it rules that the 50s plotline serves as yet another refutation of the originary myth of the show, namely that riverdale was the innocent town it appeared to be until it was corrupted by jason's death, because in the 50s there is no jason, and yet even in the absence of his murder and all the violence it spawned, something terrible has happened to ethel. >:)
dizzy was saying in a different post that s7 thus far feels sort of rudderless or unmoored, and i think at least for me this is partially why; ruth perry voice jason blossom's murder is the meaning of riverdale, both as town and story. the town needs this event or an equivalent to make sense of itself; the story needs this event or an equivalent in order for the plot to begin. because jason's death did not occur in this timeline, and because nothing has yet taken its place, there can be no real meaning or progress made, because there is nothing to make meaning of or progress from. ultimately, riverdale has been shown to be a place that needs violence in order to understand itself; if the bright and cheerful veneer isn’t attempting to cover up something awful, then it has no greater purpose. if the safety of the small town isn’t constantly contrasted with the danger lurking around every corner, than it loses clarity and meaning. on a narrative level, if no murder, then no corresponding mystery to be solved; no reason for unlikely connections to be made, for our protagonists to either come together or come into conflict. fifties riverdale is haunted by the absence of jason's death as an organizing principle; season 7 is centered around a hole, a gap, a place in the text where jason's death should be but isn't. what will arrive to fill its place? :)
