The Indictment of Will Bailey
Thoughts on the character of Will Bailey in The West Wing. Spoilers up to Episode 10 of Season 6.
The Loss of Sam
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I don't like Will Bailey, not even a little bit. I watched Season 4 out of sequence, and so my instant dislike of Will was attributed by my friends to watching the second half of the season before the first. Will, they claimed, is really rather splendid, and the moment I saw the beginning of S4 I would fall in love with him instantly. (There was also an implication that I would have to get over the loss of Sam somehow, that people move on, blah blah blah they had never been such big fans of Rob Lowe anyway.)
Codswallop.
I watched the beginning of S4 and found it middling. It was ok, don't get me wrong, but other than the Presidential debate episode, I can take it or leave it. My (second) impression of Will was that he was smart and occasionally funny, but the only real interaction he had was with Toby, which was problematic from an ensemble point of view. I can't visualise an effective (smart & funny) conversation between him and Charlie, say, although I'm sure that witty banter featured between those two at some point during Seasons 4-6. It was just - forgettable.
So. Given all these reservations and pre-formed impressions of Will, I can admit that perhaps I was never going to be his biggest fan. During Seasons 5 and 6, however, I have come to actively dislike him. Will started off as someone principled and full of passion. Although I didn't instantly 'connect' with him (and despite the fact that I was still upset over the loss of Sam), I found his determination to run a campaign for a dead candidate for the principle of the thing to be rather endearing. Pointless, but endearing. So how is it, exactly, that this principled person packs in his job - a job that he is vastly underqualified for - to run Bob Russell's campaign?
Will Bailey: Child Genius
Will Bailey did not get his job as senior advisor to the President because he is a prodigy. He got his job because Sorkin was on his way out, and hard work went out the window with him. Think about it: Will is about five years younger than the rest, with next to no experience in anything other than speech-writing. He happens to be a natural genius at it - better than Toby! - writing amazing speeches and turning out truly breathtaking pieces of prose. Sure, I can buy that. It's stretching it a bit, but I can buy it. What I have trouble with is the transition from speechwriter to policy advisor: Will Bailey doesn't have the experience or the acumen, full stop. He can't. Where could he have developed the Whiz Political Skillz of the political genius that he is suddenly praised for? For that matter, how many years was Sam in the Bartlett administration as Toby's deputy - and how many weeks does Will serve in the same role before being promoted?
The crux of the matter is that Will suffers from 'Wesley Crusher' syndrome. He isn't excessively young, cute and perky, thank God, but he is:
1) a genius at his chosen field
2) naturally adept at any field he turns his brilliant mind to
3) way, way too young for the position he is in
4) the son of famous parents
Should that last point be there? The fact that Will is the son of the NATO commander is a big part of Will's background, explaining his 'natural acumen'. Codswallop, I say. It's Mary Sue-ism of the worst kind to justify the existence of a too-young character in a position he could not naturally advance to without external help. You don't want to make him seem excessively favoured, or too ridiculously brilliant, so you build in a childhood where he spent his entire time 'learning on the job'. I don't buy it. You don't simply 'pick up' these skills; learning through osmosis does not work with something as complicated as foreign relations. Stop trying to convince me otherwise - if it was the case, we would have stuck with a monarchical system of government and nepotism would be celebrated as an efficient way of recruiting the best people.
In short, Will's background is sloppy. It tries to excuse a great many 'Mary Sue' aspects of his character and I can prove this by taking away 'commander of NATO forces' and replacing it with 'an orphan raised by Tibetan monks'. It serves just as well as an explanation for Will's 'genius'.
The Russell Issue
Given my dislike of Will's background (it makes me feel horribly inadequate to have normal parents who don't hobnob and to take away the lesson that I will therefore never be Fantastic Natural Genius In Chosen Field As A Result, Saving The World With Ease and Style), it's odd how angry the whole Bob Russell issue made me. Take the above section and put it to one side at the moment. Try and imagine a character you are trying very hard to like, and so are focusing on all his good points and trying to ignore the gaps in the characterisation that are becoming more glaringly obvious with each passing episode.
