Jump to content

How can Jaime justify his kingslaying?


Hodor's Speechwriter

Recommended Posts

Yes, he had options to overpower & subdue the King. I might think otherwise if his father wasn't sacking the city at the time.

 

How is overpowering and subduing the king to wait for (possible rebel) reinforcements upholding the KG vows? To protect the king? :huh:

 

The whole point of the episode is that Jaime was placed in an impossible situation. That's why we are endlessly arguing about it here on this forum.

 

Die defending your king, who'll likely be killed anyway by somebody else, and risk the whole population of KL (and your father's troops & other friendly troops) dying in a particularly nasty way? Or kill the crazy psycho shit before he can do any more damage? Or hand the crazy psycho to someone else so that they can likely kill him? Whatever you do, you're screwed. You're breaking one vow or another, your honour is going to be shit anyway.

 

I'm not saying the young Jaime necessarily thought it through like this - in fact, he most probably did not, since he was know for rash action, not thinking - but at that chaotic moment some instinct kicked in. Try to save one psychotic shit who revels in torturing and killing people, or save half a million innocents? Swoosh! Done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jaime was in a no win situation.
1) Kingslaying

2) Kinslaying
3) Oathbreaker/Deserter/Craven

4) Dead

 

In no way was Jaime capable of winning glory or honor.
Rossart was NOT the only one who knew of the plan to burn King's Landing, Jaime hunted down the rest of the people in the days following.
I think he has the moral highground here, he did the only thing he could to be relatively sure that his father and everyone else in King's Landing would live.
Options 2-4 don't by any means guarantee that King's Landing and everyone in it don't burn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why Robert didn't just "relieve" him of his vows. He "punishes" Jaime simbollically by kicking him out of the Kingsguard, and at the same time he gives Tywin back his heir. That would have been as big a reward to the Lannisters as Robert's marriage to Cersei.


Two reasons.

First - Robert was thirsty for targ blood. Anyone who killed a targ was to be rewarded highly. See: Tywin and the Targ Dragonspawn.

Second - Cersei probably insisted (made a massive fuss about it). Robert tends to cave at the slightest pressure to avoid dealing with her.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't Jaime eventually confide why he slayed the mad king?
Jaime recounted being horrified to witness Aerys's ii having Lord Rickard burned alive by wildfire as Brandon was forced to watch. He had his fill of the mans behavior and decided to do something about it when he had the chance. His conscious overwrestled his vow.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two reasons.

First - Robert was thirsty for targ blood. Anyone who killed a targ was to be rewarded highly. See: Tywin and the Targ Dragonspawn.

Second - Cersei probably insisted (made a massive fuss about it). Robert tends to cave at the slightest pressure to avoid dealing with her.

 

Well, Cersei can't really count yet. Ned was still to go relieve the siege at SE and find Lyanna. Jaime killed Aerys and Tywin had Elia and her children butchered before Ned's arrival at KL, which was before Robert's arrival there. Robert and Ned have a fight over those who killed Elia and children. Ned leaves to aid Stannis at SE, and then in search for Lyanna. Only after he returns to KL with the news about Lyanna's fate, is a marriage arranged between Robert and Cersei. So before that point Cersei's opinion meant shit to Robert. He basically hailed butchers and oath-breakers (who didn't give an explanation) for reason 1 only; which is quite shocking to Ned, because one of his examples would have been Cregan Stark who supported the Blacks and yet still tried the murderers of the king of the greens in the hour of the wolf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more point. The topic of this thread asks "How can Jaime justify his kingslaying?"

 

Jaime has never tried to justify his deed to the world at large. He's been silent on the thing. Brienne is the only person that we readers know of that has heard "his side of the story". Not even Cersei has heard it (as far as we know). Jaime is not trying to justify it to the world.

 

That doesn't mean he's not trying to justify it to himself, inside his head, since he obviously is when we get inside his head in ASOS. And he's going around in the same kind of circles as we here on this forum. We readers are witnessing his struggle.

 

For Jaime, it was a lose-lose situation, and something that has shaped his life since, from the outside (being called "Kingslayer" etc.) and in the inside (not being Arthur Dayne but the Smiling Knight). The idealistic, bright young thing becoming an arrogant (=defensive) shitbucket, and then finally trying to redeem himself in some way. It is notable that in his Riverlands soujourns he thinks before he acts. A very big change to the old rash, arrogant Jaime.

