Skip to content
About these ads

As the 1% grows more powerful, they speak their minds more boldly

31 May 2014

Summary:  We needn’t worry if we decline the burden of self-government. The 1% will govern us. Perhaps quite well, but certainly not in our interest, but for themselves. In fact they’re already doing so. Today we review some of the evidence. It’s all around us, if we dare look. Now they feel sufficiently secure to tell us.

The One Percent That Matters

Marketing in New America

.

To the right see an example of marketing in New America. It’s a twofer: selling security to the 1%.

.

Contents

  1. Ascendant, the 1% grow bolder
  2. They already rule
  3. Showing us the New America
  4. For More Information

(1)  Ascendant, the 1% grow bolder

The Great Recession destroyed a significant fraction of the middle classes wealth, tilted the job market even more in favor of corporations over workers, and entrenched the 1%’s control of the government (as seen in the continuity of Bush Jr’s regulatory and economic policies by the Obama administration.

As a natural result, the 1% have grown bolder in public, with deranged exaggerations of efforts to regulate corporations and raise taxes.

  1. Tom Perkins warns in the Wall Street Journal op-ed “Progressive Kristallnacht Coming?
  2. Bud Konheim, CEO of luxury-goods corp Nicole Miller tells the 99% to stop whining.
  3. Stephen Schwarzman, Chairman of Blackstone Group, described proposals to raise his taxes as “It’s like when Hitler invaded Poland in 1939.”
  4. Robert Benmosche, CEO of bail-out beneficiary AIG, described public outrage over his bonuses as like the lynching of blacks in the South.
  5. Charles Munger, vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, explains to the 99% that “You should thank God {for bank bailouts} … Now, if you talk about bailouts for everybody else, there comes a place where if you just start bailing out all the individuals instead of telling them to adapt, the culture dies.
  6. Jack Welch, retired CEO of GE, warns about Occupy Wall Street:  “the risks of this movement’s efforts to demonize business are frighteningly high.

The for next step: they tell us that they run America, a New America, as in this conversation with Silicon Valley’s Marc Andreessen. We pick up with a reference to a new study showing that the 99% have little influence on public policy (see the next section for details).

Read more…

About these ads

Does Obama “plan to use the military against citizens”?

30 May 2014

Summary: Today’s hot story on the Right concerns Obama’s new policy allowing use of military force on US soil. Great outrage and wetting of pants follows! Like the “Antarctica ice collapsing” stories this month that bedazeled the Left, these demonstrate (again) that we’re ill-informed and easily manipulated because we get information from our tribal leaders, and they lie to us. Leaders don’t speak truths, let alone harsh and difficult ones, to dogs. When we decide to again stand like men and women, we’ll find reliable sources of information. And better leaders

WW2 propaganda

True then and true now

.

Memo outlines Obama’s plan to use the military against citizens“, Washington Times, 28 May 2014 — Opening:

A 2010 Pentagon directive on military support to civilian authorities details what critics say is a troubling policy that envisions the Obama administration’s potential use of military force against Americans.

The directive contains noncontroversial provisions on support to civilian fire and emergency services, special events and the domestic use of the Army Corps of Engineers.

The troubling aspect of the directive outlines presidential authority for the use of military arms and forces, including unarmed drones, in operations against domestic unrest. “This appears to be the latest step in the administration’s decision to use force within the United States against its citizens,” said a defense official opposed to the directive.

This is agitprop fed to the gullible — like much of what the Washington Times prints. They’re pros.

  1. This article refers to DoD Directive 3025.18, which consolidates, replaces, and updates various policy documents going back to 1997 (they’re listed in the references).
  2. These policies were expressed for the field in “Civil Support“, Joint Publication 3-28, dated 14 September 2007 — before Obama was elected.
  3. JP 3-28 was reissued in “Defense Support of Civil Authorities” dated 31 July 2013.

So the policy is not Obama’s. It’s not new. The article identifies no changes. For that we turn to JP 3-28, which lists the changes from the 2007 version. Read them and tremble in fear!

Read more…

“Castle” shows that many of us don’t defend New America because we don’t like it

29 May 2014

Summary:  We conclude our examination of the hit TV show “Castle” by adding up what we’ve learned from it about America. We might have become alienated from 21st C America because we no longer see ourselves as part of it. Hence our unwillingness to defend it.  Spoilers!

Karl Marx

Karl Marx smiles, having long ago predicted our alienation

.

