Watch Your Neck: The Hickey Topic

[AZChristian]

Several people have written of the desire for a thread on the character who identifies himself as Cornelius Hickey. Here ya go.

 

(ETA:  Corrected spelling of "Hickey" in body of my thread comment.)

[Ohwell]

I don't find anything "complex" about Hickey on this show (don't know how he's portrayed in the book, haven't read it).  I just think he's an evil bastard who was probably a criminal in civilian life and stole someone's identity to escape the law. 

[SoSueMe]

Everyone has a past and some guilty secrets but Hickey seems to have cornered the market among his peers on the expedition. That does make him noteworthy at least. 

[Portia]

Awesome thread title! That's all I got. 

[Sighed I]

I've been thinking about why Tuunbaq focused his attacks on the Terror and wonder if it has anything to do with Hickey. Hickey is an unreliable narrator, but we do see a moment between Tuunbaq and him in "Punished, Like a Boy" after he finds the stacked halves of Strong and Evans. Up until this point, any sighting of the creature meant an attack was imminent or in progress, Lady Silence excepted, yet Hickey gives him the stink eye and remains unscathed. Why?

After kidnapping Lady Silence, Hickey tells the Captains and Lt. Little that just before Tuunbaq retreated, the creature looked right at him but did not attack. If this is true, that's two encounters with Hickey in one night not resulting in his demise. That can't be a coincidence.

I wonder if an untethered Tuunbaq is drawn to the "strongest" energy. We've since learned that our (least) favorite caulker's mate is completely ruthless...not unlike the creature. I assume Lady Silence returned to the camp for medical help after her gruesome self-surgery, but why has she stayed now that they're traveling south? Is she protecting someone? Did Tuunbaq reject her offering? If he is bound to her now and Hickey harms or kills her, will the creature exact revenge, or see this as a blood sacrifice he (apparently) requires to bind himself to a new "shaman"? It didn't work out that way for Sgt. Bryant when he shot Lady Silence's father, but the Marine wasn't a sociopath either.

[MaryWebGirl]

This is complete and utter speculation on my part, but I think it would be a fun little twist at the ending to see that Hickey somehow made it out alive and stole another identity to settle in North America somewhere. I don't know that the show would go that far with a fictional interpretation of the story, but I think it'd be interesting.

[slothgirl]

4 hours ago, MaryWebGirl said:

This is complete and utter speculation on my part, but I think it would be a fun little twist at the ending to see that Hickey somehow made it out alive and stole another identity to settle in North America somewhere. I don't know that the show would go that far with a fictional interpretation of the story, but I think it'd be interesting.

Just as long as they don't use that cliffhanger as the spin-off point for season 2

[Captanne]

Unless they use the existential idea that Hickey (like the Tuunbaq) is pure, barely checked Evil, I don't see how they could continue with him.

I have a hard time understanding the nature of a Series 2 for this show anyway.  I think they plan to do maritime mysteries in a fictionalized format.  So, "Hickey" the person would be irrelevant.  (He wasn't on Lusitania, for example.  Edmund Fitzgerald?  The Great Lakes are chock full of tragedy.  I think air crashes at sea might even qualify and -- if the show lasts so long -- MH370 might be a player.)

I think they are doing Mary Celeste, next, who was found abandoned in 1861 near the Azores.  (Thanks, Wiki!)

I don't know where I got that idea but when a Series 2 was announced, I saw her being tossed around the figurative waves of the Internet.

[zobot81]

On 5/11/2018 at 5:48 PM, MaryWebGirl said:

This is complete and utter speculation on my part, but I think it would be a fun little twist at the ending to see that Hickey somehow made it out alive and stole another identity to settle in North America somewhere. I don't know that the show would go that far with a fictional interpretation of the story, but I think it'd be interesting.

This is my pet theory, too.  I really hope it comes true, only bc I have been hanging onto the image (in my version, he stays in the UK) since like the third episode.  But the idea that he would go to the new world makes a lot more sense. :)

[AZChristian]

6 hours ago, zobot81 said:

This is my pet theory, too.  I really hope it comes true, only bc I have been hanging onto the image (in my version, he stays in the UK) since like the third episode.  But the idea that he would go to the new world makes a lot more sense. :)

Too bad he wasn't 100 years later . . . he could have become Jack the Ripper.

[slothgirl]

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

Too bad he wasn't 100 years later . . . he could have become Jack the Ripper.

