The Americans - General Discussion

[Umbelina]

By the way, I've read quite about about Russia, the USSR, both world wars, etc. over the years.  I've certainly been aware of the Battle of Stalingrad, but I know more about the siege/blockade of Leningrad.

Anyway, recently I started focusing in a bit more on Stalingrad, trying to focus on various people involved more than simply military strategy and mistakes.  During that I've read a couple of good books.  Blood Red Snow (basically reconstructed diary/notes of a German machine gunner) focusing on day to day events.  Also Enemy at the Gates, which is combining both battle history/decisions on both sides with real people on both sides, their stories, their outcomes.  (both books available on Kindle Unlimited BTW)

We all know it was beyond horrific for both sides, the cannibalism (similar stories in Leningrad, but in many ways, quite different circumstances, starvation being the common denominator.   For me, given Claudia's age and actions at the time of the battle(*s) there, it's perfectly understandable that, having lived through that, along with having her side winning, not just the battle, but really the war, since that was the key turning point during WWII?  She's SO understandable, and she earned her extreme patriotism in ways that few will ever understand.

In a way the second book also touches on both Philip and Elizabeth, or at least some things from their history.  There was a concentration camp in Smolensk, which, in part held German POW's.  We knew about Philip being raised in a Gulag town, but for some reason I was surprised about Elizabeth sharing that in part.  Her big city had much more than a horrific prison where people died horrible deaths though, where Philip's entire town was built, essentially for the Gulag, or sprung up around that.  Of course there were German POW's everywhere in the Gulag system, most died, many were simply shot immediately and they were probably the lucky ones.  

Back to Claudia though, I think the writers did attempt, kind of half heartedly, since she was not a primary character, to show us a tiny bit of what shaped her character by revealing that she was a survivor of Stalingrad.  Of course they did something similar with Gabriel, late in the story, by having him be part of Stalin's goon squads.  I really wish we'd had much more of them instead of Pastor Tim.  Great characters that could each probably anchor a miniseries or movie.

Edited January 31, 2021 by Umbelina

[Roseanna]

2 hours ago, Umbelina said:

He's just as much a patriot to his country as Elizabeth is to hers.

Sometimes a patriot can/must be a traitor, or a traitor can even do more for his country than millions of patriots.

I think that the crux of the matter is that every character, whether Americans or Russians, must make his/her own choices based on their inner values, not on the authority outside.

 

[Umbelina]

15 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

Sometimes a patriot can/must be a traitor, or a traitor can even do more for his country than millions of patriots.

I think that the crux of the matter is that every character, whether Americans or Russians, must make his/her own choices based on their inner values, not on the authority outside.

 

Of course. 

I'm talking about the character of Stan here though.  I gave my reasons why.

[sistermagpie]

19 hours ago, Umbelina said:

As I said, because they knew Philip was opposed to Paige or Henry becoming KGB.

That 2nd generation was their primary goal at that point.

I don't think it was that much of a priority, even without the "fail slowly" theory. It's one thing they were trying to do that might or might not pan out well in the years ahead. Not enough to kill Philip, who was a very valuable agent now, just for not liking the idea. Especially since it was going forward anyway. And even if they did decide to kill him, they wouldn't need Gabriel to do it up close and personal.

Quote

You have to go back and listen to the details about who was involved in getting Gorbachev out.  MOST of the KGB.  MOST of the most important generals, and several other highly placed political types.  Those that thwarted it, Oleg, Arkady, and most certainly Philip and Elizabeth will be dealt with.

But in the show itself nobody's saying this. Oleg's dad's only upset at Oleg being in jail. 

Quote

Stan's whole goal was getting the embedded agents, for years now, even when others let it slide, that was his primary focus.  He KNOWS the murders (or at least a few dozen of them) they've committed.  It's utter bullshit that he would betray his oaths for Philip, and even more bullshit that he would continue to lie (and not be caught by a lie detector test.)  

I think that fits with Stan's pattern of putting his own personal stuff above everything else. His primary focus was the Illegals because he personally focused on them. His feelings for Philip and the Jennings were just as strong. He started out wanting to get Oleg and then later refused to act against him because it made him feel like the bad guy after Oleg did something he considered admirable. His oaths really don't seem to be the thing that drives him at all to me. It seems more about how he feels about himself. He certainly might be caught for what he did--we're seeing here already that plenty of people in the bureau know they can't trust him. 

Quote

Claudia wanted to keep the USSR going, every single thing she's given her life to.  Also, she was RIGHT.  It collapses completely in 2-3 years.  Either way, she'll get her revenge, and she has a bunch of very highly placed people who will want that as well.

Sure, but Claudia was also like Elizabeth in that she seemed unwilling to see the government she supported as being a problem as well. The thing she was giving her life to keep going was failing for lots of reasons, not just because of enemies without and within. The people she's backing can't turn back the clock.

I can't imagine her being any other way given what we know about her, but I'm also not sure she won't be able to adjust to being about the Russian Federation rather than the USSR. 

7 hours ago, Roseanna said:

It's clearly shown that Stan lacks the essential qualities for a spy catcher his partner Dennis Adelholt has: keeping professional distance and concentrating on the big picture. Looking back, Stan's anger during the Thanksgiving dinner isn't a proof that he is committed to catch the murderer of the defectors but that is too emotional for his job.  

Yeah, it's funny that the one thing that speech didn't make me think was that Stan was committed to catching Russians to defend his country. It seems more like an expression of some kind of inner conflict.

6 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Not really.  My opinion is that STAN wouldn't do it, however, even if he did?  The guilt would consume him, sooner rather than later.  Also, the FBI (and this would go beyond just the FBI) are not the idiots portrayed by this show.  He would be caught.  He would KNOW he would be caught, and he would turn himself in first.

However, let's just say that the entire United States law enforcement community are complete idiots, and Stan is not caught, not even suspected, after LIVING ACROSS THE STREET FROM THEM FOR YEARS.  No one even questions him, after knowing they were best friends, attended EST together, had BBQ's, and Stan recommended their business for FBI trip arranging.  Let's just pretend that for a while.

The GUILT would consume Stan, he's not built for living a lie designed to work against and deceive his country.  His undercover work FOR his country destroyed his marriage and nearly destroyed him as well.  Now though?  He is supposed to live with the knowledge that he lied, and will continue to lie, for Soviet Spies, and to cover his ass, mislead the investigators?  

It's a bullet in his own brain or confession for Stan.  He's just as much a patriot to his country as Elizabeth is to hers.  His life, like all the others?  Is over.  The minute he let them go?  Done.

See, to me it seems like it's central to Stan's character from the beginning that Stan's the guy who would do this--no other FBI agent that we meet along the way we do it. Over and over Stan puts his personal needs over the goals of the FBI and therefore US policy in general. The only time he's acting in US interests with Nina is when he originally blackmails her. After that he quickly starts putting his fantasy affair above everything else. He stops short of handing over Echo, but even that fits with Stan protecting his view of himself as the good guy. And throughout he continues to lie to the FBI about whatever he's doing, and even be self-righteous about it. When he's told that his capturing of Zinaida will lead to the freeing of a CIA informant who's been in jail in the USSR for a year, he seems frankly surprised as well as disappointed that the US is going to use her to save somebody who was working for them willingly and was more important to their interests over the KGB agent who was blackmailed into working for them (and unbenknownst to Stan was a triple agent). He wasn't doing it for America, he wanted to make things right personally and projected that onto the FBI. Eventually, iirc, he starts using his own misbehavior that others had to pay for to threaten to the FBI to interfere with US interests again.

The fact that Stan was the one focused on catching these two Illegals all along seems like it could give him even more reason to feel justified in what he did. He honestly doesn't seem at all a patriot the way Philip or Elizabeth are. Or even General Renhull. All of them seem less motivated by personal stuff than Stan is.

None of which means he won't get caught, but it wouldn't be the first time Stan learned thought he was getting away with something he wasn't actually getting away from.

Edited January 31, 2021 by sistermagpie

[Umbelina]

27 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

See, to me it seems like it's central to Stan's character from the beginning that Stan's the guy who would do this--no other FBI agent that we meet along the way we do it. Over and over Stan puts his personal needs over the goals of the FBI and therefore US policy in general.

No.  We've seen others who have a brain as well.  Aderholt never completely trusted Stan, neither did Gaad, and we saw more of the "real" FBI with Taffet as well.

Again, STAN LIVED ACROSS THE STREET.  Stan was pals with a KGB agent.  Stan ate dinner with them, attended EST with Philip, booked FBI trips with their travel agency.

It's not just going to be local agents investigating this, they will throw the force of the full FBI at it, and probably others as well. 

Stan WILL be questioned.  Stan WILL be polygraphed.  They will find out.  

Personally I think Stan will turn himself in before any of the obvious happens.  Possibly trying to delay long enough to "out" his new bride, if he has the chance.

Any possible outcome of the FBI not discovering what Stan did is frankly, idiotic.  

25 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

But in the show itself nobody's saying this. Oleg's dad's only upset at Oleg being in jail. 

They said exactly that, several times.  I don't know what you mean.  ??

25 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Sure, but Claudia was also like Elizabeth in that she seemed unwilling to see the government she supported as being a problem as well. The thing she was giving her life to keep going was failing for lots of reasons, not just because of enemies without and within. The people she's backing can't turn back the clock.

I can't imagine her being any other way given what we know about her, but I'm also not sure she won't be able to adjust to being about the Russian Federation rather than the USSR. 

Oh Claudia may survive.  I seriously doubt Elizabeth, Philip, Arkady, or Oleg's family will.

25 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Yeah, it's funny that the one thing that speech didn't make me think was that Stan was committed to catching Russians to defend his country. It seems more like an expression of some kind of inner conflict.

They were murdering innocent Americans as well as trying to undermine the USA.  He knew, because he was following all of it.  

[sistermagpie]

3 hours ago, Umbelina said:

No.  We've seen others who have a brain as well.  Aderholt never completely trusted Stan, neither did Gaad, and we saw more of the "real" FBI with Taffet as well.

