S02.E10: Episode 10

[Madding crowd]

Teenagers don't give "consent" before they hook up.  Neither do most people

 

If you agree to have sex with someone and are in the right frame of mind to agree, you are giving consent. This comes off as saying that teenagers will have sex with anyone anytime and I don't believe that is what you intended. If someone has sex with you and you do not want it or say no-it is rape. If you are too drugged up or drunk to know what is going on-it is also rape. We don't really know what happened during the party, but I still believe Taylor was too high to understand what was happening. Eric may or may not have realized that fact. 

 

I

t's possible that Taylor wanted to be raped, just not while drugged. As for his fate, the whole legal process including the rush to trial, as depicted, is malarkey. However, Taylor's wanting to take charge of his own life by voluntarily going to prison, for however long (hoping to be raped?), while misguided, is credible. Incarceration can actually be empowering for some.

 

Taylor may have had specific fantasies, but if he did not agree to act out on those fantasies, it is still rape and not right. I also do not see anyone on earth, especially a teenager wanting to be raped by brutal prison inmates. I don't believe this is at all what was going through Taylor's mind. Taylor did not want to have to go to court and have Eric , who he views as his rapist, suggest that Taylor was so victimized that he acted out against Wes. It doesn't make sense in some respects that he wouldn't fight against a murderer label, but he spent his time at Leyland school being a victim without choices and he wants to make a choice himself. 

 

I believe the message of the show is about the choices we make and how a bad choice can tear a life apart. I don't agree that this message was shown in a thoughtful way. The whole story of Principal Dixon for example, made no sense to me as a long time teacher. His school would be part of a district, there would be district wide policies in place and all schools have a zero tolerance policy on violence and bullying. The fact that he was supposed to magically guess about Evy's situation and the school would actually fire him for not doing so, is just ridiculous.

 

There were also a lot of things thrown in at the last minute and the inclusion of cyber warrior Sebastian was  one of them. It would have made way more sense to have Sebastian living in the same city, and accidentally finding one piece of evidence on a used computer then this idea that he drives around with his little girls and lives in sleazy motels just so he can leak emails and minutes of meetings. 

 

I enjoyed the performances of Taylor and Eric and I liked it ending on a note where they both have choices to make, but much of the story was very muddled. 

[FiveByFive]

 

There are a few things I'm left wondering about.  First, having Taylor plead guilty - particularly his reason for it - just felt false.  He doesn't want to feel like a victim anymore?  Has anyone pointed out that he is now labelled for the rest of his life?

I completely agree but I'd argue that he's probably not operating with a full deck so-to-speak.  Furthermore he's done absolutely nothing to help himself at any point in the story. He had to be forced to admit to the police he was raped. He had to be forced to proceed with an investigation and Anne once again attempted to force him to plead not guilty. Which ties into my next point ... 

 

 

And if we're supposed to believe that Anne, who has passionately fought for Taylor to receive justice, would sign off on that deal and just give up - absolutely not buying it.  It's not true to her character.  At all.

Again, I agree with you but you could also fanwank that maybe Anne is just tired of fighting with her son who so obviously is working on a whole other level than she is. How many times does he have to tell her to back off before she does? I think, at this point in the story, if she did then she would have been justified because again, he's done nothing to help himself at all at any point without someone prompting him. 

 

 

But second, it looks like the four gang beaters were brought to the police station.  Since they saw Eric lure Taylor, and they actually performed the beating, why was Eric even necessary to mitigate Taylor's responsibility?  He wasn't.  And that pisses me off, too.

I agree again but you could also argue that they'd be more concerned with dealing with a murderer rather than helping him get less time because of the circumstances of the murder. 

 

I loved your post, BTW. I do completely agree that Taylor was making decisions that I personally would not have made but he's not me. He's a fictional character named Taylor who for all intents and purposes thinks these decisions are the right ones for him. We're the Anne's. We think they're not quite the right ones he should be making but like Anne we're just observers and at the end of the day his fate is one he chose himself. 

[Cosmocrush]

As much as I think this show hit some amazing heights and featured incredible performances this season, I just can't ignore the way it never came together. I shouldn't be left with this many questions about basic plot and character beats at the end of a story. 

Exactly.  I find this kind of storytelling lazy while others might find it high art.  It reminds me of an acquaintance who had a grant for an art piece - he literally ran out of time before it was to be shown and just titled it "Unfinished."   Half the people I talked to at the exhibition thought it was brilliant. 

 

My question has alway been why has everyone always assumed Taylor was telling the truth and Eric was lying. Maybe they both were lying. Maybe they both were telling the truth as they saw it. Maybe it is a case of things getting out of hand between two boys and then snowballing when other people tried to own that night.

For me, I always believed Taylor because I don't think he would lie about something like that - I don't think any high school boy would lie about something like that - especially Taylor who had nothing to gain and everything to lose.     Also, the pictures clinched it for me. If Taylor wasn't drugged, then what's up with all the pictures and why was Eric okay with the others taking and posting them.   Eric was never sympathetic to me, despite his crazy mother and messy homelife, even despite the suicide attempt.   I never really saw him express any emotion but anger towards everyone, including himself.  

 

There was a thing in Variety today where John Ridley said that both Taylor and Eric were telling the truth.  They were both telling the story of what had happened from their own perspectives.

 

I think the whole story has been like a Rorschach.

Yes, a Rorschach, which for me anyway, it not the same thing as good storytelling.  

 

T

 

 

...Back to Taylor not wanting to go to trial because he didn't want to depend on mitigation provided by his rapist.  First of all, I don't think we could get more solid proof that Taylor is right about being raped.  But it makes absolutely no sense that justice depended on Eric's decision to tell the truth about the gang up.  First - why in hell is Eric given the option?  That really pissed me off.  But second, it looks like the four gang beaters were brought to the police station.  Since they saw Eric lure Taylor, and they actually performed the beating, why was Eric even necessary to mitigate Taylor's responsibility?  He wasn't.  And that pisses me off, too.

