All Episodes Talk: Lorelai and Rory and the People They Love

[txhorns79]

We realize this is a fictional world being manipulated by a writer who has to adhere to certain expectations based on the fact that it's a television series run in seasons with a specific episode count and specific demands placed on episodes airing during sweeps week... as well as the expectations of the audience given the demographic being targeted and the social norms du jour... but that sometimes very seriously clashes with the authenticity of the performances offered up by the actors involved, who create characters so believable in their individual tics and responses to each other that you start to expect them to behave like real human beings or to at least go off in a direction perhaps more in line with what we see on screen then what was being written on the page.

 

In fairness, the actors don't "create" the characters. The people who developed the show created the characters.  The actors play a very important role, and can add facets to the characters, but that's only done with the approval of a bunch of other people.  For example, Lauren Graham can say all she wants that she doesn't think Lorelai would act in a certain way, based on her view of the character, but ultimately it isn't her call.           

Edited November 27, 2015 by txhorns79

[Eyes High]

actors involved, who create characters so believable in their individual tics and responses to each other that you start to expect them to behave like real human beings or to at least go off in a direction perhaps more in line with what we see on screen then what was being written on the page.

 

I think part of the problem was that the show was so stylized, even cartoonish, in certain respects--the rapidfire dialogue style that no one on this planet has ever used in real life, the nonstop pop culture references, Rory's cartoon cutout boyfriends (Intellectual Bad Boy, Rich Womanizer Douchebag, etc.), the eccentric townsfolk with improbable names, people regularly doing horrible things with no serious consequences from the people they mistrestaed, etc.--while still attempting to strive for emotional realism. It seemed like ASP couldn't make up her mind about what kind of show she wanted it to be, and that tension, between powerful, dysfunctional relationships and real, sad, serious problems (Emily/Lorelai, Jess' issues, Rory struggling at school, etc.) and plastic, uber-twee, hyper-exaggerated bullshit, made for a very jarring inconsistency in tone.

 

To be fair to ASP, this seemed pretty common with WB/CW shows. "Tee hee, here's a cute little town festival where people do some ridiculous bullshit! Tee hee, here's a cute little first date where the lead female character adorably trips over something or says something adorably awkward! Okay, now give someone an emotional meltdown with a parental figure so that everyone knows that this is a Serious Show with Real Shit. Tee hee, now the lead character will have some adorable banter with the cute local bartender/business owner!" And so on. I won't name names, but, well...

 

Glad you didn't think I was too off the mark with my real world predictions for how things would have gone down, Eyes.

 

Yup. No one in real life would ever put up with Lorelai's bullshit, least of all someone like Luke. She would have been on the receiving end of so many "Shut up, Lorelai" comments that it would make your head spin.

 

 

 

And as for Luke, I never bought for a second that he only realized Lorelai was the one when he "saw her face".

Yes! That was stupid. I think it was a plot device so the writers could explain why now he was pursuing her, as opposed to the million other times when he appeared very attracted to her and romantically interested in her.

Edited November 27, 2015 by Eyes High

[dustylil]

as for Luke, I never bought for a second that he only realized Lorelei was the one when he "saw her face". He knew he loved her from the beginning. This was just a nice way of cluing casual viewers in to the fact that the big Luke/Lorelai romance was finally gearing up to happen. Oh, I'm even willing to accept that the character might be so dense that he knew he loved Lorelai but didn't KNOW he loved Lorelai yet officially. But given how Luke behaves throughout the rest of the series it's just impossible that it wouldn't have ever crossed his mind that he seriously loves Lorelai

 

I agree. That Rachel - who had known Luke for a long time - pointed out to him his infatuation with Lorelai back in the first season should have been an early clue for him. Or so I would have thought.

 

Of course there is a more significant plot point that relates to this issue.  Why on earth was he carrying that horoscope around for eight years? Was he such a staunch believer in astrology that the clipping was a talisman for him?  I wish we had had a scene  of Nicole going through his wallet to get money to pay a delivery guy and coming across the horoscope. But as it was Luke was able to skate through his lack of commitment to his marriage and be an innocent party in its demise.

[DisneyBoy]

The Luke/Nicole relationship had me at a total loss when it first played out and to this day I remain completely baffled as to what either of them saw in each other. I suppose Nicole found Luke attractive physically and a nice change of pace from her smarty pants lawyer friends, but he clearly didn't fit into her lifestyle...I assume because we didn't see enough of her lifestyle to even know... and it was unbelievably easy for him to walk away from that entire plot line to the point where I was irritated it happened at all. ASP had Nicole cheat on Luke and she wasn't even in the episode! That's pretty amazing. Although I did enjoy Luke beating up the car somewhat. I wonder how the actress felt about how her plot line was wrapped up...

I never believed the horoscope nonsense. Much like the self-help cassettes, it was one of Amy's inventions to permit new viewers to feel like they were discovering the show at the same time as the rest of us. Luke was totally not carrying some dumbass horoscope with him that entire time as he snogged Rachel and Nicole. I fully believe he would cook Lorelai a romantic dinner, but he is not the type of guy to romanticize a tiny scrap of paper some women he just met gave him. Also I don't understand how Lorelai could have spent the 60 seconds writing out that message while in the midst of caffeine withdrawal.

Far as I'm concerned, she probably wandered in asking for coffee on several different occasions and made a spectacle of herself in the process, prompting Luke to better inform himself about the 20 something woman with the young daughter who possibly needed some assistance just to keep the men with the butterfly nets at bay. To me, it's far more romantic that he would just gradually lend her a hand then for him to suddenly fixate on her after first meeting her. That kind of love at first sight nonsense is even too syrupy for this show.

