S01.E09: The Trip

[SlackerInc]

6 hours ago, Court said:

He was upset with his bio-dad. He made that clear a few times with William. However, he's had a lifetime to sit with that and have a mess of emotions about it.

Just because he was adopted doesn't mean he can never be angry at his adoptive parents.

Yes, and I notice a lot of people seem to hold two (seemingly old-fashioned/traditional) beliefs about how Randall (and other adopted kids) should feel, which strike me as contradictory to each other, yet at the same time are both wrong in different ways.  One is that adopted children should see their adopted parents as simply their parents, period, with no qualification "adopted" prefixed.  The other is that adopted kids should be grateful to their adopted parents for taking them away from a bad situation, "giving them a better life".  In this narrative, the time and money spent on the adopted child is considered a combination of charity and volunteer work.  An adopted child must never act ungrateful or churlish, because they owe their adopted parents such a great debt. Both of these attitudes, I find repellent.

[SlackerInc]

42 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

I don't feel like adopted people owe their parents a great debt but I feel like they probably usually don't doubt they're loved, in the macro sense.  Those parents chose them, with no biological ties.  

That sounds nice in theory, but according to a federal government site dedicated to the issue:

Quote

A number of studies have found that, while adopted persons are similar to nonadopted persons in most ways, they often score lower on measures of self-esteem and selfconfidence (Borders, Penny, & Portnoy, 2000; Sharma, McGue, & Benson, 1996). This result may reflect the fact that some adopted persons may view themselves as different, out-of-place, unwelcome, or rejected.

Sounds just like Randall.

[photo fox]

6 hours ago, kili said:

I thought they were just taking the opportunity to tease him about his bear fears. Bears don't have keys and can't operate a lock pick, so one lock is normally deemed sufficient for them (plus, they are bears - they would just go through the windows. Etiquette means as much to them as it does to Olivia).

 

Well, yeah, I know one lock would keep out bears!  But Kevin was just a little kid, and I thought they meant they put the extra locks on as kind of a "placebo effect" to make him feel safe.

LOL at comparing Olivia to bears.  Bears are nicer.

[Tiger]

6 hours ago, Court said:

I thought 3 locks equaled 3 kids.

That was my understanding too, especially becsuse Randall said he was going to leave "his key" for Rebecca.  

Now logistically, if they needed all three times to open the door it doesnt work if Kate & Kevin had their keys out in LA.  Maybe each Pearson kid had a lock & key, but one key opened all three locks?

[hippielamb]

I think Randall's real issue is that Rebecca lied to him by keeping knowledge of his birth father secret. His anger feels overblown to me, BUT realizing that a parental figure has lied to you about something this important is a big deal. It cuts you deep. Watching this I think he is acting kind of immature, like a teenage kid would. This secret is something that's been hidden for years so I guess he gets a little leeway on how he's acting. 

4 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

I don't feel like adopted people owe their parents a great debt but I feel like they probably usually don't doubt they're loved, in the macro sense.  Those parents chose them, with no biological ties.  

It's the thought of not being wanted by his birth family. That the two people who were supposed to love and want him, didn't. It doesn't matter how great his adoptive parents were, he felt that he wasn't good enough. 

4 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

That sounds nice in theory, but according to a federal government site dedicated to the issue:

Sounds just like Randall.

Just Yes. I don't want to generalize because obviously not all adopted/fostered kids feel that way. But many do. 

[breezy424]

11 hours ago, kili said:

I thought they were just taking the opportunity to tease him about his bear fears. Bears don't have keys and can't operate a lock pick, so one lock is normally deemed sufficient for them (plus, they are bears - they would just go through the windows. Etiquette means as much to them as it does to Olivia).

They made such a big deal about the three locks, that I'm sure they will have some importance later.  How many locks did Rebecca have on her current house?  It may be that Rebecca has some OCD. Kate's labeling of everything in her fridge is a little OCD as well. Or it may be that something happened to Rebecca to shake her confidence. She was jumpy when Pilgrim Rick came to the door, but that hotel was something out of a Horror Movie. I think we all would be jumpy after meeting the original Pilgrim Rick and his odd gas station neighbor and then spending the night in the Creepy Cabin.

I still think part of Rebecca's fear was of William showing up and somehow taking Randall.  This could be part of having OCD. 

Yeah, Kate labeling the food was a bit OCD as well.

[breezy424]

6 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

Yes, and I notice a lot of people seem to hold two (seemingly old-fashioned/traditional) beliefs about how Randall (and other adopted kids) should feel, which strike me as contradictory to each other, yet at the same time are both wrong in different ways.  One is that adopted children should see their adopted parents as simply their parents, period, with no qualification "adopted" prefixed.  The other is that adopted kids should be grateful to their adopted parents for taking them away from a bad situation, "giving them a better life".  In this narrative, the time and money spent on the adopted child is considered a combination of charity and volunteer work.  An adopted child must never act ungrateful or churlish, because they owe their adopted parents such a great debt. Both of these attitudes, I find repellent.

I think that it is more that parents of adopted children who get upset when their child is referred to as 'adopted'.  They don't see it that way.  They don't want other people to 'see' it that way.  They are simply their children. 

'Adopted' children should be grateful to their adopted parents?  I've never heard anyone ever say that and I know a number of parents who have adopted children.   Yes, I've heard people say gratitude's regarding people who have adopted children but I've never heard anyone say that those children owe their parents gratitude.  Maybe comments like that come from ignorant people who probably make a lot of judgements about people in general.  Yep, it is repellent and it's sad.

[Dowel Jones]

On 12/1/2016 at 9:07 PM, bichonblitz said:

Don't Kevin and Olivia still have to do a play together? Awkward

And Sloane.  Really, really awkward.

