Slovenly Muse

I understand your point, lion10. The problem, as I see it, is not that people enjoy looking at images of people they find attractive. It is that, historically, real women have been TREATED like objects or decorations, and were actually considered property for many centuries. Women's worth and value, in the history of our culture, has been assessed based on their attractiveness. Traditionally, men have objectified women in real life, judging their appearances (often right to their faces), treating them like property, or like something to use and discard at will without any real personhood to consider. This way of seeing women as nothing more than things to be consumed by men has led to many years of oppression, reduction of opportunities, inequality, domestic violence, assault and abuse of many kinds (e.g., it was decided only recently that it was legally possible for a husband to rape his wife. Previously, it was not considered rape within the bonds of marriage), and many other real-world consequences that made life extremely difficult for women in our society. It is only recently that attitudes and laws have been shifting away from these old-fashioned mindsets and towards equality, but many people are still living in the past, and still believe that women are inherently less deserving of respect than men, and these old-fashioned prejudices still lead to a prevalence of discrimination, including violence against women, glass ceilings, sexual assault, unequal wages, and unhealthy pressure placed on women to prioritize their "beauty" above their well-being. These things are still happening today, and they are a relic of a time and a mindset exemplified by the Swimsuit Issue. Or, to relate it to your point, you say that as long as there is a separation between the behaviour one exhibits when looking at a picture and when interacting with someone in real life, no harm is done. The problem is that this separation you talk about has NOT existed historically, and it has led to serious consequences that are still continuing today. Things like the Swimsuit Issue and it's exuberant reception by the male public send a message that those outdated modes of thinking and treating people are still acceptable today. If there were an equivalent magazine featuring men, and women were publicly drooling over it (and it does happen, no doubt!), that's not the same thing, because there is no damage being done (apart from the people who are creeped out by having to see it!), there is no historical context of measurable harm that is being perpetuated, and no way in which women (as a group) have ever threatened the legal rights and personal safety of men as a gender. There is no resulting imbalance of power that creates a dangerous situation for men in general. The SI isn't creating discrimination out of a vacuum, but rather refusing to break ties with an old and harmful way of viewing women that people have been combating (many at the expense of their own lives and safety) for decades and has no place in our modern society. In short, it is completely acceptable to find people attractive, and to enjoy looking at images of people you find attractive. But it is also important to recognize that there is a greater context to consider when EXPRESSING that enjoyment, and that when men are encouraged to treat or discuss women like objects, there is potential harm being done. It is perfectly okay to look at a picture of a woman and think she's hot! (Hell, I do it all the time! ;) But when there is a public spectacle made of men judging women by their looks, or valuing women based on their appearance, then it is at best insensitive, and at worst actually harmful. I appreciate your non-combative question, and hope I have responded with the same tone! You're right, it is an interesting and nuanced subject, and definitely worth taking a moment to consider from more angles.

I know, right? From the excerpts I've seen, 50 Shades is complete shit. Go watch "Secretary," people, and stop wasting your time!

While the sexualization and objectification of women in the SI swimsuit issue is appalling and outdated, for all the reasons StillShimpy mentioned above, I think what makes it extra awful is how mainstream it is, and how much a part of our social culture it has become. Like those clips John showed of male reporters expressing excitement over the new issue. Because it's not porn, and it's from a basically-otherwise-reputable magazine, it gives men that kind of social permission to freely express delight over getting to ogle a new crop of heavily-photoshopped completely phony images of women. The objectification of women, judging them on their bodies, leering at them as nothing more than sex objects, is in this case a completely social exercise, even done without shame on news programs, the way actual porn could never be. And THAT'S what makes it so outdated. It's not just the magazine itself, but it's the (male) public's reception of the magazine. If men were on TV talking about how much they were looking forward to the new Victoria's Secret catalogue, it would be seen as creepy and gross, and yet somehow the rules are different for SI. It's not just the objectification that's the problem, it's the way that objectification is celebrated.

