S01.E10: Night

[Umbelina]

http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/elisabeth-moss-the-handmaids-tale-finale-1202468602/

This was posted in the media thread and I really like what Moss says about the last episode, it's the way I took it as well.  A bit:
 

Quote

 

“Night” has a lot of tonal shifts, partly because of how tumultuous and risky Offred/June’s life has become. What was behind that?

I think the finale is actually really hopeful. There are a lot of dark moments, but I do feel like we ended with this sense of hope, which I think is really important. And for me, I think that she’s been learning about her power for a few episodes now. What happens in [“Night”] is that she kind of just doesn’t give a s—t anymore. After what happens with Hannah (Jordana Blake), she’s so broken and horrified by the world she’s living in that she just chooses to live a life that she can live. With that stoning, she’s like, I‘m not going to live in this world if this is the way it’s going to be. I feel like there’s no option for her. She’s not going to stone Janine and she’s not going to subscribe to the way that these people want to live life. It’s about power, but it’s also about just the idea of, Well, I’ve got nothing to lose at this point.

 

[GreekGeek]

On 6/15/2017 at 0:21 PM, Baltimore Betty said:

I loved Serena Joy telling Fred the baby wasn't his etc...He knows he is sterile and he knows he is not the father of that baby but will never admit it.

 

I thought he kind of admitted it when he asked June, "Is [the baby] mine?" When she said, "Of course," he answered , "You do that so well," i.e. lie. 

Those other Commanders gave Fred some funky looks after he pleaded for mercy for Warren. Fred knows he's probably next.

So what happened to Janine after the Handmaids went home? Did the Guardians execute her, was she taken to the Wall to be hanged, or did she somehow get a reprieve?

Quote

What happens to the daughters of the Commanders? Nobody knows yet.

The question has come up as to whether they would be brought up to be Wives or Handmaids. The pink outfits suggest "future Handmaids"; if they were going to be Wives, their clothes should be light blue or green. Maybe pink = girls is too ingrained to be changed? I'm wondering if the Handmaid program was meant to be a temporary thing; the plan was that when the birthrate quit plummeting and there were enough fertile women and potent men again, they could all be paired off as husbands and wives. If there were too many "extra" women, the society could switch to polygamy.

[EC Amber]

My thoughts are *most* of the older children are likely the ones taken by Gilead from the Handmaid's when they were being forced into the role. Those female will be raised to be more Handmaid's. They have no familial bonds to otherwise protect them. 

The daughter of Commanders will likely be groomed to be good wives, demure, bland and without aspiration. And those that resist, those who are not claimed to be a wife, those who are rejected - Handmaid's. The true trouble makers will go off to Jezebel's. 

So, how about when a Commander sees his daughter being abused by his peers? Give the system sufficient time and it'll happen. 

[secnarf]

1 minute ago, EC Amber said:

My thoughts are *most* of the older children are likely the ones taken by Gilead from the Handmaid's when they were being forced into the role. Those female will be raised to be more Handmaid's. They have no familial bonds to otherwise protect them. 

The daughter of Commanders will likely be groomed to be good wives, demure, bland and without aspiration. And those that resist, those who are not claimed to be a wife, those who are rejected - Handmaid's. The true trouble makers will go off to Jezebel's. 

So, how about when a Commander sees his daughter being abused by his peers? Give the system sufficient time and it'll happen. 

But weren't the older children that were taken from Handmaids (like Hannah) given to the Gilead elite? So now Hannah and others like her *are* daughters of Commanders, at least as far as the Commanders and Gilead's elite are concerned. They're no different from children born via Handmaids (like Angela/Charlotte).

[Umbelina]

There is a scene in the book that deals with that question, or part of it.  You could ask in the book reader's thread.  By the way, I think the girls wore white in the book.

Still, there would be sons born as well, so I'd imagine the elite sons would eventually marry the elite girls.

[EC Amber]

11 minutes ago, secnarf said:

But weren't the older children that were taken from Handmaids (like Hannah) given to the Gilead elite?

