Season 4 Discussion

[Constantinople]

They should have just off'd Beth during the mid-season finale when the Governor attacked the prison for the second time (but then they should have off'd the Governor during or immediately after his first failed attack).

 

As  I mentioned back during the TWoP days, it was a tactical error for the Governor to turn off the tanks magical cloaking device that prevented anyone at the prison from seeing or hearing the tank approach the prison until it was right up at the gates (and the cloaking devices on his fleet of cars and trucks).

[RedheadZombie]

 

BTW, I still don't understand how the late lamented T-Dawg said they'd been all around that area going in circles, just to end up starving, missing a giant prison on the horizon the whole time, and then after they've moved into the prison...suddenly they are able to go get comic books and M&Ms and visit a Big Stop with full shelves and check out the cameras and wine selection etc.

 

I think their biggest mistake was baiting the comic fans by showing the prison in the final shot of season two.  But they could easily explained that after being boxed in by zombie hordes over the months, they were forced to settle at the prison because Lori's due date was looming.  They could have had a throw away line about the prison clearing being such a monumental task that they avoided settling there, only to be forced into settling when they were out of options. 

 

It's just another sloppy mistake, similar to their lack of alternative escape plans after the bus.  As a cop, Rick would have been through many disaster drills over the years.  With that experience and all the free time, Rick would have had options A-Z worked out and diagrammed.  He would have been drilling these people on the regular.  I realize the lack of plan B was deliberate to allow the group to be split up in particular mini-groups, but they could have easily established that meeting points 1,2,3 were overrun by hordes, and they had to then wing it.

 

(Also, the puzzle Tyrese and Carol put together was a photo of Sophia in her unicorn shirt. I think I remember reading that neither actor knew that until after they finished filming.)

 

From what I remember from TTD, MMB said the director pulled her aside right before filming the confession scene, and told her about the puzzle.

[kikismom]

I've just been re-watching as usual, and when Daryl, Michonne, Bob, and Tyreese go to the Veterinary school, they go in the black Mustang. At the same time, Rick and Carol will go to look for meds and Rick dumps Carol.

Well...I'm watching Rick put the grey metal gasoline can in the vehicle, and right over his shoulder--parked by the prison---is the black Mustang. Anyone else notice that?

[NurseGiGi]

I think everyone here is pretty damn observant except me!  I never noticed any of the stuff (and thangs) you all are talking about.  I'm thinking I need to go back and rewatch this season.

[kikismom]

I looked on The Walking Dead Timeline...and the prison falls on day 504, and Carol and Tyreese find the pecan farm on day 506.

Not to labor a point we've all made, but it's just one more example of how this group can travel in circles all autumn/winter/7 months, live at the prison for months going on runs constantly and Michonne searching for the Gov. on her horse and Daryl hunting etc etc. and nobody noticed a pecan farm with a well and working gas stove and other nice things.

They can find comic books and M&M's but they couldn't find a real nice place to live (mind you Carol and Tyreese were on foot, traveling with 2 kids and a baby and fighting walkers so it wasn't like the pecan farm was that far away.) Wasn't the veterinary college 50 miles away or something?

 

Morales had the right idea.

Edited January 26, 2015 by kikismom

[mandolin]

When the show is good, I overlook crap like that, kikismom. When it's not, well...

[kikismom]

I can't help myself!

When the Governor leaves Lilly and SammichGirl at the RV, he tells them not to worry because walkers can't cross the water.

So why did he chain Pete to weights so WalkerPete would stay under?

[AngelaHunter]

So why did he chain Pete to weights so WalkerPete would stay under?

 

JMO - He seemed to have a thing about Walkers in Water, plus we know he was the Personification of Evil who made the Marquis de Sade look like Albert Schweitzer, so he liked to pass a little leisure time watching Pete struggle.

 

He probably also didn't want the others to know that he had murdered Poor Pete, and flinging him in the pond was easier than burying him.

[Nashville]

I can't help myself!

