Thanks for sticking with me and reading this and thank you especially for all the kind and thoughtful comments. I think that the biggest compliment I can receive as a writer is when I see that people are really thinking about what I wrote; becoming an active participant with the material. And this blog is a great way for me to experience that -- so, thanks for participating.
Here goes with me attempting to answer your questions:
How many swords did we use in the sword fight? A lot. I found a picture propmaster James Clark posted on his twitter during filming, this is just a fraction of them:
On "Claitchen" Ultimately I'm happy with how this episode handled it. It felt a little more "real" than explicitly defining "we're in a relationship" or not. For some reason 13-year-olds have got the system down (they ask for clarification: "Do you want to go steady?") while everyone else is absolutely terrified to admit their true feelings and stumble their way through until there's an awkward "Are we... exclusive?" conversation. All of this is to say that Claire and Gretchen's relationship isn't supposed to be cut and dry. Claire's still figuring out who she is (in lots of different ways). What she does know is that Gretchen is someone she can trust unconditionally, coupled with some strong romantic feelings.
That said, I don't know how anyone could conclude that they are "just friends" ("People are gonna start to talk"/"Let 'em talk"). I agree that I do wish we'd seen a bit more of it in the subsequent episodes but I think the right decision was made not to rush into that storyline with only a few episodes left. I'd rather spend more time with it. For my two cents: I believe the characters are headed towards definitively being "in a relationship" (if not already) and I certainly hope to explore that next season (providing there is a next season and Madeline Zima is still available etc. etc. etc.).
Does Sylar still believe he and Claire are still meant to be together ala "Invisible Thread"? Not right now. At the moment (or moment of this episode), Sylar was focused on why Claire was on his arm and how she was going to help him get his "bite" back. This exchange is a little acknowledgment of that history: SYLAR: "It's destiny showing me what I desire--" CLAIRE: "And you honestly thought--" SYLAR: "Relax. They said I needed a connection. A friend." So that's the situation right now. But who knows what the future holds for Sylar and Claire, I wouldn't rule out that he could return to this notion if the circumstances in his life changed.
Was it the intention all along to have the two characters [Claire and Gretchen] end up together or was it decided later on in the season? It was definitely something we talked about early on as a possibility. We wanted to put Claire in some different situations with different characters and see where there was chemistry (male or female). We were fortunate enough that pretty early on there was clear chemistry between Claire and Gretchen (ie. "cut my hand with these scissors") so we took it from there.
[Re: Claithcen] You stated it was "liberating" on your twitter, but present it here as
"romantic," so I'm a little unsure as to what ultimately is canonical
to Heroes' storyline. My apologies, I misspoke somewhat on my twitter (can I blame only having 140 characters?) This scene was liberating for Claire but with a definite romantic undertone. Love, I believe, is a liberating experience. It's feeling free enough to be honest and trust another person with everything that you think and feel. Some people equate telling someone you love them to jumping off a cliff, a leap of faith or (in marriage) "taking the plunge". I think all of those sayings are somewhat related in that it's a freeing experience -- it's terrifying, but that feeling of unburdening (letting go) is wonderful. Especially when the person you're trusting to catch you does so. So canonically, I think they're together (more on Claitchen above if you haven't read it already).
[Paraphrasing: Why did Sylar kiss Claire? With Lydia's ability all he had to do was touch her right?] That's true, but I don't believe Sylar knew that. The only way he'd experienced the ability being used was in a sexual context. But beyond that, I think Sylar's a pretty bad guy and was doing it to get under Claire's skin -- he was frustrated that she wasn't providing the answers he wanted and expressed that anger and frustration in a sick and twisted way.
As for [Sylar's] tattoo [of Claire], did it vanish once Claire answered Sylar's question? [...] I can't help thinking that if it showed him what he desired, why wouldn't it do so again? And again? The tattoo must have faded at some point. We've seen Lydia's tattoos come and eventually go (sometimes instantly). Sylar was clearly able to hold onto his for an extended period of time -- perhaps it was by his choice/effort. But the tattoos don't typically shift into something else at a later date, he would need new/more ink to get another tattoo.
Did Samuel do ALL of that with Ian (the guy with the landscaping power) and the cottage all for Vanessa? Samuel's plan was two-fold. 1) To settle down and stop moving, have a place for he and the carnies to live permanently and 2) To have Vanessa join him at this place. (Thanks luvtheheaven for your well articulated thoughts on this and the other storylines).