 

And are we supposed to believe that even though the basketball team was brought in and interrogated, presumably related to Taylor's beating, no charges were ever filed?  And if charges were filed and the boys were prosecuted, that evidence in that case wouldn't have been available to the judge on Taylor's case.  Just how incompetent is Taylor's attorney, and was he forced to rely on a public defender?

 

I also think we would have seen those kids turning on each other and making deals all over the place.  Becca would probably have been offered a great deal to testify against Taylor.  They would have offered a deal to the first of the four gang beaters to get him to turn.  Kevin, who was tangentially involved all over the place, would have been leaned on to testify against the four beaters.  Yet apparently, after all of the horror we've witnessed, only Taylor and Wes received any true consequence.  Kevin and "his boys" just go on as normal.

 

RedheadZombie, I agree with your entire post but most of all the point about it being Eric's decision whether or not to testify about the beating of Taylor, including Eric's own part in it.    There is no way this would be his decision during a trial; it would be as simple as giving him a  subpoena.  Taylor's  premise of not wanting to accept "help" from his rapist would be void, he wouldn't accept the plea deal, etc. etc.  

[queenanne]

Agreed that if we know what happened, i.e. an omnipotent flashback, which is kinda sorta what I was expecting, then we know "the events".  Maybe we're supposed to think that "everyone's culpable".  I certainly didn't think we were supposed to think that Eric was in the right nor that we were supposed to think Taylor was in the right - with the shooting.  I think Taylor was absolutely supposed to have been in the right about having been raped, as others have pointed out, if "more fun" for Eric is drugs, it does not necessarily have to be fun for Taylor, nor do I think there was conversation indicating that Taylor knew or was looking forward to being drugged.

[possibilities]

the decision to bring in kids selling drugs, racisim, homophobia, politics in school, mental illness, computer hacking and rich people who try to protect their kids at all costs is one thing to many.

I think it is very realistic, though. The real world is way more complicated than most fiction. Often, things happen in real life that I think would never be accepted if written into a novel. And then I wonder: why? Why is something real not credible if imagined? I think a lot of us have trouble imagining and accounting for the full spectrum of complexity that happens in the world-- so we limit our viewpoint to what we can handle. And that's what the characters in the series did, as well. Leading to a convoluted clusterfuck, with no satisfying resolution for any of them or for viewers. Just like real life. I found it very uncomfortable as an ending but also very realistic. If they gave us closure, we could just sigh, shake it off, and move on. Since they didn't, it's up to us to decide whether to keep thinking about it, imagining what might happen if any of the possible next steps are or are not taken by the various players, and where that might lead, and what we wish they would or wouldn't result in. Again, the choices we make determine how much we do or don't get out of it, whereas if the show spelled it out, many of those doors are closed. It's a lot of heavy lifting and not so entertaining as being given a closed-circuit of beginning, middle, and end... I think it's less a cathartic watch and more a calisthenic one.

 

Why did we need to introduce another hacker, and what was the story purpose of having him go after Sebastian?

I thought that was done to show that, while Sebastian thought of himself as a hero, he was a vigilante who was making his own rules. And so was the other hacker. In an atmosphere governed by lawlessness, everyone is a potential hero in their own mind, but at the same time there is no protection against a villain, and no regulation on whether people are "good actors" or "bad actors" and no way to decide. Sebastian was trying to help, according to his own values. The other hacker may have been doing the same thing. But when you make your own rules, no one else has to follow them, and the 2nd hacker decided Sebastian was worth targeting, so he did. All season, almost everyone on the show regarded the law as an obstacle to get around and use to avoid consequences, and not as protective construct to apply toward ascertaining truth and determining consequences. And the way Sebastian found his own vigilante mentality turned around on him by another vigilante to me was a way to highlight the logical conclusion of what (nearly) everyone else was doing, too, for most of the show-- trying to make the world follow their own personal agenda and making up their own rules. I totally understand why a system as broken as ours leads to so many people feeling that way. I just think the show didn't want Sebastian to be let off completely for his behavior, when the overall picture was of both broken people AND a broken system.

 

And after all that Eric is still hooking up with strangers?

Whether he was hooking up or skipping town, I think it's credible. Eric never seemed to learn anything or be moved at all by the events. So for him to keep doing the same things makes sense to me. People do incredibly stupid things all the time, and a lot of Eric's behavior seemed to me to be defiant, more than reflective. He got away the first time, so his stupid logic would be that he can get away again, not that he should avoid the reckless risk. If he's fleeing, again-- he is being confronted right and left. He either chooses to stay put and start to face things and change, or he defiantly keeps holding to his defiance and flees.

 

Eric could be subpoena'd to testify, but Taylor didn't want to be "rescued" by the person who "put me in this position to start with" and to allow Eric to feel that he was a rescuer. Even Eric saw testifying as helping Taylor, not as helping himself. Taylor knew Eric would see it that way, too. Now, whether taking the plea was what I think is best for him, is another thing. But I think his logic was consistent with his character, even if I think there are alternative ways to think about it. He could have seen it as poetic justice that the person who hurt him was forced to help him later-- it could have been an act of contrition or an act of restitution, viewed another way. Or it could have just been seen as neutrally ironic-- Eric is my enemy and yet he's the one whose testimony gets me out of jail. But Taylor was not really feeling the love any more than Eric was, not really. I mean, Anne's devotion to him somehow made Taylor feel guilty, not loved. That's really sad.

 

And he also may have just not trusted that Eric would tell the truth even under subpoena. How horrible would it be to go to trial, expecting Eric to testify in a way that helps, only to have him actually make things worse. I think Taylor felt he couldn't risk even the possibility of more disappointment and humiliation, so he did what he felt he could do to "just protect myself from letting it get any worse." He didn't believe anymore that it could get better. It's a sad bit of control to grasp for, but I think he really had his last shred of hope beaten out of him when he gave Eric another chance after the rape, showed up for the requested meeting, and then got gang-beaten. If he was set up then, why would he believe he's not being set up now?