When the Governor leaves Lilly and SammichGirl at the RV, he tells them not to worry because walkers can't cross the water.

So why did he chain Pete to weights so WalkerPete would stay under?

For fun. Definitely not because walkers can't cross water. They can. They can't swim, mind you, but they can wade across - assuming the water's not too deep, the current isn't too strong, and/or the bottom isn't too soft. Two examples:

• The two walkers Rick & Herschel were wrangling by the creek, before the barn massacre.
• The walker who killed Dale. He got unstuck from the mud and came after Carl on the far side of the creek, then showed up to gut Dale later that evening.

ETA: formatting fixes

Edited February 5, 2015 by Nashville

[nodorothyparker]

It was a cool visual, which seems to be as much of a reason as to why they do anything on this show whether it truly makes any sense or not.

[Pete Martell]

The scene with Michonne asking Aaron "the questions" a few weeks ago reminded me of those Rick and Clara scenes, which probably disturbed me more than pretty much anything else has on this show. I remember how at the time I thought her presence was just a sign of the fall of the prison, but looking back, I realize it was a harbinger for everything we've seen since (and of Gimple's TWD ethos, for better or worse), and in some way, her killing herself was signaling the death of the first 3 seasons. 

 

She really was one of the best one-episode characters I can remember from a drama. (choosing not to count her zombie cameo in Too Far Gone)

[ghoulina]

I was just talking with someone about Kerry Condon (Clara) the other day, because she appeared in Better Call Saul. Apparently her IMDB lists her as appearing in THREE episodes of season 4.  I wonder if she's seen again in either the scene(s) where Michonne leaves the prison or the when Glenn and Tara flee?

[Pete Martell]

Inmates was the Glenn/Tara episode, so she must have been somewhere there. I don't remember seeing her...

[civilized.era]

Kerry Condon (Clara) was one of the zombies that stormed the prison after the Governor's attack.

[ghoulina]

Yea, I saw that. But it listed her in three episodes - so I was confused, because I only remember seeing her "30 Days Without Accident" and "Too Far Gone". But as Pete Martell said, she must have been in Inmates, though I don't remember seeing her either.

[kikismom]

We saw her come in when the prison fell, but if she appears when Glenn and Tara have to escape later...we need a "Clara-spotting" contest!

[kj4ever]

The scene with Michonne asking Aaron "the questions" a few weeks ago reminded me of those Rick and Clara scenes, which probably disturbed me more than pretty much anything else has on this show. I remember how at the time I thought her presence was just a sign of the fall of the prison, but looking back, I realize it was a harbinger for everything we've seen since (and of Gimple's TWD ethos, for better or worse), and in some way, her killing herself was signaling the death of the first 3 seasons. 

 

She really was one of the best one-episode characters I can remember from a drama. (choosing not to count her zombie cameo in Too Far Gone)

When we were marathoning and got to the scene where she says "help me" my boyfriend was like Oh Fuck they can talk now!  lol

[kikismom]

Rick should have known something was wrong when she said we haven't eaten for days but she doesn't tear the foil apart and at least scarf down half the sandwich.

[iRarelyWatchTV36]

Maybe it was discussed way back when, and y'all had fun that I missed out on;  but oh, The Re-Animator jokes that could be had at the expense of Clara & her 'husband' way back in "30 Days Without an Accident".....

[RedHackle]

I've been rewatching the show, from the pilot, as I do this periodically for my own amusement and weirdness.  And I just have to say this one more time: the prologue, showing Bob's lonely wandering is exquisite; everything about it, from the music, to Bob's dead man walking gait, to him eating frosting out of the can like a child, to the pitiful drinking Ny-Quil for the alcohol fix -just perfect.  I salute you, show.

[SlackerInc]

How come only the hanged people in the golf clubhouse were moving around?  Would all the people on the floor really have died by head trauma?

