Jump to content

Jaime Lannister and Guest Rights


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Ylath's Snout said:

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)

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dorian Martell's son

If Westeros found out Jaime attempted to murder Bran, even if they don't know about Cersei, I believe he'd be dead, or at the Wall if he was very lucky. 

But wanting the readers to continue to hate him after gaining his POV is probably not possible. Bran not only lived, but may have needed that push to become a greenseer (which may end up being pretty important). And Jaime's most despicible acts are things most people might do in his situation. Who'd let the Mad King burn the city to keep a promise?

Joffrey was just an insecure 14 year old boy, but I'd venture to guess most readers celebrated his cold blooded, public (guest right breaking) murder. But I wonder what we'd think if we got his POV?

Maybe if we got Walder's POV we would feel his pain, but we don't, so we don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dmfn said:

Joffrey was just an insecure 14 year old boy, but I'd venture to guess most readers celebrated his cold blooded, public (guest right breaking) murder. But I wonder what we'd think if we got his POV?

Maybe if we got Walder's POV we would feel his pain, but we don't, so we don't.

I don't know, maybe a Joff PoW would make him less sympathetic. There aren't a lot of things that would make what he does to Sansa over the books even vaguely reasonable. Reading about him think "she deserved it because X" does not seem appealing to me.The Purple Wedding from his PoW might have resulted in some sympathy for a dying in a horrible way but having Cersei freaking out over his death already does that.

Walder's "Pain" bah. He is a well of nobleman that choose safety over reputation during the Rebellion and now he gets snubbed by his liege lord. Boo hoo. It isn't like half his kids were killed by Hoster in retaliation or anything. Not to mention having the Red Wedding spoiled by Walder think about it for half a book would have been pretty bad compared to how it was written.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ylath's Snout said:

I don't know, maybe a Joff PoW would make him less sympathetic. There aren't a lot of things that would make what he does to Sansa over the books even vaguely reasonable. Reading about him think "she deserved it because X" does not seem appealing to me.The Purple Wedding from his PoW might have resulted in some sympathy for a dying in a horrible way but having Cersei freaking out over his death already does that.

Walder's "Pain" bah. He is a well of nobleman that choose safety over reputation during the Rebellion and now he gets snubbed by his liege lord. Boo hoo. It isn't like half his kids were killed by Hoster in retaliation or anything. Not to mention having the Red Wedding spoiled by Walder think about it for half a book would have been pretty bad compared to how it was written.

Joff was a monster, don't get me wrong. And Walder, too. 

Of course it wouldn't make narritve sense to have those POVs, but for Jaime it was the difference between hate and love. I didn't get that feeling for Theon when we got his POV. I mean, I feel bad for the guy, but I'm not gonna shed a tear when/if he dies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jaime is a dirtbag and we all know that.  His breaking of guest rights is one of his lesser crimes.  Some do give him a pass but some rake him over the coals with it.   am not really that interested in his story.  At least not enough to go on a long debate over his breakage of guest rights.  I hope we get to see him executed and that is that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/17/2018 at 12:36 AM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

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.  

:agree:

Readers should be criticizing Jaime more than they do Walder Frey and Roose Bolton.  Jaime was betraying his king for years.  Robb provoke and insulted the Freys.  Jaime had no reason to disrespect Robert.  He's just an immoral man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you think about it, it does make sense.

Jaime was a guest at Winterfell-check

Bran was a member of the hosts family-check. So not an uninvited random boy.

Jaime broke bread with the hosts-check.

The crime was committed in the hosts' home-check.

So I guess the guest right button is on.

And when you analyse what happens to Jaime in a short period of time after this event, it might occur to one that it was exactly the violation of guest right that caused all his trouble. 

Because: Jaime breaks his vows to Aerys: no punishment

Jaime cuckolds the new king and sires incest bastards via his sister: Well, nothing happenes after this either after so many years.

It's guest right that is put so much emphasize on by the author. Not incest, and not even kingslaying, obviously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎8‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 9:35 AM, MostlyMoody said:

Nobody is defending Jaime and what he did to Bran.
Nobody questioned the Red Wedding until a guy with a Frey profile pic started a topic defending it.

