Daydreaming, Disassociating, Etc. @andthrowmethekey - Tumblr Blog

2x12 - Santos' Gaslighting (of herself)

Fuck it. Why the tits not? I shall practice what I preach and unpack some of Trinity's self-gaslighting/her skewed perception of reality/the rewriting she does of her own narrative. Largely because I think it's: under-discussed and FASCINATING, especially in a wider conversation surrounding unhealthy coping mechanisms (which are on FULL display throughout season 2) and as a trauma response.

It was literally my first day of being a doctor...

I kinda love the fact that the first words out of her mouth are just....like, girl, it GENUINELY LITERALLY was: not!!!! Both because, y'know, s1 we had the Langdon line of doctor being a 'title you have enjoyed for, what, 90 days?' So, working 90 days backwards from the date of the 5th of September 2025 (season 1's date), that gives us a doctor graduation date of arooound about: the 7th of June.

And alongside: Whitaker in this season now being a resident without a badge/Rick the surgery intern informing Robby "I was a med student 2 weeks ago." That places our in-world (and, I believe, out-of-world) graduation/doctor becoming date at: around about the 20th of May 2026. So, loosey-gooseyness accounting for in the 'what, 90 days?' being a lowball estimate - doctoring the fuck up occurs: end of May/beginning of June. AKA: very much not the start of September. If...If we're talking about this literally. Which: u used the word, so I'm gonna.

And she could've meant: my first day at PTMC as a doctor (except she said my first day of BEING a doctor, being exists outwith: where one bes. It simply: do be, you see?). Or there could be some bizarre bend-over-backwards reason she graduated later. OR it could just be that: 'it was literally my first day of being a doctor' just Feels Right to Trinity in terms of the impact/framing of her pain/this experience.

...and Langdon gaslit me...

mm, this line may just be my white whale, y'all. Bc I already have: #issues with the way people use gaslighting. But honestly? In WHATEVER sense we use it: it ain't what happened.

For the, what I would call, proper/actual definition of gaslighting: it's a bit like abuse in that: this is actually a specific thing with a specific meaning that is not an all-encompassing umbrella term for 'someone being a bit mean to you'. One of the main things both abuse and gaslighting require is: time. These are SUSTAINED, PROLONGED, PATTERNS OF BEHAVIOUR that build-up and have an accumulating/compounding effect OVER TIME. Because gaslighting, taken directly from the original novel/origin of the term is: a PATTERN OF BEHAVIOUR - it's designed by a husband to make his wife feel like she is going insane, because he repeatedly denies her experiences/reality (eg: hearing footsteps - which she IS, and which he KNOWS because: he is the source of them - but he continually dismisses this notion because 'well the house is empty, so you must be imagining things!'). And he does this often enough that she does begin to question her sense of what is real and what is not and can she trust her own self and her own senses? It's a form of psychological abuse.

Now, if I'm feeling #Generous and I choose to apply what has taken on a more colloquial form of gaslighting where it isn't a sustained attempt to drive someone insane over the course of many months in a prolonged campaign of psychological abuse, what gaslighting would be at its most basic/fundamental/essential components to call something gaslighting is: A truth exists. Let us say it is the fact that: Santos saw Mel wearing a yellow t-shirt. Santos saw this, with her own two eyes, and was certain, in the moment, that Mel was wearing a yellow t-shirt. And, indeed: she was! Perfectly correct. Langdon: also knows this. For a fact. Langdon informs Santos flatly that, uh, no, Mel's t-shirt was definitely black. For whatever reason: Mel cannot be found to prove or disprove this one way or the other, and nor can anyone else. It's a straight he-said/she-said. Langdon continues to insist, with absolute certainty, that Mel's t-shirt was 100% black and Santos must have seen someone else/gotten confused with a different day - so that Santos begins being uncertain of what she actually saw and what is real.

This is obviously: a silly, simplified, hyperbolic example. It highlights, however, the relevant features for gaslighting which is that: 1)- Santos has to be RIGHT. 2)- Langdon has to make Santos BELIEVE she's not right but is in fact wrong based on: because I said so/convinced you of that fact.

Tragically: this never happens! Langdon calls Santos out several times over the course of the shift over a variety of incidents/issues. They all: happened. Eg: when he tells her their biPAP patient Stone does not need to be intubated, nor does he need a chest tube: the patient does not need to be intubated nor does he need a chest tube! This is not and CANNOT be gaslighting fundamentally because: he is calling Santos out on actual verifiable things that she actually did do or say wrong. That's not gaslighting that's just: the truth. (We can debate the appropriateness of the method of delivery - but it is not gaslighting).