[announcergirl]

I am sick of this little bratty as girl bossing Daryl around! This story with her and this drink she needs is just stupid. I hope they don't go THERE with Daryl and her. But I do want him to get some from somebody else!

Some of that Terrorsex would be good as long as they don't make no terrorbabies cause that little Judith gets on my nerve!

[announcergirl]

Some of that Terrorsex would be good as long as they don't make no terrorbabies cause that little Judith gets on my nerve!

And it seems like Beth is trying to seduce Daryl with this little drinking game.

[Smad]

Was it ever explained who came up with the 3 questions and why? Was it 'genius' Rick? Those questions have never made sense to me.

Rick: "How many walkers have you killed?"

Person: "18."

Rick: "Aw shucks. The minimum is 20. Bye."

Seriously, what is the minimum that makes you Team Rick material?

 

Rick: "How many people have you killed?"

Person (who is a sociopath): "None."

Rick: "Why?"

Person (chuckles on the inside): "I don't have the stomach for it."

Rick: "Oh cool. Welcome to the team."

Does Rick honestly think that a straight up murderer/sociopath/psychopath will tell him that they killed people?

[ghoulina]

I think the questions make sense. I don't think there are any clear-cut "right" or "wrong" answers. It's about getting to know someone better. And I don't even think certain answers would keep you out of the group altogether, but might better help them figure out where to put you. Obviously a young mom and her kids could be given a pass for not having killed walkers. In a previous group, they may have been protected. But if a strong, capable person like Andrea or the Guv came along and said they'd never killed a walker, you'd have to wonder. Are they lying? If so, why? Are they the type to not want to get their hands dirty? A coward? 

And, then how many PEOPLE you've killed goes with the "why?" question. You're right, that a nutso won't be like, "I killed my whole previous group to save my own skin", but I still think there's things you can gleam from a person from their answers. And there's a lot to be said for what they don't say. 

[AngelaHunter]

20 hours ago, Smad said:

Does Rick honestly think that a straight up murderer/sociopath/psychopath will tell him that they killed people?

Rick and his crew don't have lie detectors. People will lie like rugs about all kinds of things. If someone is asked, after "How many people have you killed? the "Why?" question, I doubt anyone would admit they were killing people to eat them, or "Well, I"m a serial killer. I love killing, but I promise I won't kill YOU." Of course they'll say they killed in self-defense, or defense of a loved one.

Someone said he needs to change that to, "How many dogs have you eaten?" to give him a better idea of what they'd come from.

[Smad]

7 hours ago, ghoulina said:

I think the questions make sense. I don't think there are any clear-cut "right" or "wrong" answers. It's about getting to know someone better. And I don't even think certain answers would keep you out of the group altogether, but might better help them figure out where to put you. Obviously a young mom and her kids could be given a pass for not having killed walkers. In a previous group, they may have been protected. But if a strong, capable person like Andrea or the Guv came along and said they'd never killed a walker, you'd have to wonder. Are they lying? If so, why? Are they the type to not want to get their hands dirty? A coward? 

And, then how many PEOPLE you've killed goes with the "why?" question. You're right, that a nutso won't be like, "I killed my whole previous group to save my own skin", but I still think there's things you can gleam from a person from their answers. And there's a lot to be said for what they don't say. 

All very true but I was thinking of it more in terms of the POV of the person that's being asked. Say you are alone for reasons that aren't your fault, like your group/camp got killed. Then you come cross people offering shelter but before they do you have to answer these questions. You desperately want their help so of course you want to answer those questions as best as possible, maybe even fudge the details a little. Except you can't because...what's the ideal number of walkers killed? If I say I killed a person, even for self defense reason or because a person asked to be killed so as not to turn. Should I tell these people that, they might have 'no kill' rule no matter what the circumstances. Not everyone is going to be like Bob who wanders around totally zoned out or an Aaron who is totally shell shocked and answer truthfully as a result. And of course there is the danger of psychos.

