S04.E01: Glanders

[La Tortuga]

I am not all that convinced Philip was in an orphan's home, at least not at the time he flashbacks to. We know his father died when he was six, but we also know that bullying incident happened when he was closer to Henry's age. Notice that he's not only picking up the milk himself (as opposed to living some place where it would have been sent to him), he's only picking up enough milk for one or two people. To me that suggests he's either living on his own or living with a small family (though not necessarily his own).

 

Place me in the category of really hoping the writers don't make Pastor Tim into a spy. It almost wouldn't make sense to do so; clearly the Jennings have been listening to him in his office, so you'd think they'd have heard some kind of indicator by now, especially if you consider how often P&E talk about their missions in the privacy of their office.

[sistermagpie]

We know his father died when he was six, but we also know that bullying incident happened when he was closer to Henry's age.

 

 

We don't actually know that his father died when he was six. He told that to Paige, but he would have been relating Philip Jennings' backstory, not his real history. Mischa's father may or may not have died when he was six. We've no way of knowing if that detail matched his own life.

 

Regarding this flashback I agree we don't know anything about his living situation. Even when he originally told the story to Elizabeth he just said he had to get milk halfway across the city--he could be getting it just for himself, for himself and his mother...no way of knowing. The story always made me assume he couldn't have been in any sort of state facility at that point since, as you say, you don't go get you own milk if you live in an orphanage, it's brought in (or not brought in).

 

But I think all the thoughts about orphanages are just speculation that he might have been in one at some point, like maybe after this incident. Or he might even live in one off and on--I know that wasn't unheard of. But it does always seem like the few times Philip mentions his actual past (the milk story and the icicles) it's completely devoid of context: I had to get milk/We used to have sword fights with icicles. We don't know the details in either circumstance. But this flashback reflects the same isolation. Elizabeth's flashbacks to childhood involve her mother. Philip's is him by himself.

Edited March 23, 2016 by sistermagpie

[Hecate7]

He just picked up enough milk to interest the bullies. It's not really indicative of where he's living with or with whom, except that we know he's got an allowance of some kind. He could be living in an orphanage and still buy milk. I seem to remember that they couldn't just buy soda or Sunny D, so milk might have been the approved beverage for kids to get.  This probably is at the orphanage--bored kids can do some pretty heavy stuff, especially in an all-boy environment, as this appeared to be.

Edited March 23, 2016 by Hecate7

[Umbelina]

Food was incredibly expensive and hard to find in much of the Soviet Union.  He may have simply picked up the milk he could AFFORD, or find.  Alternately, they may not have had a refrigerator, so he got the milk they would consume that day.

 

A Russian friend of mine was amazed at our supermarkets, and really stunned by "shopping for a week or more" instead of just going to the market each day to get that day's food.  Even with our abundance and appliances, he couldn't really shake that habit. 

 

Things were different there. 

 

I agree we know very little about Philip's childhood, other than the repeated rapes from both sexes at spy training.  We know a bit more about Elizabeth's but not that much, other than her mother was cold and unfeeling.

[sistermagpie]

I agree we know very little about Philip's childhood, other than the repeated rapes from both sexes at spy training.  We know a bit more about Elizabeth's but not that much, other than her mother was cold and unfeeling.

 

 

I actually wouldn't call her that. She seems to me more like Elizabeth herself. She thinks it's her duty to teach her lessons more than coddle her, but one of her earlier tapes seemed loving to me. Tough, but loving.

 

I think we do actually know a lot about Elizabeth's childhood from little things we've heard over the years. It's a sketch, but I think we do have a lot of basics about her situation.

 

Re: the milk, I think I was also going by Philip originally saying he “had to get milk” which sounded like him providing the groceries either just for himself or for himself and someone else. It seemed like that’s where these kids would target him.

[RedHawk]

Maybe Philip lived with a family who had a small child, and he was sent to get milk for it... I have a feeling we'll get a bit more of Philip's background as this season unfolds. At least, I hope so! I also have a feeling he's going to continue with EST. The scene where he was describing his memory of the attack and stopped just short of telling what really happened was so fascinating. We didn't see what led him to get up there and do it, we just came into the scene with him already talking. Amazing that he decided to open up in front of the group, because we know nothing on earth would have made Philip get up there if he didn't want to do it.

 

The way I see it is that Philip is delving into these more-or-less repressed memories of abuse and survival, which is making him start to question everything that has happened to him and all the choices he's made.

