Game of Thrones - A Man Without Honor...

[shadowkat]

Saw Game of Thrones: "A Man Without Honor" last night and was reminded of why I stuck with reading the books. Or what I loved about the books - the moral ambiguity.

This review by Maureen Ryan on Huffington Post does a rather good job of summing up many of the elements of the episode and why it worked for me. Although I admittedly got lost during the Dany/Quarth political scenes. Did in the book too. To many characters, damn it.

Once you read that review, you might understand why Jamie Lannister is one of my favorite characters.

At any rate, it's this bit here from her review that ...worked for me. And I thought, yes, this, precisely.

Does a quest for truth or a devotion to honor trump survival? How do you even define "honor"? If survival is a person's only concern, does it matter who gets hurt in the process? Should you attempt to protect others? Should you ever trust anyone else? Is it, in fact, "better to be cruel than weak," as Theon thinks? Or is it better to just chuck the whole system and go with the fierce, individualistic anarchy of the Free People? Let's face it, despite the frosty environs the Wildlings live in, abandoning the complicated system of vows and pacts that Jaime (correctly) diagnosed as unworkable seems like one of the saner options at this point.

There are no clearly defined answers to any of these questions; one thing George R.R. Martin's tale is particularly good at is pulling the rug out from under everybody, big and small, important or insignificant.

But what makes Jaime so compelling, and so worthy of our continued attention, is this fact: Despite the horrible things he's done, he knows who and what he is. He's actually a lot like Tyrion, in that he's aware that people have pre-judged him, and as a result, he wears his cynicism like armor. But Jaime is hated not just because he killed a king, but because he's a living, breathing symbol of something the people of Westeros don't want to face: He's a reminder that their system is full of unreconcilable contradictions. How could he continue to serve a king who was roasting alive those who served him and slaughtering the innocent smallfolk? Where was the honor in that? It's a valid question that lots of people in Westeros don't want to face.

In his view, Jaime embraced a larger truth that allowed him to forsake his vow and kill his king. He did what nobody else was willing to do and which arguably needed to be done; in way, he made a sacrifice for Westeros. But everyone would rather preserve their ideals about what honor means -- and for good reason. If the system of kings, lords and bannermen (a system in which some good people do real good in their communities) were to fall, what would follow? It's highly unlikely that a fairer, more just Westeros would emerge from the ashes, almost certainly not in the short term.

Most people stick to the system they've always known -- and hate Jaime as a result -- because the alternatives are terrifying.

This gets to the root of why I always preferred Jamie Lannister to Ned Stark. The ironic bit about Ned Stark is his quest for honor dooms his family, his way of life, and his world. He doesn't listen when Robert Barratheon and Cersei attempt to convey to him that they have an uneasy truce - that they are keeping Westeros from war. He refuses to see that his actions with Robert against the Mad King were not necessarily just. It's complicated. Stark was your typical "Arthurian Knight" that you see in so many fantasy stories and Martin over the course of the Song of Ice and Fire series flips Ned inside out along with his morality. You begin to question it, as do his children and his wife.
His brand of morality is not real. It's tunnel vision.

Ned Stark lies to himself and his family creating a false world. Sansa believes in lovely knights, flowers and chivalry - and the two people who help her are neither (her handmaiden Shae and the Hound, a half burned brute), Ayra has learned the hard way that such notions are foolhardy and says as much to Tywin Lannister earning his respect and Charles Dance looks like a lion. (This show is so perfectly cast.) Then there is Robb and Catelynn who stupidly continue in their war, neglecting their family and home turf - as a result, Theon takes Winterfell...and Ayra and Sansa are lost to them. While Jamie Lannister in some respects is brutally honest. He knows that he loves the wrong woman, but he loves her completely and absolutely.

The speech at the end, which is amongst my favorites of the books and the only thing I remember from Clash of Kings (the second book) - is so fitting. "So many vowes...obey your father, respect your king...but what if your father despises your king and your king commands you to kill your father?" In the book he goes on to state, "love your sister, protect the innocent..." And he also tells Catelynne that he had no knowledge of the second attempt on Bran's life - proving he didn't do it and Tyrion didn't. (I know who did do it - but that's not revealed in the books until Storm of Swords...and by the time you find out, you sort of forgot the whole thing. This happens a lot in Martin's tale and it is admittedly realistic...because that happens in life too. The onrush of events cloud what initially started them.)



Oh, brief list of favorite characters from GoT/books in no particular order:

1. Jamie (although he gets on my nerves in Feast of Crows, actually everyone got on my nerves in that book...it is bone-draggingly slow.)
2. Ayra
3. Tyrion
4. Ygritte
5. Arrya (Theon's Sister - she rocks in Feast of Crows, I don't remember her showing up before then, but then I admittedly have forgotten most of Clash of Kings)
6. Dany
7. Ser Jorah Mormount
8. Sam Tramwell
9. Bran and Osha
10. Cersei (in the tv show, I can't stand her in the books...she's grating to me)
11. Tywin Lannister
12. Bronn
13. Shae (in the tv show, she annoys me in the books)
14. Brienne
15. Spyder (Varys)

I can't say I'm much of a Robb or Jon Snow fan...although I like them better in the tv series than I did in the books and they are easy on the eyes. Catelynne is also more likeable in the tv series than the books. She annoyed me until Storm of Swords in the books.

Comments

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I thought it was Cersei who ordered the attack on Bran, because Jaime didn't seem like someone who would plan an assasination of a child like that (he's more the spur-of-the-moment type). But he would know if it was her, wouldn't he?

I can tell you for a fact that Tyrion, Cersei and Jamie neither planned nor hired the guy who attempted to kill Bran. They didn't even know about it until long after it happened.

Ned Stark and Catelynne were really horrible detectives. They are dead wrong on two murders - the murder of Jon Arryn (Cersei had nothing to do with it nor did any of her relatives) and the attempted murder of Bran (again it wasn't Cersei, Jamie or Tyrion. Although...the person who did it is connected to all three, so they were indirectly responsible.)

I can't even watch his scenes now without getting angry, especially when he's all flirty flirty with Talissa. (You have time for this??) To privilege his bannermen and their families over the fate (and possibly life) of his own siblings - I guess that's one version of honor.

Very true.

[shapinglight]

Very interesting point about Jaime, though really I tend to agree that having him murder his cousin in cold blood like that was a little OTT.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I can't remember if he did it in the book or not. I don't think he did.
It did surprise me, but...it also makes some sense.

OTT? Out of character?

[shapinglight]

Over the top.