|
Post by acc on Sept 2, 2008 17:15:31 GMT -5
Okay, if you remember my last thread-posting--about Criticisms Later Disproven--you know I've been re-watching the entire series known as The Shield. And something struck me a while back...
Certain characters do something wrong/illegal/immoral, or just something that they think they must to do preserve their family. Interestingly, after torturing themselves with this decision, they find themselves so traumatized or feeling such guilt or pain that they "lose" their family, and often avoid the very people for whom they committed said action(s).
Vic Mackey is perhaps the most transparent example. Every step he has taken to ensure the security of his family, financial and otherwise, has arguably distanced his family from him, and vice versa. David Aceveda, after being sexually assaulted, deciding to live with the abhorrent humiliation so that he could live for his wife and daughter... Two episodes later, he tells his cousin he did this for them and now all he does is make excuses for why he can't see them. Shane, murdering Lem, his greatest goal being to be there for his family, Mara and his two children--fearing that Lem was going to rat him out and put him in prison--becomes disconnected from Mara and his family in Season 6.
In each case--and I'm sure there are others--characters do something for their "family," and in each case they find themselves unable to enjoy the life they envisioned with their family in the wake of these events and occurrences.
In these three aforementioned cases, it's three men who make these decisions, and live with the consequences... The Shield has long been noted for his testosterone overtones... Is the series making a statement about masculinity?
And what other instances like these are there in the series?
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Sept 2, 2008 20:13:51 GMT -5
Great analysis, ACC. I can think of other examples ...
* Lem decides to go on the run, and later to turn himself in and go to jail, to protect his "family" (The Strike Team). This quickly leads, of course, to his murder.
* Julien supresses his homosexuality in order to gain a new "family" ..... as an aside, this is a "dropped plot" I've always thought was never fully resolved. It's as if they're saying that he can just go on the rest of his life blissfully closeted about his sexuality and nothing bad comes of it (after Season 2).
Other examples of "masculinity" run amok, not directly relating to protecting ones family, are also prevalent:
* Rawlings insistence on the seizures (don't think women can't show masculinity) * Kavanagh's dogged pursuit of Mackey to the point of becoming a criminal himself * Every major and minor drug dealer, banger, street thug is a textbook example of masculinity on steriods (Armadillo, Kern Little, Margos etc.)
I'm wondering what all this may mean in Season 7 for the least-masculine character - Dutch? I still think he plays a major part in Vic's ultimate fate.
|
|
|
Post by acc on Sept 2, 2008 20:43:31 GMT -5
n00b, thank you very much for the kind words and the more extensive examples! Exactly what I was hoping for.
I agree with you about Lem, certainly--he's a prime example of the losing of one's family (and in his special case, his very life) for the sake of his "family."
I've always believed Julien's sexuality issues would arise again in Season 7... I'm not sure if I'll be proven. The Shield writers don't forget about anything... It will be truly interesting to see if this does come back to the surface, and if so, how.
Kavanaugh is an example both of masculinity "run amok" and the guy who loses his family. Interestingly, if you watch carefully when he discusses his ex-wife when he's posing at the autism school early in Season 5, there's a moment of retrospective tenderness because for a second he's actually talking about his own ex... Which may not have even been planned at the time but it's an extra added layer now because of where the writers took the storyline later in that season.
|
|
|
Post by chemikalman on Sept 2, 2008 23:15:01 GMT -5
Interesting premise, acc, and great follow-up, n00b. I have one slight problem: "after torturing themselves with this decision, they find themselves so traumatized or feeling such guilt or pain that they "lose" their family". I don't see any of the examples as losing their "families" because of guilt they feel. I.e., I don't see guilt or trauma being a causation; rather it is their overt acts. Maybe you didn't mean it that way. Maybe you were pointing out the irony in each case, which was definitely there. Great example of a female amped up on testosterone (Rawling {sic}), n00b.
|
|
|
Post by acc on Sept 3, 2008 1:43:19 GMT -5
Yes, I was writing about the irony of those cases, chem... Sorry for the confusion!
|
|
|
Post by chemikalman on Sept 5, 2008 19:53:44 GMT -5
* Julien supresses his homosexuality in order to gain a new "family" ..... as an aside, this is a "dropped plot" I've always thought was never fully resolved. It's as if they're saying that he can just go on the rest of his life blissfully closeted about his sexuality and nothing bad comes of it (after Season 2). I've had that same feeling. I wonder why the writers abandoned that storyline? I'm going to try to find out. Did they not want to explore that theme because Six Feet Under (which debuted the year before TS) was already doing a gay cop thing as a major theme? Yes, I think the "blissfully closeted" implication can be drawn, n00b, the way it's been handled--they give us nothing to contradict that suggestion. Early in the first season of 6' a closeted character in the show, who was also one of the major cast members, came out. His partner, a black gay cop, urged him to. Their on-and-off relationship continued to be a theme throughout its 5-yr. run. "On-and-off" can also be taken literally--the bedroom scenes were more graphically depicted than I wanted to see (no, make that WAY more). They made the depictions Michael Jace was involved with look tame by comparison.
