S04.E06: The Vault

[Luckylyn]

For the record, I don't blame Norma for Norman's psychosis. The fact that Norman suffered blackouts makes it clear something is chemically imbalanced in him and a person cannot make another mentally ill, which is what Norman is. However, yes, I do blame Norma for actions she took with regard to raising Norman. Such as, NOT getting him tested and checked out for his blackouts, NOT reporting his murder of his father and covering it up, NOT reporting Keith's assault against her and her murder of him and instead dragging Norman into helping her cover it up, having little boundaries with Norman especially when he got to a very confusing age for a boy sexually, treating his attempts at making friends and having a life as him abandoning her so he was made to feel guilty for those things. Yes, she is a victim but as she said, she didn't break and she's still standing and she could have determinedly worked to give Norman something different than she had.

 

Instead, she held onto him like he was her life preserver and in the end created a very unhealthy co-dependent relationship and environment for him. And when he started getting sicker and sicker and people around her was noticing and telling her, she was still burying her head in the sand and not getting him help. YMMV, I don't think Norma is a bad person, I don't question that she loves Norman in her own way and I absolutely sympathise with her pain and traumas but I'm sorry, I do think she failed Norman. But again, this is why this story is so tragic because these things usually are a cycle of dysfunction that just goes on and on. At this point Dylan could break it but who expects him to make it out alive. 

This is how I see it too. I don't blame Norma for Norman's mental illness but for how she handled it and the dysfunctional dynamic she fostered with him. 

[Timetoread]

/d

Edited April 21, 2016 by Timetoread

[queenanne]

I think everyone's a little bit right in that Norma created a world which fostered and nurtured Norman's flaws.

 

She did not mean to; she was trying to do better by him and by herself; but to some extent she couldn't help it, as in some cases there were clearly only bad choices.

 

I do think it's intentional on the part of TPTB and interesting, that the viewpoint has now shifted over the course of the series, from "Norma is the aggressor and wants this" (which, after all, is a dynamic which she had had modeled for her by and through Caleb) - to "Norman is the aggressor and needs to be locked up; as Norma no longer wants this."  The audience probably needs to be weaned off Norman identification to some extent, because we know what happens in the end - it's a great and in some cases fun tightrope to walk.

 

This, of course, was not one of those "fun tightrope" episodes, but we've had 'em in the past.

 

However, I also don't see either as wholly responsible, because this is a situation which should happen.  Norman and Norma "should", as a counsel of perfection, achieve healthy child/adult separation for themselves.  If we're going to go to black-and-white extremes, someone could even argue that Norma should never have cut the cord by sending him to Pineview, and that in fact by not continuing to string Norman along she helped contribute to her own eventual demise.

[truthaboutluv]

Yes. I believe his being a homicidal maniac is simply a case of him being a monster, not the series of circumstances, experiences and situations he has endured.

 

 

Ask the "one" who said those things because I didn't.

 

I feel like these two comments contradicted each other but whatever. I am never here to convince anyone of anything. I share my thoughts and opinions about the show and that's it. It's clear we have very differing views, no one's mind will change so agree to disagree. 

[Timetoread]

/d

Edited April 21, 2016 by Timetoread

[Rustybones]

Ho. Lee. Shit.  This show......

[Timetoread]

/d

Edited April 21, 2016 by Timetoread

[Chaos Theory]

O.k., obviously we know that Norman had an unendurably horrific childhood. We saw what his father did to his mother and how Norman ended up killing him. All perfectly understandable. But, I wonder if they will show that Norman was "dangerously disturbed" when has very young or if his psychosis is a product of his environment. Can a person with no chemical imbalance be driven the to kind of homicidal madness Norman displays just by having a fucked up childhood? I would think not.

 

Its always been an either/or.  We can spend a lifetime discussing  the nature of born or bred.  Was he born this way?  Some forms of mental illness are genetic, some are environmental and some are just luck of the draw.   In Norman's case I think it is all three.   I think Norman is a perfect storm of disfunction which created Mother to protect him because Norma couldn't.    

Edited April 20, 2016 by Chaos Theory

[ganesh]

I liked how Norma was totally over Chick and Romero just responded with a "what the hell?" Though he handled the whole thing rather well. 

 

I was actally hoping Norma was going to shoot Chick, but I think it's better this way because he wasn't expecting that at all and probably was like, "damn I dodged one there; hey send me the check nbd."

 

No one chops more angrily than Norma.

 

The best part of the episode was Dylan pulling over to use the cell phone. 

