One is the Loneliest Number: Unpopular GG Opinions

[HeySandyStrange]

4 hours ago, Blandings said:

The most unpopular one is that I think I wish the series had ended after the fourth season.

Honestly, I don't know how unpopular this is, since if my life-long tv viewing experience almost all shows start going downhill by the sixth season or sooner. GG seemed to have lost some of its purpose after Rory got to Yale, imo, and the last few years seemed to be full of pointless drama and meandering story lines. Most of the quality was concentrated in the first three seasons.

So here is a UO that has been bothering me. It is Dean related, forgive me if it has been discussed ad nauseam. For all the character flaws that fans list as reasons to dislike him, I don't understand why the opinions he shared in That Damn Donna Reed are among them. I have re-watched the episode many times over the years and I can't find anything wrong with what he was saying. Definitely Dean showed himself to be more of a traditionalist who favored the "simple" life compared to Rory or Lorelai, but I don't see how anyone got out of that that he was a latent misogynist and wanted a fantasy 50s housewife. If anything I thought Rory and Lorelai were showing how judgmental and close-minded they could be about anyone who didn't fit into their mold. I think Dean's point was pretty fair, that if a wife likes and choses to be housewife that there is nothing wrong with that. He certainly didn't want Rory pretend to be something that she wasn't and seemed proud of how smart and ambitious she was. Dean was by no mean's the best or most compelling character on GG, but I don't think he was the one in the wrong in this instance or that this was one of his bad moments.

[amensisterfriend]

So here is a UO that has been bothering me. It is Dean related, forgive me if it has been discussed ad nauseam. For all the character flaws that fans list as reasons to dislike him, I don't understand why the opinions he shared in That Damn Donna Reed are among them. I have re-watched the episode many times over the years and I can't find anything wrong with what he was saying. Definitely Dean showed himself to be more of a traditionalist who favored the "simple" life compared to Rory or Lorelai, but I don't see how anyone got out of that that he was a latent misogynist and wanted a fantasy 50s housewife. If anything I thought Rory and Lorelai were showing how judgmental and close-minded they could be about anyone who didn't fit into their mold

Even as someone who is very much NOT a Dean fan, ITA with this! TDDR may be the episode I've done the most radical turnaround on; it was always an episode I remember disliking intensely, but much to my happy surprise, once I finally gave it another chance I realized that it's definitely one of my favorites of S1. I think this episode may have my favorite Luke moments of the series, the L/L dynamic is at its best for me, and I actually found the Rory/Dean conflict relatable and kind of interesting. I was a fairly Rory-ish teen, and I could see my adolescent self being initially put off by Dean's comments and worried about his general view and expectations of women. Ultimately, like you, I ended up feeling like Dean was being judged way too harshly for essentially saying that it's nice IF some women want to be homemakers; that that choice isn't in and of itself 'bad' in any way. He actually did try to clarify that he wasn't saying all women SHOULD choose that route and, even as a Dean Disliker, I'll freely admit that he seemed to admire Rory's lofty academic and professional ambitions.

And you are so right about Lorelai and Rory being closed minded and judgmental, especially when they're together. They're actually very much like Emily in that regard---they just usually happen to be closed minded and judgmental about different things. (Like perceived coolness and musical preferences and just generally not having the "right" tastes, interests and viewpoints!)  I still really like Lorelai despite her many (many, many, many, MANY!) flaws and love Rory despite hers (though I agree she makes it harder to maintain that love in later seasons!), and their relationship with each other is the heart and soul of the show for me. But even I can admit that as a duo they really do have this cliquey, judgy vibe at times, like two preteens giggling in the cafeteria about just how uncool non-them people are.  You see it a lot at town meetings/events and often when they're around one or the other's current significant other. 

It reminds me of a line I read in a review of the revival---though rest assured it's not spoilery AT ALL, just a very general commentary about the series---about how throughout the show it was always hard to determine whether we're supposed to note how narcissistic, judgmental and even carelessly cruel the characters can be, or whether we're supposed to find their flaws more endearing than egregious. (That is a horribly butchered paraphrase of the the reviewer's comment, but hopefully you guys get the gist!) My own view is that AS-P has a tendency to overly exaggerate most of her characters' flaws because she thinks it makes for more vibrant, memorable characters and comedic/dramatic scenes, often not realizing that we come away thinking that said characters behaved pretty shabbily. Like she's so focused on making an individual scene and moment more funny/dramatic/cute/clever/whatever the case may be that she loses sight of how her characters end up perceived in the big picture.

Most of the quality was concentrated in the first three seasons.

Whenever we do our lists of favorite episodes, I find that more and more of mine come from the first three seasons, especially seasons 2 or 3. It's sad how few episodes I'd really miss if later seasons, especially S5 and S6, were magically erased :) 

[cuddlingcrowley]

2 hours ago, amensisterfriend said:

I'm still surprised that their relationship amounted to more than a couple of one night stands in the fifth season and wish it had ended there. If not, it should have at least ended when Jess came back into town and Logan was even more of a pompous drunken jerk than usual. 

I actually like Logan as an individual (mostly) and I really dug the Rory/Logan relationship in S5, but I agree with the above so much! It should never had gotten as serious as it eventually became. It really defied characterization and all around believability.

I understand keeping them together through the Lorelai/Rory strangement for obvious thematic reasons but by the time Jess rolled into town the writing on the wall was clear. Logan and Rory weren't right for each other.

The bridesmaids thing was beating a dead horse dead. After that, they were never enjoyable to watch, IMO. On the back of my mind, sometimes I like to entertain the thought the reason Rory and Jess didn't get back together then was because ASP knew she wouldn't be there to give them a proper storyline.

As far as the revival goes, I hope against hope ASP doesn't make the mistake of falling for the fact that Rory and Logan have nice chemistry and look pretty together.  Enough!

