[spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce - Return of the Jedi (#3)

[A Cousin]

Hiya, binkie. Slumming it? Your turn to crack out the acetominaphin!

(26-01-2011 10:49 PM)binkie Wrote:  So, my question is this: When did Spooks come to be all about Harry, and should we be worried?

I don't think it has become all about Harry. Despite my blinkered obsession with the Harry character, I think the producers/writers/directors and even the man himself have generally been able to steer away from making it about one character and maintain the ensemble piece I like it to be.

The question is, if I am reading you correctly, is the generally accepted understanding that Harry cannot or will not die/depart led to a watering down of the character and consequently the dramatic content of the programme because the stakes are not high enough? Not in my opinion. Even if I were completely confident in Harry being able to survive from season to season, there are many other devices at their disposal to keep the stakes just as high as killing a character off. There is something to be said for being the survivor and the reasons Harry specifically is the survivor and how he copes with being the survivor - warts and all. Death is easy. Life is hard.

Would I watch the programme without Harry? Yes. One of the beauties of the cast replacements in Spooks is I have always learned to love again. I have known several people who have "sworn off" spooks after Toms exit, after Danny's exit, after Zoe's exit. I find that to be a crying shame. Would I be as engaged? I don't know. I sincerely thought I wouldn't be after Tom, Danny, Ruth, Adam, Ros...yet I still am.

They certainly could have written and developed a completely different character with the moral/physical aspects of Rupert Murdoch, but then it wouldn't be Harry would it? To paraphrase Jane Austen, one could have a ball without dancing, but it would rather less like a ball.

Could another actor have been cast as Harry? Yes. Could they have been just as engaging? Yes. Would the role have developed the same? Absolutely not. But it would start from the same kernel PF was handed in S1E1. PF was just smart, skilled and experienced enough to recognize the potential and build on it. An actors characterization comes as much from the person who is playing it as the person who is written on the page. That is why King Lear or Hamlet can be played by several different actors equally as brilliantly repeatedly for 400 years. Each characterization will be inherently different and individual because each actor is inherently different and individual. PF is in the very lucky position of being the right actor for the right role at the right time. I suppose for that reason, I am more than thrilled to watch this particular actor in this particular role more than just about any other just to see where it goes.

I think the popularity of the character has only strengthened the character and instilled it with more meaning by virtue of being the survivor. They kill characters off like crazy, granted for contractual reasons, but Harry is the only one to stay. Why? How? At what cost? That in itself is an interesting difference to all the other characters that have come before or are to come. It is a singular character aspect specific only to this character.

I probably could have said all this in a much shorter post. Sorry for that. I hope you enjoyed a good bluster from an American!