Also those 3 questions are not even nearly enough. I mean look at Bob (lol sorry Bob I picked you again). Those 3 questions qualify him but Bob has other problems, such as that he is an alcoholic and that can be a danger if you take him on scavenging hunts. Why don't they ever ask about other stuff that hasn't anything to do with killing walkers/humans? Like addictions, psychological and physical problems. Because as it turns out, Bob not mentioning his little problem got one person killed and he didn't even feel bad about it. Poor Zack. Or look at Lizzy, apparently her father didn't ever bother to tell anyone about the girl's existing mental problems, not even on his death bed did he fess up. And that almost caused the fences to cave in several times because she fed the walkers. And poor Mica payed for it too.

2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Rick and his crew don't have lie detectors. People will lie like rugs about all kinds of things. If someone is asked, after "How many people have you killed? the "Why?" question, I doubt anyone would admit they were killing people to eat them, or "Well, I"m a serial killer. I love killing, but I promise I won't kill YOU." Of course they'll say they killed in self-defense, or defense of a loved one.

Someone said he needs to change that to, "How many dogs have you eaten?" to give him a better idea of what they'd come from.

Look at it from another angle. If someone asked Rick these questions. He said himself he doesn't even remember how many people he has killed. But the 'why?' is answered with 'I did it to protect my family/group'. That's something anyone can understand considering the world they live in. Except, Gareth for example would answer these questions the same way but it would have totally different meaning. The questions are too simple and too generic, especially since we only ever see Team Rick ask those 3 without any follow up questions. 3 questions answered and they are in. That's dangerously naive.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Smad

[Nashville]

On 12/20/2017 at 5:16 PM, Smad said:

Does Rick honestly think that a straight up murderer/sociopath/psychopath will tell him that they killed people?

I suspect it’s not just an issue of the specific answers, but also the manner in which they are delivered.  One benefit of an honest answer, for example, is it can be virtually instantaneous; a liar trying to guess optimal answers to gain admittance to the group, in contrast, would take unintended but discernible pauses as they attempted to conjure up the right number or reply.

[Smad]

23 minutes ago, Nashville said:

I suspect it’s not just an issue of the specific answers, but also the manner in which they are delivered.  One benefit of an honest answer, for example, is it can be virtually instantaneous; a liar trying to guess optimal answers to gain admittance to the group, in contrast, would take unintended but discernible pauses as they attempted to conjure up the right number or reply.

None of them are cops or experts in body language. There are also many ways to divert a conversation naturally until you got the answer sorted out in your head. And plenty of psychos know how to play the game and are down right charming/disarming.

There is also lying by omission which is what Bob and Ryan did. Bob didn't tell anyone about his alcoholism and Ryan never said a thing about his daughter having psychological problems. Which is why those 3 questions are stupid as they are limited to direct killing.

Edited December 22, 2017 by Smad

[Nashville]

8 minutes ago, Smad said:

None of them are cops or experts in body language.

Uh... yeah Rick was, after a fashion. :)    But even so, it doesn’t take being a policeman or an expert to tell when someone is lying to you, or being evasive.  Ask any parent of teenagers.

 

8 minutes ago, Smad said:

There are also many ways to divert a conversation naturally until you got the answer sorted out in your head. And plenty of psychos know how to play the game and are damn right charming/disarming.

...and the moment someone starts playing games of diversion or manipulation, there are also many ways for an intelligent inquisitor to dump the prevaricator’s lying ass.  :)

 

8 minutes ago, Smad said:

There is also lying by omission which is what Bob and Ryan did. Bob didn't tell anyone about his alcoholism and Ryan never said a thing about his daughter having psychological problems. Which is why those 3 questions are stupid as they are limited to direct killing.

I think you’re missing a salient point; the technical content of the answers is not as important as the mindset they indicate as being behind them.

[Smad]

12 hours ago, Nashville said:

Uh... yeah Rick was, after a fashion. :)    But even so, it doesn’t take being a policeman or an expert to tell when someone is lying to you, or being evasive.  Ask any parent of teenagers.