Contents

  1. “Castle” shows us 21st C America
  2. It’s back to the future for our love of the State
  3. Why should we worry about alienation?
  4. No worries! Others will rule us.
  5. A closing note about America
  6. Other posts in this series about “Castle”
  7. For More Information
  8. The flip side of alienation is irresponsibility

.

(1)  “Castle” shows us 21st C America

We’ve used the hit TV show “Castle” as a mirror in which we can see unpleasant aspects of 21st century America which otherwise remain invisible. Attention to them benefits neither party of the 1% (“Left” or “Right”), and so remains outside the narratives told us by journalists and intelligentsia.

The 19th C was a horror show: slavery, the Civil War, the failure of Reconstruction, the oppression of Indians and workers, the 1%-engineered deflation and depressions of the Gilded Age. But in the first 60 years of the 20th C our forefathers rebuilt both America at the world. The resulting America of the mid-1960s is what we (speaking broadly) think of as America. Neither utopia or Heaven, but an accomplishment seldom equaled in history.

The sixty years since then have seen rapid and great changes to America. Changes in our society, from gender and racial roles to ethnic composition. Changes in our economy. Changes in our role in the world. In a sense it was natural evolution of society driven by our national ideologies.

The result is a New America. After a long time portraying America essentially as it was in mid-1960s, TV shows now show us — in a soft focus — America as it is today. Which we see in “Castle” (and also described in 16 other similar other posts; links in 7d below)

It’s better in many ways than the America that Once Was. Worse in other ways. Perhaps most important for many people, it’s different than what they think of as America. So much so that many of us no longer see themselves in the mirror when they look at America. They’re alienated.

Alienation shines through the actions of the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street movements. Alienation drives middle class people to use Pirate Bay. It’s obvious in a thousand other ways.

(2)  It’s back to the future for our love of the State

The most serious effect of alienation might be on our relationship to the Republic.

As Martin van Creveld showed in The Rise and Decline of the State (1999), patriotism only recently arose in the West. Without love of the State, rulers dare not burden their subjects too heavily. They recruited foreigners for the core of their military (as King David did). The revolutions that created the modern era changed the State from an scourge into something for which people would gladly sacrifice not just their goods but also their lives — and those of their children.

As van Creveld explained:

Read more…

Richard Castle shows us the dark reality of justice in 21st C America

28 May 2014

Summary:  We continue our examination of the hit TV show “Castle”, today mining for insights about justice in 21st C America. Castle is a romantic comedy; an accurate depiction of our criminal justice system would be a horror show. As in the previous chapters of this series, this suggests that we might no longer defend America because we’ve lost confidence in it.  Spoilers!

We should fear Justice. If she weighs America in her scales, she might use that sword on us.

Lady Justice
.
Contents

  1. “Castle” shows us 21st C American justice
  2. The collapse of our criminal justice system
  3. Feudal justice
  4. Other posts in this series about “Castle”
  5. For More Information
  6. They’ll have to carve these words off the Court’s building

.

(1)  “Castle” shows us 21st C American justice

From the first episode of Castle.

BECKETT:  You have quite a rap sheet for a best-selling author: disorderly conduct, resisting arrest.
CASTLE:  Boys will be boys.
BECKETT:  It says here that you stole a police horse?
CASTLE:  Borrowed.
BECKETT:  And you were nude at the time.
CASTLE:  It was spring.
BECKETT:  And every time the charges were dropped.
CASTLE:  What can I say? The mayor is a fan.

BECKETT
Mr. Castle. You’ve got quite a rap sheet for a best-selling author: disorderly conduct, resisting arrest.

CASTLE
Boys will be boys.

BECKETT
It says here that you stole a police horse?

CASTLE
Borrowed.

BECKETT
Ah. And you were nude at the time.

CASTLE
It was spring.

BECKETT
And every time the charges were dropped.

CASTLE
What can I say? The mayor is a fan,

- See more at: http://seriesmonitor.com/castle/transcripts/season1/01.html#sthash.atyJdJrh.dpuf

BECKETT
Mr. Castle. You’ve got quite a rap sheet for a best-selling author: disorderly conduct, resisting arrest.

CASTLE
Boys will be boys.

BECKETT
It says here that you stole a police horse?

CASTLE
Borrowed.

BECKETT
Ah. And you were nude at the time.

CASTLE
It was spring.

BECKETT
And every time the charges were dropped.