No, no, when I said nobody else would do what Stan did I meant that no other FBI agent is set up with the potential to protect KGB agents like Stan does with the Jennings. No other agent gets professionally compromised the way Stan does almost right away.

As to other agents figuring out that Stan let the Jennings go, I absolutely think that could happen. Even without practical evidence like Stan's disappearance from a stake-out at the right time to be there when the Jennings picked Paige up at her apartment where he claims he went by and nobody was there, he's already considered untrustworthy by many at the FBI and CIA. His reputation should be the opposite of a loyal agent nobody would suspect. Gaad already recommended he be fired once and that was before S5 where iirc he openly threatened to use his own behavior against the government if they tried to lean on Oleg because Stan, it seemed to me, felt that would make him look personally dishonorable. 

The FBI should suspect Stan, even if he did suggest the Jennings a suspects to Adderholt (which didn't get them caught).

 

[Umbelina]

Yeah, I think Stan will eat a bullet, either due to the hopelessness, or from finding out Philip is correct about his wife, or both.

 

[Roseanna]

On 1/31/2021 at 9:54 PM, Umbelina said:

They were murdering innocent Americans as well as trying to undermine the USA.  He knew, because he was following all of it.  

That way thinking is not, just as Nina said, that of the intelligence officer.

Instead of "undermining the USA", Elizabeth wants to *defend* her country. Her fear that the US will attack it was strengthened by Reagan's speech. Spies like Philip who sent exact information (the murder attempt on Reagan, the general's assurance that America's new weapons cpuldn't be made) were necessary to prevent the war.

Whatever happened in the past, now it's definitely in the US interests to support Gorbatschow against the Conservative Communists and to see both Oleg and P&E in that light. 

As for "killing innocent Americans", when an Iranian intelligence officer killed his ex-wife in the US soil in Homeland, it was no obstacle to Saul to recruit him as an American agent (I don't know if she was yet a citizen but she had been his friend and protege).

[Umbelina]

4 hours ago, Roseanna said:

That way thinking is not, just as Nina said, that of the intelligence officer.

Instead of "undermining the USA", Elizabeth wants to *defend* her country. Her fear that the US will attack it was strengthened by Reagan's speech. Spies like Philip who sent exact information (the murder attempt on Reagan, the general's assurance that America's new weapons cpuldn't be made) were necessary to prevent the war.

Whatever happened in the past, now it's definitely in the US interests to support Gorbatschow against the Conservative Communists and to see both Oleg and P&E in that light. 

As for "killing innocent Americans", when an Iranian intelligence officer killed his ex-wife in the US soil in Homeland, it was no obstacle to Saul to recruit him as an American agent (I don't know if she was yet a citizen but she had been his friend and protege).

The FBI and CIA are very very different.

Saul is different from Stan as well.  Saul's job is to develop assets around the world to keep the USA informed in modern complicated times.  Stan's job is to protect Americans on US soil back in the seventies and eighties when the USSR was the primary enemy.  

Stan knows that Elizabeth and Philip have killed dozens of Americans, many of those civilians, and some FBI or police.  He's a glorified cop, and cops don't let other cops get murdered without consequences.  

Edited February 2, 2021 by Umbelina

[Roseanna]

7 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Stan knows that Elizabeth and Philip have killed dozens of Americans, many of those civilians, and some FBI or police.  He's a glorified cop, and cops don't let other cops get murdered without consequences. 

Do cops murder? Stan murdered Vlad in revenge.   

[sistermagpie]

12 hours ago, Roseanna said:

That way thinking is not, just as Nina said, that of the intelligence officer.

Instead of "undermining the USA", Elizabeth wants to *defend* her country. Her fear that the US will attack it was strengthened by Reagan's speech. Spies like Philip who sent exact information (the murder attempt on Reagan, the general's assurance that America's new weapons cpuldn't be made) were necessary to prevent the war.

Whatever happened in the past, now it's definitely in the US interests to support Gorbatschow against the Conservative Communists and to see both Oleg and P&E in that light. 

As for "killing innocent Americans", when an Iranian intelligence officer killed his ex-wife in the US soil in Homeland, it was no obstacle to Saul to recruit him as an American agent (I don't know if she was yet a citizen but she had been his friend and protege).

 

8 hours ago, Umbelina said:

The FBI and CIA are very very different.

Saul is different from Stan as well.  Saul's job is to develop assets around the world to keep the USA informed in modern complicated times.  Stan's job is to protect Americans on US soil back in the seventies and eighties when the USSR was the primary enemy.  

Stan knows that Elizabeth and Philip have killed dozens of Americans, many of those civilians, and some FBI or police.  He's a glorified cop, and cops don't let other cops get murdered without consequences.  

Thinking over the series, it seems like Stan has a very different mindset from not just Philip and Elizabeth, but many other agents and I think that's intentional. Stan spent most of his career chasing bank robbers--his undercover work with the white supremicists was tied to that too. He even tells Henry that's what he dreamed of doing. His head is really never far into counterintelligence the same way. 

He's not a traitor, obviously, but he's not focused on international relations or defending his country in the way other are. Like this convo made me remember that conversation he has with Gaad where Vietnam comes up. Stan says he was at the academy at the time and Gaad says he was too...but he still went. Of course it doesn't make Stan unpatriotic to have not fought in Vietnam, but he kind of stands out amongst many of the adults for not being tied to it in some way. Gaad and Amador fought in it. Philip, Elizabeth, Pastor Tim and Gregory all say something about being against it. I'm sure Stan had thoughts about it at the time, but he's specifically not presented as being focused on the Cold War or American interests in that way. When he says he doesn't care who the leader of Russia is, I believe him.

But then even from the pov of being a cop Stan always stands apart from the others in his division. He doesn't feel as strongly about cops getting killed as his fellow agents do from the very start--when Gaad sets up a plot to revenge FBI agents killed by the USSR, Stan declines to participate. He always seems to see people more as personal connects vs. strangers rather than Us vs. Them.

[Umbelina]

3 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

But then even from the pov of being a cop Stan always stands apart from the others in his division. He doesn't feel as strongly about cops getting killed as his fellow agents do from the very start--when Gaad sets up a plot to revenge FBI agents killed by the USSR, Stan declines to participate. He always seems to see people more as personal connects vs. strangers rather than Us vs. Them.

He murdered a Russian when a cop was killed.  He was so devastated he went to his ex wife to talk when another cop he knew was killed.

[Roseanna]

18 hours ago, Umbelina said:

He murdered a Russian when a cop was killed.  He was so devastated he went to his ex wife to talk when another cop he knew was killed.

That murder just showed that Stan was motivated only by personal matters. He was neither a professional nor a team player.

Whatever can be said about P&E, they killed only because they followed orders, or to prevent themselves from being caught. Well, the last times Elizabeth killed she did so for charity and to save a life.

When Claudia once urged Elizabeth to revenge on her own, it failed and she let the CIA man to go. Of course he also succeeded to make her unsure.

 

[Umbelina]

30 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

That murder just showed that Stan was motivated only by personal matters. He was neither a professional nor a team player.

Whatever can be said about P&E, they killed only because they followed orders, or to prevent themselves from being caught. Well, the last times Elizabeth killed she did so for charity and to save a life.

When Claudia once urged Elizabeth to revenge on her own, it failed and she let the CIA man to go. Of course he also succeeded to make her unsure.

 

Elizabeth killed a general and a sailor and an old woman doing the books at her son's shop, she killed anyone who got in her way, especially during the last season.  She killed a random guy who was working on his car.  She killed her "friend" the AA woman who felt guilty and wanted to confess.  She killed so many people it's hard to even remember them all.

Aside from that?  She was an illegal spying on the USA, which alone is enough for a death penalty, but at the very least, both she and Philip hold VAST information that would be useful to Stan's country.

It's absurd.

I'm not trying to convince anyone else, just stating my opinion, which frankly, has only become stronger since the show ended.

Yes, Stan was an individualist with emotional issues from being embedded for too long, and partially due to that his marriage dissolved, and so he was also fairly easily conned by another Russian spy who used sex to control him as long as possible.  However, there is nothing to say that Stan was not a patriot, and not committed to his country.  If anything, he was blind to America's faults and just as fanatical about his country as Elizabeth and Claudia were about their own.

 

Edited February 3, 2021 by Umbelina

[sistermagpie]

20 hours ago, Umbelina said:

He murdered a Russian when a cop was killed.  He was so devastated he went to his ex wife to talk when another cop he knew was killed.

He murdered Vlad because his partner (who he has some responsibility for) was killed and went to Sandra when a good friend was killed in a plane crash. He didn't just feel connected to the victims because they were cops. When the rest of the department wanted to kidnap Arkady to avenge FBI agents Stan didn't have a personal connection to he didn't join in. He was only emotional about the personal connection. And even a personal connection isn't enough if something else is more important to him at the time.

[Umbelina]

21 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

He murdered Vlad because his partner (who he has some responsibility for) was killed and went to Sandra when a good friend was killed in a plane crash. He didn't just feel connected to the victims because they were cops. When the rest of the department wanted to kidnap Arkady to avenge FBI agents Stan didn't have a personal connection to he didn't join in. He was only emotional about the personal connection. And even a personal connection isn't enough if something else is more important to him at the time.

Good point.

However, are you seriously saying that you don't think Stan had ANY loyalty to the FBI, or to the United States of America, nor ANY feelings of responsibility to uphold his oath of office, or his duty?  

I [name] do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

I have taken that oath, and I would have left my job before betraying it, even when I wasn't very "patriotic."  Ever.  If anything, I believe Stan took it even more seriously.

[sistermagpie]

2 hours ago, Umbelina said:

However, are you seriously saying that you don't think Stan had ANY loyalty to the FBI, or to the United States of America, nor ANY feelings of responsibility to uphold his oath of office, or his duty?  

 

Oh no, I'm not saying he had no loyalty at all. Stan to me seems like he's motivated by a personal feeling of honor, and betraying his country or the FBI is something he would consider dishonorable so he wouldn't do it. 

