Jaime Lannister and Guest Rights

[James Fenimore Cooper XXII]

Several concepts came up during the discussions going on at the topics listed below:

 

 

I don't want to hijack the topics from the two gentlemen because my point is not directly related and it made sense to me to create my own topic.  Like I said, this is not directly related, but some ideas came up that deserve to be discussed.  Two important concepts that keep getting brought up:

1. Guest rights
2. Double-standards

I am seeing double-standards at work in the attitudes of the fans.  One of the biggest violators of guest rights is Jaime Lannister.  But no one seems to bring this up.  One side of the fandom hate the Freys for what they did to the Starks.  But many seem to brush the violation aside for Jaime Lannister.   What Jaime Lannister did to Bran Stark is not a trivial matter.  Bran was just in the wrong place, at the wrong time.  Jaime and Cersei were in the wrong place, at the wrong time, doing the wrong thing.  Seriously, FCS, Jaime is a Kingsguard who was supposed to be loyal to Robert!  The attempted murder of Bran is a gross violation of guest rights.  

Jaime's violation is in many ways much more offensive compared to what Lord Walder, Bolton, and Tywin did with the red wedding.  The red wedding is a sneaky war tactic against other fighting men.  Robb Stark is not an innocent who was just at the wrong place at the wrong time.  He was a full participant in the atrocities of the war of the five fools.  He forced the Freys to make a choice and then betrayed them.  One of the discussion contributors made mention that Robb Stark only came back to make amends because he needed Walder's help again.  Another contributor rightly pointed out, Robb Stark knew the value of Stevron Frey and knew the man fought bravely for him.  And he still disrespected the Freys.  No apology would have come from the Stark camp to the Freys if Robb had no more need of their help.  Robb Stark was not undeserving of what he got.  

All I am saying is, there is double-standards when it comes to how the fandom on this forum judge the violators of guest rights.  Jaime Lannister deserves as much derision from the fans as Roose, Walder, and Tywin get.  More, in my opinion.  

[Sensenmenn]

I'm interested but how is Jaime involved? 

[James Fenimore Cooper XXII]

16 minutes ago, Sensenmenn said:

I'm interested but how is Jaime involved? 

Please read on.  I made some changes to the topic.  Thanks

[Makk]

I don't think anyone is really questioning whether what Jaime did was evil. It undoubtedly was. But if you want a comparison, I think the Red Wedding was much worse. Jaime took action impulsively to protect the life of himself, his lover/sister and his three children.

The Freys plotted out a betrayal for vengeance of besmirched honor.

 

[Ylath's Snout]

1 hour ago, Makk said:

Jaime took action impulsively to protect the life of himself, his lover/sister and his three children.

The Freys plotted out a betrayal for vengeance of besmirched honor.

Manslaughter vs premeditated murder. Both are wrong but one is wronger.

[Ralphis Baratheon]

Perhaps the reason is because Jaime lost his sword hand that he used to push young Bran out of the tower. So in a sense he sort of received a punishment for that action. Jaime was the best swordsman in Westeros, it was his identity, so losing his hand the way he did was worse for him then it would be for the average son of a Great House. 

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

4 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

But many seem to brush the violation aside for Jaime Lannister. 

I don't know anyone who does. If anything, in the case of Jaime and Bran, the reason people don't mention guest right is because most would consider throwing a child out of a window because he saw you having sex with your sister so demonstrably wrong on so many different levels, that tagging on a complaint about a violation of guest right would seem unnecessary.

If Ned had found out that Jaime had done it, I very much doubt he would have said "In my OWN HOUSE!"

[Ylath's Snout]

6 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

If Ned had found out that Jaime had done it

So that really seems to me like one of those "this what if changes everything to the point where nothing of the original story remains" buuut I had a though. If Cersei and Jaime were uncover in Winterfell I think it is fair to say that Robert would off them both right away. Assuming Tywin rises in rebellion would the Martells sit out the fight or would the side with Robert for a chance of revenge against Tywin or would working with Bobby B be unacceptable to them?

