Whats this Jaime redemption arc I keep hearing about?

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Believe Ned was evuhlll for keeping Theon as a hostage is a thing kids do nowadays, isn't?

Is Jaime evil for offering Edmure and his child the option to be hostages of the Lannisters to save hundreds of lives?

Politically, it was the best thing to do. Keeping Theon as a hostage kept Balon at bay, while he also assured Theon to grow up with a different mentality and approach than his uncles and father. He didn't treat him like a son but he definitely treated him like his royal position required: he provided him the same education he provided Robb, his heir and future Lord of the North, as Theon would be the next Lord of the II. Also, Theon remembers to have enjoyed a certain freedom to do as he liked. And considering he was an asshole to pretty much everybody there, he was free to be a spoiled little prince as well.

As for the people who believed Ned would have killed him, they probably missed the many parts of aGoT when he's very clear about how he doesn't believe in killing children. Having Theon was a good gambit because Balon probably believed he would kill Theon as Ned Stark always does his duty. Nevertheless, the reason for keeping Theon was him not rebelling. Had he decided to rebel and not caring for Theon's safety, then there is not point on killing him at all.

[Crippledtank]

A girl and I got into a discussion the other day when she made mention to Jaimes "redemption arc".

Personally I don't see it.

Jaime has done literally nothing that I would consider even close to recompense for his past d-baggery.

The closest I can recall is him hanging some broken men. Even then he thinks how cool he is to be hanging people. "Look at me, I am golden hand the just!"

She pointed out sending Brienne off as a noble act but even that is a cop out, putting his responsibility on someone else.

Simply being slightly less of a tool isn't a redemption arc. Especially when the only reason he is refraining from his previous levels of tooldom is because he is physically incapable of cashing the checks his mouth used to write.

I like Jaime as a character but I would utterly hate him in real life

At least Theon has done a couple things to the good. I subscribe to the "Theon Durden" theory so I think he shanked some guys inside Winterfell and he also rescued (f)Arya. Don't get me wrong I hate Theon, but at least I can acknowledge and trace his redemption arc.

Well he did peacefully end any rebellion in the RL but from there it just gets pathetic he Sort of assisted Brienne on HIS mission, feels bad for himself all the time. Ummmmm what else he hasn't pushed any kids out of widows lately so that's good of him um what else.... No broken vows since autumn.... Hasn't had incest with sister for a few weeks......stood vigil at his fathers burial thing.......practises his swordplay a lot..... ........... Hmmm yer so far this "redemption arc" is more of a "fuck it I can't stab people anymore arc"

BUT HE DID LEAVE CERSEI TO ROT AND DIE SO FOR THAT HE HAS MY UNDYING LOVE AND SUPPORT!!!!

Respect/agree for the theon hate

[Crippledtank]

I know this is a bit off-topic, but how can you hate Theon?!

He's by far the most "human" character. His strengths, his flaws, his insecurities, are all extremely relatable, not to mention the quality of the WRITING IN HIS CHAPTERS, who easily surpass any other character's chapter...

This is honestly baffling to me.

I'm not disagreeing with you but there is a line In a theon chapter that goes

"Her mouth was at wet as her cunt"

But what theon did to winterfell and cassels daughter was sickening IMO

[Julia H.]

Believe Ned was evuhlll for keeping Theon as a hostage is a thing kids do nowadays, isn't?

Is Jaime evil for offering Edmure and his child the option to be hostages of the Lannisters to save hundreds of lives?

Politically, it was the best thing to do. Keeping Theon as a hostage kept Balon at bay, while he also assured Theon to grow up with a different mentality and approach than his uncles and father. He didn't treat him like a son but he definitely treated him like his royal position required: he provided him the same education he provided Robb, his heir and future Lord of the North, as Theon would be the next Lord of the II. Also, Theon remembers to have enjoyed a certain freedom to do as he liked. And considering he was an asshole to pretty much everybody there, he was free to be a spoiled little prince as well.

As for the people who believed Ned would have killed him, they probably missed the many parts of aGoT when he's very clear about how he doesn't believe in killing children. Having Theon was a good gambit because Balon probably believed he would kill Theon as Ned Stark always does his duty. Nevertheless, the reason for keeping Theon was him not rebelling. Had he decided to rebel and not caring for Theon's safety, then there is not point on killing him at all.

I agree that they have no better method than the hostage policy to ensure peace without having to kill all the rebels - yet, there is this catch: For the policy to work, people have to believe you would actually carry out the implied threat. When they don't believe it any longer, the damage is done, and carrying out the threat does not help.

Theon carried a sword and learned to be an excellent archer as well as a graceful dancer. In addition, he was free to have fun with every available peasant woman he could seduce. He was also allowed to be friends with the lord's heir.