But he also has plenty of personal relationships and other things where he wants to be honorable, and those interests don't always line up with the FBI or have anything to do with his country--but he'll sometimes put them above anything else if it wouldn't make him personally feel like a traitor. So, for instance, he'll totally put Nina above the FBI's interests up to a point, but handing over Echo is not something he can justify to himself the way he can justify other things he does. Sometimes he doesn't even just justify them, but convince himself that the FBI is wrong for not doing what he wants. I think that's something that totally comes up in the next ep in his dealings with Gaad.

 

 

[Roseanna]

On 2/4/2021 at 12:25 AM, Umbelina said:

However, are you seriously saying that you don't think Stan had ANY loyalty to the FBI, or to the United States of America, nor ANY feelings of responsibility to uphold his oath of office, or his duty?  

I [name] do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

I have taken that oath, and I would have left my job before betraying it, even when I wasn't very "patriotic."  Ever.  If anything, I believe Stan took it even more seriously.

It's by no means self-evident what patriotism is. Was Joe McCarthy patriotic when he insisted that people informed on others' opinions?

Also, nobody can be sure *beforehand* how he/she or somebody else would behave in a certain situation, especially if a person has more than one object of loyalty. If f.ex. one's husband or son becomes a deserter, can one really inform on him? (Of course, it also depends on which country and war it is.)

[Umbelina]

Stan would not give up his whole life, or the security of his country, for some dude that lived across the street from him for a few years, a dude who lied to him every single day while working to destroy his country, killing innocent civilians, and soldiers, and police, and cops, even killing Stan's defector couple in a horrific blood bath that their little son had to see.

NEVER.  HAPPEN.

Edited February 5, 2021 by Umbelina

[sistermagpie]

8 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Stan would not give up his whole life, or the security of his country, for some dude that lived across the street from him for a few years, a dude who lied to him every single day while working to destroy his country, killing innocent civilians, and soldiers, and police, and cops, even killing Stan's defector couple in a horrific blood bath that their little son had to see.

NEVER.  HAPPEN.

But remember this is a guy who went so far as to steal secret weapons technology to hand over to the same KGB to get Nina, a woman he had less of a real relationship with than he did with Philip. That would have struck a much worse blow to the US and US security than letting go two Directorate S agents who were on their way out--and Stan came this close to doing it! 

[Umbelina]

12 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

But remember this is a guy who went so far as to steal secret weapons technology to hand over to the same KGB to get Nina, a woman he had less of a real relationship with than he did with Philip. That would have struck a much worse blow to the US and US security than letting go two Directorate S agents who were on their way out--and Stan came this close to doing it! 

We all know sex and romantic love, through history, has made some men idiots/traitors and more.  "Love" is very different than "lives across the street."  Also, Nina never murdered anyone, was not an "illegal" and the entire country was not searching for her.  He felt she really wanted to defect, she, like many others at that time, wanted out of the USSR.  (Stan's mind)  

Philip just wanted to escape capture for his many, many, many serious crimes.  Had Philip wanted to defect?  Stan might have helped him.

Bottom line, he didn't do it.

[sistermagpie]

11 hours ago, Umbelina said:

We all know sex and romantic love, through history, has made some men idiots/traitors and more.  "Love" is very different than "lives across the street."  Also, Nina never murdered anyone, was not an "illegal" and the entire country was not searching for her.  He felt she really wanted to defect, she, like many others at that time, wanted out of the USSR.  (Stan's mind)  

 

I would argue Philip was more than just a guy who lived across the street. But even so, that's not the only thing to consider. In the garage Stan was faced with an extreme situation where all he had to do was not be able, in that moment, to shoot people he'd come to care about. 

In the other case, even if Nina herself was an innocent in Stan's eyes and a woman he was besotted with, he wasn't doing to her what he did with Philip, letting her go instead of sending her to jail. He was handing over surveillance reports (leverage over himself) and then coming very close to handing over weapons techology to the KGB who he did know were murderers. And in order to do that he had to think about his actions, plan how to steal classified information and then do it. Eventually he couldn't take that final step, but only after he'd gotten himself all the info and illegally recorded it.

That's a series of active decisions he's making to lie and steal that info in order to hand it over to the KGB in exchange for Nina, knowing it would be used against the US. In the garage he's making one decision to step back and let the FBI do things their way. 

[Roseanna]

7 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

I would argue Philip was more than just a guy who lived across the street. But even so, that's not the only thing to consider. In the garage Stan was faced with an extreme situation where all he had to do was not be able, in that moment, to shoot people he'd come to care about. 

In the other case, even if Nina herself was an innocent in Stan's eyes and a woman he was besotted with, he wasn't doing to her what he did with Philip, letting her go instead of sending her to jail. He was handing over surveillance reports (leverage over himself) and then coming very close to handing over weapons techology to the KGB who he did know were murderers. And in order to do that he had to think about his actions, plan how to steal classified information and then do it. Eventually he couldn't take that final step, but only after he'd gotten himself all the info and illegally recorded it.

That's a series of active decisions he's making to lie and steal that info in order to hand it over to the KGB in exchange for Nina, knowing it would be used against the US. In the garage he's making one decision to step back and let the FBI do things their way. 

That's how I see it, too. Philip wasn't just "a quy who lived across the street" but Stan's only friend. Friendship can be just as important as love.

Stan's first fateful decision was to go alone because he wanted an explanation from Philip: had his friendship been a lie? It was all personal to Stan.

Also generally, the series that had all the time shown the Russian spies not as monsters but human beings with the the same virtues and flaws just like Americans, couldn't just end with Stan catching P&E, still less killing them, nor P&E or Philip with children defecting. The other alternative was that predicted by the secret wedding a la Romeo and Juliet: Philip and Elizabeth would become so different politically that the one would kill the other or they would kill each other.  

[Umbelina]

14 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

In the garage he's making one decision to step back and let the FBI do things their way. 

He IS the FBI.

5 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Also generally, the series that had all the time shown the Russian spies not as monsters but human beings with the the same virtues and flaws just like Americans

Like Stan walking through the blood bath of Sophia and Gennardi's murder's to carry out their traumatized blood covered young son Ilia? 

Like Amador gut stabbed by Philip?

Like Elizabeth killing both a sailor and a General and three security guards quite recently?

Elizabeth choking to death Evan?

Like Philip snapping the neck of an innocent scientist who is trying to grow disease resistant wheat?

Like handing over the Lassa Virus so thousands of Afghanistan people could be murdered?

Like Elizabeth executing the completely innocent husband of a suspected Nazi collaborator?

Like Philip strangling to death an airport security guard?

Like Elizabeth smashing Lisa's head in with a bottle, leaving her children motherless?

Like Gaad being murdered in Thailand because of Philip's information?

Like Elizabeth kicking a tire jack out from under a car to murder Tom, just to create a vacancy at a lab?

Like Elizabeth killing Betty so the mail robot could be bugged?

Like Philip killing Gene to protect Martha's cover?

Like Philip shooting Salar and Matteen in an Afghan restaurant, Philip exits out the back and kills a busboy who sees him leaving.

Like Philip shooting two navy seals?

Like the various people who died via agents of The Jennings?  

Like Philip killing the student while disguised as a Janitor?

Like when Elizabeth shoots and kills two Nicaraguan field commanders being secretly trained at a camp in the US.

Like Philip killing the cook?

Like killing the driver Rendell?

Or this one?  In order to get their agent Yousaf Rana more access to information, Elizabeth kills his boss, Pervez, by attacking him in a swimming pool. After holding him underwater, she doses him with a spray that results in his death by a heart attack.

Like when Elizabeth kills Casper Weinberger's guard?

There were many more murders and deaths of course, and a great deal of intelligence that would hurt the USA stolen, but please don't tell me these people were "the same" as Americans in the show, because no, they were not.

Stan knew several of the above murders were done by "illegals" and some he just suspected, others happened before the show began, but I'm sure they were in FBI files.  

 

 

[sistermagpie]

2 hours ago, Umbelina said:

He IS the FBI.

I meant that the FBI wasn't going after the Jennings at that point. Stan was just supposed to be watching the garage and went rougue by driving over the Paige's instead. So he was letting things go the way they would have if he had just followed orders (for once!), with the FBI landing on the Jennings based on Father Andre's info. In the garage Stan was a man and an FBI agent and the man was stronger there.

 

[Roseanna]

20 hours ago, Umbelina said:

but please don't tell me these people were "the same" as Americans in the show, because no, they were not.

Well, it's common that people think that "ours" are good and "them" are bad. But the more history one reads, the more one understands that people aren't so different - or at least wouldn't be if the circumstances were the same. 

When I am not angry towards the real historical traitors, even if their aim had come true, my family's fate would have sealed, why would I be angry towards fictional characters?

[Umbelina]

5 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Well, it's common that people think that "ours" are good and "them" are bad. But the more history one reads, the more one understands that people aren't so different - or at least wouldn't be if the circumstances were the same. 

When I am not angry towards the real historical traitors, even if their aim had come true, my family's fate would have sealed, why would I be angry towards fictional characters?

It has nothing to do with anger at fictional characters.  It has nothing to do with who was worse in real life either.  I'm discussing a television show.  On the SHOW, Philip and Elizabeth were far far far more murderous than any American depicted.

It has to do with frustration with the writers and showrunners who ruined a wonderful show by ending it with complete bullshit.

[Roseanna]

On 1/31/2021 at 4:44 PM, Umbelina said:

By the way, I've read quite about about Russia, the USSR, both world wars, etc. over the years.  I've certainly been aware of the Battle of Stalingrad, but I know more about the siege/blockade of Leningrad.

