S02.E15: Right of the Boom

[innocuouspuff]

I expect that there will be a female on the task force as well so, I don't think that much screen time will be lost to male characters. Geesh!

Wait, one *entire* female? Wow. What more could we possibly want.

[Kromm]

Is this a plot against women? Frankly I doubt it, though, again, may be wrong since I suspect were that the case we'd have heard rumblings...Leoni and Nuewirth and the other women on board don't impress me as wimps and all have, I'm sure, agents and managers who have their backs bigtime. None of these women are newbies to a tough and often sexist business and have some clout behind them.

I think maybe some jokes here may have played with that, but I don't think anyone here was suggesting its REALLY some kind of conscious anti-woman thing. It's more people (unfortunately) being people and Hollywood (unfortunately) being Hollywood. Sexism unrealized, not sexism intended. Remember the showrunner is a woman too. So it's just a case of her blundering into this--not standing up for her original creative premise and maybe even getting some creative fixation with the character of Henry herself (maybe the whole writers room has, no it doesn't just have to be her). This happens to writers--they sometimes really get off-base about their own creations, falling in love with some piece of it that doesn't strike a chord with anyone other than them. Or maybe it does. For all we know "America" at large may love Henry The Superman and all of it's surrounding ridiculousness, and we could be in the minority. We've heard a few wink-wink moments in the show that seem to indicate that Hall or at least some writer under her watches the Internet (perhaps even this board, but more likely Twitter), so if it started clueless it might not have stayed that way. They might have simply decided that people grumbling on the net might be taken care of by some reflexive meta moments, but if not we could just suck on it, because well... the ratings seem to prove it's working (although it's worth noting the ratings are way down this year--that's true across all CBS dramas equally).

[Notwisconsin]

Remember the Valery Harper show?

[Netfoot]

Don't see why the problem of Bess and Henry talking about work needed to be "solved", either.

 

It could have been solved very easily, by him going back to being a university lecturer, husband and father.  (Not necessarily in that, or any, order.)  The problems only arose after he was turned into a political pundit advising the Whitehouse, a super-spy, and all that crap.  Like, he couldn't have had his own sphere of greatness, he had to start usurping hers.

[VinceW]

Wait, one *entire* female? Wow. What more could we possibly want.

At this point, viewers don't know who is on the task force or how much time the terrorist search will take up as the A plot. I expect that Jane Fellows (DIA) will be on the team.  She plays that intelligence role really well. Bess as SoS  will be making any final decisions under her domain as always. The CBS synopsis for the next episode: Hijriyyah - "After an Italian warship answers a distress call from a ship carrying Libyan refugees, Elizabeth is given 20 minutes to decide whether to question a passenger who claims to know the whereabouts of Jibral Disah, the most-wanted terrorist in the world. Also, Stevie brings her boyfriend, Jareth (Chris O'Shea), home to meet her parents".

Edited February 26, 2016 by VinceW

[shapeshifter]

This probably should also be mentioned in the media thread, but it is very germaine to the discussion here: Tim Daly was on Stephen Colbert's show and said the point of Henry being good at stuff was to be a contrast to the stereotype of the buffoon husband with the strong wife who is usually seen on TV, going back, he pointed out, to The Honeymooners.

And maybe that's why I'm okay with Super Spy Daddy Fighter Pilot Dr of Religous Studies--I used to cringe while reading the Berenstain Bear books to my kids because Momma was wise and Pappa was often the buffoon--as was my ex-husband. I like that Bess found a mate equal to her own strengths. Henry's no mooch, but Bess is no wifey either.

BTW, Tim Daly made a point of saying he had exactly 9 days of college education.

[Netfoot]

I expect that Jane Fellows (DIA) will be on the team.

 

I was thinking Marguerite Sanchez (Roslyn Ruff), FBI Director.  

[Beden]

 

I hadn't noticed she was. Now this explains (or at least theorizes) a lot. Leoni and Daly are still in the honeymoon phase of their relationship, which was not existent when the show began. I'm guessing more ArmCandy on screen is simply a way for the real life love birds to have more quality time together.

Or, she doesn't want to upset him by vetoing something that he wants and has expressed interest in.

(I don't know if he has or hasn't, but if he did, I think her not wanting to upset him would play more of a role than just spending more time together

With respect I have to disagree with these theories. I obviously don't know the individuals involved but they're both respected professionals with established careers going back for a number of years. They're also adults hired and paid to do their jobs which usually translates to showing up prepared and on time, doing their assigned work, not making waves (unless warranted) and being easy to get along with--ie, being professional. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and don't necessarily buy that the plotlines and scripts are being manipulated so that they can have a few extra scenes to gaze into each others eyes or hold hands on set. Beyond that, should that be true the possible career fallout would be a detriment to that happening; should word spread that they have hijacked a successful show for personal reasons their reputations as being people you'd want to hire would take hits. Involved in a personal relationship or not, I'd hope we can give total strangers with good professional reputations more credit than that.

[secnarf]

This probably should also be mentioned in the media thread, but it is very germaine to the discussion here: Tim Daly was on Stephen Colbert's show and said the point of Henry being good at stuff was to be a contrast to the stereotype of the buffoon husband with the strong wife who is usually seen on TV, going back, he pointed out, to The Honeymooners.

And maybe that's why I'm okay with Super Spy Daddy Fighter Pilot Dr of Religous Studies--I used to cringe while reading the Berenstain Bear books to my kids because Momma was wise and Pappa was often the buffoon--as was my ex-husband. I like that Bess found a mate equal to her own strengths. Henry's no mooch, but Bess is no wifey either.

BTW, Tim Daly made a point of saying he had exactly 9 days of college education.

The thing is, they don't have to make him a super spy and integrate him into the president's inner circle of trusted advisors in order to make him not look like a buffoon. I think being a respected professor and doctor of religious studies and former fighter pilot did that just fine.

[kwnyc]

 

I think being a respected professor and doctor of religious studies and former fighter pilot did that just fine.

I agree. And the show was originally presented to the public as one about a woman in a position of power. (Remember how upset a lot of people got when they thought it was meant to glorify Hillary?) It really feels like there's a mission creep to give Henry equal status with Bess in the show, and despite a certain amount of mansplaining going on in this thread, I see it as as systemic sexism in action (and yes, women can perpetuate sexism).

 

I adored Henry as Dr. Col. Professor Arm Candy, because he was presented as half of a high-powered, well-matched couple. And the show wasn't about him. If he's going to be the Fonzie to Bess's Richie Cunningham, I hope the show doesn't jump the shark (see what I did there?) ;-)

[shapeshifter]

I adored Henry as Dr. Col. Professor Arm Candy, because he was presented as half of a high-powered, well-matched couple. And the show wasn't about him. If he's going to be the Fonzie to Bess's Richie Cunningham, I hope the show doesn't jump the shark (see what I did there?) ;-)

I agree it was fine the way it was, I just role with each new additional skill set they give him and chuckle as I picture a cartoon version of him in a cape. So far he hasn't usurped Bess's position, finesse, or success, IMO, so let the cartoons continue.

And now you have me expecting to see him water skiing over a shark, or maybe even bareback riding a shark.

[VinceW]

I was thinking Marguerite Sanchez (Roslyn Ruff), FBI Director.  

Point taken. Both Marguerite and Jane Fellows (Jill Hennessy). Marguerite was the person who actually saved lives at the conference with her info to Bess about the Saudis. In photo stills released for the next episode, Jane is prominent in a room with Dalton, Elizabeth and Henry among others. It looks like Marguerite is in the background as well. Jane and Henry have good chemistry and she provides a link to the Defense department. Marguerite could be the technical and surveillance resource. I suppose that Dalton asked Bess to select the other members for the group besides Henry given it was her suggestion. Perhaps the task force decision by the writers presents as a good way to move the political drama away from the CIA subplots and not what has been explained away by others here as just systemic sexism in action. IMO.

Edited February 26, 2016 by VinceW

[innocuouspuff]

Remember the Valery Harper show?

Nope, had to look that one up but the google summary is hilarious.

It starts out as a standard family sitcom called "Valerie" about a mom juggling the demands of work, three boys and a frequently absent airline pilot husband. Then after star Valerie Harper has a falling-out with producers, her character is killed off. Enter Sandy Duncan as the live-in aunt and surrogate mother figure, which leads to renaming the show first "Valerie's Family" and then "The Hogan Family."

ha! Hope we're not headed to anything quite that dramatic.

[Netfoot]

a certain amount of mansplaining going on...

 

I had to look that one up.