Ok, so I finally got around to watching 10.13 "Halt and Catch Fire" a week late, and while the discussion has all wound down because I'm so late to the party, I just can't move on without ranting about how shitty it was. Yes, the MotW case was fairly typical for this show in terms of, well, what I expect from it. But although it's been said for years now that SPN has a big problem with women, I somehow never expect it when it happens so egregiously. Like, it takes me by surprise that they haven't figured out how to fix it yet! I mean, have the writers of this episode actually met a human woman before? Dean gawking at the college girls was super gross, like, SUPER gross. And it happened more than once! And the college girls, the roommates. Is that how these writers think women actually talk to each other? Between the laughable dialogue, the ghastly decor (seriously, that sparkly pink "sisters to the moon and back" poster looked like something your grandma bought on sale at Hallmark thinking the kids would like it, which they promptly burned), and the widow's obsession with "Lifetime movies," I'm wondering if there's a stereotype they left unturned! And thinking of the widow, what the hell? She loses her husband, he starts haunting her computer, then getting creepily obsessed with revenge... so, she must have known who the kids were that caused the accident, if hearing about the deaths at the college made her suspicious (and if her husband's ghost knew who they were and talked about getting revenge on them), but she never turned them in? Or confronted them about what they had done, even when she saw them leaving flowers outside her house all the time? Or, like, made any effort whatsoever to end the haunting and stop him from killing? Because she loved him too much to ever have to be without his scary homicidal ghost living in her wifi? And then when her husband's last remaining killer shows up at her door to confess, she greets her with a bouncy, friendly smile? I CAN'T WITH THIS! It's been 10 seasons! Start writing women like human people! Gaaah! Thanks, bitterness thread. I needed that.

Yep, I totally feel you, Actionmage. While it sucks that Quentin is having to go through this because the people who should be honest with him are not, it is nice to FINALLY have some movement on this! At this point, I think he should adopt Sin as his replacement daughter, say "Screw you guys" to all of Starling and hop the next plane to Corto Maltese.

I guess we're supposed to think that getting this huge accomplishment through shady means has gotten right under Louis' skin and blown his childish pettiness up to epic proportions, but I wish they'd make it a bit clearer. Because while this has always been an aspect of his character, we could also see in the past what made him a great lawyer, deserving of his position in a prestigious firm, and worthy of some modicum of respect. I'm sure there's a veritable tempest raging in that man's soul over what he's done. I only wish we could actually see some of that conflict, instead of having to deal with one-dimensional jerkface Louis having a series of tantrums over getting what he wants. Also, I love Jessica. I don't care what anyone says. Jessica is the man. Watching Mike cut Harvey zero slack over his issues was nice, but Harvey "thanking" him by lying about Professor What's-his-face figuring it out... that was not a kindness. And it goes counter to what Donna was saying about "the team" having to protect each other. If Mike wasn't going to like hearing that news from Harvey, he will like it even less when he is blindsided by a major problem he had been assured by the person he trusts most in the whole world didn't exist. WHAT ARE THESE PEOPLE THINKING?! Good thing there's Jessica. Somehow, Gina Torres makes it all better.