Anyway, recently I started focusing in a bit more on Stalingrad, trying to focus on various people involved more than simply military strategy and mistakes.  During that I've read a couple of good books.  Blood Red Snow (basically reconstructed diary/notes of a German machine gunner) focusing on day to day events.  Also Enemy at the Gates, which is combining both battle history/decisions on both sides with real people on both sides, their stories, their outcomes.  (both books available on Kindle Unlimited BTW)

We all know it was beyond horrific for both sides, the cannibalism (similar stories in Leningrad, but in many ways, quite different circumstances, starvation being the common denominator.   For me, given Claudia's age and actions at the time of the battle(*s) there, it's perfectly understandable that, having lived through that, along with having her side winning, not just the battle, but really the war, since that was the key turning point during WWII?  She's SO understandable, and she earned her extreme patriotism in ways that few will ever understand.

In a way the second book also touches on both Philip and Elizabeth, or at least some things from their history.  There was a concentration camp in Smolensk, which, in part held German POW's.  We knew about Philip being raised in a Gulag town, but for some reason I was surprised about Elizabeth sharing that in part.  Her big city had much more than a horrific prison where people died horrible deaths though, where Philip's entire town was built, essentially for the Gulag, or sprung up around that.  Of course there were German POW's everywhere in the Gulag system, most died, many were simply shot immediately and they were probably the lucky ones.  

Back to Claudia though, I think the writers did attempt, kind of half heartedly, since she was not a primary character, to show us a tiny bit of what shaped her character by revealing that she was a survivor of Stalingrad.  Of course they did something similar with Gabriel, late in the story, by having him be part of Stalin's goon squads.  I really wish we'd had much more of them instead of Pastor Tim.  Great characters that could each probably anchor a miniseries or movie.

To me, almost every time the writers tried to explain their Russian characters' background, they made serious flaws, not to speak of the scenes in Russia that seemed always more or less meretricious.

As it's likely that Gabriel worked abroad or at least for the foreign intelligence already in the 30ies, he could have forced to give testimony against his colleagues, but not to imprison them as this was done by the other organs.

As for Claudia, her background is completely presented according the official Soviet version. Not that there hadn't been much heroism, but it wasn't the whole truth. F.ex. only during the battle of Stalingrad thousands of soldiers were condemned to death. After the war, only men were regarded as heroes, whereas women who went to the front were often suspected to be "sluts" by soldiers' wives and unmarried soldiers rather married younger women than their female comrades.

The episode that annoyed me most was that where P&E killed that old lady for her "war crimes". She was a teenager who was caught and got drunk by the Germans when she was ordered to shot people - probably afraid what would happen to her if she refused.

Instead, Soviet partisans who killed all civilians in Finnish villages, are even today regarded as "heroes". 

 

[Umbelina]

8 hours ago, Roseanna said:

To me, almost every time the writers tried to explain their Russian characters' background, they made serious flaws, not to speak of the scenes in Russia that seemed always more or less meretricious.

As it's likely that Gabriel worked abroad or at least for the foreign intelligence already in the 30ies, he could have forced to give testimony against his colleagues, but not to imprison them as this was done by the other organs.

As for Claudia, her background is completely presented according the official Soviet version. Not that there hadn't been much heroism, but it wasn't the whole truth. F.ex. only during the battle of Stalingrad thousands of soldiers were condemned to death. After the war, only men were regarded as heroes, whereas women who went to the front were often suspected to be "sluts" by soldiers' wives and unmarried soldiers rather married younger women than their female comrades.

The episode that annoyed me most was that where P&E killed that old lady for her "war crimes". She was a teenager who was caught and got drunk by the Germans when she was ordered to shot people - probably afraid what would happen to her if she refused.

Instead, Soviet partisans who killed all civilians in Finnish villages, are even today regarded as "heroes". 

 

I agree completely.  

I really hated that story in particular, the young girl had no choice, and her husband was completely innocent as well.  

Stalin killing his own soldiers is still so astonishing to me.  It's why the whole "Elizabeth's father was a traitor/coward" story just being dangled out there bothered me so much.  Stalin considered anyone who retreated a traitor/coward, even though strategic military retreats have won wars.  Many of the soldiers didn't even have guns, or if they did, ran out of ammunition, but to surrender or retreat was cowardice and they would be shot anyway.

What a horrible war that was.

[sistermagpie]

15 hours ago, Roseanna said:

The episode that annoyed me most was that where P&E killed that old lady for her "war crimes". She was a teenager who was caught and got drunk by the Germans when she was ordered to shot people - probably afraid what would happen to her if she refused.

 

I can't remember the details, but wasn't she loosely based on somebody who regularly did that and slept with the Germans and so was eventually smuggled out by them? I seem to remember the character was like two people in one--her own story was that of the teenager who they got drunk and she had to kill or be killed (and nobody judging her can really say they wouldn't do the same) but her record as given to the Jennings was that of a person who decided to accept German protection longterm. (Again, not that I could say I wouldn't have done the same, but it wasn't just the one incident.)

There would be a lot more complicating that situation as well, but I guess Eilzabeth could be counted on to not see the nuances. I seem to remember the showrunners intended her to be a true war criminal? The whole thing was just too contrived imo.

[Umbelina]

18 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

I can't remember the details, but wasn't she loosely based on somebody who regularly did that and slept with the Germans and so was eventually smuggled out by them? I seem to remember the character was like two people in one--her own story was that of the teenager who they got drunk and she had to kill or be killed (and nobody judging her can really say they wouldn't do the same) but her record as given to the Jennings was that of a person who decided to accept German protection longterm. (Again, not that I could say I wouldn't have done the same, but it wasn't just the one incident.)

There would be a lot more complicating that situation as well, but I guess Eilzabeth could be counted on to not see the nuances. I seem to remember the showrunners intended her to be a true war criminal? The whole thing was just too contrived imo.

All it did really was show Elizabeth's fanaticism and ready willingness to murder.

By Elizabeth's standards, many who survived the concentration camps would be shot dead by her, for participating in various jobs that enabled the machine.  

Not one thing would have changed, except that poor teenage drunk girl would have died immediately instead of surviving.  All those she was forced to "execute" would still be dead.  She was forced to drink, gang raped multiple times, facing the horrors of blood, fear, death, torture as a teenager.

In a court, she would never be convicted.  Or if she was?  It would be argued forever as a landmark case of what not to do as a civilized society.  Her later actions were obviously Stockholm Syndrome, she was a victim.

Instead Elizabeth became judge, jury, and executioner of someone who had been through more hell than Elizabeth will ever know, and who had obviously both survived and rehabilitated herself.

I've met and listened to concentration camp survivors who carry massive guilt for the things they were forced to do, just for an extra square inch of moldy bread.  Massive efforts have been made to help those who survived forgive themselves.  For succumbing to torture and horrific circumstances, and carrying the guilt of whatever forced cooperation with Nazi's they endured.

 

[Roseanna]

19 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

I can't remember the details, but wasn't she loosely based on somebody who regularly did that and slept with the Germans and so was eventually smuggled out by them? I seem to remember the character was like two people in one--her own story was that of the teenager who they got drunk and she had to kill or be killed (and nobody judging her can really say they wouldn't do the same) but her record as given to the Jennings was that of a person who decided to accept German protection longterm. (Again, not that I could say I wouldn't have done the same, but it wasn't just the one incident.)

There would be a lot more complicating that situation as well, but I guess Eilzabeth could be counted on to not see the nuances. I seem to remember the showrunners intended her to be a true war criminal? The whole thing was just too contrived imo.

I watched the episode anew.

She told also that she had the only person left alone in a massacre where also her mother and father were murdered by the Nazis and she had to dig the pit where the offers were buried. After that, anybody would become crazy, still less a 16-year old girl (she said that she wasn't in her body).

Did she tell the truth? After all, her husband was then present. But I would believe her because of the exact details how she dug the pit. When she admitted her guilt before her husband came home, she told "the Soviet version": I betrayed my country, I betrayed my people, I shot them, but she couldn't tell the exact place - or rather, she hurried up to be so quick as possible before her husband came in.

 

[Roseanna]

On 2/9/2021 at 7:58 PM, Umbelina said:

"Elizabeth's father was a traitor/coward"

The "traitor's" whole family became pariahs - unless it was Elizabeth's mother who betrayed her husband. But any case she wouldn't have kept any photos of him at home.

With Elizabeth's background, she couldn't even become a local Komsomol leader, still less get a secret job abroad.

[sistermagpie]

5 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Not one thing would have changed, except that poor teenage drunk girl would have died immediately instead of surviving.  All those she was forced to "execute" would still be dead.  She was forced to drink, gang raped multiple times, facing the horrors of blood, fear, death, torture as a teenager.

 

Yeah, to me I could even argue they got a quick death that could have been worse. I don't think I'd feel that guilty about doing that myself. 

3 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Did she tell the truth? After all, her husband was then present. But I would believe her because of the exact details how she dug the pit. When she admitted her guilt before her husband came home, she told "the Soviet version": I betrayed my country, I betrayed my people, I shot them, but she couldn't tell the exact place - or rather, she hurried up to be so quick as possible before her husband came in.

 

And was there another story that Claudia told, like where they saw her as somebody who'd executed a lot of people over time and was smuggled out with the Germans? Something like that--I can't remember. Very much not my favorite episode. I seem to really not like the eps where old ladies speechify about how terrible I should feel about their murder before they're murdered!

3 hours ago, Roseanna said:

The "traitor's" whole family became pariahs - unless it was Elizabeth's mother who betrayed her husband. But any case she wouldn't have kept any photos of him at home.

With Elizabeth's background, she couldn't even become a local Komsomol leader, still less get a secret job abroad.

And I would assume her mother too, right? It seemed like she had a pretty respectable Party job herself. Meanwhile Philip has memories of people glaring at him and wonders if his mother disapproved of his father's job when it seems to me being a prison guard would be perfectly fine. 

It would almost have been interesting to think that Elizabeth basically blocked out a whole childhood of knowing her father was a mark of shame, except clearly her life was not like that.

[Umbelina]

3 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

Meanwhile Philip has memories of people glaring at him and wonders if his mother disapproved of his father's job when it seems to me being a prison guard would be perfectly fine. 