The ironic thing is that he and Lor spend much of season one acting as though they barely know each other. If he was helping her with Rory as much as he claims in season five, they would have been much closer. In fact, they probably would have been an item already.

Is anybody else still longing for some closure on the Jason front? I never felt that he was her future husband or anything, but his life completely derailed right when she dumped him and I never felt that he deserved that. His father seemed about as affectionate and warm as Stroab (sp?) and clearly wasn't worried about how his son would support himself in the future. That's pretty damn dark. I feel as though once Jason got home to find his condo was in perfect shape he might have just locked the door behind him and never left again.

It's also irks me to some degree that Max was left pining for Lorelai but I can get over that because I still find Max a little creepy.

Edited November 28, 2015 by DisneyBoy

[FictionLover]

The Luke/Nicole thing bothered me too. Rigid, stubborn Luke has his hair cut all nice, going to plays in New York without ranting. It was just so out of character.

[dustylil]

going to plays in New York without ranting. It was just so out of character

 

He apparently went to New York and saw plays with Lorelai though. I had hoped this occasional  theatre attending was a throwback to the intelligent, widely read Luke we met in the first season.

If he was helping her with Rory as much as he claims in season five, they would have been much closer

 

To say nothing of Luke giving Rory presents - monogrammed or unicorn related - on gift-giving occasions for all those years - as we learned in Season 7. If he and Lorelai had not been close, that would have been more than a little weird.

I never felt that he was her future husband or anything, but his life completely derailed right when she dumped him and I never felt that he deserved that

 

Well Jason  was suing her father. That would have made for uncomfortable dinner table conversations at the senior Gilmore home. As if those meals weren't already sufficiently awkward.

 

[Eyes High]

He apparently went to New York and saw plays with Lorelai though. I had hoped this occasional  theatre attending was a throwback to the intelligent, widely read Luke we met in the first season.

 

I never understood the need to dumb down certain male characters in a misguided attempt to achieve some sort of contrast between the various love interests. There's no reason why two simultaneous potential romantic interests for Lorelai or Rory couldn't both be well-read, culturally savvy and intelligent without the universe collapsing in on itself, but you'd never know it from the writing. Ugh.

Edited November 28, 2015 by Eyes High

[FictionLover]

He apparently went to New York and saw plays with Lorelai though. I had hoped this occasional  theatre attending was a throwback to the intelligent, widely read Luke we met in the first season.

I don't remember them going together. I only remember her teasing him about him seeing "Hairspray" with Nicole.

[dustylil]

I don't remember them going together

 

In Season 5 during  the drunken limousine ride back from the magazine party, Lorelai mentioned having tickets for the two of them to see Spamalot.

[DisneyBoy]

Spamalot is so up Lorelai's alley - I can only imagine how much fun they must have had. Shame we never got to see Luke at a concert or play. Would be nice to see him laughing and having a grand time and forgetting himself.

 

I never understood the need to dumb down certain male characters in a misguided attempt to achieve some sort of contrast between the various love interests. There's no reason why two simultaneous potential romantic interests for Lorelai or Rory couldn't both be well-read, culturally savvy and intelligent without the universe collapsing in on itself, but you'd never know it from the writing. Ugh.

 

 

I guess you mean Dean VS Logan, or Dean VS Jess, or Jason VS Luke? Boy, okay I didn't realize it but it DID happen a lot, didn't it?

 

I think it sucks that Dean seemed to give up on his prospects in his final months on the show. Sure, he was working as a contractor. So what? Wasn't he also only about 19 (at the most!) in his last appearance? Come on man! Buck up! He could be saving that money for a college degree or a professional training course. I suspect Tom would have gladly taken him under his wing for a while, considering how much slack poor Tom ended up cutting TJ when he joined his crew (groan).

 

"This is all you are" is a pretty low thing to say to Luke, who proudly made a home for himself and honoured his family in doing so. If the show was trying to say Dean hated himself for not being as worldly as Rory, what it was really saying was that because of the money Lorelai, Richard and Emily threw at Rory, she was a better person than Dean. Which is obviously garbage, because the show's thesis statement is that in spite of all their money, Richard and Emily were suffocating parents to Lorelai, who was almost more successful than them in the relationships she was able to make by doing things her way in Star's Hollow. The show propped Lorelai up as good in spite of being "poor"...so why leave Dean thinking the exact opposite about himself, and because of Rory of all people, whose greatness by that point was really painfully unproven?

 

Well Jason  was suing her father. That would have made for uncomfortable dinner table conversations at the senior Gilmore home. As if those meals weren't already sufficiently awkward.

 

Yes...but Jason was treated the way so many other characters on shows are treated - expendable. It was like the show used him as a stall in season four to gear up for Lor/Luke. That really bothered me. Imagine if they had had Paris lose her cherry and Harvard and Rory's friendship all in one episode and then never had her reappear simply because Rory was now supposed to go off to college and Paris isn't useful any more. That's now cruel it seemed.

 

Jason never struck me as unbalanced in wanting to take down or challenge his father. His father seemed like a truly bizarre and awful guy - again, Strobe 2.0 (how the heck do you spell that name??!) - and Jason wanting to be a success at his expense really isn't different from Lorelai's "Just once, I want ME to get exactly what I want, and YOU to get exactly what you want...and HER to get NOTHING!" position regarding Emily.

 

I feel bad for the guy and don't think he was wrong to believe he and Lorelai could work things out. They clicked. Others might disagree, but I think there was something real there.

