| Welcome to Nikki And Helen. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Otalia - Guiding Light | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 29 2009, 06:54 PM (21,278 Views) | |
| Jules2 | Jun 30 2009, 12:32 PM Post #211 |
|
Oh wow, are you both for me?
![]()
|
I didn't see calling Philip so much as getting Phillip on board. (although he did say he was okay with the idea in Feb) I thougth it had more to do with the fact that they wanted to tell Emma and Phillip should know because he is Emma's dad. Having him on board would be a big bonus though. They have so many people around them who aren't supportive and if Emma feels the need to talk about it with him (after pink shirt day and all) it would be nice for her to have her father say that she isn't an outcast, but special having two mommy's who love her. And that she'll be warm and save in their love and family. |
![]() |
|
| abzug | Jun 30 2009, 12:41 PM Post #212 |
|
In love with a prisoner
|
I saw the Ashlee scene at the end, where she walks away when Doris is getting ready to share, slightly differently. I thought it was showing how a lifetime of keeping secrets and not being emotionally open leads a kid to not be open as a young adult. So Ashlee isn't comfortable with the emotional side of her mother because Doris's secret-keeping (and the resulting emotional withdrawl) has basically led her to be emotionally stunted. Ashlee's got no context for emotional intimacy with her mom, and so when Doris wants it, Ashlee can't give it. Very sad, really.
Did you think so? I mean, I haven't seen much that makes me think Frank is a good man, nor can I understand how everyone in Springfield doesn't realize Olivia and Natalia are "together." So Blake's line didn't make much sense to me. It seems like she's the mouthpiece of Springfield--unaware but once aware supportive of the relationship--rather than the mouthpiece of the viewers. OK, question of the day: Who is doing a better job of standing up for the relationship right now, Olivia or Natalia? I'm thinking of Natalia's scene with Father Ray vs Olivia's scene with Rafe. I never thought I'd say this, but I'm coming down slightly on Natalia's side. Of course, we could also look at the question over a longer timespan, like since the non-wedding or something. And I still think I'd vote for Nat. As strong as Olivia is, she hasn't done nearly as much fighting for this as Natalia has. Although, she's been steadfast and patient, which I guess is a different kind of fighting....But Natalia has never said no to the relationship, while (right after the wedding) Olivia did, multiple times. And Natalia wouldn't let her get away with it. Sorry, random musings above. So what do you guys think? |
Visit the Bad Girls Annex!
| |
![]() |
|
| abzug | Jul 1 2009, 02:08 AM Post #213 |
|
In love with a prisoner
|
Is everyone too shell-shocked from today's episode to post? Despite the feelings of impending doom, it did have some really cool bits. Like confident, I-don't-care-what-people-think Olivia, flirting up a storm with Natalia, making sure her peeps are taken care of (even Frank and Rafe!) and just generally being steadfast and dignified and strong and self-confident even in the face of Frank's hostile insults. Like, nothing that anyone says or thinks matters in the face of her overwhelming happiness. It's really beautiful, and I think what many of us have felt when we fell in love with a woman for the first time. Plus, to be really really really shallow for a second, that shirt was HOT. We so rarely get Olivia cleavage that I treasure these moments, and it seems she will be wearing the same shirt in tomorrow's episode as well, so no matter what happens I'm happy! Interesting that Blake's anti-Catholic, you-have-to-have-sex-first perspective from Blake (how can you know you want to be with Liv if you haven't slept together) seems to produce more doubt in Nat than anything Father Ray said. Plus, in case anyone thinks there's a double-standard in the lack of Otalia kissing, fear not! Buzz and Lillian don't get to kiss either. So if you're gay or old, no kissing allowed, because it might gross people out. See, it's not homophobia, it's juvenileheterophilia. Kissing by young straight couples only! |
Visit the Bad Girls Annex!
| |
![]() |
|
| cagey | Jul 1 2009, 02:34 AM Post #214 |
|
G3 Curtain and Duvet!