In smaller gulag towns (when basically the whole town is a gulag and gulag guards) there are still levels of status, and each town was slightly different as well.

However, families of prisoners DID sometimes travel with the prisoners, set up a place to live nearby, interact with the rest of the small town (guards, etc.)

Philip's dad came home with a pair of bloody boots.  I think that could have been because he was an executioner, or simply a cruel guard who beat up prisoners, or killed them (for things like their boots.)  

Guards in many places got better food as well, though that didn't seem to be the case for Philip's family, so he MAY have been the lowest of the low (except for prisoners) or he may have been a prisoner himself, promoted by snitching to guard.

The show chose to dwell only on Elizabeth, so who knows?

[Umbelina]

7 hours ago, Roseanna said:

The "traitor's" whole family became pariahs - unless it was Elizabeth's mother who betrayed her husband. But any case she wouldn't have kept any photos of him at home.

With Elizabeth's background, she couldn't even become a local Komsomol leader, still less get a secret job abroad.

Exactly.

The implication seemed to be that Liz's mother was trading sex for favors.  It's also remotely possible that though her father was called a "deserter" that really didn't happen, and locals knew that, though they couldn't contradict Stalin's absurd rules, it just wasn't true.

As I said, any soldier (or squad, or division) that retreated at all, even under orders, or with no guns/ammunition/food for weeks, or chance in hell against German tanks were called "deserters" and "traitors."  If they were captured they were ALSO "deserters and traitors."

Stalin was insane.

[Roseanna]

7 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

And was there another story that Claudia told, like where they saw her as somebody who'd executed a lot of people over time and was smuggled out with the Germans? Something like that--I can't remember. Very much not my favorite episode. I seem to really not like the eps where old ladies speechify about how terrible I should feel about their murder before they're murdered!

The only thing Claudia and Nathalie/Anna agreed was that she had executed people. But Claudia wasn't interested in circumstances and motives. Of course there are teenagers who kill even in normal times, but I would bet that a normal sixteen-year old girl, after seeing her parents murdered in the massacre, if she didn't want to die herself, would as Claudia/Nathalie either do anything to save her life or would no more care what she did and what happened to her.

Claudia said contemptuously that N/A had slept so many German soldiers that she had got venereal disease - well, even one man is enough, and did she really have a choice to say "no".  

Claudia said that N/A killed "our boys", meaning POWS, but some groups of Soviet soldiers weren't even taken as prisoners and others were given to SS to be murdered. These groups were racial (Jews, Asians), political (Politruks, Komissars, members of the Communist Party) and those who had more than elemental education. Others were let to die of hunger and diseases in the POW camps. 

It would have been natural that a person who had worked for the Germans, would have sense to leave with them when they retreated. (You didn't have to do anything, living under the occupation alone made you at least a second class citizen. Whole nationals were punished collectively for treason by moving them thousands miles away.)

[sistermagpie]

16 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Exactly.

The implication seemed to be that Liz's mother was trading sex for favors.  It's also remotely possible that though her father was called a "deserter" that really didn't happen, and locals knew that, though they couldn't contradict Stalin's absurd rules, it just wasn't true.

That's one thing that seemed impossible to me, that her mother was trading sex for favors, because one of the few things we see of her is her refusing to even take food from a guy because he would want sex. Which of course wouldn't mean that she'd never slept with somebody for food in the past when things were more difficult, but the way that scene played out on all sides seemed to imply her mother was "respectable" in that sense.

It's odd that Elizabeth's story seems so clearly laid out--we have all the most important emotional beats--but even so it contains these big questions that don't make sense. It would make me wonder if it was playing with Elizabeth's own memory, but there seems little reason for her to remember something like her mother saying her father was a traitor.

Philip's story has only a few vague notes as flashbacks, but then still has this big confusing idea to it.

 

 

[Roseanna]

On 2/11/2021 at 7:03 AM, Umbelina said:

Philip's dad came home with a pair of bloody boots.  I think that could have been because he was an executioner, or simply a cruel guard who beat up prisoners, or killed them (for things like their boots.) 

Guards were remunerated for shooting a prisoner who "attempted to escape" which of course made them eager to shoot f.ex. a prisoner who took a step away from the line to lift something. Prisoners knew well that shooting was done without warning, but f.ex. a butt of cigarette could be too great a temptation for them. 

Criminals used to rob other prisoners from any valuables, which proper boots were in the Arctic climate, so it's also possible that Philip's father had bought boots.

[Roseanna]

On 2/10/2021 at 9:20 PM, Umbelina said:

All it did really was show Elizabeth's fanaticism and ready willingness to murder.

By Elizabeth's standards, many who survived the concentration camps would be shot dead by her, for participating in various jobs that enabled the machine. 

In this episode it's Elizabeth who seems to be touched by Nathalie/Anna's story (Elizabeth's eye make-up has flowed) whereas Philip is stone-faced. It's only after Philip reachs out to shoot that Elizabeth shoots - it could be in order to spare Philip. And afterwards in the car Elizabeth says that she wants "no more this".

Also generally, because Elizabeth is ideologically rigid, she seems tougher than Philip, but early in the series she acts against the regulations and even takes the risk of leaving an eyewitness alive. On the other hand, because Philip says his doubts aloud, it's often forgotten that after accepting the task he completes it by hook or by crook.

[sistermagpie]

Just watched March 8, 1983. This one’s hard to write about – it doesn’t break down the way I’ve been doing the others and plays differently now that the show’s over. I’m going to try to break it down into themes I noticed in the ep that seem important for the show.

 

"THAT'S HOW IT WORKS, RIGHT?"

I noticed several personal arguments masquerading as moral ones and vice versa, most obviously in two parallel scenes where Stan and Philip confess to something rebellious.

Stan confesses he’s been being blackmailed by Oleg for months in secret and getting him on tape confirming Zinaida is a spy. Stan wants to trade her for Nina and blackmail Oleg and justifies all this by saying he couldn’t live with the moral wrong of Nina going to jail. He reproachfully tells Gaad that Nina was “our agent” and so they should do all they can to save her.

But Nina was never “our” agent even before she confessed to Arkady. The FBI treated her badly by blackmailing her, not by not considering her one of their own. In fact, when Stan learns the CIA is going to do just what he claimed was right by trading Zinaida for one of “our” informants, he’s clearly disappointed. It’s not the FBI who made promises and betrayed Nina, but Stan himself. He’s projecting his personal guilt onto Gaad, hoping the bureau will do what he couldn't. But it's not really about professional ethics.

Philip sending his family to Europe is framed by both him and Gabriel as a personal demand, but Elizabeth has given everything to the Centre, and the Centre would arrange a trip like this in a second if they thought they could get the slightest thing out of it. So, in a way Philip really is arguing about how the Centre should treat their agents.

Gabriel responds with his own shaming speech, saying that everything he did he’d done to protect Philip and Philip sees him as the enemy because he’s not getting what he personally wants, that Philip sees something wrong with Elizabeth for not seeing things the way he does when it’s really Philip who’s got something wrong with him.

Philip and Gaad respond similarly to these attempts at shaming. Gaad says, “Don’t give me a speech about how we should treat our agents,” presumably referring to Stan being compromised, lying and sleeping with Nina. Likewise, Philip seems similarly unimpressed with Gabriel, who’s spent the season trying to recruit Paige, using Mischa to get Philip into bed with Kimberly and gaslighting him, now claiming his priority is protecting Philip. He knows what Gabriel’s job is and so does Gabriel. The Attorney General, otoh, completely buys Stan's actions as that of a super patriot whose hands shouldn't be tied by red tape.

This mixing of moral and personal arguments also, imo, applies to Paige. After this first aired, there was a lot of discussion about Paige’s telling Pastor Tim about her parents, and a lot of it assumed a moral motivation: Her parents didn’t take her religion seriously enough, she could never be turned, etc. But we now know that Paige will betray her country without much struggle, and toss her cross in the actual garbage. It may seem in this episode that Paige is repulsed by the situation as a Christian or an American, but what comes later suggests that that really isn’t it.

We’ve seen Paige lie when it suits her. When she tells her mother “that’s not who I am,” she’s not, imo, saying she couldn’t ever lie, but that she can’t lie to “everyone” for “the rest of my life.” It’s not the sin of lying she’s afraid of, it’s a life without intimacy. This is a central theme throughout the show, and it’s laid out explicitly in this ep…in EST.

 

"WHEN YOU TRY TO SEPARATE SEX FROM INTIMACY AND HONESTY, IT ALWAYS GOES WRONG."

The show is never about Sandra Beeman, but she always clearly has a story going on. She was a single mother for years while telling herself she was still married, and now seems determined to not make similar mistakes with her new boyfriend. Stan, I must say, seems to make the opposite choice. By the end of the series he’s married to Renee, who seems to be a female version of the husband Stan wanted to be to Sandra—a superficially cheerful cipher.

Stan keeps a copy of the family photo album which we know he’ll be looking through in S6. He’s hurt at Sandra not wanting their wedding album, but, you know, Stan is not the victim there! 

Sandra says she feels like nobody’s ever really known her and suggests she and Philip tell each other everything. Philip honestly says he doesn’t think he can do that—but it’s amusing to imagine him trying. If you’ve ever seen the sketch “Jon Snow Goes to a Dinner Party,” that would be Philip.

Anyway, Sandra helpfully explains that although she and Philip are at a sex seminar, it’s not really about sex—it’s about everything. Knowing yourself and being known. This is what Paige, who’s always trying to earnestly communicate her real life/self in relationships, is being denied, and it makes sense she'd notice given that she’s grown up always consciously or unconsciously feeling like an outsider to whom her parents lie.

This is why sex work is the deal breaker for Paige in S6. She signs up for treason as a ticket to actual relationships, only to discover that her alleged friends are lying and manipulating her. Honeytrapping=fake intimacy.

