Gertrudes said:
Yeah, I just finished watching that episode. Pretty disturbing. I wouldn't say that Greg and Abby's objective is power though, at least right now I'm not reading it that way, although that might change as the series develops.
To me they seem like two people trying to manage a community, making serious mistakes along the way due to their very poor knowledge and lack of self work. About them not showing remorse, if there is one thing I think that the way the series is directed is to blame, is the overall lack of emotional display in the face of things that would put any normal human being to pieces, so that may account for that? I mean, awful things happen and they just keep strolling along, showing only a little bit of discomfort...why, I feel way more discomfortable then they seem to be, and I'm just watching it!
Yes, it is all very stiff upper lip behaviour, isn't it. But isn't this the old traditional English response? I am not talking about the Welsh, Irish and Scottish. As far as I can judge they are more emotional?
The series was shot during the seventies. My eldest son is watching the "slick" series that was shot four years ago, based on the series of the seventies. My, how they scream and shout. It seems less stiff upper lip behaviour to me. :D
***Spoiler alert******
I simply can't understand how a group can make such a serious decision regarding Barney with so little data. I mean, it's a person's life we're talking about for Christ's sake.... Ok, we think it's him, out of all the other people living within the community, none of which were questioned, not to mentioned the possibility of an outsider having broken into the building whilst the party was going on, still, we think it is him, let's kill him! Never mind gathering more data, never mind giving ourselves more time to find the right course of action.
What struck me was that they pretended to act like a jury, executioner and judge all at the same time. But they completely overlooked the fact that every accused is entitled to some sort of legal counsel. And they knew Barney was slow. So he should have had even more assistance.
They went after their weakest link, because it was the easiest thing to do? OSIT.
Also, Greg just shot him dead, which probably reflected Britain's law at the time. Didn't they only fairly recently abolish the death penalty? After all, the BBC belongs to the state.
What bothered me also was the fact that despite all evidence from the beginning of the series, and there was plenty, that Price was a very, very shady character, they kept him because they needed him. And after two of them knew the truth about Wendy's murder, they still kept him because he was needed/useful. Sure, he murdered someone, but he's got a good pare of spare hands, so why not keep him?? Greg's last decision was extremely poor, not just because of his total lack of perspective of the overall situation, but even using his own very narrow reasoning which seems to be strictly confined to the number of people they have, what about the fact that Price has made them lose 4 spare hands?
Contextualizing this within my own life, how many things might I have lost due to giving in to an immediate need?
Well, Greg would have bashed Price's head in, if it wasn't for Abby.
But it is true, good personal skills would have saved them a lot of trouble. I enjoyed the second series, despite the harsh lessons, because there is a difference in leadership, because they go and live in the community where Charles is a leader. He is very different and so different measures are taken.
**Spoiler Alert**
I particularly thought the episode 'The Chosen' was very good with references to Nazi Germany, eugenics and the so-called chosen who survived. The blond pregnant lady (without a man by her side, no family units allowed) gave me the chills.
At one point you see the leader (an old school teacher, how typical) whipping up support for his leadership, trying to play the group.
Because it was the seventies you can see how WWII was still very much on the minds of the people. Unfortunately, that has changed dramatically.
Feelings of "need" have been brought up several times under different circumstances in the series, and those feelings were responsible for some of the worst decisions several of the characters have made, as I see it. It has made me ponder though, with the survival mechanism being triggered so quickly and strongly one is likely much more vulnerable to feelings of self interest and egoism, and finding that barrier between a natural instinct of survival of the self, and needs in the name of self interest, can become extremely foggy....worrying indeed.
Again, that changes in the second series. The episode 'The Witch' was also memorable, OSIT. But because there is one good person, who is charismatic, but who has his heart in the right place (Charles) who intervenes members of the community learn of their mistakes and make amends. That couldn't have happened under Greg and Abby.
Edit/added: The way the characters treated the kids was pretty disturbing to me during the first series. It gets better during the second series, but Greg and Jenny are not your typical warm and patient parents. I do understand their difficult position, but they don't exude any warmth, not even when their own child is born. Greg calls his son "funny face".
![Angry :mad: :mad:](/forum/styles/cass/smilies/angry.gif)
During the second series the kids get a different education, which is quite nice. They learn how to fish, milk cows and so on. They are much more involved in the day-to-day business of the farm, which I thought was great.