I don't think we can definitively say that. We saw Hannah brought out of a large brick building. Could be a school (what would they teach)? Could simply be an orphanage. 

 

[Umbelina]

I think they were given to elite childless couples. 

[EC Amber]

As a side note, with the exception of the trade delegate banquet the only children we've seen living under the control of Gilead is in the beginning when June was looking for her daughter while walking to shop - all of those children are dressed in pink, presumably all girls. I suspect they tend to keep the male and female separated during their formative years. 

I would really like to know what kind of bizarre crap they are indoctrinating those children with. Though truthfully, it can't be much further from some of the things kids are taught *now* in this country. Scary stuff. 

[PsychoDrone]

One thing that came to mind during the stoning scene was Gilead doesn't utilize psychologists or psychiatrists.  I think any head shrink could have told them having the handmaids kill one of their own was a bad idea.  Having the handmaids kill a guy they were told was a rapist was one thing.  But, to have them kill one of their sisters, whom they all would know the circumstances that drove her actions, wasn't thought out very well.  Now, Gilead has a dilemma.  They have to punish the handmaids, but it has to be done in a way that keeps them in line and doesn't cause them to outright revolt.  Regardless, the handmaids have shown that they will stick together and are an army as was stated by Offred.

I get the feeling Gilead is in a precarious state (economy, world's view of regime, constant uprisings, etc) and having handmaids fighting back en masse doesn't help their cause.  The rebellion is brewing and the wrong action could cause it to boil over.  Good finale and I'm interested to see how season 2 plays out.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, GreekGeek said:

I thought he kind of admitted it when he asked June, "Is [the baby] mine?" When she said, "Of course," he answered , "You do that so well," i.e. lie. 

I got that impression, too.  But I get mildly bugged by writing that suggests that a woman can be sleeping with multiple men within the same weeks and somehow know which sired her fetus.  Though I'll take it to mean Fred was calling her a liar not because she knew the kid was Nick's but because he knew she couldn't know that 'of course' it was his.  

[Tesla]

Quote

I've made this joke before, but I couldn't help but be reminded: "No one is to stone ANYONE until I blow this whistle!"

Eyes High, I laughed out loud during this part for that very reason.   ??

[catrox14]

2 hours ago, GreekGeek said:

I thought he kind of admitted it when he asked June, "Is [the baby] mine?" When she said, "Of course," he answered , "You do that so well," i.e. lie. 

She's really not lying though.  If he had asked her if the baby was his offspring, then maybe it's a lie but technically, according to their system, it is his child. 

[EC Amber]

22 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

She's really not lying though.  If he had asked her if the baby was his offspring, then maybe it's a lie but technically, according to their system, it is his child. 

I don't think that kind of hair splitting is recognized or appreciated by the elite of Gilead. 

What I think is odd about that statement from Fred is how did he manage to have this startling insight? June has been giving him the absolute least interaction possible "Mm-hmm." "Yes, thank you Fred." "Here I am" is about the most enthused she's been able to muster towards her rapist. She's been lying through gritted teeth this whole time... and he's happily lapped it up. That ridiculous scene where she commented that it's because they recognize a leader and he says "You understand me so well." Really?? I mean... really?!? 

Was it realizing that they would suffer some kind of consequence? That SJ actually did have some power over his destiny? Was that what prompted him to look at June without using the filter of living his fantasy?

[chocolatine]

18 minutes ago, EC Amber said:

Was it realizing that they would suffer some kind of consequence? That SJ actually did have some power over his destiny? Was that what prompted him to look at June without using the filter of living his fantasy?

I think he's known all along that she's been lying and pretending to enjoy everything he's been making her do - he's not a complete idiot. He'd just been getting off on having a woman not being able to say no to him, sick bastard that he is.

Edited June 17, 2017 by chocolatine

[EC Amber]

8 minutes ago, chocolatine said:

I think he's known all along that she's been lying and pretending to enjoy everything he's made her do - he's not a complete idiot. He'd just been getting off on having a woman not being able to say no to him, sick bastard that he is.