 

“MY BODY BELONGS TO ME”

Anton tells Nina that the KGB has his body, but not his mind, so he must reduce his body’s power over him. In the Sex seminar people go in the other direction, listening to what their bodies are saying. Anton’s advice works well as a defense mechanism, but not in a healthy life. Philip admits to being disturbed at the toys in Gene’s apartment that reminded him of Henry, but the toys are significantly mostly robots, machine-bodies that carry out orders. (Philip will tell Elizabeth to stop acting like this in S6.)

Btw, Oleg also talks about people in Siberia often spending their lives in God-forsaken villages after they get out of the camps. No idea if this is meant to relate to Philip’s family or not.

 

“YOU WOULD NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING LIKE THAT”

Elizabeth’s story with Paige in S6 is laid out in their scenes in this ep. First they take a walk in Berlin. Elizabeth describes her mother as unlike grandmothers Paige is used to. When Paige says that she has friends who also have tough grandmothers Elizabeth says no, not like her mother. As in S6, Elizabeth simply refuses to let Paige build a bridge between their two countries. She can’t allow Paige to conceive of her Russian mother on American terms. Yet it’s the only frame of reference Paige has.

The woman who comes to their room in the next scene really doesn’t live up to Elizabeth’s warnings to Paige or Philip about how unlikable or intimidating her mother would be. She seems like a sick woman who loves her daughter. Elizabeth’s need to see her as so uniquely tough seems like it might come from Elizabeth’s retaining a child-perspective of her mother even as an adult.

After her grandmother leaves, Paige retreats to the bathroom to pray. It’s easy to project whatever one personally feels about prayer onto this scene, but in the end I think whatever Paige is experiencing in her prayer is less important than her body language. She’s hunched over with her eyes shut, arms up, shutting Elizabeth out. (Completely different from Jim and Kimmy’s praying together.) In fact, Paige herself will later tell Pastor Tim that she tried praying and it didn’t help, emphasizing even more how this moment isn’t about Paige’s relationship with God, but her relationship with Elizabeth.

When asked, Paige explains that she’s praying for Elizabeth’s mother rather than for her own grandmother, implying that whatever small smile she had when invited to hold hands with them in a circle, this meeting hasn’t made Paige feel like she has connected with family. And it comes after Paige has seen Elizabeth at her most honest, crying in her mother’s lap. It’s a gentle rejection, but still a rejection. In a ginormous bathroom.

That night, Paige is troubled, imagining Elizabeth’s mother letting her say goodbye forever. When asked if Elizabeth would “let her” do that herself, Elizabeth replies that Paige will never have to do anything like that. At the time, everyone noted how Elizabeth failed to answer Paige’s question. Back then it seemed like Elizabeth said what she did because she knew she would do what Paige is worried about and just didn't want to say it. The line read as ominous--for Paige.

But Elizabeth in fact always claims hasn't been and won't be asked to sacrifice Paige. She hasn’t thought through what she would or wouldn’t potentially agree to with Paige, she simply tells herself that Paige will not be asked to do anything Elizabeth wouldn’t want her to do. The Centre hasn’t ever promised Elizabeth that Paige will have a safe life, she just insists that’s how it will be, even when Philip points out it’s not true.

Stan and Elizabeth both try to push choices they don’t want to own onto their agency. Stan does it after the fact, judging the FBI for not saving Nina. Elizabeth does it beforehand, defending her own decisions by trusting the Centre to not make her regret them.

Paige is clearly even more glum by the time they get home, yet Elizabeth describes her as doing really well to Philip. She concludes the trip was good for her, though this isn’t supported by what we saw. At the time, some thought Elizabeth was lying to Philip, but again, I think she’s lying to herself more than Philip. This is a subject about which Elizabeth is incapable of being objective. Even as she tells Philip he’s not seeing things clearly with Martha, she’s seeing what she wants to see in Paige. Elizabeth can’t conceive of Paige reacting to her truth, life, mother and country in any other way than how Elizabeth wants.

Elizabeth’s ability to lie to herself about Paige will take over their relationship in S6. She’ll continue insisting that Paige has adopted Elizabeth’s past as her own. Continue telling herself Paige will never be in danger or sexually exploited. Then she’ll add more comforting lies to the pile, telling herself that Paige is learning from the mistakes she keeps making on the job, that she won’t find out about the murder and honey-potting, that her behavior in that bar can be cured with a shot of castor oil. And so on.

 

“UH, I THINK I HAVE JET LAG.”

One other small thing that just struck me, is it really does seem intentional how the show subtly suggests Paige is a homebody. There just tends to be a lot of moments where she’s uninterested in travel. Like here Henry’s jealous of her getting to go to Europe (I like to think Philip did take him, as Elizabeth suggests he will, during the time jump) while Paige barely seems to notice she’s in Germany. The show deliberately keeps her from ever setting foot in the USSR, or even behind the Iron Curtain. Back home she glumly declares it’s “weird” to be here (DC) now when they were there (West Berlin) before. (That’s how plane travel generally works.) Philip jokingly calls her a “big traveler” when she says she has jet lag.

None of these scenes are actually about Paige not wanting to travel (she probably doesn't even really have jet lag). But it adds up when throughout the show Paige is only ever either disinterested in going somewhere or loudly against it. The only times she’s associated with it positively is when her parents are speaking *for* her about potential trips that she never seems to take and that Paige herself never expresses interest in. The Paris poster in her room seems to satisfy her. Given that the show knows it's building up to her getting off a train and going home, it seems like it might be subtly intentional.

 

“GROW UP!”

This is Gabriel’s final, contemptuous order to Philip in their scene. It comes right after he’s compared him negatively to Elizabeth. However, this scene is juxtaposed with one in Berlin that seems to suggest the opposite. When her mother says she had to let her go because “everything was at stake” Elizabeth simply says, “I know.” This is not a sign of growth in Elizabeth. She's always accepted this vague justification. The blocking of the scene emphasizes a regression too—Elizabeth sits at her mother’s feet and looks up at her. She doesn’t even assert herself as also a mother by introducing Paige. Paige is noticed and called over by her grandmother. A resistance to change and growth is actually something in which Elizabeth takes pride.

After they return home, Elizabeth’s laser focus on her cause seems more powerful than ever. The camera even pulls focus to bring her forward, staring at Reagan on TV, while everything else (including Philip) fades out of focus. This set up metaphorically mirrors S6 when Elizabeth is also focused on her cause, front and center, trusting that Philip and Paige, behind her, are fine.

But where Elizabeth has begun to calcify in S6, Philip and Paige are have grown up. When Philip tries to explain his doubts about what he’s doing at the end of this ep, Elizabeth turns away to focus on Reagan. Like in S6, she can’t imagine anything Philip is saying here could be that important. So Philip simply falls silent. In S6, though, Philip will know what he wants to say and once he starts, Elizabeth can’t look away. Behind her back, Philip will figure a lot out, including exactly what he thinks is “wrong with her” as Gabriel says. Elizabeth remains the same steely-eyed soldier as she is here, but the world has changed behind her.

Paige, here, knows that she doesn’t want a life without intimacy. She sees the person she wants to be disappearing. But as a kid the only way she can think of save herself is to turn to an adult for help. That decision is eventually going to make her feel like she has no choice but to be isolated. 

Paige was also being a kid when she asked her mother for reassurance that she would never let her go. But she will eventually choose to do exactly what she’s describing here—to say goodbye forever. Her mother doesn’t let her do it. On the contrary, Elizabeth has by then taken control of Paige’s entire life and put herself at the center of it. When Elizabeth said Paige would never be asked to do leave forever, she herself was avoiding the idea of Paige growing up and leaving her. The Centre would keep them together.

Paige’s growing up is more literal than Philip’s. Her training period with Elizabeth seems, to me, to just give her a fantasy where she can feel safe until she outgrows the need for it. Elizabeth is rejected on both sides. Her mother didn’t let her go, she made her go. Elizabeth didn’t let Paige go, Paige left her.

But here, midway through the series, Elizabeth is at her most powerful, seeming to personify Reagan’s description of the USSR’s desire to “dominate” the world and declare “omnipotence over the individual man.” She’s already losing her grip, she just doesn’t know it, doesn’t see what’s going on behind her.

 

[Roseanna]

21 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

But here, midway through the series, Elizabeth is at her most powerful, seeming to personify Reagan’s description of the USSR’s desire to “dominate” the world and declare “omnipotence over the individual man.” She’s already losing her grip, she just doesn’t know it, doesn’t see what’s going on behind her.

An interesting comparison.

However, I can't help seeing Reagan's speech as frightening. First, when you label some country as evil, people are inclined to see not only its system and government but also its people as bad and the result is that bad people is allowed to treat badly.

Second, Reagan doesn't seem to have a faintest idea how the Soviet leaders would interpret his speech - that is, they saw it confirm that the US threatened their country with war. Luckily, spies like Gordievsky made him later change his mind and his began to understand what the nuclear war would mean after seeing that movie that was also dealt in the show.

Third, remembering how the Americans reacted to 9/11, can't one understand that the Russians were traumatized by much greater attacks on their country during the centuries? Also, notice the time line: it was after Napoleon conquered Moscow that Alexander I entered Paris, it was after Germany attacked the USSR that the Red Army conquered Berlin, it was after the US helped the exile Cubans to overthrow Castro that the Soviets sent missiles to Cuba. Etc.

I don't of course say that Soviets version was right, but that doesn't change that they saw their country as embattled. Of course, the Soviet regime also took advantage of that trauma in order to create, beside the October revolution (that was rather a coup), a national myth to gather the people together.

So Elizabeth's reaction is by no means foolish.

Also Philip's patriotism is always raised when he hears that something bad is done to "us" or "we" are in danger.

Edited February 15, 2021 by Roseanna
removed a word

[Roseanna]

9 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

Stan confesses he’s been being blackmailed by Oleg for months in secret and getting him on tape confirming Zinaida is a spy. Stan wants to trade her for Nina and blackmail Oleg and justifies all this by saying he couldn’t live with the moral wrong of Nina going to jail. He reproachfully tells Gaad that Nina was “our agent” and so they should do all they can to save her.