Edited March 24, 2016 by RedHawk

[sistermagpie]

I actually hope they don’t continue much with EST. I liked it fine in this ep and it’s brought up good plot complications, but it would seem really artificial to me for us to be in what are basically therapy sessions with Philip (albeit ones where he was translating his real history into something more palatable). Those sessions would get pretty boring after a while, I’d imagine.

 

Of course I don’t even know how long EST seminars are. The main thing people seemed to always say about them was that you couldn’t go to the bathroom during them, so it seemed like a weekend seminar-type thing.

 

To me, the really good scenes comes when he says this stuff to Elizabeth. If there’s one thing the session in this ep proved it’s that these people can help him and give him advice when he’s not even telling them what’s going on or they can’t understand it.

 

Sandra said that by not telling Elizabeth (by telling EST, Sandra and Martha instead to a point) he was lying to himself, and I buy that. He’s trying to fix the problem while not really dealing with the problem. Change himself while staying exactly the same person to Elizabeth.

[RedHawk]

Maybe Philip will drop EST because of the difficulty going there and encountering Sandra could (again) bring him with Stan. And of course he doesn't want Stan to particularly pay attention to his movements or have negative feelings toward him, for many complicated reasons.

 

I didn't mean that I want to see Philip in more EST sessions, just that I believe he will continue what he's learned through EST about being open and honest. I want him to continue talking with Sandra (or Martha, or even Elizabeth) and looking inside himself. I have a feeling that he and Elizabeth are going to pull further and further apart this season, emotionally, and I'm fine with that. He's tried to talk openly with her several times and each time she turned away from him, although not quite intentionally, and never turned back to say, "Ok, now you have my attention, keep talking."

[Roseanna]

So far, I haven't liked Martha or been interested in her but now when she has become an conscius spy, I have changed my opinion in both things. To me, the most interesting thing is in the person is that she/he can surprise the reader/watcher.   

Unlike some others here, I don't condemn her "betraying her country". I find her a person whom her country/society/collegues have betrayed: she has much potential and also guts but as a woman she has always been been underrated. She is "only" a secretary who hasn't got respect, on the contrary she has been invisible. She is called Martha by others whereas she must call them Agent Surname.

[sistermagpie]

4 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Unlike some others here, I don't condemn her "betraying her country". I find her a person whom her country/society/collegues have betrayed: she has much potential and also guts but as a woman she has always been been underrated. She is "only" a secretary who hasn't got respect, on the contrary she has been invisible. She is called Martha by others whereas she must call them Agent Surname.

I remember a lot of people often had this opinion of Martha but it's one I never quite agreed with. I mean, why is it an insult that she's "only" a secretary? There's no indication that she did anything anybody would have to do to be an FBI agent and it's office protocol to call the agents Agent X and support staff by their first names. She does have a certain amount of invisibility, it's true, being a dowdy secretary rather than a really attractive one etc., but I never got the impression she was particularly dismissed by the men in the office. They seem to appreciate her as a good secretary and a basically intelligent person.

[Roseanna]

40 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

I remember a lot of people often had this opinion of Martha but it's one I never quite agreed with. I mean, why is it an insult that she's "only" a secretary? There's no indication that she did anything anybody would have to do to be an FBI agent and it's office protocol to call the agents Agent X and support staff by their first names. She does have a certain amount of invisibility, it's true, being a dowdy secretary rather than a really attractive one etc., but I never got the impression she was particularly dismissed by the men in the office. They seem to appreciate her as a good secretary and a basically intelligent person.

But why was the office protocol to call support staff on their names - as if they were servants? I confess that I may not undestand the US practive but in my country, before the 60ies all in the company were called formally unless they were teenagers, nowadays all are called informally.

My central thesis, however, is that Martha is often described as a spinster, that is a failure as a woman. Also you use adjective dowdy/attractive. It's because she is seen "only" as a secretary by the agents she could operate successfully so long.

She had talents that could have used better. Nobody paid attention when she said that mail practice was a security risk - but a new agent's words were taken notice at once.  

There wouldn't be nothing wrong to be a secretary if a woman could also be an agent - but there are no female agnets among FBI characters. Instead, in the Soviet side there had been women in all capacities, as illegals, as mentors, in Rezidentura and as a exception of Claudia's successor, quite capable ones.         

[sistermagpie]

1 hour ago, Roseanna said:

But why was the office protocol to call support staff on their names - as if they were servants? I confess that I may not undestand the US practive but in my country, before the 60ies all in the company were called formally unless they were teenagers, nowadays all are called informally.