Ugh. Don't remind me of THAT plotline. Roy is so upset at the thought that he might have killed Sara that he is ready to turn himself in for her murder... then he finds out it was just a cop he killed, so he forgets about turning himself in and just gets over it. But about Thea! Yes, it would be terrible for her to have to deal with what Malcolm did to her, but here's the thing: HE DID IT TO HER. And there was nothing stopping him from doing it again, since Oliver was "dead" and there was no one else watching out for her. The only way for her to protect herself is to know where the danger comes from. Oliver can't watch her every minute, and he can't know if she is still being chemically manipulated into continuing this whole daddy-daughter bonding thing. She's dealt with a lot of shit, and a good portion of that has been FROM people trying to protect her by not telling her information that she needs to know! Continuing the very behaviour that has hurt her and pushed her away in the past is not going to mend fences, and it's not showing her any kindness. As has always been the case with Thea, she CAN handle the truth, it's all the blatant lying from people who claim to love her that has totally eroded her ability to know who to trust and driven her into danger! In case the drinking game got you distracted, Sin told Quentin just tonight. So yay? At least he knows now. But she didn't really, did she? She told him that the Canary is "not Sara." That's not the same as confirming for him that his daughter is dead. In fact, it's worse, because now he has to deal with the uncertainty, of wondering what happened to Sara and why she's not here and if she's alive or dead, and who is responsible, and dealing with his suspicion of the people around him who have been lying to him about her, and what they know, and why they're not telling him (not to mention processing that gargantuan betrayal), while ALSO dealing with his grief for Sara all on his own when he inevitably figures it all out for himself the hard way, when EVERYONE ELSE has known for ages and kept it from him for no good reason. How can that possibly be better for his heart than hearing the truth in a safe place from someone he trusts? It's not too late to stop the madness! TELL QUENTIN!

I don't want to jump into the Olicity stuff, because Team Felicity always and forever. But can I just back up a bit? What was it Malcolm said when he was about to kill Brick? Did he really say that if he had killed Brick all those years ago, then none of these things would have happened? That... after killing the man he GENUINELY BELIEVED killed his wife, Merlyn went on to make all these EVIL decisions based on EVIL, and now that he finds out he killed the wrong man, he thinks things would have turned out differently if he had killed the RIGHT MAN? Even though he thought he HAD when he made all the decisions that led him to that point? DID I MISS SOMETHING HERE? No, seriously, I've been relying heavily on the Arrow Drinking Game to get me through these episodes. It's very possible I missed something here. (Edit: Or what BkWurm1 said first, and better, and with fewer caps.) And FOR THE LOVE OF GOD won't somebody tell Thea the truth?! I mean, she is smart and capable and actually stands a chance of protecting herself if only someone would clue her in to the situation of which she is directly in the middle! Aaarrrgh! The fact that no one informed her that her brother had DIED trying to save her from the assassins HER FATHER WHO SHE TRUSTS FOR SOME REASON set on her to save his own skin or something is as bad as no one telling Quentin that Sara is dead. Speaking of, TELL QUENTIN! Ugh. This show!

I definitely think there's something shady going on with this new sheriff. The way Keith remembers things, like it doesn't quite sit right with him, really got under my skin throughout this book. I was wondering if maybe the drugs she had her brother arrested for weren't his at all, but hers, and she set up her own brother to take the fall for her? In any case, I get the feeling that even with Lamb out of office, the sheriff's department is not likely to be cleaned up any time soon! (His absence might even be temporary, brought back after her failed term, who knows?)

Yeah, Avon still had power in prison, but he only had that power THROUGH Stringer. And he only knew what Stringer reported to him. Stringer had an idea for a new way of doing business, totally counter to Avon's way, and he knew that putting Avon back in prison would be the easiest and cleanest way to wrest power from him and make those changes. This whole plot is one of my favourites of the series, watching these two longtime friends and brothers who love each other and trust each other completely begin to slowly turn on each other. Remember that scene back in season one, where D'Angelo taught Bodie and Wallace how to play chess? That scene was so prophetic for the whole series, it just laid everything out, all the lessons anyone needs to know to survive this life. And this particular storyline circles back to that again, as Stringer learns the hard way that "you can't play no checkers with no chess set," and, of course, "the king stay the king. Everybody stay who he is." When the king falls, no one else gets to step up and take his place. The game is just over, and it's time for a new player to set up. Harris and Elba knocked this all out of the park. As much as I enjoyed the inner politics of Marlo's crew in later seasons, Avon and Stringer really had something special. Marlo may have taken Avon's corners and some of his people, but he never really replaced the man. It's especially clear whenever Avon and Marlo are in a scene together. Marlo is a thug. Avon was a king. Man, this season was good.