Edited November 29, 2015 by DisneyBoy

[Kohola3]

Strobe 2.0 (how the heck do you spell that name??!

 

 

According to IMDB, it is spelled Straub.

[dustylil]

His father seemed like a truly bizarre and awful guy

 

He may well have been. But since we only met him after his son had stabbed him in the back professionally, I was willing to cut him some slack.

Jason wanting to be a success at his expense really isn't different from Lorelai's "Just once, I want ME to get exactly what I want, and YOU to get exactly what you want...and HER to get NOTHING!" position regarding Emily

 

If Jason had simply screwed Floyd  over on a single business deal, then I might agree. But to deliberately join forces and set up shop with a business rival - after having been groomed by his father to take over the family firm - seemed puerile and excessive to me. What terrible thing had he done to Jason that would warrant such a personal and professional humiliation? Compared to some of the other parents on the show - Jimmy Mariano, Christopher Hayden and Liz Danes come to mind -  Floyd didn't seem so bad. At least Floyd attended Jason's end of summer camp concert :) I wonder if Richard did anything like that?

I guess you mean Dean VS Logan, or Dean VS Jess, or Jason VS Luke? Boy, okay I didn't realize it but it DID happen a lot, didn't it?

 

Not to forget Christopher VS Luke. In the first episode of Season 6 Luke made a witty and apropos comment about Dylan Thomas.

Then once Christopher was back on the scene and Lorelai and Luke were on Martha's Vineyard, Luke  turned into Ernest T. Bass.

[DisneyBoy]

I never much noticed a big intellectual gap between Luke and Christopher so I'm impressed that you picked up on that... Although, again, I wasn't paying much attention by the end of season six and I avoided almost all of season seven.

Maybe you are right about Jason and how excessively intense his betrayal was, but for me to see Jason as a truly evil manipulator would require me to also view him as a bit of a sociopath and therefore someone Lorelai couldn't easily date. I mean, he was a bit of a fun loving happy-go-lucky type of guy and pretty nice to Lorelai so for him to have been in such a good mood while also doing massive harm to his father out of a desire for revenge doesn't compute for me. And what's more, I think fans objected to Jason because they didn't find him sexy enough and felt he was a stall tactic to prevent Lorelai from getting together with Luke too quickly. If that is what people are really taking issue with, I don't think it's fair to say he deserved to lose his entire life in one fell swoop.

Did Jason deserve to lose out big by confronting his father? Maybe...but I still think that after a full season of seeing him and getting to know him he should have had a better resolution then showing up at the Inn only to be immediately written out the following season with one line of dialogue.

I will continue to wonder whether or not Jason was able to pull his life together. Hopefully the upcoming movies offer something by way of an explanation, even if it is just a single line of dialogue from Emily to Lorelai about random high society gossip.

I am watching Jess' first episode now and for the first time I am completely on his side during Lorelai's condescending monologue about why Jess should be grateful for the situation he's in. I give kudos once again to Lauren Graham for her delivery because it is so obviously tailored to justify Jess's sarcasm and resentment. It's fine for Lorelei to be disappointed in him stealing her beer, but you can also feel her almost goading him with syrupy language and insinuating he'll come to enjoy what he's been forced into. How annoying is that? It's strange how Jess is supposed to come off like the bad guy, but in truth it's really Lorelai who looks terrible here. I used to hate Luke's angry reaction to her into the scene immediately following but now I can completely understand why he's telling her to back off and tone it down. She really wasn't helping and I bet the dinner was her way of trying to force Jess into behaving politely after he blew her off at the diner.

Lord knows Lorelai would not be one to accept being forced to live in a situation without any say.

And does anybody else think that Jess intentionally dressed down for this dinner? He looked pretty decent on his first day but all of a sudden he's in some kind of sweatshirt hoodie thing that looks rather old... A nice touch now?

In Like Mother, Like Daughter Rory pokes fun at Lorelai modelling by saying "maybe you'll get to date Leonardo DiCaprio now!"

As true as it was in 200X as it is today...

Edited November 30, 2015 by DisneyBoy

[dustylil]

Jason as a truly evil manipulator

 

Personally, I never thought that badly of him. I just saw him as a sullen over-age adolescent - as opposed to him in actual fact being a well-to-do  adult male who had been given every advantage in life  yet thought he was hard done by.

 

DisneyBoy, You mentioned both Jess and Jason in your post. I have long been struck by the fact that it was in Season 4  that Jason railed against his parents  and was in direct business completion with Floyd. And then there was Jess who was by all accounts badly treated through much of his life by both Liz and Jimmy. Yet he had the grace and generosity to walk his mother down a well-trod aisle to matrimony.

 

That said, I don't give Jess a pass for his rudeness on his first visit to the Gilmores'. If any teenager had spoken to me like that in my own home, he would likely ended up with a bruised jaw. And I am a mild-mannered Canadian! Jess was quite lucky that Lorelai didn't repeat their conversation to Luke. I don't disagree that much of what she said was smarmy and sanctimonious, but that was no reason for crudity. A grunt or simply walking away would have sufficed. He was after all seventeen, not seven.

 

Much of the Pollyanna-ish speech Lorelai  gave to Jess that night - Luke was a great guy, Stars Hollow was a wonderful town, etc.  - could just as readily been said to him by Sookie, Babette or Miss Patty - although perhaps not Gypsy :). I wonder if coarseness to them would be similarly excusable?

[JayInChicago]

i confess i kind of like Jess being rude to Lorelai because it's one of the few times someone besides say, the elder Gilmores, just haul off and say something completely rude to Lorelai, Stars Hollow Town Queen. So I always get a tiny thrill from that scene, much like when Lindsay's mother tells Lorelai and Rory that they both can go to hell.