Considering what has been shown about Rick he wasn't exactly the greatest cop in history. After all it took a damn ZA for him to realize his best friend was a little off his rocker. Same guy that was fooled by Phillip/Gov. Most in Team Rick aren't parents either. Daryl apparently knows a good guy from a bad guy (according to Aaron) because he's Daryl 'Marty Sue' Dixon.

 

12 hours ago, Nashville said:

...and the moment someone starts playing games of diversion or manipulation, there are also many ways for an intelligent inquisitor to dump the prevaricator’s lying ass.  :)

If Team Rick was intelligent maybe. But time and time again that was proven not to be the case.

12 hours ago, Nashville said:

I think you’re missing a salient point; the technical content of the answers is not as important as the mindset they indicate as being behind them.

And I still think they are hollow and too generic. Mindset is great and all but it's limited to a person's 'killing mindset'. And even that is more complicated than killing walkers or humans, see Lizzy. I guess children aren't being asked these questions. And it ignores all the other problems people might have that could endanger your group because apparently beyond those 3 questions they don't inquire further. Like I said, Bob easily qualifies for those questions so it's all good right? But it's not because Bob has other problems that endanger the group. I don't find those 3 questions useless, I find them too simple and have issues with the fact that no other questions are being asked.

[AngelaHunter]

9 hours ago, Smad said:

Considering what has been shown about Rick he wasn't exactly the greatest cop in history.

This is true, as shown in the scene below. Rick was more focused on telling Shane he'd better not let Lori know he'd been shot at than he was on the carload of criminals.

 But watching this makes me remember how excited I was about this program, and how far it's fallen.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYHYW-vcIMw

[Smad]

2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

This is true, as shown in the scene below. Rick was more focused on telling Shane he'd better not let Lori know he'd been shot at than he was on the carload of criminals.

 But watching this makes me remember how excited I was about this program, and how far it's fallen.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYHYW-vcIMw

It's not just that scene but pretty much everything about Rick. Turning his back on an unsecured scene was just the start. His waffling in regards to Randall. Now I'm not a cop and I don't know any but I'm pretty sure cops have to be decisive. They have to sometimes make decisions in seconds when it's their life or a victim's life (like a hostage) on the line. No good cop would waffle like that, neither would someone from the military. Shane was right there, he knew what needed to be done. I bet Abraham would have been decisive as well. But Rick waffled constantly about everything, changing his mind every hour. He also has no tactical knowledge which doesn't make much sense. I also imagine cops to be able to be more realistic about the situations they find themselves in (in the ZA), especially when coming across other humans. Rick always acted as if it will all work itself out or was completely sentimental about the old ways/world. Same thing with the Governor, letting him go and thinking handing over Michonne would bring peace. Read the damn room Rick. You are supposed to be a cop for crying out loud. But then like I said, this is the guy who needed a ZA to see his best friend Shane might be a little unstable.

That scene with the car chase is both funny and sad to me. Sad because, yes this show used to be so damn good. Funny in hindsight because Rick reprimanding that 'idiot' officer to make sure the safety is off and a bullet in the chamber. Sorry Rick but you aren't exactly a shining example of being good at being cop what with turning your back on the scene.

Edited December 23, 2017 by Smad

[ByTor]

On 12/23/2017 at 2:00 AM, Smad said:

But then like I said, this is the guy who needed a ZA to see his best friend Shane might be a little unstable.

Maybe I'm wrong since I haven't seen older episodes in quite a while, but I always thought it was the ZA that made Shane unstable, not that he already was.

[Smad]

4 hours ago, ByTor said:

Maybe I'm wrong since I haven't seen older episodes in quite a while, but I always thought it was the ZA that made Shane unstable, not that he already was.

Nah. The ZA didn't make him unstable, quite the opposite. He was the sanest in terms of ZA because he adapted the quickest out of all the characters. But Shane quickly unraveled because of Lori's head games. Also he was always the stud and losing 'his woman' to Rick made Shane's ego completely go off the rails. But that's not something that developed because of the ZA. That was in Shane long before the world collapsed.