[Lemons]

If you agree to have sex with someone and are in the right frame of mind to agree, you are giving consent. This comes off as saying that teenagers will have sex with anyone anytime and I don't believe that is what you intended. If someone has sex with you and you do not want it or say no-it is rape. If you are too drugged up or drunk to know what is going on-it is also rape. We don't really know what happened during the party, but I still believe Taylor was too high to understand what was happening. Eric may or may not have realized that fact. 

 

 

Obviously if a person is incapacitated and someone has sex with them, it's rape.  But these teens wouldn't recognize someone as being incapacitated unless they were in a coma-like condition.  The problem is that people under the influence can continue to act relatively normal.   Or worse, they can act in a way that they wouldn't have acted otherwise.  Eric stated that he did not notice anything that unusual about Taylor, so it appears that Taylor wasn't out cold during the sexual encounter.   He doesn't remember. 

 

College for me was full of stories where we would talk about something that happened the night before and someone would say they didn't remember any of it.  A lot of times it came as a surprise because they didn't appear that drunk, but apparently they in the middle of a black out. 

[stagmania]

Obviously if a person is incapacitated and someone has sex with them, it's rape.  But these teens wouldn't recognize someone as being incapacitated unless they were in a coma-like condition.  The problem is that people under the influence can continue to act relatively normal.   Or worse, they can act in a way that they wouldn't have acted otherwise.  Eric stated that he did not notice anything that unusual about Taylor, so it appears that Taylor wasn't out cold during the sexual encounter.   He doesn't remember.

 

We know Taylor was not acting normal-this entire story started with pictures of him passed out, seeming completely out of it and on display at a party with his clothes half off. He was clearly incapacitated, and to be frank, whether or not Eric was fully cognizant of that does not change the reality of what he did to Taylor. IMO the ambiguity in this story is in the character motivations and how the encounter was perceived by each of them, not in whether a rape actually occurred.  

[Lemons]

We know Taylor was not acting normal-this entire story started with pictures of him passed out, seeming completely out of it and on display at a party with his clothes half off. He was clearly incapacitated, and to be frank, whether or not Eric was fully cognizant of that does not change the reality of what he did to Taylor. IMO the ambiguity in this story is in the character motivations and how the encounter was perceived by each of them, not in whether a rape actually occurred.  

 

I thought the passed out part happened after the encounter with Eric.  True, it's about how the encounter was perceived by each of them.   I get why Eric thought he was innocent because he got the texts from Taylor, the event was planned, he stated that Taylor didn't appear intoxicated to him.  So, probably to Eric, things went according to plan.  And according to Eric, Taylor was not passed out when it happened. 

 

What was also weird was that when Eric met strangers near the woods, he said he only wanted to kiss.  This was in contrast to Taylor claiming he wanted violent sex. Did the show do that just to make it even more convoluted?   

 

I just don't get how Taylor can be so sure the opposite occurred.   Was it just the pictures or was there something else?  

[Glade]

It's so sad that Taylor...has been so beaten down by all of this that he feels the only way he can express his power is by taking this terrible plea deal.  I was waiting for so long for it to finally come out that the basketball team had violently assaulted him.  But it seems that after all the shame and derision he experienced when reporting his rape, after no one believing him about that...he saw no point in going through that again by reporting the violent assault.  Why would he imagine anyone believing him the second time? 

 

And it is ridiculous if no charges were brought against his attackers, even with Eric's testimony, but that Taylor's fate would totally hinge on his rapist speaking out in court.  I can totally understand why Taylor wouldn't be able to think/act rationally in those circumstances.  But 5-10 years in prison, and then living as an ex-felon...the rest of his life will be destroyed, in a way that none of those assholes at Leyland can really comprehend, even though they felt that just the implication of a rape happening on the basketball team was just as bad if not worse.  I'm glad they lost their jobs, but it seems clear they will get other, likely also high-paying jobs.  What are the odds that Taylor will ever make more then minimum wage once he gets out of prison?

 

I really can't stand Eric.  What an insensitive, aggressive asshole.  If he hadn't raped Taylor, he still could have been decent enough to care that he was hurt and traumatized by it, rather then calling him a "whiny little bitch."  I fully believe Taylor, he was drugged and raped against his will, and he's living with traumatic scars from that, and from the fact that almost no one believed him, from the very beginning.  Eric thinks he's the real victim, but then he honestly couldn't care less about Taylor's experience or whether any of his random hookups don't appreciate being stabbed in the face for his personal pleasure.  He reminds me of some abusers I've known, really horrible people who do terrible things to others, but they aren't sorry about it, they're indignant! 

 

Sebastien continued to be an extremely unrealistic caricature.  Honestly, an underground hacker calling another underground hacker on a cell phone to talk about their hacks?  It would never happen.  It's true though that the hacker who narked on the fellow members of anonymous/lulzsec a few years ago was a single father living in shabby conditions who became sloppy and got caught, so maybe Sebastien was supposed to be based on that.  I'm glad we didn't see him arrested, though it seems inevitable if that's how he works.

[pelicanlover]

Brilliant.  The entire season was brilliantly conceived, produced, written, acted, and presented.  I am astonished that it was delivered on a broadcast network, but have decided that I can now forgive ABC for a lot of dreck in honor of their willingness to take a chance on this amazing series.

 

 

Watching Season 2 has made me think hard about many assumptions I have developed over the years, and that to me is the definition of high art.  The show turned a merciless beacon on attitudes toward all forms of racism, education, sexual orientation, law enforcement, social media, and violence.

Most particularly the series focused on what adults do to guide (or not guide) and form their children.

