#rantos

LANGDON: EXPOSING THE ROT AND CLEANSING IT

Sorry, Langdon, I didn't mean to imply u were rot, but this is what Santos sees u as a symbol of, so, i'm afraid t'was necessary. For the #science/meta.

But it's fairly strongly implied that Santos has suffered prior abuse and that her abuser never faced appropriate consequence/justice. I don't think we know/it's been implied strictly speaking whether that was because she never spoke up/reported, or she did but she wasn't believed, either way, the Langdon situation provided a chance to rewrite some old wrongs.

Now. I have to be careful here because, for me, the SITUATIONS parallel/are being projected, but not necessarily the PEOPLE (in Langdon's case). Which is to say: I think the kind of 'narrative' or process of the situation with Langdon mirrors the situation with her past abuse and that Santos is projecting THAT onto Langdon. But I DON'T necessarily agree/think that Santos has just copy-pasted her abuser onto Langdon. And I don't agree with the idea that frightened/frightens her or that she's afraid of him.

In so many ways it's just - it's not about HIM as an individual/as a person, it's about what he represents. Ie the person he is/his reasons for what he did/his addiction - none of that matters, it's what he did, and, more importantly: what SHE did to him. He's like a little poppet-doll - she can make him suffer the consequences of his actions where she couldn't make her abuser suffer the consequences of his, but I don't believe it's as simple as 'Trinity now sees Langdon AS her abuser'. I think he's symbolic, which is a small distinction/nuance - but one I think is important to me/for me.

Okay, hyperspecific tangent aside lmfao, let's compare the situations/show how/why they mirror each other in Santos' mind:

1)- Person who's an established and beloved/trusted/respect person within the environment Trinity is in as a more junior/newer/less-known and trusted person within is doing something illegal and wrong on the down-low/hidden from everyone (allowing them to maintain their 'golden' privileged status).

2)- Trinity is aware of the wrongdoing the 'reality' behind the perfect, beloved person everyone else adores (from her POV) but she has no concrete/indisputable proof of it (the evidence she had against Langdon was hella circumstantial, lbr. She had a vial that had been tampered with/glued shut - but no way to tie it concretely back to Langdon/prove it was his doing. And the fact Louie was down 10 Librium which could very well just have been lost/sold/fed to pigeons or what have you.)

3)- This is IMPORTANT, imo, because if the evidence had been undeniable then Robby actually acting upon it would've carried much much less weight with Trinity. She had a suspicion/a reason to ask people to look at this person - but they have to believe her/act on her suspicions.

So we have two instances of someone who is trusted/respect by those around them doing something shady, Santos calling it out (or not, because she's sure she won't be believed, but I feel it's more likely she did try previously, she just wasn't listened to). Except now: they diverge. In the past, she was not listened to or believed and nothing was done. In the now: Robby actually follows-up on her suspicions and takes fairly decisive action to address the issue that he does uncover. Langdon vanishes (Pittfest MCI return blip not withstanding, extreme circumstances and all that).

So we have a repetition of the format of a previous trauma - except this time, history did NOT repeat itself! She was listened to! She was believed! She was validated and vindicated and consequences occurred and the rot (sorry Langdon) was excised and she was freed and it felt like healing.

Aaaand then: Langdon came back. And that kinda dropped a nuke on her rewritten trauma and the healing she experienced from it. Because now the symbol of the fact that people CAN believe her and WILL have her back, even if their favourite/golden boy is the one doing something wrong is suddenly: walking around in front of her and proving that, hey: maybe not. (Except...He's NOT doing that, because Langdon DID experience consequences and justice for what he did, as determined by the hospital board/relevant authorities, and has a number of restrictions and requirements/conditions for his return to work, as well as the personal repercussions/fallout that he's still dealing with)

But Santos doesn't see any of that. She just sees what Langdon represents to her/what she thinks of whenever she looks at him which is: a past hurt. (It's a little bit (a lot bit) like Robby exiling Langdon to triage/avoiding him like a plague throughout the day, because seeing him just reminds him of all of the hurt from before and if he doesn't have to look at it/remember it then he doesn't have to deal with it so he's just: gonna do that. And Santos is doing: exactly the same. Let us avoid processing trauma with papa today!)