|
Oh right - I was gonna spend my lunchtime thinking about this, before I got sucked into the vortex of bad possible outcomes from today. Up to today, I would say it is Natalia. And sweet thing that she is, I still believe from the first "I know what it means to say you love someone" she has understood the depth of her feelings and all that it implies about herself, her family, her place in the community. That's why she is scared of everything, but still ploughing ahead. Olivia always seems to me like she is wrapping up a business deal. Wanting to know how each little movement will affect the "us", making sure she and Natalia are still going to do the deal, it's all just details, right? Natalia has been forced to stand up to people who are disapproving; Olivia has gotten a slide so far - so in that sense, Natalia has done the better job in standing up for the relationship. Same time, though, she's been the more evasive about just *what* the relationship is. She's good with saying she loves Olivia, but not so good with admitting what that entails.
Didn't do much for me. It was a bad date. I was interested upon meeting it, but after a few scenes I was ready to say goodbye.
Again, I think this is Blake as voice of the viewer - stating the obvious. How can they *be* together if they haven't even kissed, much less had sex. Good thing Blake didn't ask about the kissing, it would have really left Natalia with no place to squirm. Cause it IS about the sex, the touching, the kissing. It is about crossing that line, which, perhaps she has compartmentalized away during all her scrimmages with Fr. Ray. Oh dear, I'm talking myself into things again. But maybe she should have a good hard think about good old Catholic guilt towards Sex. So yes, I agree with you, abzug, that Blakey got her where she lives. Anyway, Blake isn't being anti-Catholic, per se, there are lots of other religions with injunctions about sex - she's just too blunt about people who let their moral values dictate their feelings.
What is the status of their relationship? I thought they were tentatively getting together again, as opposed to being a couple? Who knows? Like Billy and Vanessa. But I get your point - either couple will be allotted an Old Couple Peck at best. Being half of an old couple, I know how it is done.
|
![]() |
|
| ekny | Jul 1 2009, 02:34 AM Post #215 |
In love with a prisoner
|
So first, realllly sorry this turned into such a long post. If time weren't short I'd edit more as per my usual (thus making it slightly less long only) but--events converge. For the record--my email correspondents will back me up--I figured out the pregnancy thing. It's logical (in a stupid soap way)/+deduction. I wrote the following before watching a single minute of this week's ep. And having now done so--am perfectly comfortable standing by it. ----- Ok. I still haven't watched anything. I will. But I want to try to think this through, first. Let's assume this is a telescoped version of the original plotline. I don't believe they did have two different versions. They had one. They're soap writers. Otalia fall in love, Nat gets pregnant; likely marries Frank after a night of mad love with OFS or at least very enhanced kissing; goes off to an unhappy marriage because she thinks this is God's Plan &/or has homosexual Panic. Eventually realizes she cannot do this & gets together with Olivia. That's one of the problems, of course--religion. Depends how they approach it. If it's presented as anything at all to do with god or N's religious beliefs as opposed to or set against her feelings for Olivia, they may be in trouble... except again, the scriptwriters have shown themselves to be pretty adept at that. So I'm not worried about it. [ETA: per today's ep {& also Abzug's comments re Nat's presentation around this}, this, also, remains consistent. N. has yet to back down.] Given the kind of show this is, I think that's just what they intend: for this to be Nat's final station of the cross. Other problems: either Nat was stupid, cause she did this 20 years ago--and we all would like to believe Nat is not stupid--or Frank is a tool, which we already knew. But Frank won't act like this is his fault. He'll take responsibility, but use it to railroad her. Other problems: Olivia on a path of misery & self-destruction. Hopefully not. These are all just factors in the characters' backstories. This gives Olivia an excellent opportunity to have to manage dealing with Rafe and Emma. Nat comes home unwell from her miscarriage (because she cannot have an abortion), can't shag but can snog. Rafe is so grateful his mom is ok he decides he can live with it. Happy families. Which is the real endgame. So. Let's think. Why is this pissing people off so much? I mean prima facie? Well, because