Could you please clarify what an "amazing opportunity" that came up for Sendhil is? My apologies on this, I wasn't trying to be coy, I just honestly can't remember what it is. It wasn't "Rex" and it wasn't "It's a Wonderful Life". It was another feature film with some A-list actors -- Sendhil and I discussed it on set back in November but I simply can't remember what it's called (or if I'm even officially allowed to say as it's not up on IMDB or anywhere else yet that I can find). Again, I apologize for my crappy memory, but hopefully it'll be announced soon and Sendhil fans will have another thing to look forward to.
Tara, thanks for being a Mohinder fan. I'm afraid I can't really answer your questions very well as they go well beyond the scope of my episode (and paygrade). I'm sorry that one of your favorite characters is not being seen as much as you'd like, but I do hope you can find other reasons to watch. I agree that I think there's more we can do with
the character -- and I hope to get the opportunity. All I can say is that I have some Mohinder stories I'll be pitching for season 5 (as I do for most of the characters) -- but for now I'm simply hoping/waiting to see if we have another season.
Back in the day while you were writing this episode, you mentioned on
twitter that one scene in particular was difficult to resolve/get
right. Can you share which scene that was? I remember tweeting that, but for the life of me I can't remember which storyline it was (jeeze, my memory must be going). At a guess I think it might have been the Claire/Sylar storyline -- I remember having some trouble keeping things visually interesting and not just having two people talking in front of a blackboard for several scenes. Out of that struggle came the ideas for him using telekinesis, the kiss and the pencil in the eye.
CONCLUSION So I think that wraps it up for Pass/Fail -- thanks again to everyone who read and especially to those who took the time to comment. Alas, Heroes has finished airing for the season. We might hear some news about season 5 in March, but then again, we might not. For my part, I'm sitting at home waiting, working on some of my own writing projects and taking the time to write this blog and my personal one. If you're interested at all in the writing process and breaking into the business, I'm currently telling the story of how I became a writer on my personal blog.
For your Heroes fix during our hiatus, be sure to check out Hiro Nakamura's blog as he promises "to be in touch" and will soon begin a journey into the "Heroes Universe" including our new graphic novel series "From the Files of Primatech" which has already begun and will have new issues every other week.
Oliver, thanks for the answers, and thank you for addressing the Sendhil matter in a straightforward way. Mohinder is an important character to many viewers, and the lack of information about his status on the show (and, worse, the presence of contradictory information) has been a constant source of frustration. If there's a season five, hopefully we won't see a repeat of that situation.
Thanks for replying. God knows, it's a welcome change to the frustrating radio silence for the past year.
However, it has been three months since November, right? Do you guys really care so little that you couldn't ask Sendhil about the status of his projects? Considering we have been asking constantly since well before then, why can't you find the time to ask around a little and then release an informed statement, instead of giving vague "well, the last time we talked, three months ago... but I don't actually know... maybe....?" and of course, again: wait. Hey, fans of Mohinder and Sendhil? Wait. Wait some more months, why don't you. Not like we have not been waiting for months already.
BTW, I don't believe that anything good will be done with Mohinder, whether or not you personally have ideas for him. Sorry. First I want to know that you all realize that you have been treating him like crap the past two seasons, but I fear that you don't. Noncommittal promises aren't good enough anymore. Not after two years of crap, you surely understand this. Not that naive. As long as you don't even find the time to gather enough information to give a clear answer regarding Sendhil's mystery projects (TWO already, according to Heroes sources, one that kept him away *until* November, and one that kept him away *since* November. Come on, who really believes that without other sources backing it up?) we have no reason to believe you anything.
Thanks for commenting, Oliver. I take exception, however, on your thought on how anyone could not see Claire/Gretchen's relationship as romantic. I took it, after seeing Claire's angst over the last two years (haven't seen S1 or 2 completely), I imagined she was happy to have a friend, a real friend she could talk with, be herself with and trust. The "Let them talk" line told me she didn't care IF people whispered it was a romantic thing, not that she intended it would be. Now if in the future, it turned into that, fine. Re Sylar, I wondered why he started out with "I want my bite back" to I want your help and seemed more inclined to be less threatening, even when he was threatening (Gretchen). His insinuations re Claire would match your statements (you wrote it after all). My take is by the way Gretchen acted regarding the carnival, that she and Claire will butt heads alot concerning Claire's abilities and wanting to use them. She seemed so uncaring when Claire wanted to save the carnival folk. How can Claire have anyone in her life who cares so little for that major part of said life? Anyway, thanks for elaborating more.