 

 

If I had to isolate one "take away" from the season it would be the profound sadness I experienced while watching adults in almost every case using their children as tools to selfishly enhance their own lives, rather than treating them with the respect and honor that a developing human being always deserves.  That was most pronounced in the Leslie character, but even the ostensibly most caring adults in this drama (Anne, Terri, Dan) used their own children and others primarily as methods to advance their own agendas, almost without regard for the basic needs of the kids.  Terri redeemed herself somewhat at the end; I had the sense that she was starting to "get it."  Anne, however, as much as she loved Taylor, was determined to push him into doing what she wanted, what HER sense of justice demanded, than honor what he wanted.  The kids were uniformly the victims in this drama, and that to me was the true American crime.

 

 

I could quibble with a few small things in the series and wonder about others.  The film editing was still jarring, but much improved from season one.  (I think that if someone is watching a series as rich and dense as this one was, they can probably hear the word fuck without fainting, and if the censors won't allow that, a simple mute of the word would suffice and not detract from the story as the blacked out screens did.)  The Sebastian storyline was interesting, but not fully developed.  I guess I assume it was a call back to the "Mr. Robot" themes.  That story was important though and deserved more attention since the whole series of events was uncovered by stupid use by kids of social media.

 

 

I wasn't bothered by the indeterminate ending because I knew that this work was always meant to be a "slice of life" rather than a neat package.  We don't know if Eric was going to leave with the guy in the hot car like he did in Episode One or turn back to his brother.  We don't know what will happen with the other kids either, but since we're still talking about it I guess that's a tribute to the skill with which these questions were presented to us.

 

 

I wish I could shake the hands of everyone involved in this production.

[sjohnson]

The notion of Anne's guilt seems to me to imply that she should have let it all stew inside Taylor. I cannot imagine that going well for him, given his drug use. He already knew where that gun was. He was at high risk for suicide or violence. Anne letting nothing happen legally wouldn't have helped. What Taylor wanted isn't necessarily what he needed. 

 

Besides, if the police had done their job, instead of covering up the rape, everything would have been different, wouldn't it?

[St. Claire]

I'm also disturbed that a minor, who can't legally sign a consent, buy alcohol, or join the military, gets the final word on something as devastating as pleading guilty.  Can he even legally buy a lottery ticket?  And if we're supposed to believe that Anne, who has passionately fought for Taylor to receive justice, would sign off on that deal and just give up - absolutely not buying it.  It's not true to her character.  At all.

 

I think that once the justice system treats someone as an adult (i.e., if a minor is charged as such in court), he or she is considered emancipated in terms of plea deals and legal representation.

 

I gave up on Season 1 partway through, but I'm glad I kept on with Season 2. Felicity Huffman included a question in an IG post on Wednesday night about who the viewers considered heroes and who they considered villains. I think we saw the grey in every character, and none were fully one or the other. I still believe that both Taylor and Eric are telling the truth as far as their own brains will allow- Eric doesn't believe that the encounter was rape because it went according to what they'd planned in advance and he never saw any sign from Taylor that indicated that he'd changed his mind. Taylor knows that he was too messed up to give an indication, and feels like his trust in Eric was broken because of the humiliation and ridicule after the fact. There was a lot of misguided righteousness, of people being so sure that what they were doing was upstanding and correct and moral, but the basis for why is was "right" came from a flawed place. The drive to do anything possible to protect your child may fly in the face of treating another parent's child with civility and respect. Lilah thinks she is right because of her religious beliefs, yet it drives her sons away and hurts them. Leslie is a fierce protector of the institution she is charged to run, and is lauded for it for years, but when she does whatever it takes to continue to protect her school, she wounds and alienates and harms individual students. Chris made some ill-informed decisions about the students he oversees without taking into account the larger landscape of his student body and the unintended messages involved with the suspension, and it brought some unwelcome light to the inherent flaws of a underfunded and overworked school. Terri an d Michael are walking the tightrope of "rising above" the general perception of their own race while still maintaining a connection to it (i.e., not selling out and "trying to be white"). 

 

I take back my earlier comment about no one being totally bad or totally good- I still cannot find a redeeming character trait in Wes. But being a teenaged jackass doesn't have to be a death sentence.   

Edited March 11, 2016 by St. Claire

[TVHappy9463]

The finale stayed true to the tone of the season. People so out of touch with their lives and the consequences of their actions, they continue to make more bad decisions. And leaving things up in the air made sense, the whole season was grey and hard to pin down. I am  looking forward to next season and what theme will be tackled next. This is an exceptional ensemble, with writing and directing that knocks it out of the park consistently.  

[SunnyBeBe]

Quote by Izabella

This is one of the reasons I don't know if I'll be back for another season.  Not only did they cop out on answering the big questions, they didn't even bother to be clear about the smaller questions.  I want to see a full story if I'm going to devote 10 hours of my life to watching it unfold.

It seemed crystal clear to me that Leslie is the one who leaked Anne's medical records. Coach took them from her shredder in her office, and (patiently) put them back together.  I know she tried to spin as fake documents, Coach setting her up, blah blah, but that was just her trying to do damage control, and she was doing that very half-heartedly anyway.  She never imagined anyone would go through her shredding.  I wish Coach or that other guy had said, yeah, we've turned these over to the police and they'll be checking for fingerprints.  Just a partial of hers would be enough - she's not supposed to HAVE those records.

However, they didn't answer the question of how Leslie got those records.  Did the cop friend of Kevin's parents send them to her?

 

 

 

I agree.  I'm so frustrated with much of the series. I think the writers must think that ambiguity is a virtue.    It had so much potential, but I think they wasted much of it.  Granted, the performances were stellar.  That's what saved it.  To me the stories did not.

 

  I know that it's a story of fiction and an attempt to showcase real issues within our society, however, with a tv drama, I would like to see something more cohesive. I'd like for more things to get pulled together and explained or answered.  Yes, I can use my imagination and try to envision how something might have happened, but with AC, the writers seem either too scared or too lazy to give us a real story. 

