Turns Out Richard Was The Glue That Held Gilmore Girls Together

[Primetimer]

Jordan isn't a crackpot; he just thinks that, without the patriarch, the reboot and its characters are the worse for wear.

View the full article

[Melancholy]

Very good piece. I also think Rory writing a tell-all book about their family would devastate Richard. He would react as Lorelai initially did but far angrier and less tolerant/forgiving.  Meanwhile I think Emily would be ok with it and mainly judge the book based on how she and Richard came off. Richard and Lorelai share this aversion to public naval gazing and public personal lives as a career choice that DAR members Rory and Emily don't. It is a little generational. Rory is part of the selfie generation so she didn't even consider asking Lorelai for permission or the idea as a controversy. But it's even more rooted in personality differences even from family members where she shares commonalities. 

Meanwhile, I think Richard evolved and became modern enough that he'd disagree with Emily's disparaging comments about Lorelai and Luke living together unmarried (Lorelai's ultimate gift ship has been to Fiji like 10 times by now) and he'd ultimately be happy about Lorelai using the diner franchise money to expand her own business, regardless of how Richard initially earmarked the money. 

Edited December 9, 2016 by Melancholy

[beadgirl]

Very good piece. I also think Rory writing a tell-all book about their family would devastate Richard. He would react as Lorelai initially did but far angrier and less tolerant/forgiving.  Meanwhile I think Emily would be ok with it and mainly judge the book based on how she and Richard came off. Richard and Lorelai share this aversion to public naval gazing and public personal lives as a career choice that DAR members Rory and Emily don't. It is a little generational. Rory is part of the selfie generation so she didn't even consider asking Lorelai for permission or the idea as a controversy. But it's even more rooted in personality differences even from family members where she shares commonalities. 

Meanwhile, I think Richard evolved and became modern enough that he'd disagree with Emily's disparaging comments about Lorelai and Luke living together unmarried (Lorelai's ultimate gift ship has been to Fiji like 10 times by now) and he'd ultimately be happy about Lorelai using the diner franchise money to expand her own business, regardless of how Richard initially earmarked the money. 

I think you are right about all of this. I think he would have been disappointed in Rory, as much as he loved her. And while he wanted Luke to be more successful, I think he would have been proud of Lorelai's success.

I adored his comment in the finale about how the party was a testament to Lorelai and all she had accomplished.

[limecoke]

Good read and, for the most part, I agree. I do believe that the story Lorelei told Emily was true, mainly because Richard was alone when he saw young Lorelei at the mall. Had Emily been with him it never would have happened, but because Richard was alone and unhindered by his wife's disapproval, his inner dad was free to do what his heart told him to do. Beautiful scene.

[junienmomo]

Well, I'm coming down on perhaps the unpopular opinion side of this article to say it is perhaps the dumbest analysis of Gilmore Girls ever. 

Rory not only has to face what she mistakenly thinks is career failure, but also that "if we can argue that Rory's a failure -- and make no mistake, she is -- we can also argue that Richard died of a broken heart specifically because of that failure." 

He had no respect for the way Lorelai did business. He treated his partner who drove the social side of his business as a child involved with trivial matters like tea and social standing, then treated Lorelai's job as completely unimportant because she was answering his phones and ordering his lunch. 

He was mainly non-present as a father, the last speech was nothing like he'd ever said to Lorelai before and had no canon basis. He plotted with Emily and on his own against Lorelai's boyfriend. 

He didn't hold anything together. Lorelai and Rory held themselves together. As a recurring character, he served more as a 'career' for Emily than even a father or grandfather.

[Melancholy]

5 minutes ago, limecoke said:

Good read and, for the most part, I agree. I do believe that the story Lorelei told Emily was true, mainly because Richard was alone when he saw young Lorelei at the mall. Had Emily been with him it never would have happened, but because Richard was alone and unhindered by his wife's disapproval, his inner dad was free to do what his heart told him to do. Beautiful scene.

I agree. There's an element to Richard/Emily where they policed each other to adhere to Old Money rules and protocols. It's part of what made them a formidable high society team. However it's also why some of the most genuine, relaxed, sweet, fun moments with The Girls usually features them one on one with a grandparent. 

