Page 84 of 86

Re: Jacob Black #2

Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 11:22 am
by The girlie-wolf
how old are you? and how old are the wolves? they are teenagers! they have no idea what they are doing! and they never went to kill them... okay, so Jacob wanted to kill them twice but it was because he was suffering in a way it's hard to descirbe and he thought that it was their fault that Bella was dead (when he thought she was a vamp and after Nessie's birth).... and do you think that if Jacob never imprinted on Nessie and killed her, they hesitated and left him to leave in peace? they would have killed him too... to try to protect their familiy.... protect=killing sometimes...

I say that they have a value to human life, some of them.... Alice, Edward (after Twilight), Carlisle and Esme respect human life... Emmet doesn't. he has no problem to kill a human. Jasper is there just for Alice. I dunno about Rosalie... I know that they won't kill a human because they have values... but I don't think they really respect them...

Re: Jacob Black #2

Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:16 pm
by ringswraith
So, just because they're young, their behavior is excusable?

"Protect = kill" is only legally acceptable in one (please correct me if I'm wrong) situation- self-defense. In the situations that were pointed out, the Cullens were never a threat to the Pack. And yet, the Pack is more than willing to take them down the same way they took down Laurent and all those other newborns. Which, going back to the earlier point, means they do know what they're doing.

Re: Jacob Black #2

Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:58 pm
by Jazz Girl
It looks like we've taken two paths here. First, what contstitutes human? And second, what does killing have to do with the concept of being human? If I missed something, please add it in. In my eyes, or as far as this question is concern, biological processes are the least important factor. But, if you are looking at biology and discussing "human" ie homosapien, it's different from having a heartbeat and breathing. Let me preface this by saying I am not comparing Jacob to any animal mentioned beyond the differences in biology. In the strictest definition, Jacob is not human. Human refers to genus and species. Just as a a lion is different from house cat or a human is different from a gorilla. The are the same family, but different organism. He has a different chromosome count than we do (24 vs 23), separate biology (body temperature, healing ability, scent reactions etc), different abilities (agility, speed, strength again like a gorilla is much stronger and faster than a human). Strictly speaking, Jacob is not human.

Although, going on those factors, he and the pack are, in fact, closer to human than Edward and the vampires. The wolves would have an easier time blending into the human world, being able to stop their phasing, control that process. Also, there are fewer "tells" for lack of a better term (skin, eyes, cold body etc) Vampires have 25 chromosomal pairs and cannot alter their state at all. So, biologically speaking yes, Jacob and the wolves are far more human.

But, I've already said, as it relates to this question (and to me in general) biology has very little to do with it. I suppose what I truly meant was more humane, holding on to their humanity. So, consequently, killing and or your attitude towards it has a huge impact on how I see things. As Edward says, thou shalt not kill is commonly accepted as one of the rules we follow. And, do we not call the people who kill without just cause (ie direct threat to self or others) "inhuman"? Regardless of how the wolves view the vampires, regardless of their prejudices or biases, none of the Cullens ever posed a direct threat to Jacob, the pack or anyone else. Other than as a direct result of what they are (something which they have all proven then turn their back on), there is no reason for the pack to be threatened by them. Yes, I understand that Jacob perceived them as a threat to Bella's life. It's something we differ on, I'm sure. But, it was the fate she chose. When he threatens Edward, tells him he will kill him, there is no "threat", simply a choice with which he doesn't agree. When he intends to attack the Cullens, he believes her to be dead already. So what is he protecting? That would be vengence, not protection. Again, when he intends to kill both Edward & Renesmee, he believes Bella to be dead, knows that Edward intends to die anyway and knows absolutely nothing of Renessmee. Vengence, not protection. I do not fault Jacob for his feelings towards them. I can understand his pain. But, it is his intentions and actions that I look at. By those actions, he could be seen as less in touch with his humanity, less humane, less human.

The question of age and responsibility for one's actions, I think, is a little bit of an excuse. We expect children as young as a year old to understand the word no. We punish children as young as 2 or 3 for misbehavior. I would certainly expect a 17 year old young man to know that killing is wrong. It is easy to say they were young and didn't know what they were doing. But, think about Jacob's ride to the Cullens. He did exactly what he needed to do to avoid an order from Sam, even disabling his father's phone. He planned out the attack in detail, even determining who he would not fight, if it could be avoided. He knew exactly what he was doing.

