Trillian

I’m not sure the tv show actually is following the historical notes at this point, especially with respect to Canada. Canada doesn’t come across, in what we’ve seen, as particularly worried about “antagonizing its powerful neighbour” (had to add the “u” in neighbour, there, eh) and Gilead isn’t coming across as particularly powerful. Mileage on this board varies about whether the Canada trip was a sloppy writing mess (my own view) or whether Canada was deliberately insulting Gilead, but it seems to me that going all #metoo and throwing the Waterfords out when the letters were published was not the act of a country nervous about retaliation (and if Gilead was being purposely insulted, all the more so). We’ve seen nary a hint of any ambiguity in the treatment of the refugees, who seem to have been welcomed with open arms. I read a post on another board (I confess to, and sincerely repent of, cheating with another board) that said so well what I tried clumsily to express in an earlier post. In essence, it was that Atwood was writing with a political agenda and the book served that purpose. Once the tv writers moved beyond that story and that purpose, they got into things that hadn’t been properly thought out because they weren’t necessary to the original story - things like politics and diplomacy and law and technology and breastfeeding and who is made a handmaid and why and what happens to post-menopausal handmaids or widowed wives and where the next generation of handmaids comes from and what is the status of the children stolen from the first generation of handmaids and how is mode of execution determined and how do they keep that pool so clean despite the dead bodies. The things that drive us all crazy, in other words. Atwood did not build a world because she didn’t have to in order to tell her story, but the tv writers now have to and have failed to do so because they seem not to have a plan.

I totally agree that, if the show followed real world norms, Holly’s status in Canada would be a political mess and, as you say, a diplomatic nightmare. There’s all sorts of intricacies we don’t know about whether Canada recognizes Gileadian law (if it does, then Holly is Nichole Waterford and legally their child, and June and Luke are not legally married). There are all sorts of niceties involved in whether a foreign marriage is recognized, as many American gay couples discovered when they came to Canada to marry (we legalized it long before the U.S.) and then couldn’t get divorced in their home state because the marriage wasn’t legal yet there I’m too lazy to do the legal research for a potential tangential plot point, but I wouldn’t be too sure that the presumption of paternity applies when a couple has been separated (albeit involuntarily) for, what, over 3 years. A legal presumption is just a starting point and not the end point (eg, the presumption of innocence). Even if it did apply as a starting point here, it would be so easily rebuttable in this case where Luke couldn’t possibly be the biological father. I also agree that a custody battle would be boring and would also drive us lawyers nuts. What happened to Judge Judy when Gilead took over? That’s what I’d like to see.

I found an article in the National Post today, about how the City of Toronto is struggling to accommodate refugees entering Canada from the US. It has some discussion of current border treaties, the locations of several land crossings and the economics of being the recipient of a sudden influx of refugees. I post it, not to get into current politics, but because these are all questions we’ve discussed on the boards (and often found lacking on the show) and I thought some might find it interesting to get a glimpse of how it works IRL. http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/toronto-faces-having-to-close-community-centres-cancel-programs-to-house-migrant-tide-from-u-s

About two months, as it turns out. You sure called that one (interesting what treasures lurk in old posts)! Really impressive prediction, @Kokapetl. Care to let us know who will win the World Cup?

I’m with @badlemonnohope on this one. There was already a reference in Season 1 to an escaped Aunt’s giving an interview to the Toronto Star. There have been references to embargos and Canadian Forces at the border. The random woman at the elevator with her child clearly understood that Serena was a piece of dirt whom she didn’t want near her child. The refugees have a visible presence in Toronto and wherever this mythical land crossing between Gilead and Ontario is. I think what makes it implausible that Canadian news outlets wouldn’t have jumped on the story from Luke and Moira and anyone else (other than the clues above that it clearly has been in the news), is both the physical proximity of Gilead to Canada and the fact that there is no sense of the “Other” between Canada and the US. It’s easy to look at Boko Haram across the globe and think it’s the product of a completely different culture and people, so “it couldn’t happen here”. While the average Canadian will declare loudly and vociferously to anyone who will listen “We are NOT American”, when pressed to enunciate the difference, we tend to mutter something about politeness, health care and gun control and trail off into silence. I’m not denying the many cultural and social differences (and will vociferously and loudly proclaim them when necessary) but, bottom line, Americans and Canadians share the same language, a similar political democracy, ethnic and cultural makeup, and have a long history of cross-border commercial and cultural trade. We share the longest undefended border in the world. And the physical proximity means that we always have the sense that, if it happens there, it could indeed happen here. No way the Canadian press wouldn’t be all over this. There would have been Canadians protesting the Waterfords and not just the refugees.