Edited April 20, 2016 by ganesh

[queenanne]

I agree wholeheartedly that much of this is intentional in the writing - the whole argument of nature vs. nurture.  In the early days of the show they showcased a lot of Norma's flaws as a parent.  This had a lot to do with the mythology that predated the show.  The Norma that we got from the movie Psycho was Norman's version of her and she wasn't around to tell her side of the story.  So we had this predisposed opinion of her being "the reason" her son ended up as he did.  The show began with that ball in the air.  Norman seemed normal, save for quirks that could quickly be explained by faulty parenting.  Now what drew me to this show was this very conundrum in play on which I have come down on one side in terms of opinion - I think nature trumps nurture. 

 

I've been an armchair criminologist most of my life with a far too extensive knowledge of serial killers than I care to admit.  My father was in law enforcement and forbade me from going into the field but I always had a deep fascination with the criminal mind.  I believe that serial killers are born.  While their environment certainly plays a part it is not the smoking gun in why they are the way that they are.  This is why I defend Norma.  Not as a parent in general but in the concept that she is the direct cause of Norman being a killer.  Her unhealthy input - due to the fact that she is herself mentally unhealthy - fed the sickness in him, but you can't feed what isn't already there.  For centuries people have tried to figure out the cause and effect of very bad men.  Many had awful childhood experiences and people have this ""AHA" reaction to that.  But then I ask, did this person have siblings?  Were these siblings equally exposed to these damaging circumstances?  Often they were.  So why did only the one kid grow up to be a serial killer when everybody - though they may have generally struggled - remained criminally inactive?  There is also alot of study that perhaps early childhood head trauma or sickness caused the screw to go loose.  So not born, but physically damaged, not just emotionally damaged.  My own theory is that the nature of some killers is such that negative input is received in a different way than normal people receive it.  Millions of people experience all manner of trauma and psychological damage from abuse or misuse but they don't become killers.  Some killers manifest with no trauma at all.  They were nutured and professionally treated but still went south.

 

So as for Norma, I think that nearly EVERY choice she made was the wrong one for the child that she had.  But I do believe that she meant well and was never acting out of malice toward Norman.  She was simply ill equipped - and may have been so even if she didn't have her childhood.  Not everybody is savvy.  I don't blame her AT ALL for the fact that Norman is a killer.  She was a pretty lousy mother, though, and it messed up her other kid too, but he is sane and is not a danger to society.  But Norman, I believe, from day one was irredeemable.  He suffered terribly in his childhood but that didn't break him down, it solidified and justified what he already was.  It informed his already twisted observations and fueled him with the rage which he uses as an impetus.  I honestly do not think even early therapy would have helped him, nor meds, nor growing up with the Cleaver Family.  It was in him.  Just like Norman's psyche told him that killing was a viable option to avoid telling a secret, if he had no secrets killing would have been the viable option to other input - a breakup, humiliation, road rage, sexual perversion.  Something would have tickled this urge eventually.  At the very best he might have had himself committed or committed suicide before acting on it.

 

Just my humble opinion.

 

I'm not truly qualified to have an opinion on DID/psychopathy, but I think you can redirect at minimum babies/children.  If you couldn't redirect behavior to some extent with conditioning, correction, empathy and sometimes plain old fear of consequences, there would be no coming back from a nervous/mental breakdown regardless of your age.  Do we do right because we know what is right and feel a deep commitment to it; or do we do right simply because we are afraid of consequences if we don't?  It's difficult, but not impossible, to divert rages - rage is a choice that can be de-escalated instead of escalated.  A blackout rage, I grant is difficult; but is it real psychotic break territory?  I'm always a little bit dubious of what holds up in retrospect of hard theory, since Hitchcock tried to put a pattern over the condition.

 

I agree with you that there is a choice to how different people react, and there is a choice amongst people who take things too deeply - to some extent.  I mention this specifically because I am a person who takes things too deeply, and never has being lectured "you need to be less sensitive/develop a thicker skin!", actually helped me.  Some people turn this referred frustration inwardly, and others turn this outwardly.  But when does choice shade into compulsion, or vice versa?  Every child of two or three has already learned, it's pleasurable to act out and pitch raging fits as a ball of id; thus it's no surprise when people do.  And to some extent, I'm sure if we were to confront a Norman with capacity for reason at the time of his fits, he'd say he's justified in his reactions, because these people are infuriating in how they act counter to his ideas of what right, fit behavior should be - mostly due to standards imparted by Norma, which I feel would be closer to an OCD/control issue.  "Mother would never abandon her small, tender child!"  Norma _qua_ Norma, makes a lot of proclamations about good and proper behavior, which is splendidly ironic because she's noticed that there are such things; but is on the level of her id, completely incapable for decades to tell that Caleb pressuring her for sex, is part of said set of intrinsically wrong behaviors.  (Which is a circuitous way of saying, as surely as Norman blames himself for things for which he has no responsibility; it's also clearly a matrilineal family failing.)