[ByTor]

3 minutes ago, Smad said:

Nah. The ZA didn't make him unstable, quite the opposite. He was the sanest in terms of ZA because he adapted the quickest out of all the characters. But Shane quickly unraveled because of Lori's head games. Also he was always the stud and losing 'his woman' to Rick made Shane's ego completely go off the rails. But that's not something that developed because of the ZA. That was in Shane long before the world collapsed.

OK, I'll take your word for it, I really don't remember much of the older seasons, and I hated Shane more than I have ever hated a fictional character in my life...so much so that it was worrisome LOL.  I just don't recall it being established that Shane was always unstable.

Edited January 17, 2018 by ByTor

[Nashville]

4 hours ago, ByTor said:

Maybe I'm wrong since I haven't seen older episodes in quite a while, but I always thought it was the ZA that made Shane unstable, not that he already was.

Agree.  I don't know if you've run across it or not yet, but this question has been quite the ping pong ball already in the Shane part of the forum.

 

2 minutes ago, Smad said:

Nah. The ZA didn't make him unstable, quite the opposite. He was the sanest in terms of ZA because he adapted the quickest out of all the characters. But Shane quickly unraveled because of Lori's head games. Also he was always the stud and losing 'his woman' to Rick made Shane's ego completely go off the rails. But that's not something that developed because of the ZA. That was in Shane long before the world collapsed.

Disagree.  Pre-ZA, Shane's adherence to normal societal strictures kept his more aberrant tendencies in check; it wasn't until the ZA shredded such social niceties that Shane's choo-choo came off its track.

[Smad]

46 minutes ago, Nashville said:

Disagree.  Pre-ZA, Shane's adherence to normal societal strictures kept his more aberrant tendencies in check; it wasn't until the ZA shredded such social niceties that Shane's choo-choo came off its track.

Erm, you just agreed with me with what you said. You said his real self was kept in check pre-ZA due to the social structures we have and the ZA removed those so the real Shane came through. So you agree that Shane was off his rocker pre-ZA. Which was what @ByTor responded to from my post last year. That Rick was a crappy cop, one reason being that he needed a ZA to realize his friend is more than a little unstable.

However Shame was the sanest IMO when it came to the new world and what it's like now while everyone else was hand wringing and being sentimental, holding on to what was.

Edited January 17, 2018 by Smad

[ByTor]

7 hours ago, Nashville said:

 I don't know if you've run across it or not yet, but this question has been quite the ping pong ball already in the Shane part of the forum.

I haven't, my off my rocker Shane hatred has kept me away from a topic specifically about him...yet I'm talking about him now LOL. :)

7 hours ago, Smad said:

Shame was the sanest IMO when it came to the new world and what it's like now while everyone else was hand wringing and being sentimental, holding on to what was.

LOL I know this was either a typo or autocorrect, but I wonder why I never thought to call him that!

[Smad]

6 hours ago, ByTor said:

LOL I know this was either a typo or autocorrect, but I wonder why I never thought to call him that!

I thought I corrected it all. Crap. Yeah I don't know why every time I write about Shane I hit the 'm' instead of the 'n'. Maybe it's a subconscious thing.

[ByTor]

3 minutes ago, Smad said:

I thought I corrected it all. Crap. Yeah I don't know why every time I write about Shane I hit the 'm' instead of the 'n'. Maybe it's a subconscious thing.

LOL Freudian slip of the keyboard :)

[Nashville]

On 1/16/2018 at 10:46 PM, Smad said:

Erm, you just agreed with me with what you said. You said his real self was kept in check pre-ZA due to the social structures we have and the ZA removed those so the real Shane came through. So you agree that Shane was off his rocker pre-ZA.

