Topic RSS
Related Topics
I believe this means Arlene will be murdered.
This is clearly an allusion to Arlene. She's a redhead, a waitress, and she recalls Arlene suffering morning sickness. However, she is wearing the same type uniform as worn by Cindy, a murder victim.
If you've followed the discussion in the season 3 revisited thread, you've seen me speculating that Bill is trying to make Mikey an orphan because he's a magical Fae child he bred on Sookie. [using Terry or some other known hybrid, it's hard to say] Tara might have been a decoy murder victim to distract from the real targets, or he might have intended for Sookie to die to get her out of the way. IDK. I believe Bill is using Terry to get rid of inconvenient people, like he may have used Rene or at least he blamed the deaths on Rene. I believe Terry the Manchurian Candidate will kill Arlene, possibly 2 or more others, and then get conveniently caught and jailed as a mass murderer and killer of his child's mother. No attention at all would be focused on Terry vis a vie Patrick, his PTSD, and his sniper capabilities if it wasn't serving an agenda of Bill's. He's in need of a villain and a patsy whatever his ultimate agenda is and Terry is his fall guy this year. This would be true Mikey or no Mikey, but the possibility that Bill wants Mikey adds an extra layer of motivation and drama.
I wonder—IF [and I do mean 'if', as it's by no means certain] Bill's Fae breeding program is responsible for Mikey, is it possible he's also responsible for Sookie? I know we've discussed this before, but I can't remember where..
That's a valid point, BG.
But only if the HS rape actually occurred and was not a symbolic representation of Sookie's own experience. I'm toying with the idea that all of the season 4 storylines and events were a symbolic representation of Sookie's subconscious thoughts and her experiences–including Bill's 'sovereignty', Eric's true nature, and the several call-backs to scenes from earlier seasons–but I'm not sure it's logistically possible.
Bobsgran said:
Is there any clue in the CB's that we've overlooked to get a handle on the Mikey arc or that the whole of S4 was symbolic?
I'm not really sure, and my thinking on this isn't very clear yet, but when you think about how strongly we suspected Bill's magical shenanigans prior to season 4, it becomes possible that the witch storyline was Sookie's way of putting HER suspicions into symbolic form. The witches could represent not only her suspicion that Bill uses magic, but her feelings of victimhood [raped, forcibly fed off] and her desire for revenge. The witches would also represent that Sookie is still unable to blame Bill directly for her troubles. However 'blame the witches' then becomes a metaphor for her suspicion that Bill uses scapegoats to take the blame for his own actions.
11:33 AM
June 24, 2010
Offline'Blame the witches' becomes a metaphor for her suspicion that Bill uses scapegoats to take the blame for his own actions.'
Is that what is referred to as transference in psychology?
Using the witch symbology would make sense for a mostly human that wasn't aware of her own fae heritage until recently.
This is where a rewind could come into play. We rewind because season 4 was Sookie's unconscious dreamscape, but when we pick up in season 5 we rewind back to 'reality' and more or less start over from some point we can't yet identify.
The best thing that could happen to season 5 would be for an omniscient narrator–The Author–to take control of the narrative.
Bobsgran said:
'Blame the witches' becomes a metaphor for her suspicion that Bill uses scapegoats to take the blame for his own actions.'
Is that what is referred to as transference in psychology?
Using the witch symbology would make sense for a mostly human that wasn't aware of her own fae heritage until recently.
I'm not sure about the transference, but in a way, if s4 was Sookie's symbolic dreamscape, then Sookie herself scapegoated a group of women in order to avoid blaming Bill. If you'll remember, every damn time it seemed we were about to get some big revelation the narrative skittered away in fright, much the way Sookie would do when confronted with the possibility of Bill being revealed as an evil douchenozzle.
I think Sookie using her powers in s5 but only to save Bill was her way of telling herself that Bill has commandeered her magic as well.
The logistical questions then become: Just where ARE we in the timeline if s4 was Sookie's unconscious dreamscape? If we pick up s5 in real time, do we go back to the Fae abduction in the cemetery or further back still? Of the actions committed by other characters in s4, which ones were real and which ones were symbolic representations? If they were real, how did Sookie know about them? If s4 was entirely comprised of her dreamscape, is she still, as we pick up s5, in Bill's basement? Where does that leave Eric's apparent part in the 'rescue' of Sookie from her FL 'trip'?
Such is the nature of the many questions that, if they can't be answered logically, would seem to negate the theory.
Ugghhh, mine too BG.
But I can think of only one other reason for the fucked up fuckery of the s4 narrative, and that is Bill was completely in charge of the whole thing and his narratives always contain logistical glitches because he can't make his lies fit or feel like truth no matter how hard he tries. OTOH, there were a few real and solidly emotional moments in s4 that I am loathe to attribute to Bill.