 

But so often, righteous justification is in fact self-righteous, self-indulgent indignation.  And especially difficult for Norman; maybe he can't turn away from the behavior because of losing consciousness. Maybe once he has blackout rage there's no stopping him, and I'd be at a loss as to how you'd turn that off like a switch - in some ways, I'd expect to see Norman's rageaholic behavior belonging more to someone with oppositional defiant disorder.

 

Of course, I'm just patching together remnants of psychology from one introductory 100 class in the 90's, plus pop culture and a class on Hitchcock, so it's possible I lack a lot of the fine points - happy to learn though.

 

And therefore, ETA, I guess I postulate that the problem for Norman is, he feels so powerless as a result of his upbringing he hasn't learned any proper or socially acceptable way of feeling empowered, other than by physically hurting people; and that the problem/line of demarcation, comes when he "realizes" that he has in fact killed the people.

Edited April 20, 2016 by queenanne

[TattleTeeny]

So as for Norma, I think that nearly EVERY choice she made was the wrong one for the child that she had.  But I do believe that she meant well and was never acting out of malice toward Norman.

 

Exactly.

[ganesh]

That's why the show is essentially the tragic demise of Norma Bates. If she made a different choice here and there, Norman might not have ended up psycho and kill her. You could go all the way back to S1, where she wouldn't let him try out for track, or how she didn't want him to hang out with some of the school kids, even though they seemed to be fairly nice to him. Then she pulls him out of school entirely and is keeping him in the dark about her marriage.

[peacheslatour]

That's why the show is essentially the tragic demise of Norma Bates. If she made a different choice here and there, Norman might not have ended up psycho and kill her. You could go all the way back to S1, where she wouldn't let him try out for track, or how she didn't want him to hang out with some of the school kids, even though they seemed to be fairly nice to him. Then she pulls him out of school entirely and is keeping him in the dark about her marriage.

What if Norman got pissed off and killed his track coach? What if he blacked out at a party and murdered some other kid? Ever since Norman killed his father (and even before that, for all we know) Norma has been afraid to leave him to his own devices for long. At least while he had the structure of school,she felt he was probably not going to go off the rails. Then came Ms. Watson and even school wasn't safe.

[ganesh]

And what if he didn't? I don't get the point. Norma's decision making for Norman is tragic. I don't think that's a some out there observation. She got him into Pineview now, but it's clearly too little too late.

[truthaboutluv]

That's why the show is essentially the tragic demise of Norma Bates. If she made a different choice here and there, Norman might not have ended up psycho and kill her. You could go all the way back to S1, where she wouldn't let him try out for track, or how she didn't want him to hang out with some of the school kids, even though they seemed to be fairly nice to him. Then she pulls him out of school entirely and is keeping him in the dark about her marriage.

 

Exactly. Like I've said many times, criticizing Norma's parenting skills isn't saying it's her fault her son's a serial killing psycho. It's simply saying that in many ways she did fail in her role as his parent. Yes and that likely had to do with her own traumas but as I stated above, that's why dysfunction is often times a cyclical thing. It's like how many cases do we hear of people who grew up in abusive households being abusive themselves because it's all they've known. To me Norma is a tragic character and so is Norman who never had a chance himself being raised by a woman who was so traumatized and damaged herself. 

 

What if Norman got pissed off and killed his track coach? What if he blacked out at a party and murdered some other kid? Ever since Norman killed his father (and even before that, for all we know) Norma has been afraid to leave him to his own devices for long.

 

Except the way the episodes played out, it didn't seem like Norma's rationale about Norman having a life had anything to do with worrying about what he'd do. Because at that point, I don't think Norma really thought something was truly wrong with Norman. She might have just figured he was so traumatized about killing his father that he blocked it out, but that was it. And again, we all know now just how awful Norman's dad was so I don't think Norma viewed Norman murdering his dad, especially while he was attacking her, as proof that something was very wrong with him. 

 

Norma's attitude in terms of Norman's wanting to try out for the track team and wanting to hang out with Bradley and company seemed purely motivated by a need to have him attached to her and only her. His joining a team might mean he'd go off and have his own life and god forbid, what would she do when her whole world was Norman. And especially as she kept telling him, that all they had was each other. Life had beat Norma down in more ways than one and she felt like Norman was the only male in her life who never disappointed her and who she could truly count on and hold onto and so she was hostile to anyone or thing that may threaten that. Which is why I mentioned above that Mother is similar to Norma, just a harsher and more murderous version of her. I mean now, with her relationship with Alex and the full reality of just how messed up Norman is, she's finally attempting to let go but it is likely too little too late.