if your politics are highbrown or low, if you're watching a lesbian storyline, you'd rather not keep seeing men in it fucking up the works. Ok. I *have* been pointing out this is a Problem with Guiding Light, per se. I did post to this effect. Nevertheless, it's entirely consistent, again, with how the show functions. So if this is Nat's final obstacle, I still don't see why people are so pissed. Because this story, as Cagey elsewhere pointed out, had nowhere else to GO, after this. Rafe, I suppose. No. She needs to miscarry & Rafe needs to fear for her life. That'll take care of that. (Assuming it's not a false/hysterical pregnancy or isn't in fact one thing presenting as something else, like acute appendicitis. Whatever.) And the scriptwriters' thinking would be: this, of all things, will prove to their target audience--who is not lesbian--that Natalia just doesn't choose Frank. We already knew that. The problem remains: an audience segment who wanted to be treated with parity. And forgot they were watch a Christian, family-oriented soap. I think my original analysis stands. I think happy families with pink bunnies is exactly where we are going. The audience just isn't going to be happy with the way we get there. If they'd gotten a kiss or two earlier on, they might have hung on. But I don't think so. In a way, this is pretty much parallel with what happened during S3 of Bad Girls for some audience members. Where we had some of the more sensational on-screen lesbian kisses *I've* ever seen on a tv show. (Or much of anywhere else.) And it still wasn't enough. If Shed had aired the deleted scene, would *that* have been enough? I used to think so. Now I'm not so sure. There is simply no way to happily address/resolve this problem within straight media, far as I can see. If there is, it sure hasn't happened yet. Lesbians react poorly to the presence of a man as interloper/plot-development. There are excellent historic reasons for this, as I am well aware. But it doesn't change the basics around *this* storyline, which is that any kind of expression of sexuality is beyond what this show has been thus far able to accommodate, because it is very invested in accommodating the lowest common denominator: fearful straight viewers. Those are the people being addressed with this storyline. So yeah, I can see why lesbian viewers see it as a betrayal. I'm not sure, even now, I agree. What am I missing? In both cases, the plot *does* motivate the story. In the case of BG, so long as Nikki is locked up, Helen can't be with her; Nikki's behavior endangers them both--literally endangers their freedom & possible future. Helen's decisions around breaking up do make sense; further, her moral scruples are real. But her fear, expressed through her brief, tepid affair with Thomas, also needs to be addressed. And although Thomas might seem like an externalization of that fear, how else is the story supposed to show that? Have Helen drinking too much, pacing around her apartment & mumbling to herself? That's not drama. In the case of GL, the plot is so thoroughly externalized it makes no sense for another reason: because it's stupid. Because Otalia already have obstacles. And because it's just another soapy way to put off dealing with their sexuality. (Which, for the umpteeth time, Guiding Light cannot deal with, I think that's pretty clear.) But it's not a surprise. Soaps are the weakest form of drama. So of course this is the route they choose to make Natalia's choices clear to the lowest common denominator. I am *still* not seeing why people are so upset. Except this: since the start, the word of choice has been invested, around audience involvement with this soap. But that's not accurate--at all. They're not just invested, like it's a bank. They're cathected. That's very different. The need here, on the part of this audience segment, is *enormous*. The 'investment' is correspondingly so. That's what plot-moves like this are incapable of addressing. I don't know that it's their business to. Although it's certainly their business to hew to their storyline & maintain its integrity. We still don't have any data on whether that can still happen. But given the limited parameters for this story *as I understand them*, I see no reason why not. Is it going to give the audience what they want? Clearly not, at this point. Is this entirely the show's fault? I'm not sure. That's all I got, for now. Oh--except Natalia now has a female ally. Finally. And the soap *is* aware that the no-sex is a problem. They might be presenting it, still, as Natalia's Problem. But it's not that it isn't getting mentioned. And agree with Abzug's comments about Doris's subplot. And would point out that would seem to also indicate they're still on-message.