Edited November 30, 2015 by JayInChicago

[dustylil]

I too think Lindsay's mother was entirely entitled to tell Rory and Lorelai off. Can one imagine what might have been said if the shoe was on the other foot! Yikes!

But  I don't think Lorelai has been spared all that often from rudeness (Rory is another story). Off the top of my head, I recall occasions when Straub, Christopher, Trix, Headmaster Charleston, Jackson, Mrs. Kim, Luke, and the Stars Hollow Stepford wives were less than civil towards her.

[Taryn74]

I am watching Jess' first episode now and for the first time I am completely on his side during Lorelai's condescending monologue about why Jess should be grateful for the situation he's in. I give kudos once again to Lauren Graham for her delivery because it is so obviously tailored to justify Jess's sarcasm and resentment. It's fine for Lorelei to be disappointed in him stealing her beer, but you can also feel her almost goading him with syrupy language and insinuating he'll come to enjoy what he's been forced into. How annoying is that?

....

Lord knows Lorelai would not be one to accept being forced to live in a situation without any say.

 

 

I've long since felt this way, so it's always nice when someone else sees what I see, heh.

 

LORELAI: Ugh, Jess, let me give you a little advice. The whole 'my parents don't get me' thing, I've been there.

JESS: You have, huh?

LORELAI: Yes, I have. I've also done the 'chip on my shoulder' bit. Ooh, and the surly, sarcastic, 'the world can bite my ass' bit, and let me tell you, I mastered them all, in heels, yet.

 

I know in Lorelai's mind she was just being cutesy and probably genuinely (at that point) wanted to help, but she was talking to him like he was a twelve year old throwing a tantrum because his mom wouldn't let him stay up late.  I don't blame Jess for what he said to her, at all.  And yes, I get a bit of twisted amusement out of it.  *grin*

 

(And I don't blame Luke for what he said to her, either.  She was just as condescending to Luke as she was to Jess.)

[shron17]

Maybe you are right about Jason and how excessively intense his betrayal was, but for me to see Jason as a truly evil manipulator would require me to also view him as a bit of a sociopath and therefore someone Lorelai couldn't easily date. I mean, he was a bit of a fun loving happy-go-lucky type of guy and pretty nice to Lorelai so for him to have been in such a good mood while also doing massive harm to his father out of a desire for revenge doesn't compute for me. And what's more, I think fans objected to Jason because they didn't find him sexy enough and felt he was a stall tactic to prevent Lorelai from getting together with Luke too quickly. If that is what people are really taking issue with, I don't think it's fair to say he deserved to lose his entire life in one fell swoop.

 

Jason was the one who started the whole thing, so yes I absolutely think he got what he deserved.  The unbelievable part is that he thought Floyd would let him take his clients without retaliation, even if it was technically legal.

 

JASON: Because I want to do something on my own. I want to work someplace that hasn't known me since I was six. I'd like to get through an entire day without being called Digger. And I really, really want to piss off my dad.

RICHARD: You what?

JASON: Can you imagine his face? No, really, take a moment. Picture it. I walk into his office, he's sitting in his enormous red-leather chair, and I say, "Dad, I am leaving. I am taking all of my high-paying clients with me, and I am getting into business with Richard Gilmore, the man you forced out to make room for me." Can you see that face?

 

Of course Jason was nice to Lorelai and to Richard--he was wooing them both (woo=working over others).  This is why I don't blame Richard for doing what he did. Why should he end up as collateral damage because of Jason's revenge plan? When Floyd was getting ready to leave he made some comment to Richard about not getting to tell a story and maybe next time, obviously his signal to Richard that there was more to his plan.

 

I am watching Jess' first episode now and for the first time I am completely on his side during Lorelai's condescending monologue about why Jess should be grateful for the situation he's in.

 

I've always felt that way too.  Trust Lorelai to make it all about her--"and I did it in heels!"  And yes, Jess was crude in return, but IMO that's not a very shocking response when you give a condescending, self-serving speech to a teen-aged boy.  

 

(And I don't blame Luke for what he said to her, either.  She was just as condescending to Luke as she was to Jess.)

 

I agree with this too.  And Lorelai had been condescending to Luke since she found out Jess was coming--he probably just got tired of it.  What Luke said was closer to a blunt truth than a parenting insult, in my opinion.  I do find it amusing that Lorelai got over it so quickly despite how horrible some viewers think it was.

 

I too think Lindsay's mother was entirely entitled to tell Rory and Lorelai off. Can one imagine what might have been said if the shoe was on the other foot! Yikes!

 

I didn't mind that Lindsay's mom said something, but don't think she had to make it sound like the whole thing was Rory's evil plan.  If the shoe was on the other foot, I'd like to think Lorelai would lay more of the blame on the cheater than the woman he cheated with.

Edited November 30, 2015 by shron17

[dustylil]

I'd like to think Lorelai would lay more of the blame on the cheater than the woman he cheated with

 

That would be the logical and sensible thing to do. But  we know how much reasoning and common sense enter into  how Lorelai responds to injuries - both physical and emotional - done to Rory.

This is why I don't blame Richard for doing what he did. Why should he end up as collateral damage because of Jason's revenge plan? When Floyd was getting ready to leave he made some comment to Richard about not getting to tell a story and maybe next time, obviously his signal to Richard that there was more to his plan

 

Not that Richard was an innocent party in any of it. I can't see that Floyd would trust him all that much even once he was back in the firm's fold. I can't recall - was Richard still working for  Stiles when he began that ludicrous Yale lectureship in economics?