She says as much to Whitaker that she was, "Kind of hoping I would never see him [Langdon] again." (which, oh, look at that parallel to papa telling Dana "I was sort of hoping to be on my sabbatical when he [Langdon] came back." - let me not have to look at this Symbol Of My Repressed Trauma).

For me, I think Langdon once again: existing in the same space as her/Being Visible is her problem (same as it's Robby's problem, and I may actually do a gifset with all of the parallel issues they have with Langdon, bc this is interesting but...that's for another time). But yeah, I don't actually think she cares about the consequences of what he did from a pure justice/'this is what he DESERVES' perspective, not REALLY, not as long as those consequences: remove her from her visual eyeline/involve him being pretty much anywhere but here.

See a couple (more) examples in addition to the 'Kind of hoping I would never see him again'. bc I love me my quotations:

2x12 Santos (to Whitaker): "And it's taken me a long time to feel like I belong here, and now he's back." 2x12: Robby: "You have to figure out a way of working with him now that he's back." Santos: "Or until he relapses." 2x10: Santos (with Garcia): "He should have been fired. But instead, he waltzes back in here, no big deal." 2x11: Langdon: "Look. I'm just trying to get through my first day back." Santos: You shouldn't even be here! I should have reported you to the state medical board. You should have lost your license and gone to prison."

Note the repeated idea of 'he's back' - but the varying ideas/reasons Santos gives/cites for why Langdon 'shouldn't even be here' whether he: loses his license, is fired, goes to prison, or relapses - all of these scenarios involve Langdon: no longer being in this hospital/not being back. Frankly (heh), I think he could be: quite literally anywhere. At another hospital practicing medicine there, at a Wendy's in Kentucky, exiled to Pluto - there where/what/specific doesn't matter.

What matters is that he is NOT in another hospital/Kentucky/Pluto he is HERE. Where she has to SEE him. Flaunting his existence and lack of: not being away from her (the way her abuser was not kept away from her)/not experiencing consequences (in her view. Consequences which, again, would have: made him go away).

We see other elements of her projection/where the cracks are showing and the fractures between the current reality and what likely happened previously - which again show us/indicate to us what Santos is doing and how the two separate realities are crashing together - and they don't always fit perfectly/the gaps and inconsistencies show us there's more going on here/there's more than just this happening.

IT'S PARIAH-PITT TIME:

2x10 Santos: Meanwhile, I've been a goddamn pariah for the last 10 months for doing the right thing. Garcia: Or maybe you're a pariah because you don't play well with others.

First up - Garcia has a point (Garcia is: blunt, direct, painfully honest - but she is HONEST, and she's typically right). Santos DOESN'T play well with others and does have a hard time forging relationships - she clashes with Whitaker/is prickly and struggles to have honest or productive conversations with him all season. She and Javadi are still tense/Javadi obviously isn't her biggest fan - and that's in large part due to the way Santos treats her (the barbs/snarky comments, the continued use of 'Crash' which Javadi directly stated twice in the first season she didn't like it/appreciate it and didn't want to keep being called it but. Here we be. 10 months later). Mel starts discussing her thoughts on bullying behaviour being tied to personality disorders after Santos teases her/gives her a "Mel-practice" nickname re her upcoming deposition. Her complete unwillingness to even attempt to be anything resembling civil/professional towards Langdon lmfao - etc etc.

In addition to that: we can just objectively see that she is NOT a 'pariah'. Yeah she has some issues/points of tension and isn't as close to some people - but that's normal in a workplace. Pariah implies someone is an outcast - ie that they are entirely rejected/ejected/at the very least isolated from their group/society and shunned pretty much universally (which, ironically/interestingly to me - Langdon comes way closer to in s2 than Santos does, tho that's a different conversation)

But okay, no, just objectively speaking: Santos ain't a pariah. She and Whitaker are: LITERALLY LIVING WITH EACH OTHER. She's seen scheming/gossiping with Princess (in Tagalog #secretlanguagebros). Perlah has her back and supports/helps her really well with her Kylie case, and is dropping off special energy drinks with encouragement to help her get through her day. She and Dana have a nice back and forth, Santos refers to her as "D" and is bantering back and forth with her about espresso martinis. Yes, Dana pushes her/makes her: do her literal job, but that's DANA'S literal job. She and Robby are also incredibly close - to the point it's implied, imo, that he actually knows, at least to an extent, about her CSA history/the abuse she's previously suffered, which is HUGE.