I'll just leave this here. *Headdesk*

I think the trick to watching this show, and enjoying it, is to acknowledge that the premise is somewhat ludicrous, and then just accept it anyway. Complaining about how implausible "the secret" is is not going to change the fact that it is the central premise of the show. You can complain about it forever, and you'll be totally right about how dumb it is, but it's a much more enjoyable ride when you just suspend your disbelief and go with the flow. I actually really like the acknowledgement that enough people know and have used it for leverage that it's no longer "Mike's secret" but rather a crime that belongs to all of them equally. Before, it was easy to vilify Mike and say that by staying he was endangering the firm, but it's just not true. They've all done this together. I thought this episode really brought home how the situation they're in now can't be fixed. Yes, they can fire Mike, they can get him a real law degree, whatever, but it doesn't change the fact that they hired him and kept him and allowed him to work cases knowing that he wasn't officially qualified. These will be the facts no matter what happens going forward. It's too late to turn back. If the secret gets out now, the whole firm goes down. If it gets out later, the whole firm goes down later, regardless of Mike's situation at the time. There is really no way around it, and no way out of it. Now it's just a matter of seeing how far they can ride this wave before it all comes crashing down. For me, I think that clears up a lot, if not ALL of the bullshit surrounding the secret. Rather than shuffling blame around by leaving doors open (Mike could get a real degree! Jessica could fire Mike and Harvey! Some people have plausible deniability and others don't! Mike could just get another job! They could all protect themselves by stopping this now! It's crazy that they don't!), it closes down every avenue but the simple truth that if/when the secret gets out, they're all done. And there's nothing more to it. So, not only does this lock down the sketchy premise pretty well, but it also opens up some new dynamics and storytelling possibilities. After all, up to now the characters have been lying to and manipulating each other in order to keep from being found out. Now, they're all in the same boat, committed to seeing this through, and will have to suck it up and work together to protect the firm and each other. I'm about ready to see how that goes!

Don't forget Rosalee. That chick can hang with the dudes and probably drink them under the table and beat them all at pool. How about Trubel? (Seeing as how she has been at least mentioned in every single episode since she left, it's a fair guess the writers don't want us to forget about her.) Throw her and her "take no shit" violent streak into the mix and I'd watch that show!

Well, to be fair, we're talking about two specific women placed relatively highly in a completely-male-controlled structure. It takes some leaps of empathy to understand why they act the way they do, and part of it is that they are just awful people. But let's not set up a double-standard. A mother pushing her son into becoming a high-ranking and respected member of a group that may protect him from becoming one of that very group's victims, is an awful person. But is she really more awful than the men who murder each other over territory and vague possibility of betrayal? Or the men who sell drugs to junkies on their last legs, knowing that shot could be their last? Or the men who recruit and set up children to be murderers before they're even out of middle school? There is more than enough despicable behaviour going around to condemn everybody. Why is a mother's failure of humanity more appalling than a father's? DeLonda and Briane's actions are the ones I find MOST understandable (though still not forgivable). And the show does have a fair share of mothers who put their kids first. Miss Anna, Beadie, Elena, Kima's ex, all the mothers and grandmothers that have sat silent in their homes as the police tore the place apart, afraid that a misplaced word on their part could sentence their child to death on the streets... On balance, it tends to be the fathers BY FAR who mistreat their families on this show. Including Wee Bey, who wanted Namond on the corners every bit as much as DeLonda did (and that was the least of his crimes). So I think it's important not to fixate on only vilifying the women who don't live up to our parental standards. Nearly every single character on this show is a monster in some respect. And DarkRaichu is right. We saw in season one how hopeless the future seemed for the people in the projects. Joining the drug dealers and rising in the ranks seemed to be the only way any of the kids there ever moved up, the only future that was possible for them, the situation being what it was. Briane and DeLonda both owed everything they had to that organization, and would lose everything if they were to leave it. So really, what were their alternatives? Not to say they didn't have a choice at all, because of course they did. I'm only saying that context is important, especially when judging other people and their choices.