Gotta agree with Lisa M, I don’t see how you can’t understand how people don’t think it’s romantic.
Your reasons are good, but I don’t think want you wanted translated very well/clearly on screen. While yes, there is chemistry and things that have gone on this season between Claire and Gretchen could very well be “romantic” they could very easily be “friendship”. I can take it as romantic because I had a feeling that was where the storyline would be heading because that seems to be the popular trend on shows these days (not saying that it’s bad or that it’s good, just saying that having same sex relationships on shows is becoming the thing to do). But honestly, if I hadn’t read your blog, while I could see the possibility of the two of them becoming official in the future, I would have just believed as the poster above me said, Claire has someone she trusts and a good friend and just doesn’t care what anyone thinks about her anymore. You mention the hand cutting scene, I did not take that as sexual chemistry at all (at least on Claire’s end), although I did expect the kiss to happen then, but that was only because I read spoilers and knew that Claire would receive a kiss at some point and was waiting for it, but not because I was seeing chemistry and would expect the two to start making out. I kind of feel that while the two actresses work well together you guys almost forced things to look like they could be sexual or creating situations that cause tension i.e. riding in a trunk together and falling on top of one another to push the idea that the two should/could be more that wouldn’t have been there otherwise, if you take out the “Strange Attractors” scenes you lose a lot of the sexual tension scenes because sitting close in your pj’s in a candle lit room is not odd and not romantic (for MOST girls) and neither is being overly concerned for a friend or missing them. That fact that people can debate it or some people didn’t get it means that there is something missing.
I understand what you’re saying about how relationships are complicated and with adults it’s not always defined “are we going steady” like a teen would define it, but when you are telling an audience that “yes, these two are beginning a relationship” you need to have something more definite said/shown than “let them talk” especially given the fact that Claire just had a revelation about letting people in and embracing who she is in general and when all season long it seems you guys have been walking along this fine line of ambiguity about this pairing. Having Claire acknowledge her feelings for Gretchen is fine, but I think it should have been done separately (such as next season) from her accepting herself/power. I can see the sexual side to their scenes this season, but I’m just saying that I can see where people are coming from when they don’t see it as sexual/romantic.
Despite this little rant, I enjoyed the episode very much and appreciate you taking the time to write the blog and answer questions. Thank you.
Seriously, I think you'd have to be trying pretty hard NOT to infer a romantic relationship. I mean, why would Sylar find the "pauses" so intriguing if they were only about "friendship"? Remember what he said? "All these moments so ripe with subtext." "All these interactions, and you still can't say the one thing you really want to say to this girl." What do you suppose he meant? That Claire wants to tell Gretchen "Let's be besties?" I didn't think it was all that ambiguous.
And you folks *did* notice where Claire & Gretchen!Sylar had their little chat, didn't you?
Thank you for the replies. I hope we'll hear the news about Sendhil's project soon. If there is S5 and Sendhil is still on the show, Mohinder should get a good story with fair share of screentime. Same goes for Tracy. In general, more equal screentime distribution would be great. And if the characters go missing for many episodes in a row, it better be explained on the show (just drop a line or two!), not in the GNs or interviews. Please, no more "mohindering" (a fandom term for sidelining/role diminishing) characters without explanation on the show.
I'm with Lisa M and MEP on Claire/Gretchen. I don't mind seeing them as a romantic couple, but so far they come across as just friends. I believe that Claire has strong feelings for Gretchen, but Gretchen seems to me a bit too detached from Claire; I've got an impression her crush is getting weaker instead of becoming stronger. I see how you (the writers) intended to go the romantic route, but the result turned out confusing for me as a viewer, sorry.
I personally love Claire and Gretchen together; I do think they have great chemistry and that Madeline Zima is an extremely talented actress. I also understand why as writers you had to take slower steps to build up the relationship. I would have done the same thing and as a viewer I appreciate the sincerity that goes along with taking things slower. It comes across as more genuine- not to mention anything else wouldn't really run as smoothly as there are so many other story lines in the show to also work with and around. However, I do understand why sometimes their relationship comes across as ambiguous. Had I not read your explanation I probably would be somewhat confused as to the dynamic of their relationship. Yes, its clear they have romantic feelings for each other but its not clear how they're approaching them. But then again I understand that there are so many other things you are working with and by slowly building up their relationship is not only more realistic and in character (for Claire) but it shows that you as writers are taking this relationship seriously. And that is a breath of fresh air, I think.
