I've previously argued that Jimmy's color is all of them, and I stand by that. But out of all of them, yellow is the most prominent.
The two most obvious yellows associated with Jimmy are his iconic Esteem and the mug Kim gifted him, both of which have a touch of criminal red.
The Wexler/McGill logo is a mix of Jimmy's yellow and Kim's blue (notice how the office is mostly yellow, because this is Jimmy's dream, not hers.)
So why yellow? Well, it's loud, it's bright, it catches the eye. Jimmy loves to be noticed. But most importantly - it's not red or blue. It's the other primary color! Because in the beginning, Jimmy's not quite criminal red, and not quite lawful blue. He's in his own category.
In 1x01, there's yellow lighting in Jimmy's office (his attempt to play it straight), but there's also yellow when he reveals his Slippin' Jimmy past (notice the blues there, too, as his natural yellow crowds out his lawful aspirations).
What does it mean? I think it means that Jimmy's colorful approach to the law is not inherently criminal. If it was, he'd be red. The implication is that Jimmy could have made it as a legitimate lawyer while still being himself.
And to prove it, here are some shots from 1x05, when he visits Mrs. Strauss for the first time. Everything in her house is yellow - the walls, her furniture, even her teapot (although she herself is dressed in lawful blue.)
Jimmy the Elder Law Lawyer was perfectly in tune both with his natural colorful nature (his slippin' ways were what uncovered the financial abuse of the Sandpiper residents) and the law. He couldn't cut it in the stifling halls of HHM or Davis & Main. But he could have struck his own path and been happy. In a kinder universe, maybe he did. Alas. :(
the humble "like" is oft mocked despite what it does for us. "like, three people" is a vastly different statement from "three people". "and i was like 'what the fuck'" is vastly different from "and i said 'what the fuck'". i love you "like" and anyone who says you make people sound stupid will be killed on sight
I'm going to go back to talking about the more monochrome characters (I'm working on Mike and Howard right now), but I feel like talking about Jimmy, our protagonist, who has no assigned color. Instead, he's a mix of all of them.
This is partly due to his unstable sense of identity - he is Jimmy Mcgill and Slippin' Jimmy and Saul Goodman and Gene Takovic and Viktor St. Clair. He never seems to have a good grasp on who he is and fluctuates wildly depending on the situation. As a conman, he's a chameleon, becoming whoever he needs to be to achieve his goals.
But at the same time, I feel like that reading paints his colorfulness as a pathology. It is sometimes, but look at the rainbow in this picture. Think of Kim asking Jimmy if he's going to be "colorful" with his law practice. Think of the Inflatable montage and Jimmy's joyful reveal of his colorful new wardrobe.
Jimmy's colorfulness is not a bad thing. Or at least, not only a bad thing. His stint at Davis & Main shows how miserable he is trying to fit in with the straight-and-narrow world. I don't think the message is that Jimmy is supposed to try harder. In fact, painting over the rainbow in his shared office isn't portrayed as Jimmy triumphantly leaving his colorful past behind. It's gloomy.
In season 1, Mike gives some advice to Daniel/Pryce about the difference between criminals and bad guys - "I've known good criminals and bad cops, bad priests and honorable thieves." He tells him, "You are now a criminal - a good one or a bad one, it's up to you."
The legal (blue) and the illegal (red) characters don't fall neatly into good and evil. Likewise, Jimmy didn't have to always play it straight to be a good person. His colorfulness can be nasty and destructive, but there's also an ingenuity and playfulness to his benign schemes. For example, it was his colorful nature that led to him uncover the abuse at Sandpiper.
Jimmy's problem isn't that he needs to try harder to fit in. His problem isn't that he needs to mold himself to Chuck's idea of a good person, which would be its own kind of tragedy - a quieter, less harmful one, but still sad. His problem is that he needs core values to anchor him. His tragedy was that he was never able to establish them for himself.
I love when fiction makes the audience feel guilty about their role as the audience. When something fucked up is treated as a joke but later it's recognised how fucked up it was and the audience feels guilty for finding it funny. When a character breaks the fourth wall to plead for help, and you can't do anything so you just watch. And you know that the characters pain isn't real, but they're begging for help and you're not helping because their suffering is entertainment for you
“how would you feel if someone blocked you just because they found you annoying?” then i wouldn’t have to interact with someone who thinks i’m annoying? i don’t see a problem
15K notes ·
View notes
Statistics
We looked inside some of the posts by
seraphtrevs
and here's what we found interesting.
Average Info
Notes Per Post
255K
Likes Per Post
142K
Reblog Per Post
113K
Reply Per Post
233
Time Between Posts
1 hour
Number of Posts By Type
Text
16
Photo
1
Explore Tagged Posts
Fun Fact
In Q3 of 2020, 31% of US users access the Tumblr app daily.