Question of the week #11

[treonb]

Throughout the first season, we were introduced to various characters.  For some we got extensive backgrounds, while others we learned to know through the eyes of other characters.

This week's question: Is there any specific character you wish you knew more about?

You can expect spoilers for the entire first season in the comments.

(There's no expiration date on these questions, so if you're reading this post months later and feel like jumping in, please do.)

Comments

[katiac]

For me, that character is Philip. They did such a great job of fleshing Elizabeth out and giving her a back-story that explained aspects of her personality. She grew up in difficult conditions economically with a single mother as an only child. Not having any relationship with her father, not seeing her mother have a healthy relationship with a man, and not even having siblings to deal with likely influenced her extreme independence and self-reliance. It explains why everyday relationship dynamics--compromise, relying on a partner, sharing yourself emotionally--are very difficult for her. Knowing her father sacrificed himself for his country may have influenced that same sentiment in her. The rape by Timoshev may have affected her need for control. She joined the KGB very young and missed out on some normal steps of young adulthood which led to her being stunted emotionally in some ways. She's still trying to catch up in how she's able to form relationships with both men and her kids. Even her friendship with Sandra seems unfamiliar and uncertain for her at times. Without understanding Elizabeth's history, it would be easy to label her as "cold" or "ice queen" but understanding the influences that have gotten her to this point makes her much more sympathetic.

But for Philip, he's practically a blank slate. We don't know if he's such a good dad because he had a good dad himself, or because he grew up in an orphanage and had nothing. We don't know if he is so attached to a woman who slaps and pulls knives on him because he just loves her that much, or because he was abused as a kid and has been patterned to expect that in a relationship. We don't know if he tells Elizabeth the kids should stay with her in the finale because he truly believes she's the better parent, or because he doesn't see that value in himself. We don't know if he's such a great spy in terms of fitting in and switching personalities because he was always like that as a kid, or because he had to become that way at some point in order to survive. In short, I hope next season they give us something on him that fits perfectly with why he is how he is, as much as they did with Elizabeth this past season.

[jae]

I want to know more about all of them, frankly, and the fact that there are plenty of things left to say about most of them is one of the things that excites me most about the second season. I want to learn about Stan's undercover experiences and how that's been driving the "two different Stans" we've gotten to know. I want to learn things about Nina's past that will contextualize her motivations for the choices she's made, and help me get a better handle on where she is ideologically. I want to learn more about Claudia's backstory in order to better understand both the various facets of her personality and why she speaks perfect English (my working hypothesis is that in the show-world, the Line N officers, i.e. the people who have her job, are former illegals). Even the characters who seem pretty straightforward--Martha, Paige, Sandra, etc.--I'd be happy to learn more about.

The character who interests me the most, though, is Philip--and for a lot of same the reasons that Katia mentioned. I think we actually have a pretty good handle on who he is based on his behaviour on the show, but unlike Elizabeth, we don't have any contextualization for the psychology behind that behaviour in his past as Misha. I'm hoping we can get some of that in season two as well.

-J

[treonb]

I actually was thinking of this question in connection to Amador. I wasn't curious about him at all, until they told us more about him. and by that time, I felt I was too late, and why didn't we know more earlier.

So.. I think I'm more curious about people like Nina and Martha. Claudia too, if she was coming back. Maybe her wrap-up for the season was an Amador kind of 'let's give this char some background before it's too late'? Maybe also Stan's kid, he probably had a weird childhood growing up.

Actually, looking at the credits, I see there's somebody who appears as 'core FBI agent' in almost all the episodes. I wonder what's her story :-)

[katiac]

I actually was thinking of this question in connection to Amador. I wasn't curious about him at all, until they told us more about him. and by that time, I felt I was too late, and why didn't we know more earlier.

Yeah, I had the same sort of reaction to both Amador and Zhukov, like the bulk of their interesting stuff was thrown in right before they died. And certainly a focus on their character in the episode they exit is appropriate... just would've been nice to get a little more sprinkled along the way too.

[jae]

For what it's worth, Joe Weisberg has commented on that being a weakness in their writing in season one (especially in the Zhukov episode), which means that they're conscious of it, and will likely take steps to do things differently in the future. (We can hope!)

-J