Re: Jacob Black #2

Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:45 pm
by The girlie-wolf
This conversation became about humanity... :lol: I'm the only Jacob protector left? huh... explains a lot
About their age... I never said that because they are young they don't know what the meaning of no is or that they don't know good and bad. I say that they are very young and it's normal for teenagers to disobey... when your father tells you you can't go to the big party and he tells you NO... you sneak put... it's teenagers, no biggy... but of course that here it's on the extreme level... I don't say that it's exusable, I say it's normal to disobey, like the thing with Jacob finding a way to disobey Sam in BD. He'll do anything to get what he wants, no matter if Sam says no... I get it. as a teen if my parents say no and I think I'm right and I'm so caught in to it, I'll do it, like every other teen.
But the age is an important factor, no matter how you guys think it's an excuse. The boys in this age fight all the time. They all want "action" no matter how human they are.
Humanity- I never said he is completly human. just said that he is way more human than Edward. not human... I can't phase into a giant wolf :( lol
And I don't think you understand his pain. I know it was venagence with Jacob there... His head was clouded with hate that he couldn't see anything else... I don't really know how to explain but I really understand him. And I don't really take BD seriusly because I don't think it's a very good book and it's not "related" to the saga...
The thing with Nessie- look at the facts- The Cullens are briding (?) a new creature, Bella is dying because of it, no one knows what it is, Edward's face when he talks about it. All of these facts say that Nessie is danguors... that it needs to be destroyed.. none of them know what it's going to be... So Sam wants to end it. He wants to PROTECT the humans there, La Push. And if you think about it he is right, though I don't like Sam very much.

Re: Jacob Black #2

Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 4:38 pm
by vampirenerd
Jazz, I love that you brought up vengence in regards to Jacob wanting to kill Edward and Renesmee. It's true that in that situation he wouldn't be protecting anything. He would be getting revenge on them for taking Bella away from him. The Cullens never really threatened the wolves just by existing. In fact, they have a treaty so unless the Cullens were to break said treaty there would be no reason for the wolves to intervene.

I still don't see how age is important, even with your exampls. I don't think that you can chalk this up to teenagers being prone to rebellion and disobedience. Yes, they are...but comparing sneaking out when your father tells you not to and killing someone is a bit of a stretch. I agree with 17 any teenager with normal mental functions would know that unless their life is in direct danger (like Rings said, self-defence) there is no excuse for killing someone. I'm 22 to answer your question and that's not that far away from 17. I can remember how I was at 17 and while I was very rebelious I would never have considered murder. So, I do think age is just an excuse and not a very plausible one.

Yes, Bella is "dying" b/c of Renesmee, yes no one knows what she will be, and yes there is a need to be cautious. But Carlisle had a back up plan to save Bella, since it was her choice all along to become a vamp they were ready to do it as soon as Renesmee was born. Just because something is unknown doesn't automatically mean it should be destroyed. At that point the Cullens hadn't broken the treaty so therefore it was really not the wolves concern.

Re: Jacob Black #2

Posted: Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:25 am
by Jazz Girl
Hmmm... So, can we look at the discussion and say that the concensus is that Jacob is not truly human, but is as human as he can be, given his circumstances?

* waves shyly at Ringswraith* I love seeing you round the boards. It's like a hug from a long lost friend. :D I am interested to know what the point you decided not to make is.

Re: Jacob Black #2

Posted: Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:42 pm
by una
I have been following this discussion and feel the need to chime in. Humanity's definition is partly what is skewing this discussion. We each have different interpretations of humanity. I agree, once Jacob transitioned into being a shapeshifter, he should be place in the "paranormal" category. However, as SM stated, if the paranormal had never entered Bella's life, Jacob was the natural path her life would have taken. True love develops differently for each person. With Bella and Jacob, it started as an easy friendship that turned into more. If Edward had never appeared, I believe Jacob would have been her true love. From their first interactions, Jacob was attracted to her and would have slowly courted her. His admiration of Bella was even noticed by Billy, I'm sure. However, Edward did appear and although Bella loved Jacob, she loved Edward more. Plus, due to timing of Edward's appearance, he not only became her true love, but her first love. That is a powerful combination, one that Jacob couldn't stand against.