Look, if you will, at where Toby and Will are writing insulting jokes about their VP candidate and then forget to remove them from the VP's speech. *facepalm* Funny, yes. But IC? God, I hope not. "This is what the administration is reduced to?" was my first thought upon seeing that scene. I felt for Bob Russell, in a way, especially when he later cornered the boys and told them that he was glad they knew what his problems are. The whole thing felt puerile; more like something Josh and Sam might have done during the campaign - not what Toby would do after five years of experience in the West Wing.
Set that aside for the moment.
Will Bailey does not like Bob Russell. More importantly, he doesn't respect him. Russell has no principles, no ideas, and no personality other than 'dull'. (Where the ideal choice is Leo McGarry and they eventually settle for Bob Russell, yes, I have no problems with calling Russell the anti-personality and the anti-issue - this was a candidate picked for his thorough inoffensiveness, after all.) If he were a colour, he'd be beige. Bob Russell is everything that Will despises about politics: bland, ready to go with the majority opinion, neutral on practically everything - an insta-candidate.
This is the man Will wants to be President?!
I join Josh and Toby in despairing.
Rather than turning this into a Russell-rant, I want to consider what could possibly have motivated Will to make such a stupid choice. No - actually, it's not stupid. It's a wise career move, to attach yourself to someone who has a hope of winning the election. It is, however, completely inconsistent with Will's character. This is a man who ran an election for a dead candidate! Is it really conceivable that he would choose Bob Russell?!
The more episodes I see of season 6, the more convinced I am that Will Bailey was replaced by an alien pod person while he slept. He's not alone: in the episode where Toby is trying to find a new press secretary, he interviews a man who is actually rather capable. CJ vetoes his choice, saying that this man "has no soul". He was grown in the same pod as the Will-replacement: capable of attaching himself to anyone or anything that will advance his career, rather than what he actually believes in.
I offer as evidence the sanctity of marriage act (or however that's called on the series) - the rider attached to the budget in Season 6. Will thinks that his candidate should stay quiet.
I'm going to let you think about that for a second, and then just move on without belabouring the point that this isn't Will Bailey. Certainly not the Will Bailey we met in California.
Season 6
I have trouble with the position that Will is in, with the person he chooses as his candidate (compare this to Leo's reasoning of why he chose Jed Bartlett), and with his inconsistent characterisation and personal 'convictions'. I have even more trouble with these things in Season 6, where the focus of the show shifts squarely onto CJ Cregg and how everyone else is coping with leaving the West Wing. Admittedly, this is a limited focus from Will's perspective because 1) he has already left the West Wing and therefore there is no need to explore this issue with him, and 2) he doesn't really have much of a relationship with CJ other than backing his lacklustre candidate through Russell's determination to jump on the bandwagon of every passing controversy. The more we see of him the more all I can think of is: how dull. How limited. The President solves the Middle East (a subject that I'm likely to come back to after I see how it plays out in the rest of the season), is paralysed, starts North Korea nuclear talks, and an asteroid is going to hit the earth and kill everyone. And all Will can think of is how to get his candidate into a photo op with the President and how many times to mention that Russell was playing tennis when he heard the news of the President's paralysis.
I am currently about half-way through Season 6, and I have realised that I can accept these limitations. I cannot, however, deal with Will as a viable character anymore.
The Loss of Sam
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I don't like Will Bailey, not even a little bit. I watched Season 4 out of sequence, and so my instant dislike of Will was attributed by my friends to watching the second half of the season before the first. Will, they claimed, is really rather splendid, and the moment I saw the beginning of S4 I would fall in love with him instantly. (There was also an implication that I would have to get over the loss of Sam somehow, that people move on, blah blah blah they had never been such big fans of Rob Lowe anyway.)
Codswallop.
I watched the beginning of S4 and found it middling. It was ok, don't get me wrong, but other than the Presidential debate episode, I can take it or leave it. My (second) impression of Will was that he was smart and occasionally funny, but the only real interaction he had was with Toby, which was problematic from an ensemble point of view. I can't visualise an effective (smart & funny) conversation between him and Charlie, say, although I'm sure that witty banter featured between those two at some point during Seasons 4-6. It was just - forgettable.