|
|
|
Post by acc on Sept 5, 2008 22:28:19 GMT -5
Season 3 seemed to be the turning point for that whole Julien sexuality arc, chem. The writers allowed certain nagging issues to remain, such as the fact that Julien as a heterosexual was impotent--a storyline that is touched on in 3x04, 3x08 and 3x10. However, since 3x10, there's been nary a word about it aside from the occasional reference or joke (like Billings mentioning cops using slurs behind Julien's back in 4x11 or Shane making an obvious homosexual joke in 6x06 ("Let's not get ass-reamed").
I've always believed that the writers felt that they needed to enlarge the picture of Julien as a character beyond his sexual leanings, and the Vic-tutoring-Julien--no, wait, now Claudette-tutoring-Julien storyline of Sesaon 3 was the transition to that...
Actually, now that I've thought about it, Julien did have the storyline of the glory holes in Season 5--which did touch on his past homosexuality fairly heavily, if the viewer knew about it.
Adam E. Fierro wrote on this website, though, I *believe*, that the writers had some ideas on how to bring the issue back to the surface in Season 7. I'm intrigued.
|
|
|
Post by electroshockblues on Sept 6, 2008 4:03:41 GMT -5
Regarding the Julien storyline I've heard various rumours that it was dropped because Jace was uncomfortable with it.
That would seem to gel with Jace's various insistences that Julien is now "straight", as in the recent FX interviews.
Weirdly, both times I've commented upon this on the IMDB boards the entire thread has been erased without trace.
|
|
|
Post by F*ckernando on Sept 6, 2008 8:17:31 GMT -5
Weirdly, both times I've commented upon this on the IMDB boards the entire thread has been erased without trace. holy shit!!! It seems that someone was unhappy with those threads ..yea
|
|
|
Post by conrad on Oct 1, 2008 10:57:41 GMT -5
ACC: I'm late to this party and just read your post for the first time. As I've written elsewhere, I think the overarching theme has more to do with people's efforts to hide their dark secrets than anything else. (Secrets like, e.g., Terry's murder, Lem's murder, Julien's homosexuality, Aceveda's sexual assault, Claudette's lupus, the paternity of Danny's baby, Cavanaugh's bizarre marital relationship, Monica Rawlings' silent grief over the death of her married ex-partner and lover Rich Nelson, Dutch's near-infatuation with the criminal mind).
While I would agree the show has explored aspects of masculinity in dealing with certain characters and situations, I'm not sure there has been any conscious attempt to connect that theme to the loss of one's family. I would point out that none of the characters seems to have a rewarding family/romantic life in the first place, so there hasn't been much there to lose!
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Oct 1, 2008 13:30:50 GMT -5
Will have to disagree with your last part there conrad. Vic had a very nice family and much to lose in Season 1 - and he lost it, and is slowly losing it more and more to the point of irrevocable loss being likely as S7 plays out. Aceveda had a good family, nearly lost it over the rape thing, and could seemingly lose it entirely in S7 if things go badly. Shane, Danny, and Julien have all tried to start good families, with varying degrees of success. And the Strike Team itself was a a very rewarding "family" for the four original members that has now all but disintegrated.
|
|
|
Post by conrad on Oct 1, 2008 17:12:11 GMT -5
I'll grant you Vic. I don't really agree about Aceveda for the simple reason that he was a victim. I don't think his alienation from his family was on account of any decisions HE made; it was due to something that was done to him by someone else. So while it may be true he had a good family life before the rape, and may have lost his family, I don't think his situation is an example of someone making decisions ostensibly to help his family having that decision backfire on him.
As for Julien, Danny, and Julien, at best they have all TRIED to develop rewarding family lives, but apparently without much success. I don't recall them deciding to do something bad to protect his familiy, only to see that decision backfire.
(Actually, since there have been 80-some episodes, one probably could find some examples that might fit within that pattern, but I don't think it's a pattern the writers have consciously tried to stress.)
|
|
|
Post by kingoffarmington on Oct 13, 2008 22:52:39 GMT -5
I think you're on to something, especially considering the title of the final episode of the series.
|
|
|
Post by acc on Nov 26, 2008 14:30:14 GMT -5
Thanks, everyone... Interesting to look back on this topic in the wake of Family Meeting.
|
|