 

My biggest frustration was with Taylor.  I tried my best to give him sympathy, but the young man was so annoying that I had trouble.  He was so resistant to help.  OMG.  He wouldn't accept help from his mom, his friend, his counselor, attorney...even the judge was trying to coax him into turning down the plea! He was just so clueless.  I ended up thinking that maybe he would be better off in prison for many years. I don't think he has the ability to live in society and utilize any resources that would be provided to him.  Plus, Taylor's whole argument about not using the rapists help.....so bizarre.  His brain definitely has not developed much.

 

I can't imagine that I will invest in another season, but we'll see. I'm a sucker for great acting and this show pours it on with this.  Too bad the actors involved can't spurn some better writing. 

[Chaos Theory]

I agree. I'm so frustrated with much of the series. I think the writers must think that ambiguity is a virtue. It had so much potential, but I think they wasted much of it. Granted, the performances were stellar. That's what saved it. To me the stories did not.

I know that it's a story of fiction and an attempt to showcase real issues within our society, however, with a tv drama, I would like to see something more cohesive. I'd like for more things to get pulled together and explained or answered. Yes, I can use my imagination and try to envision how something might have happened, but with AC, the writers seem either too scared or too lazy to give us a real story.

My biggest frustration was with Taylor. I tried my best to give him sympathy, but the young man was so annoying that I had trouble. He was so resistant to help. OMG. He wouldn't accept help from his mom, his friend, his counselor, attorney...even the judge was trying to coax him into turning down the plea! He was just so clueless. I ended up thinking that maybe he would be better off in prison for many years. I don't think he has the ability to live in society and utilize any resources that would be provided to him. Plus, Taylor's whole argument about not using the rapists help.....so bizarre. His brain definitely has not developed much.

I can't imagine that I will invest in another season, but we'll see. I'm a sucker for great acting and this show pours it on with this. Too bad the actors involved can't spurn some better writing.

I thought that was what makes it good if not great writing; not spelling out all the answers..And they all lived happily ever after. I personally thought the life goes on ending was brilliant but to each is own I guess.

[Tara Ariano]

In case you missed it, here's the Previously.TV post on the episode!

 

Few Will Return From The Waste Land After Season 2 Of American Crime
Many questions are left unanswered, but there's no question that the bar has been reset for network TV dramas.

[represent]

 

I thought that was done to show that, while Sebastian thought of himself as a hero, he was a vigilante who was making his own rules. And so was the other hacker. In an atmosphere governed by lawlessness, everyone is a potential hero in their own mind, but at the same time there is no protection against a villain, and no regulation on whether people are "good actors" or "bad actors" and no way to decide. Sebastian was trying to help, according to his own values. The other hacker may have been doing the same thing. But when you make your own rules, no one else has to follow them, and the 2nd hacker decided Sebastian was worth targeting, so he did. All season, almost everyone on the show regarded the law as an obstacle to get around and use to avoid consequences, and not as protective construct to apply toward ascertaining truth and determining consequences. And the way Sebastian found his own vigilante mentality turned around on him by another vigilante to me was a way to highlight the logical conclusion of what (nearly) everyone else was doing, too, for most of the show-- trying to make the world follow their own personal agenda and making up their own rules. I totally understand why a system as broken as ours leads to so many people feeling that way. I just think the show didn't want Sebastian to be let off completely for his behavior, when the overall picture was of both broken people AND a broken system.

This is excellent, this is the big picture as I see it as well.

 

I really liked the finale, Eric getting the tag at the end and I'll be back next season even though things weren't wrapped up. Life isn't wrapped up. I appreciate this kind of writing in my dramas, not all of them, but I find it thought provoking and acceptable for some shows to do so.

[PQuinn]

"the overall picture was of both broken people AND a broken system."

 

I completely agree. I loved the finale, obviously; well as much as you can love something this tough to get through.

[Calamity Jane]

So, this was Rashomon with less closure and the added twist of one narrator not really knowing what happened, and without being sure any narrator is telling the entire truth.  It's a bit unsatisfying as a viewer because I want answers from a story, especially one this long, but I think the show came out as intended - we didn't get the answers because "truth" is perceived differently by different people, and in life that's often how things rest.  In stories, we expect and usually get the knot tied and the bow fixed on top, and personally that's my preference, but I can see what they were going for here, and they succeeded.  Not sure I'd sign on for another season, though.  

[Bobbin]

In that Eric's testimony would involve his raping Taylor, even if it was statutory rape due to Taylor's age (the paradox of Taylor being legally a juvenile and an adult in the same trial), by virtue of the Fifth Amendment he couldn't be compelled to testify. It would have to be voluntary only, with him waiving his rights in order to be cross-examined. He could appear as a character witness at sentencing only. Either way, he couldn't be subpoenaed.

Of course, in the American Crime universe, there doesn't seem to be a Fifth Amendment. Or civil rights in general.

[potatoradio]

I wasn't expecting a "law and order" type of wrap-up, with the "truth"wrapped up in a bow via a courtroom drama, but the finale didn't have a huge emotional impact on me. It just seemed to leave things deliberately muddled with the idea that "life is complicated" and "there is no real truth here, just a big old mess of pain. How tragic."

Well, yeah, life is like that, but I can read or watch documentaries for that. I hate to see complex characters wasted in such a weak ending. Because of the acting, I was very connected to many of the characters. The set up was wonderful - complicated and nuanced, but ultimately wasted. I don't want a pat ending, and I can certainly handle an ambivalent one, but there's a big difference (to me) between ambivalent and unresolved.

Still, I hope this comes back and I'll probably watch again because I loved the character set up and the acting. I'll just adjust for weak storytelling. The acting is worth that!