CASTLE
What can I say? The mayor is a fan,

- See more at: http://seriesmonitor.com/castle/transcripts/season1/01.html#sthash.atyJdJrh.dpuf

BECKETT
Mr. Castle. You’ve got quite a rap sheet for a best-selling author: disorderly conduct, resisting arrest.

CASTLE
Boys will be boys.

BECKETT
It says here that you stole a police horse?

CASTLE
Borrowed.

BECKETT
Ah. And you were nude at the time.

CASTLE
It was spring.

BECKETT
And every time the charges were dropped.

CASTLE
What can I say? The mayor is a fan,

- See more at: http://seriesmonitor.com/castle/transcripts/season1/01.html#sthash.atyJdJrh.dpuf

BECKETT
Mr. Castle. You’ve got quite a rap sheet for a best-selling author: disorderly conduct, resisting arrest.

CASTLE
Boys will be boys.

BECKETT
It says here that you stole a police horse?

CASTLE
Borrowed.

BECKETT
Ah. And you were nude at the time.

CASTLE
It was spring.

BECKETT
And every time the charges were dropped.

CASTLE
What can I say? The mayor is a fan,

- See more at: http://seriesmonitor.com/castle/transcripts/season1/01.html#sthash.atyJdJrh.dpuf

This is a realistic description of High Justice in America, the criminal justice system for the rich. Drug use? Disorderly conduct? Sexual assault, rapeEven murder? Erased by money and power.

A young man of the middle class who commits crimes like Castle’s gets Middle Justice:  a criminal record, with punishment mitigated only if the relatives fund crippling legal fees. Disorderly conduct, indecent exposure, and resisting arrest are misdemeanors, usually punished by fines and probation — with possible “collateral consequences” such as loss of professional licenses and bonds.  Theft of the police horse is a felony, with punishment depending on the degree of anger felt by the police.

A young man of the lower classes commits such crimes gets Low Justice: a criminal record, with all of the above plus the possibility of jail time.

(2)  The collapse of our criminal justice system

The “Castle” TV show frankly if lightly describes some dark aspects of our criminal justice system, such as prison rape. But overall it is accurate as a “police procedural” in the same sense that Lord of the Rings describes warfare. Fun fantasy.

Read more…

“Castle” shows us a dark vision of Romance in America

27 May 2014

Summary:  We continue our examination of the hit TV show “Castle”, today mining for insights about romance in 21st C America. It’s an ugly picture, suggesting (as did previous chapters) that perhaps we no longer defend America because we no longer like it. America has always been an ideological project. It might have evolved into a form that we no longer recognize as us or ours. Post your thoughts in the comments!  Spoilers!

.

Here we see one slice of romance among boys and girls in America, as shown on “Castle”. See 0:10 to 0:24.
.


.

Castle proposes to Beckett

Yes, I will. I also promise to stop abusing you.

Contents

  1. “Castle” shows us 21st C American romance
  2. Video evidence of an ugly trend
  3. Gender bending marking the rise of women to equality, or beyond
  4. Long-term effects on men?
  5. Other posts in this series about “Castle”
  6. For More Information

.

(1)  “Castle” shows us 21st C American romance

Gender bending is one of the largest, most important, and least visible trends of our age, and perhaps one of the major sources of cultural stress. We are redefining our core cultural features, an social experiment on a scale with few — perhaps no — precedents in history.

This redefinition of gender roles provides many of the distinctive features of “Castle”. It shows the normalization of what in the past were extraordinary character traits.

  1. From the script alone how often could you tell the gender of Castle or Beckett? From reading just the police procedural scenes (solving the mystery)? From reading the romance scenes? Very few.
  2. Women as leaders: Beckett as senior detective, Captain Gates as head of the unit. Beckett as the aggressive leader; Castle as the metrosexual follower.
  3. Beckett is an example of  “action girl” (see TV Tropes) or women warrior.  Master of weapons, able to defeat men in hand-t0-hand fights.

“Castle” often takes these now-common tropes to a new level. Castle often screams like a little girl, and occasionally displays outright cowardice (e.g., leaving Beckett to run out of the damaged building in the season 6 episode “Under Fire”). He often portrays the opposite of Beckett’s consistent calm but aggressive reaction to danger.

Even more extreme, in the first few seasons Castle meekly submits to physical abuse by Beckett (e.g., episodes 1 & 3 in season 1; episode 1 of season 3). See the flashbacks in the video at the top of this post. He cannot hit back; that would be wrong. Complaining would look weak. Castle shows the essence of beta: he can neither cope with her nor walk away. The writers and audience show no empathy for him; we mock the clown.