[SparklesBitch]

Finally got to sit down and watch this one. For the most part, I really liked it. My very first thought was that I need my very own Blake. He's fantastic and is always one step ahead. Loved him handing her the fruit punch so she could hydrate.

 

Can't say that I care too much about Matt and his issues, but anything that leads to more screen time for Nadine is a win in my book. Like others here, I was afraid they were going to hook up. I'm incredibly glad it didn't go that way. I got a kick out of her laughing at him over setting her pan on fire and her "you think I'm a cat lady?"

 

I hated Henry automatically accusing Bess of blocking his attempts to rejoin the DIA. Seriously, Henry? You know she's not thrilled, but has agreed to support you in your idiocy, and now you can't possibly think of any other reason they might turn you down other than that your wife purposefully went behind your back, blocked your attempt to get back in, and then lied about it to your face?? That's the woman you think you married? Seriously? I was so offended on her behalf that all the other stuff about him being chosen for this elite terrorist hunting group didn't even register with me until I read this thread. I'm still annoyed at him. He should know her better than that. I'd really like to see him apologize for that before I want to look at him again. Just...ugh. I think I'm taking this harder than she did.

 

On the whole Dr. Professor Pilot Arm Candy, Spy and Terrorist Hunter Extraordinaire thing...yeah, this is getting old quickly. For me, the strongest point of this show has always been Bess and Henry's relationship. Their amazing together and I love them, but she should be the star. We're supposed to be watching her do SoS things.....that's supposed to be the focus, and I feel like he's been slowly horning in on that for a while now.

 

I get the whole "now they can talk to each other about work!" thing, but.....like other people said, they could do that if he was still a professor, or pilot, and became a model and decided to do the arm candy thing for pay. That issue didn't need to be fixed by giving him this super special government gig. I also get the "make the husband not a buffoon!" thing, because I hate the buffoon husband shtick with a blinding passion. But again, he can be a perfectly competent human being while having a completely different discussion safe job outside the government sphere.

 

Geez, show. You're lucky I'm so head-over-heels in like with you. Because Bess. And sometimes other things. On that note, Bess driving the Saudi ambassador into a corner where he couldn't say no to turning over the terrorist was pretty awesome.

 

Lastly, I'm slowly getting attached to the FBI director. Can we keep her?

[pennben]

Okay, this reference is probably going to be so old that no one gets it, but I imagine Season 1 as a fine-brewed coffee.  I see Season 2 as a classic Folger's decaffeinated instant coffee switch where they tell you that the decaf instant coffee is as good as what you were getting in Season 1.   But, as anyone who ever had Folger's crystals back then (other than the folks being filmed in the commercials) could attest....nope, it really wasn't that good. Let's go back to the good stuff!!  And to me, the good stuff is more Tess, less Superhero Henry....how about the human Henry we saw in the first season, he wasn't weak there, he just wasn't whatever he's become here. 

 

I mean for Daly to say that it is important for a show about a powerful woman to make sure that her husband is shown to be very powerful as well so that her power isn't diminished because a powerful woman wouldn't be with a buffoon so I need to be a superhero (I know, I'm fudging here, but I don't think I'm far off), well, it makes me feel like I snorted a few of those decaffeinated crystals!!

Edited February 27, 2016 by pennben

[Driad]

Maybe I missed a line, but was the bombing an attack on Not Malala, the young woman with the burned face?  What happened to her?

[shapeshifter]

Maybe I missed a line, but was the bombing an attack on Not Malala, the young woman with the burned face?  What happened to her?

Not sure, but it looked like she made it out of the building, though not among the first.

[VinceW]

...............................I hated Henry automatically accusing Bess of blocking his attempts to rejoin the DIA. Seriously, Henry? You know she's not thrilled, but has agreed to support you in your idiocy, and now you can't possibly think of any other reason they might turn you down other than that your wife purposefully went behind your back, blocked your attempt to get back in, and then lied about it to your face?? That's the woman you think you married? Seriously? I was so offended on her behalf that all the other stuff about him being chosen for this elite terrorist hunting group didn't even register with me until I read this thread. I'm still annoyed at him. He should know her better than that. I'd really like to see him apologize for that before I want to look at him again. Just...ugh. I think I'm taking this harder than she did.

 

On the whole Dr. Professor Pilot Arm Candy, Spy and Terrorist Hunter Extraordinaire thing...yeah, this is getting old quickly. For me, the strongest point of this show has always been Bess and Henry's relationship. Their amazing together and I love them, but she should be the star. We're supposed to be watching her do SoS things.....that's supposed to be the focus, and I feel like he's been slowly horning in on that for a while now.

 

I get the whole "now they can talk to each other about work!" thing, but.....like other people said, they could do that if he was still a professor, or pilot, and became a model and decided to do the arm candy thing for pay. That issue didn't need to be fixed by giving him this super special government gig. I also get the "make the husband not a buffoon!" thing, because I hate the buffoon husband shtick with a blinding passion. But again, he can be a perfectly competent human being while having a completely different discussion safe job outside the government sphere................

Our couple have separate story lines most of the time and they don't interact much except at home, but as far as the special work group, the show creator might have selected that direction as the best way to tell a story about how to deal with terrorists who radicalize religion in order to justify destroying western culture or else I might be giving Barbara Hall too much credit. It makes sense to use Henry as an consultant for his theology expertise and profile skills. The writers might be using the work group idea as an opportunity to test audience reaction having them work together outside of the home. Perhaps the writers feel that the relationship can grow that way because they have such good chemistry together and the solidity and intimacy of the relationship persists because of good writing and acting.  However, that idea could be a mistake if they give him too much authority which overshadows Elizabeth's stature as SoS, but that seems unlikely at this point.

 

Henry accusing Bess after he learned that the DIA refused his return was overdone and reminded me of his arrogant tone during some conversations with Jane Fellows during the Russian conflict. I enjoy watching Jill Hennessy in her recurring role as an intelligence analyst and it seems likely that she will be in the work group.  Henry's persona at times gets troubling which I hope he doesn't bring to this new group.

 

 I hope that the task force arc is short and not something that is being used to force a change in the family dynamic which would make his role on the show become somewhat nonsensical. Sometimes writers try to get too clever with the storytelling and risk changing the balance needed to keep viewers watching. IMO

Edited March 5, 2016 by VinceW

[sinkwriter]

As soon as Henry said he wanted to rejoin DIA, I eyerolled and said, "Here we go again..." The very idea filled me with dread. Here comes more melodrama. I just wouldn't be able to take it. The task force is a much better place for him.

 

Though personally I agree with this:

 

 

I was thinking Marguerite Sanchez (Roslyn Ruff), FBI Director.

 

I liked her as a character. She did her job well, and was smart and insightful and on the ball. She should have been part of that group. 

[madam magpie]

Okay, this reference is probably going to be so old that no one gets it, but I imagine Season 1 as a fine-brewed coffee. I see Season 2 as a classic Folger's decaffeinated instant coffee switch where they tell you that the decaf instant coffee is as good as what you were getting in Season 1. But, as anyone who ever had Folger's crystals back then (other than the folks being filmed in the commercials) could attest....nope, it really wasn't that good. Let's go back to the good stuff!! And to me, the good stuff is more Tess, less Superhero Henry....how about the human Henry we saw in the first season, he wasn't weak there, he just wasn't whatever he's become here.

I mean for Daly to say that it is important for a show about a powerful woman to make sure that her husband is shown to be very powerful as well so that her power isn't diminished because a powerful woman wouldn't be with a buffoon so I need to be a superhero (I know, I'm fudging here, but I don't think I'm far off), well, it makes me feel like I snorted a few of those decaffeinated crystals!!

To be fair, that's not at all what he said. His point was that often, when a story leads with a competent female character, her male partner is less competent. In those narratives, men can't cook or care for children or clean properly or even carry on a rational conversation. Not only is that bad for men; it's bad for women because it reinforces the gender stereotype that women are the only ones who can be nurturing caregivers who can maintain a household. To have a show that portrays a powerful couple where not only is the woman the focus and the authority, but the two are equally competent at home is a rarity. Friday Night Lights is the only other show I can think of that sort of did this, and even there, Coach Taylor didn't cook or do laundry. His wife did. What Tim Daly was saying drew him to the character was that Henry didn't just support his wife's right to have a powerful job, he was an equal partner to her at home. Bess doesn't have to save the world and then come home to a filthy kitchen and kids who are clamouring for her, and only her, support. She has a husband who can hold down his own powerful career, make dinner, and comfort their children in her absence. It's all very Lean In. Bess isn't better (OK, yes she is, but still...) than Henry. She isn't more capable or smart or nurturing. They're a powerhouse pair of equals and they battle and love and live that way. I think it's fantastic. Edited April 2, 2016 by madam magpie

[pennben]

Oh, I wasn't really disagreeing with what he had to say in general about tv, he's right.  I guess my dissatisfaction was with how this season has played out, in my view, emphasizing him over the stories of her that I more generally enjoyed last season.  It's why I stopped watching after this episode.