Interesting thoughts about Briana and DeLonda. It's so hard to imagine any mother wanting that kind of life for her son. Then again, I think it's important to remember that these were two women who were very deeply entrenched in a culture/society that is deeply misogynistic. While both had a high standing within this society, neither had any real power. Briana's opinion counted for something, but she didn't have any power or influence beyond what she could convince Avon and D'Angelo to do. DeLonda had no influence at all, beyond the specter of her husband's name. Both women were doing their best in a society that would award them next to zero power, influence, or respect. Their only way to survive in the world they were living in (the world they had no choice but to live in) was to attach themselves to powerful men who could protect them and wield influence on their behalf. Briana wielded power through Avon so effectively that she IS able to manage certain affairs in his absence without her authority being challenged, but only because the family is out of power. (No one would follow her into a war against Marlo, for example, if that was still on the table.) DeLonda wasn't born into a powerful family. Her only shot at surviving this culture was to attach herself to a man who had the power to look after her. NO ONE would disrespect her when she was married to Wee Bey. But without the power to earn any respect for herself, all the respect she received was secondhand, and relative to her husband's position in the organization. With Wee Bey in prison, the only man who could get her back the power and influence that she had lost became her son. Is it any wonder that she pushed him so mercilessly? He was her only shot at being something more than a corner rat herself. (Note that she only let Namond go after Wee Bey outright THREATENED her. This is how much her husband respects her, and how desperate she is to retain the shreds of influence she has left.) I think it's interesting that the show went through pains to show us throughout the seasons just how far a woman can advance in the Barksdale organization (i.e., not at all, which is a lesson D'Angelo's stripper girlfriend learned the hard way in season one). It gives just the right amount of context to characters like this, who live in constant danger, and who have no power or protection beyond what the men around them choose to give. In this way, we can still hate their guts for the things they do, but a good portion of that hatred gets deflected back to the broken system in which they live (like with everything else on this show). Marlo has a female underling (Snoop), but overall he doesn't seem to be any more progressive in that respect than anyone else on the corners. Every woman's gotta do what she's gotta do to survive the life she's been handed. It doesn't excuse her for being an awful person, but it does go a ways to explaining her. It's downright monstrous that the only way for some people to survive this life is to actively perpetuate the cycle onto the next generation. Yet another reason The Wire shows us why the cycle of poverty is so damn hard to break.

Yeah, that first season packs a hell of a wallop. And I think a big part of that is because it's so different from what the "standard" formula for this kind of show is, that you're realizing right to the end that even when the good guys "win," it's about the hollowest victory possible, and there is no possibility for a happy ending to any of it. That's a tough mindset to get into, and the first season really hammers it home in a way that is more shocking than many viewers are expecting. On rewatch, though, I find this season the hardest. I feel like David Simon is reading his audience's mind between seasons. Like, we finish season one with this hopeless thought of, "Ok, so we'll never win the 'War on Drugs' on the street. But what if we could stop the drugs coming in in the first place?" And then he spends the next season carefully pulling apart the import/export aspect of it. And then we go, "Ok, but what if we shook things up politically, and got some not-so-corrupt-and-incompetent people in charge of all this bullshit? They would clean it up and that would fix things, right?" And then we get a good hard look at the mayor's office and the hopeless situation at that end of things. And when that's over, we think, "All these kids being bullied and brainwashed into throwing their lives away in service of these thugs... what if we could get to them first? Maybe we could stop them from getting into the life, and interrupt the cycle enough to cripple the drug trade!" And by the time the season is done, the realization that we actually can't save these kids from this terrible fate is what ends up being, for me anyway, the toughest societal pill to swallow. Because the other seasons, the tragedy comes from adults making decisions for themselves. Even D'Angelo started the series as a murderer, hardly an innocent. The kids are just pure victims. They can't do anything to help themselves out of their situation. One of the toughest moments for me was when Michael was afraid of his brother's father and what the man might do to his brother... but even with all the kind, compassionate adults in his life, people who would do anything to make life better for him and his peers, who genuinely care about him and want him to be safe... the only person Michael feels he can go to for help is the murdering thug who supplies his mother and her "friends" with drugs in the first place. And it's not hard to see why. Yeah, I never really came to care too much for Namond, but I did really like his story. Of everyone on the corners, at his school, in his social circle, Namond was the only one who really had advantages. He had money, he had the power that comes with his father's name, and he had, I think, no desire whatsoever to be dealing drugs. He had a soft temperament, compassion, humanity, and he should have had a choice. It was really rough watching his parents, who should have wanted the best for him, pushing him towards one of the worst lives he could have, against his wishes and against his natural inclinations. All the aggression and frustration he displayed was borne by being forced into a life he hated and wasn't cut out for. The only kid on those corners who really had a choice, and his own parents took it away. Not because they were driven to by something as implacable as addiction, but because they were just genuinely horrible people. And what's the takeaway? Not necessarily that it's random who makes it out or not, but more that the kids who already have advantages are the only ones with a shot. That was brutal. I got shivers all over and made noises I don't care to describe. Even worse, though, for me, was his resigned forgiveness at the end. "It's okay. You tried." I may have wept a little. Wow. It turns out I have more feels about this season than I thought.