Except that we’ve seen that female American official at, what I always assumed was the Consulate for the remaining U.S. gov’t, has binders of pictures of dead women, filing cabinets of stolen children and intelligence good enough to get pictures of the bombing victims and know their names. And this is not happening around the world but right next door. The meeting doesn’t make sense. I enjoyed it immensely - I loved seeing the Waterfords taken down a peg or three - but it doesn’t make sense. Re: Canada seemed too idyllic - that part was true. Come visit. Fun local fact: the first time Serena’s eyes bugged out in their drive from the airport, they were passing by the very chic and very very expensive haut couture shops of Yorkville. They didn’t show the shops, but that was clearly where they were.

FYI, I watched again to see how the Canadians identified themselves. Two are Deputy Ministers - the deputy minister is the highest-ranking civil servant in his/her ministry. The other introduces himself merely as “PMO”. That’s the Prime Minister’s Office. From what little I know of international protocol, people of similar ranks meet, which would suggest that Fred is a high-ranking bureaucrat rather than a Minister or Department Secretary or whatever they call them in Gilead. (But, then what’s the PMO doing there? I personally think the writers just thought “PMO” sounded vaguely officially Canadian, but YMMV). I agree that it’s possible to rationalize (some of) these details away, like the Toronto/Ottawa thing. But I also think that viewers shouldn’t have to fill in so many gaps to make sense of the details. I thought the same thing about the Mexico visit (and its gotten worse with this episode: why is Mexico contemplating importing handmaidens when, in Canada, life is going on happily with no discernible difference from “before”? ). I am - in case it’s not already obvious :) - a Canadian, and we are required by federal law to revere Margaret Atwood. But, she ain’t no world builder. This story works best when in stays in the closed world of Gilead. Even then it has problems, but they were more or less covered by the first-person point of view of the novel. I’m not fond of these forays out of the novel, or what could plausibly have been in the novel, and fear for the story if it goes on much longer.

I enjoyed the episode. When I just let it wash over me, I do enjoy it. But ... I find the further they get away from Atwood’s source material, the weaker the story. And this episode had such major plot holes that it came across as very weak indeed. Things that bugged: I was not impressed with the portrayal of the Canadians. It was dumb. If you’re meeting with the Federal government, as appeared to be the case, why was the meeting in Toronto instead of the national capital Ottawa (other than “we’re already shooting in Toronto so it’s cheaper”)? And why meet with Gilead if you’re going to send junior Ministers and civil servants who can’t even pretend to polite? Welcome to Canada, you’re an asshole and your country sucks. Now let’s talk about trade. And what would it mean to meet with Gilead? Does Canada have diplomatic relations with the surviving U.S. government? I would’ve thought so, from clues we’ve seen. If that’s the case, then you don’t just invite reps from the rival government to your country with big fanfare as if you are recognizing their sovereignty. At most, IRL, the junior ministers and civil servants would quietly go to Gilead for talks. Too many unanswered questions because no one seems to have thought through the politics. Why did they need the letters when they have actual handmaids, at least one Aunt (referred to in Season 1) and many refugees? And why were the Canadians suddenly so shocked by what’s going on in Gilead that they threw the Waterfords out? It reminded me of Inspector Renault in Casablanca - I’m shocked! There’s gambling going on here! Kinda silly, since it was obvious from their earlier rudeness that they knew what was happening and there’s all these refugees who presumably are telling their stories. No one has legally smoked in a bar in Toronto for at least 15 years and almost that long anywhere in the province. American guy would’ve known that unless he just arrived for the first time from Alaska and if he didn’t know it, the bartender would’ve. It’s not the bar’s policy - it’s the law. Ok, that last one was really nit picky. The episode got off to a bad start with me when I realized that the Waterfords were repeatedly driving up the same street en route to their hotel (now we’re north of Bloor Street. Oh. Now we’re south of Bloor going northbound. Oh look, now we’re even further south of Bloor still going northbound.) I’ve said before that recognizing the shooting locations is a bit of a distraction for me but this one drove me nuts since it was actually supposed to be Toronto this time.

Perhaps I am a monster, but I am Team-Nick on this one. I acknowledge that Eden is an abused child, and, in a perfect - or normal - world, she should be taken away and sent to school and put under the tutelage of loving parents. But this is not a normal world and she is dangerous. It’s not right (by our standards) that she is the true believer that she appears to be. ITA she’s not going to respond well to anything but the discipline she believes is right and that includes the discipline of her husband. Nick has no choice but to be harsh with her about rifling through his contraband because she’s not going to respond to the kindness she’s never known. Not the only one. I also thought it would be Rita and was struggling with how I felt about that. I’m both relieved and disappointed they didn’t go that route. I agree. She knows it would be an offence before Godard wouldn’t do it. Now, whether she keeps that up or not, remains to be seen.