Edited April 20, 2016 by truthaboutluv

[ari333]

Norma only wanted Norman in Pineview and took steps in that direction bc that admin or Dr or whoever said that he'd be back in that other hospital otherwise.

I thought Chick was toast on that bridge.

[Rustybones]

When Norman gets out and learns about Norma's marriage, what will happen?  Who will Norma love more, Norman or Romero?  Hands down it will be Norman.

[Chaos Theory]

When Norman gets out and learns about Norma's marriage, what will happen? Who will Norma love more, Norman or Romero? Hands down it will be Norman.

Maybe in previous seasons. But the major difference between Norma and Norman is that Norma is capable of healing. Telling Romero a VERY difficult and honest truth about who and what she is was a big step she was not capable of in season one. Yes of course she loves Norman but I think that is part of the tragedy. Norma has moved on without him.

[ganesh]

Romero's days are clearly numbered now. 

 

Norma's attitude in terms of Norman's wanting to try out for the track team and wanting to hang out with Bradley and company seemed purely motivated by a need to have him attached to her and only her.

 

I think the whole point of the first season was to highlight this. Norman was the new kid, but he wasn't shunned or made fun of at school. They invited him to a party and everyone was all like, "oh hi, new kid. all right." Then it's like, "no, you can't be on the track team, don't hang out with Bradley." Leading up to pulling him out of school entirely so his own social circle is essentially Norma. 

[ari333]

Norman is gonna freak when he finds out Norma is married.

[Timetoread]

/d

Edited April 21, 2016 by Timetoread

[Timetoread]

/d

Edited April 21, 2016 by Timetoread

[ganesh]

Clearly, that's not what I was saying. I feel like my words are being parsed and picked to the point that the initial meaning and intent is lost. It's not fun for everyone else to go through the cycle. In short, I think the show is essentially a tragic portrait of Norma by the classical definition of tragedy. It's been set up that way since S1. I've said in a few times in the best way I can. truthaboutluv quoted on my initial observation, and elaborated on it quite well. I don't think it can be explained clearer than that. 

[Mabinogia]

I don't think it's an either or situation. I think Norman was doomed from the start because of his heredity. He had violent abusers on both sides. He is damaged. Norma, being totally unsuited to living as a normal human being given her own damaged life, made a series of well meaning mistakes that exacerbated the situation.

 

I do not believe that Norman would ever have been "well". I think his damage goes a lot deeper than anything Norma did. But I don't think Norma made the right choices in raising him. But she made the best choices she could given she has no idea what a happy, healthy family looks like.

 

To me they are both tragic. If Norman procreates, his child's life would be equally tragic. It is heartbreaking, the cycle of abuse and how it can manifest itself.

 

I like how the show explores the victimization of generations. The tragedy of this family runs deep and it is heartbreaking.

[truthaboutluv]

Clearly, that's not what I was saying. I feel like my words are being parsed and picked to the point that the initial meaning and intent is lost.

 

Yup...to say the least. 

 

In short, I think the show is essentially a tragic portrait of Norma by the classical definition of tragedy. It's been set up that way since S1.

 

Agreed. To me personally, and again we are all entitled to our own interpretations, from the first season of this show and I saw where it was going, I have viewed it as a tragic tale of mother and son. I wasn't sure what we were going to get and what the writers would do with the idea of a prequel about Norman Bates. I actually was curious if they were going to just make him this evil sociopath right from the start.

 

But that's not what we got in my opinion and instead I realized that the tragedy of this story was going to be about this woman who really thought she was doing the best for her son and in the end inadvertently contributed to his madness and in the end is killed for it. And maybe he would have become a serial killing psycho regardless - whether she'd told the truth about her husband's death, tried to get him help with the blackouts, etc. But again, to me that is the tragedy of this show and story. That we will never know because these things didn't happen. 

 

I don't think it's an either or situation. I think Norman was doomed from the start because of his heredity. He had violent abusers on both sides. He is damaged. Norma, being totally unsuited to living as a normal human being given her own damaged life, made a series of well meaning mistakes that exacerbated the situation.

 

Exactly. Again, in my opinion that's what makes this show and story and Vera and Freddie's performances so powerful and intriguing and well, sad. 

Edited April 20, 2016 by truthaboutluv

[peacheslatour]

 

Of course it will be Norman.  He is her child.  Romero is a man she met a couple of years ago.  I don't think the problem will be the choice Norma makes, it will be Norman's reaction to ANY choice she makes.

Yes, but will it ever be enough for Norman? You and I both know how betrayed he will feel.