But Nina was never “our” agent even before she confessed to Arkady. The FBI treated her badly by blackmailing her, not by not considering her one of their own. In fact, when Stan learns the CIA is going to do just what he claimed was right by trading Zinaida for one of “our” informants, he’s clearly disappointed. It’s not the FBI who made promises and betrayed Nina, but Stan himself. He’s projecting his personal guilt onto Gaad, hoping the bureau will do what he couldn't. But it's not really about professional ethics.

- -

Philip and Gaad respond similarly to these attempts at shaming. Gaad says, “Don’t give me a speech about how we should treat our agents,” presumably referring to Stan being compromised, lying and sleeping with Nina. - - -The Attorney General, otoh, completely buys Stan's actions as that of a super patriot whose hands shouldn't be tied by red tape.

I have always wondered that excessive admiration towards "the lone wolf" who breaks all orders but is presented to alone know what is best for the country (f.ex. Carrie in Homeland). Could any institution really allow this kind of behavior and not to fear of him/her becoming loose cannon?

[Umbelina]

21 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

Btw, Oleg also talks about people in Siberia often spending their lives in God-forsaken villages after they get out of the camps. No idea if this is meant to relate to Philip’s family or not.

I wondered that too.

Then again, it was simply the truth, most had no money to travel the long distances to where ever "home" had been, not to mention the broken bodies and spirits.

I was watching a travel show on Vladivostok, and I'd guess nearly all of the city is descended from gulags, prisoners and even guards are the fathers, mothers, grandparents of nearly everyone who lives there now.  Some are finally telling their stories.

12 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I have always wondered that excessive admiration towards "the lone wolf" who breaks all orders but is presented to alone know what is best for the country (f.ex. Carrie in Homeland). Could any institution really allow this kind of behavior and not to fear of him/her becoming loose cannon?

Yeah, it's definitely a Hollywood trope, but it has also seeped into the consciousness.  Sometimes, it's a good thing.  The "whistleblowers" and the those who stand up against tyranny, or at least later write about it.  "Just following orders" has had an especially unpleasant connotation since WWII and the trials at Nuremburg.  

[sistermagpie]

15 hours ago, Roseanna said:

An interesting comparison.

However, I can't help seeing Reagan's speech as frightening. First, when you label some country as evil, people are inclined to see not only its system and government but also its people as bad and the result is that bad people is allowed to treat badly.

Oh, it is scary. I didn't mean to imply that Elizabeth's reaction was that unreasonable or that Reagan's speech wasn't dangerous--especially since he's speaking to Evangelicals, getting them to support nuclear war with the excuse that it's the war on "evil." Watching it now I couldn't help but note what an effectively sinister argument it was. He knew what he was doing and knew how to convince them/US-ians.

It just happens that at the same time Elizabeth's pov is dominating her household and she is trying to choose the fate of at least her daughter here. As an individual she does have a controlling personality!

It's funny, too, watching this ep how Elizabeth comes home and calls for Henry, now that we know how she'll wind up relating to him once she gets what she ostensibly wants with Paige.

Another thing I noticed on rewatch was the first time I think I felt like Philip wasn't paying much attention to Reagan's speech, but I think he is shown reacting to it also, just in a more muted way. He and Elizabeth exchange looks during it. And in fact, it might be making him set aside whatever he was trying to say. If Elizabeth seems reflected in the stuff about domination and deciding fates, the part in the speech about "removing yourself from the struggle between right and wrong, good and evil" is something that would speak to Philip.

 

15 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I have always wondered that excessive admiration towards "the lone wolf" who breaks all orders but is presented to alone know what is best for the country (f.ex. Carrie in Homeland). Could any institution really allow this kind of behavior and not to fear of him/her becoming loose cannon?

Yes, it can be a terrible myth and in fact gets used all the time on the type of entertainment sometimes referred to as "Copaganda." They always set up police as knowing who the bad guy is and having the highest intentions, but then their hands are tied to beaurocratic rules so the audience is encouraged to cheer when they ignore the laws about civil rights and abuse prisoners. 

And of course in this case, Stan isn't doing what he's being praised for doing. Iirc, the time when he burst into the DAG's office complaining about red tape he was already motivated by trying to get Oleg, who he thought was threatening Nina. 

I think this show is actually pretty good about this trope, in fact. Because you've got Elizabeth on one extreme who follows orders without thinking, but it's not like the show presents the lone wolf cliche as the alternative. It almost always seems to be saying that things are complicated and you need to think things through either way.

3 hours ago, Umbelina said:

I wondered that too.

Then again, it was simply the truth, most had no money to travel the long distances to where ever "home" had been, not to mention the broken bodies and spirits.

I was watching a travel show on Vladivostok, and I'd guess nearly all of the city is descended from gulags, prisoners and even guards are the fathers, mothers, grandparents of nearly everyone who lives there now.  Some are finally telling their stories.

Yeah, it struck me this time because we know now that Oleg's mother was in a camp, but came back to Moscow, and there's not necessarily any reason for him to just bring it up here. In fact, it's almost sad listening to him say that this is his fear for Nina when we know that she'll just be killed. Maybe it's setting up the audience to worry about this for Nina since we don't yet know what will happen to her, or it might be a way of introducing the whole idea of camps because they do figure in the histories of the characters. 

[Roseanna]

On 2/15/2021 at 2:38 AM, sistermagpie said:

Btw, Oleg also talks about people in Siberia often spending their lives in God-forsaken villages after they get out of the camps. No idea if this is meant to relate to Philip’s family or not.

 

5 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

Yeah, it struck me this time because we know now that Oleg's mother was in a camp, but came back to Moscow

In Stalin's time the sentence was followed by deportation if there had been "an organization" (f.ex. two friends who had discussed about politics). Or at least there were restrictions where they were allowed to live.

Oleg's mother was lucky as she was sentenced in the 50ies and Stalin died (and her husband took her back as many divorced from their spouses who were handicaps in career and life).

There was also other reasons. In the Northern mining towns there was good jobs for free workers (better salary, free holidays f.ex. in Crimea, lower retirement age). Some nationalities weren't allowed to return home region even after Stalin died (f.ex. Tatars of Crimea, Finns living around Leningrad). It might be that a person had altered so much in the camp that she felt weird to be with people who had had a "normal" life and couldn't understand her. 

[Roseanna]

10 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Yeah, it's definitely a Hollywood trope, but it has also seeped into the consciousness.  Sometimes, it's a good thing.  The "whistleblowers" and the those who stand up against tyranny, or at least later write about it.  "Just following orders" has had an especially unpleasant connotation since WWII and the trials at Nuremburg.  

Yes, but that's an exception, not the rule. 

I think "lone wolfs" in the movies can often been compared with Fascists who feel no duty to be loyal to the government people have democratically chosen but they have "a higher duty as the only true guardians of the nation's interests". They are not loyal to their country but to "the idea of the nation" that they alone have defined.

[Roseanna]

On 2/15/2021 at 2:38 AM, sistermagpie said:

But Nina was never “our” agent even before she confessed to Arkady. The FBI treated her badly by blackmailing her, not by not considering her one of their own.

That's right, but as a character Nina is complicated and interesting and has to make difficult choices. Therefore she arouses (at least my) sympathy, just like Martha but unlike that that ordinary woman who only wants a better life to her son and her money-hungry ex-hockey player boyfriend who were murdered by Elizabeth.

 

[sistermagpie]

16 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Yes, but that's an exception, not the rule. 

I think "lone wolfs" in the movies can often been compared with Fascists who feel no duty to be loyal to the government people have democratically chosen but they have "a higher duty as the only true guardians of the nation's interests". They are not loyal to their country but to "the idea of the nation" that they alone have defined.

Yup. And not only do they have a higher duty but they have a special understanding of human nature. It's just a given that they "know" who's guilty and who deserves what based on their instincts. Stan isn't a fascist here, but he's not, imo, being presented as a hero here who's standing up to an unfeeling government. Yet there are other characters who are put in situations where they go against the state and do seem to be making a higher moral choice--like Nina''s story here.

12 hours ago, Roseanna said:

That's right, but as a character Nina is complicated and interesting and has to make difficult choices. Therefore she arouses (at least my) sympathy, just like Martha but unlike that that ordinary woman who only wants a better life to her son and her money-hungry ex-hockey player boyfriend who were murdered by Elizabeth.

 

I agree. I do absolutely see the FBI as having treated her badly--they blackmailed her into betraying her country and put her in danger. Gaad and Adderholt don't seem to ever lose sight of that. Stan seems to almost rewrite their history as soon as he starts sleeping with her, wanting to be the American hero who's saving her from the heartless Soviets when she only needs his protection because of what he did to her. 

[sistermagpie]

Just watched Glanders. I remember seeing the preview for season 4 on TV and by the time it was done my heart was pounding. This part of the show is INTENSE!

THE REZIDENTURA

Tatiana is revealed as a member of the Division 12 that’s using Arkady’s office to operate in secret. Arkady has always distrusted her and wanted to low key ally with Oleg against her. William is also introduced in this ep. He’s snarky right from the start—and it’s cool how even in their very first meeting you can see him connecting with Philip just a bit more than Elizabeth. If Tuan is Elizabeth w/o Philip, William is Philip w/o Elizabeth.

 

SIBERIA

Anton has some success in his work and Nina demands to see the husband we couldn’t be sure she had until now. Anton imagines himself as nothing but a bad memory for a son, the way he just disappeared with no good-bye, even a phone call. We know Nina’s going to try to get his son a letter, but watching it now, I mostly think of how Philip did call Henry before disappearing.

 

HENRY

Henry doesn’t appear in this ep, but Philip and Elizabeth’s little convo about how he’s stinking up the house with his new cologne works as a nice warning that although Henry was a child when we saw him yesterday in his time, he is now a teenager. LOL. Philip, btw, has discussed the cologne with him, giving him good advice—this will come up later when the cologne comes up w/Stan. People tend to not believe anyone talks to Henry off-screen, but it’s kind of sweet imagining this little Body Odor talk.

