Jane's sister Jamie probably doesn't even exist.

edited September 2014 in The Walking Dead

Think about it: Jane's such a natural and compulsive liar it's entirely possible she's an only child. She improvised the story about a younger sister as she went along, just like Verbal Kint's interrogation in The Usual Suspects.

She created "Jamie", probably the first name she thought of because of its similarity to her own, first to get on Clem's good side. Over time she then added little touches whenever she ran across objects or scenarios that she could weave into the narrative. Got a nail file? Make up a story connecting it to the falsified younger sister. Got a bottle of rum? She uses the bottle to manufacture another story involving blood and drinking, things that Jane as an impulsive psychopath always lusts for.

Jane viewed Sarah as baggage or just wanted to watch her die so Jane pushed to leave her behind. When Sarah gets killed or nearly gets killed in the trailer she improvises a scenario where Jamie died in a near parallel manner to the situation Sarah was in. In the event that Clem asks about Jamie earlier, Jane dodges the question until she's figured out a good way to keep spinning the lie.

Over and over again when she encounters an object or a situation she uses it to build the backstory of a sister and selling the image to Clem, buttering her up and building a false familial bond to drive as a wedge against Clem's remaining support network.

It's impressively devious and crafty if you ask me.

It also keeps with her character's Modus Operandi of being deceitful and manipulating people to make evil decisions they normally wouldn't.

In fact I'm ready to accept this as canon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5Ed_vCOKY4

Thoughts?

«134567

Comments

  • Exactly. Who would drag someone like Sarah/Jamie across three states, forcing them out of catatonia every time they woke up? That's not even possible.

    Way too many unexplained factors in Jamiegate.

  • You might be on to something there.... XD

  • edited September 2014

    Boy. When you're right, you're right...

    Alt text

    Lemoncakes posted: »

    Exactly. Who would drag someone like Sarah/Jamie across three states, forcing them out of catatonia every time they woke up? That's not even possible. Way too many unexplained factors in Jamiegate.

  • Never know because she is a compulsive liar.

  • Ok?

    Nikolaj-11 posted: »

    Whatever

  • Now Ive heard everything.

  • Yeah, it's ok.

    TDMshadowCP posted: »

    Ok?

  • If we are going to follow this logic, is it then reasonable to say that Carver and Rebecca never had an affair, but it was rather just a lie from two people who lie a lot? Besides the case with the baby, when has Jane explicitly lied about anything to us?

  • I have no words for this.

  • I guess her saying she's leavin in ep4 and then returning in ep5 is technically a lie. ;)

    If we are going to follow this logic, is it then reasonable to say that Carver and Rebecca never had an affair, but it was rather just a lie

  • edited September 2014

    It would be possible were it confirmed that Rebecca and Carver were adept, compulsive liars with something to gain for perpetuating this lie. Yes.

    Beyond that "besides the case with the baby" is a pretty massive "besides".

    If we are going to follow this logic, is it then reasonable to say that Carver and Rebecca never had an affair, but it was rather just a lie

  • Another Lemoncakes thread...

  • Ok.

    Nikolaj-11 posted: »

    Yeah, it's ok.

  • We need to go deeper.

    TWD_1992 posted: »

    You might be on to something there.... XD

  • What I am saying is this:

    You accuse her of compulsive lying. To be a compulsive liar, one has to lie often and instinctively. BESIDES what happened with the baby, when has Jane exhibited traits of lying, if not to save lives (with the Troy situation). Where is your evidence in the first place that Jane is a compulsive liar?

    Lemoncakes posted: »

    It would be possible were it confirmed that Rebecca and Carver were adept, compulsive liars with something to gain for perpetuating this lie. Yes. Beyond that "besides the case with the baby" is a pretty massive "besides".

  • Ok what? Ok that it's ok?

    Lemoncakes posted: »

    Ok.

  • That's moreso a change of heart than a lie.

    Nikolaj-11 posted: »

    I guess her saying she's leavin in ep4 and then returning in ep5 is technically a lie.

  • The ease with which she lied to both Troy and Kenny/Clem calls everything she says into question.

    We know nothing concrete about her history.

    We know nothing about her motives beyond survival and a desire to pull Clem away from the group.

    In fact all we do know about Jane is that she's impulsive, mercenary, unscrupulous, deceitful and more often than not puts her own needs first.

    What I am saying is this: You accuse her of compulsive lying. To be a compulsive liar, one has to lie often and instinctively. BESIDES wh

  • Looks at title "dafuq" sees it was made by @Lemoncakes "that explains everything"

  • edited September 2014

    She also lied about eating glass tho! There was no blood in her mouth that I could see, so no proof. I call lie on dat bruh..

    That's moreso a change of heart than a lie.

  • How deep are we talking? Not too deep I hope ;)

    Lemoncakes posted: »

    We need to go deeper.

  • Mamma mia.

    Here we go again.

  • edited September 2014

    Excuse me I think my thread is very original.

    ABigBadWolf posted: »

    Mamma mia. Here we go again.

  • CrazyGeorgeCrazyGeorge Banned
    edited September 2014

    Did you know Laura Eisenhower once told me that she went to outer space, to the secret moon base set up by the CIA.

    Alt text

    KCohere posted: »

    Now Ive heard everything.

  • All the way past the tongue!

    TWD_1992 posted: »

    How deep are we talking? Not too deep I hope

  • If anything, she's brutally honest.

    If we are going to follow this logic, is it then reasonable to say that Carver and Rebecca never had an affair, but it was rather just a lie

  • So what would you rather make topics about. "we luv keniiiii!!2q" Someone tries to post an idea. Doesn't matter if they've done other ideas like that. Too me it sounds reasonable and a deeper, interpretation of the game. Either I missed something or it's National "Be a dick" day.

    Looks at title "dafuq" sees it was made by @Lemoncakes "that explains everything"

  • Ooh sexy. I'm in :D

    Nikolaj-11 posted: »

    All the way past the tongue!

  • This is the crux of the issue.

    How can you trust someone who's inherently untrustworthy? How can you believe the narrative of an unreliable narrator?

    I sure am relieved these are questions that My Clementine, in having allowed Jane to die, doesn't have to grapple with day and night.

    CrazyGeorge posted: »

    Never know because she is a compulsive liar.

  • I'm getting tired of threads like these...

  • Youre calling me a dick, @Lemoncakes have been shitting on Jane fans for far too long, i want him to stop, how is that Being a dick?

    Talimancer posted: »

    So what would you rather make topics about. "we luv keniiiii!!2q" Someone tries to post an idea. Doesn't matter if they've done other ideas

  • I think you have a point there. Ive never before heard the theory that Jane's sister was a phantom of her own making.

    Lemoncakes posted: »

    Excuse me I think my thread is very original.

  • Original in that hateful @Lemoncakes kinda way

    Lemoncakes posted: »

    Excuse me I think my thread is very original.

  • I appreciate your support but please don't feed trolls like @telltalemaster

    If you ignore them they go away.

    Talimancer posted: »

    So what would you rather make topics about. "we luv keniiiii!!2q" Someone tries to post an idea. Doesn't matter if they've done other ideas

  • CrazyGeorgeCrazyGeorge Banned
    edited September 2014

    I stopped questioning when she died so :/

    How can you trust someone who's inherently untrustworthy

    You cannot.

    Lemoncakes posted: »

    This is the crux of the issue. How can you trust someone who's inherently untrustworthy? How can you believe the narrative of an unreliab

  • Deep thro-- oh wait. Forget it.

    Lemoncakes posted: »

    We need to go deeper.

This discussion has been closed.