I'd second that. The line only makes sense if it's taken in the context of the show's method of addressing the open question (for those who still want to call it that) of Otalia's sexuality. Or Nat's fear. I think Olivia's own issues (nastily tweaked by Frank today, of course) & her self-esteem stuff got in the way, immediately after the wedding/gondola business, but that so long as she's got N. on her side she's unstoppable. And so Happy!Olivia today made me sad, cause naturally it's clear she's about to get another anvil dropped on her head. |
![]() |
|
| abzug | Jul 1 2009, 02:46 AM Post #216 |
|
In love with a prisoner
|
Great posts! Much to think about! Girlfriend calling me upstairs to cuddle in bed. So I think I'll be choosing real life tonight rather than television, but will hopefully have some thoughtful things to say tomorrow.
|
Visit the Bad Girls Annex!
| |
![]() |
|
| marymartin | Jul 1 2009, 03:43 AM Post #217 |
|
The ghost of Larkhall!
|
Having read the spoilers and gone through the five stages of grief at least three times, I thought I had braced myself for this week. Right now I feel like someone I love died. I just see no upside to any of this. This has gone from being a good romantic love story to a rushed mess. In the process, Olivia and Natalia and even Frank, have had their characters ruined. I went from thinking Frank was a mildly annoying doufus, to now hating him so much that I would like him to get into the path of the Spaulding Mercedes the next time James drives drunk. How any thing positive is going to come from this pregnancy is beyond me. I am so sick of angst, angst, angst, onscreen and I don't see how we're going to have anything but more angst while Jessica is offscreen due to her maternity leave. Poor Jess looked so miserable today -- I have attributed it to the death of her character, rather than the discomfort of her pregnancy. |
| "Thomas is gorgeous. He's everything you would want in a man. But I want a woman." | |
![]() |
|
| marymartin | Jul 1 2009, 03:49 AM Post #218 |
|
The ghost of Larkhall!
|
Sorry to correct you, but they do kiss. It's just a quick peck on the lips but hey, it's more than Olivia and Natalia are allowed to do. |
| "Thomas is gorgeous. He's everything you would want in a man. But I want a woman." | |
![]() |
|
| cagey | Jul 1 2009, 05:47 AM Post #219 |
|
G3 Curtain and Duvet!
|
Abzug : Oh sure, the gf gambit. On a higher plane - thanks for the 3 course menu with dessert optional, ekny.
Something like that - I still think Nat never marries Frank just for the timing issues of when the would be marriage happened - before cancellation. Of course she might have considered it later, but it just feels too constrained in a modern soap world.
Absolutely. And Nat still hasn't quite thought that through, valiant though she is in understanding the fundamentals of what she takes from her religion and applies it to her living every day. It may be her final station of the cross, as you say, to admit something more than she already has done about her feeling towards O.
I hope she is working past the self-destruction but it is certainly going to come up into her face again, as it did with Frank today.
You make me happy with this, for today. We will see what happens tomorrow. That is the central concern of the lesbian viewer - to which you allude later. The interference of the male into the females' story. Even the interference of a fetus, with a paternity, into the story. The presumption being that, since we know the paternity of the fetus, that paterfamilias will always be in the way. Interesting twist on what is happening in a separate sl, where Shayne is both acknowledging his paternity but giving the raising of that child to the adoptive parents. Well, for now, anything can change in a soap.
This is a very interesting insight - one that is lost on the grieving masses at this point. Course, I can't say if it is completely accurate - that the writers thought they had to go to these lengths, but I do think it is a reasonable explanation.