So what made this time different? June's pregnancy? I don't think it would be that... that is just more of his fantasy. 

I think it was SJ calling him out, telling him it wasn't his to begin with combined with the realization that if he does get caught "just being human" then she might have some power to exert over his punishment. I think he realized his position wasn't as fortified as he thought. 

[chocolatine]

Just now, EC Amber said:

I think it was SJ calling him out, telling him it wasn't his to begin with combined with the realization that if he does get caught "just being human" then she might have some power to exert over his punishment. I think he realized his position wasn't as fortified as he thought. 

I think it was more the latter - when it was just Serena confronting him he ordered her to go to her room. The reality check came when he realized that the top dog Commander actually granted a Wife's request for a harsh punishment.

[EC Amber]

:-) There was all kinds of truth telling in that last episode. June got to (finally) tell SJ was kind of deplorable, wretched monster she is. SJ got to tell Fred that the baby isn't his. 

I kind of want to see Putnam back with the other Commanders. Wonder how he feels being "damaged." 

[millennium]

The only moment in the entire series that grabbed me emotionally was poor Janine kneeling on the green, smiling vacantly, like a calf about to slaughtered.

I still can't stand Elizabeth Moss.   Moira's three minutes of screen time was far more compelling than 40 minutes of EM.

I can't believe Christians aren't more pissed off by their portrayal in this series.   I don't buy into Bill O'Reilly's "War on Christians" but it's shit like "The Handmaid's Tale" that fuels it.   I suspect no filmmaker would dare cast Jews or Muslims as the religious villains in a dystopian society or be filming a scene in which characters quote from the Torah or Koran as justification for stoning a woman to death.    The backlash would be swift and immediate.   But Christians?   Sure, why not.

Finally, worst use of Tom Petty's "American Girl."  Ever.

[WearyTraveler]

3 hours ago, millennium said:

I can't believe Christians aren't more pissed off by their portrayal in this series.   I don't buy into Bill O'Reilly's "War on Christians" but it's shit like "The Handmaid's Tale" that fuels it.   I suspect no filmmaker would dare cast Jews or Muslims as the religious villains in a dystopian society or be filming a scene in which characters quote from the Torah or Koran as justification for stoning a woman to death.    The backlash would be swift and immediate.   But Christians?   Sure, why not.

Who says the religious nuts in The Handmaid's Tale are Christians?  I haven't seen / heard a single mention of Christ.  They talk about God and the Lord, but if you study a little bit of the origins of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, you'd know that they all describe the same events in the past.  What Christians know as the first five books of the Old Testament, Jewish people call the Torah, and (from Wikipedia) "The Quran assumes familiarity with major narratives recounted in the Biblical scriptures. It summarizes some, dwells at length on others and, in some cases, presents alternative accounts and interpretations of events."

And all of this goes back to the same source documents: The Dead Sea Scrolls.

For all we know, the guys in THT just created their own religious cult mixing and matching from several sources.  Most Jewish people refer to a supreme being as God, but many think they all use "Yawheh" more often than "God"; Muslims use "Allah", off course.  So, I guess because the guys in THT use "Lord" and "God", it's easy to believe their origin is "Christian", who have no other name for their Supreme Being than God or Lord.  But so far, I don't see any indication that these guys are "Christian".  They seem more like "Old Testament" religious extremists to me.

Assuming they are Christians, though, I don't think that has anything to do with trying to attack that particular religion.  Truth is, the majority of people in the US are Christians or Catholics, not Jewish or Muslims; in addition, those who are in power now and those who were in power before are / were mostly white men claiming to be Christians / Catholic, so, it makes sense that after a world cataclysm such as the one presented in this story, those same white men who are in power now would use the chaos to solidify their power and push their own religious agenda.

It would be weird if it were Muslims who seized power from the white male Christians and enslaved them.  How would they have accomplished such a thing when their starting point in this story is with less power than the other top religions in the US?