Castle’s passive acceptance of this humiliation foreshadows the events in the following seasons.

  1. His decay from flashes of alpha to full-beta in the later seasons (he loses all self-respect after accepting this abuse).
  2. This in turn explains Beckett’s actions. How many alpha women (Beckett was a wild girl even in high school) would respect such a man? She friend-zones him while hooking up with alphas like Josh Davidson (cardiac surgeon) and detective Tom Demming. Castle follows Beckett like a puppy while Davidson ignores Beckett’s complaints about his life as a world-traveling surgeon, as did her previous love (FBI agent Will Sorenson).
  3. Beckett hears her biological clock ticking at the end of season 4, signalling Time to find a nice stable rich guy.

As mentioned in the second chapter, only with the help of amnesia can fans see this as a romantic saga.  It’s an ugly perspective on the complex drama of relationships in 21st C America.

(2)  Video evidence of an ugly trend

Let’s consider this last point in more detail, as it highlights our radical new gender roles.

(a)  Grrrl Power in the cinema

We watch and cheer Hermione Granger hitting Draco Malfoy in “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban”. The clip does not show what follows: Draco and his team running away, looking back at Hermione in fear. What else can Draco do? Video:

Read more…

How should we honor our vets on Memorial Day?

26 May 2014

Summary: How should we honor the sacrifices made by our veterans, past and present.? After 150 years of frequent wars, as the last of our troops return from Afghanistan, as the military begins the long post-war downsizing, we need to up our game. Memorial Day is the day to begin.

The price paid for our wars

The price of our wars

.

Contents

  1. Who started Memorial Day?
  2. Four ways to celebrate Memorial Day
  3. Another perspective on Memorial Day
  4. Something else to ponder on Memorial Day

.

(1)  Origin of the Memorial Day holiday

The Grand Army of the Republic was a fraternal organization composed of veterans who served in the American Civil War. Here is their General Order No.11, issued on 5 May 1868:

The 30th day of May, 1868, is designated for the purpose of strewing with flowers or otherwise decorating the graves of comrades who died in defense of their country during the late rebellion, and whose bodies now lie in almost every city, village, and hamlet church-yard in the land. In this observance no form of ceremony is prescribed, but posts and comrades will in their own way arrange such fitting services and testimonials of respect as circumstances may permit.

For 16 years I led Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts on Memorial Day to plant flags on graves. That’s an appropriate thing for children to do. But the US has been at war much of the past 150 years, and that’s no longer sufficient for its citizens. The toll of the crippled and dead have grown too long. We should redefine our obligations to our veterans, living and dead.

Blue Star Moms

(2)  Four ways to celebrate Memorial Day

(a) Support our troops

Flowers on graves are nice. But donations or volunteering show your support for our troops in a more useful way. Here are three organizations that provide valuable support to our troops.

(b) Force Congress to better fund care for Veterans

Veterans Administration

There is no excuse for underfunding care for veterans. As they come home this problem will grow more serious.  Fix it now. This has been a problem — well reported in the news for a decade. It’s in the news again. Unless we speak out it will be in the news again next year.

Our military leaders have proven that they care about funding for things — like the malfunctioning, insanely expensive F-35 — more than the people who fights our wars.

Read more…

“Castle” shows us marriage in America, a fault line between our past & future

23 May 2014

Summary:  The TV show “Castle” shows us the mad nature of marriage in 21st C America, and suggests why we no longer work the machinery that drives our vital institutions (the alienation that social scientists describe). We no longer believe Reform requires understanding what’s happening, and clearly seeing how we want to live. Society must be built on rock, not sand. Spoilers!

“… a world-without-end bargain.”
— William Shakespeare’s “Love’s Labour’s Lost” (c. 1595)

From the season one “Castle” episode “Nanny McDead”

BECKETT: How many times have you been married, Castle?

CASTLE: Twice. .. How about you?

BECKETT: Never been. … I’m not an “if at first you don’t succeed” kind of a girl. When it comes to marriage, I’m more of a “one and done” type.

Beckett's bridal gown

Beckett is ready to go

.

Contents

  1. In her marriages, Beckett is everygirl
  2. In their divorces, Castle is everyman and Beckett is everygirl
  3. A Useful Conclusion
  4. History of marriage
  5. Other posts in this series about “Castle”
  6. For More Information
  7. Tom Tomorrow gives us A Brief History of Marriage

Post your thoughts in the comments!