And whhhhy am I a #stickler for this. Well, first off: words matter. They mean things. If you're gonna use them: use them properly. I feel like that's reasonable.

Secondly: you know who IS gaslighting Santos, by both technical definitions of the word laid out above? Yeah. Santos herself. Because I don't believe she's lying to Whitaker in this scene/deliberately fudging things to present herself more sympathetically/to show what happened as being worse. I think that is GENUINELY how it has come to exist and be in her mind.

And we all do this - humans, as a rule, our memories are imperfect. We forget details. Or we change them. Or we can't quite remember properly so we fill in a blank. Our memories of an event are never ever going to be a perfect, proper reproduction of the event exactly as it happened - that's just...not a thing (I guess unless you have a perfect memory, but, u know, for most humans). Santos is just doing this at: a whole new level. Where I believe that, for HER, this IS a true reflection of how she feels like her first day with Langdon went (and consequently: why it's affected her so strongly months and months later).

It's just that, OBJECTIVELY - as viewers who have: a god's-eyed view of this series and can analyse (and rewatch) scenes over again: we know that how she remembers it is NOT what actually happened. So she's rewritten it/changed things (likely unconsciously, and likely over time, repeatedly going over every interaction with Langdon and every time she remembers it, a tiny change happens - a word, an expression, the tone - until gradually, over time, bit by bit, very 'frog in the boiling water' it gets worse and worse and more and more traumatising - and she's had no one to push back against this/course-correct because: no one can verify the colour of the t-shirt. It's just been her, in her head, rotating these things and this man and likely splashing on other incidents and blurring lines between other reprimands and scoldings and now there is: a giant emotional clusterfuck that is very difficult to uncluster.

So her being AWARE of this term and this concept but not SELF-aware enough to realise that: she's been doing it to herself makes me want to go chew on concrete it's so juicy-tasty-excellent-fascinating.

and made me question my skills over and over.

This is another thing that, OBJECTIVELY: never happened. Langdon NEVER questions Santos' skills or ability - he questions her lack of EXPERIENCE (which is, again, just...a basic fact. She has only been a doctor for 3 months. She has objectively less experience than someone who's been one for 2/3/4+ years) and her decision-making/over-confidence: aka her penchant for putting in orders when she was told she HAD to run them by a senior resident or attending first.

But at no point does he tell her she cannot do this - in fact, even after she fucks up (and: nearly kills a guy, which, u know, i feel like we really dont talk about enough in terms of this whole scenario but that's...a separate issue) but he NEVER kicks her out/refuses to teach her because he thinks she's a hopeless fuck-up. Indeed - he continues to let her assist with and observe procedures and talks her through them in terms of 'when you do this procedure' - as in: this is a thing I believe you will absolutely do in the future/are absolutely capable of doing.

Even in That One Scene in 1x09 - he never actually says, or even implies, he doesn't think she can do this (quite the opposite, actually). Loathe tho I be to open this: worm can, let's do it, let's throw the worms all over the floor, fuck it. Before we do, let us remember that these worms are the product of: what Langdon knows. Which is different to what we as an audience know. Not least because: Santos told him SHE was wrong abt the diagnosis of the seizure patient and Mohan was right, but she wouldn't listen to her.

Is it... is it hubris OR ignorance that makes you think that you know more than other residents that have two to three years more experience...

1)- Is it ignorance OR is it hubris - something that Collins and Garcia have both previously accused Santos of being. 2)- she...she DOES do this lmfao. And she HAS done this. Repeatedly. To both Langdon himself and to (as per Santos' fake-confession/his knowledge/what he's basing this one) to Mohan (whom Langdon is: very specifically defending/upset for in this scene btw). But she repeatedly makes decisions on her own/disrespects and argues with people who have more experience than her. Sometimes she's right to do this - Langdon has seen: 0 of these times.

It doesn't matter! Stupid OR arrogant,

Hey, it doesn't matter WHY she's doing this, stupidity or over-confidence (aka: a far cry from 'santos u are a fucking eejit who couldn't tell ur aorta from ur abdomen'). Either she's a moron, or she's just arrogant/over-confident: it doesn't matter/that's not the point. The point is.....

you need to realize that you are a beginner, which means your job is to shut up, listen, and learn

Okay let's make a couple of things real clear here: is this an appropriate way to speak to a newbie/trainee: no! Is it an appropriate way to speak to anyone: no! Is it a good means of communicating information: no! Is it a good teacher moment: no! Is it a good person in general moment: no! Is the content of what's being said fundamentally wrong in spite of all of that? Also: No.