Glad you're enjoying the series! Wallace's death was definitely one of the hardest moments to get through. I know the "chess lesson" scene in Ep. 3 seemed ham-handed at the time, but in the perspective of the season as a whole, it becomes quite deftly prophetic, and actually continues to be so throughout the rest of the series. My favourite moment of the second half of the season, though, that's an easy one. I love this show, and my first time through it, my inner dramatist was near-catatonic with ecstasy. My inner feminist, however, was more cautious. Because as "The Sopranos" unfortunately taught us, there is a fine line between portraying a culture of misogyny, and participating in it. I was not sure exactly how well "The Wire" was going to walk that line until the magnificent scene where D'Angelo's girlfriend, obediently standing by her man despite the detectives' efforts to turn her, was brought down to the morgue to see the body of her friend and colleague, discarded in a dumpster by very people she was protecting, and realized exactly what she truly meant to the Barksdales and their crew. What women in general meant to people like that. And she agreed to put her own safety on the line to help take them down. Holy shit, was that ever satisfying! That was the moment when 100% of me became totally on board with the show and what it was doing.

I love this season so much, it's probably my favourite. (Of course, every time I rewatch another season, I think THAT one's my favourite!) The whole show is grim and brutal and hard to watch, but especially this season, given that the focus is children, and the takeaway is so hopeless. I noticed during my last rewatch something interesting in the opening credits. Towards the end, after that chilling shot of Snoop in the playground, there are about four or five shots in a row of circular objects spinning around. The convenience store wicket, the merry-go-round on the playground, the rims in the auto shop, the old tire being used as a toy... Certainly it's not a coincidence. While the whole show emphasizes the cycle of poverty, this is the season in which many storylines set into motion in season one come full circle. Especially Bodie, who rose in the ranks by shooting his friend dead for being a (potential) snitch, and now suffers the same fate himself in a situation best described as "through a mirror, darkly." And Prezbo, the same guy who once blinded a child for talking back to him, is now giving everything he can to support and inspire his young students. McNulty is approaching full circle, ending the season with one foot back on the ride he swore he'd walked away from. And the projects and the corners have come full circle, with the upheaval of the Barksdale crew, now fully replaced by Marlo's gang, nothing changing, certainly nothing improving. And yet, despite the apparent hopelessness of the situation, despite their parentage and the harsh culture in which they were raised, and being written off by every authority figure in sight, some of these kids are just damn good people. And no matter how bad things get, it's hard to believe they won't eventually be able to find a way to make things better. And that is, at it's core, what I believe makes this season so great.