Edited November 16, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley

[hippielamb]

2 hours ago, amensisterfriend said:

I'm at the table of people who thinks this as well. Even *I* mostly like Luke in S1, and those who have been around a little while know that I have major issues with him overall :) The acting and writing combined to exaggerate his temper issues and bitterness post-S1, often making him seem (to me) like an utterly unpleasant killjoy at best and a nasty brute at worst. I'm realizing as I type this that I actually like Luke more in S7 than in nearly any post-S1 season. At least I'm in the right thread :) 

He was the most likable in season 1 but as a viewer, it annoyed me how they were pushing him and Lorelai together. If they had hooked up then and gone back to being friends, I could handled their relationship a lot better. 

[Melancholy]

On November 16, 2016 at 3:51 PM, HeySandyStrange said:

So here is a UO that has been bothering me. It is Dean related, forgive me if it has been discussed ad nauseam. For all the character flaws that fans list as reasons to dislike him, I don't understand why the opinions he shared in That Damn Donna Reed are among them. I have re-watched the episode many times over the years and I can't find anything wrong with what he was saying. Definitely Dean showed himself to be more of a traditionalist who favored the "simple" life compared to Rory or Lorelai, but I don't see how anyone got out of that that he was a latent misogynist and wanted a fantasy 50s housewife. If anything I thought Rory and Lorelai were showing how judgmental and close-minded they could be about anyone who didn't fit into their mold. I think Dean's point was pretty fair, that if a wife likes and choses to be housewife that there is nothing wrong with that. He certainly didn't want Rory pretend to be something that she wasn't and seemed proud of how smart and ambitious she was. Dean was by no mean's the best or most compelling character on GG, but I don't think he was the one in the wrong in this instance or that this was one of his bad moments.

I agree with this. I don't like Dean but I think his POV was fine in TDDR. 

In the spirit of supporting a guy that I normally dislike even if it's an UO, I'm mostly on Chris's side when he flips out at Lorelai at the end of It Should Have Been Lorelai. IMO Chris undeniably wronged Lorelai by being a dead-beat dad but he doesn't also deserve blame for Lorelai sabotaging her romantic relationships. Now, I know that Lorelai didn't intend to angrily blame Chris but she did intend to play the martyr and as Chris said, get guilty-sympathy from him and that was completely inappropriate. Now, I'm inclined to say that Chris still should have just bit back his anger because Lorelai deserves a lot of slack from him for single-handedly taking on both of their responsibilities to raise Rory and doing it so well. However still it's anger that Chris has a right to and Lorelai could use more people setting her straight. 

[cuddlingcrowley]

On 16/11/2016 at 5:09 PM, hippielamb said:

He was the most likable in season 1 but as a viewer, it annoyed me how they were pushing him and Lorelai together. 

I'm amazed whenever I read stuff like this because until the end of S4 Luke was just one of towns' people to me. Yes, it was obvious he had a thing for Lorelai and on occasion she was intrigued, but he was always the guy on the background for me, as a viewer. You can imagined how shocked I was that by S7 all signs were pointing to him being endgame. Of all of Lorelai's guys, he was the underdog for me. Oh well.

Edited November 18, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley

[Guest]

I completely agree with the opinions about Dean and TDDR and Chris in ISHBL.  Yelling in public is too much, but I had no problem with what he said.  I think in a lot of ways, Lorelai was childish in her relationships both romantic and otherwise. She doesn't necessarily want something until she can't have it or just in general she doesn't want to share - see Luke and Rachel, Rory and her grandparents, Chris and Sherry.

[Taryn74]

3 minutes ago, deaja said:

I completely agree with the opinions about Dean and TDDR and Chris in ISHBL.  Yelling in public is too much, but I had no problem with what he said.  I think in a lot of ways, Lorelai was childish in her relationships both romantic and otherwise. She doesn't necessarily want something until she can't have it or just in general she doesn't want to share - see Luke and Rachel, Rory and her grandparents, Chris and Sherry.

ITA!  I think I mentioned this when I was voting on that scene in the elimination game, but the only thing I didn't like about that scene was that it was OOC for Christopher to yell at Lorelai in public and so it always felt "off" to me, especially after watching the rest of the series.  What he said to her?  Totally spot-on and something she needed to hear.

[txhorns79]

Quote

-Lorelai, while a great character, was not a great parent. She taught Rory that she was the center of the universe.  Then when Rory acted on those beliefs, she acted shocked and appalled.

Go even deeper, and you can say the parent who produced a child with an incredible drive and determination to live out her dream was Emily.  Lorelai's daughter was not a fighter and was not prepared for real adversity.     

[ChlcGirl]

Truth above me (would quote but I've got some quote from June stuck on my phone) 

My greatest wish for the revival is to see Rory not getting everything she wants just by lifting her finger.  I want to see her taken down about 18 pegs - like Mitchum but even more casually dismissive.

[Blandings]

The older I get, the more I find Emily easier to sympathize with than Lorelai and Lorelai easier to sympathize with than Rory. I am Rory in certain ways, a bookish introvert who's on surer footing academically than socially, but although her flaws are less glaringly obvious and obnoxious to the viewer than Emily's and Lorelai's, Rory has become the least likable Gilmore girl to me. Emily and Lorelai have a spirit and resilience that Rory lacks. And Emily and Lorelai's multiple imperfections are noted and commented upon; Rory's are generally overlooked or excused. Maybe I like Rory less and less because she reminds me of parts of myself that I wish I could fix, but as much as folks here dislike Lorelai, I find Lorelai easier to love these days and a much more interesting character. And despite normally disliking those of Emily's ilk, she is often the Gilmore girl I love most. 

The Gilmores are complex and well drawn characters overall, but sometimes I find myself thinking most of the men in their lives deserve better. 