[Eyes High]

In his defence, Jess did get Lorelai to shut up and leave him alone, a Herculean feat. If he'd been less crude, she might have taken it as an invitation to bestow on him yet more condescending nonsense. It was indeed crude, but it was effective.

I also loved that Lorelai assumed that Jess was soooooo screwed up because he wasn't interested in her patronizing nonsense. Jess had many, many issues, but impatience with Lorelai's bullshit wasn't one of them.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Eyes High

[dustylil]

I thought it was classy of Lorelai not to object to Rory dating the little putz - given how much she disliked him throughout his time in Stars Hollow. I guess she figured the example she set when she dated a Hartford society bad boy would keep Rory on the straight and narrow ;)

[txhorns79]

I thought it was classy of Lorelai not to object to Rory dating the little putz - given how much she disliked him throughout his time in Stars Hollow.

 

I think this may confuse Lorelai's acceptance of the relationship with her not objecting to the relationship.  I'm pretty sure Lorelai did object.  I also think Rory would have to not have a head to know how her mother felt about Jess.   

[Aloeonatable]

I wish we had gotten a scene or two with a mature Jess and Lorelai. Maybe in the Netflix series.

[Eyes High]

I wish we had gotten a scene or two with a mature Jess and Lorelai. Maybe in the Netflix series.

I expect Lorelai's reaction would have been similar to Lorelai's reaction to Logan in his more mature incarnation: pleasantly surprised and appreciative, but wary.

[DisneyBoy]

I never really thought about it but Jess' life is like an alternate version of Rory's...if Lor had dated around too much and destabilized her daughter's life, Rory could have ended up just as angry and unfocused.

I wonder how much it burned Jess to see another kid from a single-parent household who lucked out in having a decent house to live in and steady friends and all of life's amenities, while he got nothing.

The show never explored that - heck, Paris compares her life with Rory's far more - but it's rather interesting when you think about it that Jess wouldn't even resent her a tiny bit, and actually be attracted to her.

Edited December 12, 2015 by DisneyBoy

[Aloeonatable]

I think Jess never bothered to compare. He accepted that this was his life. He may not have been happy but he was smart enough to realize that you have to accept certain things in life and that his life was just that, his life. Sure he was angry about being sent to Stars Hollow, but that was just because his mother gave him no choice. He wasn't old enough to live on his own. 

[Commando Cody]

Was there someone named Martha who was significant to this show? In the season that Sookies daughter was born, other than her being named Martha, the name "Martha" was used a lot. Somebody knew someone named Martha and they kept bringing up Martha Stewart. I thought maybe it was some sort of inside joke to use that name. 

[dustylil]

that was just because his mother gave him no choice. He wasn't old enough to live on his own

 

I had kind of assumed it was the authorities and his mother who had given him no choice.

Also, if Lorelai was able to live on her own at that age, why wasn't he? Again, perhaps the authorities were involved.

[takalotti]

I had kind of assumed it was the authorities and his mother who had given him no choice.

Also, if Lorelai was able to live on her own at that age, why wasn't he? Again, perhaps the authorities were involved.

I don't know if the show ever got into the exact specifics, but I think Lorelai was 18 when she left.

I think it's established that she's 16 when Rory is born, and that Rory is 1 when Lorelai takes off. So Lorelai could have been 18 by then. Or perhaps so close to 18 that she figured by the time her parents found her she would be 18 and unable to legally make her come back.

[dustylil]

Jess was seventeen when he came to Stars Hollow, the same age as Rory. I am not sure of his actual birthday as for some reason the town didn't  give him a  party to honour the occasion.

In any event unless there were legal restrictions keeping him in the town, there was no reason for him to stay once he turned eighteen. I am pretty sure Rory was still with Dean at that point. Surely anyone who can work a  regular job at Walmart while convincingly lying to all and sundry that he was attending school full-time can take care of himself. Probably as the son of Liz he had to learn to how to  cook and do laundry at an early age.

she figured by the time her parents found her she would be 18 and unable to legally make her come back

 

With respect, there is no evidence that she needed to be found. In all of the discussions  about Lorelai leaving with Rory, there was never any comments from Richard or Emily along the lines of them being sick with worry not knowing where the two of them were. It would appear that Lorelai  notified  them of her whereabouts pretty soon after arriving in Stars Hollow.

[takalotti]

No, you're right. No evidence. But enough hints that I don't think it's wrong to interpret things this way.

First Lorelai didn't sit down with her parents and explain she was moving out, that she needed to move out and raise Rory on her own. She snuck away. To me, that means she was sure there would be significant resistance, not just a reasonable amount of "What? No, let us help you. Please stay." And I don't think she was being dramatic for assuming so. E/R have a track record of being quite controlling.

Second, Emily told Mia that she would have wanted Lorelai to find someone to send her home. I guess that could have meant, "Yes, I knew all along she was living here, but I would have rather she had been at home with us. I wish you had tried to talk her into that instead of making it so easy for her to stay away." But Emily seemed a lot more upset than a mom who had known where her daughter was but just wanted her home. It really read to me like she hadn't known where Lorelai was at first and resented that Mia was part of that.

Third, Richard said Emily couldn't get out of bed for a month after Lorelai ran away. Yes, she could have just been distraught that her daughter rejected her by leaving, or that Lorelai was being so distant and limiting how often they could see her and Rory. Or this could have been Emily sick with worry because she didn't actually know where they were; that even though Lorelai was checking in, if anything happened Emily wouldn't have known where to find her.