Huh? 100 years later was 1948. Am I just reading your post all wrong?

[AZChristian]

44 minutes ago, slothgirl said:

Huh? 100 years later was 1948. Am I just reading your post all wrong?

I was just guesstimating the start of Jack's reign of terror. Sorry if I confused you.

[zobot81]

44 minutes ago, AZChristian said:

I was just guesstimating the start of Jack's reign of terror. Sorry if I confused you.

Really good add. Thanks.

[Captanne]

Interestingly, the Ripper was only about thirty years later and committed his murders in the Whitechapel neighborhood of London — where a guy named Stephan Goldner canned the food that went on the Franklin Expedition.  It was a terrible part of town full of lowlifes and criminals. 

[Ohwell]

I could definitely see Hickey as a knockoff Jack the Ripper.  The man is psycho.

[Captanne]

Maybe Stephan Goldner was the Ripper??!!  (Goldner did disappear into the fog of Whitechapel when it looked like the Admiralty was closing in on him.  His assistant, Richie, wrote a letter disavowing his employment with Goldner.)

[AZChristian]

I checked out the actor who plays Hickey on IMDB.  Interesting to see that he was in "Happy Valley" . . . a British series I really enjoyed.  So I went back into Netflix and found one of his scenes.

Same "look" . . . scraggly beard, greasy hair . . . but he's playing a modern punk.  The policewoman who is the star of the show grabbed him and threw him into a police car ("no cameras here"), and then grabbed his privates to "encourage" him to be honest with her.  I must say I took a little bit of pleasure in watching him whine, cry, and beg for her to stop.  

[Portia]

15 minutes ago, AZChristian said:

I checked out the actor who plays Hickey on IMDB.  Interesting to see that he was in "Happy Valley" . . . a British series I really enjoyed.  So I went back into Netflix and found one of his scenes.

Same "look" . . . scraggly beard, greasy hair . . . but he's playing a modern punk.  The policewoman who is the star of the show grabbed him and threw him into a police car ("no cameras here"), and then grabbed his privates to "encourage" him to be honest with her.  I must say I took a little bit of pleasure in watching him whine, cry, and beg for her to stop.  

Wow, now I'm going to have to go back and rewatch Happy Valley! Love that show.

[Captanne]

He sounds like he's getting typecast.

[Portia]

7 minutes ago, Captanne said:

He sounds like he's getting typecast.

You may be on to something. That's funny to me, because he has such a cute, crinkly-eyed smile. I think I'd love him in a nice-guy role.

[CarolinaPam]

I saw him in “The Commuter” a few weeks ago (before “The Terror” began airing).  He was a nice guy in that movie...and with an American accent as well.  

[Hazel55]

On 5/7/2018 at 12:15 PM, Sighed I said:

I've been thinking about why Tuunbaq focused his attacks on the Terror and wonder if it has anything to do with Hickey.

While I think that the first round of attacks (in episodes 2-5) were caused because our heroes invaded Tuunbaq's land and killed his sacred Shaman, I believe that Hickey was definitely responsible for the Tuunbaq's second round of attacks, in episode 8. 

Though the creatures closest bond with with the late Shaman, Lady Silence's father, it has been implied strongly at various points throughout the show that the Tuunbaq also has a deep connection to the land itself, and the Inuit people. The Tuunbaq leaves the crew alone for quite awhile, and they believe it to have been killed; then Hickey incites the murder of 4 innocent Inuit. The very next episode, Tuunbaq returns, and goes on his biggest rampage to date, killing dozens of men. I can't help but think the two events are connected.

IMO, Hickey is responsible not only for the death's of 2 crew and 4 Inuit people, but for the dozens of men killed by the Tunbaq last episode.  The Tuunbaq is a wild spirit/ animal/ being, and operates by his own rules; when he went on the rampage, he was merely avenging the murder of four of his people. 

On 5/7/2018 at 12:15 PM, Sighed I said:

We've since learned that our (least) favorite caulker's mate is completely ruthless...not unlike the creature.

I'd say that Hickey is, at this point, far worse morally than the Tuunbaq. Hickey is wholly selfish, apparently incapable of empathy or remorse, commits (and takes pleasure in) acts of murder and torture, and above all has no real reason for doing this save his own advancement, pleasure, and entertainment. Meanwhile, the Tuunbaq's land was invaded by a bunch of white guys, who proceeded to brutally murder his Shaman (and apparently the only person capable of "talking" to him), ravage his sacred land, and murder 4 of his chosen people. Tuunbaq, like Hickey, is a beast; but unlike Hickey, he also displays some human qualities, like loyalty and affection. 