Edited November 18, 2016 by Blandings

[Guest]

49 minutes ago, ChlcGirl said:

Truth above me (would quote but I've got some quote from June stuck on my phone) 

My greatest wish for the revival is to see Rory not getting everything she wants just by lifting her finger.  I want to see her taken down about 18 pegs - like Mitchum but even more casually dismissive.

Especially since they spun the Mitchum thing as untrue, and acted like he had just said it because of her relationship with Logan. The fact that there could have been true or even partly true never occurred to anyone named Gilmore.

[NumberCruncher]

3 hours ago, Blandings said:

The Gilmores are complex and well drawn characters overall, but sometimes I find myself thinking most of the men in their lives deserve better. 

This.  I find all 3 women rather selfish and always tended to sympathize with their significant others.  I much prefer the Emily/Lorelai/Rory relationship over their romantic entanglements because I feel like they don't treat the men in their lives very well at all.  Maybe that's to be expected due to the female-centric focus of the series but it is what it is, I guess.

[ZuluQueenOfDwarves]

Really? I've never once felt for Richard. Emily is a fantastic character, and her flaws are rich and varied, but Richard hit the jackpot with her. Their temperaments are well-suited to one another, she's an expert at commanding the social circles he relied on to benefit his career, plus she loved and was utterly devoted to him. 

[ChlcGirl]

58 minutes ago, NumberCruncher said:

This.  I find all 3 women rather selfish and always tended to sympathize with their significant others.  I much prefer the Emily/Lorelai/Rory relationship over their romantic entanglements because I feel like they don't treat the men in their lives very well at all.  Maybe that's to be expected due to the female-centric focus of the series but it is what it is, I guess.

Emily/Lorelai/Rory really all deserve each other.  And I mean that in the kindest and most honest way.  Absolutely none of the men (and even some of the other women on the show) really don't deserve to be treated the way they treat folks.  They can really only go head-to-head fairly against each other.

[Melancholy]

I thought Emily was a wonderful wife to Richard. She's a high maintenance shrill person and I could see that draining on Richard but Emily was required to and did make it her life's work to make his life as perfect as possible. At the cost of her happiness (Trix, Jason, his business drama)

Zuluofthedwarves beat me to this point. 

Edited November 18, 2016 by Melancholy

[ChlcGirl]

3 minutes ago, ZuluQueenOfDwarves said:

Really? I've never once felt for Richard. Emily is a fantastic character, and her flaws are rich and varied, but Richard hit the jackpot with her. Their temperaments are well-suited to one another, she's an expert at commanding the social circles he relied on to benefit his career, plus she loved and was utterly devoted to him. 

during the course of the show I have felt for Richard when he lodged between two of the girls.  There's truly no winning in that situation! :)

[Melancholy]

To add, I think Rory was a fine girlfriend to Logan except for The Real Paul Anka. She had her share of mistakes with Jess but I think it was impossible to have a smooth, happy dignified relationship with him in S3 and I say this as a Jess fan. I think she was just crappy to Dean. 

Lorelai is the worst at romance of the girls. I don't even think she was in love with any of her guys except for Luke. She often seemed like she'd enter romances just to perform the virtue of love to all and sundry and thrived off when the romance became inappropriate but lost interest when the shock and drama of the circumstances receded. Like when it was about settling down with Max instead of dating Rory's teacher or settling down with Christopher instead of the scandal rebound. And while I strongly believe Lorelai loved and respected Luke so deeply, a lot of that is grounded in her testing him on how much he'll stick by when she's a pain. 

Edited November 18, 2016 by Melancholy

[blueray]

I was watching Gilmore girls yesterday  and I noticed that Lorieli called her father "dad" but called Emily "Emily". I have never thought about it before then. Lorieli definelty had a better relationship with her dad, which shows throughout the show. But I just found that was interesting way back in a season 1 episode.

[txhorns79]

Quote

Lorielai definitely had a better relationship with her dad, which shows throughout the show. But I just found that was interesting way back in a season 1 episode.

I don't know if I agree.  Maybe it seemed better because Emily took the brunt of Lorelai's attitude/quips/anger?  With Richard, they seemed more like cordial acquaintances.  Sometimes he would show that he was hurt by her behavior, but most of the time, it didn't seem like they had much of a relationship one way or the other. 

[Bumblebee Tights]

2 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

I don't know if I agree.  Maybe it seemed better because Emily took the brunt of Lorelai's attitude/quips/anger?  With Richard, they seemed more like cordial acquaintances.  Sometimes he would show that he was hurt by her behavior, but most of the time, it didn't seem like they had much of a relationship one way or the other. 

Yeah, I don't know if I'd define Lorelai's relationship with Richard vs. her relationship with Emily as "better", so much as "less conflict driven". I actually usually found Richard to be pretty cold and stand-offish when it came to Lorelai, especially when you compare it to how clearly enamored he was with Rory. Emily, on the other hand, no matter what the current status of her relationship with Lorelai was, was always completely passionate about her daughter and her involvement in her daughter's life, often to her detriment. So even though this made for a more contentious relationship than the one Richard had with Lorelai, I always felt Emily cared about her a lot more.

In fact, there's really only one episode (though there are a few little moments throughout the series) where I feel like Richard really focuses on Lorelai, and that's Help Wanted, which I love for that very reason.

[moonb]

Richard strikes me as mostly conflict-avoidant, unlike Lorelai and Emily, and something else he had in common with Rory. Sometimes that came across as as coldness or lack of interest, in his relationship to Lorelai especially, but also his refusal to draw a line with Trix about her treatment of Emily, or his oblivious belittling of Emily's charity work.  Or sometimes it comes across as underhanded deviousness, like in his business dealings in season 4, or dealing with Lorelai's relationship with Luke in season 5 (taking Luke golfing, persuading Emily to keep in contact with Lorelai after WBB). Richard is a warm grandpa-type the same way Rory is a sweet and compliant teenager in the beginning - it turns out they both have these callous tendencies also. 