[WhosThatGirl]

15 hours ago, kili said:

I thought they were just taking the opportunity to tease him about his bear fears. Bears don't have keys and can't operate a lock pick, so one lock is normally deemed sufficient for them (plus, they are bears - they would just go through the windows. Etiquette means as much to them as it does to Olivia).

They made such a big deal about the three locks, that I'm sure they will have some importance later.  How many locks did Rebecca have on her current house?  It may be that Rebecca has some OCD. Kate's labeling of everything in her fridge is a little OCD as well. Or it may be that something happened to Rebecca to shake her confidence. She was jumpy when Pilgrim Rick came to the door, but that hotel was something out of a Horror Movie. I think we all would be jumpy after meeting the original Pilgrim Rick and his odd gas station neighbor and then spending the night in the Creepy Cabin.

I do wonder if we are going to learn something about Rebecca, Jack said to Randall, "your mom was dealing with some things too" sure, she was dealing with The Secret, and then Jack mentioned how he wasn't the perfect husband even if things looked perfect in their marriage (which I hope we get more insight on later, we do seem to be getting a Jack is perfect except for episode 2 with his short lived drinking problem, I think this means more is coming), but maybe Rebecca has other things going on as well? We know she doesn't get along well with her parents, whether that means anything.  I just think all these characters have different things going on, which is great for me as a viewer because I love layers on characters. Rebecca isn't a perfect parent, I agree, she handled the whole William Randall situation horribly wrong, but I don't hate her like about 90% of this forum seems to. I understand why she was skittish. 

The characters I still don't like: Miguel. I will never like him. I just find his whole story messed up and have since episode 2, it's just all sketchy. And Toby. Ugh. Oliva, I'm unsure about. Look, it's such a trope for a bitchy girl to meet a nice guy who makes her change her ways and they fall in love, so I'm hoping there is something more there? I mean, another trope is to have her have some truma-ruma thing about why she is the way she is but I'm hoping there is more. I'm already sick of the cat and mouse game she and Kevin have going, I had hoped once William wise owled her during Thanksgiving that she was over it but for some reason the writers forgot that? I don't know. I hope there's more there. This show loves a twist, so I'm hoping. I'm not ready to throw on the towel on the character yet, they could redeem her if they do it well enough. 

[JudyObscure]

I like to see children growing up with a healthy lack of gratitude to their patents, even taking them and their love for granted.  It's part of a secure happy childhood to have the feeling that you're loved unconditionally and that your parents enjoy taking care of you.  Nobody wants a mother that harps on about, "I was in labor for 48 hours with you" or a father who gripes about the cost of your doctor bills.  But when we grow-up and have kids of our own it usually wakes us up to a realization of some of the sacrifice and effort our parents made for us and if that produces a feeling of gratitude, then that's a good thing isn't it?  Oprah thinks it is, anyway. 

If anyone said they thought Randall should be grateful, I think it was probably because he's a father now and should be mature enough to look back and appreciate the time, effort and devotion Rebecca gave him, in many different ways, and maybe weigh some of that against her new found faults.

Personally, I would love to see Rebecca ignore Randall for a while, nurse Kate through her surgery and recovery, and go to Kevin's play.

[ShadowFacts]

1 hour ago, JudyObscure said:

Personally, I would love to see Rebecca ignore Randall for a while, nurse Kate through her surgery and recovery, and go to Kevin's play.

That makes me think, once the storm of the secret being out passes, what's going to top that?  Surgery and recovery usually aren't so interesting to watch, Kevin's play could also get draggy, I mean we can't see people going to it more than once.  William's death will be dramatic, but what comes next, I wonder.

Edited December 3, 2016 by ShadowFacts

[Tiger]

I still think the best route would be to have Kate, with professional medical guidance, decide that surgery isnt for her but she still wants to lose weight, and then shift that to the background with work and relationship stories being at her forefront.  

The weight loss can still be touched upon a line or two every few episodes, but it can be her only and/or driving story.

[SlackerInc]

7 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

I like to see children growing up with a healthy lack of gratitude to their patents, even taking them and their love for granted.  It's part of a secure happy childhood to have the feeling that you're loved unconditionally and that your parents enjoy taking care of you.  Nobody wants a mother that harps on about, "I was in labor for 48 hours with you" or a father who gripes about the cost of your doctor bills.  But when we grow-up and have kids of our own it usually wakes us up to a realization of some of the sacrifice and effort our parents made for us and if that produces a feeling of gratitude, then that's a good thing isn't it?  Oprah thinks it is, anyway. 

This is very nicely stated indeed.  But it is a million miles away from an implication from others to quit your bitching and be grateful they didn't leave you in an orphanage.

[saber5055]

Quote: "Toby's ex was attractive, so I don't think Toby is one of those men." The key is, Toby's EX was attractive, and they split. If he takes up with a fat woman that no other man wants, then Kate will never leave him. Even though he did, and he even turned her need to find herself around to "But what about ME?"

Nuts, I meant to write "even though SHE did." I hate that I cannot edit posts.

I wish Rebecca would have shown Randall how she could roll her tongue so she must be his bio mom.

I thought the three locks were for the three kids, each would have a key. I was wrong, of course. Seeing Rebecca's door-locking panic during Randall's "trip," made me wonder if Jack had been murdered, maybe killed at that cabin which is why she is selling it. Although I also wondered why that place was so s*** and span clean, with a fully stocked fridge (and electricity!) when no one had been there for years according to the kids.

[Court]

56 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

I don't understand the '3 locks for 3 kids' thing.  Is no one allowed to use the place unless they can all prove they're there at once or something?  

Don't you have a little pencil icon on the bottom of your posts, to edit? 

I didn't mean it in an actual literal sense. I meant it in  Rebecca had 3 locks to protect her 3 kids from whatever. Like she was worried about all of her children. Does that make sense?

Did the cabin actually have 3 locks? I thought that was just in Randall's vision.