I don't defend the practice, but it did seem to be a pretty common so I just don't think it has anything to do with Martha personally. (On this show it doesn't seem that different at the Rezidentura in that Nina says Arkady Ivanovich because he's her superior but he seems to often call her Nina--Vasily was completely out of line iirc, calling her "Ninotchka" even before they were sleeping together). There's a hierarchy of jobs in the office and forms of address that go with it. In some other episode, iirc, one of the employees at the travel agency calls Philip "Mr. Philip" - people do that when they come from a culture where it feels disrespectful to address your boss the way you would a colleague. Philip probably said to call him Philip and the guy added the Mr. because it made him feel more comfortable.

1 hour ago, Roseanna said:

My central thesis, however, is that Martha is often described as a spinster, that is a failure as a woman. Also you use adjective dowdy/attractive. It's because she is seen "only" as a secretary by the agents she could operate successfully so long.

I did use the term dowdy to suggest that she's judged as less noticeable because the men consider her less attractive (though Amador went out with her and wanted her back). But I can't think of a time when anybody acts as if her being a secretary means she couldn't be the mole. Secretaries are absolutely suspects in that case. 

After all there's two ways of looking at it. You can look at her being the mole as something that makes her better than anyone thought--that there's more to her than meets the eye, that she could be working against everyone without them knowing it, that she outsmarted them all. But you could also look at it in a negative way--the agents trusted her based on her good work over the years, they didn't think she was a prime target to be duped into helping the USSR, they thought she actually held the values she claimed to hold.

1 hour ago, Roseanna said:

She had talents that could have used better. Nobody paid attention when she said that mail practice was a security risk - but a new agent's words were taken notice at once.  

Yes, they listened to a new (male) agent as if his words carried more weight and they were wrong about that. But saying she had talents that could have been used better always sounds to me like the rest of the office is at fault for Martha's career choices. Like the only way Martha could have gotten the respect she deserved was if somebody decided to promote her to FBI agent because she seems to have something to offer. But that's not how you become an FBI agent. In 1981 Martha would have had career options outside of being a secretary, but she doesn't seem to have been pursuing them--nor did she seem dissatisfied with her job as support staff, actually.

 

1 hour ago, Roseanna said:

There wouldn't be nothing wrong to be a secretary if a woman could also be an agent - but there are no female agnets among FBI characters. Instead, in the Soviet side there had been women in all capacities, as illegals, as mentors, in Rezidentura and as a exception of Claudia's successor, quite capable ones.         

The FBI in the show is noted for being discriminatory more than once, I agree. Certainly there should be women FBI agents. There will be women agents just as there was an Amador and an Adderholt who broke racial barriers. (We do see a female CIA agent.) But that female agent would not be Martha either way since as far as we know she never tried to be an FBI agent and didn't do any of the things to qualify as one.

[Roseanna]

On ‎17‎.‎3‎.‎2016 at 5:31 AM, sistermagpie said:

Philip was a master with Martha using the EST stuff and his actual torment to manipulate her--but at the same time probably really wanting to confess and get some forgiveness from somebody since he couldn't get it from the "bully."

  

On ‎17‎.‎3‎.‎2016 at 5:42 AM, RedHawk said:

Philip took Sandra's advice and went and told his wife some of his true feelings -- in some ways Martha is more his wife than Elizabeth. 

I agree more with Sistermagie. Philip used "his true feelings" to manipulate Martha. 

This was a really dangerous moment: knowing that "Clark" has committed a murder could have turned Martha againts him and at first she was terrified and took part of the blame - but Philip succeeded to convince her that he had done it to protect her which won Martha over.      

 

On ‎17‎.‎3‎.‎2016 at 9:06 PM, maczero said:

That's it.  I'm no longer in Martha's corner.  I felt sorry for her at one time but now she's gone all in with being Philip's source so no more sympathy for her.  The worst part is I bet a part of her finds it romantic that Philip killed someone to protect her.

I wish the story would've had Martha say she's done spying for Philip.  She can still be loyal enough to not turn him in but I wish she would've said "I'm done with this shit" when he asked her to get the security detail files.  It would've put Philip in a tough spot because killing her would lead to an investigation into her death and leaving her would probably make her want to snitch.

I agree with you that Philip succeeded to make Martha see his murder as "romantic". But I don't understand your logic by "staying loyal". One doesn't say a murderer "I am one with spying" if one wants to stay alive.