[Melancholy]

I really agree, moonb. I think among the Gilmore foursome, Lorelai is similar to Emily and Rory is similar to Richard. I think Rory and Richard are products of being adored only-children of hyper-capable, loving mothers who put their children on pedestals even though they get snarky with the world at large and throw considerable charisma and force of personality behind how they ADORE their children far above the rest of the inferior global population. There's a big contrast between the pain of the abandonment of the father (either through death or willful abandonment) contrasted with the hyper-adoration of the mother that drive Rory and Richard to hold onto that venerated adored feeling that their mothers imbued them from the world at large and to deal poorly when they don't get it. 

I think it's quite a family-trait that Richard, Lorelai, and Rory held on their first loves to self-destructive, immoral ends with some possession of MINE, not losing what's MINE. 

[Blandings]

This is the brightest, most thoughtful and insightful group of Gilmore Girls I've ever found anywhere. 

You all are reminding me that the Rory/Richard relationship was one of my favorite aspects of the show when I first watched it, but I was less touched by it this second time around. It's wonderful in the first season, though you all have seen by now that I think almost everything was at its most wonderful in the first season. Through most of the series, there is something almost cruel about how Richard constantly shuns Lorelai while slobbering praise and attention all over Rory. I'm not claiming that's intentional, but it sometimes feels like Richard really rubs it in about how perfect Rory is and how Rory's exemplary traits and behavior differ from Lorelai's own actual or perceived failings as a child and even now as an adult. The contrast between how he treats them could not be more glaring. And the more frustrated I get with Rory, the more irritating it is to see how Richard is her self-appointed chief enabler. We talk about how Lorelai and the townsfolk pampered Rory and gave her an inflated view of herself and what life owes her, but Richard is at least as big a culprit. It's possible that many grandparents see their grandchildren as perfect, but when you contrast it to the critical coldness he treated Lorelai with,  it can be as obnoxious as it is sweet. I know that Season 6 was about Emily channeling the hopes she had had for Lorelai into Rory, but it sometimes feels like Richard has been doing that all along, giving up on the thorny and difficult relationship with Lorelai that once cauased him pain and directing all of his love and hopes towards Rory instead. While Emily pushes too forcefully, Richard emotionally retreats. I think we see that both in their relationship with each other and with Lorelai. I'm not claiming he didn't love Lorelai; he did, though it was a more conditional love than what we usually expect from a parent. But he distances from emotional issues and relationships that cause drama and potential angst, so it was often easier for him not to try to engage with Lorelai than to risk getting close to her. 

Quote

I think among the Gilmore foursome, Lorelai is similar to Emily and Rory is similar to Richard. I think Rory and Richard are products of being adored only-children of hyper-capable, loving mothers who put their children on pedestals even though they get snarky with the world at large and throw considerable charisma and force of personality behind how they ADORE their children far above the rest of the inferior global population. There's a big contrast between the pain of the abandonment of the father (either through death or willful abandonment) contrasted with the hyper-adoration of the mother that drive Rory and Richard to hold onto that venerated adored feeling that their mothers imbued them from the world at large and to deal poorly when they don't get it. 

I think it's quite a family-trait that Richard, Lorelai, and Rory held on their first loves to self-destructive, immoral ends with some possession of MINE, not losing what's MINE.

x

 

 

I want to legally marry this post. 

Edited November 19, 2016 by Blandings

[txhorns79]

Quote

Richard strikes me as mostly conflict-avoidant, unlike Lorelai and Emily, and something else he had in common with Rory. Sometimes that came across as as coldness or lack of interest, in his relationship to Lorelai especially, but also his refusal to draw a line with Trix about her treatment of Emily, or his oblivious belittling of Emily's charity work.

I viewed it somewhat like Richard essentially wrote Lorelai off when she ran away.  He has that big moment of emotion with Lorelai in Christopher Returns, and gives her at least a little insight into what her parents lives were like after she left, and then just kind of shuts down with her.  He has little moments with Lorelai that pop up again in the series, like when Lorelai helps set up his office, or when she has an insurance question for him, but otherwise, you might say he just doesn't want to open himself up to be hurt again.  With Emily, she very clearly almost desperately wanted a relationship with Lorelai, even a bad one, just to have something.  That's real love, I think.         

[chessiegal]

6 minutes ago, txhorns79 said:

I viewed it somewhat like Richard essentially wrote Lorelai off when she ran away.  He has that big moment of emotion with Lorelai in Christopher Returns, and gives her at least a little insight into what her parents lives were like after she left, and then just kind of shuts down with her.  He has little moments with Lorelai that pop up again in the series, like when Lorelai helps set up his office, or when she has an insurance question for him, but otherwise, you might say he just doesn't want to open himself up to be hurt again.  With Emily, she very clearly almost desperately wanted a relationship with Lorelai, even a bad one, just to have something.  That's real love, I think.         

I so agree. It's clear to me through the entire series that Emily very much wanted a relationship with Lorelai. She might not have understood Lorelai, but she wanted a closer relationship. While I can criticize and nitpick parts of the show, I think overall it is a wonderfully crafted story. 