[ShadowFacts]

6 minutes ago, Court said:

Did the cabin actually have 3 locks? I thought that was just in Randall's vision.

I think there were three locks in reality.  That's a real pain in the butt to install what looked like deadbolts (if you're anything like me).  There had to be some good reason other than trying to make a kid not fear bears.  If it's meant to prevent break-ins, there are windows, so, I don't know. 

[sasha206]

On 11/30/2016 at 1:20 PM, Jillybean said:

This is my favorite show, and Sterling K. Brown is my favorite actor in it, but I HATED Randall's mushroom trip.  I couldn't think of any circumstances under which Randall would drink a smoothie that some stranger brought to their cabin. And the fact that Kate & Kevin just left him to his own devices outside seemed wholly implausible.  There were so many ways they could have gone with this storyline, and choosing a hallucinatory drug trip seems like such tripe.  The scenes of Randall hallucinating his family in another time rang false to me. I hope they bounce back next week, because this episode was a "miss" in my book.  /UO

YES.

I hated this plot device.  In fact, the whole episode irritated me.  

[kaygeeret]

It killed me to read that "there is a not small group" of anti adoption people.

I suppose I'm part of that "not small group".  I don't mind the modern trend toward more open adoption, but in general I'd like to see society be more supportive of young or poor women being able to raise their own kids.  If you have a lot of money and want to use that affluence to obtain a baby (because let's face it: the majority of Americans don't have enough money to qualify as adoptive parents*), I'm really not that sympathetic to you.  And I certainly don't like the idea of pretending there is no difference between being an adoptive vs. biological parent.

*Jack and Rebecca didn't seem to have a ton of money at the beginning themselves, but I guess that's another thing to handwave away

 

I am responding to Slackerinc and am sorry for not knowing how to do that clearly.

To be clear, my relatives and all the adoptions were in the 1950's and early 60's.  None of my relatives were wealthy.  Nor was my family.

Granted we were not living in an oligarchy in the 50's the way we are now.  For instance, a clerk at a grocery store earned a wage that could support a family.  Not so much now.  I paid my own way thru college working at a grocery store, a hotel as a receptionist and other random jobs.  Not possible today.

Money was very different when I was young and the wealthy were not so HUGELY wealthy and isolated from the communities in which they worked and lived.

Thus adoptions were not the prerogative of the wealthy - as I believe that is what Slackerinc means.

My bottom line is that I would love for policies that gave all children the best possible chance - I really do not see that idea anywhere on the horizon.  If adoption fulfills that role, then go for it.  If one or two children benefit, I have to be behind it - I saw 17 children benefit, how can I condem it?

[kaygeeret]

Oh my gosh, kids will feel how they feel whether they are adopted or not.

We all know someone who feels that their family (biological) 'betrayed' them.  It could even be true.

When everyone does their best and the kids know exactly what is what ...adopted? YES..what does that mean?   It means....whatever you say it means, but with luck THE TRUTH!

No good ever comes from LYING to kids about themselves......

How about this....no good ever comes from lying to anyone about themselves.

Just sayin'

AND......my family is what I say it is!  Warts and all.  (my family's warts are really cute tho')

[Cardie]

1 hour ago, kaygeeret said:

Thus adoptions were not the prerogative of the wealthy

Although it's kind of a taboo subject, Roe vs. Wade meant that there was another option if a young woman felt she could not raise a child. Thus, those women who did give birth and then put the children up for adoption were (excuse the crass terminology) in a much tighter market where supply of the subset of healthy, white infants was drastically reduced, So they didn't have to go through the state but could benefit from the competitive private adoption market. This would not have impacted the Randall adoption, of course, but I think that's another reason we may now view adoptions as the prerogative of the wealthy. 

[ThoughtAFool]

Trying to put my finger on what's so annoying about Olivia.  I think she (joined in this episode by Shroom Dude) is treating Kevin's family like a reality show for their own private consumption.  It goes hand in hand with crashing a stranger's wake to use others' real emotions as your own entertainment/method-acting fodder.  "I'm too above-it-all to actually feel anything, so let's study others to imitate."

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 12/1/2016 at 3:24 AM, Marley said:

I also don't like how they are kind of making William into this saint. I like the character but it was pretty lame of him to not cop to his original problems that first caused Rebecca to not trust him. 

William told Randall upon their initial meeting that he had been a drug addict who couldn't even remember abandoning Randall at the fire station.  I don't think that Randall has any doubt about the fact that WIlliam had been ill-equipped to take care of him 36 years ago.  I don't even think that Randall thinks that he's not better off for having been raised by Rebecca and Jack.  He's extremely upset because he would have wanted to know William while being raised by Rebecca and Jack, and to have had him as part of his adult life.

[ShadowFacts]

5 minutes ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

William told Randall upon their initial meeting that he had been a drug addict who couldn't even remember abandoning Randall at the fire station.  I don't think that Randall has any doubt about the fact that WIlliam had been ill-equipped to take care of him 36 years ago.  I don't even think that Randall thinks that he's not better off for having been raised by Rebecca and Jack.  He's extremely upset because he would have wanted to know William while being raised by Rebecca and Jack, and to have had him as part of his adult life.

William has been honest as far as we've been told.  And he abided by Rebecca's wishes for many, many years.  Did not intrude.  Did not seek Randall out.  Told Beth he has lived most of his life alone, and is drinking in this experience of living with them and is sad it is going to end with his death.  I think he paid a big price for the drug addiction he long ago conquered.  I don't begrudge him anything and I think he did the best he was able to do in his circumstances.  And the proof is in the pudding, Randall turned out very well, Jack and Rebecca had their third child, and Randall gets some time with his father who he now knows loves him and always did. 

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 11/30/2016 at 10:14 PM, hippielamb said:

I don't think they um, portrayed being on mushrooms accurately but whatever.

 

On 11/30/2016 at 10:34 PM, SlackerInc said:

Psychedelic mushrooms don't really work that way, but w/e.