They’re home. Without the kids. Staring into space. Words don’t do it justice

That plane is way too nice looking to be Aeroflot.

Brothers in Arms. Used to perfection on the West Wing. And now on the Americans. Wow.

I think there’s a chance Renee might be one of us. OMG! The look ? n Stan’s face! Priceless

When you rush home from work on Wednesdays, have a shot of vodka, and play Communist music on YouTube while preparing Russian dishes, the recipes for which you pulled off the internet because they are unfamiliar to you. And then you wonder what watch list you’ve gotten yourself onto by playing Communist music on YouTube and googling Russian recipes. Another shot of vodka to ease the anxiety caused by that thought. Rinse and repeat. Comrades, before all hell breaks loose on the Board tonight at 11:30, let me say it’s been an honour and a pleasure watching with you all and reading your amazing insights. Спасибо.

Of course, by definition, everyone's (birth) mother was able to get pregnant ... :)

It’s a good thought, but I don’t think so. I watch this show through the eye of a Torontonian - double whammy: one who grew up in Hamilton, another filming location - and am frequently distracted from the story by recognizing or trying to figure out where a scene is shot. In other words, I notice the buildings more than a non-local viewer. Emily’s university is the University of Toronto Mississauga campus. I haven’t been able to confirm where the new Red Centre was shot, but it’s been driving me nuts how much it looked like the TD (Toronto-Dominion) office complex in downtown Toronto. Even if I’m wrong about the actual location, the two buildings look nothing like each other, so I’d be surprised if they made such a different building stand in for the university. On on another note, while I was initially annoyed by June’s seeming refusal to play the long game, it’s come to feel to me to be an entirely human reaction. Yeah, she knows it’s in her best interests to play besties with Serena, but that’s a hard game to play. It frankly reminds me of me in an old job I had: I’d wake up telling myself that I’d go to work and smile and be a team player, but by lunch I’d be charging into my boss’s office with some grievance or other. Now the potential consequences for me were much less serious than for June in her situation, but it reminds me that play along to get along is much easier said than done, so I cut June some slack on that one.

Umbellina, I would love to know what old memories you have of being chased by FBI agents in shiny black shoes. On second, thought, maybe I don’t want to know.

Until sometime after 9/11, it was common to cross the US/Canada border without any ID at all - especially when coming IN to Canada. I always found the US border guards more suspicious, but even then, they usually didn’t ask for ID. I once crossed back, with a bus load of young athletes I was managing, with the Canadian border guard coming on the bus and calling out “everyone here is a Canadian citizen, right?”, while vigorously nodding his head and simultaneously waving us through. Parents with one or two kids, with Canadian plates - I assume at least one of those plates Elizabeth grabbed was Canadian, although I didn’t get a good look - would be waved right through in the 80s.

Maybe I’m being naive, but what do the FBI actually have on Oleg? Stan can threaten all he wants to pin all those murders on him, but nothing links him to them. No one implicated a tall, extraordinarily handsome man. Passing secret notes isn’t per se a crime. If they decode the note it may or may not say anything incriminating (or it could be the recipe for Zharkoye - these people know their code words). I guess he knows the identity of the illegals, but the lawyer in me asks how they could prove that, assuming that itself is a crime. He’s not guilty of spying on the US; at most, they can prove with the note that he’s spying on the Soviet Union. Or or maybe I just want to see Oleg get home to bachelorette #3 and his cute son and spend the rest of his life on train schedules.

You get a “like”just for the Broadcast News reference. Well done!

Yes. Thank you. That was one of my peeves about the episode, too. The team should have had a hard time understanding and speaking 17th century English. It wasn’t Shakespearean anymore, but it sure wasn’t modern English. Other related peeve: the women were all too modern in their attitude. They all acted like 20th/21st century women, who do not believe in witches and who do believe they are the equal of men, just plopped into a 17th century plot. Back in grad school, I did some research on the witch trials in England in roughly the same period. The people who didn’t confess defended themselves on the basis that the inquisitor got the wrong person and not on the basis that witchcraft isn’t real and that the accusation was bogus. That was part of how accusations spread - if the cow died mysteriously, it wasn’t me; must’ve been the neighbour. Everyone was way too modern in attitude as well as speech. I don’t expect a documentary, but try for a touch of historical realism. The other problem I had with the episode is totally frivolous. I kept thinking about the Bewitched episode when Sam and Darren end up in Salem and Darren was accused of witchcraft and Samantha had to save him by using real witchcraft. Now *that* was a good episode!

