Plot-holes

[binkie]

(07-03-2011 06:15 AM)xRuthx Wrote:  See, as a writer myself, I don't think it matters how good an actor is. Bad writing is bad writing and I can't believe how many Spooks viewers just seem to accept the Lucas storyline because it was acted well. I wonder how many fans would insist the Lucas storyline made perfect sense if it had been Ruth with the double identity and the bombing of an embassy. (I obv. am glad this didn't happen. I love Ruth. She's my favourite Spooks character but still... I wonder what difference in reaction there would have been...)

Oohh!! Hello, xRuthx. I like you This is a really good point, which I'm glad has re-surfaced.

It does sadden me that there is a facet of criticism of season 9 which is less about the production and more about the reaction to the content and conclusion of the storyline. We shouldn't spend so much time debating and questioning the Lucas-is-John factor, this criticism suggests, because it's been and gone and it is what it is. It was an exciting and entertaining plotline, for which we should be grateful, and whinging about the loss of Lucas is just the equivalent of unfollowing Justin Bieber's Twitter feed because he got his hair cut. I can't help feeling this is something of a disingenuous attitude, predicated on an assumption of immaturity about the appreciation of Lucas' character and context.

A lot of the analytical effort which has gone into dissecting the logical and moral consequence of season 9 relates to rhetorical function and narrative structure. The fact that the character at the centre of the analysis happens to be Lucas is a necessity of the plot development with which we were presented. Of course we write about Lucas! The writers wrote about Lucas! (Sort of. A bit. When they weren't distracted by writing about John. Or writing John. Or tripping over their own back story. Or falling into plotholes.)

Anyway...

Of course, if the focus of season 9 had been the revelation of Ruth's former life as Gertie-the-mad-bomber-of-old-London-town, and her suddenly renewed efforts to reconnect with the hitherto unmentioned (and unwritten) love of her life - who, it turns out, is conveniently now working as a human rights lawyer at a chambers not five minutes from Thames House - then we would write about that. And we would write about Ruth. And we would write about how there was no implication of Gertie (TMBOOLT), because, not only had Gertie not existed in the minds of the writers who created Ruth, but also the minds of writers who created the character of Gertie (for Ruth to have apparently forgotten to be for the last 15 years) seem to have had only a cursory interest in the character, motives and history of Ruth at all