[Crippledtank]

Anyone who says he did the right thing with pushing bran

"I'll do anything to protect my children who are born of Incest with the queen and if anyone finds out my children will suffer I WILL do anything to protect/save them"

(Continues fucking the queen)

.......

[JonCon's Red Beard]

I agree that they have no better method than the hostage policy to ensure peace without having to kill all the rebels - yet, there is this catch: For the policy to work, people have to believe you would actually carry out the implied threat. When they don't believe it any longer, the damage is done, and carrying out the threat does not help.

Well, people DO believe Ned would do his duty no matter what. Balon definitely believed it.

That's the subtly of Ned's characterization. Yes, he always does his duty but killing children is a line he doesn't cross. That's the reason he resigned as a Hand and why he hates the Lannisters.

[Julia H.]

Well, people DO believe Ned would do his duty no matter what. Balon definitely believed it.

That's the subtly of Ned's characterization. Yes, he always does his duty but killing children is a line he doesn't cross. That's the reason he resigned as a Hand and why he hates the Lannisters.

I agree. People believe he would do it, partly because he is so dutiful and partly because other Starks did it before him. Besides, few people have a chance to know him well enough to understand what his standpoint is regarding children. Basically, the better he plays his part, the less likely he is to get into a situation where he might be expected to perform this particular "duty". To take it a step further, his real duty is to seem ready to do the deed but never get to the point where it might be seen as "necessary". After all, only a living hostage has any value at all.

I think Jon has picked up on this and his answer to The Norrey is wonderfully ambiguous:

"So tell me, boy... if these wildling friends o' yours prove false, do you have the belly to do what needs be done?"

Ask Janos Slynt. "Tormund Giantsbane knows better than to try me. I may seem a green boy in your eyes, Lord Norrey, but I am still a son of Eddard Stark."

[JonCon's Red Beard]

I think Jon has picked up on this and his answer to The Norrey is wonderfully ambiguous:

"So tell me, boy... if these wildling friends o' yours prove false, do you have the belly to do what needs be done?"

Ask Janos Slynt. "Tormund Giantsbane knows better than to try me. I may seem a green boy in your eyes, Lord Norrey, but I am still a son of Eddard Stark."

Yep. He was smart in taking the wildlings' children because that's something they wouldn't even risk to lose.

That's something we also see during Jaime chapters in Riverrun. Blackfish knows Edmure being killed was a ruse because they never got the nerve to do it. Yet, Edmure did believe Jaime would send his kid with a trebuchet because Lannisters would. And we know Jaime was all "don't make me say it! I don't want to!" during the whole scene, despite he has already made another child fly.

It's about the image perceived. Ned and Jaime are men people believed would kill a child, but we know they wouldn't. Jaime has evolved into feel uncomfortable doing it as well, but people doesn't know that. He's relying on that image as much as Ned, to make the best of their situation. He saved Edmure's life, and Ned saved Theon's, as another rebellion would cost his life.

[BitsOfBrains]

I'm not so sure Jon wouldn't execute a hostage if it needed to be done. Like if the option were execute one hostage to prevent anarchy and chaos in the north I bet he would, even though he would be torn up about it.

UnJon on the other hand would chop up all those little wildling shits if given half a reason. Maybe.

[BitsOfBrains]

It's about the image perceived. Ned and Jaime are men people believed would kill a child, but we know they wouldn't. Jaime has evolved into feel uncomfortable doing it as well, but people doesn't know that. He's relying on that image as much as Ned, to make the best of their situation. He saved Edmure's life, and Ned saved Theon's, as another rebellion would cost his life.

Didn't Jaime attempt to kill Bran and try to kill Arya? I doubt Ned would do it, but Jaime? No prob. Again, we have seen him do it. I consider chucking Bran from the window the same thing as killing him. He meant to kill him and basically ended his life replacing it with a tortured pointless existence where he can't have a woman or a son or win battles or anything. He also thinks "gee it sure would be a bummer if I had to execute my squire the Piper. That might ruin my entire afternoon". At no point does he consider not executing the kid, just that he would prefer not to have to give him to Payne.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Didn't Jaime attempt to kill Bran and try to kill Arya? I doubt Ned would do it, but Jaime? No prob. Again, we have seen him do it. I consider chucking Bran from the window the same thing as killing him. He meant to kill him and basically ended his life replacing it with a tortured pointless existence where he can't have a woman or a son or win battles or anything. He also thinks "gee it sure would be a bummer if I had to execute my squire the Piper. That might ruin my entire afternoon". At no point does he consider not executing the kid, just that he would prefer not to have to give him to Payne.

Jaime DID try to kill both Stark kids but Jaime now doesn't want to have that image. He also realised that he did it all for Cersei and he didn't mind about his honour, which he's trying to clean a bit now. He's very uncomfortable about having to threaten Edmure yet he did it. The whole point on using his child to make Edmure accept the deal is that he knew he wouldn't gamble his child's life and would agree. Had he said no, he would have to kill his child and also Edmure.