 

On 12/1/2016 at 2:24 AM, Marley said:

Just gonna be honest too I've been crazy high from some shrooms before but I've never seen anybody like that. I know it's a tv show lol but still.

Some details:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/health/hallucinogenic-mushrooms-psilocybin-cancer-anxiety-depression.html?_r=0

On 12/1/2016 at 9:28 AM, Clanstarling said:

I think Rebecca's actions, while Randall was a child, were understandable for the most part. Except for not telling Jack. Hiding it from her husband, I think, shows that she knew she was in the wrong.

She knew that if she told Jack that she knew William's identity after Jack mentioned hiring a PI, and after finding out for herself that William was clean, that Jack would have insisted on Randall meeting William.  She did not want that to happen. (I think that Jack would have gotten past her not telling him about her initial meeting with William after Randall's birth, when William was still in the throes of drug addiction.)

On 12/1/2016 at 7:14 AM, Tiger said:

I think right before the kids were born Jack & Rebecca had just moved into the house we see them in in 1981, 1988, and 1995.

Yes, they still had all the packed boxes and knew they were having triplets, so had just moved into a 3 bedroom house.  When they first came back from the hospital, Rebecca did send Jack to the kids' room for burping cloths, but I think it likely that the babies were all kept in the room closest to the master bedroom when they were babies, and then split between Kate's room and the boys' room when they were older and out of cribs.

I noticed that when they were older, Randall and Kevin both had full-sized beds in their shared room, which means it was one giant room.  Perhaps if all 3 kids had been boys, there would have been 3 twin beds in that room and Rebecca and Jack would have had a guest room. Of course, given the way that Kevin and Randall clashed, one of them would have probably moved into the extra room, most likely Randall, the private school student with all the extra homework, and there would have been more cries of favoritism.

On 12/1/2016 at 9:36 AM, saber5055 said:

Hoping beyond hope that this is the last I see of Toby. I suspect he won't be all that about Kate if she loses weight anyway. There are men like that, they only want women no other men will look at.

I don't think she would become even "average" weight for a very long time.  More likely, her extreme eating restrictions post-surgery would make a relationship difficult.

I happen to like Toby, and think he really does have feelings for Kate.  He's a big guy, but not so big that he couldn't find women a lot less heavy than Kate who would date him, in my opinion.

[Clanstarling]

18 minutes ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

She knew that if she told Jack that she knew William's identity after Jack mentioned hiring a PI, and after finding out for herself that William was clean, that Jack would have insisted on Randall meeting William.  She did not want that to happen. (I think that Jack would have gotten past her not telling him about her initial meeting with William after Randall's birth, when William was still in the throes of drug addiction.)

I agree that she didn't want to tell Jack at this juncture because he would do exactly that. But, if he had known what Rebecca knew from the get-go, he might not have been inclined to do that. Or, at least, he would have had enough information to know it was a dicey proposition given what they knew at that point. Even if he did want to pursue it, he would have been there to support her through her understandable fears. IMO, not telling Jack from the first was her biggest mistake. The decision about whether to find William, and/or tell Randall (and what age to do it) could have been a shared burden - as well as shared responsibility/blame if Randall was never told.

[theatremouse]

On 11/29/2016 at 9:01 PM, Ms Blue Jay said:

It's funny how Rebecca calls William a drug addict - and it's technically true, like being an alcoholic? - but the truth is that he was clean for at least 5 years?  Was he just permanently clean after that?  I wonder.  Was William a drug addict when Randall was born and then a few years later he permanently cleaned up?

We don't know yet how long he was clean after that, but since Randall was 9 at the time, it suggests he was not clean, at least not consistently, during the four years prior. So I can see how on the one hand, it was terrifying for her seeing him clean because she worried he would try to take him back, but also worrying it might not be permanent at all since he spent years not clean and years clean and you can never really tell if it's "permanent".

On 11/29/2016 at 9:11 PM, Crs97 said:

I didn't love William's explanation that he was just abiding by her wishes - no explanation to Randall that for the first four years (at least since I still don't believe that he has been completely clean ever since) of Randall's life he was still using drugs and wouldn't have been able to be a parent.

I interpreted the "abiding her wishes" comment to be specifically about when they first met, William didn't out Rebecca. It had nothing to do with actions or lack thereof over the course of Randall's life. That conversation was about why William did not admit to having met her when Randall first found him, or in the past several weeks.

On 11/30/2016 at 7:12 AM, candall said:

I was SURE the point of that scene was going to be that, when Jack finally failed from exhaustion, the other men would crowd in and help lighten the load--maybe taking Randall onto their own backs for awhile.  Wasn't that the theme when the sensei(?) introduced Randall and pulled in the fathers--from now on you'll turn to each other when you stumble.  It takes a village!

I thought that after Jack did go on (after having been told he could stop) eventually he did stop and then they went around and the other fathers did more pushups with Randall on their backs too. I thought there was a wider shot after Jack initially did the extra pushups that show him on another dude, which I took to mean the sensei was indeed having all the fathers do pushups with him too.

 

On 11/30/2016 at 3:01 PM, photo fox said:

I don't know how I feel about Rebecca "hiding the truth" from Randall, but she was under no moral obligation to get William to sign over his legal rights, just because she figured out who he was.  He terminated those rights when he left the baby at the fire station.

Emphasis mine. This is not exactly true. Many states have safe haven laws that do indeed A)include drop-offs at fire stations or police stations, not just hospitals, and B) some subset of those states' safe haven laws do include a provision that the act of doing so is equivalent to terminating one's rights and no additional paperwork is necessary. I don't know PA's laws from the 80s, but at least right now, their safe haven laws do not appear to cover fire stations, only hospitals. And their statute does not explicitly address termination, be it immediate if the child is left at a safe haven, or after some period of time after doing so, or if they actually have to sign something vs it being done automatically. Many state's safe haven laws do explicitly address this, but PA's doesn't which to me suggests the timing happens more based on general abandonment rules, but I don't know what they are or how long it takes to involuntarily terminate rights in PA.

