"Well, we only see his point of view."
One of the most annoying lines ever, IMHO. I'm not talking about, say, the fanon!Austenfen who go on about how we only ever see Elizabeth's perspective in P&P (ridiculous, of course), but about a rather more generic issue. I've seen it the Austen fandom, yes. I've also seen it in HP. And LOTR.
And now, of all places, in Psych.
To elaborate:
A lot of books/moves/TV shows/whatever rely on the character type I call "the snarky bastard with a heart of gold." This man (it's almost always a man) is abrasive, edgy, ruthless, clever, scheming and - ultimately - good-hearted and well-intentioned. I'm not talking about morally ambiguous antiheroes, though they can look similar on the surface; this guy is solidly on the side of the angels. He pays his taxes, donates to charities, rescues puppies, and performs brilliantly, though sometimes unconventionally, at his profession. He may ignore the rules when they're inconvenient for him, but when it comes to principles, he sticks firmly to the straight and narrow. Once he's decided something is A Worthy Cause or, alternatively, a Force of Evil, he cannot be moved. Seriously, don't even bother trying. Unless you want a railroad track where you used to be.
We've all seen him, because he shows up across all genres, pretty much. Not as a protagonist, usually - few can carry it off - but rather, in major supporting roles: relentless mentors, demanding bosses, scary-though-useful allies, difficult best friends, weird relatives. Often all of the above. And, however aggravating he may be as a person, he makes one hell of an attractive character. He's probably one of the most popular archetypes of all time.
I love him, too. Often rabidly. But - and this is an important but - he has to have those sharp edges. This guy may save orphans, but he'll probably insult them while he's doing it. That's part of his charm, such as it is. The snark. The cunning plans. The sheer brain power coupled with sheer obnoxiousness. Strip that away and he looses most of what made him attractive in the first place. Goodness alone isn't particularly cool. Couple it with a complex and rather alarming personality, and - well - cool.
So, I'm just a tad bit out of patience with the "we only see Other Character's point of view" as justification for the fact that, frankly, he's kind of a bastard. It doesn't just reduce his character to a single dimension. It's stupid. In a book, yes, our man's behaviour may be filtered through mind and feelings of a third party, but unless that person is lying through his/her teeth, we still see the behaviour. We, the readers, are still perceiving what really happened.
And in a television show, or a movie? Come on, people. We are in no way we're getting only one side of the story; we're seeing what happened, as it happened.
So, no, we do not either get only Elizabeth's view of Darcy's insult. (In fact, we don't get Elizabeth's view until afterwards, but that's a snit for another day.) We're shown what happened with practically no editorial. Darcy was in a bad mood, Bingley prodded him into dancing w/ some random girl, and Darcy snapped at him. That's all. Not particularly heinous, but no shining moment, either. But some discussions make it sound like the whole thing is a figment of Elizabeth's imagination.
So, back to Psych. Henry Spencer was a fabulous cop, remains an awesome character, but turning your son's childhood into a training ground for a life fighting crime is not, in any world, good parenting. This is not something that exists only in Shawn's imagination; we see him doing it at the beginning of almost every episode, and throughout the rest of them expressing near-constant disappointment at Shawn's failure to live life/solve crime according to the Henry Spencer model. Certainly, capricious, brilliant, mischievious Shawn was (and is) a difficult child - but, still, it's no wonder that twenty years later, he's still boiling over with resentment. The fact that their relationship varies between Utterly Dysfunctional and Endearingly Troubled is not merely an unhappy coincidence. It's because, for all their differences, they're both Snarky Bastards (TM) and constitutionally incapable of saying anything like "I was wrong" or "you did well" or "thank you" or any of the other things normal human beings do to communicate. (One of the best Henrycentric lines ever: "That's how he begs?") So, when people go on about what a wonderful, amazing father Henry was, and how he did everything right, but it just looks screwed-up because we only see it how Shawn, who is immature and irresponsible, sees it . . . just, no. It looks screwed-up because that is one hell of a screwed-up way to bring up a child, even an extraordinary one. And Henry looks like kind of a bastard because, um, he kind of is.