0/10 for delivery, student satisfaction score currently: negative a million, but he's also: not wrong. She IS a beginner. She IS here (at the TEACHING HOSPITAL) to learn. Robby points this out - 'that's why it's a four year program' - there's a reason they don't punt baby doctors directly from medical school into the big bad world and it's because: you need EXPERIENCE to teach you the things that you can't learn from school.

This is also: not something you tell someone that you believe has: no skills/does not belong here. Because if that were the case you would not believe them to have the capacity to: learn anything at all. Langdon obviously DOES see potential in that - it's why Santos has continued to assist him/have procedures explained to her all day and why he wants her to LEARN. He would just like her to do that in a way that: does not (in is eyes/from his perspective) disrespect/disregard/undermine her fellow residents.

Again: he communicates this APPALLINGLY, he's behaving like an asshole here - that is not up for debate. Just. Purely CONTENT wise. Some food for thought.

because so far today, the only thing you have been successful at is proving repeatedly that you know nothing.

This is also: unfortunately true (from Langdon's perspective). Before I expand/explain on this seemingly rage-bait statement, let me note one thing: what he says is that 'what you have been SUCCESSFUL AT PROVING' is that you know nothing. Now. This is me being: a rat-bastard stickler again (I do that, I have an English lit degree, which is essentially just a degree in being: a rat-bastard stickler) specificity is important!!! Especially when we throwback to him telling her that HER JOB right now is to: be wheesht and gain knowledge.

So, again, yes, terrible delivery, assholish presentation, absolutely awful, the works, please see above etc etc. BUT. There's actually a reasonable bit of insight in here, if you just look purely at WHAT he's saying and pretend they're discussing this in a pleasant setting over tea and scones in a park or some shit.

He's telling her that her JOB is to: shoosh and learn. He's also telling her that she has only been successful in proving what she doesn't know. (Which is NOT the same as 'you know nothing') it is what it says: what you have proven to be today is all the things you DON'T know. I need/want you to stop that. Your JOB is to learn and gain experience. I do not need or want you to try and prove yourself to me right now - it is NOT helping; either you, me, your fellow residents, or our patients. Sit down and shut up and stop trying so goddamn hard to impress everyone: it's having the opposite effect of what you want. You're trying to push in and prove to everyone how much you know and how smart you are and it's just exposing your lack of experience. You don't need to do this. I don't WANT you to do this. Just. Your JOB/all that is expected of you right now is to: learn. Not to be perfect or prove anything. Just be here and take everything in.

Now, again, that is: NOT what comes across/is obviously not what is sticking in Trinity's head (or anyone else's). But I DO think it's interesting/important/relevant to note that: Langdon sees her. He sees the pressure she's putting on herself. He understands WHY she keeps butting in and WHY she keeps contradicting and WHY she keeps trying to do all the procedures and flex her giant medical guns at every one in her vicinity: he gets that she's trying to impress and prove herself and prove that she belongs here and she can make it here (and he probably knows all of this becaaaause: yeah. he does that shit, too lmfao. And ask him and his benzo addiction where that road leads some time).

So he does NOT communicate this well and I'm not saying that this is what Santos should have managed to get out of him: yelling at her in front of her coworkers/that she needs to sit down and analyse the contents of this man's words to try and find their #TrueMeaning (bc that's MY job, thank u very much) but just: something to consider from a viewer perspective.

Also, as I mentioned: he's right. FROM HIS PERSPECTIVE. If you actually go and pick through every season 1 scene that Langdon and Santos have together up to this point (which I: have done, actually) it's genuinely fascinating. Because they both, but Langdon in particular ,really just get a condensed 'Greatest Hits' style album of each other. Except in this case it's: Santos' Worst Bits. Any time she makes a mistake, or a wrong call, or doesn't know something/gets something wrong (which: she's going to do! because she's human and new and this is expected! it's why she's supposed to present her cases!) but yeah, Langdon just pretty much witnesses: 101 Fuck Ups by Trinity Santos. Her cool catches, her saves, her insights, her performing well under pressure and with tricky procedures that we as an audience see and that other characters see: yeah Langdon sees none of that. He just sees her at her worst. So, from his POV, all she actually HAS successfully proven to him is that she: doesn't know nearly as much as she thinks she does.

