Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
Oh Kim...I mean Khatru. You just keep putting your faith in Jimmy and he just keeps burning you. Was it Chuck's fault that a con-man convinced 9 yr old Jimmy to steal from the till as well?
Jimmy's has a soft heart and a bad BAAAAD moral compass. That's not Chuck's fault, nor is Chuck the bad guy for seeing Jimmy for who he is.
|
I don't know where you get the idea I have faith in Jimmy. That whole point was about not believing everything Chuck says because he has blind spots/agendas as well. I think in this show you should not take any character at face value. For instance, when asked at the job interview about where she came from and her past, Kim seemed pretty uncomfortable about that. I bet we find out why.
I'd also be careful extrapolating too much from that 1973 flashback. Yes, Jimmy took $8 out of the till -- after Dad gave $10 away to the grifter, after he gave money to some other hard-luck story the week before. That establishes a pattern. So was Dad so generous that he gave away $14,000 over several years to sad sacks, putting his business in jeopardy? (While I was watching I was trying to calculate if that were feasible. Perhaps not.)
Jimmy technically wasn't even taking from his Dad there, he was taking $8 of the $10 that his Dad had already given away to the grifter (and not expecting it to be spent on smokes at the store). Now, did that become a pattern -- did Jimmy start skimming from the till? Maybe. But unlike the evidence with Dad, the only piece of info we have to substantiate that conclusion is Chuck's version of events -- which brings us back to biased perspective and issues of trust.
I'm not saying Jimmy didn't or couldn't have stolen from his old man. But with this show, with its depth of character, I wouldn't be surprised if there were multiple layers to this -- such as Chuck forever holding Jimmy responsible for something he didn't do because of an assumption based on Jimmy's reputation. That to me would make for a much more interesting dynamic.