We really are starved for content here, aren't we?

Agreed. These threads are getting annoying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The Sunland Lord said:

When you think about it, it does make sense.

Jaime was a guest at Winterfell-check

Bran was a member of the hosts family-check. So not an uninvited random boy.

Jaime broke bread with the hosts-check.

The crime was committed in the hosts' home-check.

So I guess the guest right button is on.

And when you analyse what happens to Jaime in a short period of time after this event, it might occur to one that it was exactly the violation of guest right that caused all his trouble. 

Because: Jaime breaks his vows to Aerys: no punishment

Jaime cuckolds the new king and sires incest bastards via his sister: Well, nothing happenes after this either after so many years.

It's guest right that is put so much emphasize on by the author. Not incest, and not even kingslaying, obviously. 

Agree.  And you wanna know something else.  Those in the fan communities who bash Catelyn Stark endlessly for taking Tyrion into custody should really take a closer look at the root cause of the War of the 5 kings.  Yeah, Catelyn's reaction was not the smartest of moves but she was right about the Lannisters, she just got the wrong one.  The Lannisters attacked a Stark in their own castle and tried to murder him.  The Lannisters did it.  The only thing Catelyn was wrong about was which Lannnister.  I blame Jaime more for starting the war.  He is more guilty than Catelyn.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

I'm aware of that. I'm a big believer in not allowing nonsense to go unchallenged though. 

Would you find the thread annoying if it were a criticism of Catelyn, Daenerys, Arya, Jon Snow?  

See, I think a lot of it depends on how we feel about the character being criticized or whose behavior is being questioned.  In my opinion, the o/p posted an interesting topic for discussion.  I believe you and I very much differ in the characters we like.  I am basing that on some of your posts that I have come across.  A post that you might find annoying, I may find interesting.  

I have no problem discussing why Jaime's behavior should be judged as harshly as that of Walder Frey and Roose Bolton.  I think it is a fair topic for discussion.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Buell Rider said:

Agree.  And you wanna know something else.  Those in the fan communities who bash Catelyn Stark endlessly for taking Tyrion into custody should really take a closer look at the root cause of the War of the 5 kings.  Yeah, Catelyn's reaction was not the smartest of moves but she was right about the Lannisters, she just got the wrong one.  The Lannisters attacked a Stark in their own castle and tried to murder him.  The Lannisters did it.  The only thing Catelyn was wrong about was which Lannnister.  I blame Jaime more for starting the war.  He is more guilty than Catelyn.  

You're right. I never saw it this way.

Jaime pushed Bran and not just he did so, but it caused more consequences.

Robert made that insensitive comment about Brandon in front of Jaime's son, Joffrey, who gave in to the idea that Bran should be murdered because he can't walk. 

Jaime indeed had a role in causing the realm bleed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jaime vs. Catelyn

I am one of the members here who criticize Catelyn for arresting Tyrion and thus sparking the WotFKs.  Sometimes a silly act is just as harmful as an act of evil.  Taking it all in consideration though, there is no doubt in my own mind that Catelyn is a better person than Jaime.  It is not even a close contest.  Catelyn was willing to give Tyrion as fair a trial as she could.  Jaime would have taken the head off anyone who crossed his family at a mere suspicion.  He's a bad dude and there is no way around to excuse him.  Looking at the actual spark to the war and it is Jaime's attack on Bran.  That is what set Catelyn on the path to find the truth.  And what mother would not.

NOTE:  I have watched the program from The Order Of The Green Hand, called Catelyn Sucks.  I have to admit now.  I cringe a little.  I had to ask myself if I am somehow guilty of minor misogyny because a lot of the men did horrible things that far surpassed Catelyn's poor judgment on Tyrion and these men get a free pass from the readership! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Lord of the Crossing said:

I have watched the program from The Order Of The Green Hand, called Catelyn Sucks. 

Order of the Ding-bats more like, those fools make no sense.