Given the amount of time that had passed, surely his rights were terminated involuntarily and if he had no paper trail of his own showing his trying to track down the baby or any kind of attempt to regain the child before that amount of time passed (nor reporting him missing etc) he'd have very little to stand on in a trial, were he to try to sue when Randall was 9, or in some way claim his rights should not have been terminated. So while Rebecca's fears were emotionally fair ("oh no he seems to want this kid back, panic" "he didn't terminate his rights himself before the adoption"), if she had say, talked to a lawyer, maybe not even admitting to knowing the dude, just going in with hypotheticals, presenting as much info as she could, then ask a lawyer would there be danger of losing Randall if they were to hire a PI to find him and let them meet, I think the chances were probably low based on what we know from the show so far. That doesn't mean the chances of it going to court were low, which could've been devastating and horrible for all involved. And that sort of thing did get a lot of publicity in the 80s, even though it was not super common.

I'm not commenting on whether her actions were good, bad, reasonable or unreasonable, just that the legals bits are complicated. And we also have the monkeywrench that regardless of what the actual laws in PA were either at the time or now, we don't know for sure if the show is plotting anything based on that. They might be assuming their own version of how that works that might match a real different state (then or now) it might not at all. Or it might be some horrible grey area. I'm just saying, if Rebecca were not well versed in this area of law, which, of course she wasn't, it's not totally illogical that she'd be super scared.

I also didn't interpret the scene where she went back to meet William as her ever saying she intended to let them meet. She just told him that Randall had been asking about him a lot. I didn't think her follow up was going to be "so can we arrange that" at all. William just got super excited and jumped forward and then she really freaked out. I don't know what she was going to suggest, but it might have been much more of a methodical, like, would you be ok with that, here's a zillion ground rules, when he hits a certain age, something something who knows what. She was like a horse that spooked but I do think he was assuming what she was about to say was much more than what she was actually about to say.

Edited December 4, 2016 by theatremouse

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 12/2/2016 at 6:14 PM, Winston9-DT3 said:

On 12/2/2016 at 4:23 PM, possibilities said:

suddenly he learned that he was wanted both by his parents and by his biodad. He just got this news in the past 24 hours or so

I don't understand this.  How did Randall not know the Pearsons loved him?  He was there while Jack did the pushups and everything else they did for him all those years.  Rebecca's biggest flaw as a parent seems to be making Randall feel more loved than her other kids.  

I don't feel like adopted people owe their parents a great debt but I feel like they probably usually don't doubt they're loved, in the macro sense.  Those parents chose them, with no biological ties.  

(Bolding above is mine.) He knew he was wanted by his parents; now he knows that William cared about him, too.  Wait until he finds the "Poems for my Son," when cleaning out William's apartment following his death.  He will be overcome with regret for what might have been.

Edited December 4, 2016 by ItCouldBeWorse

[hippielamb]

3 hours ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

 

 

Some details:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/health/hallucinogenic-mushrooms-psilocybin-cancer-anxiety-depression.html?_r=0

That's an interesting article. I had never thought of using hallucinogenics to treat depression associated with illness but it makes sense. Most of the folks I know that do it are into expanding their minds. I do think it's a little funny how tv/films portray these trips. No rainbows or prisms of light, it is usually having the character associate with a dead relative. A good storytelling tool but, um, not exactly accurate. Never once in almost 30 years of doing this have I had a conversation with a deceased relative. 

[GodsBeloved]

On 12/3/2016 at 7:37 AM, JudyObscure said:

I like to see children growing up with a healthy lack of gratitude to their patents, even taking them and their love for granted.  It's part of a secure happy childhood to have the feeling that you're loved unconditionally and that your parents enjoy taking care of you.  Nobody wants a mother that harps on about, "I was in labor for 48 hours with you" or a father who gripes about the cost of your doctor bills.  But when we grow-up and have kids of our own it usually wakes us up to a realization of some of the sacrifice and effort our parents made for us and if that produces a feeling of gratitude, then that's a good thing isn't it?  Oprah thinks it is, anyway. 

If anyone said they thought Randall should be grateful, I think it was probably because he's a father now and should be mature enough to look back and appreciate the time, effort and devotion Rebecca gave him, in many different ways, and maybe weigh some of that against her new found faults.

Personally, I would love to see Rebecca ignore Randall for a while, nurse Kate through her surgery and recovery, and go to Kevin's play.

I'm in love with this post.

[Dreamboat Annie]

Are we supposed to hate Olivia?  If so, then the actress is doing a marvelous job, because every friend I have talked to who watches this show hates her yet wants to know more about her.  Trouble is, I find her so off-putting that I don't care what makes her tick or why she is like she is.  I just want her gone. 

[jhlipton]

Get ready for a dust or allergy attack.  I looked up the real Dudley Randall and this is one of his poems:
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems-and-poets/poems/detail/46562

On 11/30/2016 at 0:01 AM, Ms Blue Jay said:

It's funny how Rebecca calls William a drug addict - and it's technically true, like being an alcoholic? - but the truth is that he was clean for at least 5 years?  Was he just permanently clean after that?  I wonder.  Was William a drug addict when Randall was born and then a few years later he permanently cleaned up?

AA, NA and the rest of the _As remind their members that "once an addict, always an addict".  That's why they continue to celebrate "20 years clean" or "50 years clean".

 

On 11/30/2016 at 7:47 AM, Crs97 said:

UO here, but I didn't love the Dojo scene.  Maybe because I just kept thinking what if Jack hadn't been physically strong enough to do the pushups.  It was moving for what it was, but I just felt like it was written to be a moving tear-jerker scene rather than organic to the story.