[Dofs]

Didn't Jaime attempt to kill Bran and try to kill Arya? I doubt Ned would do it, but Jaime? No prob. Again, we have seen him do it. I consider chucking Bran from the window the same thing as killing him. He meant to kill him and basically ended his life replacing it with a tortured pointless existence where he can't have a woman or a son or win battles or anything. He also thinks "gee it sure would be a bummer if I had to execute my squire the Piper. That might ruin my entire afternoon". At no point does he consider not executing the kid, just that he would prefer not to have to give him to Payne.

Jaime is disgusted by himself that he tried to maim/kill Arya.

[Julia H.]

I'm not so sure Jon wouldn't execute a hostage if it needed to be done. Like if the option were execute one hostage to prevent anarchy and chaos in the north I bet he would, even though he would be torn up about it.

UnJon on the other hand would chop up all those little wildling shits if given half a reason. Maybe.

I hope we'll never seen an UnJon.

As for the living Jon, I guess he would feel he has already failed if he ever got into a situation where an innocent child's life would be the price of peace. We have seen him protect children before, even the child of his enemy, and we know what he has learned from Ned about looking into the eyes of the person sentenced to death.

Back on topic, Jaime's record is against him in this respect, but his general behaviour towards the defeated lords (not only Edmure but also Lord Blackwood) shows a change of attitude, and we know that he feels a certain sympathy towards Edmure. Besides, he also knows that hostages are needed alive.

[chrisdaw]

Assessing a redemption arc when the whole "redemption" part has only just begun. Why?

[JohnathanSnew]

I think it's possible to aknowledge that Jaime's arc is one of redemption and still believe that he is beyond redemption. The important thing is not whether he succeeds or not, but the process of self-examination and the journey. Jaime did some awful things that should not be forgiven, and I don't blame readers who hold this opinion. However, the redemption arc of Jaime is a separate thing that doesn't depend on how someone personally feels about him. It's a journey Jaime is taking and it's happening. That's pretty objective. How you feel about it is subjective.

Sorry to revive an old thread. I found this post while doing a Google search, and honestly, I think this is one the best descriptions of Jaime's situation re: redemption. As GRRM has now said that he wanted to explore the concept of redemption with Jaime's character, I don't think anyone can reasonably deny that there are aspects of redemption within his story, however that doesn't mean that everyone needs agree that it's something Jaime can or has achieved.

I've always been intrigued by how much debate this topic attracts in this fandom, but I definetely think that both for and against arguments have their merits.

[Resonant Frequency]

Word, t.s.
Personally, I can't stand him and I find it inconceivable that so many people now cite him as one of their favorite characters. He seems to embody everything that is wrong in westeros.

[Fat Mac]

Word, t.s.
Personally, I can't stand him and I find it inconceivable that so many people now cite him as one of their favorite characters. He seems to embody everything that is wrong in westeros.

 

Jaime's extremely likable. Hence why people like him. He's a fascinating and complex character, which is what most people look for in their favorites.

 

 

To the thread, I don't think Jaime has done much to redeem himself, honestly, but I think he might in the future. He's done a few things that shows he's not at heart a terrible person, I think. I don't know how people can judge his "redemption" when we're only halfway through his story arc.

[Resonant Frequency]

 
Jaime's extremely likable. Hence why people like him. He's a fascinating and complex character, which is what most people look for in their favorites.
 
 
To the thread, I don't think Jaime has done much to redeem himself, honestly, but I think he might in the future. He's done a few things that shows he's not at heart a terrible person, I think. I don't know how people can judge his "redemption" when we're only halfway through his story arc.

I see nothing fascinating, complex, or likable about him whatsoever. He's basically a spoiled brat who has sex with his sister and hurts a lot of people that can't even defend themselves.

His reputation is mostly a result of lannister propaganda, as evidenced by his lack of accomplishments in the kingsguard book.

[Lord Wraith]

 

Jaime's extremely likable. Hence why people like him. He's a fascinating and complex character, which is what most people look for in their favorites.

 

 

To the thread, I don't think Jaime has done much to redeem himself, honestly, but I think he might in the future. He's done a few things that shows he's not at heart a terrible person, I think. I don't know how people can judge his "redemption" when we're only halfway through his story arc.

 

:agree: well than and the interesting parallel he serves to Tyrion. One is getting darker and the other lighter.  

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Jaime's actions and his wish to change exist for a reason: to cause a reaction.

Jaime is a character that did terrible deeds and now, he's regretting it. Whatever the reason is, he wants to come clean despite his crimes.

If we see this and say "no, I will never see him under a good light because he was evil from the beginning!!!", the one wrong here is not Jaime. Because Jaime does not exist. We do.