So she's NOT a pariah. And (even if she were) Langdon has nothing to do with that because he is Not the golden boy she accuses him of and, look, I'm just gonna lay this out real blunt and simple: people who do not visit/call/so much as text a guy they worked with for 4+ years while he's off for rehab/withdrawal/going through A Bad Time are absolutely 100% NOT (either now or then) icing out/treating the person who reported him (which....is apparently NOT common knowledge? Was at the very least a revelation to Al-Hashimi (where Langdon's drug taking/issues were not)) but regardless - they ain't making Santos a pariah in solidarity with/on behalf of the guy they: didn't even acknowledge the existence of until he was back at work again.

Soooo methinks there's something ELSE going on here!!!! Ie: Santos' previous trauma/experience involved her: being treated this way for doing the right thing/for trying to call out the actions of a trusted person that everyone else picked over her.

And this idea also ties to that thing she says about, how, "And it's like no one here even remembers any of this. And everyone here talks about community and family, all while they throw you under the bus..."

Which - this line was in the OG meta/the linked post and I discussed it then from the objectivity/realistic POV. But from a Santos POV/a projection/reliving of trauma perspective - it's clearly grating that SHE feels aggrieved by Langdon, because he's back, and his presence is hurting her - and no one else is deigning to notice or acknowledge that. Which. Is likely something she experienced before - and any thought she had of 'belonging' here at the Pitt is threatened now, because if they don't even remember Langdon's HEINOUS CRIMES and they don't isolate HIM and treat HIM as the pariah because he's the one who should be! She did the right thing and he did the wrong thing - but if they don't do that do they even care?

And, again, this idea ties as well to her telling Langdon, "Santos: You really want to atone for your sins? Tell everyone here you stole drugs and got kicked out of the ED because of it."

This is just... This is just a straight-up fantasy, imo, of what she wishes had happened previously with her past abuser (And I don't mean that in any kind of demeaning/patronising way - this is ENTIRELY valid to want, for everyone to know how the person who hurt you hurt you, for them to see you were right/valid, to feel bad for how they treated you; and for how they treated HIM when he was this monster).

I think she wants Langdon to experience/suffer what she feels SHE suffered for doing the right thing and exposing him. She's being treated like the pariah he should be - because HE was the one who fucked up and did the wrong thing and she did the right thing - yet she's the one being punished!? (Which, again: is not objectively true in THIS situation, even if it was previously).

I also... Ironically, I actually don't really think this would fundamentally change anything/give her the outcome she's looking for? In the sense that I don't think the hospital/Pitt crew would suddenly become the angry mob and grab up their pitchforks ready to drive Langdon out of the ED then fall at Santos' feet and apologise for not believing her/for isolating her (because, well, they haven't done that, for a start - and I'm unsure how many people actually know that she was the reason for Langdon leaving)).

But also because... Well, just, objectively, stealing drugs from a hospital is not QUITE in the same league as being responsible for CSA and doesn't have the same social weight/consequence. And also... The show can make this whole 'but do they know you STOLE!!!' thing a Thing but... it's not uncommon in hospitals - most people probably know or know of someone else who's done this. And also...they're not stupid, ya know? If a guy is addicted to benzos, which they throw around the ED like sweeties at a parade/are used daily - I mean, I feel most of them can connect those dots.