[Amy88888]

Well, I'm coming down on perhaps the unpopular opinion side of this article to say it is perhaps the dumbest analysis of Gilmore Girls ever. 

Rory not only has to face what she mistakenly thinks is career failure, but also that "if we can argue that Rory's a failure -- and make no mistake, she is -- we can also argue that Richard died of a broken heart specifically because of that failure." 

He had no respect for the way Lorelai did business. He treated his partner who drove the social side of his business as a child involved with trivial matters like tea and social standing, then treated Lorelai's job as completely unimportant because she was answering his phones and ordering his lunch. 

He was mainly non-present as a father, the last speech was nothing like he'd ever said to Lorelai before and had no canon basis. He plotted with Emily and on his own against Lorelai's boyfriend. 

He didn't hold anything together. Lorelai and Rory held themselves together. As a recurring character, he served more as a 'career' for Emily than even a father or grandfather.

:)

[Amy88888]

Well, I'm coming down on perhaps the unpopular opinion side of this article to say it is perhaps the dumbest analysis of Gilmore Girls ever. 

Rory not only has to face what she mistakenly thinks is career failure, but also that "if we can argue that Rory's a failure -- and make no mistake, she is -- we can also argue that Richard died of a broken heart specifically because of that failure." 

He had no respect for the way Lorelai did business. He treated his partner who drove the social side of his business as a child involved with trivial matters like tea and social standing, then treated Lorelai's job as completely unimportant because she was answering his phones and ordering his lunch. 

He was mainly non-present as a father, the last speech was nothing like he'd ever said to Lorelai before and had no canon basis. He plotted with Emily and on his own against Lorelai's boyfriend. 

He didn't hold anything together. Lorelai and Rory held themselves together. As a recurring character, he served more as a 'career' for Emily than even a father or grandfather.

Thank you! I share your unpopular opinion. And dying of a broken heart due to Rory's failure? Please. He adored her no matter what she did, and besides, she published articles in reputable publications.

I seem to recall he had heart issues all the way back in S1, so more likely those killed him, not a broken heart.

[Bumblebee Tights]

6 hours ago, junienmomo said:

Well, I'm coming down on perhaps the unpopular opinion side of this article to say it is perhaps the dumbest analysis of Gilmore Girls ever. 

Rory not only has to face what she mistakenly thinks is career failure, but also that "if we can argue that Rory's a failure -- and make no mistake, she is -- we can also argue that Richard died of a broken heart specifically because of that failure." 

 

Yeah, I've mostly been staying out of these discussions, both because I feel like everyone is entitled to their opinions and because all the negativity is a little disheartening for me personally, since I enjoyed the revival so much, but I have to say I'm with you on this, and the quoted sentence above is just not working for me. At all.

While I actually view Richard in a fairly positive light, especially in regards to his relationship with Rory, I just can't with this article because it's starting from a place where Rory is irrefutably a failure. For me, struggle is not failure...even if it's self inflicted and not merely circumstantial. A reconsideration of priorities and goals is not failure. Even if we're saying that Rory 'failed' at being a print journalist, which is seriously debatable, that doesn't make HER a failure as an individual. Most of all, I'm just like..Rory's life is not OVER yet. We don't know where she's headed.. maybe she'll become a successful memoir writer and decide to continue writing novels, maybe she'll decide to get her Master's and teach at Chilton, maybe she'll keep the baby, maybe she won't...maybe she was just in a rut and she'll end up continuing to pursue journalism after all. We don't know, and I think that was kind of the point, as Amy has given a few interviews that say as much. What we were seeing was just a snapshot of Rory's life.. honestly, we don't even know what her circumstances were in the last ten years in terms of failure and success.

I also don't know if we're supposed to just take for granted that she's been coasting on the trust fund... I guess I understand where this notion is coming from, but I'm not thinking it was the intention. I think Rory's money situation in the revival is more of a case of ASP not being very realistic in her depictions of money, just like every other episode of GG ever. There's also mention of her very dumpy sounding Brooklyn apartment that preceded this period.