Also an interesting supposition. I would argue that part of what is going on here is also good old time soap angst. That given the "realities" of whatever happens next, some part of the lesbian audience will accept it as being the story, and will watch it as the story. Those who have recently arrived and expect a pay-off in concrete terms, in keeping with their own expectations, perhaps not. Since I fall somewhere in the middle, I will await developments. Yes, marymartin - that's just what I am saying. The gf and I know how to do a good old couple peck, like Buzz and Lillian. And aren't I proud of that.
|
![]() |
|
| abzug | Jul 1 2009, 06:43 PM Post #220 |
|
In love with a prisoner
|
Wow, this is maybe the most astute description of Olivia that I've read. I don't have anything to add to it, just a thank you for conceptualizing it so clearly. And it's fitting for the character, given her history, isn't it?
Hehe. Well, I could do without the pattern, but the neckline more than made up for any flaws. I'm forgiving that way, about dates and about shirts.
Isn't she more being critical about people who let their moral values dictate their actions? I mean, it's behavior that they're talking about, not feelings. Well, feelings come up at the end, but only in the context of how important behavior, living the feelings is in fully understanding those feelings. The kind of weird thing is, we're not supposed to doubt that Natalia loves Olivia in the way she thinks she does, even if they haven't had sex. So arguably Blake switches sides, and by the end isn't speaking for the viewer when she suggests Natalia might not really know how she feels about Olivia if they haven't slept together. We know Natalia and Olivia don't need to have sex to know they're in passionate, mad, romantic love with each other. Blake (and now Natalia) are less sure than we are.
My read was that they got together the day of Frank's non-wedding to Natalia, when they had a very chaste kiss in the church.
<sigh> That would have been lovely to watch, even if it meant Natalia married Frank. Although as cagey pointed out, the runaway bride scenario was always part of the storyline, because that was all written and filmed pre-cancellation.
You think she's going to miscarry? In the world of this show, that would NOT be a happy ending, and weirdly could be viewed as a punishment for her moral misdeeds, either sleeping with Frank without being married or (more likely) choosing Olivia over a good man. I think she'll come home pregnant, and she and Olivia will plan to have and raise the baby together.
Yeah, I don't think so. I mean, the problem is: no kissing. Right? I mean, that's been the ongoing torture with Otalia. We knew they wouldn't kiss during the wedding week (although there were some moments which appeared close) but ever since then we've been watching nearly every episode hoping against hope that this would be the kissing one. BG viewers in S3 must have felt the exact same way, but in their case they had had something which was then taken away. Arguably, that felt even worse.
Yes, well, and that's the problem, isn't it? That's why some of us are still here, on the Helen and Nikki message board, TEN YEARS after BG premiered, and EIGHT YEARS after H&N left the show. Because in ten years we're lucky if we get a handful of emotionally involving, realistically written storylines. Bad Girls. ER (and that ended badly), Guiding Light, Sugar Rush. I can't count The L Word or Grey's Anatomy. Am I missing any other major lesbian relationships from the past 10 years? I don't think so.
This is a most excellent point. And it gives me a tiny bit of faith in how they're depicting Otalia's sexuality, even though they really aren't able to show much explicit sexual interaction between the two.
Oh, I've been feeling this way about Frank since March, easily. Maybe since February. So nothing has changed for me about Frank recently. I just think he's showing his true asshole colors right now.
Yes, this is what everyone is anxious about, isn't it? Because lesbian viewers all hate Frank by now, just as marymartin does, and we want him as far away from our girls as possible. And now it looks like he's going to be stuck on them like a really bad smell until September 18. |
Visit the Bad Girls Annex!
| |
![]() |
|
| traveller | Jul 1 2009, 07:03 PM Post #221 |
|
G2 landing
|
I have asked myself the same question. I am a Lesbian and I don't see it as a betrayal. It's a story line. What I enjoy is the buzz it has created and that peeps are discussing relationships and love. What worries me is peeps who are angry and sending writers and actors nasty letters. What is with that ?? All soaps have angst. If you watch any one of them you will see the same format. I think that is what drives soaps... that is why we watch. I can speculate, yell at the TV and complain at the writing of a scene but I still view the show. Why?? Maybe I love the angst. If everyone lived happily ever after, soaps would have ended years ago.