Yeah, I'm not totally sure either. I don't think that part of it is important. The truly important aspect of that case was that if he had or had not been killed for being a witness, it could have decided the Baltimore mayoral election, since it could/would be seen as another failure on Royce's part to protect witnesses (part of a pattern) that Carcetti could use to his advantage politically. So all those ridiculous hoops were jumped through to try and prevent the case being solved BEFORE the election. But I'm not sure they ever made clear exactly WHAT the guy had witnessed.

Snoop is definitely a girl. She's played by Felicia Pearson (the character's full name is actually Felicia "Snoop" Pearson) and is addressed as "girl" and referred to as "she" throughout her run on the show (though it took me a few episodes to figure it out, too!). The actress is actually a former "corner kid" herself, and I believe "Snoop" is/was her actual street name. Fun fact: She's a friend of Michael K. Williams (who played Omar) and landed the role of Snoop after visiting the studio on MKW's invitation. This is why The Wire is so damn good at capturing the essence of Baltimore's many communities. Rather than attempt to re-create them in a studio somewhere by rough description, they used as much authentic local talent as they could. So much respect.

Just discovered this series. Holy cow! The first episode was incredible: every moment was a building block in constructing the perfect storm of a volatile situation! I binged the rest as soon as I had time the next day. In regards to Becky's suicide, I do believe she was raped, if not because that's what she told her mother, then because we know TLR is an unrepentant rapist, murderer and all-around monster. What motivated her to kill herself... I think it was suggested back in episode one that Becky didn't want her father to know about the rape, but he found out anyway, and she killed herself shortly after. It could be that he didn't react well, or that she couldn't live with the (perceived and undeserved) shame of her parents knowing what had happened to her. This was the parallel to Catherine having to tell Ann's father what had happened to her. As the event that may have caused her to lose her own daughter, having her do that was brutal. I don't think it was too much of a stretch. For one, the reason Catherine found Ann was because she was already keeping an eye on TLR. And the reason TLR had Ann was because he was the sort of monster who needed tracking by the police. We already knew he was a rapist. It makes perfect sense for him to continue harming others once being released from prison, and Catherine knew that, which is why she knew it was a good idea to watch him. Kirsten was a bit of a coincidence, but it looked like a small police force, so I can buy it. Ann was not her surrogate daughter until AFTER Catherine rescued her. So, this wasn't some crazy coincidence where the same terrible thing happened to two people who happened to know each other. Rather it was a case of one man committing several similar crimes (not unexpected), and his victims banding together afterward and seeing each other go through the same pain they felt themselves. The fact that they had a loose connection beforehand is not unusual in a small town. I do agree that it was a bit crazy of Catherine and Clare to let Ryan bike home by himself. Then again, they knew TLR was badly hurt and in hiding, possibly dead. And even if he was mobile, Catherine seemed certain that SHE was the one he wanted, she was the one hunting him with the most ferocity, so it would be crazy for him to go near her or her family when he should be trying to get as far away from her as he could. But it was still a stretch for them to let Ryan ride around out there alone. Despite the few problem areas, I thought this series was fantastic. I spent the whole run biting my nails and whimpering obscenities at my TV. One reviewer on tv.com said that what they loved about it was that they genuinely never knew what was going to happen next, and I totally agree. It was such a wild ride, and even though it was based in familiar territory, there was so much poised to go wrong, and to go right, at any given moment that it was a thrill finding out how it was going to turn!

I was wondering about this, too. Did the actor get injured before filming? I couldn't tell if they were trying to awkwardly explain away why Carl would be appearing with a cast for a few episodes, or if they were setting up a plotline for him, or if they were just trying to find an excuse to sideline him for an episode or two while they dealt with other story threads. Unless it's been mentioned in an interview or something, I guess we'll just have to keep watching to find out!

Unless you consider tokenism to be the pinnacle of post-racial casting, then yes. That is correct.