 

"and for years the two of them lived as if there was no one else in the world. Then she met a man and it seemed to Norman that she 'threw him over' for this man. That pushed him over the thin line... and he killed them both."

[peacheslatour]

 

And what if he didn't? I don't get the point.

What if he didn't?  Would you let a known killer, who has blackouts and doesn't remember killing  his own father hang out with the locals, people you know nothing about? When Norma wouldn't let Norman get a drivers license because she knows that he blacks out, teenagers would assume that she was just trying to control him and that's what Norman did. We know better.

[Solzhenknitsyn]

[T]he tragedy of this story was going to be about this woman who really thought she was doing the best for her son and in the end inadvertently contributed to his madness and in the end is killed for it.

Beautifully stated. Her shortsightedness about her parenting, and her blindness to the lingering effects of her own trauma, are part of the tragedy.

No-one sees his/her own shortcomings with perfect clarity. Norma's shortcomings are huge, and with Norman as a son, the stakes for lack of self-awareness were so high. One could argue that Norma was doomed from the start. "So foul and fair a day I have not seen."

And maybe he would have become a serial killing psycho regardless - whether she'd told the truth about her husband's death, tried to get him help with the blackouts, etc. But again, to me that is the tragedy of this show and story. That we will never know because these things didn't happen.

I agree with this as well.

[ari333]

Norma chopping !

TMI but my mother used to do that same mad chop. It gave me chills. Also even as an adult, if I didn't do what she wanted with my own life , she wouldn't speak to me for days or longer. [/too much sharing]

Finally, it dawned on me, "Fine. Don't speak to me then. "

Edited April 20, 2016 by ari333

[peacheslatour]

This truly is a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions. Sophocles would be proud. Maybe some day the story will be made into an opera.

 

 

Norma chopping !

TMI but my mother used to do that same mad chop. It gave me chills. Also even as an adult, if I didn't do what she wanted with my own life , she wouldn't speak to me for days or longer. [/too much sharing]

I'm so sorry to hear that. I've always felt that the "silent treatment" was a form of abuse.

[ari333]

This truly is a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions. Sophocles would be proud. Maybe some day the story will be made into an opera.

 

 

I'm so sorry to hear that. I've always felt that the "silent treatment" was a form of abuse.

I agree that it is.... 

I'll add the eye roll as a form of contempt. But anything else I'll take to small talk .

[peacheslatour]

I love this site. We can disagree and have rather scholarly debates with out getting too personal. On some other sites this discussion would have devolved to ad hominems and personal attacks. Thanks to the mods for not shutting us down. There needs to be a place where honorable people can disagree and keep it academic. Kudos to all.

[Luckylyn]

I feel that no matter what Norma did Norman was going to be mentally ill.  It could be genetics (Norma's mother was mentally Il) or it could be environment (growing up in an abusive household).  It may be both.   The area where Norma has culpability is not getting him help sooner. 

Edited April 21, 2016 by Luckylyn

[TattleTeeny]

I really haven't read anything here that implies a belief that Norman isn't as crazy as a shithouse rat regardless of the reason or that he'd be a model citizen if it wasn't for that meddling mom of his, or that Norma is 100% responsible for Norman's condition.

Edited April 20, 2016 by TattleTeeny

[queenanne]

What if he didn't?  Would you let a known killer, who has blackouts and doesn't remember killing  his own father hang out with the locals, people you know nothing about? When Norma wouldn't let Norman get a drivers license because she knows that he blacks out, teenagers would assume that she was just trying to control him and that's what Norman did. We know better.

 

That's an excellent point, but it could go both ways.  Is it Norma, proper, correct, black-and-white-behavioralist-critical Norma, who was afraid of what Norman would do because she was afraid of what he might do towards other people; or is she afraid because if what he did wrong comes out, she looks like a shit mother?   She does care a lot about how others see her.

[TattleTeeny]

Off topic a little, but my favorite Norma moment ever was when she was in that bar and the terrible guy was hitting on her. He said that she looked like she was about to cry, and super-rapid-fire, she said, "Maybe you're projecting; maybe you're gonna cry!" My BF and I still say it to each other, replacing "cry" with whatever it is the other just said (e.g., "You look tired." "Maybe you're projecting; maybe you're tired!").

[Garden Wafers]

I don't think it's an either or situation. I think Norman was doomed from the start because of his heredity. He had violent abusers on both sides. He is damaged. Norma, being totally unsuited to living as a normal human being given her own damaged life, made a series of well meaning mistakes that exacerbated the situation.

 

I do not believe that Norman would ever have been "well". I think his damage goes a lot deeper than anything Norma did. But I don't think Norma made the right choices in raising him. But she made the best choices she could given she has no idea what a happy, healthy family looks like.