Also, Tuunbaq caught a seal for Lady Silence, for no other apparent reason than to be nice. Hickey would never, ever commit such an act of altruism. 

For the first 7 episodes, Hickey fascinated me. Now I'm getting a bit bored with him. The gradual reveal/ unraveling was brilliant on the writers part, however, now that we've seen him for what he is, he doesn't add up to much more than a generic psychopath. Who is also, judging by the past few episodes, none too bright. Tuunbaq is actually the smarter of the two at this point, IMO. 

[Sighed I]

3 hours ago, Hazel55 said:

While I think that the first round of attacks (in episodes 2-5) were caused because our heroes invaded Tuunbaq's land and killed his sacred Shaman, I believe that Hickey was definitely responsible for the Tuunbaq's second round of attacks, in episode 8. 

Though the creatures closest bond with with the late Shaman, Lady Silence's father, it has been implied strongly at various points throughout the show that the Tuunbaq also has a deep connection to the land itself, and the Inuit people. The Tuunbaq leaves the crew alone for quite awhile, and they believe it to have been killed; then Hickey incites the murder of 4 innocent Inuit. The very next episode, Tuunbaq returns, and goes on his biggest rampage to date, killing dozens of men. I can't help but think the two events are connected.

IMO, Hickey is responsible not only for the death's of 2 crew and 4 Inuit people, but for the dozens of men killed by the Tunbaq last episode.  The Tuunbaq is a wild spirit/ animal/ being, and operates by his own rules; when he went on the rampage, he was merely avenging the murder of four of his people. 

I'd say that Hickey is, at this point, far worse morally than the Tuunbaq. Hickey is wholly selfish, apparently incapable of empathy or remorse, commits (and takes pleasure in) acts of murder and torture, and above all has no real reason for doing this save his own advancement, pleasure, and entertainment. Meanwhile, the Tuunbaq's land was invaded by a bunch of white guys, who proceeded to brutally murder his Shaman (and apparently the only person capable of "talking" to him), ravage his sacred land, and murder 4 of his chosen people. Tuunbaq, like Hickey, is a beast; but unlike Hickey, he also displays some human qualities, like loyalty and affection. 

Also, Tuunbaq caught a seal for Lady Silence, for no other apparent reason than to be nice. Hickey would never, ever commit such an act of altruism. 

For the first 7 episodes, Hickey fascinated me. Now I'm getting a bit bored with him. The gradual reveal/ unraveling was brilliant on the writers part, however, now that we've seen him for what he is, he doesn't add up to much more than a generic psychopath. Who is also, judging by the past few episodes, none too bright. Tuunbaq is actually the smarter of the two at this point, IMO. 

Great post. I absolutely agree Hickey is far worse on a moral level than Tuunbaq. After this latest episode, I'm thinking Tuunbaq isn't evil at all. He seems to be more a force of nature than something good or bad. I'm going to save the bulk of my thoughts on him for the episode thread (or try to, anyway ;), but I wanted to mention a few things here in relation to Hickey.

I also agree Hickey murdering Lady Silence's people spurred the creature's latest attack. The Inuit belong there; the sailors do not, and ever since they arrived everything's been out of whack. Given his reaction to LS's father's death and Franklin's extremely disrespectful disposal of the man's body, it makes sense that the murder of five Inuit would send Tuunbaq on a rampage like no other.

The irony is, in his attempt to undermine Crozier by killing those people, Hickey ultimately shot himself in the foot. He wasn't wrong that it would be next to impossible to feed all the men based on the available resources. But this makes what few resources which are available that much more vital. Like Crozier said in Terror Camp Clear, getting help from the indigenous people is no longer an option. That's all on Hickey.

I, too, enjoyed the gradual reveal of Hickey's true nature and found it very well done. Knowing what we know now, Lt. Irving calling him a "devious seducer" turned out to be a nice bit of foreshadowing. My own love affair with the character came to an abrupt end with episode 6 when he killed Dr. McDonald. There was a fair bit of debate in the episode thread about whether it was intentional, with me falling in the "hell yes it was" camp. After everything he's done since then, it's abundantly clear to me it was no accident.