.

(1)  In her marriages, Beckett is everygirl

We watch hit TV shows because they speak to our dreams, fears, goals, and conflicts. Romantic comedies like “Castle” focus on marriage, one of our foundational institutions. It’s a major theme of the series “Castle”, both of the main characters’ arcs and the individual episode.  How people select partners, the ceremony, marriage, divorce, and post-marriage life.

Richard Castle has married twice, a conventional middle-aged American. hoping that the third time is the charm.

Beckett has more interesting history, illustrating the several irrational elements to our social system. Married in a drunken fling while in college, she could not cope with the resulting cognitive dissonance between her logical desire for divorce and her self-image as one who marries for life. She’s everygirl.

She resolves this is a mad but human way: she ignores the marriage. That’s not as mad as it seems, since there are no central records for marriages in the US (as First World nations have). In fact the Centers for Disease Control says:

Information on the total numbers and rates of marriages and divorces at the national and State levels are published in the NCHS National Vital Statistics Reports. The collection of detailed data was suspended beginning in January 1996. Limitations in the information collected by the States as well as budgetary considerations necessitated this action.

A 15-year old Vegas marriage might easily remain secret. Background checks, even by the FBI, don’t query the marriage records of every State — and seldom investigate more than 10 years history (except the basics, such as birth and education). Beckett’s marriage appeared on the NYC computers through plot magic.

But Beckett points us to a deeper conflict in our system of marriage. One we all see, but consider too horrific too mention.

Read more…

NCIS: Los Angeles – TV adventures of our stylish security police

22 May 2014

Summary:  We interrupt our series about the TV show “Castle” to answer a reader’s question. This analysis reveals dark aspects of US culture (with worse to come in future chapters), but are the lessons from “Castle” typical of American TV? To answer that we’ll look at one of the shows in the hit Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) franchise: “NCIS: Los Angeles”. It should be called Gestapo: LA.  Spoiler for the post: the answer is “it’s not only typical, there are darker shows.”

Daniela Ruah

Daniela Ruah as stylish NCIS: LA special agent Kensi Blye

Post your thoughts in the comments.

Contents

  1. The NCIS franchise: fun & effective
  2. About NCIS: Los Angeles
  3. About the the Gestapo
  4. Ending on a darker note
  5. Other posts in this series
  6. For More Information

.

(1)  The NCIS franchise: fun & effective

The original “NCIS” has been a hit for 11 seasons. It spun off “NCIS: Los Angeles”, the short-lived “NCIS: Red”, and the new “NCIS: New Orleans”.

Goebbels, the NAZI propaganda genius, would have loved these shows. They’re fun to watch because they’re well-written and done by  skillful actors.  They’re useful because they have a powerful subtext.

Their popularity shows our acceptance of tyranny; perhaps even our eagerness for it. Watching these was one reason for my prediction that Snowden’s revelations about government surveillance would produce no substantial reforms.

(2)  About NCIS: Los Angeles

In NCIS: LA we see, and can react to, a prototype of an American Gestapo (i.e., in an early stage of development).

Their agents are a diverse group of attractive, young, incredibly skilled security agents. Each speaks many languages fluently, and has mastered many skills — except for Marty Deeks, the least of the team, the butt of their jokes, who is a LA street cop who has a law degree and passed the difficult California bar exam. Their supporting technicians are geniuses.

It’s important that Americans consider their gestapo agents to be superior men and women.

Each week our team hunts down unamerican terrorists (foreign and domestic)  — often gypsies, Jews, and people of color — stopping their nefarious plans to destroy America.

It’s important that Americans remain accustomed to seeing people of color as fit subjects for close surveillance (as New York’s Finest did with area mosques).

Read more…

The TV show “Castle” challenges us to see our changing values. Most fans decline, horrified.

21 May 2014

Summary:  Today we look at the collision of values between our hero, Richard Castle, and the lovable rogue Rogan. Fans express outrage at the thought that Rogan might be right. For good reason, because this illustrates in miniature the evolution of American society in a direction we prefer not to see. This is the fourth in a series about the TV show “Castle”, mining it for insights about ourselves. Spoilers!

Stana Katic

Beckett, the reward for diligent respectability

Post your thoughts in the comments!

.

Contents

  1. Has Castle lost faith in our respectable suburban values?
  2. Long roots to the love of outlaws
  3. The insights from the fringe carry weight
  4. The ghetto drives American culture
  5. Nietzsche gets the last word
  6. Other posts in this series about “Castle”
  7. For More Information

.