Due to all this, I think Lorelai ran away, leaving a note so her parents would know she wasn't kidnapped or something. Then she called them to let her know she found a job and a place to live (and maybe called a few times before that to check in if it was taking a while to find a job) so that they wouldn't worry, but might not have told them specifics yet. Then sometime later (possibly waiting until she turned 18, and likely after her parents pointing out they deserved to know in case anything happened) she let them know where she was.

Edited December 13, 2015 by takalotti

[dustylil]

For me the fact that Emily took to her bed for a month indicated she knew where Lorelai was and that she wasn't coming back. Emily was not a passive person, simply waiting on news or for others to do their work.  She would take action. Look how she conducted herself in another family crisis, when Richard was ill in the first season.

If she didn't know where her daughter and granddaughter were, she would be hounding the local and state police, hiring private investigators, and grilling Lorelai's friends and the hapless Christopher as to her whereabouts. Only then - when she knew - would she be able to give into grief and anger.

My own guess is that Mia - herself a mother - would have insisted Lorelai contact her parents before hiring her to work at the Independence Inn. I similarly thought it was Mia who encouraged Lorelai to have Richard and Emily visit  at the Inn when Rory was tiny.

[txhorns79]

Second, Emily told Mia that she would have wanted Lorelai to find someone to send her home. I guess that could have meant, "Yes, I knew all along she was living here, but I would have rather she had been at home with us. I wish you had tried to talk her into that instead of making it so easy for her to stay away." But Emily seemed a lot more upset than a mom who had known where her daughter was but just wanted her home. It really read to me like she hadn't known where Lorelai was at first and resented that Mia was part of that.

 

I thought it meant she resented Mia's interference in what was essentially a family problem that Mia knew little to nothing about.  And really, I think Emily was right.  Lorelai wasn't running from an abusive household, or one where she had been told to leave.  She was just another in a long line of unhappy teenagers who didn't like their parents.   

Edited December 13, 2015 by txhorns79

[shron17]

Lorelai wasn't running from an abusive household, or one where she had been told to leave.

 

This is true.  All Mia knew was Lorelai was unhappy enough living with her parents to take her daughter and strike out on her own.  And she did try to keep her safe by offering her a job and providing shelter.  But Mia didn't keep her from her going back home--Richard and Emily did that with their behavior and inability to compromise.

[dustylil]

But Mia didn't keep her from her going back home--Richard and Emily did that with their behavior and inability to compromise

 

Exactly. And  that behaviour and inability to compromise went on until we met all four Gilmores almost fifteen years later. I certainly don't think Lorelai was hard done by by her parents. Anymore than I thought Lane was.  But I could completely understand her desire to get away from their way of life, head out on her own and raise her own daughter in a different manner.

Edited December 14, 2015 by dustylil

[txhorns79]

But Mia didn't keep her from her going back home--Richard and Emily did that with their behavior and inability to compromise.

 

Mia kind of kept Lorelai from going back home.  She offered her what was essentially a fantasy job for a high school dropout, single parent, with no real options. And yes, being a maid is hard work, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find many jobs today that offer free room and board, along with the fact that Mia apparently didn't have any issue with Lorelai bringing Rory on the job with her.    

 

And honestly, what horrible behavior did Emily and Richard exhibit towards Lorelai that made it so she had to leave?  Was it when they didn't force her into a marriage with Chris?  Was it when they gave Lorelai and Rory a home and support for the first year of Rory's life?  Was it that Emily made a comment about Lorelai having a big head when she was two that everyone treated as a joke thirty some years later?  I can understand Lorelai was unhappy and felt that she had to get away, but I don't think it was really ever justified by anything we saw or heard about Lorelai's teenage years. 

[takalotti]

Having grown up with a controlling, domineering, and insulting parent much like Emily, I fully understand her need to GTFO. Did it count as mental abuse for either me or Lorelai? I really don't know. All I know is that when you are constantly and harshly criticized for every imperfection, you realize nothing is ever going to be good enough so why bother.

[Smad]

And honestly, what horrible behavior did Emily and Richard exhibit towards Lorelai that made it so she had to leave?

No love. Isn't that bad enough in and of itself? Sure Emily and Richard provided for Lorelai in the most basic ways like food, roof, education and so forth. But beyond that was nothing. Emily at most has conditional love just like she has conditional everything. I will give you money for Rory, if you come to dinner. I will co-sign a loan but I will schedule weekly lunches at your inn. If something doesn't go Emily's way she will just freeze you out.

 

And I don't know about you but a child's first words being 'big head, want dolly'...geez. They are easy to understand as parents. Do what they tell you, follow their plan and never embarress them and they will shower you with praise (not to be confused with love). Follow your own path, ruin their plans for you and reject their high society and you are the scum of the family.

[dustylil]

I know Mia has often been viewed as Lorelai's guardian angel.  Certainly Mia gave her a job, saw that she had potential,  and encouraged her. And over time the two women became close. Now perhaps I missed something. But is there any evidence in the show - beyond allowing Lorelai to live in an out building with her small child - that Mia treated her in her early years at the Inn any differently than she might any other employee?

[Melancholy]

I know Mia has often been viewed as Lorelai's guardian angel.  Certainly Mia gave her a job, saw that she had potential,  and encouraged her. And over time the two women became close. Now perhaps I missed something. But is there any evidence in the show - beyond allowing Lorelai to live in an out building with her small child - that Mia treated her in her early years at the Inn any differently than she might any other employee?