Which, AGAIN, does not justify his behaviour or the way he spoke to her etc etc etc, official disclaimer coming at y'all once again on this. But it IS, at least in my opinion: extremely interesting. And a very good reminder that: our experiences are not these characters' experiences. They make decisions and judgement calls and form opinions of others based on limited information. And that's always very important to keep track of/keep in mind.

And it's taken me a long time to feel like I belong here, and now he's back.

Now here - here we start slipping into the bounds of hypocrisy/self-contradiction (fascinating) where, even outside of being objective god-mode viewers: we can see there are some flaws here. Because two episodes ago, Santos informed Garcia that:

"Meanwhile, I've been a goddamn pariah for the last 10 months for doing the right thing."

Fundamentally: These two things CANNOT coexist at the same time. They CANNOT both be true. It's like saying that 2+2=4 but also that 2+2=6. You gotta pick one! These statements just, logically, cancel each other out/contradict each other.

You cannot feel like you belong here (even if this has taken a long time to happen) AND be a pariah. You just can't! They directly contradict one another! So either: you do not fit here/do not belong/are isolated from everyone because you did the right thing and got rid of their golden boy and they're all pissed at you and won't include you.

OR

You do feel like you belong here, but now Langdon is back and threatening that/threatening to disrupt the connections you've formed and the sense of community and settling that is felt here.

Now, when I say these things cannot coexist I mean: LOGICALLY. As in from a rational 2+2=4 almost mathematical, realistic, logical view of the matter: they can't coexist. EMOTIONALLY? They absolutely can. Because humans are often irrational and emotional and do not give a damn about logic. I can absolutely think that Trinity both does genuinely feel like she's a pariah AND that her place and her belonging here is under threat. This is not a case of dismissing or invalidating her feelings - this is an exploration of what is logically, factually, demonstrably and provably true to us as independent god-mode viewers vs what Santos is feeling/experiencing/perceiving in HER version of reality. This is about demonstrating that these two things: are different, to open up conversations around: how/why/what that then tells us about Santos' character/headspace/dynamics etc. And because it's: fucking fascinating (or at least it is: to me).

And I don't even care that he was an addict. I care that he was a fucking asshole.

Winding down a little bit towards the end here, because we're moving into realms of 'I feel/I think' - ie things that are not factually provable or disprovable one way or the other.

The only note I have here/the thing I find interesting is that: essentially, this is something Langdon's apology to her in episode 2x11 targeted/homing missile honed in on pretty much perfectly. Whether that was insight/his awareness of what ACTUALLY mattered to her about the situation and his deliberate attempts to address that, a complete coincidence/happy accident, or a byproduct of him attempting to target how his addiction/behaviour directly impacted Trinity (which - let's be so for real here, had NOTHING to do with the drug stealing, like, on a personal level. Frank pocketing Louie's librium has approximately: 0 real world consequences for Santos/impacts her: not at all/is not relevant to her) rather than: apologising for every thing he ever did - orrrr some combination of all 3, we do not know, but....that is almost exactly, to a perfectly crossed T, what he said to her in 2x11.

Mentions of his addiction: 0 (which she just stated she: does not care about (and why would/should she??? she doesn't know this guy from Adam, his drug issues ain't her business)). Mentions of/acknowledgements towards/apologies regarding his asshole behaviour (which is what she says here she cares about): all!

And it's like no one here even remembers any of this.

Any of what? That Langdon had a benzo addiction and has been off for 10 months as a result of that? No I... I think people definitely remember that. Langdon's: trashed/ruined relationships, especially with Robby and Dana (Dana is: less obvious than Robby who is: the MOST obvious about the change in their dynamic but....there is ABSOLUTELY a change in Dana and Langdon's relationship between season 1 and season 2. I mean, not least covered by the fact that: she didn't contact him while he was off, either) are pretty clear proof of the very lingering memory/hurt of: all of that.

Then there's also, y'know, the smaller elements/evidence that this is definitely a thing people Remember like:

-Whitaker jumping in to prescribe benzos that Langdon just ordered (with bonus Perlah: grimacing at the #awkward of it all). -Samira casually referencing that Langdon went to rehab and is working the steps now. -Baran, who has been here for: less than a day! Knowing that Langdon is part of the PHP (privacy!? medical confidentiality!? bitch ive never fuckin' heard of her (dont get me started on the PHP and its #Issues. just. don't)) -Mckay asking Langdon how his first day is going/referencing her own previous addiction issues -Javadi and Whitaker's "Langdon's an addict" "Uh person with substance abuse disorder" convo -Dana ambling over in the middle of the ED to remind Langdon that he: has to go upstairs and piss in a cup in front of a stranger now please and thank you.