I agree. It is the same phenomenon that occurred with Nikki and Helen. Do you think part of this is because the actors have such a chemistry together that we have convinced ourselves that their characters are some how "real" and we are invested in the outcome?? Hope that makes sense. As I have said before, I watched the entire L Word series and never felt any connection to the characters like N&K and Liv & Nat. L Word covered many Lesbian issues which included and I don't remember ever seeing or hearing the outpouring of emotions that were created when Helen was with Sean/Thomas or Frank, Rafe and pregnancy in the Otalia storyline. What I will miss in the GL - Otalia story is that we will never see the union, the struggles, the lesbian issues, the blended family and all the other angst that soaps thrive on. It is the same with Bad Girls. We never saw the "After Larkhall N&H. Maybe that is why Fanfic still thrives today. We have created our own "ever after." |
|
Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood ..... Helen Keller No one can make you feel inferior without your consent .... Eleanor Roosevelt | |
![]() |
|
| ekny | Jul 1 2009, 07:40 PM Post #222 |
In love with a prisoner
|
I agree! Was emailing someone earlier & revised this idea, it's not a viable solution. I do think that's where they're going. A baby is the other way to legitimize them as a couple in soapland. The writers have gone about it in a monumentally stupid way, but... shrug. In terms of soap-law, this positions the couple as stable, moral, & together. Without the usual follow-ups of cheating & so forth cause there's no time. It's either a baby or a marriage to stamp the imprimatur of acceptability on them. Unless it's acute appendicitis. Which let's face it, would be a whole lot better.
I'd make the distinction that there was motivation throughout S3 for what happened & why. (However it felt to some viewers... the end result was a stronger couple with a real chance of making it.) There's no motivation here that's *internal* to the characters or their dilemmas--only external. I can argue this is the outcome of N's impulsive behavior with Frank, but why tie myself in knots? That was 4 months ago. I think they are walking through a bunch of very careful points about laying out this relationship in a pragmatic way so that the dullwitted can follow. Though it's not supposed to be an outline, any more. It's supposed to be a story. They had all the obstacles they needed. etc. But this is the choice they made or so it seems.
I just read a blog claiming that their public behavior is inconsistent with their private behavior. Which is true; they're reversed, or at least were in the last 2 days' eps. Then again, everything about this pairing's approach to being a couple has been reversed since day 1. So how is that news? And everything about the last few days has been about laying out the groundrules for these new sets of alliances. Liv & Phillip--finally on a similar page. Phillip unconditionally supporting her & her decision. Frank making clear it's not that Olivia's a woman, it's that Olivia's Olivia. And Nat having to deal with the double-barreled attack from Fr Ray & Rafe. Rafe's homophobia is clearly presented as adolescent. Fr Ray is a different argument. Anyway those are all polarizations I see them settings up in order to make this s/l continue to fall into the place they want it to.
I think you're spot on with this. The only thing to say, to quote Cagey, is: Ain't it terrible? People dig the angst. It's part of the ride, I guess.
I'm still thinking about it but, yeah... in part it may be because the story is told so well & truthfully we start identifying with it on a very, very personal level. So when things go wrong or we fear they have (which is my view of what happened to some people in S3, ymmv)... we've kinda lost the fourth wall, there isn't the same sort of ability to stand back or say It's a soap, yo.