 

To me they are both tragic. If Norman procreates, his child's life would be equally tragic. It is heartbreaking, the cycle of abuse and how it can manifest itself.

 

I like how the show explores the victimization of generations. The tragedy of this family runs deep and it is heartbreaking.

 

That's an interesting sentiment and something I'm still mulling over myself: given Norma's background, is she really "totally unsuited to living as a normal human being" and doomed to pass this destructive and tragic path on to Norman and any other offspring? I mean, taking into consideration the horrible odds she's faced, it certainly seems like the most realistic outcome. But I still find it awfully disheartening to think that victims of abuse wouldn't be able to break out of this cycle - either on their own or with the assistance of a third party/external force.

[truthaboutluv]

That's an interesting sentiment and something I'm still mulling over myself: given Norma's background, is she really "totally unsuited to living as a normal human being" and doomed to pass this destructive and tragic path on to Norman and any other offspring? I mean, taking into consideration the horrible odds she's faced, it certainly seems like the most realistic outcome. But I still find it awfully disheartening to think that victims of abuse wouldn't be able to break out of this cycle - either on their own or with the assistance of a third party/external force.

 

I'm sure they do and there are many cases of it. It's just that unfortunately there are also the many cases where the dysfunction just continues. 

 

I really haven't read anything here that implies a belief that Norman isn't as crazy as a shithouse rat regardless of the reason or that he'd be a model citizen if it wasn't for that meddling mom of his, or that Norma is 100% responsible for Norman's condition.

 

This. To me, the fact that Norman was even having blackouts says that something was clearly not right in his brain. As I said once before, normal, healthy people don't blackout and lose time and have no memory of what they did and what happened. Also, in the first season we saw that sometimes his blackouts were triggered by him going into a really dark rage, like when he killed his father. 

 

However, the reason I personally don't dismiss the character as simply a monster is because his horrible actions are not all he has been. If all we'd seen of Norman is him angry, violent, selfish, evil and just plain unlikable, that would be one thing. But while watching Bradley be murdered was one of the most disturbing things I've seen on television, I also remember Norman's reaction the one time he knowingly killed someone. That wasn't the actions or reaction of a monster IMO. It was that of a scared, remorseful and vulnerable kid.

 

Similarly, when he remembered killing Ms. Watson. He went off to try and kill himself and pleaded with Norma that something was wrong with him and she wasn't telling him. Again, not the actions IMO of someone evil. And even this season when he broke down to the therapist. Norman is without question crazy and dangerous. However, in my opinion, I don't think he's an evil person. I think he's a really, really damaged kid. 

Edited April 21, 2016 by truthaboutluv

[Mabinogia]

If she had gotten assistance things might have gone differently but, like Norman, Norma never got the help she needed. I don't believe that no victim of abuse is unable to break the cycle, I know for a fact that some do, I just don't think Norma is strong in that way. I do think she is incredibly strong, to have survived all she has she would have to be, but she is, IDK if insecure is the right word for it, but she got caught up in a terrible cycle of abuse that went from her father to her brother to her two husbands, then there was that guy who used to own the hotel that raped her, Norman emotionally manipulates her.

 

I think she would have needed to find a Romero much sooner than she did in order to heal. Norman is the only male in her life that she ever really felt love from, I think (of course I don't know this, it's just my impression) which is why their bond is so strong. I do think she broke part of the cycle of abuse. There is no sign that she ever beat Norman or physically abused him. That is a huge thing considering her history. She just, with an abusive father and an emotionally absent mother, doesn't know how to form normal familial bonds with people. Even with Dillon there is always this weird undercurrent of sexuality to her interactions with him.

 

I think she lives by impulse. Whatever she feels in the moment, that is how she reacts. It can be seen in the conversions with Chick and Romero. She has had enough, she doesn't want to be controlled by yet another man and she just unloads on Chick in a way that must have felt so very therapeutic for a woman who lives a life of secrets. And then she becomes so vulnerable and honest when she admits the truth to Romero. She has given up. She's tired and just wants it all to be over. And when he doesn't leave, she just lights up. And so do I because Vera plays the role so brilliantly that she could do pretty much anything and I would still feel deeply for her.

 

She is an amazing blend of incredibly vulnerable, like a frightened child, and fiercely strong, like a true fighter. I love the character so very much. She is so complex and tragic. She can be the sweetest person ever in one moment and cruel in the next. She is well meaning but delusional. She lives on impulse, flying by the seat of her pants. She is completely beaten down but still hopeful.  