A lore/theory video made by Robogarda has more credibility than them, and his only skill is his Marge Simpson impression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, Jaime violated guest right. But what he did also falls into the category of "attempting to murder a 7-year-old child". I guess most readers just tend to focus on this aspect of his crime - which does not mean he is absolved. IIRC, when we first read about this incident, guest right had not been discussed in the book yet, we simply didn't know how important this sacred law was in this world, but it was easy for most readers (at least I hope so) to understand how horrible Jaime's act was even without the guest right aspect. In AGoT the morality of innocent children being the victims of the adults' game is a serious question. We find out this was a question that caused Ned to quarrel with his best friend. Ned literally dies due to his strong conviction that children must be protected at all costs. The life against an innocent child against other lives is a question that comes up several times in the novels. This makes me think that at this point the reader is intended to think of Jaime primarily as a (quasi-) child-murderer, not as a violator of guest right. 

At the same time, the Red Wedding is narrated with "guest right violation" written all over it. Catelyn herself calls our attention to the importance of this tradition, and a few chapters later we see Bran recall the story of the Rat Cook, in which it is specifically stated that "A man has a right to his vengeance. But he slew a guest beneath his roof, and that the gods cannot forgive." (In other words, Walder Frey has a right to his vengeance, but not like this.)

Also, my personal opinion is that the Red Wedding happens exactly in the kind of circumstances for which the law of guest right must have been originally invented - to make reconciliation, peace talks and the forging of alliances possible without having to fear a trap all the time. After all, your friends or family members are not so likely to kill you when you are visiting them. But guest right says that you only have the right to kill your enemies in the battlefield, and not when you have invited them into your house on pretext of talks or reconciliation. Guest right makes sure that talks are really talks, not traps, and when guest right is no longer respected, it threatens the functioning of the whole society. 

It seems the reader is meant to think of the Red Wedding primarily as a violation of guest right and of Jaime's crime as primarily an attempted murder of an innocent child (which also happens to be guest right violation, yes). Two different crimes, both are monstrous. One is premeditated, the other one is not; one is motivated by revenge, the other is motivated by fear, and so on. I don't agree that the victims deserved their fate in either case though. But we can debate which is worse. We can also compare them to see the differences and the similarities. Just seeing the differences does not mean there is a double standard though. There are differences, after all.

By the way, the Purple Wedding also involves the violation of guest right. The characters on page don't think of it though because they are more preoccupied with the regicide aspect, and when Tyrion is framed, it raises the issue of kinslaying.

As we see, guest right is violated again and again in this society - such is human nature. But it seems that most of the time it happens secretly (disguised as an accident) and / or without premeditation. The Red Wedding stands out because of the blatant, unabashed and obviously premeditated manner in which it was done. 

On 8/18/2018 at 3:18 AM, dmfn said:

@Dorian Martell's son

Joffrey was just an insecure 14 year old boy, but I'd venture to guess most readers celebrated his cold blooded, public (guest right breaking) murder. But I wonder what we'd think if we got his POV?

Maybe if we got Walder's POV we would feel his pain, but we don't, so we don't.

Well, perhaps the author doesn't consider it important for us to feel old Walder's pain or to sympathize with Joffrey. He chooses what information the reader needs to have and if he chooses not to give us any information that could make Joffrey or Walder more likeable, it probably means they are not meant to be likeable characters. 

Apart from that, giving a character POV does not necessarily equal creating sympathy for the character. On the one hand, we don't have Robb's POV, but we can still imagine how he must have felt when he heard of Winterfell being lost, and his brothers having been murdered. On the other hand, we have Cersei's POV, and that does not make the character likeable - not for me, anyway. I understand her motivation better, but I still can't sympathize with her goals and her attitudes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Buell Rider said:

Would you find the thread annoying if it were a criticism of Catelyn, Daenerys, Arya, Jon Snow?  

See, I think a lot of it depends on how we feel about the character being criticized or whose behavior is being questioned.

Of course it does, because different characters act in different ways, and therefore get different reactions.

What an inane comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...