I agree at this point he's pretty much your standard psychopath. I'm bored with him too, though I have to admit I want him gone mostly because he pisses me off. Sociopaths reveal themselves sooner or later if we listen to our instincts--as emotional, social beings, humans have the ability to sense something is "off" about someone--but so often people ignore their intuition for any number of reasons. Hickey has a big neon sign blinking "DANGER, DANGER!" above his head, and it's maddening watching these men being led by their noses despite all the warning signs. He murdered a friend expressly for the purpose of eating him. Do any of them actually think he won't do the same thing to them when they are no longer useful to him? I mean, come on! How blind can you be?! Still, I can't deny self-delusion isn't part of the human condition, then and now, and probably always will be.

[Sighed I]

In light of what we learned about Tuunbaq in episode 9, I've been thinking about the question I posed earlier, about the creature's relationship with Hickey, if any. If Tuunbaq collects or ingests souls, is it possible he can detect them from the living? If so, maybe the reason why the creature hasn't attacked Hickey isn't because he's drawn to his strength or power, but that he's repelled by the man's malignant spirit and sucking up his soul would be like ingesting poison. If part of Tuunbaq's purpose is to maintain the natural balance, absorbing Hickey's essence might skew that balance, just as it's doing in the material world.

It's pretty amazing, the damage one person can do. They were never all going to make it, but I wonder, if the mutiny hadn't happened, if that would have changed anything for some of them? Since the story's structured around real life events, probably not, but if we view the show separately from what actually happened, I wonder if removing Hickey's influence from the equation would have made a difference? Of course it's possible it could have been even worse if he'd stayed with the main group, destroying them incrementally from within. It seems to me he would have been rooted out and disposed of sooner or later, though. I can't imagine a provocateur remaining under the radar in such extreme conditions since everyone would be on edge with their survival instincts particularly heightened.

[TudorQueen]

I hate the character, an amoral scoundrel whose needless compulsion to complicate things only deepens the tragedy for others, but I also find him oddly fascinating, and I give credit for that to the actor.  In crucial moments I am utterly captured by his mastery of stillness. I'd love to see him again in a different sort of role.

[Captanne]

He was two dimensional -- and, in a show that was crammed full of thought provoking characters and situations -- he was a great disappointment.  

[Fellaway]

On 7/16/2018 at 11:42 PM, TudorQueen said:

I hate the character, an amoral scoundrel whose needless compulsion to complicate things only deepens the tragedy for others, but I also find him oddly fascinating, and I give credit for that to the actor.  In crucial moments I am utterly captured by his mastery of stillness. I'd love to see him again in a different sort of role.

I don't know what kind of role it is, but he and Jared Harris have been cast in an upcoming miniseries titled Chernobyl.

[paramitch]

I've been rewatching, and it's plain if you do so that Hickey has ALWAYS been a manipulator, an agitator and a psycho. I really missed so much of it the first time:

• Hickey's first scene is a master class of subtly sowing dissent and potential mutiny. He talks about the unfairness of their situation, that the dog is well-treated and how it's a waste of food and attention, and that it's unfair that a dog "that can walk the quarterdeck" (i.e., the officers' station) is higher positioned than they are. Again, this means something different when we look back -- at first, I just thought he was a scrappy guy envying officers. He's not. He's an evil man already manipulating people to his will.
   
• Hickey's next big scene is him stealing the ring from Young's dead body. I remember thinking he was a good guy here on first watch, but WATCH CLOSELY! He's not. The coffin lid shifts, and he looks down and sees the sparkle of the ring on Young's finger, right-hand-side of the open coffin. It glitters in the sun. The other men joke about moving the lid. Quoting piety, Hickey then goes down to "shift the lid," then we see him slip something (the ring) into a pocket, then smile, and disquietingly, the smile includes him sticking out his tongue in a kind of weird enjoyment. All while pretending to be a martyr to cover the corpse "as his father would have wanted."
   
• When Hickey is 'caught' in a compromising position with his lover Gibson belowdecks by Irving, Gibson comes out and simply looks a bit abashed. Hickey takes many seconds longer, then walks out from hiding, and THEN openly adjusts his fly, blatantly showing what they'd been up to and making Irving (and Gibson) complicit. He could have adjusted his fly before exiting, but he does so deliberately here.    I remember when I first saw this I was on Hickey's (and Gibson's) sides, feeling for them having to hide their relationship. But here it is plain that it's just another machination of Hickey's -- he wanted Irving to see, in order to manipulate people into loyalty to him, and he gains two powerful holds here over both men.
   