[starri]

In that Eric's testimony would involve his raping Taylor, even if it was statutory rape due to Taylor's age (the paradox of Taylor being legally a juvenile and an adult in the same trial), by virtue of the Fifth Amendment he couldn't be compelled to testify. It would have to be voluntary only, with him waiving his rights in order to be cross-examined. He could appear as a character witness at sentencing only. Either way, he couldn't be subpoenaed.

Age-of-consent in Indiana is 16.

[RedheadZombie]

This is the first season I've watched, and I'm not sure if I'll be back.  The first time I watched The Color Purple, it was so very disturbing.  Just watching incest, rape, beatings, etc.  But there's a pay off at the end.  In comparison, the most relentlessly bleak and hopeless movie I've ever seen is The Road.  I tried to make it through, but turned it off and read the ending on Wikipedia.  I don't need happy endings, perfect justice, or absolute truths, but if I want to subject myself to endless suffering with minimal payoff, I'll read Russian literature.  It will completely depend on the next story line, and which actors come back.  It will be hard to resist if Lili is back.

 

For me, I always believed Taylor because I don't think he would lie about something like that - I don't think any high school boy would lie about something like that - especially Taylor who had nothing to gain and everything to lose.     Also, the pictures clinched it for me. If Taylor wasn't drugged, then what's up with all the pictures and why was Eric okay with the others taking and posting them.   Eric was never sympathetic to me, despite his crazy mother and messy homelife, even despite the suicide attempt.   I never really saw him express any emotion but anger towards everyone, including himself.  

 

I felt sympathy during his suicide attempt.  But even then he was more angry than sad.  I felt for him what I would feel for any closeted gay teen who has been outed before they were ready.  But I think Eric's tendencies are towards harming others more than self-harming.  People like Eric are much more likely to vent that anger by hurting people.  I feel sorry for people he will encounter in life.  He's gotten away with three violent acts without consequences.  I don't see him changing his ways.

 

Whether he was hooking up or skipping town, I think it's credible. Eric never seemed to learn anything or be moved at all by the events. So for him to keep doing the same things makes sense to me. People do incredibly stupid things all the time, and a lot of Eric's behavior seemed to me to be defiant, more than reflective. He got away the first time, so his stupid logic would be that he can get away again, not that he should avoid the reckless risk. If he's fleeing, again-- he is being confronted right and left. He either chooses to stay put and start to face things and change, or he defiantly keeps holding to his defiance and flees.

 

Out of all the characters, I thought Eric learned the least.  No growth, no self-reflection, no empathy, no remorse.  In fact, he's simply grown angrier, and blamed everyone but himself for his actions.  He's a ticking time bomb.  He's not even accepted his sexuality at this point.  I hope he figures it out soon, because I can see him marrying a woman to prove he's straight, then beating her and her children for "forcing" him to live this way.

 

What was also weird was that when Eric met strangers near the woods, he said he only wanted to kiss.  This was in contrast to Taylor claiming he wanted violent sex. Did the show do that just to make it even more convoluted?   

 

I just don't get how Taylor can be so sure the opposite occurred.   Was it just the pictures or was there something else?  

 

I'm not sure where this concept of Taylor wanting "violent sex" comes from.   Taylor said he likes a pillow over his face during masturbation, "hint, hint".   What Taylor is describing is autoerotic asphyxiation, which while dangerous, is unfortunately not uncommon.  Am I forgetting that Taylor requested something that could be interpreted as drugged, restrained, made helpless, or forcibly sodomized?

 

I believe Taylor because of the photos, the fact that he's clearly traumatized, the fact that Taylor consistently called it rape, and the fact that the rape kit was consistent with rape.  There's also the flash to Eric looking Taylor in the face, and instructing him to "be fun".  The impression was that Taylor was incapacitated, and Eric was looking him straight in the face, and saw his condition.

 

I disbelieve Eric because he's an angry unrepentant person, who never once took responsibility for any of his actions.  The flashback of Eric instructing Taylor to "be fun",  is in line with Taylor resisting somehow, or at the very least was not participating.  There's the fact that Taylor ended the encounter sobbing, semi-comatose, and with his pants down.  Eric's anger that Taylor cried like a "bitch baby", and dumping Taylor on the street rather than helping him in the house,  all of these things point to Eric's guilt, IMO.

 

I really can't stand Eric.  What an insensitive, aggressive asshole.  If he hadn't raped Taylor, he still could have been decent enough to care that he was hurt and traumatized by it, rather then calling him a "whiny little bitch."  I fully believe Taylor, he was drugged and raped against his will, and he's living with traumatic scars from that, and from the fact that almost no one believed him, from the very beginning.  Eric thinks he's the real victim, but then he honestly couldn't care less about Taylor's experience or whether any of his random hookups don't appreciate being stabbed in the face for his personal pleasure.  He reminds me of some abusers I've known, really horrible people who do terrible things to others, but they aren't sorry about it, they're indignant! 

 

Eric has shown absolutely no remorse in anything he's done.  He's a rage monster, and I pity his brother and any other weaker person he encounters.  He's paid no consequences, and that may embolden him more.  I don't fault Eric for slicing that man's throat, and if that man had died, Eric would probably have gotten off.  Unlike Taylor who used deadly force against someone who took part in attacking him, and was threatening his life when Taylor shot him.

 

I really tried to feel more empathy for him, because his mom is obviously mentally ill.  And while I think it's sad that Eric's younger brother used homophobic language on Eric, why do we assume that Eric hasn't been beating on this kid his whole life?  Eric displayed no regret or shock in his action of choking the kid out. 

[SunnyBeBe]

Not to nit pick, but most statutory rape statues require that the perp be at least 3-4 years older than the victim.  It varies by state.

[Bobbin]

There are no age considerations for non-consensual sex, AKA rape. So, the possibility of it having been consensual never having been resolved, my point about Eric not being forced to testify stands.