 

Well, I always thought that Lorelai and Rory lived rent-free in the cottage and arguably ate some of the excess and left-overs at the inn on top of Lorelai collecting a salary. That's a huge favor that Mia facilitated a way to help take care of Lorelai's and Rory's costs of living. I don't have solid proof of this but Lorelai and Rory seemed to regard the cottage as a huge favor and Lorelai was able to save to buy a nice suburban house on what had to be minuscule pay for awhile. Plus, Rory and Lorelai already seem to have unlimited access to the Independence Inn kitchen and they acted like that was their due. I also got the impression that Mia pitched in with watching Rory when she was a baby or let Lorelai take Rory along when Lorelai worked her duties (indicated by the cut scenes in Those Are Strings Pinnochio) and no mention of a nanny or babysitter who helped full-time worker Lorelai before Rory reached school age- and was a million more times more flexible about childcare than almost any other service employer out to make a professional image (maids don't have their kids with them as they attend to guests.)

 

These are all huge favors where Mia took care of many of the elements that ultimately strangle single young mothers who'd love to have a Gilmore Girls story but remain impoverished or trapped in a life of crime and debasement. 

Edited December 14, 2015 by Melancholy

[Kohola3]

But is there any evidence in the show - beyond allowing Lorelai to live in an out building with her small child - that Mia treated her in her early years at the Inn any differently than she might any other employee?

 

I don't know what might be considered evidence but Lorelai did the wedding toast which seems to me to indicate a much deeper relationship than just an employee.  Plus she seemed to spend all of her time during the visit to the Independence Inn with the GGs.

[txhorns79]

I don't know what might be considered evidence but Lorelai did the wedding toast which seems to me to indicate a much deeper relationship than just an employee.  Plus she seemed to spend all of her time during the visit to the Independence Inn with the GGs.

 

She told Emily she had kept boxes of pictures of Lorelai and Rory's growing up at the Inn.  Presumably, she didn't do that for every employee (or maybe she did and ran the Independence as kind of a crazed surveillance state!).  I mean, I thought it was kind of obvious from the way Lorelai, Rory and Mia interacted that the relationship was much closer than boss/employee/employee's child, and that Mia had done something pretty extraordinary for Lorelai.  Heck, I think Mia even told Lorelai that she held back on considering offers on the Independence because she didn't want to do anything that would disrupt things for Lorelai.        

 

 

No love. Isn't that bad enough in and of itself? Sure Emily and Richard provided for Lorelai in the most basic ways like food, roof, education and so forth. But beyond that was nothing. Emily at most has conditional love just like she has conditional everything. I will give you money for Rory, if you come to dinner. I will co-sign a loan but I will schedule weekly lunches at your inn. If something doesn't go Emily's way she will just freeze you out.

 

I think Emily and Richard love Lorelai a lot.  If they didn't, they would have been done with her a long time before the series ever started.  I'm not saying Emily or Richard are great parents, or that they couldn't use a change in attitude at times, but I never once thought they didn't love Lorelai.   

Edited December 14, 2015 by txhorns79

[Kohola3]

I think Emily and Richard love Lorelai a lot.

 

I think they love her in their own way and as best they could.  But money and status were the driving forces behind all of their relationships (Emily MUST HAVE THE FIRST CUP OF TEA) and that translated with their treatment of Lorelai.  They couldn't win her back without totally changing their normal modus operandi with so they had to buy her back with granting the loans. I don't see that as loving her all that much. It was more like adding onto a list of their high status positions on committees and in their social circle.

 

Now Rory, I do feel that they did love her.  But she was the substitute daughter they never had in Lorelai.

[HeySandyStrange]

 

I think they love her in their own way and as best they could.  But money and status were the driving forces behind all of their relationships (Emily MUST HAVE THE FIRST CUP OF TEA) and that translated with their treatment of Lorelai.  They couldn't win her back without totally changing their normal modus operandi with so they had to buy her back with granting the loans. I don't see that as loving her all that much. It was more like adding onto a list of their high status positions on committees and in their social circle.

 

Now Rory, I do feel that they did love her.  But she was the substitute daughter they never had in Lorelai.

 

I agree with this. Emily and Richard, however well intentioned their actions might have been to them, it always seemed to come along with the sense of "keeping up appearances" and not "besmirching the Gilmore name". That is the main difference between their control freak parenting style and Mrs.Kim's, to me, because at the end of the day Mrs.Kim really thought her way would be the best for Lane's happiness and well-being. I'm not sure I can believe that Em&Rich really, truly cared how happy Lorelai was as long as she was doing everything so was "supposed" to do, including being stuck in an ill-advised shotgun teen marriage with Christopher.

 

As for their relationship with Rory, I think it all came down to her having a personality that melded better with theirs then Lorelai's did. Which is funny because I do think Lorelai got some of her parents (especially Em's) more difficult traits, but there was definitely an issue with rightness of fit in regards to them as a family unit. They probably would've done better with having a Rory like child, but then I would feel like if they had a more passive, people pleasing Rory they would've totally steamed rolled over her/him even worse then they did Lorelai.

Edited December 14, 2015 by HeySandyStrange

[ghoulina]

Having grown up with a controlling, domineering, and insulting parent much like Emily, I fully understand her need to GTFO. Did it count as mental abuse for either me or Lorelai? I really don't know. All I know is that when you are constantly and harshly criticized for every imperfection, you realize nothing is ever going to be good enough so why bother.