Exactly. The fact that there is a comment about it written into the script indicates that this cast has been assembled with a specific eye for diversity. So what's their excuse? It looks like Medieval Europe, but it's not really. It's a fantasy kingdom, not a historical one. It could be populated by whomever the producers decide. There's no historical context here, or need to abide by historical realism. And that scripted comment about "diversity" shows that they think they're doing a good job of it. But having one token Black performer in every chorus is not diversity. Sid and Isabella aren't treated like rarities because of their skin colour, which indicates that they are not anomalies in this world. So where are the others? If that one Black Pirate had a line or two, something to indicate that he was a person with a relationship to the other characters, that would be one thing. But it is not okay to bring out one "Black Pirate" or "Black Peasant" for a dance number and then shuffle them off again when it is time for some real human interaction. I could also mention that in an episode that seemed at first to be about him, Sid was the only one (besides Isabella) who actually DIDN'T get a story in episode 3. A proper story arc has a beginning, middle, and end. Gal got a story, where pretending to be a squire taught him a lesson about humility. The resolution to the whole episode was Gal finally "getting off his high horse" and being a friend to Sid. Richard and Madalena got a resolution to their story. Even the Eunuch got a complete story (gets kicked in the crotch, gets revenge in the form of outing Madalena and the jester to Richard, gets carted off to the dungeon). Sid and Isabella, and their fake engagement, was the only plotline that didn't actually get resolved, just an implication that it was probably dealt with off-screen later. Meaning that when the writers/editors were deciding how to cut things down to fit everything into a 21-minute episode, Sid and Isabella (coincidentally the only minority characters)'s story was the one they considered most expendable. I don't mean to harp on this point, but it really is too egregious to ignore, and too pervasive to just handwave away, especially since we're halfway through and it hasn't changed. It bugs me because I KNOW they can do better, the show has been brilliantly put together, performed and choreographed, and it's frustrating to see them doing so poorly in this regard.

I really enjoyed the science fair episode, except for a few nagging details. First off, I'm not quite okay with how unconcerned the team seems with Jones' casual thieving. The rest of the team aren't criminals, so why the blase attitude towards Jones using their headquarters as a getaway from the cops with stolen art tucked under his arm? Cassandra knows what it means to win or lose a trophy in a fair like that, and she's not the sort of unethical person to steal one. So I would expect her reaction to Jones stealing a trophy for her to be more "That's sweet!... Now give it back to the person who actually won it," rather than, "Oh goody! A trophy for me!" For that reason, I was also disappointed that the "judges" chose to award the prize to volcano kid, who obviously didn't deserve it, compared with all the other amazing projects that had been created. Unless they chose him because he was the only one who didn't try to use witchcraft to cheat? But if that was the case, I wish they had been clearer about it, rather than seeming to tank the thing for the heck of it. I would expect Cassandra, after her rant about how crucial the win would be to the future careers of the participants, to choose a project that was genuinely impressive out of respect for the process. And, unfortunately, this was the second episode in a row that left me scratching my head at the resolution. Last week it was Jones' magic time-freezing coin, and this week, Baird is using the Faraday Cage to protect the kids, then suddenly she's "between the seconds" with Morgana, and then she's... gone back in time? To volcano kid's demonstration? So, did the "blowback" undo the events of the fair after that point? But it can't have, because Amy's project was still disqualified. And if they DID want us to believe that all the magical attacks had been reversed and the timeline altered as a result, then why was fifth-alternate volcano kid even there? He wouldn't have been, if the magic was undone. I'm a big fan of "show, don't tell," but I wish they had actually explained what happened, because the events shown made zero sense. As for the second episode, I mostly enjoyed it a lot, but I'm finding it hard to form an objective opinion since it reminds me so strongly of the book "The Shining Girls" by Lauren Beukes, about a serial killer who finds a house that can travel through time and uses it to stalk his victims throughout history, and the would-be victim who miraculously survives and begins to figure out his game and hunt him back. Besides that, I enjoyed the episode, but still found the logic to be a bit weak. If the house was designed to meet people's needs, then wouldn't Katie's other victims' NEED to survive have outweighed her "wish" to kill them, especially if the house wanted her to fail all along? But I guess I can handwave it, because overall it was pretty solid.