[millennium]

The Old Testament is part of the Christian religion.   The author also cited the Puritans as her inspiration for the good folk of Gilead.   The Puritans were Christians, of the variety we know today as Congregationalists if I am not mistaken.

We can fence over this, whether they're Christians, whether any other group could have seized power, etc.   But in the end, I think any casual viewer coming to the story would doubtless conclude that the dystopian masters are Christian extremists.   JMHO.

[HeySandyStrange]

4 hours ago, millennium said:

 

I can't believe Christians aren't more pissed off by their portrayal in this series.   I don't buy into Bill O'Reilly's "War on Christians" but it's shit like "The Handmaid's Tale" that fuels it.   I suspect no filmmaker would dare cast Jews or Muslims as the religious villains in a dystopian society or be filming a scene in which characters quote from the Torah or Koran as justification for stoning a woman to death.    The backlash would be swift and immediate.   But Christians?   Sure, why not.

Finally, worst use of Tom Petty's "American Girl."  Ever.

Christianity is the dominant religion in the US, so it makes perfect sense to me in the context of THT that a group Christian extremists took over. The sad thing is there are and have always been Christian fanatics in America with ideology similar to that of THT. 

Also, aren't Muslim extremists/terrorist often villains in many movies/TV shows? Plus in the West there is often a lot of justified and unjustified criticsm for the practices of Islam. Judism is a much smaller and more insular religion then the other two and doesn't get as much focus. In a historical context, the sinister Jewish villain was often in many books and plays, so Jews haven't escaped negative representations.

I actually think THT has been rather soft on the Christian extremist angle in a sense, take the Theocracy out of Gilead and it's not much different then 1984/Big Brother or any number of fictional Dystopian societies where religion wasn't the catalyst. 

Edited June 17, 2017 by HeySandyStrange

[Guest]

I think the fact they are extremists takes the sting out.  Muslim extremists might be into terrorism but it says nothing about all muslims, for example.  

The Gilead people remind me of Mormons, another religion that claims to be Christian (now, not always), for broader acceptance.  Theologians don't consider them Christians.  I think today's mainstream Christians would feel the same about Gilead.  They've taken tenets of Christianity and warped them to their uses.  

Mormons have that same patriarchal basis as Gilead.  Men can earn godhood of their own planet in time.  Women can only have a divine afterlife if they're a good wife to a man who earns it and chooses to invite her.  

[Anela]

5 hours ago, millennium said:

The only moment in the entire series that grabbed me emotionally was poor Janine kneeling on the green, smiling vacantly, like a calf about to slaughtered.

I still can't stand Elizabeth Moss.   Moira's three minutes of screen time was far more compelling than 40 minutes of EM.

I can't believe Christians aren't more pissed off by their portrayal in this series.   I don't buy into Bill O'Reilly's "War on Christians" but it's shit like "The Handmaid's Tale" that fuels it.   I suspect no filmmaker would dare cast Jews or Muslims as the religious villains in a dystopian society or be filming a scene in which characters quote from the Torah or Koran as justification for stoning a woman to death.    The backlash would be swift and immediate.   But Christians?   Sure, why not.

Finally, worst use of Tom Petty's "American Girl."  Ever.

Every religion has their extremists, and Christianity is no different. I think it's very clear that they are extremists. 

[bijoux]

I really appreciated Moira escaping after June gave her the push. It was a lovely payback to how things were between them earlier in the series, with Moira being the clear eyed, fighting one. I think she actually gave June strength to go on even while she thought Moira had been killed, so being the one to provide Moira with necessary strength was a lovely way of coming full circle. Also, I have never liked Luke more than I did in his one scene in this episode.

The episode had some interesting stuff about the wives as well, with Naomi and Serena Joy standing up against their husbands for once, but then there was also Janine's new mistress, who was so strangely cheerful about the whole thing. That was creepy in a new way.