In the real dojo this is based one, one child was brought by his grandfather. Other family members and the rest of the dojo did the push-ups.

 

On 11/30/2016 at 0:44 PM, DoubleUTeeEff said:

Doesn't every surgery carry the risk of death? 

You don't understand how "magic surgery" works with "morbidly" obese people.  Amy other surgery is just too risky and had far too many possible complications, but weight-loss surgery -- cutting someone open and messing up their internal organs -- is a walk in the park!

On 12/1/2016 at 0:13 PM, SlackerInc said:

Beth's bad side has been shown.  As in, pretty much every scene she appears in, LOL.  That kind of intense, Type A personality (similar to Kristina in Parenthood) just doesn't mesh with mine.  But also similar to Kristina, I think she's a realistic character who is not actually malicious, and the actor is doing a good job portraying her.

The very first scene Beth is in, Randall says "You don't censor anything." And she says, "No, I don't!"

On 12/2/2016 at 5:03 PM, JudyObscure said:

I agree, but Randall will never get the answers to those questions if he continues to forbid his mother to speak.  That's the only thing I really fault him for. 

He just wasn't ready to hear her right then.  He'll hear her by Christmas (a month away) if not before.

On "sainting" people after death, one thing my mom insisted on at my father's memorial was that whoever spoke couldn't paint him as a saint.  My dad was a great guy and my mom loved him so much (we celebrate his birthday by talking about some of the tings he'd do), but she was not going to have his real life tarnished with fake adoration.

On 12/3/2016 at 7:11 PM, Winston9-DT3 said:

I don't understand the '3 locks for 3 kids' thing.  Is no one allowed to use the place unless they can all prove they're there at once or something? 

Def-Cabin 5

[ItCouldBeWorse]

I wonder if Randall will buy the cabin from his mom. He can probably afford it and his family might enjoy it. He was certainly bagging up a lot of possessions there. How much stuff could he have had?

[biakbiak]

1 hour ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

I wonder if Randall will buy the cabin from his mom. He can probably afford it and his family might enjoy it. He was certainly bagging up a lot of possessions there. How much stuff could he have had?

It's like a three room cabin most likely in PA, I imagine even Kate might be able to scrape together the funds. I don't think Rebecca is selling it because of the money but simply because no one was using it. 

[ShadowFacts]

Thanks for sharing the 'Ballad of Birmingham', jhlipton. 

[saber5055]

"Don't you have a little pencil icon on the bottom of your posts, to edit? " No. This site changed in April and I lost the ability to format text, quote anyone, edit, insert links or graphics. Everything is gone. The only thing I have is this box to type in, and it's one inch wide x 1/4 inch deep. There is a "submit reply" button to click to post what I type. And that's it. I can't even "like" posts any more. Oh ... and even if I put spacing between paragraphs, everything posts as one big block of text. Like here.

[chocolatine]

1 hour ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

It sounds like you're on a phone?  Maybe try another browser?  I use the site fine on my iPhone on Chrome, or on my laptop or Surface.  Sorry it's not working for you.  

Sounds like a browser that doesn't support JavaScript. @saber5055, you may be able to upgrade to a newer browser (Google Chrome is a great one, and it's free) if your operating system allows it.

[romantic idiot]

16 hours ago, jhlipton said:

Def-Cabin 5

Isn't that the lowest one? :-)

Edited December 5, 2016 by romantic idiot

[Jax7917]

I think its a natural thing in life to always pay attention to the bad things someone says or does to you rather than look at the good things. Even though the adopted child knows that they were adopted because someone chose them, they wouldn't have had to be chosen if their biological parents didn't give them up to begin with. So I think that fact sticks with them more.

[queenanne]

On 11/30/2016 at 10:58 AM, candall said:

I know Olivia's very unpopular, but Kate was way out of line with her "I know women like you."  What makes you think you know Olivia so well, Kate?  Because you've spent four hours with her?  Maybe you've read some gossip mag articles?  Because of her looks?  Yikes, is it possible to say anything more superficially judgmental?

I think we saw pretty clearly from her dropping all the celebrity names when making calls for Jamie Gertz' charitable thing, Kate does know a little about interacting with celebrities, thus she may indeed have known shallow, etc. actors, models etc., in the same vein as Olivia.  Is Olivia some rare special snowflake?  Maybe.  Maybe she'll turn out to be formerly overweight, or have some kind of hidden depths.

On 11/30/2016 at 11:16 AM, DearEvette said:

Olivia was on my shit list last week.  But I couldn't get over just how cavalier and thoughtless she is about everything and everyone.  She has no polite social skills.  If it wasn't being clearly shown that she does have feelings, then I'd think they were trying to hint that she was a sociopath. 

I loved how Sloane was "I hate her but I have to be nice to her" which also tells me that not only is Olivia rude and thoughtless but she is a bully.  I also hope they aren't going for a lame love triangle.  And I sincerely hope we are not going to get some lame redemption arc for her. 

Let's not forget, they were overtly telling us a couple weeks ago, that Olivia is the perfect, nay ideal, person to teach Kevin about getting in touch with his feelings.  She's in fact such a hotshot actress, even though she acts as if she has some kind of personality disorder with connection troubles of her own, that she is sought after and was seen as the intimidating A-list talent in this pairing by the director.  The "I can't even dream of dreaming of being as good as Olivia!" to Kevin.  I refuse to believe this.  I refuse to believe you'd be at the top of your acting game with Olivia's weird hybrid of autism/Aspberger's (note not a medical professional here, so be gentle in your corrections) behaviors.  I think Olivia'd be worse off than Kevin, but she's clearly meant to be some almost-Michelle-Williams-like figure of skill (minus I guess the Oscar) here, as per how Kevin and the director treated her in Kevin's audition. 