[Melancholy]

29 minutes ago, Blandings said:

You all are reminding me that the Rory/Richard relationship was one of my favorite aspects of the show when I first watched it, but I was less touched by it this second time around. It's wonderful in the first season, though you all have seen by now that I think almost everything was at its most wonderful in the first season. Through most of the series, there is something almost cruel about how Richard constantly shuns Lorelai while slobbering praise and attention all over Rory. I'm not claiming that's intentional, but it sometimes feels like Richard really rubs it in about how perfect Rory is and how Rory's exemplary traits and behavior differ from Lorelai's own actual or perceived failings as a child and even now as an adult. The contrast between how he treats them could not be more glaring. And the more frustrated I get with Rory, the more irritating it is to see how Richard is her self-appointed chief enabler. We talk about how Lorelai and the townsfolk pampered Rory and gave her an inflated view of herself and what life owes her, but Richard is at least as big a culprit. It's possible that many grandparents see their grandchildren as perfect, but when you contrast it to the critical coldness he treated Lorelai with,  it can be as obnoxious as it is sweet. I know that Season 6 was about Emily channeling the hopes she had had for Lorelai into Rory, but it sometimes feels like Richard has been doing that all along, giving up on the thorny and difficult relationship with Lorelai that once cauased him pain and directing all of his love and hopes towards Rory instead. While Emily pushes too forcefully, Richard emotionally retreats. I think we see that both in their relationship with each other and with Lorelai. I'm not claiming he didn't love Lorelai; he did, though it was a more conditional love than what we usually expect from a parent. But he distances from emotional issues and relationships that cause drama and potential angst, so it was often easier for him not to try to engage with Lorelai than to risk getting close to her. 

Yup. You can see that pattern in S6. Emily is upset that Rory was having sex and she knows that the boat-stealing/dropping out of Yale isn't good but Emily deals with Rory's problems by suffocating attention and bossiness on Rory to set her straight. By contrast, Richard just retreated and avoided Rory the more that he grew upset with her, right down to sitting in his office through her 21st birthday party. 

I agree that Richard treats Rory and Lorelai radically differently and it's very unfair. Emily is more outwardly fond of Rory because Rory is leading the life that Emily approves of. However when Rory steps out of line, Emily does treat Rory like she treats Lorelai. Certainly in S6, but even earlier, Emily corrects how Rory asked Trevor out, how Rory didn't give a speech to her classmates at her birthday, Rory's "lapses" in first dance decorum with Dean, the furniture in the apartment, the "No one is the mood for your funny jokes, young lady" when she was on edge about Trix, the "Go back outside and do this evening again!" scolding when Rory snubbed Emily post-Luke/Lorelai's break-up. It's not good that Emily is so critical and insulting- but that's just Emily's parenting style and how she deals with her descendants. 

However, Richard has a calculated insurance-man mentality where he makes a choice on where and when he's going to invest his love and attention based on the returns that he anticipates receiving. He decided that Rory was going to make him proud and give his legacy meaning only after Rory impressed while golfing in contrast to Emily was determined to have a good relationship with her granddaughter no matter what as long as she now had a chance to be in her life. However, Richard decided Lorelai was too much of a risky/failing proposition so he withdrew "coverage". Richard became more caring later on in the series to Lorelai when, IMO, Lorelai demonstrated both longevity of a relationship with him and also business success. However, that's further conditional love. 

I think you even see this with Richard's relationship with Emily. Richard did become a more attentive husband in the later seasons while he was prone to take Emily for granted in the early seasons and it all came down to how he realized that his life is much worse without Emily in it in S5. 

Edited November 19, 2016 by Melancholy

[hippielamb]

On Thursday, November 17, 2016 at 7:11 PM, cuddlingcrowley said:

I'm amazed whenever I read stuff like this because until the end of S4 Luke was just one of towns' people to me. Yes, it was obvious he had a thing for Lorelai and on occasion she was intrigued, but he was always the guy on the background for me, as a viewer. You can imagined how shocked I was that by S7 all signs were pointing to him being endgame. Of all of Lorelai's guys, he was the underdog for me. Oh well.

It feels almost heavy handed. Sookie keeps bringing up the possibility of them being together, even Emily mentions it a few times (with an attitude of snobbery, of course). Even Rachel dances around it. We, the audience are supposed to sympathize with Luke when Lorelai starts dating Max. The producers increased his role on the show, and included his crazy family (though I do like Liz). 

I started watching the series in season 2, so that always effects my opinion on the show. They seemed to scale back the Luke/Lorelai stuff with it still being on the back burner. But season 1 was much more obvious. 

[Taryn74]

3 hours ago, Melancholy said:

I think it's quite a family-trait that Richard, Lorelai, and Rory held on their first loves to self-destructive, immoral ends with some possession of MINE, not losing what's MINE. 

Um, wow.  Why have I never noticed this before???  That is exactly right.

[cuddlingcrowley]

18 hours ago, hippielamb said:

It feels almost heavy handed. Sookie keeps bringing up the possibility of them being together, even Emily mentions it a few times (with an attitude of snobbery, of course). Even Rachel dances around it. We, the audience are supposed to sympathize with Luke when Lorelai starts dating Max. The producers increased his role on the show, and included his crazy family (though I do like Liz). 

I started watching the series in season 2, so that always effects my opinion on the show. They seemed to scale back the Luke/Lorelai stuff with it still being on the back burner. But season 1 was much more obvious. 

I adored Max, but I suppose Christopher always felt like THE guy the writers were pushing for Lorelai, for me. Until Sherry got pregnant, that is. That's when they cooled it way off. But at the back of my mind he was always gonna come back eventually. 

And then we had Jason who I've always dug. 

So any hints to Luke/Lorelai always seemed like isolated affairs, in my eyes. More to keep the tension up in a scene than anything that was ever gonna have a major pay-off. Heh, shows you how wrong I was! I suppose my complete indiference to Luke's character blinded me.

The only period of Gilmore Girls that I can say honestly felt heavy handed towards L/L endgame was season seven for me. After all, there was no other reason Luke would be entitled to a completely separate storyline.