Ofglen 2.0 was great here, and it started with her bickering with June. I took it as them bonding. People have been saying that June couldn't take anymore after Ofglen stood up for Janine, but she was the only one not parroting taught phrases when the handmaids were assembled. She was done by the time she knelt IMO. Alma commenting on how she hated stonings like it was a vegetable she didn't like was some dark humor. I actually thought they would stone Aunt Lydia once she came down in the circle. There's a time for peaceful protest and this isn't it. Yeah, they'd be punished, but they'll be punished now as well, and the witch would have been dead or seriously injured in my scenario.

The scenes of June with the letters and Moira being met with kindness being back to back almost did me in. Both were excellent and harrowing.

[millennium]

I didn't see anything brave or bold in the Handmaids' refusal to stone Janine.

Until now, the Handmaids have been routinely executing people.  How many we can only guess, though a good indicator might be the blithe manner in which that one Handmaid says,  "I hate stonings."   But only when it's one of their own on the receiving end do they find the courage to resist.   When you think about that, it tends to undercut that dramatic moment of defiance.  

[PsychoDrone]

24 minutes ago, millennium said:

I didn't see anything brave or bold in the Handmaids' refusal to stone Janine.

Until now, the Handmaids have been routinely executing people.  How many we can only guess, though a good indicator might be the blithe manner in which that one Handmaid says,  "I hate stonings."   But only when it's one of their own on the receiving end do they find the courage to resist.   When you think about that, it tends to undercut that dramatic moment of defiance.  

Which begs the question, would they have done it if Offred had not have made the gesture of defiance?  OfGlen stepped up, but she got a rifle butt to the face.  Not sure how many executions OfGlen was a part, but Offred only had the one.  She was still new and hasn't been exposed to everything yet.  Plus, seeing her daughter may have added to her wanting to defy the regime.  The handmaids are abuse victims and chose this moment to say, "Enough!"  What actions they take next will be telling for their future.

[bijoux]

1 hour ago, PsychoDrone said:

Which begs the question, would they have done it if Offred had not have made the gesture of defiance?  OfGlen stepped up, but she got a rifle butt to the face.  Not sure how many executions OfGlen was a part, but Offred only had the one.  She was still new and hasn't been exposed to everything yet.  Plus, seeing her daughter may have added to her wanting to defy the regime.  The handmaids are abuse victims and chose this moment to say, "Enough!"  What actions they take next will be telling for their future.

Was this clearly stated one way or another? She wasn't that new, the Waterfords were her second assignment.

[millennium]

2 hours ago, PsychoDrone said:

Which begs the question, would they have done it if Offred had not have made the gesture of defiance?  OfGlen stepped up, but she got a rifle butt to the face.  Not sure how many executions OfGlen was a part, but Offred only had the one.  She was still new and hasn't been exposed to everything yet.  Plus, seeing her daughter may have added to her wanting to defy the regime.  The handmaids are abuse victims and chose this moment to say, "Enough!"  What actions they take next will be telling for their future.

I never had the impression it was only Offred's second execution.   In fact, she seemed relatively nonplussed about the whole thing until they dragged Janine out.   Even en-route to the execution, the greatest concern seemed to be that she and her shopping partner might be late.  

But even if as you suggest the encounter with her daughter spurred her to action, how is that courageous or noble in any way, or worthy of the "girl-power-Nina-Simone-music slo-mo" (as Rubinia called it)?   So Offred refuses to take a life only because her personal frustration has reached an apex?   Nothing heroic in that.  

[PsychoDrone]

Standing up to their abuser (Gilead), when it could lead to further or worse abuse, takes courage regardless of the catalyst.  Some of them are risking punishment by helping out the rebel groups.  Handmaids have done horrible things and had horrible things done to them.  And, it seems the only way for them to escape is suicide.  I don't like that they've taken part in executions or that they've become so accustomed to it.  But, if they're finally willing to take a stand, suffer the consequences, and keep the momentum going to topple Gilead, then more power to them.  I doubt any of the rebel groups wouldn't help the handmaids or reject their help because they took part in the executions.