 

STAN

Stan tells his current girlfriend Tori from EST how he’s currently not very popular at the FBI. Tori reels off some EST stuff in response and Stan barely refrains from laughing at her. Tori seems to consider herself a much wiser observer of life than she actually is—she’ll later report to Stan that Philip and Sandra are having an affair after spotting them together. You’d think she’d know that EST is the kind of situation that would make people look intimate w/o sex.

Stan’s dating a woman with whom he has nothing in common because she pursued him and he doesn’t seem to mind that he doesn’t connect w/her at all. I honestly do think Stan’s issues with intimacy are what make him such an easy target for spies. It’s also, again, why I find the whole “Stan’s the better father” thing so grating, because it’s praising Stan for doing exactly the thing he shies away from doing—that’ll come up later.

When Stan pushes Philip around over his meeting w/Sandra, I’m mostly struck by how Stan and Elizabeth always interact through those hearty, sexist cliches that Stan likes. Here Elizabeth refers to Stan wanting to talk to Philip as “boy talk.” It maybe stands out more starkly after seeing Philip and Sandra interact like actual male/female friends.

 

SANDRA

Sandra drops another one of her casual truth bombs about marriage. She tells Philip that if he’s lying to Elizabeth, he’s lying to himself—and he is doing exactly that. He and Elizabeth will both be doing it in S6 until Philip finally gets real. (Elizabeth will have to wait until she gets to Russia to stop lying to herself.)

 

ELIZABETH

Elizabeth told Philip Paige did really well in Germany, and here Gabriel that if he’d seen her and her grandmother together he’d know they were right to take her there. But she’s having enough doubts about it to bug the Pastor’s office. She says it’s because Paige is “different” somehow, but the truth is, she was never the way Elizabeth imagines she was, it seems. She can’t trust Paige the way she trusts Philip.

Gabriel, btw, claims he came out of retirement to “help them” but he’s really there to get them to do what the Centre wants. He similarly claims that he wanted to keep them out of working with William. He’s just always subtly reminding him of all he does for them, even though their relationship is mostly based on them fulfilling orders that come through him.

I remember some thought Elizabeth was being arrogant when she informs Philip that the night he called off a meet with William because he had a “bad feeling” he was wrong--there was no surveillance, but I think she was right to nip that in the bud. Sure, an experienced spy might sense something wrong before being able to see it, but that wasn’t what Philip was doing.

But of course, Elizabeth’s dismissal of “feelings” isn’t great either. In S6 she’ll be doing the opposite of Philip, shutting down all her feelings so she can see what she wants to see, and so ignore all the red flags waving in front of her face.

One of the main things I’m paying attention to on this re-watch is the Paige story, since now that I know where it ends, I might get a better idea of where she’s supposed to be coming from. She asks Elizabeth exactly what Philip is doing out in the middle of the night and Elizabeth mostly lies, telling her he’s meeting with someone who might give him information. She says her job is mostly getting people to trust them and understand they all want the same thing. This, of course, is hardly relevant to what Philip is actually doing, warning a woman he’s tricked into committing treason that he’s murdered a colleague to protect her. Elizabeth makes it sound like—explicitly says, really—that their relationships w/sources are honest, just secret and Paige, it seems, believes this.

 

PHILIP

This ep starts with a rare Philip flashback—at least now I know just how rare! He tries to work through the memory of his first murders at EST and with Sandra with limited success. It’s hilarious hearing him try to slip some EST talk to Elizabeth when he tries to explain that he cancelled the meet because he had a bad feeling. Like maybe it just seemed like a bad idea to bring home a highly contagious disease. Your whole life is a bad idea, Philip!

The scene where Philip talks to Martha after Gene’s death often got referenced as evidence that Martha was the “real” wife that Philip went to her for comfort and this, to me, shows why Philip often gets underestimated as a spy. It’s easy to see what Elizabeth’s doing with Lisa, for instance. But Philip’s being a master manipulator here and yet the scene’s remembered as him being vulnerable. When Philip first tells Martha he’s killed Gene, she’s horrified, tells him not to come near her or touch her. After work, she’s still repulsed by him. When he sits down beside her she moves away.

Telling her he tried to make Gene’s death “easier” it doesn’t help. But when he tells her about the toys he saw at Gene’s, intentionally letting her see him as haunted by what he’s done for her, and muses about trying to understand himself, it does. Martha doesn’t offer comfort, exactly. She returns to her imagined place as his partner. And once he’s got her on that hook, he vows that having murdered Gene in order to protect Martha, he will not put her in danger again, prompting Martha to say they need to make that kind of decision together. Okay, Philip relents, in that case bring him surveillance reports. It’s a ball-of-steel move, and yet this is a scene people remember as showing him needing to unburden himself to her for comfort!

Btw, Philip isn’t wearing the glasses and wig anymore, but he’s making sure to wear Clark’s colors, which look weird on him, but it’s a nice detail to remind us he hasn’t come clean with her, just adjusted his lie.

Philip’s flashback with the milk always reminded me of Henry’s hitting the guy with a bottle in S1, but now I see it’s also meant to echo Paige in the bar in S6 when she keeps punching a guy who’s just standing there. Philip really isn’t kidding when he says he knows how she feels. It’s also why I get frustrated with people who still claim the scene where they fight in S6 shows Philip “losing control” with Paige. It’s Paige who has no control.

I honestly can’t tell how Philip is reacting to the EST guy’s advice, btw. But it’s nice that the ep begins and ends with him facing a beatdown and handling it differently.

 

MARTHA

For all Martha’s freak out about Gene in front of Clark, she’s ready to look Stan in the eye about it at work. She’s also wearing these 80s style earrings that look like a spy lady—a woman wearing a fedora—very apropos. I’m not sure exactly where Martha is at every moment, but it’s fascinating watching her go through it. This is the type of thing we just don’t get with the Paige story. Martha’s scenes often could have the same problems people saw with Paige’s scenes, but Alison Wright makes her unpredictable rather than just inconsistent or impenetrable. You watch her more closely instead of getting frustrated or bored.

 

PAIGE

So, Elizabeth assures Paige what Philip is doing at night isn’t dangerous (it is) and he’s just convincing someone of their cause (he’s not). You can see Paige looking down guiltily when Elizabeth talks about trust and then try hard to get onboard with what her mom’s saying. Pastor Tim later tells Paige she shouldn’t feel bad about speaking the truth in church, which is wildly simplifying the way many people interact with church. That’s relevant given the context. Tim and Elizabeth both tell Paige they are the person she can be truthful with and both are exaggerating.

In retrospect, having Paige wait out the Pledge of Allegiance in the school hallway seems like the show going to OTT symbolism over consistency since she’ll be so uniquely unbothered by the national loyalty part of her predicament throughout. The kid extras get little Paige-related business to perform, especially a little boy who looks like he hasn’t hit puberty yet and obviously has a big crush on Paige. Girl is never hurting for admirers!

 

PASTOR TIM

It’s Pastor Tim who really caught my attention in this ep. I never had the problems with his story that some did, but I admit he never really works for me as a real person rather than a plot device. I have affection for him, but he’s like the mail robot—a mascot more than a person. Watching this ep got me thinking about why.

The creators often expressed frustration with people expecting Tim to be revealed as a villain—another spy, an enemy spy, a predator—instead of just a nice guy from a nice church. They thought people overidentified w/P&E or were paranoid. I never thought he was anything but a pastor, but it annoyed me that they didn’t take responsibility for people thinking he was shady.

I don’t know what the creators were thinking when writing him, but it really *feels* to me as if they reacted to viewer suspicion by trying to play him even more sincerely, which made it worse, because the plot required him to continue to be shady.

Like, there’s a scene in S2 when Martha says she loves Clark’s toupee. Iow, she noticed something off about Clark’s hair, but she had an innocent explanation handy. A toupee makes Clark silly and vain, but not sinister. With Tim, though, the showrunners refused to give him the toupee. That is, an innocent, if unattractive, explanation for his shadiness: “This guy doesn’t have bad intentions but he is a gossip who loves drama and overestimates his abilities.”

All of that is right there in the script. It’s just played with such thoughtful sincerity it’s like you’re not supposed to see it. If they leaned into it instead, I think he’d not only become a more coherent person, but his character arc might be compelling. I’m going to be on the lookout for it.

In this ep, he tells Paige that while her secret is unusual, he’s used to hearing secrets—a little bit of a brag, as if he’s totally qualified to deal with KGB spies. The show does make hearing secrets central to his job as a pastor in ways it wouldn’t be on another show—it’s a show about secrets after all. Tim’s not so unethical that he spreads those secrets around, but we’ll learn he considers it okay to tell his wife anything. (And he writes about it in his diary.)

Then he asks if Paige couldn’t bring her parents to him to talk. When she rejects this idea in horror, he tells her to find out more about what they do and come back and tell him, suggesting that the two of them might have to somehow act on what she learns.

Now, I can accept him deciding, as a person whose priority is Paige, not to turn her parents into the FBI right off. But that means setting the potential crime question aside. If he’s really trying to do what’s best for Paige personally, shouldn’t he just help her work through her feelings while encouraging her to distance herself from their activities and prepare to be independent? Basically, what Philip tries to do with Henry?

Instead, he directs Paige to get *more* involved in their illicit activities. That makes little sense…unless the guy is motivated, even if he isn’t aware of it, by a love for drama. That guy instinctively wants to be speaking with the secret KGB agents as an “equal” and is going to find some moral justification for it. That guy will send the teenager in to get him more details and suggest she and Pastor Tim are the ones with the responsibility to do something.

If the performance just leaned into this a bit more, I think Pastor Tim might still be unliked, but he’d be a fool rather than a villain. A guy whose smalltime flaws just become more dangerous when applied to this situation. Dangerous not just for him, but for Paige too.

Because when it comes to her, I think I might have let him off a bit too easy. I saw him as trying but unable to help her and now I think…differently. But I’ll have to see if that reading holds up as I keep watching.

Edited March 31, 2021 by sistermagpie