Erm, no; I’m pretty sure I was saying the exact opposite.  Unless your threshold for sanity is “without aberrant tendencies of any kind”, that is, and I’m pretty sure nobody on the planet could jump high enough to clear THAT bar - including most of the people posting on this forum.  :>

Neuroses, jealousies, paranoia, etc. - virtually everybody has these aberrations to some degree.  Most of us don’t give them free reign to run rampant and grow into full-blown psychoses, however, because such a degree of psychological self-indulgence will inevitably conflict with those around us.  Sure, Shane had his aberrations pre-ZA; most people do - but that’s a long way from saying Shane was insane.  Like most people, the rules of polite society were part of the structure which kept Shane’s psyche intact.  Lacking the onset of the ZA, I have little doubt Shane would have continued living a “sane” life - enjoying occasional victories, and sublimating occasional defeats with either denial or alcohol.  You know, like most folk.  :)  

It wasn’t until the ZA destroyed any semblance or remnant of pre-ZA normal society that Shane began his descent into madness; along with his neighbors, the ZA killed the societal structure which was a large part of his psychological safety net.

 

On 1/16/2018 at 10:46 PM, Smad said:

However Shame was the sanest IMO when it came to the new world and what it's like now while everyone else was hand wringing and being sentimental, holding on to what was.

Saying Shane was the sanest person in the post-ZA CDB is like saying the sanest guy on a battlefield is a sociopath with a machine gun; both may find their tendencies well-suited for survival in their new surroundings, but that doesn’t mean both aren’t crazy as shithouse rats. Equating sanity and survivability is an apples-to-oranges comparison.

[Smad]

2 hours ago, Nashville said:

Erm, no; I’m pretty sure I was saying the exact opposite.  Unless your threshold for sanity is “without aberrant tendencies of any kind”, that is, and I’m pretty sure nobody on the planet could jump high enough to clear THAT bar - including most of the people posting on this forum.  :>

Neuroses, jealousies, paranoia, etc. - virtually everybody has these aberrations to some degree.  Most of us don’t give them free reign to run rampant and grow into full-blown psychoses, however, because such a degree of psychological self-indulgence will inevitably conflict with those around us.  Sure, Shane had his aberrations pre-ZA; most people do - but that’s a long way from saying Shane was insane.  Like most people, the rules of polite society were part of the structure which kept Shane’s psyche intact.  Lacking the onset of the ZA, I have little doubt Shane would have continued living a “sane” life - enjoying occasional victories, and sublimating occasional defeats with either denial or alcohol.  You know, like most folk.  :)  

It wasn’t until the ZA destroyed any semblance or remnant of pre-ZA normal society that Shane began his descent into madness; along with his neighbors, the ZA killed the societal structure which was a large part of his psychological safety net.

 

Saying Shane was the sanest person in the post-ZA CDB is like saying the sanest guy on a battlefield is a sociopath with a machine gun; both may find their tendencies well-suited for survival in their new surroundings, but that doesn’t mean both aren’t crazy as shithouse rats. Equating sanity and survivability is an apples-to-oranges comparison.

Ok let me make it simple for you.

Shane was the sanest (along with Daryl) in seeing the ZA for what it was. The old world was gone and the new one was a whole new ball game. You have to adept to that world or you die or get everyone else killed. All the other characters continually tried to hang on to what was. Society and it's rules, the law, their former lives etc.. It created massive problems for the group time and again. I'm not saying that Shane was right in everything he did. I'm saying that seeing the world for what it truly is rather than living like it's still pre-ZA is the sanest thing to do.

However Shane as a person wasn't great even before the ZA. And as you and I agree, the only thing holding him back from cracking and showing his true colors were the old world rules (society, law etc.). This new world is what caused him to freely be who he actually is, aided by Lori completely screwing with his mind to use him for her own purposes.

Hope that explains my position better.

[Nashville]

9 hours ago, Smad said:

Ok let me make it simple for you.