(1)  Has Castle lost faith in our respectable suburban values?

Castle sees himself in another man’s eyes, those of Rogan O’Leary: an alpha, attractive to women, living a life of adventure as a petty criminal. Rogan sees an over-weight beta humbly following his fiancée to beg her husband for a divorce. His rail-thin, ultra-hot fiancée who — after 5 years of spurning him — heard her biological clock ticking, and decided to settle down with a rich famous nice guy. Naturally Rogan treats Castle with contempt, derisively calling him “man parts”, telling Beckett

“Oh, wow. You’re engaged to a douche.”

This analysis outraged many “Castle” fans. A common rebuttal (link to original):

{B}asing this predicted “spoiler” on Rogan, a drug/alchi/felon/con man/thief/pathological liar/ADHD candidate. … Rogan is stupid and hysterical, with a long series of crime/swindle failures. … My police friends remind me that they have yet to met such a “smart” criminal.

This is American myopia on full display. First, the description of Rogan is fantasy, beyond anything in the episode, probably exaggeration of Rogan’s flaws to minimize the truth of his words.

Rogan is a common small crook. He has led an adventurous life as an outlaw on the fringes of society. Not everybody wants to be an accountant. It’s a different kind of life.  And one which, unsurprisingly to anyone familiar with life outside the suburbs, has gained him the devoted love of a beautiful women (and probably many).

Such people have an attraction to those in the dull mainstream, often romanticized. As in this episode of “Castle”: when given $25,000 in cash, Rogan hands it to his girlfriend (she needs it to save her business).

(2)  Long roots to the love of outlaws

The admiration and even idealization of outlaws has deep and mysterious roots in our history, described in Popular Admiration of Great Thieves, a chapter in Charles Mackay’s great work Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841):

Read more…

What the TV show “Castle” teaches us about America, and ourselves

20 May 2014

Summary:  Let’s start our series about the TV show “Castle”, mining it for insights about ourselves (America), with an easy parallel. Fans of “Castle” tend to see the show as fan fiction, which requires amnesia about its actual history. Much as Americans have amnesia about much of our history. That’s fun for fans and 4th of July celebrations. It has horrific effects on citizens running a nation. Spoilers!

Stana Katic

Stana Katic, co-star of “Castle”

.

Contents

  1. About fans & patriots
  2. Forgetting the contradictions in “Castle”
  3. Forgetting the contradictions in US history
  4. Other posts in this series about “Castle”
  5. For More Information
  6. Stana Katic reading the collected posts of the FM website

.

(1) About fans and patriots

Each successful TV show is in effect a collective fan fiction by the audience. We see a storyline and characters beyond that show on the screen, and a plot arc to the series.

That’s true of patriots as well. We see a the national history as a story. The high points are exaggerated (the Civil War freed African-Americans! We defeated the NAZIs!) and superimpose a Whig narrative on the story (our past is a progression towards greater liberty and enlightenment).

Both of these require serious amnesia.

(2)  Forgetting the contradictions in “Castle”

For a TV show the fans have foes. The showrunners have a different needs, writing two-dozen interesting stories per year while keeping (growing) their audience. Hence the TV Trope The Status Quo Is God., the easiest and well-proven method to managing these conflicts (which eventually tend to eventually destroy the show).  There are weird new back-stories, improbably plot developments, uncharacteristic actions by the leads.

Contradictions accumulate between the fans’ vision of the characters and the actual show history, causing cognitive dissonance in fans. Creative amnesia minimizes this. For example, in the season 6 finale “For Better or Worse” we learn that Beckett was married in college (15 years ago). She explains this by saying she didn’t believe the marriage was real. On the websites for Castle fans they devise convoluted explanations to spin this to make Beckett look good. Occam’s Razor gives us a simple answer.

Backstory: Beckett has lied twice to Castle about big things: her memory was not lost after being shot, and a lie of omission about her trip to DC. It’s a pattern. She might have found it difficult to fess up to Castle about her marriage, and more difficult as time went on. She might have liked the sound of saying “one and done” (matching her self-image), but then found this made the truth more difficult to say. As did her teasing Castle about his two divorces.

It’s human nature. This doesn’t make her a bad person. But the fan-favored scenarios explaining this incident are absurd. Amnesia and fantasy about the back story allows their imaginations to run wild:

Read more…

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,490 other followers