Thank you so much for all your answers. I truly enjoy reading what you have to say. Keep up the amazing work.
I do not 100% agree with Lisa and co. up there, but I do understand their point, you know? What happened between them at Pass/Fail and after that, very ambiguous. Felt really Xena-like (Are they together? Are they not? Are they not yet but slowly moving there? That kind of question! :p). Beautiful, fun, but ambiguous! Which is why I think Zima should come back. It feels like the relationship is still moving forward, and we should have a 5th season to permanently put them together (ok, now I'm just hoping! :P)
But it was still very beautiful!
Also, I disagree with when Lisa said ''My take is by the way Gretchen acted regarding the carnival, that she and Claire will butt heads alot concerning Claire's abilities and wanting to use them. She seemed so uncaring when Claire wanted to save the carnival folk.''. Quite the opposite, she cared a lot, she's very supportive of Claire in general. But we know she doesn't handle life threat very well (remember Becky), and she probably can't handle memory threats much better, either! Which is why she seemed like she didn't care. But from ''The Wall'' (I think), we know she did, actually, that she supported Claire all the way, much more than Noah did to say the least! :p
Sorry, I'm just the greatest Claitchen fan there is! So I speak too much about it! But the rest of your episode was great, too! The Trial, really, was a true piece of art! :) Good job!
P.S. Just saying, if we learn that, sadly, there is no 5th season, can we hope to see a Graphic Novel or two that would make them end up together, permanently? Just an idea that popped in my head! ^_^ You do what you want with it! lol
It’s not that I don’t necessarily see it; it’s that I can see where others don’t see it. Part of the issue for me is, as I said, Claire shutting people out in general is too close to Claire having feelings for Gretchen. We’ve read what Oliver wanted, but what we were shown is that Claire wouldn’t even talk to Gretchen or take even friendship and comfort from her. As for what Sylar, on boards I’ve read people saying they have a hard time believing him because it’s him and he wants Claire to open up and he knows that if he plays it right she will open up to Gretchen. So why not hype up the connection to Gretchen. Also, I read others say that the hand cutting scene and so on were before Claire knew Gretchen’s feelings (maybe the implication is that Claire had feelings for Gretchen before she knew Gretchen’s orientation) and were when Claire had just/ was about to share her biggest secret and Gretchen didn’t reject her. Not saying I necessarily agree, I’m just saying what I’ve read from other and pointing out that not everyone see’s the same things when they watch something (and there seems to be a good chunk that did not see the two as romantic). I am on the line. I see it in the episodes, (but I do feel to a certain extent it’s kind of forced/contrived (the only thing we’ve really been told is what Sylar said), the two certainly have chemistry (but not all chemistry is sexual), but I can see where it doesn’t look “romantic” from Claire’s end for the MOST part. Sorry, I don’t think you would have to work very hard to see it as friendship or at least blurry.
I like what Alex had to say. You guys are taking it slow and I like that, and this episode works well with moving things at a good pace, it left me with the impression things could/will happen (the two are in that friend/not-friend mode), but that Claire is not there yet, she’s just starting to open up to the idea. If the writers intention has to have it this way, then good job because I think the confusion proves that it worked out this way. However, Oliver, if I’m understanding correctly, you are saying that’s not the case and they are together and I just don’t feel it came across that way clearly enough, and had to read your blog to know that for fact. It feels like you almost disregarded the slower pace and made it escalate so that you could have them “together” now (I mean they haven’t really seen each other for a couple of weeks right. They were united in Thanksgiving and went right to the carnival Claire stayed Gretchen left, then Claire went to Nathans funeral).
Sorry, in my last paragraph, I meant to say if I’m understanding you correctly, you’re saying that it is complicated and there’s still work to be done on the relationship, but it’s not as ambiguous/hazy as some believe it is and is more definite than Claire still trying to figure things out and starting to open up to the idea?
Yes, we weren't shown specifically *why* Claire keeping Gretchen at arm's length. But given what Claire said to her at the end of the episode, it makes sense that Claire's feelings had moved beyond friendship. Why would someone compare becoming friends to "jumping off bridges"?
