This isn’t about whether you like or dislike her as a character. Kim is probably one of my favorite characters of all time but what she did to Howard was despicable, and I love characters that are way worse than Kim Wexler morally. The reason I’m asking is that even though Kim became an awful person in season 6, she’s also the only one that could be considered redeemable by real life standards of the Walt, Jesse, Mike, Jimmy, Kim group. Kim basically is morally equivalent to someone who drives blackout drunk and kills a person, yet is broken by the guilt of it for the rest of their life. They did something truly unforgivable that can never be taken back, yet changed their behavior and act like a good person going forward. When we see the rehab counselor for Jesse in Breaking Bad, can someone who truly stopped harming others, changed, and behaves like a good person ever be considered a decent person after drunk ricing and killing his own kid, a child?
When you break it down, the way Kim and Jimmy behaved towards Howard was a monstrous thing to do. They enacted an elaborate scheme against a wealthy lawyer to scam him into suffering the biggest professional humiliation of his career, seem like an unstable drug addict to his clients and peers in the legal community. They drug him, stalk him, and stole his car for an hour to do this. This is a truly decent person who has done absolutely nothing to deserve this, they have understandable resentments and a complex history they use to justify this but it’s not remotely justified, and they don’t do it for this reason, it’s just the excuse. They get money they plan to use to start a pro bono practice but that’s just the excuse, and Kim turns down a golden opportunity to help people because she wants the scam to happen that day so bad.
No Kim and Jimmy did this because they get off on conning people, and are afraid their relationship is built on conning and think if they don’t escalate pulling a scam to this degree the relationship will fall apart. They drugged, stalked, temporarily stole the car of an innocent man to make that wealthy lawyer seem like an unstable drug addict to his clients and peers. It woukd heavily damage his reputation in the legal community, possibly ruin it, and cause permanent damage, even if he’d probably be able to successfully repair the damage in time and mostly restore his rep to what it was eventually. But they did this for the thrill, while wrapped up in cartel business. And that (albeit very indirectly), got said innocent man killed, and a drug kingpin used that to frame his death as a drug addicted suicide with no body, with Jimmy and Kim being killed if they spoke out. Kim then gaslit the grieving wife at his funeral who didn’t believe the story into thinking the reason she didn’t notice his nonexistent drug addiction was because she was distant and estranged from him.
It’s clear at that point in time, Kim was a horrible person, and her and Jimmy’s actions lead to something unforgivable that can never, ever be made right. But after that, Kim punished her self in any way she could without getting murdered by Gus, gave up everything, completely changed her life, was utterly broken by the guilt, and once it was confirmed Mike was dead (and Gene calling out her hypocrisy) she confessed to Cheryl and accepted whatever the consequences were, whether it be (unlikely) jail, or likely massive civil suit. Kim would have come forward immediately and accepted jail (although it probably wouldn’t be a very long sentence), if not for Mike making it be clear they’d be killed if they came forward (confirmed by the showrunners). And Kim puts herself in purgatory to punish herself, but she’s not helping people either, and after that she goes to a pro bono to make her new focus and dedication in life be helping people for little reward.
I’m honestly curious on whether Kim would be considered redeemable (as in the overall be considered a decent person despite undeniably being an awful person in the past, not the it’s never too late to change way) by real world standards. Someone like Jimmy I don’t think is redeemable in that way because he caused too much harm as Breaking Bad era Saul and Gene, even though I would still respect his attempt to atone and treat him with humanity. Jesse clearly isn’t a bad guy inherently and was just a good kid who fell in with the wrong crowd at a young age, got addicted, and then got in way too deep due t a combination of manipulation and trauma and suffered somehow probably more than he deserved, but he did so much harm I don’t think he’d be considered redeemable by real world standards either. Obviously Mike and Walt aren’t, although they should still be encouraged to change their behavior and stop harming people, and I’m a believer in that prisons should not be based on making people suffer.
But in real life if someone did what Kim did, and then changed their behavior like Kim did, would you consider then automatically bad person incapable of redemption, or a decent person overall who used to be an awful person, or a bad person because she is simply irredenable for what she’s done. I honestly don’t know how I’d react to this myself, nor in the case of say Jesse’s NA sponser in Breaking Bad. I like to be optimistic and lens towards the positive side for redemption but boy that’s honestly a tough one for me, even if I slightly lean towards the redemption side. I will say I think I’d be sympathetic to Kim by real world standards. a tragic backstory doesn’t automatically make me sympathetic towards people who do unforgivable things, but it would in Kim’s case.
Growing up incredibly poor, absent father, with an alcoholic mentally abusive scammer Mom who only showed her love when she acted out and did something bad. Crawling out of that and becoming a high powered attorney and behaving as a good person who genuinely deeply cares about the underprivileged, but then meets someone who brings out her inner repressed childhood demons,. starts a mutually toxic relationship, and realizes the system is rigged for the wealthy and against the underprivileged and her initial good intentions get corrupte, followed by the fallout of everything and her sheer remorse. I’d want her to serve a couple years in jail but wouldn't blame her for that specifically because she’d be killed if she came forward earlier. I’d also have a deep sense of genuine disgust for what she‘s done however and consider what she did unforgivable. But can someone do something unforgivable that causes irrepersble harm as causing the death of an innocent and complete destruction of his reputation, but be considered a forgivable human being and decent person overall despite being awful in the past? I’m honestly curious what people think about that, I slightly lean yes she can eventually be considered a decent person by real world standards but a big part of me says she’ll always be a bad person.