I had read an advance review of this episode that talked about the cooking session, so I decided to make Zharkoye for supper last night. Maybe I did it wrong (I had never made it - or even heard of it - before, but I compared about a dozen recipes on the internet to try to get it as authentic as possible) but it looks just like beef stew. Tastes like the most delicious beef stew ever, but doesn't look unusual. Even if Stan rifled through their refrigerator (possible), he isn't going to note it's a Russian dish. And even if he did, he isn't going to jump to the conclusion that they are Soviet spies. Elizabeth experimented with Korean cooking, and that wasn't an issue. For that matter, China is a Communist country, and Philip was eating Chinese food! The scene does show, I think, how incredibly careful with detail Elizabeth and Philip have to be. They were told to leave their Russian selves behind so that they would never ever slip. Except when Elizabeth was shot and when they got married - both intensely intimate moments - they never speak Russian to each other. They never cook Russian food, even though Russian food is not inherently suspicious. We have seen them enjoy Russian food when in a safehouse - Gabriel used to cook for them too - when they can relax their cover a bit. The food represents their former identities. When Philip rejected it, Elizabeth probably took it as a rejection, not only of her love offering, but of that Russian identity.

But it was Chinese food. He only had to wait an hour....

I very recently had a conversation,in a social setting, with a Family Doctor who related a conversation he had recently had with the Palliative Care doctor who had taken on one of his patients. Family Doc expressed surprise that Palliative Care Doc told him that they were rationing pain meds , rather than “making him happy” in his (the patient’s) last days/weeks. We may want to believe that medical personnel will happily push drugs on us at the end to make us comfortable, but, according to the doctor with whom I spoke, it isn’t necessarily true. So maybe Elizabeth-the-Palliative-care-nurse plot isn’t beyond the realm. It seems to be a thing, as cruel as it appears at first glance

I don’t think they’re imposing two mythologies, just because I once inadvertently screwed a travel agent (unfortunately, a relative) in a similar fashion to on the show. While the customer doesn’t pay the travel agent, different agents may have different deals with different tour companies - an agent who sent a lot of business to a particular tour company might get a bigger commission and/or extras from the tour company to encourage their sending more clients their way. An agent could then reduce his/her commission or throw in an upgrade (paid for by the tour company) so the customer is either paying less or getting more for less. Customer doesn’t care, since it’s a bargain; the new agent gets a reduced or non-existent commission (probably the former) but a new on-going client. The original agent is left out in the cold. This was explained to me (quite angrily) by the relative who lost my business (and her commission) when a competing agent offered me the same package for my honeymoon at a reduced cost. Oops. I am embarrassed to admit that I am a very long-term smoker (B&H Menthol Lights as well!) and my first thought upon watching Elizabeth smoke last night was that Kerri Russell is not a smoker. If nothing else, she didn’t inhale. I have a somewhat different take on Elizabeth’s view of Paige than the (excellent - thank you!) recap and many other posters: when Elizabeth says that she herself was a fast learner, she wasn’t bragging. She’s an exceptional spy who has trained other agents and she KNOWS that Paige is not good at this. As a mother, she is disappointed that her daughter isn’t cut out to follow in her footsteps. As a KGB agent, she is worried that the agent she is training isn’t cut out for this. I think that’s why she was raising with “Granny” (funny [prescient actually- these writers are brilliant] that Philip first called her that and that she is now acting in that role with Paige) what Claudia should do if she took over training. She can’t tell Claudia that her daughter is a failure because that would imply Elizabeth’s own failure and perhaps result in some awful consequence for Paige, but she is floating the suggestion that Claudia should take over training and re-direct Paige to something that she might be able to handle. Granny doesn’t take the bait and Elizabeth is all alone with her worries. Similarly, I think Elizabeth desperately wants to discuss this with someone. Who better than her fellow agent and the co-parent of the hopeless trainee? So, she floats the idea out there to Philip - Paige got a name wrong - but Philip misses the cue. He doesn’t ask how Paige is doing generally as a spy or if that’s the only error. He’s out of the business. He’s worried about other concerns and - beautifully- is trying to be supportive of Elizabeth so he just says it’s a rookie mistake. And Philip and Elizabeth again fail to connect on this issue where his input could have lightened her load and where they could have worked together for some solution. I will so so miss this show but am so enjoying the journey.