 

Anyway, the moniker "Kingslayer" was just too lovely for the other rebel lords and knights and even smallfolk to pass up on. If Jaime Lannister is the kingslayer, the guilty one, no-one else is, right? By calling Jaime "Kingslayer", they whitewashed themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His own father was sacking the city at the time. At what point was Jaime in danger of later being executed for handing him over? :wideeyed:

Sorry, I meant Aerys would be executed. Basically, you propose that there were two alternatives.

 

Jaime kills Aerys. He kills the king he swore to protect.

 

Jaime captures Aerys, hands him over to the rebels who will execute him. He indirectly kills the king he swore to protect.

 

Why do you think the second one is the better option? Why would it save his reputation? He betrays Aerys in both cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever heard of a man named Stanislav Petrov? Well you should have, because back in the 80s he broke from protocol and saved every damn person on this forum (and everyone else in the world too).

 

Rules and vows are only useful to a point; only the most tragic of fools would let everyone burn to protect their own honor.

 

Absolutely correct, which is why I think Jaime should take the advice Tyrion gives Jon basically - wear the name with pride. Except he doesn't do that in his mind. He hates the monicker, and since he intended to sneak of before anyone else found out, he wanted to protect his honor in name. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I meant Aerys would be executed. Basically, you propose that there were two alternatives.

 

Jaime kills Aerys. He kills the king he swore to protect.

 

Jaime captures Aerys, hands him over to the rebels who will execute him. He indirectly kills the king he swore to protect.

 

Why do you think the second one is the better option? Why would it save his reputation? He betrays Aerys in both cases.

Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By not being pissy about being judged and saying "Stark he was going to blow up kl look fire and stuff" instead of "how can he judge me it's not my fault wawawa"

He is kinda right though. By what right does Ned judge him? Ned rebelled against his rightful king, he was basically a traitor himself. And even without knowledge about the wildfire plot, he knew that:

 

- Aerys was mad

- Aerys liked to burn people alive (Stark people, for example)

- Jaime's own father was sacking the city

 

What was Jaime supposed to do? Protect the mad king? Fight against his father's soldiers? Kill his father? Die protecting Aerys?

 

Jaime had just as many reasons to rebel against Aerys as Ned did. Yet Ned condemned him from the very beginning, he didn't care about any explanations..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is overpowering and subduing the king to wait for (possible rebel) reinforcements upholding the KG vows? To protect the king? :huh:
 
The whole point of the episode is that Jaime was placed in an impossible situation. That's why we are endlessly arguing about it here on this forum.
 
Die defending your king, who'll likely be killed anyway by somebody else, and risk the whole population of KL (and your father's troops & other friendly troops) dying in a particularly nasty way? Or kill the crazy psycho shit before he can do any more damage? Or hand the crazy psycho to someone else so that they can likely kill him? Whatever you do, you're screwed. You're breaking one vow or another, your honour is going to be shit anyway.
 
I'm not saying the young Jaime necessarily thought it through like this - in fact, he most probably did not, since he was know for rash action, not thinking - but at that chaotic moment some instinct kicked in. Try to save one psychotic shit who revels in torturing and killing people, or save half a million innocents? Swoosh! Done.

Did you not notice I agreed with your assessment of the situation? I never said Jaime could have completely upheld his vows. I said he could have not killed him and made himself a kingslayer in the eyes of the realm. The rest is moot & already discussed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't Jaime eventually confide why he slayed the mad king?
Jaime recounted being horrified to witness Aerys's ii having Lord Rickard burned alive by wildfire as Brandon was forced to watch. He had his fill of the mans behavior and decided to do something about it when he had the chance. His conscious overwrestled his vow.

 

Brienne is the only person he's confided in, as far as we readers know.  In the bathhouse in Harrenhall. In the end he collapses and Brienne calls for help for the Kingslayer, and just before he passes out, Jaime thinks, "Jaime. My name is Jaime." I thought that a very poignant moment and that's when I first started to "get" Jaime.

 

Brienne is also probably the only person Jaime has told (between the lines) how horrified and traumatised he was about Aerys's actions. When it seems imminent that Brienne will get raped by Vargo Hoat's men, he tells her to "go away inside", "that's what I did". He then tells how he had to witness Aerys roasting Rickard Stark with Brandon Stark strangling himself to death trying to save his father. Jaime was obviously very traumatised by that event, and coped by adopting an arrogant, devil-may-care cynical attitude. He was a teenager when this all happened. Now he's in his thirties and finally confronting and coming to terms with everything that went on.

 

Uugh, I'm beginning to sound like an amateur psychologist. :blushing: :frown5:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is kinda right though. By what right does Ned judge him? Ned rebelled against his rightful king, he was basically a traitor himself. And even without knowledge about the wildfire plot, he knew that:
 
- Aerys was mad
- Aerys liked to burn people alive (Stark people, for example)
- Jaime's own father was sacking the city
 
What was Jaime supposed to do? Protect the mad king? Fight against his father's soldiers? Kill his father? Die protecting Aerys?
 
