before.

We have no evidence of your supposed fact. There is no text, including that you quoted, proving that Cersei was an accomplice in Jaime's decision. If anything, the evidence goes in the other direction, in light of Jaime's noted tendency to feel sorry for himself and stew over slights against him. Had Cersei really changed her mind over the matter only following the realization that Bran would survive, this is something that would have undoubtedly come out multiple times in Jaime's own thoughts on the issue. As it is, he only notes that Cersei was angry at him for the option he chose. Not that I think she feels any sympathy for Bran, but she certainly does not feel guilty about it, which she actually does for many of her own egregious acts.

[The Mother of The Others]

The topic dares us to say yes, so how can we not? Yes. For the surprisingly philosophical reasons listed, and because voyeurs should be slapped on general principle, and because precocious children who are already in midair when they receive that slap need to understand they're not above gravity. Because what leads kids to defy gravity in the first place? Arrogance. Bran's peeping eyes challenged Jaime to a trial by visual combat. Bran scored a major coup by seeing the twins scoring with each other, so Jaime was under pressure to top that visual with something even more eye-catching, and he airmailed the boy as his way of saying "Look at this, Bran! It's a scenic route through the air!"

So Jaime scored the walk-off home run in their eyeball duel by being the one who was able to still walk, and he thought he'd provided the visual of the day. But unbeknownst to him, Bran developed a 3rd eye while in mid-air, which trumps Jaime's 2. So while Bran may have tapped out that day, he actually won on points. So it's a split decision. Jaime is not the undisputed champ, and he has something to fear from the rematch because sleeping on weirwood stumps has since given him weird dreams, so you'd have to say that Bran's 3rd eye has invaded Jaime's mind and landed a punch squarely on Jaime's brain. This isn't over, fight fans! 3rd eyes may be trending!

[A Man Has Said]

The topic dares us to say yes, so how can we not? Yes. For the surprisingly philosophical reasons listed, and because voyeurs should be slapped on general principle, and because precocious children who are already in midair when they receive that slap need to understand they're not above gravity. Because what leads kids to defy gravity in the first place? Arrogance. Bran's peeping eyes challenged Jaime to a trial by visual combat. Bran scored a major coup by seeing the twins scoring with each other, so Jaime was under pressure to top that visual with something even more eye-catching, and he airmailed the boy as his way of saying "Look at this, Bran! It's a scenic route through the air!"

So Jaime scored the walk-off home run in their eyeball duel by being the one who was able to still walk, and he thought he'd provided the visual of the day. But unbeknownst to him, Bran developed a 3rd eye while in mid-air, which trumps Jaime's 2. So while Bran may have tapped out that day, he actually won on points. So it's a split decision. Jaime is not the undisputed champ, and he has something to fear from the rematch because sleeping on weirwood stumps has since given him weird dreams, so you'd have to say that Bran's 3rd eye has invaded Jaime's mind and landed a punch squarely on Jaime's brain. This isn't over, fight fans! 3rd eyes may be trending!

I think there's an accepted snark tag on this forum: Comic Sans MS.

Also you forgot to mention that along with 3 eyes to Jaime's mere 2, Bran also has 2 hands to Jaime's mere 1. That (and having Hodor to carry him up to the CoTF's cave, after which I don't think he's going anywhere) more than makes up for Jaime's 2 legs IMO.

[FalseSpring]

Incest is a victimless crime generally. I don't see why everyone has such a big issue with it, especially when it's between two consenting adults of the same age. (Age difference can create power dynamics in incest.) *wether the children are victims or not, I'm not going to debate that, as they probably are.

Something like 10% of marriages worldwide are between first cousins or closer. It is much more common than people realize.

[Buried Treasure]

Incest is a victimless crime generally. I don't see why everyone has such a big issue with it, especially when it's between two consenting adults of the same age. (Age difference can create power dynamics in incest.) *wether the children are victims or not, I'm not going to debate that, as they probably are.

Something like 10% of marriages worldwide are between first cousins or closer. It is much more common than people realize.

Treasonous adultery on the other hand is a crime with very real consequences in the setting.

[A Man Has Said]

Incest is a victimless crime generally. I don't see why everyone has such a big issue with it, especially when it's between two consenting adults of the same age. (Age difference can create power dynamics in incest.) *wether the children are victims or not, I'm not going to debate that, as they probably are.

Something like 10% of marriages worldwide are between first cousins or closer. It is much more common than people realize.

I don't think realistically that the morality of incest ever even entered into this discussion. If that's all it was, it would be trivial.

Fucking the Queen is treason. Getting three bastards on her is another act of treason (or three, I guess.) Fraudulently presenting one of those bastards as heir to the throne is another act of treason. And possibly plotting regicide in order to ensure the succession of the fraudulent heir sooner than later is of course the worst act of treason there is.

“You are as blind as Robert,” the woman was saying.

“If you mean I see the same thing, yes,” the man said. “I see a man who would sooner die than betray his king.”

“He betrayed one already, or have you forgotten?” the woman said. “Oh, I don’t deny he’s loyal to Robert, that’s obvious. What happens when Robert dies and Joff takes the throne? And the sooner that comes to pass, the safer we’ll all be. My husband grows more restless every day.

It's not explicit, but the implication is that Cersei is at this point in time already looking for some opportunity to rid herself of Robert.

[Prince of the Green]

I have a hard time empathizing with anyone who does something that would make Cersei happy or content. She's the devil.

What gets me is that there's a pretty good chance that the two of them continued and finished their sordid affair after Bran was pushed.

[Ranzadule]

Situational morality can be used to justify just about anything. There is no scenario in which a man can launch a child out of a window and have it be excusable, much less "right."

Jaime would not be on this wonderful path to redemption if he had committed no misdeeds. I am glad that he did and interested to read the rest of his story.

[Dofs]

We have no evidence of your supposed fact. There is no text, including that you quoted, proving that Cersei was an accomplice in Jaime's decision. If anything, the evidence goes in the other direction, in light of Jaime's noted tendency to feel sorry for himself and stew over slights against him. Had Cersei really changed her mind over the matter only following the realization that Bran would survive, this is something that would have undoubtedly come out multiple times in Jaime's own thoughts on the issue. As it is, he only notes that Cersei was angry at him for the option he chose. Not that I think she feels any sympathy for Bran, but she certainly does not feel guilty about it, which she actually does for many of her own egregious acts.

Why it would have undoubtedly come out in Jaime's thoughts? At that point Jaime believed almost everything that Cersei had said.

Before Jaime pushed Bran, he was going to fall anyway. So, when initially Jaime saves Bran, Cersei's says 'what are you doing'. How exactly these words mean that she wanted Bran to be spared?

Then, Jaime reflects to when Cersei was angry:

Cersei had given him no end of grief afterward, when the boy refused to die. "He was seven, Jaime," she'd berated him. "Even if he understood what he saw, we should have been able to frighten him into silence."

"I didn't think you'd want—"

"You never think. If the boy should wake and tell his father what he saw—"

Cersei had given him no end of grief afterward, when the boy refused to die. "He was seven, Jaime," she'd berated him. "Even if he understood what he saw, we should have been able to frighten him into silence."

"I didn't think you'd want—"

"You never think. If the boy should wake and tell his father what he saw—"

So, she only started complaining when she had found out that Bran had survived. That means that just after Jaime had pushed Bran, she was fine with it.