On 11/30/2016 at 8:24 PM, HeyThere83 said:

Snickered to myself earlier today thinking this could also be titled: "This Is What Rebecca Did To Us." 

Sigh....I'm sure there will be some shocking "twsit" coming later with Jack, but there is a strategic reason for waiting and giving him all these types of scenes now. Same for Miguel. It's a cop-out to me. Is it just easier to point all fingers at Rebecca? Or is it to have fewer characters that are "dirtied up"? Since nobody can be *too* unpleasant. Except for in the case of certain plot devices aka supporting characters Olivia, Miguel. I mean, why not give at least one issue that Jack was responsible for....and then give the other 50 to Rebecca? Or one to William? And 49 to Rebecca? Or make Jack alive? Or William not dying? That to me would not be taking the easy way out. 

Yeah, I'm not liking the pile-on in the face of the fact that the rest of the writing's so good.  I keep thinking "You're better than this!  This can't be an accident and had also better not be laid at the feet of Reasons.  If you're not doing this on purpose with a payoff, I'm out."

[jhlipton]

13 hours ago, ShadowFacts said:

Thanks for sharing the 'Ballad of Birmingham', jhlipton. 

No problem>  i was only able to find a half-dozen or so of Randall's poems, but most of them are pretty cool, and would sound great set to jazz.

6 hours ago, romantic idiot said:

Isn't that the lowest one? :-)

Hmmmm... when I was a kid, many eons ago, I always thought 5 was the highest.

[SlackerInc]

On 12/4/2016 at 10:42 AM, ItCouldBeWorse said:

 

 

Some details:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/health/hallucinogenic-mushrooms-psilocybin-cancer-anxiety-depression.html?_r=0

 

Interesting!  Thanks.  I know either LSD or psilocybin (they are molecularly very similar, and have similar effects) was found years ago to be an effective treatment for alcoholism as well.

[candall]

8 hours ago, queenanne said:

On ‎11‎/‎30‎/‎2016 at 9:58 AM, candall said:

I know Olivia's very unpopular, but Kate was way out of line with her "I know women like you."  What makes you think you know Olivia so well, Kate?  Because you've spent four hours with her?  Maybe you've read some gossip mag articles?  Because of her looks?  Yikes, is it possible to say anything more superficially judgmental?

I think we saw pretty clearly from her dropping all the celebrity names when making calls for Jamie Gertz' charitable thing, Kate does know a little about interacting with celebrities, thus she may indeed have known shallow, etc. actors, models etc., in the same vein as Olivia.  Is Olivia some rare special snowflake?  Maybe.  Maybe she'll turn out to be formerly overweight, or have some kind of hidden depths.

But this is my point exactly.  Kate doesn't know Olivia--has barely spent any time with her at all.  But she nevertheless feels qualified to assign Olivia to some "vein"--whether that category is Kevin's usual kind of girlfriend, or slender pretty girls, or Celebrities I Have Met.

Are you saying that "actors, models, etc" are "shallow, etc" and therefore Olivia must be, too--unless she's a rare special snowflake?

 

At the point in the story when Kate tells Olivia "I know women like you," all she really knows about Olivia is that she likes pie, whether her table manners are decent, that Kevin has a crush on her and that she isn't sensitive enough to realize people might be sentimental about their childhood board games.

Mainly, I think Kate's just pissy that Kevin ruined the fun sibling weekend that Kate had envisioned and that causes her to unload on Olivia.

 

ETA:  Oh right, I forgot Kate only arrived for Thanksgiving as dinner ground to a halt because Randall blew up at Rebecca.  Kate had no intel on O's fondness for pie or table manners.

Edited December 6, 2016 by candall

[OtterMommy]

2 minutes ago, candall said:

Mainly, I think Kate's just pissy that Kevin ruined the fun sibling weekend that Kate had envisioned and that causes her to unload on Olivia.

I do think that is part of it.  Kate seemed to have it in her mind that she and Kevin and Randall, who was busy being bitter and making lists, could have some bonding time and then Olivia and her crew show up.  

But it wasn't just that.  Olivia WAS rude from the moment she walked in the door (and she had been rude for the entire time we--the audience--saw her on Thanksgiving).  I don't think Kate was out of line to be upset about that.

Also, Kevin became the male equivalent of the giggling lovestruck girl whenever Olivia was around and Kate was very obviously frustrated with that (and her frustration was aimed towards both Kevin and Olivia).  Basically, her brother opted to "play a role," and not a very becoming one.

Was Kate out of line with her speech?  Yeah, probably...but so was Olivia, for reasons I've talked about upthread.  But, in the end, Olivia had 3 valid strikes against her in Kate's book by the time we even got to the speech so, well, I'm still on Kate's side here.

[possibilities]

We also don't know what Kevin has told Kate about Olivia already. Maybe he told her about the memorial crashing and "I will never fuck you again, I only did it to teach you how to feel sad". Plus, Kevin told her and Randall that he didn't invite Olivia's ex and Sloane, and he was visibly disappointed that she brought them. I also don't think Olivia was being subtle with her "how quaint" BS the second she walked in the door, with bringing an uninvited entourage including an EX, and really within about 2 seconds of any scene with Olivia in it, I want someone to read her royal rudeness the riot act, so I'm with Kate on this one.

[RachelKM]

9 hours ago, OtterMommy said:

But it wasn't just that.  Olivia WAS rude from the moment she walked in the door (and she had been rude for the entire time we--the audience--saw her on Thanksgiving).  I don't think Kate was out of line to be upset about that.

Maybe, if she saw it. Kate arrived at the end of the meal and while Olivia was having a reasonably good time.  It's possible that Olivia proceeded to be an a-hole for some time after Kate arrived,  but the writing didn't bother to tell us she did or that Kate had any knowledge of such.  But even imganing we are to assume that Kate saw some other rude remarks in the remaining evening from Olivia to go along with the condescending, but hardly more than annoying, comments at the cabin, rudeness wasn't really what Kate lit into her about.   She told Olivia that she  knew who she was and then spouted a bunch of assumptions about Olivia that had little to do with rudeness and lots to do with assuming Olivia uses people.