• ALSO -- I thought (and I think most people thought) that Hickey shit in Gibson's bed for his blaming Hickey unfairly to Irving as a 'seducer.' But if you look back, Hickey is shitting in the officer IRVING'S bed -- the officer. He even tries on Irving's white glove and looks lovingly at his hand in the glove. Then shits on the bed, caressing the glove on his hand (which he is still wearing). Again, he is envying a status he doesn't have.
   
• Then, while the crew and marines are paying tribute to the loss of Captain Franklin, Hickey is down below and rifling through Crozier's papers (and of course discovering Crozier's original plan to strike out for help with a party on his own, even against Franklin's orders, and even though it would mean the end of his Navy career).
   
• In E4, Hickey and his handpicked crew of loyalists (already growing), go and kidnap Silence and then tell tales about her and the Tuunbaq. I firmly believe what Hickey tells here is total lies. Including his assertion that the Tuunbaq looked him in the eye -- TWICE -- and spared him. No. No, I don't believe it did.
   
• Hickey carries out a more successful racism campaign later in the series, when he murders an officer (I think it's Irving?) and ensures that a peaceful Inuit party is slaughtered (the worst irony here, beyond the evil and reprehensible bloodshed of good people including a child, is that this party could have saved them all -- gotten word to other villages and Inuit, helped to get them saved (and food and supplies).
   
• Even Hickey's over the top insubordination of Captain Crozier (and the ensuing lashes) simply helps him cement his status as a martyred outsider who was unfairly punished for a good deed. It's grotesque and subtle but it's there. (And we see Hickey's picked men trade glances while it takes place -- it's classic mutiny behavior. Hickey is using sympathy to build his own power base.)
   
• And this is all before Hickey's worst deeds -- lies, betrayal, mutiny, joyful murder (of peaceful Inuits and children, as well as of crewmates, colleagues and former lovers), and unrepentant cannibalism.

The show blindsides us early on about Hickey and it's brilliant. He seems sympathetic, even admirable, because unless we look closely, he's just a good-hearted guy who had to hide his orientation, who helped cover a coffin and then overreached to "save the crew" from an "evil" Inuit girl -- and got flogged.

But, as I noted in the rewatch thread, just in the first 4 episodes I rewatched, for me it is plain that Hickey is a bad, manipulative man from moment one, and one who is subtly gathering threads of loyalty to himself for future manipulation. He does not care about shame or theft or death. He is already turning this survival situation into his own private game.

On 5/16/2018 at 6:01 PM, Hazel55 said:

While I think that the first round of attacks (in episodes 2-5) were caused because our heroes invaded Tuunbaq's land and killed his sacred Shaman, I believe that Hickey was definitely responsible for the Tuunbaq's second round of attacks, in episode 8. 

Though the creatures closest bond with with the late Shaman, Lady Silence's father, it has been implied strongly at various points throughout the show that the Tuunbaq also has a deep connection to the land itself, and the Inuit people. The Tuunbaq leaves the crew alone for quite awhile, and they believe it to have been killed; then Hickey incites the murder of 4 innocent Inuit. The very next episode, Tuunbaq returns, and goes on his biggest rampage to date, killing dozens of men. I can't help but think the two events are connected.

IMO, Hickey is responsible not only for the death's of 2 crew and 4 Inuit people, but for the dozens of men killed by the Tunbaq last episode.  The Tuunbaq is a wild spirit/ animal/ being, and operates by his own rules; when he went on the rampage, he was merely avenging the murder of four of his people. 

I'd say that Hickey is, at this point, far worse morally than the Tuunbaq. Hickey is wholly selfish, apparently incapable of empathy or remorse, commits (and takes pleasure in) acts of murder and torture, and above all has no real reason for doing this save his own advancement, pleasure, and entertainment. Meanwhile, the Tuunbaq's land was invaded by a bunch of white guys, who proceeded to brutally murder his Shaman (and apparently the only person capable of "talking" to him), ravage his sacred land, and murder 4 of his chosen people. Tuunbaq, like Hickey, is a beast; but unlike Hickey, he also displays some human qualities, like loyalty and affection. 

Also, Tuunbaq caught a seal for Lady Silence, for no other apparent reason than to be nice. Hickey would never, ever commit such an act of altruism. 

Oh, this! All of this! I 100% agree. Hickey brings on each new level of increasing evil upon them all. He is a horrible person in every way. No soul at all.