#overthinking tv

Ok, ok. First, for anyone reading this analysis, I say that my post will be a long, thorough critical analysis of the Lagertha arc. Just wanted to give a heads up:

I was so incredibly happy with the Lagertha in S2E5, for not only does she demonstrate her strength as a physical combatant fighting well amid the men on the field but her overall strength as a character is fascinating: she understands the value of duty unlike many of the male characters in the show (e.g. Ragnar, Rollo, King Horrik, Borg, as well as countless others) and actively works to balance her personal ambitions with that duty. Considering her character’s insistence to be a good wife, a good woman, a good mother, and a good friend, I sat with my mouth agape much of the time I saw Lagertha in S2E6 “Unforgiven” after struggling immensely with the violence, shame, humiliation, and various forms of abuse upon returning to her husband after the incredibly profound ending to the previous week’s episode which I paraphrase as follows:

Bjorn: Don’t take any more shit, mom. Lagertha: Do you know who I am, kid?!

Now that I have had some time to reflect (I only watched it Saturday night as I cleared out the week’s DVR offerings), I think, for as insignificant as it may appear, that I understand the reason for the violence Lagertha encounters (before you throw hate my way, I did not not say that I accept or any other comparable synonym with condone). And. Here we go:

The seer’s advice to Siggy at the beginning of this episode really resonated with me in that I use that ominous declaration as foreshadowing the end game between Lagertha and Sigvard:

The gods will always smile on brave women. Like the Valkyries, those furies who men fear and desire.

While she made it pretty clear in S2E4 that she understood the ramifications of Borg’s conquest over Ragnar’s lands for her people, she also made it pretty clear to Sigvard that she could best him in one-on-one combat. Early in this season the audience knows he has hit her, but I argue she chooses to let him go with only slapping her. There is no indication of what their marriage was like (or why she marries him at all), but the audience needs to understand that their limited presentation shows how she did not actively engage in any sort of violence with her husband prior to his attempt to have her give him his husbandly rights. The need for sex (consensual or dutiful) conveniently arises only after she demonstrates to his people that he does not possess a leader’s mind:

He did not recognize (because of second-husband pride perhaps) how such a close usurpation could easily spill onto his lands. Using chess for an analogy, he’s limited to viewing the moves that just happened while Lagertha sees several moves ahead thus reinforcing her intelligence while establishing the difference between husband and wife. She wants to proactively engage against an imminent threat rather than waiting to see how they might be affected whereas he does not see beyond her relationship with Ragnar.

Now, hold up. I know that she was his ex, but I don’t necessarily hold her personal relationship as being the main justification for her argument to become involved. Throughout the series, Lagertha often displaces her physical/emotional needs to serve those around her (think on her duty as nurse and overseer when the fever eventually overwhelmed the town; she risked her own life, while he daughter was ill, to take care of those who were ill). Just wanted to put that out there to show that I do acknowledge the opposing view on this engage or not engage discussion.

Ultimately, I assert Lagertha’s plea and argument to become involved signals her prowess as a strategist. Moreover, her being physically capable in overpowering Sigvard is just a further indication of his inferiority. Because she announces so fiercely that errs and is mistaken by assuming he can usurp the agency she holds on her body, she diminishes any hope he may have in ever being her superior. To add insult to injury, she left to rally with her ex husband and fight against Borg’s forces while showing the entire community her husband does not have control over her.

Bad ass, indeed. Her speech at the end of “Answers in Blood” condemns not just Ragnar’s failings (as well as so many of the men presented in the show) to abide by his obligations and duties to others selflessly but she also indicates her ability to move all those under his care to strive to be better. Think of the fangirls who eagerly run to greet Lagertha despite her having left Ragnar and these people four years ago. The audience appreciates almost immediately how important that moment is in showing Lagertha as the HBIC. Sure, her actions saved them, so maybe the fangirling is more of people being giddy. I would argue, however, that people ran to greet her because she dutifully assists them and her former family even though she holds no obligation to either party presently. Her needs are to help those other people, and she dutifully helps with no regard for her emotional needs (aka being a spiteful HBIC with troops and not helping out her ex, which is so typically presented in most TV shows).

Even during her imminent exit, the people do not seem disgusted or unhappy with her choice to return home; she places a significant duty on their shoulders (I mean, she didn’t look at Ragnar when she said everyone needed to look after Bjorn) because her obligation to her husband conflicts with her obligations to her son (noticeable within the split lip and return home episodes). After all, her duty to Bjorn put the events in place necessitating numerous disagreements between the Jarl and his wife.Lagertha takes her duty as mother seriously, so her making the entire community a surrogate dutiful parent forher only son seems like her acknowledgement to concede one duty to them currently in opposition with the duty she has to Sigvard (as well as the people of Hedeby).