Edited November 19, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley

[hippielamb]

2 hours ago, cuddlingcrowley said:

I adored Max, but I suppose Christopher always felt like THE guy the writers were pushing for Lorelai, for me. Until Sherry got pregnant, that is. That's when they cooled it way off. But at the back of my mind he was always gonna come back eventually. 

And then we had Jason who I've always dug. 

So any hints to Luke/Lorelai always seemed like isolated affairs, in my eyes. More to keep the tension up in a scene than anything that was ever gonna have a major pay-off. Heh, shows you how wrong I was! I suppose my complete indiference to Luke's character blinded me.

The only period of Gilmore Girls that I can say honestly felt heavy handed towards L/L endgame was season seven for me. After all, there was no other reason Luke would be entitled to a completely separate storyline.

That's how I always saw it too, but season 2 is the year for Lorelai and Chris so I'm sure that influenced my view. Plus, I'm inclined to like him more than Luke (who had his share of conflicts with Lorelai in season 2). 

[Guest]

On 11/18/2016 at 7:40 PM, Melancholy said:

 

I think it's quite a family-trait that Richard, Lorelai, and Rory held on their first loves to self-destructive, immoral ends with some possession of MINE, not losing what's MINE. 

Wow. I never thought of this or saw it pointed out before, but it is spot on.

21 hours ago, hippielamb said:

 (though I do like Liz)

Good thing this is the UO thread. ;)

[Frelling Tralk]

On 18/11/2016 at 4:31 PM, deaja said:

Especially since they spun the Mitchum thing as untrue, and acted like he had just said it because of her relationship with Logan. The fact that there could have been true or even partly true never occurred to anyone named Gilmore.

It was frustrating how in season six the viewpoint of the show seemed to be that Rory was unfairly attacked by Mitchum, even though there was nothing particularly harsh or belittling about him in that scene, he even tries to console Rory by saying that he's not unhappy with everything that she's been doing, and that she would make a good assistant. Obviously that wasn't what Rory wanted to hear, but still it wasn't like he was tearing into her either just for the sake of it. Richard and Emily were hypocrites to act like it was such an outrage to 'crush' a young girl like that, even though they were always happy enough to judge and criticise others, indeed they were absolutely delighted and couldn't stop laughing when Rory wrote an article on a young ballerina which really did personally attack her by comparing her to a hippo, and pointing out that fat was hanging out of her bra strap 

Edited November 22, 2016 by Frelling Tralk

[Crs97]

I always thought Mitchum was right that she didn't have "it."  When Christianne Amapour showed up at the inn, she had to be dragged to speak to her.  Mitchum was trying to get her involved at the internship, and she demurred.  One harsh criticism and she went off the deep end.  No, she didn't have what it took.

[amensisterfriend]

I always thought Mitchum was right that she didn't have "it."  When Christianne Amapour showed up at the inn, she had to be dragged to speak to her.  Mitchum was trying to get her involved at the internship, and she demurred.  One harsh criticism and she went off the deep end.  No, she didn't have what it took.

Exactly! And my UO is that this whole issue and how it was (or, more accurately, wasn't) handled on the show bugs me a lot more than the question which of her men she did/should/will end up with :) 

Even as early as S1, and certainly S2 and beyond, there were just so many signs that Rory wasn't well-suited to be an international correspondent. And almost none of the reasons why are meant as an insult---it's just a matter of which path I see her as the right fit for, and, like Mitchum, I don't think journalism is what Rory was meant to pursue. She's naturally introverted, she hates conflict, criticism, controversy and stirring things up, she loves consistency and stability and routine, she freaks out when people are mad at her, she's mostly a homebody, and she always seemed FAR more genuinely excited and passionate about novels and fiction than she did about journalism, politics, social issues etc., at least to me.  Honestly, you could make the argument that she's the Gilmore LEAST cut out for that particular career! Maybe she'll end up doing book reviews for the Stars Hollow Gazette, which would take into account her passion for fiction and her love for being close to home. That or maybe a fact checker or copyeditor are the only types of newspaper work I can see Rory genuinely loving and doing well.

Again, a lot of the above is actually why I relate to Rory, so I don't mean it as a put down. I just think that a story about how her lifelong plan and dream turned out NOT to be what she's meant to do with her life would have been a lot more relatable and interesting (at least to me!) than the storylines we actually got for her in S5-S7. It would have been fun to see her have to figure herself out and redefine herself, experimenting with different majors and jobs, etc. And it would have been made for a more proactive character rather than just watching her drift along aimlessly with the DAR, Life and Death Brigade etc. and reacting to whatever lame turns her love life took in a particular week :) 

[Frelling Tralk]

35 minutes ago, Crs97 said:

I always thought Mitchum was right that she didn't have "it."  When Christianne Amapour showed up at the inn, she had to be dragged to speak to her.  Mitchum was trying to get her involved at the internship, and she demurred.  One harsh criticism and she went off the deep end.  No, she didn't have what it took.

I agree, once Mitchum made it clear that he had been looking for her to speak up more and share her opinions, all she needed to do with take that feedback onboard and resolve to impress him. Really his criticism wasn't all that devastating, it's not like he accused her of being a bad writer and having no talent for it! Dropping out of college entirely was a ridiculous overreaction to what he actually said, and it annoyed me how season six then kept painting him as the bad guy, never mind examining why Rory would let a bit of fairly mild criticism knock her off-course entirely

[Kohola3]

I always thought it so hypocritical when Richard ranted about Mitchum "devastating the girl" when he would have done the same damned thing.  He went through how many resumes and interviews for an admin - he acted like they should all have a PhD to be worthy of the position.  I doubt any woman with the Caspar Milquetoast personality that Rory displayed would last 5 minutes in his office.   (For you youngsters, here's an explanation of the reference.)

