astra

And so I think that Almost Ethel is not some opposite of Actual Ethel, but rather the version of Ethel that exists within Actual Ethel that she, out of fear and shame, keeps inside. That is to say, Almost Ethel is some untraumatized form of her inner child. With that in mind, I think it's really sad to see Ethel engaging in all these intellectual interests and social escapades ("Let's have a midnight feast --- the party to end all parties!") and just generally being an unfettered person who is, if a bit annoying and a bit too socially comfortable, actually alive and genuinely enjoying her time. Like, yes, Almost Ethel is still sort of mean and snarky, but she does it out of naive self-interest, not out of spite or bitterness or pain like Actual Ethel does. Because it might just be the framing of the story, but Ethel as a character is genuinely almost always miserable. And I've given the writers slack for this before, about Ethel's character arc constantly restarting at practically the same place --- probably worse, actually --- despite all these "lessons" she's learning, but the truth is, it might actually really make sense because it is so, so, so difficult to grow as a person when you do not have the resources for that type of change, that type of strenuous effort. Looking at Ethel's life, all she does is strenuous effort; in every possible environment of her life --- academic, social, familial --- she is constantly in a mode of survival where she believes she has to edge out all of the competition in order to be worth the space she takes up. Everything she does is a hierarchy, everything she lives and breathes is productivity, everything is measured and it has to be, not even just "right," but better. Constantly. I think the stark difference between how Ethel and Almost Ethel behave is an illustration of just how hard this teenage girl is fighting to keep everything that would make her weak, that would make her unworthy, below the surface. And I know, Ethel is horrible and awful to everyone and, especially as the seasons go on, obviously dangerous, and all of this far from excuses it: Ethel seems to choose spite and anger and hatred at every turn where it would've been possible to choose possibly anything else. This is a person who does not know peaceful conflict resolution. This is a girl who does not know how to self-regulate --- has likely never been taught, and in fact more likely to have been further aggravated when vulnerable, knowing her god-awful parents. So I'm not saying she deserves anyone in the show's friendship or respect, and she definitely needs stronger consequences the longer the show goes on --- some sort of intervention, hopefully. But I also see this young girl who's forcibly so radically different from who she would be if she allowed herself to enjoy her life a little more --- i.e. someone like Almost Ethel --- and I also see someone who at least just needs resources of some kind.

I also think it's interesting how each of the Hallow sisters' responses to their obviously stressful home environment is so radically different but also cohesively indicative of the same kind of pressure existing at home. For Esmerelda, the eldest, that mechanism has been responsibility, seizing control of everything she can, taking care of everything she can --- overall, over-functioning and losing herself in caretaking. This fatal flaw of hers is especially obvious in her most significant character point in the series, when she sacrifices her magic to Agatha because she believes it is Miss Cackle who needs help. Esmerelda is obviously hesitant and cautious --- but in the end she makes no complaints, not even a slight comment or question to "Miss Cackle"'s face. Asking your teenage student for them to sacrifice their magic for you --- their magic, which many students, and especially a witch as talented and powerful (for her age) as Esmerelda Hallow already source their entire identity as a witch --- is such an obvious breach of boundaries in any situation; stopping for even one moment to consider the cost of the decision, the ramifications, would have yielded at least a passing comment from any reasonable person, especially one as smart as Esmerelda. But here, she isn't responding with her logical brain, and we get a glimpse into her emotional brain and how it responds to stress: By completely abandoning herself. When push comes to shove and an authority figure asks to take something from her --- to take away her identity and offer her nothing in return --- Esmerelda just agrees. Because it's the right thing to do, and because it's who she is --- but good people can have boundaries (take for example, Ada). It's self-abandoning people who let their kindness become their weakness. Most of all, she does it because it's what she's used to. In her mind, if someone in charge tells you to do something, you just do it. She comes from an inner life and a childhood where this was normal and expected --- this is how you be good. This is how you avoid the most pain.

Then, we have Sybil. Unlike both Esmerelda and Ethel in their coping mechanisms and worldviews, Sybil just completely gives up her entire sense of self. Speaking in terms of nervous system response (fight-flight-freeze), where Esmerelda fawns and Ethel fights, Sybil flees. I would guess this is because she's the youngest sibling and she has that ability to go unnoticed if she wants --- in the hierarchy of familial responsibility, her mantle is not nearly as heavy as Esmerelda's, and in the hierarchy of familial attention, she doesn't have to work as hard to matter as Ethel. When we're first introduced to Sybil in S2, she is a complete wreck who has no confidence in anything except the fact that everything will always go wrong --- a pit of anxiety if there ever was one. Then, in S3, when Sybil comes back from summer holidays, her new identity is Mildred Hubble super-fan. Where Esmerelda is attached to her role and identity as caregiver and all-around good person, and Ethel is attached to her role as breadwinner (in a manner of speaking) and all-around talented person, Sybil attaches her value and identity to basically nothing. She doesn't have a strong (or in fact, existent) sense of self, and she's anxious all the time because unlike her sisters, she hasn't even found something that makes her feel safe at all. Yes, her sisters' respective coping mechanisms aren't the healthiest --- one sister more than the other (Ethel sorry honey I'm looking at you) --- but at least they each have some form of control over their life and have, to a certain extent, an internal locus of control; this helps them feel more secure. Sybil, on the other hand, has an almost entirely external locus of control, which leads her sense of safety to rely entirely in how her environment treats her --- her friends, her school, her family. Sybil is depicted as a natural "scaredy-cat" as it were, and that really just illustrates her natural instinct to run away from every problem under the sun. Because that's what's always worked for her --- her parents, her sisters, her home has always been overwhelming, and she's learned to be safe over time by just running from danger when she sees it. For Sybil, it's always been more dangerous to have an identity; to stand for anything is to risk getting yourself in danger, and for what? She doesn't have the responsibilities she has to fulfill that Esme does; she isn't starved of attention like Ethel. For Sybil --- concerning her childhood (which, to be fair, is technically ongoing but still) --- quiet, blank, scared, and nonexistent is the safest way she could possibly be.

So it really is kind of masterful how well-crafted these sisters are to illustrate not some characters strewn together in a trio --- but an actual family with a shared learned belief system and a set of shared root issues that present in much different but compatible and sensible ways. To illustrate, maybe: You can say that Esmerelda was too trusting and foolish for believing so deeply in the good of others, but you will never say that she was unkind like Ethel, because she was brave enough to love. And you can say that Ethel was aggressive and hostile, but you will never say that she was too afraid to exist like Sybil, because she was brave enough to have a concrete sense of self. And most definitely, you could say that Sybil was too afraid and too cautious, but you will never say that she was left hurting in the dust alone because she gave too much like Esmerelda, because she was brave enough to consider her own safety.

This is why it hurts so much that this family was largely written off and why it's tragic that there was no discussion of the sacred hell that is going on with this trio of sisters. And yes, I know, that wouldn't be practical for the show and yes, they did show lots of those disconcerting moments and have a plot around them --- and I'm grateful for that. But I think I just really connected with their stories, and deliberating all this has made me genuinely so. Not, well, happy but kind of content and intrigued. I would kill for like a non-kids show version of the Hallow family's story, and supposedly eventually I'll have to write it out of sheer desperation, but until that pans out... We just do fun little character analysis during rewatches!!