Hmph.
And now, of all places, in Psych.
To elaborate:
A lot of books/moves/TV shows/whatever rely on the character type I call "the snarky bastard with a heart of gold." This man (it's almost always a man) is abrasive, edgy, ruthless, clever, scheming and - ultimately - good-hearted and well-intentioned. I'm not talking about morally ambiguous antiheroes, though they can look similar on the surface; this guy is solidly on the side of the angels. He pays his taxes, donates to charities, rescues puppies, and performs brilliantly, though sometimes unconventionally, at his profession. He may ignore the rules when they're inconvenient for him, but when it comes to principles, he sticks firmly to the straight and narrow. Once he's decided something is A Worthy Cause or, alternatively, a Force of Evil, he cannot be moved. Seriously, don't even bother trying. Unless you want a railroad track where you used to be.
We've all seen him, because he shows up across all genres, pretty much. Not as a protagonist, usually - few can carry it off - but rather, in major supporting roles: relentless mentors, demanding bosses, scary-though-useful allies, difficult best friends, weird relatives. Often all of the above. And, however aggravating he may be as a person, he makes one hell of an attractive character. He's probably one of the most popular archetypes of all time.
I love him, too. Often rabidly. But - and this is an important but - he has to have those sharp edges. This guy may save orphans, but he'll probably insult them while he's doing it. That's part of his charm, such as it is. The snark. The cunning plans. The sheer brain power coupled with sheer obnoxiousness. Strip that away and he looses most of what made him attractive in the first place. Goodness alone isn't particularly cool. Couple it with a complex and rather alarming personality, and - well - cool.
So, I'm just a tad bit out of patience with the "we only see Other Character's point of view" as justification for the fact that, frankly, he's kind of a bastard. It doesn't just reduce his character to a single dimension. It's stupid. In a book, yes, our man's behaviour may be filtered through mind and feelings of a third party, but unless that person is lying through his/her teeth, we still see the behaviour. We, the readers, are still perceiving what really happened.
And in a television show, or a movie? Come on, people. We are in no way we're getting only one side of the story; we're seeing what happened, as it happened.
So, no, we do not either get only Elizabeth's view of Darcy's insult. (In fact, we don't get Elizabeth's view until afterwards, but that's a snit for another day.) We're shown what happened with practically no editorial. Darcy was in a bad mood, Bingley prodded him into dancing w/ some random girl, and Darcy snapped at him. That's all. Not particularly heinous, but no shining moment, either. But some discussions make it sound like the whole thing is a figment of Elizabeth's imagination.
So, back to Psych. Henry Spencer was a fabulous cop, remains an awesome character, but turning your son's childhood into a training ground for a life fighting crime is not, in any world, good parenting. This is not something that exists only in Shawn's imagination; we see him doing it at the beginning of almost every episode, and throughout the rest of them expressing near-constant disappointment at Shawn's failure to live life/solve crime according to the Henry Spencer model. Certainly, capricious, brilliant, mischievious Shawn was (and is) a difficult child - but, still, it's no wonder that twenty years later, he's still boiling over with resentment. The fact that their relationship varies between Utterly Dysfunctional and Endearingly Troubled is not merely an unhappy coincidence. It's because, for all their differences, they're both Snarky Bastards (TM) and constitutionally incapable of saying anything like "I was wrong" or "you did well" or "thank you" or any of the other things normal human beings do to communicate. (One of the best Henrycentric lines ever: "That's how he begs?") So, when people go on about what a wonderful, amazing father Henry was, and how he did everything right, but it just looks screwed-up because we only see it how Shawn, who is immature and irresponsible, sees it . . . just, no. It looks screwed-up because that is one hell of a screwed-up way to bring up a child, even an extraordinary one. And Henry looks like kind of a bastard because, um, he kind of is.
Hmph.