Suffice it to say, I come to the matter at hand: explaining an analysis of this week’s Lagertha and her struggles to exist after returning home. I’d like to focus specifically on a few key moments during the Skol toasting scene:

Her uneasiness whilst at the table. Her fidgeting with her earring, that dangles in the ear closest to her husband, offers the audience an interestingly new Lagertha who seems genuinely, uncharacteristically nervous unlike the calm, cool, and collected woman from the previous episodes (or the entire series).

Sigvard’s drunkenness. While showing some sort of toast to honor his wife’s return, much of the characterization Vikings has made of Sigvard shows him as being too deep in his cups and perhaps only finding bravado (or Earl’s authority, maybe?) with some liquid courage. I mean, the freaking burp there was incredibly cliche and reminiscent of some bawdy Restoration Play like The Country Wife.

The fleeing women. While Lagertha is not completely an enigma, the only other shieldmaidens presented thus far have been with protecting Asglod, going to Ecbert’s realm, and the one who took on Borg and died. The women’s escape really shows how precarious Lagertha’s return will be not to mention her husband practically telling her that she’s sleeping alone thereby completely in need of her own devices.

Sleeping alone. Her husband does not actively engage in the conflict in their quarters because she successfully defeated his authority. He has to rely on others to do his dirty work, for his coping mechanism (oh, the sweet taste of liquid courage in some cups) further compromises his ability to best her. Plus, she already thwarted him in his last physical encounter with her and then thwarted him in his decree to remain neutral. Thus, his reliance on others to defeat her demonstrates his shortcomings and inefficacy as Earl.

Despite those aspects, the scene with the beaten yet still proud Lagertha left me gobsmacked. Sigvard’s attempt to successfully demean Lagertha comes only after he relies on weaker men to reclaim his rights as man, Earl, and husband. There is the moment where the camera pans out, to what I’m assuming is meant to be Lagertha’s view, showing some women laughing and/or quickly looking at the noise to return back to their table. She cannot rely on any of the women to help her because there has not been any indication any of the fighting, shieldmaiden women exist in this place; thus, she stands alone as a woman against a man, a wife against a husband, and a female leader against a male leader. His need to proclaim her value, aka her breasts’ parallel to Freyja (not a good omen btw), serves to indicate his failing in all of those categories (considering Bjorn’s interaction with that slave girl being somewhat protective albeit naive and/or possessive) and his possession of her breasts. Therefore, he attempts to reestablish his masculinity by highlighting his possession of her femininity (again, breasts being symbolic).

So, I mean her reaction (stabbing him in the left eye seems a bit sexual: knife is phallic and eye is vulvic thus Lagertha’s symbolically inserting a phallic object into a vulvic one) is defensive and symbolic to all those around her. Despite being beaten and despite being reminded of her place as being below Sigvard’s, Lagertha reminds everyone who the hell she is by standing up for herself. Now, the surprise and further indication of Sigvard being insignificant upon his wife’s return comes from dude willing chopping Sigvard’s head right off. Much like the fangirls back in Kattegat showing the audience how important they see Lagertha, this man (who I cannot say I remember ever seeing before that moment) feels inclined to intervene while others watch aghast as this woman assaults her husband. Before this head chopping happened, I feared the people would react poorly to Lagertha’s decision (yeah, I know the story but still felt fear).

While this man’s willingness to step up and help Lagertha (again, noticeably beaten resonating loud and clear by her face for the majority of that scene) shocked and surprised, I feel his intervention serves to establish how the people within Hedeby could easily follow Sigvird’s wife rather than Sigvird.

Basically, take everything this said, and then multiply it 100 times, add some random capslock and a great deal of ineloquence and that is how I feel about Castle season four.

In fact I agree so wholeheartedly with the sentiment of this that is remarkable to me that I find anything to disagree with. I do. But I almost don’t want to go into it, you know, because from a black-and-white perspective I would never want to detract from its argument.

I disagree entirely with the notion of fans not investing in the romantic relationship if the supporting characters were fleshed out from the beginning. I think the fanbase was always going to solidly revolve around the Castle/Beckett ship. It’s just that kind of show … even with really developed supporting characters people are still going to fixate on that relationship. There will always be those who don’t (hi wonderful unique humans, I like you a lot) – or who ship other pairings entirely – but the majority of viewers are watching for that central storyline and the majority of them probably would have with or without supporting cast. But I do think developing your supporting cast is important for maintaining momentum as a show progresses (so completely agree with the OP there).