Many, many people (if not most people) have a dream of becoming something as teenagers, and even go to college and get a degree in that something, only to eventually wind up doing something else. Are they all failures? I'm not sure there can be a verdict on a person's life as a whole at 32. 

As for Richard, well, the notion that he died of a broken heart is not something I even really want to comment on. I will say that, while I'm not sure how he would have felt about the book, I don't think you can really compare Richard's feelings in S6 after he had spoken to Mitchum to what he would hypothetically be feeling about Rory here. In that situation, Richard was realizing that Lorelai had been right about the way the Huntzburgers had treated Rory, and he was recognizing that she was in pain and hiding from her feelings, and that he had provided an outlet for her to do so. He wanted a certain life for her, yes, but he also truly loved her and wanted her to have what he knew she really wanted. 

Edited December 10, 2016 by Bumblebee Tights

[limecoke]

I still believe Rory was a failure because she wanted to fail.  For years, she worked hard to live up to everyone's lofty expections but she really wanted a life in Stars Hollow, she just didn't know it yet.  Why else would she self-sabotage every job interview?  Because she hated all of them.   With Richard's death, Emily's new life and Lorelei's happiness, she could finally have the life she really wanted.  

Edited December 10, 2016 by limecoke

[ShadowFacts]

On 12/9/2016 at 0:40 PM, junienmomo said:

He didn't hold anything together. Lorelai and Rory held themselves together. As a recurring character, he served more as a 'career' for Emily than even a father or grandfather.

I think it was his business success and money that held things somewhat together -- not young Lorelei and not until Chilton money was needed.  But I also think he was a proud, loving grandfather who would have looked favorably on Rory in journalism or newspaper editing or teaching or whatever she chose, even if there were stumbles along the way.  No way do I think he would view her as a failure. 

[stillshimpy]

Thank you! I share your unpopular opinion. And dying of a broken heart due to Rory's failure? Please. He adored her no matter what she did, and besides, she published articles in reputable publications.

Also, Richard wanted great things for Rory and believed that she would get them.  A piece in the New Yorker isn't a bad feather in her cap.  Presumably, she's had a lot of other pieces.  I think what is more likely to be true is that Richard would have ably and nimbly bent his idea of what success looked like to have it fit Rory, rather than the other way around.   Emily was not an emotionally demonstrative person.  Lorelai was so loved starved that she -- and this was the saddest part about that story Lorelai told Emily, it hinged on Lorelai believing for that one night that someone loved her, someone found her special, someone thought she was lovable just as she was, only to have that notion ground to dust -- apparently looked towards a series of guys to try and find some form of love and approval but she knew her father didn't approve of her.   

Rory was the first person in his adult life who was openly affectionate and often trusting that he had her best interests at heart.   Richard valued success as a mark of love, in part because that's how he showed his own love for other people,  Rory was often emotionally vulnerable with him.  

Just saying, he always had a hugely inflated idea of how great Rory was.  I remember the whole, "She was reciting the periodic table at four...." stuff which was not even close to true and even if it was, Richard wasn't aware of it because they only saw each other at Christmas and Easter....and it came as a surprise to Richard in the first season that Rory was ambitious and widely read.  Just saying, he had a tendency to see her accomplishments in a "an objects are bigger than they appear" manner.  

[blueray]

I think that Richard while still would love Rory would be disappointed with her life choices. I feel like if she was more responsible and less "spoiled" she would have found a job doing something, even if it wasn't a dream job. As someone who is in their twenties, I know how hard it is to find your dream job or to even live up to what you were expecting. But shit happens and get a job that will help deal with it. I feel like Richard would have been appalled with Rory's affair and more disappointed that she gave up on herself. Not being prepared for any interview, is not the Rory from the TV show (well the earlier seasons). She would have had researched and gone overboard with any questions they may ask. She took herself seriously and didn't not let others tell her otherwise.