Now, how fitting/reasonable any of these things are: not the point. The point is that, from a purely factual POV: Yeah, no: evverrryyyybody knows about/remembers this. And the man has (at least) 4 more years to go in the PHP which means: no one is forgetting about the whole 'addict' thing any time, well, ever, really.

On the other hand, if we're talking about the specific asshole-ishness/Langdon yelling at her? I... I am going to say this as gently and respectfully as I possibly can, with an acknowledgement of my own experiences with angry men/abuse, as well as my own special interest in and respect for trauma and its many manifestations and the very real impact it has on people: honey, why the actual fuck would they???

Objectively: Langdon was an asshole. 100%. 0 way to justify how he yelled at her in 1x09. Also objectively: it was one shift's worth of shitty behaviour culminating in that moment of ultimate shit - for which he was IMMEDIATELY pulled out of the room with Santos and verbally dressed down/reprimanded by their attending who made it extremely clear that was: not acceptable and not tolerated.

Only Mohan and Princess were actually in the room where it happened (the room where it happened!) and, okay, if I acknowledge the hospital grapevine, sure, let's say, for argument's sake: the entirety of The Pitt is privy to every individual detail and it's like they were present in the room at the time.

It is still: one case of assholery that happened to take place on a day in which there was, only a few hours later: a MASS FUCKING SHOOTING AT A MUSIC FESTIVAL RESULTING IN A MASS CASUALTY EVENT which, per Robby, is, "the worst mass casualty incident in this city's history". Now. Forgive me. But. OBJECTIVELY SPEAKING HERE: I feel like, mayhaps, just maybe: people have some other big standout memories of that day that kinda make them forget about: the yelling.

Which is not to diminish the impact it's had on Santos but, again, this is about looking objectively at what happened/at peoples' experiences of it. And, I'm sorry, but of fucking course 10 months after the fact, peoples' biggest concern/thing to have retained from that day was not: oh Langdon behaved like an asshole towards you.

For Santos: ABSOLUTELY it's a big deal. (Especially after 10 months of self-gaslighting/rotating/letting everything fester and get worse and worse and worse) but for everyone else? A bit of context and perspective/seeing the bigger picture is never a bad thing/always good to keep in mind. Again: people have different experiences and perceptions which are limited by their own personal issues/demons/emotions. This is: okay! It's also: very relevant/important to remember!

And everyone here talks about community and family, all while they throw you under the bus, and I–

I don't have much to say on this point (HUZZAH you all cry!) I just... I just want to flashback to season 1 for a hot second and remind ourselves of this grand Santosian nugget of wisdom from 1x03: "You (Mel) see a family, I see every man for himself."

It's another one of those 'have your cake and eat it' / these cannot both be true. Either you reject the notion of family and community and are working in your own 'every man for himself' system. OR you respect and want to be part of the family/community and therefore it hurts when they...do unto you as you have done unto them. (A rather brutal assessment, but hey, it's 2am and I'm tired/my patience is running thing. I'm also: not wrong.)

Robby is the only attending who actually sees through the bullshit, but now he's leaving for some grand ego-death spirit quest...

1)- Santos, Robby is: your ONLY attending period!!!! I mean. I guess there's Abbot (and Shen - I remember ur not a resident no more, Shen!) but they are both: night shift! But okay, fine, let's still go with Robby is the only one who sees through the bullshit.

Let's just please acknowledge that, in this case, the 'bullshit' is:

2)- the bullshit concept of family/community - but everyone just throws everyone else under the bus. And let's just...

I'm going to take a moment to point out/reflect here that: the biggest foundational issue with The Pitt/with the state of everything (ie: everyone's SHOCKING mental health) in season 2 is that: they're all playing a team sport as individuals right now. There is no family. There is no community. There are: a bunch of individuals trying to individually do their jobs and individually deal with their problems, both personal and professional, and that they are not seeing or communicating with each other or working together and that is, in short: why everything is fucked. (yes yes there are other factors, too: this is the main one.) Y'all just gotta trust me on this, okay, bc I can and will write a meta the same length as this one: proving/demonstrating that point - but that will be for a separate day bc this bitch is already long enough, lbr.