And although Sylar is a manipulative bastard, in this case the idea that he was being deceptive makes no sense. If Claire doesn't have those feelings for Gretchen, how would telling her that she does make her "open up?" Why would Claire open up about feelings she doesn't have? The fact that she did open up to Gretchen confirms that Sylar was right. And given what both Sylar and Claire said, I saw the hand-holding as being more than "friendly".
Thanks for the Q & A responses. I think considering all the confusion regarding "Claitchen," if there is another season, it seems that people need to be "knocked over the head with it." Subtlety, metaphor, and subtext are apparently hard for a lot of people to follow.
Personally, I thought the "no labels" speech prior to the "I want to hold your hand" statement was a "knock you over the head" moment, but I can see how people who don't look for subtext and metaphor (or haven't heard a 'coming out' speech from someone close to them) could miss those things.
As for the feelings being mutual, I think people are confused because of looking for the obvious, rather than the subtle. Since the actors knew where their characters were going, there were subtle moments in a few episodes leading up to this one. I've even rewound the show a few times because the first time I saw the "better than BFF" expressions I was surprised, but afterward in subsequent episodes, they were easier to find. Plus, for someone with significant trust issues, Claire was very emotionally attached to her new friend. That in and of itself was a bit of a clue for me.
Heroes in general often uses subtext, metaphors, and subtlety to relay a message, and since I've watched this show, I've always seen that frequently confuse the heck out of people. For me, it's a breath of fresh air, but again, I can see how people get confused.
I just wanted to add: if the issue is "the current stage of Claire/Gretchen relationship", *then* I can see how one might be unsure. But how they feel about each other is pretty clear, I think. At some point the relationship should be clearly established (*ahem* Matt & Daphne), but there's only so much you can show on network TV at 9pm :)
Grigsby thanks for the q&a! I'm so glad you answered some of my questions. I really appreciated it! I just wanted to address the following question I posed and your response to it:
[Paraphrasing: Why did Sylar kiss Claire? With Lydia's ability all he had to do was touch her right?]
That's true, but I don't believe Sylar knew that. The only way he'd experienced the ability being used was in a sexual context. But beyond that, I think Sylar's a pretty bad guy and was doing it to get under Claire's skin -- he was frustrated that she wasn't providing the answers he wanted and expressed that anger and frustration in a sick and twisted way.
Interesting response because it seemed that this season was about redemption, right? So is Sylar not really a good guy at this point? Because it seems to me that he goes from zero to sixty in three point two seconds...Or are you saying that despite future episodes (The Wall, Brave New World) he's still a bad guy underneath it all? And lastly, why would Sylar be frustrated that Claire wasn't providing him answers? I thought it was his intention to push her over the edge, so she'd go running to Gretchen (Sylar!Gretchen) and be able to get answers that way? I believe you stated that the episode needs to be reviewed in the context that he's running a con, so if that's the case...why would he be angry for Claire doing what he wanted her to do?
On Claire and Gretchen...I don't mean to bash anyone's ship but I just can't buy a storyline that has a young, attractive female giving into college experimentation with the same sex. Its trite and cliche and it seems to me that someone in the writers room realized that and hence the ambiguity of the episode over all. While you point out that many people don't want to be labeled...why are so many of the bicurious storylines we see on tv written starring hot females giving into Sapphic tendencies? Actually that's a rhetorical question...because I'm sure its only about attracting viewers. Particularly male viewers. Arguably Sylar and Peter have chemistry, they were alone together for five years or so with no one else, and we don't see them holding hands or kissing nor do I ever think we'll see that on the show...hence, you can't convince me that Claire/Gretchen is anything more than a ratings ploy.
@eb "And although Sylar is a manipulative bastard, in this case the idea that he was being deceptive makes no sense. If Claire doesn't have those feelings for Gretchen, how would telling her that she does make her "open up?"
I don't disagree with you that Sylar is being manipulative, I , for one, fully believe he is genuine in these scenes. However, if he were lying to Claire telling her she had these deep feelings for Gretchen, that would be the perfect way to get her to open up to Gretchen (aka Sylar). As Grigsby pointed out, Sylar's intent is to run a con, he knows Claire will never open up to him...but he knows she'll open up to Gretchen if he pushes it, so why not make her think that she truly does love Gretchen to "push" it further? I don't believe he was lying to her, but he could and it would have worked out the same.
eb: Yeah, I think the main issue is the status of their relationship. Wether we could consider them girlfriend and girlfriend after Pass/Fail or if there were still just friends, but moving there.