[queenanne]

If she had gotten assistance things might have gone differently but, like Norman, Norma never got the help she needed. I don't believe that no victim of abuse is unable to break the cycle, I know for a fact that some do, I just don't think Norma is strong in that way. I do think she is incredibly strong, to have survived all she has she would have to be, but she is, IDK if insecure is the right word for it, but she got caught up in a terrible cycle of abuse that went from her father to her brother to her two husbands, then there was that guy who used to own the hotel that raped her, Norman emotionally manipulates her.

 

I think she would have needed to find a Romero much sooner than she did in order to heal. Norman is the only male in her life that she ever really felt love from, I think (of course I don't know this, it's just my impression) which is why their bond is so strong. I do think she broke part of the cycle of abuse. There is no sign that she ever beat Norman or physically abused him. That is a huge thing considering her history. She just, with an abusive father and an emotionally absent mother, doesn't know how to form normal familial bonds with people. Even with Dillon there is always this weird undercurrent of sexuality to her interactions with him.

 

I think this is a necessary development for us to believe there is an environment which could breed/nurture/hothouse "a Norman", but to some extent I wonder if that isn't because TPTB have piled on Norma to an almost absurd proportion.  While it's probable that someone knows an unfortunate soul with these type of Perils of Pauline Hurricane Pile-On, whose life has been nothing but misery; it's unlikely for most, thus difficult to evaluate its effect.  TPTB almost have to paint a mythically unfortunate individual for us to believe that Norma never breaks her cycle after choosing to get involved with, or even happenstancing into the orbit of these men.  It took her until her forties to meet a decent good man who could go the distance; and it's not like good people along the way haven't liked and/or befriended Norma.  (Well, maybe "good" is too strong a word for Michael Vartan's character and his sister, but they were of a higher socioeconomic class and gentility than poor Norma.)  If the upper class people are willing to befriend you, you must pass muster, in a way that seems likely you would find some relative measure of success in life to rise you above squalor.  You wouldn't be a perpetual victim targeted by squalid abusers. (I say squalid to separate them from the upper class abusers who put on a good show.  I know they exist.  I'm just thinking it's more likely for Norma to find these folks among disadvantaged people the apparent likes of Sam Bates, who are the way they are because their lack of advantages and constant tread-upons breed resentment.)

Edited April 21, 2016 by queenanne

[maczero]

I get a little confused bc sometimes Norman sees and hears MOther and Mother is sitting beside Norman and he is interacting with her. Other times, he *IS* her and speaks as her.

What confuses me is if Mother is aware of Norma.  BTW, I can't wait for Norma to meet Mother! 

 

Is it just me?

Did any of you think that Norman was going to crack Dylan over the head with that croquet mallet when he told him about Emma?

For a moment I did.  I was relieved that he was cool with it.  However, that probably shows how little he cares for Emma.  Now when he finds out about Romero, that's going to be something.

 

The best part of the episode was Dylan pulling over to use the cell phone. 

What was so special about that?

 

I agree with those of you who pointed out season 1 Norma is different from the current Norma.  She's not quite as stern/bitchy as she was in season 1.  Any reason for the change?

[Fable]

I agree with those of you who pointed out season 1 Norma is different from the current Norma.  She's not quite as stern/bitchy as she was in season 1.  Any reason for the change?

Just a guess, but in season 1, Norma was freshly out of an abusive relationship and a life that revolved solely around her abuser and her son.  Being away from that situation, she has been able to establish a sense of independence, and as a result has become somewhat less rigid.

[truthaboutluv]

That's an interesting interpretation. Honestly, I just figured it was because the writers realized how the viewers responded to nutty, kooky Norma and went more in that vein with her. I think they also realized they had to make her more sympathetic, so when the inevitable end comes of Norman murdering her, viewers will have more sympathy and be more upset by it. Because if the old TWOP board was anything to go by, the opinions about Norma after the first season were not very favorable.

 

Sure some thought she was kind of amusingly nuts but they also thought she was manipulative, extremely creepy and inappropriate with Norman and basically an inadvertent enabler of his crazy. That is why there was plenty of debate about whether or not Norman even really murdered his father because some felt that the only person's word we had to go on with that was Norma's (ftr, I totally thought Norman killed his dad from the pilot and just didn't remember). 

Edited April 21, 2016 by truthaboutluv

[TattleTeeny]

Norma is a stress-ball on a good day, so in season one, even just a big move involving a new home and a business venture fraught with peril would be enough to make a person who is already on edge even more stern and bitchy (because, ugh, moving!). Add on the burdens of her son's mental health and her almost-fugitive status, and she's an even bigger ticking time bomb.

[Mabinogia]

The best part of the episode was Dylan pulling over to use the cell phone.

What was so special about that?