 

However,  I'm glad you still love it and so do many others and I hope it runs for many years.  I sincerely mean that, it just wasn't for me anymore, that's all.

 

All the best.

 

PS  I agree, Friday Night Lights was fantastic.

[madam magpie]

Oh, I wasn't really disagreeing with what he had to say in general about tv, he's right.  I guess my dissatisfaction was with how this season has played out, in my view, emphasizing him over the stories of her that I more generally enjoyed last season.  It's why I stopped watching after this episode.

 

However,  I'm glad you still love it and so do many others and I hope it runs for many years.  I sincerely mean that, it just wasn't for me anymore, that's all.

 

All the best.

 

PS  I agree, Friday Night Lights was fantastic.

Well, I can't speak to that yet. I'm semi new to the show and am sort of watching out of order. I haven't seen all the episodes in season two yet. But so far, I haven't noticed his stories being more important than hers, just that he's been more integrated into the bigger picture. I mean...It's Tim Daly. He's too big a star (and too pretty) to just sit on the sidelines. Plus, honestly, it's hard for one actor to carry an hour-long drama; the schedules are exhausting and such. They may have needed to beef up his stories so that Tea didn't have to be in every (or nearly every) scene.

I do like having him more involved in the secret stuff, but I like spies in all their forms. I don't care much for Jill Hennessey, though. Not sure why, but I don't like her character. Maybe it just makes me nervous that the show's going to try and set up some kind of affair...or almost...or maybe...or something. I don't know. I don't trust TV not to do that, but I hope not.

I will admit that if I had to choose, I liked season one better so far. But I'm a huge fan of Tea Leoni, so logistical issues or no, I'd rather she be in every scene. That might be why.

[CheshireCat]

madam magpie, on 02 Apr 2016 - 7:05 PM, said:

Well, I can't speak to that yet. I'm semi new to the show and am sort of watching out of order. I haven't seen all the episodes in season two yet. But so far, I haven't noticed his stories being more important than hers, just that he's been more integrated into the bigger picture. I mean...It's Tim Daly. He's too big a star (and too pretty) to just sit on the sidelines. Plus, honestly, it's hard for one actor to carry an hour-long drama; the schedules are exhausting and such. They may have needed to beef up his stories so that Tea didn't have to be in every (or nearly every) scene.

 

For me, it's the little things - we know from flashbacks that Henry was deployed right after they got married and then he made such a fuzz when Bess was offered to become Station Chief in Iraq for a year and she ultimately turned it down and I feel she did that in part because Henry threw a tantrum. And then he goes on about how he's comfortable being the man beside the woman and whatnot and when she expresses concern and tells him she wasn't okay during the Dimitri thing, he brushes her off. And he calls Fellows anyway. So, basically, it's again Bess who would have to make the sacrifice if she feels their marriage is threatened and they can't continue to both work in classified jobs because Henry seems to feel entitled. Or at least, he comes across as feeling entitled. And that imbalance didn't even get addressed.

 

He also didn't apologize for accusing her for having blocked him with DIA.

 

And then there's all the stuff about him getting away with downright insubordination while Bess gets chewed out by Russell for something which came only close and untrained Henry besting those who are trained etc which I already mentioned in another thread.

 

The story isn't bad or at least, I don't find it bad. It's just handled badly. And I would love to see that they reach a point at which they clash over something and ague because they're neglecting their family and that it's then Henry who quits his job because, as per his words, he's the man who's comfortable being the man beside the woman. That would also be a really great thing for his character to do!

 

I do like having him more involved in the secret stuff, but I like spies in all their forms. I don't care much for Jill Hennessey, though. Not sure why, but I don't like her character. Maybe it just makes me nervous that the show's going to try and set up some kind of affair...or almost...or maybe...or something. I don't know. I don't trust TV not to do that, but I hope not.

 

From the interviews/comments I would say that they'd all fight tooth and nail for that not to happen and if it did, that it was the network forcing them to. Both leads enjoy that the characters are in a strong marriage and it seems the producers like that, too.

[madam magpie]

Well, I don't think that objecting to your spouse taking a job that will put him/her in a war zone for at least a year when you have little kids and a marriage is throwing a tantrum. That's a legitimate concern for people who have agreed to be partners, and I thought Henry's point that Bess wasn't a field agent was legit as well; that's a totally different position from analyst. Not that he wouldn't have married her or that she couldn't consider changing careers or any of that. But I mean, if my husband suddenly came home one day, said he was leaving me for a year to take a job in Iraq, and I was on my own with three little kids, I'd object too. I think the point of that exchange and of her decision was (besides the obvious plot point that Juliette went instead and was changed by the experience) to show the strength of their shared commitment to their family. These two both seem to want to be people who are home to parent their own kids and be attentive to their marriage. They've made that agreement. Her choice was also a contrast to her brother who shows up later as someone who leaves his family to save the world, his child and spouse be dammed. When Henry says something about how Jason won't even remember who she is, she seems crushed because her children's emotional well-being and growth matter to her a great deal. So does her marriage, and she brought up Henry's spying being an issue a couple of times. There was the bit about how she needed to be able to trust him, and the time when she said she didn't know if their marriage could survive them both being in harm's way. Her marriage and kids are super important to her. Those are OK priorities for me, especially since I think Henry prioritizes both as well. I don't need either of them to quit their high-powered jobs or for Bess to step away from her marriage and children to prove that they're both leaning in. I just need to see them share the responsibilities of all facets of life: home and career. Life is all about choices. Sometimes you don't take the big job, sometimes you do. Sometimes she cooks, sometimes he does. We've seen her do the dishes and him reach out to the kids. They both contribute to home and career equally. Plus, every time their children falter because of her position, Bess feels terrible guilt about it. So I totally buy that for the sake of her family and marriage, she'd choose not to go to Iraq. I didn't like that Henry basically threatened to leave her if she did it, but I can accept that he faltered. No one is perfect and he was clearly upset. I really like that they get to be upset with each other, but it doesn't become a huge thing. They allow each other to make mistakes.

I don't need apologies either, really. I want that parsed out and time spent on it only when absolutely necessary. I haven't seen all the examples you mention yet, but so far, the only apology I remember is when Bess lost it on Henry when she had PTSD. That seemed appropriate. The only one I wished we'd gotten and didn't was when she wasn't fully supportive of Stevie when she questioned her about the leaked bedroom photos. I can't think of a time when I thought Henry needed to apologize to Elizabeth and didn't. I feel like their relationship is such that remorse can be implied. I saw an interview with the woman who wrote the book and movie for Room where she said she purposely didn't ever have the mother and son say "I love you" to each other because if the story required them to say it, she'd failed in the telling. I feel like that about this relationship too. I don't need Elizabeth and Henry to apologize for all infractions, or even most infractions. I can see the remorse in their interaction and commitment...at least so far.

If I'm going to complain about anything on this show, it's the details. I feel like we've gotten conflicting information about how long they've been married, how long Bess was at the CIA, how she could possibly have gotten a PhD to be a college professor, etc. In the episode where she has a panic attack, I think they say she's 46 as they wheel her through the hospital. It's just not believable to me that she's 46, was a CIA analyst for 20 years, has been married for 25 (or 23?) years, had three kids, and somehow found the time to get a PhD so she could teach college. I believe Tea could be a superhero and if they'd let Bess be Tea's actual age of 50, I'd be willing to accept it, but that's all a bit much. Also, as someone who lived in the DC area for years, every time they call the State Dept. interns "PAs" or try to convince me that the Secretary of State's kid would go to public school with no security, it makes me chuckle. But TV shows aren't known for their attention to detail, so I just have to let that stuff go.

From the interviews/comments I would say that they'd all fight tooth and nail for that not to happen and if it did, that it was the network forcing them to. Both leads enjoy that the characters are in a strong marriage and it seems the producers like that, too.

Yeah, I've watched some interviews about this too, and I hope it's true! But on TV, I feel like one can never know until it's over. I think the audience might revolt, though, which is always a good ace in the hole to have.