You know, the more I think about it, the more I think it was the first option! I mean, sure, ''holding hand'' is nothing very special, friends (who are girls) do it, too. But it seems like there were quite some emphasis on that, especcially in ''The Art of Deception''. So, who knows, it might mean something more! Also, the candles... Now that was just too big, for ''just friends'', IMO!
But still, a clearer confirmation would be good, I wouldn't mind that at all! :)
As for those who say it's forced, I do wonder why, you know? Because Claire didn't seem to be bisexual or homosexual at first? I don't see why it matters, since it's Gretchen that took the initiative at first! She just discovered that she didn't dislike it! That's not impossible! They aren't forced, thay are actually über-cute together! :P
@evagolden...I think its forced because its girl-on-girl college experimentation storyline.
Now if Claire actually turns out to be a lesbian, like say with out Gretchen, I'll back off but you must recognize how exploitive such a storyline is? How easily perceived it is just to drum up ratings? We don't see male characters, otherwise considered heterosexual, suddenly deciding to test the waters of a same sex relationships--ever, not on Heroes to be sure. That's a double standard to be sure, and one that means you can't ignore how off the whole Claire/Gretchen storyline is.
Liz: Hey, it's not Hayden's fault if she's a girl! I mean, she asked for her character that kind of relationship! And considering her power, she couldn't go for a sex-change operation and then a guy-guy relationship. Even if she could, NOW that would feel forced!
It's true girl-girl relationships are more common in TV shows, but I think it's just that they are more socially accepted than guy-guy ones? Why, I don't know that one bit, althought I theorize it's because girls are generally more open-minded than guys. But it doesn't matter, as I think poitive representation of homosexuality in media is always a good thing. Anything that can help the homosexual cause in the long run, you know? If it has to start with the girl-girl ones, so be it.
Liz:On Claire and Gretchen...I don't mean to bash anyone's ship but I just can't buy a storyline that has a young, attractive female giving into college experimentation with the same sex.
Same sex relationships aren't about how attractive or not someone is. A friend in my sorority was a gorgeous university cheerleader whose mother flipped because she fell in love with her college roommate. It happens.
This isn't an implausible storyline nor is it ambiguous. It's not that things are ambiguous in the storytelling, it's that things are subtle. Sometimes a "flashing neon sign" is needed for understanding stories, particularly if you're not used to looking at the subtleties and nuances of storytelling.
Also, people often comment that girls hold hands who are just friends. Yes we do all the time, but it would be cruel for Claire to make an "I want to hold your hand" speech to her BFF that she knows likes her as more than a friend, if it was only about friendship. Claire isn't cruel. She's an empathic person. So there is no ambiguity. It's actually a good storyline for Claire. She's the only character it makes sense for based on what we know about her. That is also one of the reasons why despite the very close minded belief that a former cheerleader who is clearly eye candy can't possibly be anything other than straight is an important story to tell if it's handled well, and this one has been so far.
Quote from Kacey: ''Same sex relationships aren't about how attractive or not someone is. A friend in my sorority was a gorgeous university cheerleader whose mother flipped because she fell in love with her college roommate. It happens.''
Man, that sounds SOOOOO much like the Heroes plot! The only thing missing is we don't know how Sandra feels about the Claitchen... yet! ^_^
But yeah, you have a point, gorgeous or not, it doesn't matter much for a relationship, no matter which sexual orientation! :)
My problem with the claire/gretchne relationship has nothing to do with the fact that Claire could be homosexual. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear but a couple people are misunderstanding what I'm saying.
@ Kacey and evagolden: What I'm suggesting is that lesbian relationships with established heterosexual characters are exploitive to women and about empowering male sexuality not female. I have many friends who are gay, many who are attractive, I'm certainly not saying homosexuality has anything to do with the actactiveness of someone...but I'm saying that in the reality of tv shows where characters are written into relationships you don't see ugly female characters turning lesbian. You see "the hot young thing" experimenting and trying something new, then you see it being hyped with promos and teasers...that's not liberating, nor positive, that not an embracing of differences--that's a ratings ploy and nothing more, and anyone who says anything differently is drinking the kool aid.
I hear what you're saying and I agree for the most part about many TV bisexuality/lesbian stories being exploitative in nature. However, I don't think this one is. Also, the problem with the "clearly heterosexual character" statement, however, is that it's never been established that Claire is "clearly heterosexual." Just because she's never shown in interest in girls before, doesn't make her "clearly heterosexual." Claire is 18, at most 19. Many people (like the friend I mentioned in my post above) don't realize they may be attracted to the same sex until they're in college. I have another friend who just realized she is attracted to girls and she's 28. Until now, she thought she was "clearly heterosexual." By your argument, if her story was told on television, it would be "unbelieavable."
