theamericans | Episode discussion post: "Tchaikovsky"

Entry tags:

episode discussion

Episode discussion post: "Tchaikovsky"

Aired:
4 April 2018 in the U.S. and Canada

This is a discussion post for episode 602 of The Americans, intended for viewers who are watching the show on the U.S./Canadian schedule. (Feel free to dive in to the discussion even if you're coming in late--and you should also feel free to start a new thread if it seems too daunting to read through what's already been posted first. If you're reading this at a point where you've already seen subsequent episodes, though, please take care to keep comments spoiler-free of anything that comes after season six, episode two.)

Original promo trailer

Watch on YouTube

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

I am a little sad the show never did anything with that (I think it could have been great). Ah well, I suppose they can't do everything.

-J

Maybe her entire self-image is so centered on being an ideological warrior that she simply can't see any point to just being herself. It's not that she doesn't value a normal life. Perhaps she doesn't value herself living a normal life. She sees no value or purpose in just living a normal, ideologically uniformed life.

In the story I wrote about Elizabeth, I took her back to the time (which we know about from Gregory) that she left Philip briefly when she was heavily pregnant with Paige, and this was pretty much exactly my take on how she would have felt then. A huge part of her really, really WANTED that normal life, more than she ever had before, but she had such huge self-loathing about that desire and felt like it made her weak and less of the great ideological warrior she thought she had to be. (Which is, of course, why she would have gone right back to Philip the next day.)

-J

We've got movies, music, drawings and sculpture. Elizabeth sees it all and doesn't get it or doesn't care for it. They're obviously going somewhere with this, though I have no idea what.

Is your story online?

What's so interesting about Elizabeth is that on these hugely important but incredibly intimate details, she is still a cypher. We're back to puzzling out her reaction to watching the 'normal' Moscow women in that movie. "Huh."

Elizabeth, what does that mean??? Huh.

She's so mute about her own desires for herself. Or maybe she isn't. At the end of last season, when Philip said that they deserved to have a life, she said, "I can't." That might end up being true. It is possible that Elizabeth cherishes being a warrior for what she perceives to be the greater good so much that she is content to put herself and her family second, and she would be content to die for the cause. As much as I, the viewer, want her to survive and be happy in a non-spy life, Elizabeth might not want that at all. I don't think she's motivated by hatred of the West so much as she is by love for an impossible ideal. If she goes down in flames in pursuit of that ideal, would that be a bad fate for her? Not for her.

I note that Claudia is careful to make it clear she's "not supposed to be curious" about what the orders for Elizabeth she's handing over from the Centre are about, i.e. that she does not know anything of the matter.

I thought it was Claudia's way of fishing for info. "I'm not supposed to ask" isn't the same as "you're not supposed to tell me". There's a slight pause after that sentence, and then Elizabeth moves on to a different topic.

It does feel like a wasted opportunity to explore Stan's character in more depth, but you're right that the show can't do everything. I suspect that if the show had stuck to it's original focus on spy story-of-the-week, they might have gone more in depth about Stan's background to position him as an equal adversary to the Jennings. Instead of FBI agent with intensely skilled undercover experience vs. skilled undercover KGB agents, the show switched it's tone and focus to the Jennings' marriage and family. It almost seems to me that Stan's role in the story changed from opponent to merely being a component in Philip's journey to self-awareness. Philip has genuinely become friends with Stan, and it's via Stan that Philip got introduced to EST.

I still keep the image in my mind of Stan being 'undercover agent infiltrating horrible white supremacist group' because it reminds me to not take Stan for granted. He's not just the nice guy next door who hangs out and has dinner with the Jennings. He can be dangerous when he needs to be, and he's unpredictable. I think about the time when he shot that Russian guy from the Embassy out of what seemed to me to be purely self-righteous anger.

For whatever it's worth, Mossad agents supposedly do not use sex.

But then, that's where the children complicate things. Because Elizabeth herself has obviously chosen the ideological life long ago. She'd immediately say she chooses that over a normal life--likewise, if Philip has to choose between Elizabeth and a normal life he'll always choose Elizabeth.