[readster]

1 hour ago, Frelling Tralk said:

I agree, once Mitchum made it clear that he had been looking for her to speak up more and share her opinions, all she needed to do with take that feedback onboard and resolve to impress him. Really his criticism wasn't all that devastating, it's not like he accused her of being a bad writer and having no talent for it! Dropping out of college entirely was a ridiculous overreaction to what he actually said, and it annoyed me how season six then kept painting him as the bad guy, never mind examining why Rory would let a bit of fairly mild criticism knock her off-course entirely

That's what I said during the original airing and so forth. It was made worst when Richard ended up finding out what Mitchum said and Mitchum told Richard: "If she did all this because of one thing I said, then I was right." Richard didn't have a come back, if anything, I think Emily bitching the wife made more sense. I mean, how dare she said that Rory was unfit for Logan, when she married into money. Had come from a very dark past and it was known that Mitchum and even Mitchum's dad were known to be on the border with cheating with them. How Honour ended up so level headed and sweet is beyond me. When you looked at their parents, Logan's "bad boy, thrill seeking" made sense. Honour went the other way and was down to Earth. So, when it comes to Emily's smack down, that was fine, it was Mitchum's that I thought was ridiculous not only how Rory took it, but then how everyone thought that Lorelai had made up the disastrous dinner and the critique at the paper that day. I remember Richard saying himself: "I doubt that's what happened." No, it was EXACTLY how it happened dumbass. 

4 minutes ago, Kohola3 said:

I always thought it so hypocritical when Richard ranted about Mitchum "devastating the girl" when he would have done the same damned thing.  He went through how many resumes and interviews for an admin - he acted like they should all have a PhD to be worthy of the position.  I doubt any woman with the Caspar Milquetoast personality that Rory displayed would last 5 minutes in his office.   (For you youngsters, here's an explanation of the reference.)

That's exactly it, both Richard and Emily lived in this short sighted bubble of how things should be and how dare anyone call them out on: "That's not how the world works." Of course, reminds me of my own in-laws who had the same view on things (generational thing I guess). However, how many times did Richard or Emily have to be smacked upside the head with these facts and then acted like: "Lalala, no that's no real, stop lying to me, look a rainbow!" 

[cuddlingcrowley]

1 hour ago, Kohola3 said:

(For you youngsters, here's an explanation of the reference.)

You sent me in a spiral googling recipes of "Milk toast". I hope you're proud of yourself.

[JaggedLilPill]

The Mitchum thing was blown so entirely out of proportion by everyone named Gilmore. Even if that was his opinion, so what? He wasn't going to actively prevent Rory from getting a job as a journalist. He also wasn't going to be following her around checking up on her success (or lack thereof). On one hand, I get it. I hate criticism, but at that point you have a choice. You can take the person's suggestion to heart and make an effort to change or you can brush it off and continue doing it the way you feel comfortable. This is partly why I think Rory regressed after season three. This is the girl who managed to write a brilliant article when Paris gave her the parking lot paving as a topic but she can't handle Mitchum's critique? Just a lazy way to start a feud between Rory and Lorelai.

Now, I do absolutely get their anger at Shira and Logan's grandpa since that was really asshole behavior at dinner. Another overreaction. Calm the hell down! Rory and Logan were officially together for all of two seconds. Neither was thinking about marriage. Plus, it's really terrible to bring up other suitors around the actual girlfriend/boyfriend. (Although Richard and Emily's anger is quite ironic considering Richard's shanghaing of Dean years earlier and the more recent crappy elitist attitude they had towards Luke only some months prior. RME). 

[Minneapple]

4 hours ago, amensisterfriend said:

Even as early as S1, and certainly S2 and beyond, there were just so many signs that Rory wasn't well-suited to be an international correspondent. And almost none of the reasons why are meant as an insult---it's just a matter of which path I see her as the right fit for, and, like Mitchum, I don't think journalism is what Rory was meant to pursue. She's naturally introverted, she hates conflict, criticism, controversy and stirring things up, she loves consistency and stability and routine, she freaks out when people are mad at her, she's mostly a homebody, and she always seemed FAR more genuinely excited and passionate about novels and fiction than she did about journalism, politics, social issues etc., at least to me.  Honestly, you could make the argument that she's the Gilmore LEAST cut out for that particular career! Maybe she'll end up doing book reviews for the Stars Hollow Gazette, which would take into account her passion for fiction and her love for being close to home. That or maybe a fact checker or copyeditor are the only types of newspaper work I can see Rory genuinely loving and doing well.

Well, journalism isn't just about politics and controversy. As you say, she would have done a fine job as a book reviewer. Or a movie reviewer. Or writing longer feature pieces for a magazine or a website like Buzzfeed (more likely nowadays). She could have made a good entertainment reporter, writing about music and bands. That's still a type of journalism; it's just not "covering war from a hole in Afghanistan." And I agree, Rory wasn't really suited for that kind of journalism at all.

[amensisterfriend]

Well, journalism isn't just about politics and controversy. As you say, she would have done a fine job as a book reviewer. Or a movie reviewer. Or writing longer feature pieces for a magazine or a website like Buzzfeed (more likely nowadays). She could have made a good entertainment reporter, writing about music and bands. That's still a type of journalism; it's just not "covering war from a hole in Afghanistan."

Right, I'm aware that there's more than one type of journalism. But Rory had specifically indicated on at least a couple of occasions that she wants to be a foreign correspondent, and the job she took at the end of the series was to cover Obama's campaign, so that's the type of 'politics/controversy/tons of travel/etc.' journalism I was referring to in my post and which I think she was poorly suited for.   

[cuddlingcrowley]

18 hours ago, JaggedLilPill said:

This is partly why I think Rory regressed after season three. This is the girl who managed to write a brilliant article when Paris gave her the parking lot paving as a topic but she can't handle Mitchum's critique? Just a lazy way to start a feud between Rory and Lorelai.