Also, don't confuse writers with network brass. Writers and networks often have differing and incongruous agendas. I feel for writers who want to tell a simple story but have to deal with network brass who want to promote the "hot girl on girl action." What the network promoted was nothing like the story that was told, which speaks volumes about the writers intentions vs the network's. If the story had been told in the the way it was hyped by NBC, then I'd agree with the exploitation aspect. The story isn't told in an exploitative way at all. It was done through good storytelling.
College is about discovering who you are, so it makes sense for a story like this to be with the college kid on the show. It just so happens that she's an attractive girl. This IS television. Most people on TV are attractive. Maybe because I've seen similar stories unfold with friends, I don't have the issues with it that.
In the end, Liz, you see it the way you want to, really! You see it as a rating ploy, well I see it as a sweet, cute, yet uncommon love story! You can see it any way you want! Heck, you could even see it both way if you want to; even if it's a rating ploy, that doesn't change the fact that the relationship itself is just great!
But I don't see it as a rating ploy because, if it were, the relationship would have been waaaaay more physical! Besides that kiss in Hysterical Blindness, we didn't had much... Actually, to me we didn't had enought, but that's just me! :p
Finally, seeing it as a rating ploy because they choose the attractive girl... well... 1- Hayden Panettiere is actually the one who suggested this relationship, it's not her fault if it happens she's hot! And 2- Even if the writers would have choosen someone else from the main cast for the sapphism, it would have been either unrealistic (Angela? Sandra? lol) or it would be with a hot girl (Claire or Tracy). Those are basically the two only girls with whom this sapphism would have appeared believable (and even with Tracy, that wouldn't be as believable as with Claire in the first place). In other words, they only had access to hot girls for the lesbian idea!
And Claire, they made it totally believable! As Kacey does, people might not have figured themself out before college. Some are even later than that! Claire, especcially, she actually never had time to figure herself out, because everytime she is set in a normal environment, some crazy stuff happen! As a ''special'', she knows who she is but, as part of the normal world, she has a long road ahead of her! If this road implies girl-girl romance, that's totally plausible! How should we know if Claire doesn't know herself! :)
Anyway, I'll conclude, Liz, by saying that wether or not it's a rating ploy depends only on you, not on the writers or the producer! You can see it as a rating ploy or as a very cute and sweet romance (or, again, as both! ^_^ ). Whichever you wish! I choose to see romance and love it that way. If you love to see a rating ploy, it's ok too, I guess!
Oh, and also: CLAITCHEN 4EVER! May Madeline be back next season! :D
ON Claitchen! ; I LOVE THEM!! I think both Hayden and Madeline are doing a GREAT work playing their roles and all though I don't think it's completly clear in the previous episode that they are in fact togheter, I hope to see more of them in the future!! LET THERE BE A FIFTH SEASON!!
I like Gretchen, but I hope this pairing disappears if there’s a season 5.
I don’t think Claire should have been in a relationship with anyone this season, male or female. She needs to form bonds with people and make friends. I feel you did a good job with building up a friendship with Gretchen and just said what the heck let’s make them a couple too. Even your answers give me that impression. You say, it’s this and this…with romantic intentions. It feels tacked on. I just don’t think Claire should be entering into a relationship with the first person she’s really formed a bond with and trusts.
That and I don’t see when Claire would have had the time to think about these feelings and develop them. We are talking about a matter of what 3 ½ to 4 months? The first part where Claire was just meeting Gretchen and thinks she is a stalker that killed her roommate and is concerned about sharing her secret of healing. Then she’s worried because someone’s trying to kill Gretchen and who knows what with her. Then Gretchen gone and Claire’s thinking about the carnival and what Samuel said about her dad. Gretchen comes back, but then Claire’s off to the carnival, then she finds out her father was killed and was really Sylar and then we end up with this episode and Claire has feelings and knows she wants to be more with Gretchen. I get that she would probably be thinking about Gretchen between the attempt on her life and Thanksgiving, but I just don’t buy that it would be in the romantic sense especially if she if trying to work on keeping people out.
