June asking Hannah if she remembers her?
June: Do you remember me?

4 Comments

  1. I never saw Nick as a match for June or part of some love triangle. June, I’ve felt, has manipulated the men of Gilead in order to obtain some form of comfort or power. With Fred, we’ve seen her stroke his ego to get out of Gilead and see Moira, get a picture of her daughter, and she made him feel guilty enough to arrange a meeting.

    As for Nick, same thing. She gave him enough to catch feelings and help her. He almost got her freedom but then something happened. June doesn’t love any of these men. They are just a means to an ends.

    Sorry about the late reply. After a certain length, Vuukle flags comments for me to review.

  2. Perhaps you’re right and Ive been too harsh in my assessment of “TV-Nick”, but he is certainly a big wimp in comparison to the book and movie versions… I guess what I find hard to fathom with “TV-Nick” is the writers rationale in making him such an extreme departure from “Book-Nick”, who could be selfish, but was also confident, charming and determined. “Book-Nick” also had a sarcastic sense of humour, “TV-Nick” is just so unceasingly serious.

    I wonder, since Luke is unambiguously alive in the TV version, perhaps they deliberately set Nick up to be a less desirable match in order that the audience would be onboard for an eventual Luke/June reunion? Do you think?

    If that’s the case, then it plays into a pet peeve of mine – I’m always irritated when writers present a love triangle and try to manipulate the audience’s sympathies by exaggerating the flaws of one partner or another.
    Indeed, one of the major flaws of the series in general, I find, is how OBVIOUS it is in trying to provoke specific emotional reactions from the audience, so it wouldn’t surprise me.

    A more charitable explanation is that the writers wanted to illustrate certain social or moral concepts (such as that apathy can enable tyranny and lead to further suffering), but then realised they only had the time and budget to accomodate a certain amount of characters – so changing the personalities of existing characters enabled them to work their message into the story more smoothly… but I find this rather problematic too.

    Because in practice it means that the characters go through experiences that should teach them a valuable lesson or at least shake up their established pattern of behaviour – but a few episodes later, they are back to their old ways, as the plot demands… only to fly off the handle again, as the plot demands… and this has the effect that every time I see some new “revelation” about the characters in this show I wonder if the character-development will stick or not…. I think this is a problem with “TV-Serena” & “TV-Fred” as well as “TV-Nick”. This episode made me wonder if the characterisation of Fred and Serena is ultimately going to go anywhere meaningful.

    I don’t think I’d mind so much the departures from the characterisation in the novel if the new characters had greater internal consistency, and their decisions didn’t seem so much like arbitrary conveniences to the plot.

  3. I don’t see Nick as a douche, used or new, but I can certainly understand your frustration. With me, I wouldn’t use as many negative adjectives for when it comes to Nick, I see him as someone to compare next to Fred. Nick isn’t necessarily lazy but certainly isn’t trying to climb Gilead’s power structure or make a huge amount of waves. He just enjoys not having a hard job and preferred it when he was glorified security. Because, he is fine with that and seems secure in that position.

    Fred, on the other hand, is very insecure, ambitious, but also has this desired to be like. Hence why he’ll bend over backwards and be a kiss ass to people who don’t even have power over him. As for Nick, as shown through Eden, who could report him as a gender traitor, doesn’t give a damn. If he doesn’t like you, he’ll do the bare minimum he has to but if he does like you, as shown with June, he’ll use whatever network he has to try to help you.

    So I wouldn’t call him lazy as much as someone who, if he isn’t passionate about something, he is going to show minimal effort.

    Which sucks for Eden but I find it hard to blame Nick for being coerced a wife. For even though Eden is nice, cute, and all that, Nick is from the old school where you chose your partner.

    But considering he is now dead and being dragged off somewhere, I guess now there is a need to wonder what does that mean for Eden? She is a widow to someone who, depending on the guardians spin it, betrayed Gilead. And guilt by association seems like a punishable offense.

    For she could bring up the letters, but then the question becomes – why did you wait to say anything? So that poor girl is screwed.

  4. Your blog is the main reason I keep watching this show, that and morbid curiosity to see what is, in effect, a glorified fan-fiction followup to a classic novel play out on my TV screen… as it meanders along, I find it more and more difficult to believe the writers have a plan for wrapping up this series. So many plot developments strike me as overly random, made up on the fly, and intriguing concepts/characters are introduced only to be covered fleetingly.

    Like you, I find it odd that June not only challenges authority (in a way that her literary inspiration never did), but is so foolhardy about it. I expect her to be more intelligent and crafty than this. Given her established smarts, I would’ve expected her to use a combination of lies, subterfuge and trickery to get what she wants – instead she just baldly says it out loud to people she knows are empowered to crush her on a whim. It seemed like the writers were having her behave out of character in order to accomodate some attention grabbing plot points
    (like Serena and Fred agreeing on raping her to “put her in her place” and somehow speed up the birth process – it makes no sense)

    Also, once again Fred bends the rules to indulge his own personal whims… this happens so often that it’s starting to strain my disbelief. Don’t you think it’s telling that they never show Fred making the arrangements for June’s meeting with Hannah? I can’t imagine how he’d explain to anyone involved (Hannah’s new parents, the soldiers on duty etc) that breaking the law to make one Handmaid feel better was a good idea and have it come off convincingly.

    Also, do you feel this series would’ve been at all improved if Nick had been depicted as a confident, suave, intelligent and charismatic person? (as he is in the book and earlier movie)

    The Nick of this series is self-absorbed, lazy, indecisive and inept at coping in a crisis situation… I think that even if I hadn’t read the book or seen the earlier movie I’d hate this character. Not only is he totally useless when push comes to shove, but he behaves like a massive dick – and with the way he handled Eden in this episode, pretty much forfeited all claim to my sympathies.

    why on Earth did the writers think it was a good idea to characterise him in this way? The Nick of the book was no saint, but at least he was good at his job and had enough social graces to play the system to his benefit. Why did the writers think depicting him an ineffectual douche would make the series better? In the book and movie, I was rooting for June and Nick to escape the US and begin a new life together. In the series, I wanted their relationship to end before it had begun.

    Do you feel at all exasperated at Nick and perplexed at his characterisation too?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.