However.

I don’t really think that the way Castle has done this has been too little too late. I was always intrigued by the relationships between the cast members, and we didn’t see a lot of it early on, but that actually just made me crave it and want it more and appreciate it a lot more when we did see it. (So in that way, I think I personally cared more because I tend to be the sort of person that focuses on those gaps in the story, or the untold backstory of supporting characters, so I’ll take any crumbs from that table with pleasure. But that could definitely be a personal quirk.) I think the crux of the issue is that nothing was ever going to be able to compensate for the lack of momentum between Castle and Beckett this season, because even with a supporting cast that I care a great deal about. Seriously, I love this immediate family and the dynamic at the precinct is just… it brings a tear to my eye. I have loved seeing the change up in the partnerships this season, seeing Ryan with Beckett and Espo with Castle and vice versa. Esposito and Beckett in Killshot were brilliant. Hell, I am even enjoying seeing what becomes of Espo and Lanie.

The problem isn’t that I don’t want to see that.

The problem isn’t even that Castle and Beckett aren’t together.

The problem is that the aforementioned storylines between the supporting cast are being used as filler, as a distraction, because at this point it really feels like the writers are trying to think of every possible way to distract the viewers from the fact that Castle and Beckett have made zero progress since Rise.

I don’t think any amount of fleshing out of Lanie, Ryan, Epsosito, Alexis, Martha and Gates could save those storylines from seeming like cheap flashy distractions. It’s not because the audience isn’t invested. It’s because the audience (well, some of the audience) sees a spade and calls it a spade.

And again, while I absolutely appreciate the view that killing Montgomery was a mistake, I don’t actually think any of that arc, was, by its very nature, unworkable. That story is so complex and so interesting. In many ways, even what is actually happening between the characters could be interesting and workable. I don’t think it’s a plot issue so much as an execution issue.

(Which is exactly what the OP has described.)

I am completely 100% on board with the notion of mini-arcs, of how the unwillingness of TPTB to stick with a storyline week after week has cheapened the arc, has cheapened the show. A procedural can still be a procedural and have an ongoing story arc. In fact, modern TV almost demands it. There are ways of writing cases of the week that do well in syndication that also have themes running through them, and characters that interact like human beings do (you know, by actually talking about things) and fit within seasons that have narrative direction. In fact I really think an ongoing storyline is what keeps people watching a procedural.

I mean sure, you turn on CSI every once and a while, but unless the characters grab you, you don’t keep watching it. You might sit it out every now and then, but if there’s a two parter that you don’t see the end of? Well fuck, you are watching that shit next week. I’ve watched NCIS about as religiously as I go to church (lol so not a lot), but I still made sure I was home and in front of my television to see what happened in the aftermath of Kate’s death.

It is always about a story arc. It is always about the characters.

A procedural has to have good cases. I firmly believe that you can’t start to fall back on your characters too heavily when you start to run out of case of the week ideas. But you’re also not going to keep a fanbase with good cases alone, not the kind of fanbase that Castle has anyway.

I completely agree about Countdown and Setup.

In fact, the last half of season three was so clearly building to something between the characters, and it really could have been amazing, but it was handled so poorly. Beckett’s significant other was treated appallingly – as really nothing more than a drama device/roadblock for the relationship – which makes very little sense for either character. And then it continued to be … not even poorly handled, but just really firmly put in a box and ignored. Pandora indeed, appropriate on many levels I’m sure.

That's the saddest thing for me is that there's nothing intrinsically bad about it. There's just something tentative about the way they've handled it. They have kid gloves on when it comes to handling the Castle/Beckett relationship when they should've just taken them off. It's like they're afraid to tell any kind of interesting story about relationships between adults. Like if it doesn't fit some American network TV stupid conservative narrow view of heterosexual mating then it can't be done.

It's cheap, because everyone watching knows that it's not real. It makes these characters who we have come to love and relate to seem like caricatures. So I completely agree with the conclusion of the post: there is no Moonlighting Curse, there is simply an unwillingness in the people who make us TV to take on the subject matter of real relationships. 

And when it comes to Castle, the real reason why this season is falling flat for a lot of people is because of that, because the writers are so clearly dodging the elephant in the room at every turn. 

Absolutely, a brilliant post.