Right. We were robbed anyway; obviously, killing a month with a bonehead move like this does kinda doubly suck. But it continues to make sense to me structurally both in terms of how this soap seems to work & what they've apparently mapped out as the way to get their chosen audience who-is-not-us to the place they want them to get to. |
![]() |
|
| Jeanna | Jul 1 2009, 08:06 PM Post #223 |
|
I said SIT IN THAT CHAIR
|
Well...you've gone there then and been watching before your allotted friday deadline, e. Is it comforting to know that people are still waving the Red Herring flag? I don't know. But...right about now...that absurd melodramatic plot twist of the NatNapping that some were predicting would be better appreciated than this. |
|
H&N Music Vid by me and ekny Something To Talk About YouTube My BG Music Vids On YouTube My vids You Tube removed Click Here OR HERE BAM for Beginners BAM Channel | |
![]() |
|
| ekny | Jul 1 2009, 08:30 PM Post #224 |
In love with a prisoner
|
Yeah I did. It just seemed stupid to be getting emails that were so heavily edited people were like, talking to me in Code. And I didn't have a guidebook cause I'd insisted. So--enough of that. I mean I'm still not watching previews or reading spoilers or anything. Obviously. I just got sick of not being able to talk to people.As for red herring flag--no idea what you mean. I'm just... speculatin on a hypothesis. xo |
![]() |
|
| cagey | Jul 2 2009, 02:26 AM Post #225 |
|
G3 Curtain and Duvet!
|
The stick is blue...the herring is red... the dog barks at midnight. That - ek - is the real code we should be talking. ![]() Okay: new theory. And you soap pros can help me. Is it possible to have too many babies at one time in a soap? Is there a maximum allowable number? We got Henry and Colin already. I am very sure that Bill and Lizzie will get there in the next few months, since the actor playing Lizzie has managed to time her pregnancy to the story. I know Christina wanted to start a daycare center but this is beginning to look like Springfield: The Next Generation. So, on the dueling babies platform, I think Lizzie wins. Oh wait, didn't I say something up thread about Bizzie being the test case for how equal the treatment is for Otalia? Perhaps that is why Otalia needs a baby - it's affirmative action. As long as I am being silly:
"neckline" abzug? sure. ![]() Well as sad as it was to watch today - and I really felt sad for the first time - I did not detect Bad Writing, as in - Other Writers had been assigned the story. Nat is in a very deep hole with no ladder to climb out and this played well. She did end up with her *thinking, thinking, thinking* look which always reminds me of my computer loading, loading loading. A few thoughts:
If only. There is the final, gigantic internal leap that Natalia has to make. And I am not sure they will play this through as it ought to be. But, she has to have a crisis of faith. In that sense, the baby thing is the McGuffin to get her off the canvas but the real and very internal thing she needs to settle is whether - baby or no, since she's already done baby-without-marriage, is whether she thinks god is punishing her for loving (and thinking sexy thoughts about) Olivia. Same time, different channel I don't know if Olivia has dealt with her own internals. Not just the self-hate stuff we all know so well, but the being-in-a-lesbian-relationship stuff. When I said she sounds like she is closing a business deal (glad you liked the image, abzug) I hadn't realized how much she is depending on once the B BBQ happens, they are out and it is over - they are a couple. Punto chiuso. Yeah, right.
I think you caught it Traveller. There is probably a subtle distinction between this and regular soap viewing. If you watch soaps regularly then "Springfield" exists in your mind and these characters play their game in a virtual reality sort of way. But in this case, the characters have jumped over that barrier and have become more *real*. The realness coming from the actors choices, chemistry and the writing that resounds somewhere in us. That would be a collective Us - not just a single person having a moment of totally loving some random character on a show.
Well they had to kill the month somehow. I am curious to see how or with what Nat comes back. Maybe she will send the baby off to the Bosnian Nuns for adoption.
She had to go - and it was not going to be nice. Now I trying to get behind her returning with a little bundle of joy and knocking on Olivia's door at the Beacon. If we are lucky it will be a kitten or a puppy, but even if it has to be a bambina, they can choose to raise it together and get the frack out of Springfield and move in with Ava in the other SF. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Comfy Sofa · Next Topic » |







So I think I'll be choosing real life tonight rather than television, but will hopefully have some thoughtful things to say tomorrow.
Which let's face it, would be a whole lot better.



8:46 AM Jul 11