Hi Room! Did you read Bokenkamp last interview?? Imo, there’s hope for Lizzington, am I right?? I like his explanation about John’s parent-child thing! Idk if you are going to read it, but if you do, I would love read your opinion! Thanks!
Okay, I went and looked this up and I agree, anon.
for those who don’t know what this is about, there’s a JB interview that came out a few days ago where he - unprompted - finally addresses in detail what many of us have had issues w/, that is:
“On the parent-child thing, you know, John says that often in interviews and I sometimes get after him about it because it doesn’t necessarily mean that that’s what it is — a parent-child relationship. What he means is that it is parent-child baked into the DNA of their roles. He’s a more experienced, seasoned, crazy bad guy. She started — and is still, in comparison to him — learning. And learning from him. And he has lots of advice that she takes. And so, you know, it doesn’t mean that he’s her father or, Troy, her mother, or, you know, and that it’s parent-child in that way (although it could mean that). But it doesn’t — that’s not what John’s saying. He’s just saying that there’s a — an inherent sort of parental nature that one is learning from the other.” (transcript courtesy of @alyblacklist, thank you! read the whole thing here)
Now, this is one of his better interviews, I admit, and despite everything I feel grateful that this show exists and that JB (in all good faith) tries to give us an insight into the messy balancing act of writing for a network show, but I still have 2 main issues here and both stem from the same source:
(1) “crazy bad guy” – seriously? Red is a beautiful, classic Byronic hero (or, in a broader, more modern sense, an antihero) for crying out loud. The troping is already laid in thick and somehow they still cannot articulate what it is that they have in him. I know Red is mostly James’ own creation (it shows, lbr – the emotional intelligence, the eloquence, the self-awareness, the delicious nuance in everything he says and does) but still how can you dismiss his character like that even if it was just an attempt to be idk… funny? This is exactly what grates me to no end when these guys try to talk about Red and his relationship w Liz. It comes across so reductive, disrespectful, and disingenuous most of the time. Which brings me to
(2) apparently the actual (non-offensive) term to apply to Red/Liz is/should be adult mentoring. And when you mentor another adult, you do not label them a child ffs. This isn’t the norm btw professors and students at my uni and it’s def not the norm at workplaces where you’re assigned a mentor to supervise and orient you as you learn the ropes (at least not at those I’ve been to). In fact, it would be deeply insulting to be labeled a “child” in this situation, esp when you are an adult woman and you are mentored by a man. Also, if you insist on this being some defining element of their dynamic (I am all for it when done right), then maybe we should see some actual consistent mentoring btw these two bc it was great and def there in S1 but became kinda sporadic after that. In S6, for instance, it’s completely absent. Red giving Liz & the task force cases and then leaving them in the dark and to their own devices is not mentoring, it’s delegating.
To me it was already clear that James dislikes/dismisses the “parent-child” label (he shut down JE at SDCC, he never uses it during interviews and it’s in his portrayal of Red, too) and now it seems JB actually has a somewhat similar attitude but he’s still wishy-washy about it for some reason. “It is not that but it could be but in fact it is not but no” Come on.
Apparently, their entire reasoning behind using this label is that a hardened crime lord knows more about the practicalities of being a criminal than an FBI agent does and that he cannot stay mad at her when she rips his heart out. Okay, then. He also knows more than Cooper or Ressler, and he lets a lot of stuff slide w/ those two he normally wouldn’t w/ associates, yet those men are not characterized as “children”. I wonder why. And not being able to stay mad at someone “just” means you’re invested in them bc you love and care about them. Cooper couldn’t stay angry at his cheating wife, either. Liz couldn’t stay mad at Tim, not even after he beat her and coerced sex from her. So are these now parent-child dynamics, too? Please.
It’s a ridiculous, misused label that – at this point – is likely kept alive to appease the crybabies who need a security blanket now bc their simplistic, misogynistic fixation on “he can only be her parent” isn’t being humored on-screen anymore. It’s irritating but at least now we have additional confirmation about how little water this holds, which feels vindicating. I doubt it will resonate much w the rabid idiots who claim our ship is incest and pedophilia (bc that’s what you call shipping two unrelated adults these days when you don’t have a real argument) but oh well… JB was prompted yet refused to say anything against Lizzington (while he kept shutting down DG and MG), and he also let it slip that Red/Liz is “more” than Red and Dembe’s dynamic. That’s certainly nice to hear.
bottom line: the antis’ sad little hate platform is sinking fast and it’s amusing to watch them thrash about.
vaporwave
kaledo-art
discoholicmusic
turnnoffyourmind
izzy806