Edited April 3, 2016 by madam magpie

[CheshireCat]

madam magpie, on 02 Apr 2016 - 9:40 PM, said:madam magpie, on 02 Apr 2016 - 9:40 PM, said:

Well, I don't think that objecting to your spouse taking a job that will put him/her in a war zone for at least a year when you have little kids and a marriage is throwing a tantrum. That's a legitimate concern for people who have agreed to be partners, and I thought Henry's point that Bess wasn't a field agent was legit as well; that's a totally different position from analyst. Not that he wouldn't have married her or that she couldn't consider changing careers or any of that. But I mean, if my husband suddenly came home one day, said he was leaving me for a year to take a job in Iraq, and I was on my own with three little kids, I'd object too.

 

 

I'd object, too. But the thing is, he went to war and that was okay. Yet when she brought up the Station Chief job in a war zone he told her he didn't know what it would look like when she came back. Which I interpreted as saying, I might have changed and we might be estranged once you return. And I don't really see the difference between being away because you're deployed or because you're assigned Station Chief in a foreign country. I guess, my point is, why would things change in the way Henry seemed to imply (that their marriage might not survive it) when Bess is away but not while he was away?

 

So, it's not really about the choices they make or made, it's about the choices the writers make, really. Their way of thinking.

 

Quote

 So does her marriage, and she brought up Henry's spying being an issue a couple of times. There was the bit about how she needed to be able to trust him, and the time when she said she didn't know if their marriage could survive them both being in harm's way.

 

My point exactly - she brings up the issue, he brushes it off. Henry brought up a similar issue in the flashback, and he seemed to make a valid point. At least, we can assume that it was considered a valid point because Bess quit. Why is it only a valid point when Henry brings it up but he can just brush it off and doesn't even get called out on it or realizes that maybe he was a bit hasty in what he said. Because, if we look back on episode 9, then he was the one who wanted to talk and who ended up sharing information I'm not sure he was supposed to share. While Bess was bothered that they couldn't talk about work and didn't have much to talk about, he was the one who was a lot more upset over the restrictions than she was and he was the one who couldn't keep things to himself.

And I understand his desire to share information, but he was completely wrong brushing off Bess' concerns and somehow I feel that should have been addressed.

 

QuoteQuote

 Sometimes she cooks,

 

Much to everyone's horror, it seems... ;-)

 

Quote

So I totally buy that her family and marriage are super important to her and that for their sake she'd choose not to go to Iraq. I didn't like that Henry basically threatened to leave her if she did it,

 

So, it wasn't just me who interpreted it in that way. But, as I said, that exactly is my point. Why was it okay for him to get deployed but not for her to leave for Iraq? Why does he get the right to threaten to leave her but she has to stand by him when he gets deployed and accept it? Why can he threaten to leave her then but her concerns about their marriage not surviving him going back to DIA get brushed off and why does he get to do what threatens their marriage anyway and she has to accept it (again)?

 

It's not about the choices the characters make, it's about the principle the writers seem to apply as they seem to hold men to a different Standard than women.

 

Quote

I don't need apologies either, really.

 

I do when something was uncalled for and Henry's reaction was absolutely uncalled for. I guess, if he only had accused her, I might have been fine had there not been an apology, but he brushed her off (even though she was right) and then did what he wanted anyway without, I'd say, talking to her again and then he accused her. He was in the wrong ever since he came home from the hospital yet he didn't need to acknowledge it even once.

 

Quote

I saw an interview with the woman who wrote the book and movie for Room where she said she purposely didn't ever have the mother and son say "I love you" to each other because if the story required them to say it, she'd failed in the telling.

 

I guess, I have a different view on that. Apologies and "I love you"s were always important in my family because apologizing is admitting to wrong-doing and owning up to mistakes and the other is something which we know but like to hear anyway. It's balm for the soul and I love, by the way, how it's part of a lot of Henry's and Bess' phone conversations and I absolutely loved how that was handled in "Unity Node".

 

Quote

I feel like that about this relationship too. I don't need Elizabeth and Henry to apologize for all infractions, or even most infractions. I can see the remorse in their interaction and commitment...at least so far.

 

While I agree that I don't need them to apologize for every infraction, and that actions often speak louder than words, I don't know how or when Henry would have shown Bess that his accusation and brushing off her concerns were uncalled for and unwarrented.

 

Quote

If I'm going to complain about anything on this show, it's the details. I feel like we've gotten conflicting information about how long they've been married, how long Bess was at the CIA, how she could possibly have gotten a PhD to be a college professor, etc. In the episode where she has a panic attack, I think they say she's 46 as they wheel her through the hospital. It's just not believable to me that she's 46, was a CIA analyst for 20 years, has been married for 25 (or 23?) years, had three kids, and somehow found the time to get a PhD so she could teach college. I believe Tea could be a superhero and if they'd let Bess be Tea's actual age of 50, I'd be willing to accept it, but that's all a bit much. Also, as someone who lived in the DC area for years, every time they call the State Dept. interns "PAs" or try to convince me that the Secretary of State's kid would go to public school with no security, it makes me chuckle. But TV shows aren't known for their attention to detail, so I just have to let that stuff go.

 

 

Agreed. I've decided to go with the Information which fits/seems to fit better. CIA for 12 years, college professor for 10. If she's 46 in S1, then that puts her at 24 when she started at the CIA and should give her time to get her PhD after she quit the CIA.

And since they celebrated their anniversary, I'm also going with the 25 and consider Henry's statement and messing up of the lines ;-)

Edited April 3, 2016 by CheshireCat

[madam magpie]

I don't think it was about OK or not OK, really. It was about expectation and agreements. Henry was an active-duty soldier. They get deployed, they go to war, they come home. She was a CIA analyst in the DC area, basically a desk job. His point was that they hadn't made their agreements about how to live their partnership with her as an agent who would be sent into the field for a year or more. That could mean no contact, no leave, and a crap-ton of danger...while he's at home hoping she's not dead and taking care of three little kids alone. A better analogy, I think, would be if he'd redeployed without talking to her about it. It's not like she said she was getting a promotion that might require more hours or a move to another city. And in fact when she did later get the crazy job offer that required a move and long hours, required her husband to quit his job, and required her whole family to be uprooted, they talked it out and she took it, becoming Secretary of State. It's not like Henry is a guy who holds her back.

I think they both brush each other off sometimes, but that just happens in life. They've been together for two-plus decades. They're going to have many moments of inattention. I'm judging by the whole picture, not individual mistakes. That's how I believe marriage (and basically all relationships) work. I do think he was wrong to threaten to leave her, but I also think he was very scared. In 2005, Iraq was insanity. Just remembering how scary the war was back then is a little chilling for me. This was just two years after Abu Ghraib and while the court marshals were still happening, two years after Valerie Plame was outed by the Bush Administration and while that investigation was happening, etc. It was a crazy time.

We saw him scared again later when he "pulled the husband card" in an effort to get her to bail on Iran. So, ok. Maybe that's his MO when he's afraid. Maybe she went after him, said something like, "Are you fucking kidding? You're saying you'll leave me??" and he fell apart. Who knows? The dude is just an imperfect person who adores his wife and worries about her safety in crazy dangerous situations. Given how I've seen them resolve other things, I'm willing to assume they talked out the Iraq posting and Elizabeth decided not to do it. I just don't buy that she's a person who gets pushed around by her husband. I've seen no evidence of that. From where I sit, she fights as good as she gets. I don't need him (or her) never to make a misstep. I just need them to battle and live as equals and partners. It always looks to me like they do.

I like your rework of the details! I'm on board with all that, except I'm making her 50. Go big or go home. We don't need to age her down. Or hell, let's say 55. I saw an interview with Tea where she said women do the lying about their age thing all wrong. You need to lie up, and then people are like, "Dayum! You look great for 55, Bess!" ;)

Edited April 3, 2016 by madam magpie

[CheshireCat]

madam magpie, on 02 Apr 2016 - 11:53 PM, said:madam magpie, on 02 Apr 2016 - 11:53 PM, said:

I don't think it was about OK or not OK, really. It was about expectation and agreements. Henry was an active-duty soldier. They get deployed, they go to war, they come home. She was a CIA analyst in the DC area, basically a desk job. His point was that they hadn't made their agreements about how to live their partnership with her as an agent who would be sent into the field for a year or more. That could mean no contact, no leave, and a crap-ton of danger...while he's at home hoping she's not dead and taking care of three little kids alone. A better analogy, I think, would be if he'd redeployed without talking to her about it. It's not like she said she was getting a promotion that might require more hours or a move to another city. And in fact when she did later get the crazy job offer that required a move and long hours, required her husband to quit his job, and required her whole family to be uprooted, they talked it out and she took it, becoming Secretary of State. It's not like Henry is a guy who holds her back.