Oh, im not confused; I see where you’re coming from - I simply don’t agree with your description of the view.  ;)

 

Quote

Shane was the sanest (along with Daryl) in seeing the ZA for what it was. The old world was gone and the new one was a whole new ball game. You have to adept to that world or you die or get everyone else killed. All the other characters continually tried to hang on to what was. Society and it's rules, the law, their former lives etc.. It created massive problems for the group time and again. I'm not saying that Shane was right in everything he did. I'm saying that seeing the world for what it truly is rather than living like it's still pre-ZA is the sanest thing to do.

Again you equate adaptability with sanity - and again, I feel this is an invalid equation.  The ZA represents a major shift in the natural world, true.  Also true is the necessity for some form of adaptation to survive in this changed environment.  I disagree, however, with your assessment that abandoning one’s humanity and embracing the violent animalistic tendencies of this brave new world - in effect, to adapt to the new environment by becoming the most violent, self-survival-focused animal in the animal kingdom - is the optimal solution for survival.  History, in fact, has proven quite the opposite:

1. On the historical scale, individual humans have rarely (if ever) been the apex predator in their respective environments.  In terms of innate natural endowment, we just aren’t built for it; we don’t have the biggest or sharpest teeth, we have no claws in any practical sense, we’re not really that fast, and our instinctual capabilities are relatively rudimentary.
2. So what did Nature give us to increase our survival potential?  Opposable thumbs and big brains.  The thumbs give humans the ability to manipulate our environment - (a) change it to better accommodate our needs, (b) create tools (including weapons), and (c ) use those tools.  The brain’s survival utility is threefold: (d) we can imagine better environments and use the tools to create them, (e) we can set and execute traps, and (f) we can work communally to defend against and/or hunt predators with greater innate natural advantages.

One of the primary points upon which your Shane-is-sanest syllogism fails is your inferred assumption that adaptation to one’s environment maximizes survival potential.  This has never been the case for humans - or any other creature in nature, for that manner.  Adapting oneself to conform with one’s environment is inherently limited, because one can only adapt so far; eventually your environment will always present you with an obstacle or obstacles to which you simply cannot adapt - drastic weather changes, predator overrun, disease, etc.  Humans’ primary strength has never been in adapting to accommodate their environment; it’s been in adapting their environment to accommodate them.  Reference points 2a-2e.

The other primary point of failure is your contention that abandoning preexisting societal rules maximizes survival potential, and is therefore a “saner” choice.  While I will agree modification of those rules may be necessary to deal with drastic changes in one’s environment, I would contend simple abandonment of same will decrease survival potential, not increase it.  Our current rules of society labor under heavy layers of increasingly nuanced interpretation, but at its intrinsic core “society” is nothing more than the commonly agreed-upon rule set which enables the exercise of point 2f (communal action for defense/offense).  Societal rules need to be changed, not abandoned.  Shane’s adoption of a “anything goes so long as me and mine survive” mindset, however, constitutes total abandonment of the communal social contract - and IMHO pursuit of that selfish mindset is what leads to Shane’s eventual demise.  Hardly a survival enhancer, that.  ;>

 

Quote

However Shane as a person wasn't great even before the ZA. And as you and I agree, the only thing holding him back from cracking and showing his true colors were the old world rules (society, law etc.).

No real argument there.

 

Quote

This new world is what caused him to freely be who he actually is, aided by Lori completely screwing with his mind to use him for her own purposes.

I would argue the only thing “freed” for Shane by the ZA were his fears, his lusts, and his paranoia, which were allowed to flourish and grow from minor societal aberrations into full-blown sociopathic tendencies - and I would challenge the contention a person’s “actual” self is their collection of worst tendencies, summed and amplified to the nth degree.  We may just have to agree to disagree on that point, however.  :)

 

ETA: Agree with you 100% about Lori, though.  What a bitch.  :D

 

Quote

Hope that explains my position better.

Likewise.

Edited January 18, 2018 by Nashville
Remembering Lori’s.death makes me happy ALL OVER AGAIN!!!