In comparing, who is more human, Jacob by biology strictly would be more human than Edward. However, if you compare personality, beliefs, it is more a toss up and much more open to debate. A debate that we may all never agree on. Jacob as a shapeshifter is born to protect his tribe...not the human race and that is an important distinction. Remember, the tribe has NO problem with the townsfolk of Forks becoming meals, as long as their land and people are safe. While Edward (and the Cullens) seek to not only refrain from treating humans as meals, but Carlisle seeks to help them. Due to his nature as a vampire, he is a superior doctor and saves far more humans than his human counterparts. Edward strives to keep Bella from becoming a vampire. Oddly, this is something that Jacob and Edward had in common (until the end of Eclipse). Unfortunately it was ultimately Bella's decision, and sadly, if Edward is her love, it makes sense that she change so they can be together.

In the end, it works out best for Jacob...he thought he would never find his imprint. Especially considering the "rarity" of finding that one person...and looking around himself at Sam's pack and seeing how many had already found theirs, his odds were quiet awful. Remember, Jacob loved Bella and if he couldn't (and didn't' think he would) find his imprint, he wanted to be with Bella. In the end, he does find his one true love.

Jazz Girl, I've gotten carried away, but to answer your question. It depends. It wholly depends on what the reference is...the parameters of Jacob being human or inhuman. In his breaking from the pack, he shows his humanity because he not only seeks to protect his tribe, but Bella, knowing she is beyond his grasp. Comparing Jacob against the vampires, yes he is human, compared to Mike, no...he is not human. I will agree, he is as human as he can be given the circumstances...oddly, this is something he has in common with Edward and the rest of the Cullens.

Re: Jacob Black #2

Posted: Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:28 am
by The girlie-wolf
I'm really in a bad mood now and I don't have the strength to answer all of this... and I see that you have your opinions and no matter what I'll say you'll have something to say.. I said everything (almost) that I have to say about Jacob... If you waste your energy hating one of the main charecters than you don't enjoy half of the saga... enjoy it...
I told you what I think.... the age is important to me, Jacob and the pack are not killers and there's a reason for everthing, the humanity is both physically and moraly so the wolves are more like humans...
And they didn't kill anyone actually... Laurant tried to kill Bella and the newborns too... so although they have no problem killing all of the vamps they didn't. So don't act like Jacob is a killer cuz he isn't...

Re: Jacob Black #2

Posted: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:59 am
by Jazz Girl
Girlie Wolf~ Please don't misunderstand. I do not hate Jacob. And, I think I can safely say none of the other posters so far hate him either. Speaking only for myself, though, I take issue with his behavior. That's all. I can hate his behavior and like him without a problem. For the most part, I find Jacob to be a good guy and a good friend. But, in my eyes, there comes a point in time when he crosses a line and, at that point, I stop supporting what he's trying to do. I may believe that he could be capable of killing, but I don't think he's a cold-blooded killer.

Yes, you argued your position very well, made very good points. We merely provided counter-argument. That's what we are all here to do, to discuss the characters and the situations in the books. Please don't be discouraged. It's just a matter of striking into a conversation on which people have strong opinions. I'm glad that Jacob has such passionate defenders. While I don't agree with many of the things he did, he is a great character and has a true purpose in The Saga.

Re: Jacob Black #2

Posted: Fri Apr 16, 2010 12:23 pm
by The girlie-wolf
I'm really sorry about the last post... it's just that I didn't get in to a student exchange thingy that I really wanted to get into and I'm really crushed and devastated right now...

Jacob's behavior is part of who he is and you can't expect him to act differently... He is immature sometimes and can be a jerk (I have my theory about it), I know, but everyone has their bad qualities and he can be sarcastic. I don't agree with some of the things he does, like kissing Bella against her will on the La Push beach, though I totally understand how he deluded himself like that. Everything he does I understand complelty but I don't agree with some of them. And I find more things like that in Edward and I understand them too. Cuz no matter how "perfect" anyone is, there are always the bad qualities cuz nobodys perfect... And I'm the inly one defending him here so I feel a little corenerd sometimes when everyone is against him...