But in this case - no. No Robby is seeing: nothing right now. (someone fetch this bitch his glasses). I get that he is your Spiritual Papa and that you two have trauma-bonded and also just bond-bonded over these 10 months (which, not to sidebar again but holy SHIT at some point we need to engage with Robby and Santos' s2 dynamic and how it might just be: the most fascinating thing ever. Especially given the fact: NO ONE IS FUCKING TALKING ABOUT IT. but. again. another meta another day) - but no Robby is not the only one who has reached Enlightenment and sees through the bullshit concept of, uh, attempting to help your fellow humans he is simply: dying. Please do not let him take you with him.

and Robo-Doc over there shoots me in the proverbial dick.

Honey. Sweet baby snookums. Your dick, proverbial or otherwise, was not shot - it was not even shot AT, if i wish to be a pedantic little bitch a la Abbot. Al-Hashimi told you that: being TWENTY charts behind/not keeping up to date on charting was: not acceptable. Because it's not. Because it: kills people. (No. Seriously. Like. I sound as if I'm being dramatic/hyperbolic but: actually. Charting is important. It's not sexy or glamorous, none of the doctors enjoy it, it is the bane of every existence, it is also: extremely necessary. If you haven't documented someting: it hasn't happened. And if it hasn't happened then we start getting into the realms of: extra med dosages being given because if it wasn't charted, how is anyone else supposed to know what's been given to who when? Meds that should not be mixed: being mixed because we didn't know they were being mixed because it wasn't written down! Allergies! Side-effects. Bad responses to meds or treatments! Also: safety elements! Possible aggression to flag up! Possible infectious disease! So many possibilities! None of which are known because: there's no goddamn accurate/up-to-date chart!!!!

Al-Hashimi is not just getting on Santos' case for the lolz/because she's decided to dislike her/punish her for existing. And she's not just being a rule-following "robot" because, well, charting is The Rules so we must do them. She's doing it because it: MATTERS!!!! Charting IS a fundamental (and ESSENTIAL/highly important) part of the job! It is not a 'well I'll just get to it later' 'it can wait' 'It'd be a better use of my time to do xzy' - it's NECESSARY. it's boring and painful and hated but it MUST be done. And it is ABSOLUTELY a reason to call up the idea of repeating R2 year (which I don't think is a thing Baran is ACTUALLY just going to hop-to, like, come on people) - but it emphasises that: this is serious. this affects patients/patient care (and hospital billing/admin stuff which, again, snooze-fest/an Evil but it's: a necessary evil) this is an ESSENTIAL, non-optional part of the job and, like any other essential non-optional part of the job, if it's something the resident cannot handle then they cannot progress.

She also: mentions it a couple of times but she ALSO: checks in with Santos, offers understanding/support that R2 year is difficult and she knows this - Santos just has to keep grinding. She also offers potential solutions/options to help (like the AI-app which, if Santos had ACTUALLY used it properly/the way it was supposed to be used and: proof-read the charts it created, it WOULD have saved time/helped). She also praises her for good work with patients - so it's not as if she just got out her machine gun and proceeded to: pepper Santos with non-stop shots to the proverbial dick, come on now.

Welp. This got longer/more involved/more in depth than I was originally intending #oops. But hopefully at least some of it was vaguely interesting/insightful/contained some Food For Thought.

Santos is a character who is fascinating to me. But I find looking at her in a purely black 'she is the devil, nasty awful mean woman i hate her' or white 'she is a poor little trauma victim who has #Suffered and thus has never done any wrong in her life and is incapable of it, actually' to be equally boring/reductive. There's a LOT going on here and a LOT we don't talk about because it could appear to be negative/critical but hey, guess what, Santos, like every other character on this show is: human and therefore: flawed. And those are always the juiciest/most interesting things to look at.

But her penchant for gaslighting herself/rewriting her own narrative is: absolutely FASCINATING. especially when there are things she says or does that can be demonstrably proven to be: factually incorrect. because then we come round onto the topic of: well how did this happen? Why did this happen? How does that impact her and her relationships to everyone around her? Will this eventually boil over/become obvious to other people in-world? What impact will THAT have? How should we as an audience engage with Santos and her takes/impressions/views of other characters/situations when we know she can be an unreliable narrator - but one who is fully convinced of the truth of her own narration???

Just. I WANT TO ENGAGE WITH THESE CHARACTERS ON LEVELS THAT WOULD COME ARCOSS AS SLIGHTLY WORRYING TO THE AVERAGE JOE, OKAY. CAN WE START DOING THAT IN FANDOM AGAIN!? PLEASE!? I WANT TO BRING NEW MEANING TO THE WORD 'OVERTHINKING'. PLEASE.

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Daydreaming, Disassociating, Etc.