 

I kind of fail to see the difference between her going into a war zone and him going into one. She would have been Station Chief, she would not have been out in the field or gone undercover. The way I understood it is that she would have worked at a stationary place and coordinated intelligence work and operations from there and would have been the boss for all of the CIA officers who worked in Iraq/are involved in any Iraq operations. There doesn't seem to be a reason for her not being able to contact Henry any more or less than he would have been able to contact her while deployed. Yes, she was an analyst, however, I'm sure Henry knew when he married her that the CIA is forbidden to operate on US soil and that there was a chance that she would be transferred overseas. Don't all or most of the embassies have CIA outposts as well?

 

And wasn't the flashback said to be from 2003 and not 2005?

 

And regarding the brushing off - I didn't feel it was a moment of inattentiveness. Rather, she expressed concern that their marriage wasn't fine and she wasn't fine and he just said that it was and that was that for him. He didn't give it another thought. And normally, I'd agree, it happens in a marriage. The problem that I have, again, is that it seems only his concerns are valid or are shown as valid and they get talked about but when she voices them, he gets to dismiss them and does things his way anyway.

 

I would exclude Iran or Bess becoming SoS as neither threatened their marriage. However, Henry felt her going to Iraq would threaten their marriage and they had a lengthy argument about it and in the end, Bess quit, and Bess feels Henry going back to DIA would threaten their marriage (which she is actually right about as we've been shown) and he dismisses it and calls Fellows anyway.

And again, it's not about the characters, it's the principle which is applied. I would be fine if we saw a fallout from it, if it would come back to bite Henry, however, I don't see any evidence of it since he's not with DIA and everyone seems peachy now.

 

 

Quote

 I like your rework of the details! I'm on board with all that, except I'm making her 50. Go big or go home. We don't need to age her down. Or hell, let's say 55. I saw an interview with Tea where she said women do the lying about their age thing all wrong. You need to lie up, and then people are like, "Dayum! You look great for 55, Bess!" ;)

 

 

But the re-work of the details does work with her being 46 ;-)  Though I didn't rework anything. She does mention that she worked 12 years in the CIA under Dalton and then Alison says that she was "like 6" when Bess quit the CIA when she turns 16. So, it's either make Bess older, then she can have worked 20 years in the CIA and 12 of those under Dalton or keep her 46 and forget the other 8 years of CIA and only go with the 12 years under Dalton. Since Dalton recruited her and was still there when she quit the job, I'd say 46 and 12 years in the CIA seems more likely.

Edited April 5, 2016 by CheshireCat

[madam magpie]

I kind of fail to see the difference between her going into a war zone and him going into one. She would have been Station Chief, she would not have been out in the field or gone undercover. The way I understood it is that she would have worked at a stationary place and coordinated intelligence work and operations from there and would have been the boss for all of the CIA officers who worked in Iraq/are involved in any Iraq operations. There doesn't seem to be a reason for her not being able to contact Henry any more or less than he would have been able to contact her while deployed. Yes, she was an analyst, however, I'm sure Henry knew when he married her that the CIA is forbidden to operate on US soil and that there was a chance that she would be transferred overseas. Don't all or most of the embassies have CIA outposts as well?

And wasn't the flashback said to be from 2003 and not 2005?

And regarding the brushing off - I didn't feel it was a moment of inattentiveness. Rather, she expressed concern that their marriage wasn't fine and she wasn't fine and he just said that it was and that was that for him. He didn't give it another thought. And normally, I'd agree, it happens in a marriage. The problem that I have, again, is that it seems only his concerns are valid or are shown as valid and they get talked about but when she voices them, he gets to dismiss them and does things his way anyway.

I would exclude Iran or Bess becoming SoS as neither threatened their marriage. However, Henry felt her going to Iraq would threaten their marriage and they had a lengthy argument about it and in the end, Bess quit, and Bess feels Henry going back to DIA would threaten their marriage (which she is actually right about as we've been shown) and he dismisses it and calls Fellows anyway.

And again, it's not about the characters, it's the principle which is applied. I would be fine if we saw a fallout from it, if it would come back to bite Henry, however, I don't see any evidence of it since he's not with DIA and everyone seems peachy now.

But the re-work of the details does work with her being 46 ;-) Though I didn't rework anything. She does mention that she worked 12 years in the CIA under Dalton and then Alison says that she was "like 6" when Bess quit the CIA when she turns 16. So, it's either make Bess older, then she can have worked 20 years in the CIA and 12 of those under Dalton or keep her 46 and forget the other 8 years of CIA and only go with the 12 years under Dalton. Since Dalton recruited her and was still there when she quit the job, I'd say 46 and 12 years in the CIA seems more likely.

I guess, but the premise for the show says she'd been with the CIA for 20 years. She's also been married for 25 years (or 23?)...meaning she got married while she was a junior in college? Really??? And then she had three babies, worked for the CIA, and got a PhD? I don't buy it, but I also don't care that much. TV shows are so bad with detail and make characters (especially women) so much younger than they'd really be. I'd never get to enjoy anything if I got bogged down in that. And if we're going to get super picky, the flashback events in the finale don't even jive with what Elizabeth told Stevie earlier in season one about why she left the CIA. When Stevie gets upset that her mother was a torturer, Bess tells her "that's why I left," implying that she had a disagreement with the folks in charge on policy and a crisis of conscience, not that she was kicked out because she didn't want to go to Iraq. But again...details are rarely the TV writer's strength.

The CIA defers to the FBI on matters of domestic operations and the two agencies historically haven't really gotten along, but CIA headquarters is in Fairfax County, VA, right outside D.C., and they have field offices throughout the country. My understanding is that plenty of people who work for the CIA, and many analysts, never leave the United States, though we know Elizabeth did at some point because she interrogated that one guy. But expecting that her career wouldn't demand that she spend extended time in Iraq doesn't seem odd to me at all. I mean, even Elizabeth was stunned that Dalton wanted to send her. She flat-out says, "What?? But I'm not an operative."

My read of the "it wasn't fine, I wasn't fine" line was that she wasn't fine before, when they both were doing secret things. Not that their marriage wasn't fine at the moment. Yeah, he brushed her off, but the guy had just been through a bombing, hospitalization, etc. I don't blame her not for pushing. That would have been mean. Then she told him she didn't like it but she supported his choice. And then she came up with the task force idea to solve the issue. It seemed to me that the biggest problem for her was the fact that they couldn't talk to each other about what they were doing. That had wrecked her because she felt distrustful and knew that could destroy a relationship. So she found away for everyone to win. She's the story's hero. That's what she does. I felt a "back to bite you" clean resolution for Henry was unnecessary because life so often doesn't work like that. Sometimes you get mad, sometimes you suck it up, and sometimes you put a bug in the president's ear about a special task force so you can keep your secret-spy husband close.

I have zero problem with someone objecting to a spouse saying out of the blue that he or she was leaving home and family for a year to go undercover in Iraq during the worst years of the war. Henry's fear seems completely reasonable to me, though, like I said, I thought his threat was uncool...especially as I watched more episodes and learned how much Elizabeth craves the stability of family and how her own fears send her straight to the joke of calling lawyers when they hit something particularly tricky. That's clearly a soft spot for her, and to be fair, we've seen him notice and be specifically reassuring about it. Again, though, I'm looking at the big picture, not just the couple of times Henry was wrong. My sense is that Elizabeth's feelings, concerns, and needs matter a great deal to her husband, even if he's not a perfect person. He strikes me as extraordinarily proud of her, he admires and respects her, he values her opinion and encourages her to express it, and he's a true partner to her in the mundane aspects of daily life. But we can agree to disagree on that.

The date stamp for the flashback in the finale was 2005.

Edited April 5, 2016 by madam magpie

[CheshireCat]

madam magpie, on 04 Apr 2016 - 10:34 PM, said:

I guess, but the premise for the show says she'd been with the CIA for 20 years. She's also been married for 25 years (or 23?)...meaning she got married while she was a junior in college? Really??? And then she had three babies, worked for the CIA, and got a PhD? I don't buy it, but I also don't care that much. TV shows are so bad with detail and make characters (especially women) so much younger than they'd really be. I'd never get to enjoy anything if I got bogged down in that. And if we're going to get super picky, the flashback events in the finale don't even jive with what Elizabeth told Stevie earlier in season one about why she left the CIA. When Stevie gets upset that her mother was a torturer, Bess tells her "that's why I left," implying that she had a disagreement with the folks in charge on policy and a crisis of conscience, not that she was kicked out because she didn't want to go to Iraq. But again...details are rarely the TV writer's strength.