[Eureka]

Finally watched this. Wasn't crazy about some of it but glad they finally circled back around to the book ending. Even if we didn't get the epilogue.

On 6/14/2017 at 1:17 AM, Shaynaa said:

The directing and set design on this show is amazing.  The visuals with all the red robes were stunning.

 

So refugees have better access to healthcare than a hell of a lot of people in the present united states.  

When they came for June, what did Nick whisper to her?  Are we supposed to understand?  It sounded like mumbling.

1. I agree. I especially like the scenes with the bright sunlight, as if to juxtapose their situation with brightness. If only some of the episodes weren't so dark...the series as a whole was very uneven that way to me.

2. Exactly what I said to DS as we watched the guy hand over the health insurance and rx cards! 

3. He said "trust me." That was right on-book. There was something else that he said in the book that he didn't say but not sure if it was just me not hearing it. Where did the spoiler icon go, I can't find it anymore.

Edited June 18, 2017 by Eureka

[WearyTraveler]

54 minutes ago, PsychoDrone said:

Standing up to their abuser (Gilead), when it could lead to further or worse abuse, takes courage regardless of the catalyst. 

Exactly! Let's take one Handmaid and see what their life is like.  And since she's the protagonist and we've experienced the Handmaids journeys though her eyes, let's review June's tale, so far:

• Loses her job
• Has to flee her home leaving behind everything
• Gets captured
• Loses her daughter, her husband and her best friend
• Gets electroshocks for looking at someone the wrong way
• Sees that when Janine stepped out line, the punishment is losing an eye
• Is psychologically and physically tortured every day while she's being trained to be Handmaid
• Is forced to punish others or risk being maimed (like other handmaids who lost an eye, a hand, etc.)
• Is raped at least once a month
• Is under constant surveillance (or is led to believe that she is)

She obviously has no power whatsoever in this society.  She has no weapons, no superhuman strength to fight back, no fight training... nothing.  Defying the regime will get her punished, physically and psychologically.  Off course it takes courage to to defy your oppressor.  

[millennium]

1 hour ago, PsychoDrone said:

  I doubt any of the rebel groups wouldn't help the handmaids or reject their help because they took part in the executions.

I think the word for that is "collaborators."

[Pachengala]

2 hours ago, millennium said:

I think the word for that is "collaborators."

I have absolute faith that any 'rescuing' group would not be that reductive in their review of the handmaids' roles in the executions. 

[Umbelina]

33 minutes ago, Pachengala said:

I have absolute faith that any 'rescuing' group would not be that reductive in their review of the handmaids' roles in the executions. 

Indeed.

Bravery doesn't always come with fireworks.  Bravery means risking your own life and limb for others.  In this case, all of those women were very brave to reject what they were being ordered to do, when they know how cruel and permanent their punishments are likely to be. 

I don't think they thought of themselves as brave, very few truly brave people do.  They simply could not kill their very damaged friend or co worker.  The Aunts and Gilead finally ordered them to do something that crossed their lines.  They know they may lose an eye, a hand, be beat mercilessly, and may even die.  They did it anyway. 

If that isn't brave, I don't know what is. 

Edited June 18, 2017 by Umbelina

[Becks]

On 6/13/2017 at 10:17 PM, Shaynaa said:

When they came for June, what did Nick whisper to her?  Are we supposed to understand?  It sounded like mumbling.

He said, 'Just go with them. Trust me.'

Along with the black level being too dark in many scenes, this show also has audio issues - or they just let the actors mumble/mutter/swallow words too much.

Edited June 18, 2017 by Becks

[Umbelina]

9 minutes ago, Becks said:

He said, 'Just go with them. Trust me.'

Along with the black level being too dark in many scenes, this show also has audio issues - or they just let the actors mumble/mutter/swallow words too much.

That's what I heard, a recapper said he said "Just go with it.  Trust me."  (same thing really.)