Edited December 13, 2016 by blueray

[dmc]

I think Rory is failing because she has too high of expectations. Rory is used to being a big deal and when she immediately wasn't at journalism she kind of just stopped trying. You can see it at that interview where she barely comes prepared because she thinks they are beneath her so they she just hand her the opportunity. She just needs to get a job at a magazine or paper even a crappy one and work her way to something better. People don't start off at the New Yorker. Most people who write have to slum it, that's how blogs became so big.

As for Richard, as great as he was...saying that a man was the glue that held together three strong women is kind of sexist. I don't think Richard held anything together. I do think he would be disappointed in Rory but because she has forgotten the fundamentals that Richard taught her which is just keep working hard. Richard was with the same company forever. Even Lorelai toiled forever at that inn until she owned her one. Rory has had a lot of instant success and it spoiled her.

[Deputy Deputy CoS]

On 12/9/2016 at 8:12 PM, limecoke said:

I still believe Rory was a failure because she wanted to fail.  For years, she worked hard to live up to everyone's lofty expections but she really wanted a life in Stars Hollow, she just didn't know it yet.  Why else would she self-sabotage every job interview?  Because she hated all of them.   With Richard's death, Emily's new life and Lorelei's happiness, she could finally have the life she really wanted.  

Who works for something all their lives then want to fail at it?

She killed Richard with her failure? 

I am so sorry I clicked on this thread. 

[moonb]

I'm not sure Richard would have considered Rory a failure as such, but he might have been disappointed that she couldn't make herself stand out in a tough field like journalism. I doubt he'd mind that she turned to a different field of writing, though (and he certainly won't be the villain of Rory's memoir).  After all he didn't have her set on a specific career track so much as an Ivy League education, professional success and traveling before she settled down somewhere.  It's not surprising that Rory wouldn't have "made it" by 32 - I'm remembering Richard and Trix's argument in season 4 over a failed investment he made in his late 20s. Lorelai was a successful general manager of an inn and a homeowner by 32, but her real business success  didn't come along until years later with the Dragonfly. *And* both Richard and Lorelai were in much more stable careers than journalism. 

I do think that it's appropriate and a little touching that Lorelai would expand her 'empire' with Richard's money, both of them being business oriented.  I doubt Luke's doing too shabbily either, given that he was able to loan Lorelai money for the Dragonfly years earlier, lives in her house, already owns two buildings, and his diner is always busy.

Edited December 16, 2016 by moonb

[Melancholy]

18 minutes ago, moonb said:

I do think that it's appropriate and a little touching that Lorelai would expand her 'empire' with Richard's money, both of them being business oriented.  I doubt Luke's doing too shabbily either, given that he was able to loan Lorelai money for the Dragonfly years earlier, lives in her house, already owns two buildings, and his diner is always busy.

Maybe unrelated but it ticked me off a lot that there was no indication that assets were divided fairly after Lorelai left Luke in S6. I don't expect a show like GG to belabor financial points but it was inflammatory that Lorelai and Christopher were set up for their married life in a home Luke seemed to provide most of the money and energy and labor to renovate without any mention of giving him compensation. And that Lorelai left to go bang Christopher at the end of Partings without giving back the engagement ring, the universal human gesture of a woman calling off an engagement. Add to that how we never learned if Lorelai paid off the Dragonfly investment since the business lines were blurred in how they started their relationship upon the opening of the Inn.

A fair resolution didn't *have* to be L/L ending up together. I'm not saying that. But at least, it's a resolution that nips cynicism that Lorelai ripped Luke off in the bud to see him living at the Crap Shack and with their assets ultimately comingled by the end of the Revival. 

Edited December 14, 2016 by Melancholy

[Eeksquire]

Quote

And that Lorelai left to go bang Christopher at the end of Partings without giving back the engagement ring, the universal human gesture of a woman calling off an engagement.

Plus, in Connecticut, it's the law*! Ask me how I know. ;)

*Unless you got engaged on a birthday, Christmas, Valentine's Day or other gift-giving holiday.  Let that be a warning to all of you.  (Though since Luke bought the ring from Kirk's widow collection, no doubt it'd just go back into the rotation!)

[hippielamb]

I thought it was weird that they re-used the engagement ring. The ring, the dress, all of it should have been pitched. Seems like bad karma to me.