Jaime had just as many reasons to rebel against Aerys as Ned did. Yet Ned condemned him from the very beginning, he didn't care about any explanations..


Ned didn't swear a single oath to Aerys jaime swore to die for him. Killing Aerys was right but being a childish bastard about an honourable guy giving you a nasty look because your dishonourable and deciding not to warn/explain about a city full of wildfire wasn't. If jaime did tell him btw lord start enough of the evil eye I had to kill him he was planning on buying everything I doubt ned and the rest still think he's a piece of shit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1.  Why didn't he overpower Aerys?

 

Several problems present themselves.  Jaime has just killed psycho fire-nut (Rossart, right?)  He turns to Aerys. 

 

First, is there any real difference between detaining the King, and killing him?  I guess the name could have been different.  They could have called him "King-Capturerer".  It's still a betrayal, and in Jaime's mind, in for a penny..... 

 

Second,  I can say from experience that physically overpowering a psycho old man with long fingernails is a lot more difficult than it seems.  Psychos have unlimited energy for some reason, like people who are high on stimulants.  Sometimes they are psycho AND high on stimulants, in which case good luck.  In such cases, I'm sure a well trained individual COULD overpower another.  But it greatly depends on the level of training in specific forms of unarmed combat.  As far as I know, Kingsguard and Knights in general are not well trained in unarmed takedown moves in order to spare the life of the perp. 

 

Third.  Jaime probably had been dreaming of possibly killing Aerys for awhile.  Here is his excuse/chance.  It's Jaime's way of executing justice and "cleansing" him of some of his earlier inaction that bothered him. 

 

Fourth, it's been brought up that detaining the King, (in some sort of headlock, for how long?) created possible problems.  Jaime had no idea how long he would have to hold Aerys.  There are guys running around everywhere.  All it takes is for one or more to show up and Aerys screams orders for the pyromancers to light up the town. 

 

2.  Why did Jaime cop to the assassination?  Why didn't he admit the cause?

 

I don't think it ever occurred to Jaime to lie about it.  He first admitted his guilt to Lannister stooges.  I think that it was a combination of honor AND pride.  By the time Ned showed up, it was a combination of both.  I don't know if pride can be categorized as stupid if it helps you do the right thing. 

 

3.  Was Jaime right, or obliged to break his oaths in order to do the "right thing"?

 

I will say yes, but their are serious problems with saying yes.  As soon as you say "yes", you grant a KG Knight the ability to kill the King any time he believes the King is immoral in some way.  Are these decisions that the Kingsguard knights should be making?  By themselves, singularly?  Does a single Secret Service Agent have the right to cap the President if he goes nuts and orders nuclear Armageddon?  You've created a group of people, entrusted with protecting the sovereign, with the ability to kill the sovereign.  You've created the Praetorian Guard, which creates problems. 

 

I will straddle the line and say that Jaime did the right thing, but should have been punished for breaking his oath.  Much in the same way that Bloodraven may have done the right thing but was exiled for breaking a truce.  Jaime should have been sent to the Wall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I meant Aerys would be executed. Basically, you propose that there were two alternatives.
 
Jaime kills Aerys. He kills the king he swore to protect.
 
Jaime captures Aerys, hands him over to the rebels who will execute him. He indirectly kills the king he swore to protect.
 
Why do you think the second one is the better option? Why would it save his reputation? He betrays Aerys in both cases.

  
Because one is killing the king and the other is surrendering to own father. Which would you want to be known for?

Absolutely correct, which is why I think Jaime should take the advice Tyrion gives Jon basically - wear the name with pride. Except he doesn't do that in his mind. He hates the monicker, and since he intended to sneak of before anyone else found out, he wanted to protect his honor in name.

Which is EXACTLY why he should have detained the king instead of kill him. Own you actions. If he felt justified he should have explained it and not let it cause bitterness for the last 15 years: If he didn't feel justified, he shouldn't have done it the way he did.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

More importantly why the fuck did he take credit.
*Ned rolls up to a dead Aerys and a deserted throne room*
Jamie shows up
Jamie:Shit...someone killed the king while I was off to kill my father as Aerys ordered.Darn.

Hahaha!

 

I love your dialogue. 

 

Jaime already sullied his honor by killing him, and I don't think he wanted to stoop even lower by not owning up to it. I think it shows his strength that he was willing to sacrifice his reputation by admitting what he'd done and not even trying to justify it by explaining why. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...