[millennium]

2 hours ago, Pachengala said:

I have absolute faith that any 'rescuing' group would not be that reductive in their review of the handmaids' roles in the executions. 

I'm not so sure.   History hasn't looked kindly upon those who abuse or kill on the enemy's behalf, even if the motivation is to save one's own skin. 

 

1 hour ago, Becks said:

He said, 'Just go with them. Trust me.'

Along with the black level being too dark in many scenes, this show also has audio issues - or they just let the actors mumble/mutter/swallow words too much.

I always watch with the closed captions or subtitles enabled.

[WearyTraveler]

1 hour ago, millennium said:

I'm not so sure.   History hasn't looked kindly upon those who abuse or kill on the enemy's behalf, even if the motivation is to save one's own skin. 

It's not always that straightforward.  After WWII, arguably the biggest and most deadly armed conflict the world has seen, the denazification program eventually resulted in amnesty and re-integration of ex-Nazis into society.  But, off course, most of us just remember the more dramatic Nuremberg trials.  A good book to read on the subject, if anyone is interested, is Frei, Norbert (2002). Adenauer's Germany and the Nazi Past: The Politics of Amnesty and Integration. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-11882-8.

 

A lot of historians also think the mercy shown by the US to emperor Hirohito of Japan after WWII is largely responsible for the country's economic recovery and its pacifist attitude after the conflict.

After such mass conflicts, the ring-leaders are always served justice, but history actually shows us that amnesty processes follow the punishment of the high profile figures of those conflicts, with the aim of integrating back into society those who had no choice, were forced or were psychologically influenced to participate.

Edited June 18, 2017 by WearyTraveler

[Scarlett45]

I finished episode 10, I am glad I have had the chance to discuss the series with you all. 

 

The two mosy most emotional moments of the show (for me) are when OfGlen2.0 refused to stone Janine and when Moira saw Luke, and he told her he got an alert because she was on his family list- I almost cried. Moira having pushed down her pain for so long, just focusing on the moment and surviving and then being able to let it out. Being HUMAN again after years of being NOTHING  

It's moments like this, in the darkest of times, after years of torture and inhumane treatment people rise above again and again. 

 

Im looking forward to next season, will we have to wait an entire year?

[millennium]

On 6/14/2017 at 10:46 AM, rubinia said:

The girl-power-Nina-Simone-music slo-mo made me cringe.

 

Red Is the New Black.

[Ms Blue Jay]

On 6/14/2017 at 3:03 AM, Umbelina said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

First and nearly last acts were just spectacular, the middle was very good too.  Watching Moira be treated like a human being again, and her shell shock at that, was so moving.  It's happening right now in Canada, with some kind people welcoming refugees.  They couldn't possibly have known that back when they wrapped shooting early fall or late summer.  Talk about timing for a TV show!

It's not like it's the only time Canada has welcomed refugees.

[EC Amber]

2 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

It's not like it's the only time Canada has welcomed refugees.

Don't think that was her point. Synchronicity. 

[Ms Blue Jay]

Sure, I understand that it's a nice coincidence.  But I just wanted to point out that Canada is certainly known for welcoming refugees which is why it made sense in 1984 (if that was in the book) and the show filming in 2016 (or whenever it did) and it coincidentally also makes sense for right now.

[Ms Blue Jay]

On 6/15/2017 at 1:43 PM, Trillian said:

Perfect! What with that, the huge Canadian flags everywhere, and the free healthcare, all that was missing was the Timmy's maple-glazed donut (yum) and a double-double (not that she would have known what that last one is). 

I did find it oddly jarring that the intake officer said "Welcome to Ontario".  The only time I have ever heard a fellow Ontarian self-identify as such is in the hands of an American screenwriter.  We might identify with our city "Welcome to T'ronno" (translation: Toronto)  or magnanimously speak for the whole country, but we tend not to refer to ourselves by province.  It should have been "Welcome to Canada", especially when speaking to a foreign refugee. 