Langdon is also: back, yes, but no one has been quiet about being fully aware that he's been in rehab, nor is Dana particularly subtle about approaching him in the middle of the ED to be like "LANGDON, HONEY, HAVE U TAKEN UR MANDATORY DRUG TEST YET!?" Whitaker also: stepped in to insist on putting in Langdon's Librium order - and then followed-up by telling Mel and Mohan about it, they know he's experiencing consequences/had to go away and work on himself/prove himself to get back here/is having to continue proving himself and they'll, for the most part, likely accept that, methinks. Because he IS a good doctor and if they're already willing to acknowledge but move past him being on drugs while treating patients - they're probably willing to acknowledge but move past him taking said drugs from the hospital (which, I feel, for most healthcare workers - the first crime would probably be bigger than the second??? From their perspective/in terms of what they personally hold as most important)

So his being back, for Trinity, implodes the neat little method she had for course-correcting her trauma via him, so all of that trauma is rushing back in, and now she's seeing everything from before reflected/projected onto this situation, too, even though it's objectively not true. But she's #GoingThroughIt (it being: past trauma). She built Langdon up to be the bearer/symbol for her past suffering and now: he is back. And so all of her prior suffering is also: back. But, really, ultimately...it's not really about Langdon as an individual.

Okaay this ran longer than I thought it would/I ended up talking abt things that just occurred to me ~in the moment~ of writing this lmfao. So. U know. Moving on Imma just quickly (HA!) talk about the Robby/others of it all and wrap this bitch up bc I'm tired of my own typing at this point lol.

ROBBY - THE MENTOR THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN

The Santos-Robby dynamic is GENUINELY fascinating to me - and I think, of all Robby's newer ducklings he feels much closer to Santos than either Whitaker or Mel (sorry Hucklerobby peeps, this is my truth and i must speak it). However this is INTERESTING from a 'Santos' prior abuse' perspective because her buddying up with another older male authority figure/person who has control over her seemed a little...paradoxical, if nothing else (and ofc people respond to trauma in different ways/it can manifest in a lot of ways that don't seem reasonable/understandable. But every other manifestation of Santos' trauma involves her being: a spiky little pufferfish. Avoid avoid avoid. Avoid getting close to people. Avoid caring so they can't hurt you. Avoid reminders/symbols of trauma (sorry again Frank). Avoid talking about it/dealing with it/acknowledging it as an issue).

But then I realised... I realised it was the same as the Langdon Situation (u earned that capitalisation, buddy, roll with it) - but it's another 'fixing' effort/another instance of her reliving her trauma/repeating history - but NOT. Because she's changing the ending this time/is trying to replace the old and bad with the new and good.

Something that always strikes/haunts me from the scene with Silas Dunn in season 1 (I mean, you know, apart from just: all of it in general) is this specific note she makes:

1x06 Santos: "You know, I know men like you... men you trust, men you look up to."

Which very strongly...I mean, no, let's not say strongly implies, let's just say tells us, because that's what it's doing, it's telling us that the person who hurt her was someone she trusted and looked up to - a mentor figure, one she respected and listened to and let get close to her.

A role that Robby is now absolutely filling for her: someone she trusts and looks up to. Because he proved to her that she could trust him because she told him a suspicion, about his best boy no less, and he (from her POV) 'picked' her/chose to believe her and listen to her and support her - and has clearly been doing so since. To the point that she's very obviously upset by the idea of him leaving/her not having him anymore, as the "only attending who actually sees through the bullshit" - and the only attending she feels sees her/the only one she actually trusts who has her back.

So her getting that close to Robby, who I'd say is the character she's closest to apart from (or maybe even including, to an extent) Whitaker, who she's literally living with - being, essentially, a repeat of the same kind of man who hurt her previously initially seems a bit !?

Until you realise that: Robby is the rewriting of that past narrative. He's what the man who hurt her SHOULD have been. He's doing everything right. He's not hurting her - he's listening to her and supporting her and believing in her and helping her be the best doctor she can be. He gets her and sees her and respects her (and gives her a lil bit of favouritism/special treatment, as a treat/bonus cherry on top). In other words: He's the mentor she SHOULD have had; and the mentor she HAS.

Until she doesn't. And here now we get an echo back to the Langdon mirroring. Because Langdon, the symbol of her traumatic situation is: back. Meanwhile, at the same time, Robby, the symbol of the proof that not every man she lets herself trust and get close to will be like her abuser, the symbol of healing and of trusting again - is leaving.