Martha's complete dependence on Clark is shown, just like in the case of Walter Taffet when she found out that Clark wasn't working for the US government, that she came home to speak with Clark. If she had decided to denounce him, she would have done it already.       

[sistermagpie]

20 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

Martha's complete dependence on Clark is shown, just like in the case of Walter Taffet when she found out that Clark wasn't working for the US government, that she came home to speak with Clark. If she had decided to denounce him, she would have done it already.       

It's a little like that joke where the guy asks the woman if she'd sleep for him for a million dollars and she says yes. Then he asks if she'd sleep with him for a dollar. She says "What do you think I am?" He says, "We've already established what you are. Now we're just haggling over price."

Martha openly told Philip she was going forward with him as a spy. This was always what she agreed to, she just of course didn't want or expect this to happen.

[Roseanna]

On ‎18‎.‎3‎.‎2016 at 0:23 PM, txhorns79 said:

I'd say it's more that Phillip has a much darker history than Elizabeth.  In terms of his soul, he clearly is torn and almost overwhelmed by guilt over the things he has done.  I would think someone with a dark soul wouldn't spend their time agonizing the way Philip does.  They would just kill whomever they needed to, and move on without regret.   

 

On ‎18‎.‎3‎.‎2016 at 0:35 PM, Anne Elk said:

I guess I shouldn't have been surprised about Phillip's adolescent murder spree. The show has pointed out many times that what makes him such a good spy is his incredible ability to compartmentalize. Ruthless, brutally violent killer one minute, blandly ordinary family guy the next. The KGB probably had some psychological tests that picked up on that kind of personality and that's how Phillip got their attention. Languages, technology, sexual prowess -- all that can be taught. But they didn't have to teach Phillip how to be a cold-blooded killer, that came naturally. 

I doubt KGB chose Philip because he had already killed. Killing can be taught - after all, it's taught to soldiers. And it's essential to their job and that of Philip to kill on orders, not to run amok. 

What is essential IMO is that just that murder troubles Philip, not those he had done "in the line of duty". In his childhood he completely lost his control by continueing to hit the boy who was down - nowadays he is a master of self-control, as shown with the scene with Stan.    

[sistermagpie]

2 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I doubt KGB chose Philip because he had already killed. Killing can be taught - after all, it's taught to soldiers. And it's essential to their job and that of Philip to kill on orders, not to run amok. 

Also I could be wrong about this, but it doesn't really seem like Philip was caught for that murder. He was 10 years old, not even an adolescent, so if the murders were discovered people might not immediately suspect him. Plus he seems to tell the story as his first big secret rather than it changing the course of his life in any way.

Violence might be a good quality for some KGB jobs, but I doubt it would be the primary thing you looked for in an Illegal. As you said, you'd look more for control. It would be ironic if Philip already carried a big secret before the KGB gave him so many more. Henry himself also has a violent incident he doesn't want anyone to know about. They're maybe very much alike, but since they're both secretive they don't know just how much.

[maczero]

On 8/7/2017 at 5:20 PM, Roseanna said:

  

I agree more with Sistermagie. Philip used "his true feelings" to manipulate Martha. 

This was a really dangerous moment: knowing that "Clark" has committed a murder could have turned Martha againts him and at first she was terrified and took part of the blame - but Philip succeeded to convince her that he had done it to protect her which won Martha over.      

 

I agree with you that Philip succeeded to make Martha see his murder as "romantic". But I don't understand your logic by "staying loyal". One doesn't say a murderer "I am one with spying" if one wants to stay alive.

I really wanted Martha for once to have some power in their relationship. Though I'll admit telling a murderer to fuck off is probably not too smart.  Although I personally don't believe that Martha thinks Philip would harm her.

[Roseanna]

On ‎17‎.‎3‎.‎2016 at 5:31 AM, sistermagpie said:

I assume she's just truthful--thanks to EST. She thinks Philip's friend is not his friend so she told him.

I suspect that Tori knows that Stan still loves Sandra, so she wants to blacken her, in order to get a closer relationship with him.

Of course we don't much about Tori, except that she used EST to get Stan's bed. But generally, the truth is no abstract ideal that is always good to reveal but it can also used maliciously.  

In this case, as Stan and Sandra are divorced, Sandra can date anybody she likes. If somebody should have told, it would be Elizabeth. But not about talking when having coffee! A man and woman can also be friends or just have a casual talk.  

[sistermagpie]

10 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I suspect that Tori knows that Stan still loves Sandra, so she wants to blacken her, in order to get a closer relationship with him.