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

6 minutes ago, Ylath's Snout said:

Assuming Tywin rises in rebellion would the Martells sit out the fight or would the side with Robert for a chance of revenge against Tywin or would working with Bobby B be unacceptable to them?

That's probably a separate thread in its own right, but we kind of know what they'd do. When the Lannisters went to war with the Starks and Baratheons after Roberts death, they sat it out.

[Ylath's Snout]

Just now, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

That's probably a separate thread in its own right, but we kind of know what they'd do.

Sure but it felt like too weak of a What If Scenario for a thread of its own.

2 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

When the Lannisters went to war with the Starks and Baratheons after Roberts death, they sat it out.

Good point.

[Three-Fingered Pete]

8 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

All I am saying is, there is double-standards when it comes to how the fandom on this forum judge the violators of guest rights.  Jaime Lannister deserves as much derision from the fans as Roose, Walder, and Tywin get.  More, in my opinion.  

Jaime also violated his oath as a knight, but at that point in his life he didn't hold oaths or traditions/rights in very high regard.

The thing about Jaime compared to Robb, Roose, Walder or Tywin is that we get to see him evolve through his POV. We never experience those other character's minds firsthand and they also don't evolve as characters at all. Robb never gets the chance to as his one big mistake is his last and the others might as well have been cast in iron for their immutability as people. Also, Robb's impulsive arrogance makes him off-putting, even when you want to root for him and his cause. Robb suffered from stupid protagonist syndrome and he paid for it. He knew the situation and the possible costs of reneging on his agreement, yet went ahead anyway and then underestimated a man known to be petulant and spiteful.

Jaime, on the other hand, goes through a very personal arc of redemption as we see him begin to reevaluate himself and his worth as a person after the loss of his hand. We forgive his transgressions much like we forgive Tyrion's because despite ourselves we want to like the guy; especially as he starts to question and dislike his sister when he begins to see her more clearly. We can relate to his distant relationship with his children since he can't openly acknowledge them, didn't really want them in the first place and has been emotionally cut off from them by their own mother's clinging hostility toward absolutely anyone she perceives as a threat to them, including Jaime.

Jaime, like Tyrion, has a tragic side to attach the reader to him. He suffers the same domineering patriarch that drove him to do what he wanted to rather than what his father wanted, only to be trapped into the same dynamic with his sister, for whom he was blinded by love. The fact that he begins to realize this and move away is what gives him his sympathetic aura. Compare this with Robb, who had all the benefits of a caring and attentive upbringing filled with legends, traditions and instructions in oaths of honor and fealty, only to betray all of that on the first opportunity presented to him because he was horny. He then compounds that problem by making the strategically inane decision to side with the family of his new consort instead of the petulantly spiteful fellow.

[Bael's Bastard]

I can't say I've ever seen anyone defend what Jaime did to Bran as OK, but there is a notable difference between what the Freys did and what Jaime did.

The Freys contrived the wedding for the specific purpose of getting the Starks under their roof so they could murder them, and proceeded to carry out that murder even after Catelyn made an issue of guest rights with Lord Walder. The Freys didn't just violate guest rights, but used them to lull the Starks into a false sense of security so they could then murder them.

Jaime and Cersei were caught by Bran in an act that is considered a monstrous sin by both the old gods and new, which likely would have led to them both being executed, and attempted to murder Bran in order to prevent it becoming known. All in all, Jaime compounded the sins of incest and murder, though any violation of guest rights was probably done without thinking.

This is a very bizarre thread, as I don't really see anyone suggest that Jaime is innocent or somehow absolved of all the crimes he has committed. I think some, perhaps many, readers would like to see him do something (or some things) for the good, but that doesn't mean that he is somehow innocent of sins and/or crimes.

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

11 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

This is a very bizarre thread, as I don't really see anyone suggest that Jaime is innocent or somehow absolved of all the crimes he has committed. I think some, perhaps many, readers would like to see him do something (or some things) for the good, but that doesn't mean that he is somehow innocent of sins and/or crimes.

Exactly.