 

Much to my disappointment, I feel that the MSec writers have been especially bad with details - they state that Bess has worked for 12 years in the CIA under Dalton in episode 2 and then she says she's been working as an analyst for 20 years in episode 3. ... And then 13 episodes later we get confirmation that she's been out of the CIA for 10 years and an episode later she's only 46 years old. That's a lot of contradictory information in one season... Unless you squint really hard and are willing to view the 20 years as a reference to having been an analyst and  college professor. 

Anyway, I have no idea how long it takes to get a PhD, however, if she spent 22 years working as an analyst and college professor and she's 46 (was in S1) then she would have been 24 by the time she was recruited for the CIA. Makes sense to me because if she were 50 then I'd wonder what she was doing those 5 extra years in between. And I don't think that recruitment right out of college is all that unusual. It would also make her 21 when she got married which I don't think is that unusual either. That would mean that they got married in early 1990 and that works with the fact that Henry was in the first Iraq war and got deployed right after they got married.

 

(And yes, there seem to be two different reasons for why she quit, or rather, the finale flashback gives the impression she quit because of the situation at home. On the other hand, the report she handed in included interrogation tactics, so maybe it all ties together?)

 

(Oh, and about the premise, I think the details of that can change/get adjusted as a show evolves/goes into serious production, just like character details and names change/get adjusted - I noticed that her middle name changed, too. Can't remember what it was before but it wasn't Adams)

 

 

Quote

The CIA defers to the FBI on matters of domestic operations and the two agencies historically haven't really gotten along, but CIA headquarters is in Fairfax County, VA, right outside D.C., and they have field offices throughout the country. My understanding is that plenty of people who work for the CIA, and many analysts, never leave the United States, though we know Elizabeth did at some point because she interrogated that one guy. But expecting that her career wouldn't demand that she spend extended time in Iraq doesn't seem odd to me at all. I mean, even Elizabeth was stunned that Dalton wanted to send her. She flat-out says, "What?? But I'm not an operative."

 

My point was simply that, while probably unlikely, there was the possibility.

 

Quote

My read of the "it wasn't fine, I wasn't fine" line was that she wasn't fine before, when they both were doing secret things. Not that their marriage wasn't fine at the moment.

 

I'm pretty sure she referred to the Dimitri situation. A) It has more or less been stated in intervews, and b) they kind of set it up even if not that obviously. But they had this info-mercal discussion when she seemed less than pleased about not being able to talk and then they had this sort of argument when Bess gave Henry the "official" line about what happened in Moscow and she refused to talk with him about classified information. And Henry's claim that everything was fine was clearly not the case since he was the one pushing her to talk and not being fine with not being able to talk.

 

Quote

Yeah, he brushed her off, but the guy had just been through a bombing, hospitalization, etc. I don't blame her not for pushing. That would have been mean. Then she told him she didn't like it but she supported his choice.

 

 

I don't blame her for not pushing either, I wouldn't have pushed him either. But my point was that he shouldn't have called Fellows in the morning and that he did it simply because he wanted to. He had brushed off her concerns the night before (even though they were warranted) and then, I would say, without talking again, simply calls Fellows even though he knows Bess is concerns and I'm sure, deep down also knows she's right. (Because, as I said, he was the one who pushed her to talk in ep 9).

 

Quote

And then she came up with the task force idea to solve the issue. It seemed to me that the biggest problem for her was the fact that they couldn't talk to each other about what they were doing. That had wrecked her because she felt distrustful and knew that could destroy a relationship. So she found away for everyone to win. She's the story's hero.

 

 

I agree that that is what bothered her.

I disagree that she solved the problem because she didn't mention Henry once and couldn't know that he would be used for the task force. I also think that if she had suggested the group as a solution she would have told Henry that when he accused her of blocking her with DIA. In my opinion, she was the one to suggest it because she was brought in to think outside the box, so it would make sense for her to want to form a task force to track down the terrorist group/leader. It also makes sense because I would imagine she has led similar ops in the CIA. So, out of everyone in the office at the time, she kind of had to be the one to suggest it. And I would say TPTB then used it as a tool to involve Henry in a way that would enable them to talk, too. I'd say the order of events was Bess suggesting the task force, Dalton probably realizing Bess is right, Dalton getting Henry're request to go back to DIA and, realizing that Henry's got the experience and Dalton wanting him in on it.  

 

Quote

I have zero problem with someone objecting to a spouse saying out of the blue that he or she was leaving home and family for a year to go undercover in Iraq during the worst years of the war. Henry's fear seems completely reasonable to me, though, like I said, I thought his threat was uncool...especially as I watched more episodes and learned how much Elizabeth craves the stability of family and how her own fears send her straight to the joke of calling lawyers when they hit something particularly tricky. That's clearly a soft spot for her, and to be fair, we've seen him notice and be specifically reassuring about it.

 

 

But again, the characters themselves and their reaction are not the point. The point is the principle applied by writers/TPTB. There's a difference. A character reaction can make sense but the principle which was applied still can not make sense.

 

The character reaction is fear, in one instance it's Bess' fear, in the other it's Henry's. The principle which is applied is how the scenes are handled by the writers. Not by the characters. By the writers. And that handling makes it look like they're applying different principles when it comes to male and female concerns. The principle which they are applying gives one more weight than the other. It may not have been done intentionally, however, that is how it comes across.

 

Quote

 Again, though, I'm looking at the big picture, not just the couple of times Henry was wrong. My sense is that Elizabeth's feelings, concerns, and needs matter a great deal to her husband, even if he's not a perfect person. He strikes me as extraordinarily proud of her, he admires and respects her, he values her opinion and encourages her to express it, and he's a true partner to her in the mundane aspects of daily life. But we can agree to disagree on that.

 

The date stamp for the flashback in the finale was 2005.

 

 

 

I agree with your assessment. However, now that you say it, I wish there was more of it shown in S2. I loved how they handled Henry in S1. You could really see that he was content being the "man beside the woman". And I have to admit, I miss that in S2. I understand that Daly wants something more challenging as an actor than being a house-husband/college professor as that is probaby not very challenging if you spend an entire show doing that. However, I think by giving him something more challenging to do, they're somewhat losing the "man beside the woman" concept.

 

And I must have mixed up the finale flashback with the other flashbacks.

Edited April 6, 2016 by CheshireCat

[madam magpie]

For me, once characters are written and out in the world, they no longer just belong to the writer. Yes, the writer is trying to communicate something, but that vision doesn't exist in a vacuum. These people have written the ENTIRE story, not just the bit where Henry was wrong. Good characters created by good writers come alive and, I think, can be understood almost entirely by their behavior. It's all in the reactions. The way Elizabeth and Henry react to people, situations, each other, emotions, distress, etc. forms the entire basis of my read of their characters, and it's how I understand what the writers are trying to say. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there as well.

As for how possible Elizabeth's backstory is, sure. Anything is possible. But your scenario is unusual, and there's a reason we say "truth is stranger than fiction." Liberal-minded, academic young women in the early 1990s didn't usually get married in college. (Anecdotally, I was one of those, and I know no one who got married that early. One very conservative religious friend got married at 24 after graduating early and getting both a BA and an MA. Plus, we can look at Elizabeth's real-life counterparts and when they got married, if they did at all.) CIA analysts often don't go out of country. People don't usually have the time to simultaneously study for PhDs (and MAs; if Elizabeth was teaching in the liberal arts, she'd need one of those too), raise three children, and work full-time at the CIA. Not to mention that her husband was doing the same thing! Working for the NSA, getting his own PhD to teach religion. Who was watching their kids??

It can take years to study for and defend a thesis to get a PhD, plus a minimum of four years for undergrad and two for a master's. In a story, to make unusual details work, the writer needs to explain them. If it's true that Elizabeth got married at 21, have her talk to her similarly aged daughter about it to ground the detail. If she were somehow working full time as a CIA analyst while going to grad school, have her talk about how hard those years a were and how she never had any time or barely saw her kids. (I don't buy that bit at all, by the way. That would be so extraordinarily difficult.) The reality, I think, is just that the creators of this show are wishy-washy with details...like most TV show creators. And I think they fell into the trap of aging down the main female character so that she fits better with the mainstream obsession with youth.On one level, that irritates me (a lot) because you've got a beautiful, capable actress in Tea Leoni who actually is about the age the character should be. But on the other, I care very little. I'm entertained, I love the characters, I love the clothes, I love the politics...the wonky details warrant mostly a shoulder shrug from me, really.