Even if, as speculated above, Kevin told her about the memorial service and the "never happening again", it is hardly enough for Kate to suggest 1) she knows Olivia and/or 2) make assumptions about what Olivia thinks about Kevin or how she dates.  It's one thing to take issue with someone's behavior, but that's not enough knowledge to assume someone's entire personality from one anecdote and a combined 2-4 hours of intermittent observance. 

Whether or not she is right is irrelevant to the analysis because, to me, the writing didn't support Kate having sufficient information for the analysis. And honestly, I didn't feel that the writing wanted me to think Kate was being insightful.  The fact that they had Olivia throw Kate's own slightly condescending characterization about Kevin back at her indicated to me that the writing wanted us to read it as Kate was out of line.

10 hours ago, candall said:

Mainly, I think Kate's just pissy that Kevin ruined the fun sibling weekend that Kate had envisioned and that causes her to unload on Olivia.

I agree.  I think when Olivia was admittedly a bit condescending with her "quaint" remarks, Kate was already piqued over the intrusion on her planned sibling trip and took extra offense at everything because she was primed to be pissed.  

Olivia was a guest invited by Kevin. To the extent that I saw Kate's ire at least partly (I think mostly) originating in the presence of guests at all, she was unloading on the wrong person.

Edited December 6, 2016 by RachelKM

[Lady Calypso]

I think Kate was mostly out of line with the way she spoke to Olivia, but she wasn't wrong in telling her off generally. Olivia did bring guests without asking. She was being deliberately rude. I think Kate could have also noticed how hurt Kevin was by Olivia's actions. We don't know what she knows of Olivia through Kevin, but we do know that Kate has experienced at least a sliver of Olivia's rudeness. So calling her out wasn't the issue; it was mostly the assumptions that Kate threw at her. She doesn't know Olivia that well. She can't say that she knows women like Olivia when they've only known each other officially in two interactions. 

I agree that Kate unloaded on Olivia but I also think that she might not have done that if Olivia was nicer. Or maybe she would have, but we don't exactly know. Kate needed to unload on Kevin first, not Olivia. However, Olivia still needed to be called out and that's why it made sense when Kevin did it later. He's the one that invited her, but he did it because he wanted to get closer to her and probably start a relationship with her. His whole "that kiss was real" spiel definitely makes it seem like Olivia will definitely come back and redeem herself for Kevin. Part of me is hoping that she doesn't, because it might be more realistic if she stayed the same. 

[Clanstarling]

I think part of Kate's reaction to Olivia is an innate protectiveness she has toward her Kevin. Yes, she might be pissed at Kevin - but I think she's reacting to this woman who's nothing but rude and condescending, and who is casually hurting Kevin by being all handsy with the 'ex'.

As children, she had a special place as the girl, in particular Daddy's girl; Randall has a special place as Mommy's boy and by virtue of being the adopted one, and Kevin is just there, often overlooked. We haven't seen this at play in the childhood scenes yet, but suspect that she is the one who is particularly sensitive to Kevin's needs, both as a twin and being a nurturer in general, and struggles and becomes his protector.

I'm not saying she was right to call Olivia out (and kind of incorrect in her assessment), but that it comes from more than just being annoyed at Kevin.

Edited December 6, 2016 by Clanstarling

[ShadowFacts]

I wasn't bothered by the "I've known women like you" statement overly much--I took it to possibly mean entitled, give-them-an-inch-they'll-take-a-mile people since Olivia brought two of her entourage.  Though Kate might have had more than just that in mind. 

[RachelKM]

1 hour ago, Clanstarling said:

I think part of Kate's reaction to Olivia is an innate protectiveness she has toward her Kevin. Yes, she might be pissed at Kevin - but I think she's reacting to this woman who's nothing but rude and condescending, and who is casually hurting Kevin by being all handsy with the 'ex'.

I agree that there was definitely protectiveness of Kevin.  I don't think Olivia had been handsy with the ex at that point, but bringing him at all was sort of shitty on top of not asking if she could bring additional people. But my point was that Kate getting so pissy about it at that point was a lot more because she was primed to be pissed because she was annoyed Kevin invited her at all.

As I mentioned in my initial post, I also took issue with Kate's manner of protectiveness of Kevin.

2 minutes ago, ShadowFacts said:

I wasn't bothered by the "I've known women like you" statement overly much--I took it to possibly mean entitled, give-them-an-inch-they'll-take-a-mile people since Olivia brought two of her entourage.  Though Kate might have had more than just that in mind. 

Well, Kate made some pretty specific assumptions about Olivia including how she saw Kevin as simple and malleable (which ironically came off sounding like how Kate might assess Kevin). 

[romantic idiot]

Kate said "earnest and sweet". Neither of that means 'uncomplicated / simple / malleable' last time I checked. Olivia suggested they thought he was forced to act 'uncomplicated. Kate did NOT say simple, nor malleable. 

Also, when she said I know women like you - she explained what she meant immediately after -  pretentious pretty girls who use guys like Kevin to feel..you know..interesting because they are dating someone uncomplicated. In that sense she was being rhetorical / using those words as a filler. And if we see what we saw Kate experience before the confrontation, Olivia's sample dialogue was: "This place is so quaint", "Oh my god, this looks absurd", "If only Gertrude Stein had one of these in her Paris salon." The friend that Olivia brought was wearing suspenders over a thermal, whose sample dialogue was "Rad cabin by the way. Norman Rockwell would have really lost his mind."

These are not unpretentious people. And it is natural for pretentious people to feel themselves superior by being around 'simple' people. I don't think Kate is off. Also, Olivia is pretty and she was obviously using Kevin & her ex...