 

It may seem silly, but I will applaud any time a show shows responsible driving. I love it when characters buckle their seatbelts and pull over to use a cell rather than driving and talking on the phone which, at least in my state, is illegal. My biggest acting/driving pet peeve is when the character driving is conversing with the passenger and spends half the drive looking at the person they are talking to. I'm always yelling "watch the damned road" in my head.

 

I do think Norma is less severe now because, from the sounds of it, this is the first time in her life she is doing things her way. She went from her abusive childhood to marrying an abuser to give Dillon a father to leaving him to marry Norman's father, also an abuser to now, where she is actually on her own for the first time. Also, when we first met her, her son had very recently murdered his father. That's bound to make a person edgy.

[maczero]

Norma is a stress-ball on a good day, so in season one, even just a big move involving a new home and a business venture fraught with peril would be enough to make a person who is already on edge even more stern and bitchy (because, ugh, moving!). Add on the burdens of her son's mental health and her almost-fugitive status, and she's an even bigger ticking time bomb.

Yeah but I'd argue her life has become progressively worse since season 1 yet she seems a lot warmer (and more vulnerable) now than she was then.    Although there is the possibility that getting kicked in the teeth by life enough times can soften people rather than make them even harder.  Or as the poster above noted, TPTB didn't want Norma to come across as a totally unlikeable shrew and decided to soften her character a bit.

[truthaboutluv]

She went from her abusive childhood to marrying an abuser to give Dillon a father to leaving him to marry Norman's father,

 

I'm not sure Dylan's father was abusive. I think that marriage just didn't work out, probably because Norma only married the guy to get away from creepy Caleb. Also, I'm pretty sure she alluded to having an affair with Norman's dad while married to her first husband, which likely also contributed to the marriage ending. It's odd though that it seemed Dylan has no relationship with him and there's not much mention of him since I assume he's still alive. 

Edited April 21, 2016 by truthaboutluv

[ari333]

I'm not sure Dylan's father was abusive. I think that marriage just didn't work out, probably because Norma only married the guy to get away from creepy Caleb. Also, I'm pretty sure she alluded to having an affair with Norman's dad while married to her first husband, which likely also contributed to the marriage ending. It's odd though that it seemed Dylan has no relationship with him and there's not much mention of him since I assume he's still alive. 

 

Dylan's father is Caleb, Norma's brother.

 

Sometimes when Norman gets really calm and soft spoken, it is chilling.... like he's going to blow any moment.

ETA: correct typo. "Norma gets really clam."

Edited April 21, 2016 by ari333

[maczero]

Dylan's father is Caleb, Norma's brother.

 

Sometimes when Norman gets really calm and soft spoken, it is chilling.... like he's going to blow any moment.

ETA: correct typo. "Norma gets really clam."

I think the poster you were responding to was referring to Norma's first husband who Dylan thought was his father.  Why hasn't Dylan mentioned much of anything about their relationship?  Dylan seemed to be genuinely bothered that Norma left his "father" for Norman's father.

 

On a related note, am I the only one that was disgusted when Dylan called Caleb "dad"?  Incest aside, Caleb has no right to that title because he didn't raise him.  Even worse is that Dylan can rarely bring himself to call Norma "mom".

Edited April 21, 2016 by maczero

[truthaboutluv]

Dylan's father is Caleb, Norma's brother.

 

I know that. I guess I should have put father in quotations. I was referring to the high school boyfriend she married and convinced he was Dylan's father and who Dylan, until very recently, also believed was his father. My point then is that I do not believe that guy was abusive to Norma or at the least I don't remember Norma or anything else in the show giving that indication. 

 

I think the poster you were responding to was referring to Norma's first husband who Dylan thought was his father. 

 

Yes, exactly. 

 

Why hasn't Dylan mentioned much of anything about their relationship?  Dylan seemed to be genuinely bothered that Norma left his "father" for Norman's father.

 

Well this season we got confirmation from Norma that she cheated on her first husband with Norman's dad so that would explain Dylan's being bothered by her leaving him. But it still doesn't explain where he is and why Dylan just didn't go off with him when he needed a place to stay, especially considering how tense and tumultuous his and Norma's relationship was when he first showed up. 

 

On a related note, am I the only one that was disgusted when Dylan called Caleb "dad"?

 

Well I've personally been disgusted by Caleb's existence since he first showed up but yeah that's just strange. The thing is, Dylan and Norma had a very strained relationship for a long time, in part because she resented him because she knew who he really was the product of. So that would explain his not calling her mom since there's still a weirdness between them, though it has thawed considerably. While the circumstances of Caleb being his "dad" are definitely gross and disturbing, his relationship with Caleb is still for the most part a blank slate, if that makes sense. 

Edited April 21, 2016 by truthaboutluv