All that said, I also sort of miss Henry being the person who grounds Elizabeth in her real world of partner and mother. In giving him his own spy story, they did mess with that dynamic some. My hope is that since he's now working with her, he'll be integrated into her larger stories and we can have them act as a powerhouse spy/political team. I would like that a lot, I think, and it would use Tim Daly in a way that he deserves. You just can't cast someone like him and then relegate him to happy, oblivious husband. (Nobody puts Tim Daly in a corner!) He can literally be the man beside the woman now, right there in the State Department. I think that could be cool.

That's interesting that you saw the task force as a lucky coincidence. I totally saw that as Elizabeth moving all the pieces where she wanted them to be so it would look like a happy accident. I mean, diplomacy and that kind of manipulation are exactly what she does; we're just not used to her doing it for personal gain. And I feel like I caught a sly smile in there somewhere, but I'd have to rewatch to be sure. It never occurred to me that bringing Henry into her circle wasn't her master plan all along. She couldn't tell him what she'd done. Technically, it was completely unethical, and I think he'd object. It needed to look like he got it fully on his own merits separate from her pulling strings. The whole thing looked like spycraft to me.

Edited April 6, 2016 by madam magpie

[CheshireCat]

madam magpie, on 05 Apr 2016 - 11:37 PM, said:

For me, once characters are written and out in the world, they no longer just belong to the writer. Yes, the writer is trying to communicate something, but that vision doesn't exist in a vacuum. These people have written the ENTIRE story, not just the bit where Henry was wrong. Good characters created by good writers come alive and, I think, can be understood almost entirely by their behavior. It's all in the reactions. The way Elizabeth and Henry react to people, situations, each other, emotions, distress, etc. forms the entire basis of my read of their characters, and it's how I understand what the writers are trying to say. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there as well.

 

I wasn't meaning that the characters belong to the writers, so I'm not really sure what you're referring to.

However, I do disagree about it being all about the reaction. I think it's about motivation. If we understand the motivation of a character (even if we don't agree) we can understand and relate to the character. I understand Henry's motivation for his actions and I understand Bess'. What I don't understand is the writer's motivation, and why they handle certain things the way they handle them because they paint characters, in this case Henry, in a not particularly sympathetic light.  

 

 

As for how possible Elizabeth's backstory is, sure. Anything is possible. But your scenario is unusual, and there's a reason we say "truth is stranger than fiction." Liberal-minded, academic young women in the early 1990s didn't usually get married in college.

 

Which is interesting because research I did for a project some time last year showed that the average marriage age of women was 22/23. 

 

(Anecdotally, I was one of those, and I know no one who got married that early. One very conservative religious friend got married at 24 after graduating early and getting both a BA and an MA. Plus, we can look at Elizabeth's real-life counterparts and when they got married, if they did at all.) CIA analysts often don't go out of country. People don't usually have the time to simultaneously study for PhDs (and MAs; if Elizabeth was teaching in the liberal arts, she'd need one of those too), raise three children, and work full-time at the CIA. Not to mention that her husband was doing the same thing! Working for the NSA, getting his own PhD to teach religion. Who was watching their kids??

It can take years to study for and defend a thesis to get a PhD, plus a minimum of four years for undergrad and two for a master's. In a story, to make unusual details work, the writer needs to explain them. If it's true that Elizabeth got married at 21, have her talk to her similarly aged daughter about it to ground the detail. If she were somehow working full time as a CIA analyst while going to grad school, have her talk about how hard those years a were and how she never had any time or barely saw her kids. (I don't buy that bit at all, by the way. That would be so extraordinarily difficult.) The reality, I think, is just that the creators of this show are wishy-washy with details...like most TV show creators.

 

They probably are, that's why I've put together what fits in my mind.

That said, can she not have continued her education after she left the CIA? If I remember correctly, there was never a statement which said she spent 10 years teaching as a college professor.

 

As for the obsession with youth, you're probably correct. Still, if she was 46 last year then she would only be 3 years younger than Leoni herself, and that's not really an awful lot.

My own mother got married at 22, my grandmother was 18 1/2! They both had children a year later and they both were working mothers, so, I find the timeline they gave Elizabeth entire possible. Don't forget that she's also said to be well-off, so that sounds like they would have had the financial means, too.

 

 But on the other, I care very little. I'm entertained, I love the characters, I love the clothes, I love the politics...the wonky details warrant mostly a shoulder shrug from me, really.

 

Agreed.

 

All that said, I also sort of miss Henry being the person who grounds Elizabeth in her real world of partner and mother. In giving him his own spy story, they did mess with that dynamic some. My hope is that since he's now working with her, he'll be integrated into her larger stories and we can have them act as a powerhouse spy/political team. I would like that a lot, I think, and it would use Tim Daly in a way that he deserves. You just can't cast someone like him and then relegate him to happy, oblivious husband. (Nobody puts Tim Daly in a corner!) He can literally be the man beside the woman now, right there in the State Department. I think that could be cool.

 

The thing is, I don't feel like they're using him in that way. They are still doing two separate stories and he gets to be his own hero and actually somewhat of a superhero who has never done anything similar to that task force and suddenly excells at it.

Yes, the Henry who grounds Bess is missing and yes, he could be the man beside the woman working right along with her. It just doesn't seem they're going down that route. And it is that dynamic which is missing. I don't know if it intentionally or accidentially. But it has created something which has taken away something of what I really loved about the show!

 

That's interesting that you saw the task force as a lucky coincidence. I totally saw that as Elizabeth moving all the pieces where she wanted them to be so it would look like a happy accident. I mean, diplomacy and that kind of manipulation are exactly what she does; we're just not used to her doing it for personal gain. And I feel like I caught a sly smile in there somewhere, but I'd have to rewatch to be sure. It never occurred to me that bringing Henry into her circle wasn't her master plan all along. She couldn't tell him what she'd done. Technically, it was completely unethical, and I think he'd object. It needed to look like he got it fully on his own merits separate from her pulling strings. The whole thing looked like spycraft to me.

 

 

But all she said was that she thought they needed to think outside the box and create a special working group. How could that lead to Dalton thinking he wants Henry for it? How could she think that that would lead to Dalton thinking about Henry? How could she be sure that he would not want Henry to go back to DIA just by suggesting a special working group?

As I said in the spoilers thread, it just seems to be an awful big leap for everyone to make and I think if she had wanted Henry to be part of that group, she should have said something else. Maybe it was the writers original intention, that she plants the seed and maybe there's a scene they cut, however, the way the episode aired, I don't think there's any evidence of Bess planting a seed about Henry with Dalton. And she seemed to be truly taken aback when Henry accused her.

Of course, she knew what Dalton was talking about when he came to see them at the house. It wasn't too hard to figure out. And if there was a smile it could just have been because Dalton heeded her advice. But as for her specifically wanting Henry to be part of the group... from what I'm seeing I can't entirely buy into that.

[madam magpie]

Which is interesting because research I did for a project some time last year showed that the average marriage age of women was 22/23.

You consider Elizabeth's career and life path to be average? I don't. It's true that the average age women married in 1990 was about 23. But it's also true that only about 20%-ish of women got college degrees in 1990. The "average" woman in 1990 didn't go to college at all. And Elizabeth went on to get some kind of higher degree (maybe it was a law degree, not a PhD, actually; she did wear that Harvard Law sweatshirt), work for the CIA, teach college, and become secretary of state. Her path is way outside the mean, which is why I suggested we look at her real-life contemporaries, not averages for all women in the U.S. But I get that you think it's believable to have her married at 21. I think it's improbable. I mean...OK.

I wasn't meaning that the characters belong to the writers, so I'm not really sure what you're referring to.

However, I do disagree about it being all about the reaction. I think it's about motivation. If we understand the motivation of a character (even if we don't agree) we can understand and relate to the character. I understand Henry's motivation for his actions and I understand Bess'. What I don't understand is the writer's motivation, and why they handle certain things the way they handle them because they paint characters, in this case Henry, in a not particularly sympathetic light.

I'd argue that the reason you understand Henry and Elizabeth's motivations is because of how they've reacted to things over the last two seasons. I understand them too, not because this show's writers came up with super-prosey speeches for them to give telling me exactly how they feel, but because I've watched how they behave with each other, with their children, with their colleagues, etc. I've listened to them talk things out, fight, console. The writers' motivations are Henry and Elizabeth's motivations. That was my point about the characters no longer belonging to the writers, though maybe what I should have said is that once the story is out there, the writers become the facilitators of the characters. Yes, on some the level the writer is trying to communicate via his or her characters. But it's the characters who demonstrate the writer's motivation. If you understand what motivates Henry and Elizabeth, I don't understand why you're confused about what motivates the writers. They're telling a story about a powerful, highly successful, and intelligent couple and show us how those people navigate through life, love, career, family, etc. I don't think every character has to be perfect or sympathetic all the time, though I do find them both generally sympathetic. That's what makes them interesting and dynamic. I love watching Henry and Elizabeth navigate their flaws/strengths and seek common ground, and at the core, their relationship seems built on a tremendous amount of love and respect. The give and take of that is interesting to me, and bringing it to life it is what motivates the writers.