Having several examples of Sookie's unknowing psychic abilities, it's also possible that some of the actions she portrayed for other characters in season 4 were her precognitive abilities on display. Or indeed, her psychic and telepathic abilities is what allowed her to know what was going on in real time with the other characters even though she was being held as a prisoner in suspended animation. This is how she was able in prior seasons to represent other characters when she was not actually present for the action, so it's not out of the question I guess.
12:04 PM
June 24, 2010
Offline" OTOH, there were a few real and solidly emotional moments in s4 that I am loathe to attribute to Bill."
Could it be that even though he appeared to have had complete control of the narrative, he didn't recognize or credit the "solidly emotional moments", therefore they were shown as the truth without his varnish of self aggrandizement?
WTF do I mean by that?…..IDK, LOL.
"WTF do I mean by that?…..IDK, LOL."
LMAOOO!!
"Could it be that even though he appeared to have had complete control of the narrative, he didn't recognize or credit the "solidly emotional moments","
No. If there is one thing we can be sure of with Bill it's the fact that he is incapable of depicting real emotion because he is incapable of feeling real emotion. [except for rage, lust blah blah 'basically, all the good stuff' as Daphne would say]. I think the actors are ALWAYS directed to act like a 'strange facsimili' of their character when a scene's narrative is supposed to be directly under Bill's control. All you have to remember is how badly he got Terry wrong in the season 3 finale.
2:44 PM
September 2, 2011
OfflineI've wondered if season 4 wasn't all going to turn out to be a dream/hallucination spell/screen memory as well. I think the title of the premiere, She's Not There, is Alan Ball being a cheeky badger by referring not to the year she was missing, but what we were about to see ("LOL, why are you mad, audience, I told you right up front Sookie wasn't there."). Not only that, but they cared enough about the song and its meaning to the story to record a new version of it, and make it a duet.
I noticed sometimes in season four, Sookie acted as though she was doing a practiced dance routine, you could see the acting (and Anna is better than that). Except sometimes her timing was a little off. Like when Tara sees Eric coming out of the cubby and screams, Sookie turns away from her friend and her ward, and looks at the corner where the fireplace poker is, before Tara ever runs over there.
"I've wondered if season 4 wasn't all going to turn out to be a dream/hallucination spell/screen memory as well. I think the title of the premiere, She's Not There, is Alan Ball being a cheeky badger by referring not to the year she was missing, but what we were about to see"
I always totally believed 'She's Not There' referred to Sookie not actually being in FL. Logically we can extrapolate that to mean she 'wasn't there' for the whole of season 4.
But I think we have to figure out or decide if it was a dream/hallucination OR a spell/screen memory because I don't think it can be both. With a dream, the symbolic interpretations would be Sookie's own, but with a screen memory or spell the interpretations would have been forced on her, in which case the symbolic representations might be considered wholly inapplicable to Sookie's own thoughts and feelings. I don't think the latter applies, given what we know of Sookie and how season 4 went down.
"I was beginning to take the "She's Not There" as, she's not All there. Alluding to her inability to deal with all that's happened to her."
BG, I think this is true as well.
If what we witnessed was a dream, it would have represented her way of 'dealing' with what's happened to her. Only she didn't really deal with it, she reinterpreted everything in a more palatable light to protect herself. However much we could see harsh reality bleeding through Sookie never faced any of it head on. Plus she threw in a lot of wish-fulfillment stuff like having her house cleaned, spending 'quality time' with Eric, and so forth.
Still. I'm not sure this is a logical theory nor am I sure I am satisfied with the implications of it, one of which is Eric never became FAE to protect her. It's true though that Sookie may have conjured FAE as a way of telling herself Eric only has her best interests at heart, while at the same time acknowledging to herself that he's capable of subterfuge to reach an objective. PLUS, his amnesia would represent her own suspected amnesia.
Most Users Ever Online: 157
Currently Online:
27 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
Bobsgran: 2590
JerronBarksdale: 927
anna: 842
IATM: 810
Exit_Pursued_By_A_Sloth: 642
BellaKarma: 417
Genie: 296
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 0
Members: 1643
Moderators: 0
Admins: 3
Forum Stats:
Groups: 3
Forums: 13
Topics: 309
Posts: 14357
Newest Members: carrie, tawnymac, ravynsprt, pez, Jennifer, Dwimordene, aiyanamichaela, Marianne, blunderwoman, Sass
Moderators:
Administrators: Renée (576), sunny (4369), osterby (1122)
Log In
Register
Home










I'll take the stab that it's got to do with the possibility of cubs in Hotshot, or……