[possibilities]

Eric wasn't going to testify that he'd raped Taylor, was he? He was going to testify that the gang threatened to beat him up if he didn't lure Taylor to be beaten, because they wanted to beat a gay guy. And I thought he was going to get immunity for his cooperation (instead of being an accessory to the beating).

 

Also, Eric and Taylor are both younger than 18, because Kevin was the only 18 year old at the party, right? And Taylor is being charged as an adult, so I don't think statutory rape was under consideration for charging Eric.

 

Which reminds me: they never said what the DNA test revealed. If it showed that the semen they found on Taylor's clothes was Eric's, and Eric was going to be charged with statutory rape, that would have happened already, I think.

Edited March 12, 2016 by possibilities

[albaniantv]

Didn't like having no endings, made it feel  like a training video for high school or college kids about rape and bullying.

 

I would have liked one ending about the character I cared about the most --Taylor and then closed with Eric on the road as  it did.

[PQuinn]

This is the first season I've watched, and I'm not sure if I'll be back.  

If there is a season 3, I do hope you come back, because your insights into this season have helped me parse a lot of things that I missed or couldn't figure out. That also goes for the entire forum. 

Edited March 12, 2016 by PQuinn

[Lemons]

I'm not sure where this concept of Taylor wanting "violent sex" comes from.   Taylor said he likes a pillow over his face during masturbation, "hint, hint".   What Taylor is describing is autoerotic asphyxiation, which while dangerous, is unfortunately not uncommon.  Am I forgetting that Taylor requested something that could be interpreted as drugged, restrained, made helpless, or forcibly sodomized?

 

 

 

 

 

I think there was more to the texts than just a pillow.  The show did not say that he was raped.  We can all come to different conclusions. 

[vixenbynight]

Besides, if the police had done their job, instead of covering up the rape, everything would have been different, wouldn't it?

It's not just the cops that failed. Leslie and Dan failed Taylor, Wes and the school from all of this tragedy.

They basically threw Taylor to the wolves, in order to try and protect the legacy of Leyland.

[jb1183]

If there is a season 3, I do hope you come back, because your insights into this season have helped me parse a lot of things that I missed or couldn't figure out. That also goes for the entire forum. 

I want to echo the appreciation for the forum. More so than any show or movie I've watched in recent memory (and possibly ever) I really needed to hear other thoughts and perspectives to help me process what I was seeing. The conversation in these threads has been very thoughtful, intelligent, and respectful even in the face of differing viewpoints regarding complex and difficult subject matter.

 

I really think this season is a text worthy of an in depth scholarly criticism. There's just been so much to analyze here.

 

After sitting with the finale the past few days, I'm even more inclined than ever to declare the season a television masterpiece. And, yes, the public school and Sebastian subplots were mostly distractions and the season could have been stronger and tighter without them. But in the end, we got one of the most powerful, thought provoking, challenging,  and haunting shows I've personally ever watched, and my minor quibbles seem very small in comparison to all the greatness.

 

If I'm left with any disappointment it's my realization that, in this era of peak TV and the additional disadvantage of their youth and lack of name recognition, Connor Jessup and Joey Pollari will have a hard time getting the acting nominations that they both so richly deserve.

Edited March 13, 2016 by jb1183

[Neurochick]

The story with the Marshall school made me think about this controversy at Yale that I read about last year:  https://www.thefire.org/yale-students-demand-resignations-from-faculty-members-over-halloween-email/

 

Maybe what Ridley is asking is what's going on here?  Taylor was raped then assaulted, then someone was killed; yet in the Marshall school, people were protesting something that basically was a non issue.  It's almost as if people are more concerned with non issues than real issues.  Where were the protestors for Taylor's rights?

[possibilities]

That's really interesting, to think they may have been highlighting how the one school had protests and the other school didn't. I hadn't thought about that before.

 

It does seem like at Leyland, the kids basically let the adults handle things. They trust the system. At Marshall, the kids don't trust the system, and tried to handle things themselves-- first in the hallway and then in the street. To be fair, they tried to talk to the Principal to explain the causes of the fight and why they felt it was important to protest the unequal suspensions, and the principal did not let them tell their story. Later, he found out from another adult, but it's not like the kids didn't try to "go through channels" to some extent, and were basically shut down.

 

I think for me, the way that Leyland put order over investigation was similar to how the Marshall principal behaved as well. In both instances, the response to an incident was to assign blame to one party and bury the rest of the situation. And in btoh cases it blew up on them because the underlying conflicts just weren't going to go away.

 

At Leyland, they tried to limit the issue to "Taylor violated the hon or code by being on drugs" and then make an example of one team captain for "hosting the party where this incident occurred." They somehow hoped that humiliating or punishing these two examples would deter others from similarly embarrassing the school? I really don't understand how they thought that would work. It was at no time an investigation into what really happened, nor did they try to justify blaming one captain vs both. No one looked into who posted the pictures, or what else was (known) to be happening at the party, not just the drugs but the hooking up. They really didn't care what happened, only that the school did not suffer from negative PR or any kind of liability. So it was appearances vs substance all the way. They didn't feel responsible for the moral development or health and safety of the kids, only for "the reputation of the school" and its funding issues. Despite the image, the school does not perceive itself as guardians and champions of the students. Rather, the students are assets or liabilities to the school and are evaluated in terms of value or threat potential to the school's bottom line.

 

At Marshall, the principal is concerned with keeping a lid on things seemingly because he literally does not see there is anything more complex going on. The debate over school-sponsored meals spoke to this. He does not really care about whether the kids get the nutrition, he isn't interested in the complexity of whether they can get to school in time for the proposed schedule, he sees himself as a bureaucrat, protecting the school from chaos and keeping it in budget, rather than  looking out for or championing the students (just like at Leyland). Yes, he is under-staffed and under-funded and over-worked. But he doesn't seem to regret it or to try to change the situation, he just accepts that his task is to keep law and order, to be a bureaucrat not a leader or an educator. It's really very similar to how Leyland's leadership  behaved, not for profit but for simplicity. He doesn't seem conflicted about it, any more than Leslie or the Leyland Board seemed conflicted about it. He doesn't see it as his job to delve deeper. The rules say no fighting, he caught someone fighting, he takes action. Just like with Taylor being drugged. You can understand why the Marshall principal did what he did, but it's still pretty much the same thing as what happened at Leyland-- the system is not motivated to get to the bottom of things, it's motivated to protect itself from chaos and keep a lid on conflicts, rather than resolving them.