I could buy it if you said that in this episode Claire realized that Gretchen is very important and cares deeply for Claire (although I question whether Gretchen would have those deep thoughts yet or would still be in crush mode) and that Claire is becoming more aware of what her feelings could be and opening up the possibility of a future between the two, but to say, no Claire has these romantic feelings for Gretchen and they are a couple, I don’t know. I guess in this part of the blog you kind of say it’s this is the case in a sense, but it part one of your blog you make the two as a pairing and Claire’s feeling sound a bit more definite. Just don’t believe these type of feelings and thoughts would have been on her mind with all that was going on in this sort of time, especially when this is her first true friend in a long time.
As for Sylar not knowing how to use Lydia’s ability. He tells Claire that all Lydia has to do is touch someone and says that her methods were a bit hyper-erotic. Maybe I interpreted this wrong, but I would take that to mean he knows that kissing is not necessary. But I do believe that Sylar would do it regardless just to get under her skin as you said.
My feelings on Claire and Gretchen are mixed, but I think the desire for them to not be involved is stronger.
Although this relationship was handled better then it could have been (they weren’t making out and all that all the time) I don’t believe Claire would be interested in Gretchen that way. I’m not saying people can’t change their orientation or can’t be gay just because they never showed signs before, I’m just saying I don’t buy Claire being one of those people and I don’t feel she showed this on screen either. I saw a girl (Claire) desperate for a connection, a friend (boy that sounds like Sylar too) and behaving towards Gretchen as a friend does. If this were reality I would bet that Claire would only be doing anything romantic with Gretchen because she doesn’t want to lose her only friend and is confused more than she is in love with her. As others have said I only saw some tension because I was expecting it and it was almost a forced feeling. I feel this was only done because having girl on girl relationships is the “in” thing to do. I can understand their relationship not being defined in your episode as yours could be seen as the set up for it, but it should have been before the end of the season if they are in fact supposed to be together. I just feel that if there’s another season and it is decided not to have them together, it would be very easy to say this pairing never existed and what people have suggested about Claire and Gretchen just being friends was in fact the case, and if what you intended is supposed to be the cannon then I feel this was executed poorly if this could happen. I would question whether or not everyone involved in this show, especially those higher than you, want Claire and Gretchen together. It almost feels as though throughout this entire season it was written so people, if they wanted, could see the two maybe being together, but if not than it could easily be dismissed. It just felt so back and forth.
I saw this on the Sherlock Holmes board and this is how I feel about the decision to make the two more than friends (if this is really the case) and is actually how I feel about more than just this show. I am perfectly fine with same sex relationships, but I am tired of friendships becoming almost nonexistent in shows, particularly dramas:
“Exactly. See, there's this really archaic concept (no one today seems to remember it even existed, actually) called "friendship." It used to be insanely popular but seems to have fallen out of fashion lately. As the line in the movie goes "Brothers, not in blood but in bond."
See at the time this movie is set, a 'friend' would be someone you knew inside and out, someone you could rely on unfailingly for just about anything, someone for whom you would be willing to suffer grievous injury or even death; as opposed to today's definition where a 'friend' can easily apply to someone whose name you barely know and whose face you've never seen.
That is what I see between these two: friendship. And nothing more. …There is also, of course, the underlying sense that Holmes needs Watson for companionship and as a sympathetic mind and he sees a distinct possibility that if he marries Mary, Watson will leave him alone in the world with no one else to hold an intelligent conversation with.
…Very well said. Every-time two male friends are depicted, some *beep* claims there is "homoerotic subtext”
It just seems like unless a friendship is established before a show begins there has to be romantic feelings involved.
On another note, I loved your Hiro scenes. They were so well done. I hope there’s another season and I hope to see more from you.
pjljdevgmrwsdvfiuddk, http://vigoramedinfo.com/ De armas tendo em vista que tal princÃpio vigora na fase processual nÃ£o na fase administrativa bem como o modelo teÃ³rico remete Ã atuaÃ§Ã£o do, AnrAADs.
pjljdevgmrwsdvfiuddk, http://vigoramedinfo.com/ De armas tendo em vista que tal princÃpio vigora na fase processual nÃ£o na fase administrativa bem como o modelo teÃ³rico remete Ã atuaÃ§Ã£o do, AnrAADs.
nwnsnvjeqytwpvtlxavo, http://uhc4u.com/Vigora.html É imperioso concluir que na fase de investigação preliminar face aos inúmeros fundamentos acima não vigora o princípio do contraditório pois significaria suprimir, BwYmska.