But now there's the question of the kids. Does she really want them to have this life too? Because that's not exactly the same thing.

It seems like they almost went the opposite way with the way they portrayed him, because there's so much about Stan that seems to completely negate the idea.

Which I can except--I just erase that little fact from his background and replace it with something that fits better. It's important that he was away for years and immersed in a job that was traumatizing, not that he was undercover as a white supremacist. Since they've done so little with it it doesn't take much adjustment on my part.

Instead of FBI agent with intensely skilled undercover experience vs. skilled undercover KGB agents, the show switched it's tone and focus to the Jennings' marriage and family. It almost seems to me that Stan's role in the story changed from opponent to merely being a component in Philip's journey to self-awareness.

I think Stan's been more of his own character than just someone there for Philip--if you think back on the show he has a very clear arc that's a natural reflection of the Jennings. The way he couldn't assimilate into his family life, his struggles with his wife and son, Nina and Oleg and all that. He's paralleled the Jennings and Philip especially in a lot of ways--or not paralleled but had a parallel running story.

I'm not sure what to make of Renee. She's so much less of a character than Sandra, I think that's why she comes across as a spy. Even in this ep Stan's saying cliche things about how "you want to tell Renee I'll be home late!" and gossiping about secret stuff without any sense of who she is as a person beyond Stan's new wife. Sandra was far more of an individual and her relationship with Stan far more unique.

I personally think she absolutely has desires for herself, but she doesn't think she should have them. And so she could almost certainly be happy outside of being a spy, she'd need an awful lot of therapy first. ;)

-J

P.S. My story is called "Five Points Down", and it's here.

Yes, so far it seems like another EST to Elizabeth. It connects her to the part of her that's alive and as such her instinct is to kill it with fire.

We also even had dancing--she mentioned going to the ballet with Paige (who also seems a bit separate from art, but not as aggressively) and Philip line-dancing.

Oh right! I didn't even think of all those examples but yes. Stan has to stick with Gennady, and it's obvious that no, Claudia and Elizabeth would not be the same when it came to Paige. She can't just "finish with her."

Oh, absolutely--how the characters judge or don't judge what they do is absolutely essential to understanding them. Especially on a show like this.

I guess what I mean is something like this: if you were to ask me if I'd want to be friends with any of these people, I'd have to say no? But it doesn't even really occur to me to think about that. By watching the show I get to see inside their heads and thoroughly understand them without being their friends, so it wouldn't even occur to me to insert myself into their lives in the way I have to in order to judge them as myself.

-J

Edited 2018-04-09 18:02 (UTC)

Hm, that's quite plausible. Yes, I think you're right, she was fishing.

I like to think that the writers have purposely withheld information about Renee to keep us all wondering about her. In some ways, that's just as effective to build user interest as fleshing her out more might have been. OTOH, if the series ends and she's still just a blank slate, that'll be quite a waste. I expect we're going to find out more about her this year.

I think that this show is so beautifull way it push us to see all characters out of our point of view or our morality. It want we see them as person, as human been; it want we see them for how they are.
I don’t like call them antihero because an antihero is Who does something only for his personal interest, or Who is sociopathic as, i mean, a serial killer.

Edited 2022-06-20 22:04 (UTC)

It can throw you out of your comfort zone when a character you think you've figured out does something that conflicts with what you thought you knew about them

How many times does this happen in the real life? More than I can expect

I really just irritated with the writer(s). So far, all of the characters on this show have been consistent. The new things we've learned about them have been consistent with what we already knew about them.

Me too.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Page 4 of 4

Episode discussion post: "Tchaikovsky"

Re: Approving of characters

Re: Replacing family

Art

Re: Replacing family

Claudia's curiosity

Re: Approving of characters

Honey pots

Re: Replacing family

Re: Approving of characters

Re: Approving of characters

Elizabeth and happiness

Re: Art

Re: Handing things off

Re: Claudia

Re: Claudia's curiosity

Re: Approving of characters

Re: Claudia

Re: Approving of characters