 

I agree with this. I do think Emily and Richard loved Lorelei in their own way. And, sure, they provided the very best as far as a home, schools, clothes, vacations, etc. But what about her emotional needs? I don't think Lorelei ever felt understood or supported in that home. And she was an only child. I can't even imagine how lonely that was. Frankly, I was surprised Lorelei didn't run away BEFORE telling them about the pregnancy. It was clear, to me, that her parents weren't people she felt she could rely on in times of trouble. 

[ghoulina]

As for their relationship with Rory, I think it all came down to her having a personality that melded better with theirs then Lorelai's did. Which is funny because I do think Lorelai got some of her parents (especially Em's) more difficult traits, but there was definitely an issue with rightness of fit in regards to them as a family unit. They probably would've done better with having a Rory like child, but then I would feel like if they had a more passive, people pleasing Rory they would've totally steamed rolled over her/him even worse then they did Lorelai.

 

I agree that Rory was more of the daughter they always wanted - easy going, eager to please, academically focused. But I do feel that while they were by no means perfect, Emily and Richard learned some lessons from what happened with Lorelei. We see instances of them genuinely trying to get to know who Rory was, even the non-Gilmoreish parts (Lorelei taking Emily shopping for Rory's birthday present). And we also saw them sometimes overlooking things they wouldn't have with Lorelei, making an effort to bite their tongue, so they didn't lose BOTH girls. 

 

So yes, I think Rory was kind of a do-over in many ways. 

[HeySandyStrange]

 

So yes, I think Rory was kind of a do-over in many ways.

 

Very true. It has been suggested before that Emily and Richard's accepting reaction to Lorelai's pregnancy and desire to keep the baby had something to do with the fact that they may have wanted more children but it never happened for them for whatever reason. Maybe that was what ultimately pushed Lorelai towards running away, her parents horning in on her mothering of Rory.  I do think they definitely tried harder to understand Rory and it was very sweet on some levels. But also they were starting with a nearly clean slate with Rory and got to play the part time doting grandparents rather then the full time parents.

[Guest]

I'm bringing this over from the Nitpicking thread.  

 

The thing that stuck out the most was why didn't Sookie get a tubal Ligation? After you have two kids the doctor will ask you if you want one. Instead she pulls a surprise vasectomy on her unsuspecting husband. There is a process. You don't just schedule one for somebody.

 

Tubals are a lot more invasive than vasectomies.  Unless she already needed a c-section for some other reason, a vasectomy is the more obvious choice if a couple is sure they are done having children. Note, I said "a couple." Not "the wife decides to remove bodily autonomy from her husband and in a bizarre turn of events, the doctors agree and don't do a consult."

[Melancholy]

I think Emily and Richard loved Rory and Lorelai. Frankly, I think Richard loved Lorelai but he really loved Rory a lot more and he could have lived very easily with hardly seeing Lorelai if that's the way she wanted it. He loved Lorelai in a distant, obligatory sort of way- hardened by the fact that he strictly observed mid-20th century roles for fathers to merely provide and discipline (even though Lorelai grew up in the '80s when fathers should have known better but Richard was old-fashioned) so he never bonded very much with Lorelai as a child and right when she was supposed to do him credit and interact with him as a successful, ascendant young lady, she got pregnant and ran away. With Emily, I think she loved them both equally and passionately but she just got angrier more easily with Lorelai because Lorelai didn't fit with her as much as Rory. 

 

However, I think as much as Mrs. Kim, the senior Gilmores were strict with Lorelai and demanded things done their way because they felt that THIS was how to become a successful, happy person. To be educated at the finest schools, enter a powerful, high-paying profession, marry another wealthy, educated man from a good family and to maintain the deportment and manners to ascend to even the most restrictive and elegant halls of power and influence. It's NOT completely off-base. As a secular person, it makes more intuitive sense to me than Mrs. Kim's fears of damnation if Lane didn't obey every religious rule. Frankly, I think Lorelai found a more kitchy, individualistic way of being successful- but ultimately as an adult, she also picked a career highly fussed with deportment and teas and parties and elegant appearances (Emily) and running a solid business geared to make profits instead of free spirit all over the place (Richard) and sought to raise a daughter who went to the finest Big Name blue-blood institutions to have a powerful, high-paying career.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Melancholy

[dustylil]

also got the impression that Mia pitched in with watching Rory when she was a baby or let Lorelai take Rory along when Lorelai worked her duties (indicated by the cut scenes in Those Are Strings Pinnochio) and no mention of a nanny or babysitter who helped full-time worker Lorelai before Rory reached school age- and was a million more times more flexible about childcare than almost any other service employer out to make a professional image (maids don't have their kids with them as they attend to guests

 

So nothing from the show itself then. Of course, Lorelai could similarly have used local babysitters or traded off daycare with other Inn staff - like millions of other low wage parents before and since.

 

I was never quite sure allowing a young woman and small child to  live in a one room outbuilding on the Inn's property - however delightfully furnished - was such a wonderful thing to do. Given the weather of Connecticut.  However, the show's creator was born and raised in southern California where there has been some  history of transforming  garages into homes so perhaps that particular notion - however fanciful - was understandable.

 

As to eating at the Inn, to my understanding (limited as it might be), access to leftover food is one the perks of working in such an establishment. So Lorelai and Rory having some grazing rights didn't surprise me. Although given how Sookie appeared to manage the kitchen of the Independence Inn, I did wonder if the place was profitable. But I digress..

 

I didn't doubt in the least the Mia and Lorelai were close, both personally and professionally, over many years. Mia was a friend, confidante and surrogate mother to Lorelai. And in Lorelai she got a very capable staffer and loyal friend. I just never saw or heard - in the series -  what fairy godmother like gifts Mia had seemingly bestowed on Lorelai.