To me it was fine because he was speaking to an American.  Sure, Canadians don't walk around and talk to each other like, "Nice weather we're having here in Ontario, eh?" but to an American or anyone not from Canada I could see identifying the place as such.  But yeah, definitely there to make the American audience feel comfortable.

I don't understand why book talk is so allowed and freely used here.  I don't think people understand if we haven't read the book yet we don't want to know anything about it.  Some people mention the book  every single time they post.

I read Big Little Lies before the show premiered, and now that I'm on the other side of things, I totally get how annoying it is for people who haven't read the book.  I have to quickly skip over every time you guys post about it.

Edited June 19, 2017 by Ms Blue Jay

[NutMeg]

Pet peeve: as a European, I find it weird when America does't include Canada. Last time I checked, America was not limited to the US of  A.   

[secnarf]

18 minutes ago, NutMeg said:

Pet peeve: as a European, I find it weird when America does't include Canada. Last time I checked, America was not limited to the US of  A.   

As a Canadian, this is extremely irritating to me. I can't imagine there is a single Canadian who wouldn't look at you funny if you tried to tell them that Canada is a part of "America".

We are a separate country. "America" is used as shorthand for USA, similar to "The US". Canada is most certainly not a part of America.

"The Americas" refers to North, Central and South America, of which Canada, the USA (and many other countries) are a part.

I am aware that centuries ago, before Canada or the USA existed, 'America' included the entire area. However, that has not been the case for a long time.

[EC Amber]

Well, for those of us on the North American continent, generally there are "The Americas" to refer broadly to the geographical area that encompasses all of Canada, United States, Mexico and Central America. 

"America" is used to refer to "the States" or USA. 

Canada is, of course, Canada. 

I'm sure those who are not on this hemisphere have their own colloquialisms. This doesn't mean it's particularly accurate - only that culturally they have their own terms. 

Much like I'm not a fan of hearing the word "fag" as a reference to a cigarette. But I consider that unique to the other side of the pond and nothing for me to dictate to them what their language is or should be according to my sensibilities. 

[greekmom]

1 hour ago, NutMeg said:

Pet peeve: as a European, I find it weird when America does't include Canada. Last time I checked, America was not limited to the US of  A.   

Think of it this way:

 Continental Europe.  Continental: North America

Countries in Europe: Germany, Italy, France, etc.

Countries in North America: Canada and United States of America.

I think what is confusing you is that fact that the United States of America has the word "America" in it. Meanwhile there isn't a country in Europe that is called United province of Europe or United States of Europe.

BTW - calling a Canadian "American" is a bit of a faux pas insult.  Like calling an Irishman "English".  But as a Canadian we are overly polite and will just correct you, eh ;-)

 

 

Hope that helps.

[EC Amber]

7 minutes ago, greekmom said:

But as a Canadian we are overly polite and will just correct you, eh ;-)

It's wonderfully charming, all too lacking and much needed in this world. 

American who loves her Canadian neighbors (I'm biased, I'm half Canadian myself). 

[NutMeg]

2 hours ago, secnarf said:

As a Canadian, this is extremely irritating to me. I can't imagine there is a single Canadian who wouldn't look at you funny if you tried to tell them that Canada is a part of "America".

We are a separate country. "America" is used as shorthand for USA, similar to "The US". Canada is most certainly not a part of America.

"The Americas" refers to North, Central and South America, of which Canada, the USA (and many other countries) are a part.

I am aware that centuries ago, before Canada or the USA existed, 'America' included the entire area. However, that has not been the case for a long time.

That's very interesting, I had no idea there were Canadians who didn't want to be considered part of America. While the rest of the world learns that Canada is a country in America. Then again, I guess the UK don't see themselves as part of Europe, but until recently most of Continental Europe did consider UK as a European country. Now let's wait until we hear how Australians feel :)

P.S. If the name of my continent was "used as shorthtand" for the name of a country that is not mine on that continent,  I would be bitter. But who am I to judge people thinking otherwise?  

Edited June 20, 2017 by NutMeg