The whole point of Jaime is that he is a man who, when we first meet him, we consider an absolute villain for doing deplorable things, and as time moves on we at least grow to understand him better, if not sympathise with him. If as a reader you blithely think that everything he does is brilliant, you really are missing the point.   

[Rufus Snow]

Jaime starts off the series with shit for honour, wallowing in the deepest pits of Westerosi opprobrium. At this point individual crimes barely register against his monstrous record. Most of his crimes seem to have been committed in the 'heat of the moment' due to a total lack of self-reflection or thought for consequences. However, his arc is one of redemption with a steep, steep climb out of the moral mire. I think most readers understand that so don't obsess over individual acts, just take it as read that he's a shitbag at the beginning....

[Davjos]

I think a possible reason for the fact that people see Jaime as more redeemable is the fact that the question: Would I kill 1 kid to save my 3 kids, myself and the woman I’ve loved for years? is harder to answer than: would I kill thousands of people for the breaking of a (kind of empty) promise. Jaime’s motivation for a despicable act is more easy to identify with. 

[Chris Mormont]

13 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

Robb Stark was not undeserving of what he got.  

Really, so the punishment for breaking off an engagement is you and your friends are invited to a wedding and then killed?

And what do you mean by "the Freys were forced to make a choice"?  Which choice, to join Robb and go to the aid of Riverun, or to set up an assassination of a king?

[Universal Sword Donor]

4 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I can't say I've ever seen anyone defend what Jaime did to Bran as OK, but there is a notable difference between what the Freys did and what Jaime did.

I'll be the first to admit I'd have done the same as him if my (non incest created) family were in danger. My family versus a young boy I hardly know? That's hardly a decision. That, however, doesn't mean it is OK.

4 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

The Freys contrived the wedding for the specific purpose of getting the Starks under their roof so they could murder them, and proceeded to carry out that murder even after Catelyn made an issue of guest rights with Lord Walder. The Freys didn't just violate guest rights, but used them to lull the Starks into a false sense of security so they could then murder them.

Jaime and Cersei were caught by Bran in an act that is considered a monstrous sin by both the old gods and new, which likely would have led to them both being executed, and attempted to murder Bran in order to prevent it becoming known. All in all, Jaime compounded the sins of incest and murder, though any violation of guest rights was probably done without thinking.

This is a very bizarre thread, as I don't really see anyone suggest that Jaime is innocent or somehow absolved of all the crimes he has committed. I think some, perhaps many, readers would like to see him do something (or some things) for the good, but that doesn't mean that he is somehow innocent of sins and/or crimes.

Basically this

[Son of Man]

5 hours ago, Rufus Snow said:

Jaime starts off the series with shit for honour, wallowing in the deepest pits of Westerosi opprobrium. At this point individual crimes barely register against his monstrous record. Most of his crimes seem to have been committed in the 'heat of the moment' due to a total lack of self-reflection or thought for consequences. However, his arc is one of redemption with a steep, steep climb out of the moral mire. I think most readers understand that so don't obsess over individual acts, just take it as read that he's a shitbag at the beginning....

I don't believe Jaime is capable of redemption.  He's playing at honor right now.  Let's see if he is truly serious about it.  I hope he fails at it and returns to his former self, and then gets cooked for his crimes.

[Dorian Martell's son]

17 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

All I am saying is, there is double-standards when it comes to how the fandom on this forum judge the violators of guest rights.  Jaime Lannister deserves as much derision from the fans as Roose, Walder, and Tywin get.  More, in my opinion.  

He loses his kids, his father, his brother, his hand, and his ability to do the one thing he was good at. He paid for his violations 

[Ylath's Snout]

6 minutes ago, Dorian Martell's son said:

He loses his kids, his father, his brother, his hand, and his ability to do the one thing he was good at. He paid for his violations 

They don't punish guest right breakers like they used to. Nowadays it is all "boo hoo you're crippled and your family is in shambles.". Why back in my days you break the Guest Right them gods would turn you into a monster rat and compel you to eat your own children for all eternity.

- Old Nan, from inside a Weirdwood.

(The above quote may or may be totally fake)