But all she said was that she thought they needed to think outside the box and create a special working group. How could that lead to Dalton thinking he wants Henry for it? How could she think that that would lead to Dalton thinking about Henry? How could she be sure that he would not want Henry to go back to DIA just by suggesting a special working group?

Well, since this is fiction, because it was an obvious narrative choice to move the story and characters forward. But if we're speaking realistically? She couldn't. She could only use the information she had about the people involved and make an educated guess. Since that's basically her entire job at the State Department and was her job at the CIA, and since we've seen over two seasons that she's very good at her job, it seems logical to me that she set the course. To me, there was no leap at all. Of course that's how it went down; we've watched this character orchestrate things like this for two seasons. One of the things I like about this show is that it asks the audience to make reasonable connections without spelling them all out. I see that as a smartly written story.

The thing is, I don't feel like they're using him in that way. They are still doing two separate stories and he gets to be his own hero and actually somewhat of a superhero who has never done anything similar to that task force and suddenly excells at it.

He did intelligence work for the NSA during their early marriage. That's been long established. He was a spy last season, and he's working in intelligence now. These jobs are all similar. I don't actually think he's excelling at it, though. Henry is struggling terribly. He clearly wants to do the job, but he's much too ethical for it. The push/pull between his military/duty-bound self and his religion professor/highly ethical self and how that affects him personally and his relationship with his wife seem to be the point of this story. He's also only been working on the task force for a couple of episodes, so I'm willing to wait and see how it all plays out. If he and Elizabeth worked together, I'd like it very much, and I'm hoping they integrate his work into the larger story. But I also think that from a logistical, filming standpoint, this show can't have Tea Leoni in every scene or leading every storyline. That would be way too much work for any one person. So it looks like they're giving Tim Daly who matches her in skill and standing (and surpasses her in fame) equal billing. I don't mind that. His character can still support, admire, and champion her while having a career and life of his own. I don't need the man relegated to a lower or less-heroic level; I just need the woman to be his equal at home and at work. I believe that in this case, she is. Edited April 10, 2016 by madam magpie

[CheshireCat]

madam magpie, on 10 Apr 2016 - 1:00 PM, said:

 (maybe it was a law degree, not a PhD, actually; she did wear that Harvard Law sweatshirt),

 

I thought so, too, then I came across something on the internet and realized it says "Just kidding" underneath the Harvard Law slogan.

 

 

The writers' motivations are Henry and Elizabeth's motivations. That was my point about the characters no longer belonging to the writers, though maybe what I should have said is that once the story is out there, the writers become the facilitators of the characters. Yes, on some the level the writer is trying to communicate via his or her characters. But it's the characters who demonstrate the writer's motivation. If you understand what motivates Henry and Elizabeth, I don't understand why you're confused about what motivates the writers.

 

Because this isn't about the characters and their choices but the writers and their choices. I know you don't agree but I still believe they handled similar siuation applying different principles and I don't understand why. I know why Henry acted the way he did in this episode. What I don't know is why the writers applied what I believe is a different principle than what they applied in the S1 finale. The only explanation I have is for the sake of the story. I probably have to accept that, however, I don't have to like it because I feel that if something is done for the sake of the story character integrity is sacrificed and I think it was in Ep 16 and 17. And, as I said, I also believe that the way they handled it created an imbalance in regards to gender equality (to put it very generally)

 

 

They're telling a story about a powerful, highly successful, and intelligent couple and show us how those people navigate through life, love, career, family, etc. I don't think every character has to be perfect or sympathetic all the time, though I do find them both generally sympathetic. That's what makes them interesting and dynamic. I love watching Henry and Elizabeth navigate their flaws/strengths and seek common ground, and at the core, their relationship seems built on a tremendous amount of love and respect. The give and take of that is interesting to me, and bringing it to life it is what motivates the writers.

 

I agree. However, the respect is an interesting aspect and here I can say/ask - I feel that Henry disrespected Bess when he brushed her off when she voiced concerns. I understand why because I understand his state of mind. What I don't understand is why the writers allowed him to get away with it in the following episodes and even rewarded it by giving him what he wanted and making him this guy who's suddenly always right in everything he does.

 

Well, since this is fiction, because it was an obvious narrative choice to move the story and characters forward. But if we're speaking realistically? She couldn't. She could only use the information she had about the people involved and make an educated guess. Since that's basically her entire job at the State Department and was her job at the CIA, and since we've seen over two seasons that she's very good at her job, it seems logical to me that she set the course. To me, there was no leap at all. Of course that's how it went down; we've watched this character orchestrate things like this for two seasons. One of the things I like about this show is that it asks the audience to make reasonable connections without spelling them all out. I see that as a smartly written story.

 

Well, the easiest way to respond to this is to say that when you mentioned that by suggesting the task force, she was manipulating Dalton into putting Henry on it, my reaction was: where did that come from? because I didn't see any evidence for that. Contrary to that, I don't have that reaction to conclusions characters have drawn out of her orchestrations up until now.

But since I don't need her to have manipulated Dalton into using Henry on the task force, I'm fine with it either way.

 

 

He did intelligence work for the NSA during their early marriage. That's been long established. He was a spy last season, and he's working in intelligence now. These jobs are all similar.

 

 

I'd argue that there's a difference between gathering and providing intelligence and analysing it. He gathered and provided intelligence before, now he's suddenly analysing it and interrogating suspects which is a whole other matter, too.

 

I don't actually think he's excelling at it, though. Henry is struggling terribly. He clearly wants to do the job, but he's much too ethical for it.

 

 

He is now, but in ep 16 he was the one who came up with all the solutions and all the right answers and the rest of the trained professionals in the room were either wrong or not allowed to say anything at all. As I think I've said before, it would have been much nicer if they had come up with things as a group and he hadn't provided all of it as an individual.

 

The push/pull between his military/duty-bound self and his religion professor/highly ethical self and how that affects him personally and his relationship with his wife seem to be the point of this story. He's also only been working on the task force for a couple of episodes, so I'm willing to wait and see how it all plays out. If he and Elizabeth worked together, I'd like it very much, and I'm hoping they integrate his work into the larger story. But I also think that from a logistical, filming standpoint, this show can't have Tea Leoni in every scene or leading every storyline. That would be way too much work for any one person. So it looks like they're giving Tim Daly who matches her in skill and standing (and surpasses her in fame) equal billing. I don't mind that. His character can still support, admire, and champion her while having a career and life of his own. I don't need the man relegated to a lower or less-heroic level; I just need the woman to be his equal at home and at work. I believe that in this case, she is.

 

 

And it was nice that for once a woman was just a tad more heroic than the man for a season and a half.

That said, I felt that they were equals before, even while he was "just" a college professor or a college professor who worked for DIA/NSA. I didn't need him to have this fancy job and be involved in matters of national security to see him as an equal. I saw him as her equal because she saw him as his equal. And I guess I object to the fact that he now gets pushed on me as this slightly larger than life character who also needed to be involved in matters of national security. I'm more okay with it now, the worst were ep 16 and 17. But I don't believe it's the job who makes a person, it's not the job who makes someone equal. It's who they are and how they act and I actually had more respect for Henry and admired him a bit more for who he was and what he did before ep 16.

 

Daly himself has said so many times that he loves that Henry is confident enough to let Bess go and do her thing. And that is what I loved about the character. I guess, Bess is still the one in the spotlight, however, what we see on the screen now doesn't reflect that anymore. What we see is a Henry who's suddenly so much more actively involved in keeping the Nation safe, just like his wife. We see him at the White House which, up until then, was Bess' prerogative. Now he's there all the time. He also gets to interact with Russell, which, again, up until then only Bess got to do. He and his team have executive power, just like Bess. Maybe not on a scale as big but we get to see it on a scale as big because of what we are shown. I guess you could say that he has invaded her space, is now on her territory and I believe that is what is making the difference. That is what gives the impression that he's not the husband who's content to be in the background anymore, because he's where she is. All the time.

 

(And do we maybe need a thread in which we can discuss characters?)

[madam magpie]

(And do we maybe need a thread in which we can discuss characters?)

Sure, though I don't really have anything else to say. It sounds like you and I view the characters and what the show is doing pretty differently. Others might, though.

Good catch on the Harvard sweatshirt.