 

I think putting the Marshall school into the show served to keep the show from being about how the rich people are bad, and make it about how all of American society as a whole is culpable of this syndrome. It would have been very easy to look at the Leyland school and just conclude the show was about "those terrible people at that terrible school" rather than considering it as a widespread problem and not just an isolated incident. But staging similar dysfunctions in schools for both the 1% and the 99%, they made it about a much broader American cultural problem, not just one random example.

Edited March 13, 2016 by possibilities

[represent]

 

If I'm left with any disappointment it's my realization that, in this era of peak TV and the additional disadvantage of their youth and lack of name recognition, Connor Jessup and Joey Pollari will have a hard time getting the acting nominations that they both so richly deserve.

Yes, if they were on HBO they'd have a much better chance. The Emmy voters don't care that HBO shows don't always have the numbers of viewers that other basic tv/cable channel shows may have. They definitely judge this networks show on their quality. HBO cleans up every freaking year.

 

I know I watch just about every show/documentary I can find on the network. There's not much of their original programming that I don't give a chance and end up enjoying.

 

But at least the show is on their radar, Regina won and that means at least they'll probably give it another look. These voters are so guilty of habit, that they exclude the new projects from year to year. For them to even look at a show some of it is based just on recognition. If they don't recognize and it doesn't resonate just on site, sometimes they don't even bother.  But since they've looked, nominated and even awarded this show already, I'm pretty sure they'll give the show a second look. Hopefully they'll decide not to pick the same nominees from the same show, which is something they do repeatedly as well. 

Edited March 13, 2016 by represent

[LJonEarth]

I'm an idiot and only now realizing that this was the season finale. I'm of two minds. I appreciate when art reflect life without nice neat endings. But, with the history of this show, this all still feels a bit like the storytelling on this show is more about courting awards voters and playing games than telling a story and telling it well. I'm frustrated.

[Bobcatkitten]

I don't need a bow but I need some answers - a few - something. It just ended, boom. Lots of great performances but lazy writing in my opinion. 

[mansonlamps]

The story with the Marshall school made me think about this controversy at Yale that I read about last year: https://www.thefire.org/yale-students-demand-resignations-from-faculty-members-over-halloween-email/

Maybe what Ridley is asking is what's going on here? Taylor was raped then assaulted, then someone was killed; yet in the Marshall school, people were protesting something that basically was a non issue. It's almost as if people are more concerned with non issues than real issues. Where were the protestors for Taylor's rights?

I really can't stand Eric. What an insensitive, aggressive asshole. If he hadn't raped Taylor, he still could have been decent enough to care that he was hurt and traumatized by it, rather then calling him a "whiny little bitch." I fully believe Taylor, he was drugged and raped against his will, and he's living with traumatic scars from that, and from the fact that almost no one believed him, from the very beginning.

I see what you are saying, but if Eric thinks, as we've been led to believe, that they had consensual sex, it's hard to imagine why he would empathize with Taylor who has now accused him of rape and is trying to put him in jail. I would find that kind of unbelievable.

This quote is from what Neurochick posted about Yale, couldn't get the quote to work in the same post as another quote.

FIRE is concerned by yet another unfortunate example of students who demand upsetting opinions be entirely eradicated from the university in the name of fostering “safe spaces” where students are protected from hurt feelings.

This is obviously a completely different topic but no less sad in the state of affairs of what's going on with young people today in college campuses. For students in institutions of higher learning to think silencing others opinions is the answer saddens me, as does their constant demands of firing people they don't agree with.

Edited March 20, 2016 by mansonlamps

[atomationage]

I wanted to watch this series because of Lily Taylor and Felicity Huffman, but it took me forever to get through the first episode.   I didn't  find any of the kids sympathetic at all.  When I finally finished the first episode, I couldn't stop watching and binged all 10 episodes in 2 days.   It was frequently uncomfortable to watch, but I thought it was great.  

<quote>Kevin: Did he have anything to do with the rape? Why was he on the list?</quote>

Because he hosted the party, and provided the alcohol, and possibly whatever else was used to render Taylor unconscious/semi-conscious, at least in Taylor's view.  Also, Kevin's parents questioned his sexuality twice in the series, so we're probably supposed to think there may have been something more to his relations with other guys, or not. 

Kevin's parents were the ones responsible for the release of the medical records.  This series is kind of like The Rules of Attraction, where we only know things from each character's viewpoint, and sometimes they don't even get the other character's names right, much less the objective reality in any given situation.

Eric, IMO, probably wouldn't be able to or be willing to have sex with a conscious male. 

Russell Howard is one of my favorite UK comedians.  Here is a vid about the (UK) Police launching a Youtube ad campaign comparing sexual consent to making tea:

Edited April 29, 2016 by atomationage

[millennium]

I despised last season, but this was better.  Still, enough with the contrived racial conflicts and Regina King playing the same character in different clothes.

The two young men did an excellent job of acting.  Story-wise, it was frustrating that Erik never received any comeuppance for the rape, and was able to keep spreading his version of events unchallenged.

Hated Felicity Huffman last season, thought she was great this time around.   Timothy Hutton was pretty good too, though the character was unlikeable (I was Team Lesley all the way).  

The show tried too hard to be Art.  It failed.

[IDreamofJoaquin]

The whole Sebastian thing was such an easy fix.  Everyone is incriminated because of hacking.  They really ruined the last 2 episodes of what could have been a great story.