In many ways, Chilton brought out that best out of Rory. It was a structured, highly competetive enviroment where she was kept on her toes constantly and had to have more than a little backbone. Not having any real friends there and being constantly hounded by the likes of Tristan and Paris. It was a much needed balance to her fairytale homelife where she was the "greatest kind in the whole world".

Without being able to turn to her support sytem in Stars Hollow (Lorelai + Lane + boyfriend) like in the Chilton days, Logan became her security net in Yale and Rory grew too relaxed to the point of cockiness. She got to do all the fun parts of being a legal adult: partying, drinking, sex. But one criticism, and she fell apart like a house of cards. 

Now, my unpopular opinion is I think Rory would have been suited better to a Law related field. It would have the structure she obviously craves while she would be taken out of her comfort zone daily by the intelectual challenges and inherently competitiveness of the field. She would have been an amazing clerk for a Judge for one. She's organized, enjoys doing research and there's some writing too.

Or maybe I'm just projecting!

Edited November 23, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley
typo: tale = turn

[readster]

Quote

Now, I do absolutely get their anger at Shira and Logan's grandpa since that was really asshole behavior at dinner. Another overreaction. Calm the hell down! Rory and Logan were officially together for all of two seconds. Neither was thinking about marriage. Plus, it's really terrible to bring up other suitors around the actual girlfriend/boyfriend. (Although Richard and Emily's anger is quite ironic considering Richard's shanghaing of Dean years earlier and the more recent crappy elitist attitude they had towards Luke only some months prior. RME). 

Completely agree, Shira and the grandfather came off so out of the blue. With Richard's reaction, Rory and Dean had been together for a bit, but at the same time I wanted to go: "They are in high school." Of course, in Richard's mind, he was still thinking of Lorelei and Christopher back in high school, which was such a pigeon hole thing that the show was so stuck in. I mean, one of my unpopular opinions is I wanted everyone to get over themselves. It was such a focus for the entire series about: "Lorelai made a mistake in high school" that got us our sweet princess Rory. That's all everyone thought of or focused on for decades. No one could move on, no matter the progress, success in life, ect. It was always back to what started everything in the first place. 

[txhorns79]

Quote

But Rory had specifically indicated on at least a couple of occasions that she wants to be a foreign correspondent, and the job she took at the end of the series was to cover Obama's campaign, so that's the type of 'politics/controversy/tons of travel/etc.' journalism I was referring to in my post and which I think she was poorly suited for.   

I agree.  I feel like Rory's desire to be a foreign correspondent was because the writers thought it sounded impressive.  However, within the world of the show, I don't recall seeing much to indicate Rory was suited for that kind of job.  You have to be pretty aggressive, and be willing to put yourself at serious risk.  Also, it didn't seem like Rory's interest in foreign affairs was all that strong.  

[clack]

Do you have a 15 year-old girl in your life? (Daughter, niece, whatever). Chances are you still see her as a child, certainly not as a full adult. And even if her parents don't come from old wealth, they have plans for her (graduating high school, likely college).

Now, imagine that 15 year-old girl getting pregnant, leaving home with the baby, and then getting a job as a maid. Richard and Emily employed maids, now their once promising daughter, their only child, is working as one.

And Rory, only one year old. Emily and Richard must have bonded with her, loved her, and now she too is gone from their home and, for all intents and purposes, their lives.

Point I'm getting at, is that Emily and Richard have been traumatized. They are still fixated on their past wounds, and I don't blame them for it.

[txhorns79]

Quote

Point I'm getting at, is that Emily and Richard have been traumatized. They are still fixated on their past wounds, and I don't blame them for it.

I fully understand Richard and Emily's hurt and anger when it comes to Lorelai.  I'd imagine it would be utterly devastating for a parent to find a note from their child announcing she has left their house forever, and has taken their only grandchild with her.  Richard was right when he said that he and Emily did nothing to deserve that kind of treatment.  You also have the extra knife twist in Lorelai returning, not because she wants a relationship with her parents, but because she wants their money for Rory.  I say this also understanding how a teenage Lorelai may have felt desperate and that she had to leave the house.   

[Minneapple]

16 hours ago, amensisterfriend said:

Right, I'm aware that there's more than one type of journalism. But Rory had specifically indicated on at least a couple of occasions that she wants to be a foreign correspondent, and the job she took at the end of the series was to cover Obama's campaign, so that's the type of 'politics/controversy/tons of travel/etc.' journalism I was referring to in my post and which I think she was poorly suited for.   

Well, at the Yale paper she did do features instead of hard news. She could have been covering campus crime or whatever, but she was doing show reviews and things like that. I thought she'd figure out that that was the right track for her rather than trying to be a war correspondent or similar. Even political journalism doesn't necessarily have to be hard news. She could have found softer stories while working the Obama campaign -- feature pieces about campaign staffers and whatnot.

But we agree that she's ill-suited to be a hard news journalist.

[Lady Calypso]

So, I guess I have a UO: I like the theme song. There, I said it. I like the show's theme song. I barely remember anything about the first time I watched the show. I was around 10 when my mom and sister watched it, and I used to watch it with them but I only got into the show this past year. But the one thing I remember about the show is the theme song. I can sing the lyrics with ease, and did when I watched the pilot earlier this year. I remember the opening credits clearly. It just stuck with me more than the show did when I was young. So I guess that's why I really like the theme song. Also, it's catchy. 

I think Rory's not suited to become a journalist, but she was good at being an editor. She ended up being better at the behind the scenes stuff and yeah, she's a good writer. But we never saw her go out and hunt for any stories. We heard about it, but we never saw it. I think that's why it's harder to believe. 

[Melancholy]

I LOVE the theme. That's an UO? Sign me up. Carole King FTW. It's also very pretty to look at. The golden autumnal hues and the pretty, pretty cast. I love it.