 

I'm surprised I never thought of that because that totally is the one thing Tori could get out of this. We do know that she thinks Stan is still hung up on his ex (and she's right). She doesn't have much reason to want to get rid of Philip but her wanting Stan to let go of Sandra would give her good reason to see them as "intimate."

That's an interesting thing to think about too. Because there's nothing Philip and Sandra are doing in that scene that implies anything sexual. They don't look physically intimate. But Tori may have honestly picked up on them looking intimate in a general way, because in the few conversations they've had there is an actual intimacy there. Just because they really do seem to be connecting. There is maybe a little clue there for Stan if he could see it (which realistically he probably couldn't)--Philip is more comfortable with his ex than he is with Stan. What Philip looks like with Stan is not what Philip looks like when relaxed.

[crgirl412]

I am rewatching all of the seasons now and wonder why Clark didn't create a cover story that involved more than 1 person.  When Walter Taffet showed up Martha knew that Clark was lying but if it had been a multi-person agency/team he could easily have held her off longer.

[sistermagpie]

1 hour ago, crgirl412 said:

I am rewatching all of the seasons now and wonder why Clark didn't create a cover story that involved more than 1 person.  When Walter Taffet showed up Martha knew that Clark was lying but if it had been a multi-person agency/team he could easily have held her off longer.

That wouldn't much help. Walter Taffet is looking into the bug Clark planted. The real Clark would have been able to clear that up after the fact if it was a question of crossed wires. Clark did have more people in his cover story but they were the DOJ. The DOJ sent Walter Taffet.

[crgirl412]

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

That wouldn't much help. Walter Taffet is looking into the bug Clark planted. The real Clark would have been able to clear that up after the fact if it was a question of crossed wires. Clark did have more people in his cover story but they were the DOJ. The DOJ sent Walter Taffet.

How did Martha know that there was only one person who did that job in the entire federal government?   

[sistermagpie]

2 hours ago, crgirl412 said:

How did Martha know that there was only one person who did that job in the entire federal government?   

She didn't. Clark told her the DOJ was investigating the department to see if there was a mole--that wouldn't just be Clark, he was just the guy who was questioning her. Then when the FBI found the pen bug they thought there was a mole and called...the DOJ. Because that's who would be in charge of moles. It wasn't weird that somebody other than Clark would show up (although for sure Martha was desperately hoping it would be Clark who showed up), but it was weird that this guy was investigating a bug his own department (through its representative Clark) had planted as if it was proof of a mole. So when Clark asked her who Walter Taffett was and she said "He's you, Clark," I don't think she meant that both WT and Clark couldn't both exist, but just that this guy was supposed to be *another* Clark so why didn't he know about the bug? Why didn't Clark know that the FBI had called the DOJ about the bug? Walter Taffett and Clark should have known all the same things. If Clark was real, he would tell the rest of the DOJ it was their own bug.

That was a big sign, imo,  that Martha knew, underneath, that Clark wasn't on the up and up, because she didn't just tell Walter Taffett herself right away that it was a DOJ bug specifically placed by his co-worker, Clark Westerfeld. Instead she kept quiet and then laid a trap for Clark by casually mentioning the visit from WT and Clark outed himself by being clueless.

Edited November 30, 2017 by sistermagpie

[crgirl412]

14 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

She didn't. Clark told her the DOJ was investigating the department to see if there was a mole--that wouldn't just be Clark, he was just the guy who was questioning her. Then when the FBI found the pen bug they thought there was a mole and called...the DOJ. Because that's who would be in charge of moles. It wasn't weird that somebody other than Clark would show up (although for sure Martha was desperately hoping it would be Clark who showed up), but it was weird that this guy was investigating a bug his own department (through its representative Clark) had planted as if it was proof of a mole. So when Clark asked her who Walter Taffett was and she said "He's you, Clark," I don't think she meant that both WT and Clark couldn't both exist, but just that this guy was supposed to be *another* Clark so why didn't he know about the bug? Why didn't Clark know that the FBI had called the DOJ about the bug? Walter Taffett and Clark should have known all the same things. If Clark was real, he would tell the rest of the DOJ it was their own bug.

That was a big sign, imo,  that Martha knew, underneath, that Clark wasn't on the up and up, because she didn't just tell Walter Taffett herself right away that it was a DOJ bug specifically placed by his co-worker, Clark Westerfeld. Instead she kept quiet and then laid a trap for Clark by casually mentioning the visit from WT and Clark outed himself by being clueless.

Gotcha.  Thank you for the explanation!!