So. Given all these reservations and pre-formed impressions of Will, I can admit that perhaps I was never going to be his biggest fan. During Seasons 5 and 6, however, I have come to actively dislike him. Will started off as someone principled and full of passion. Although I didn't instantly 'connect' with him (and despite the fact that I was still upset over the loss of Sam), I found his determination to run a campaign for a dead candidate for the principle of the thing to be rather endearing. Pointless, but endearing. So how is it, exactly, that this principled person packs in his job - a job that he is vastly underqualified for - to run Bob Russell's campaign?
Will Bailey: Child Genius
Will Bailey did not get his job as senior advisor to the President because he is a prodigy. He got his job because Sorkin was on his way out, and hard work went out the window with him. Think about it: Will is about five years younger than the rest, with next to no experience in anything other than speech-writing. He happens to be a natural genius at it - better than Toby! - writing amazing speeches and turning out truly breathtaking pieces of prose. Sure, I can buy that. It's stretching it a bit, but I can buy it. What I have trouble with is the transition from speechwriter to policy advisor: Will Bailey doesn't have the experience or the acumen, full stop. He can't. Where could he have developed the Whiz Political Skillz of the political genius that he is suddenly praised for? For that matter, how many years was Sam in the Bartlett administration as Toby's deputy - and how many weeks does Will serve in the same role before being promoted?
The crux of the matter is that Will suffers from 'Wesley Crusher' syndrome. He isn't excessively young, cute and perky, thank God, but he is:
1) a genius at his chosen field
2) naturally adept at any field he turns his brilliant mind to
3) way, way too young for the position he is in
4) the son of famous parents
Should that last point be there? The fact that Will is the son of the NATO commander is a big part of Will's background, explaining his 'natural acumen'. Codswallop, I say. It's Mary Sue-ism of the worst kind to justify the existence of a too-young character in a position he could not naturally advance to without external help. You don't want to make him seem excessively favoured, or too ridiculously brilliant, so you build in a childhood where he spent his entire time 'learning on the job'. I don't buy it. You don't simply 'pick up' these skills; learning through osmosis does not work with something as complicated as foreign relations. Stop trying to convince me otherwise - if it was the case, we would have stuck with a monarchical system of government and nepotism would be celebrated as an efficient way of recruiting the best people.
In short, Will's background is sloppy. It tries to excuse a great many 'Mary Sue' aspects of his character and I can prove this by taking away 'commander of NATO forces' and replacing it with 'an orphan raised by Tibetan monks'. It serves just as well as an explanation for Will's 'genius'.
The Russell Issue
Given my dislike of Will's background (it makes me feel horribly inadequate to have normal parents who don't hobnob and to take away the lesson that I will therefore never be Fantastic Natural Genius In Chosen Field As A Result, Saving The World With Ease and Style), it's odd how angry the whole Bob Russell issue made me. Take the above section and put it to one side at the moment. Try and imagine a character you are trying very hard to like, and so are focusing on all his good points and trying to ignore the gaps in the characterisation that are becoming more glaringly obvious with each passing episode.
Look, if you will, at where Toby and Will are writing insulting jokes about their VP candidate and then forget to remove them from the VP's speech. *facepalm* Funny, yes. But IC? God, I hope not. "This is what the administration is reduced to?" was my first thought upon seeing that scene. I felt for Bob Russell, in a way, especially when he later cornered the boys and told them that he was glad they knew what his problems are. The whole thing felt puerile; more like something Josh and Sam might have done during the campaign - not what Toby would do after five years of experience in the West Wing.
Set that aside for the moment.
Will Bailey does not like Bob Russell. More importantly, he doesn't respect him. Russell has no principles, no ideas, and no personality other than 'dull'. (Where the ideal choice is Leo McGarry and they eventually settle for Bob Russell, yes, I have no problems with calling Russell the anti-personality and the anti-issue - this was a candidate picked for his thorough inoffensiveness, after all.) If he were a colour, he'd be beige. Bob Russell is everything that Will despises about politics: bland, ready to go with the majority opinion, neutral on practically everything - an insta-candidate.
This is the man Will wants to be President?!
I join Josh and Toby in despairing.
Rather than turning this into a Russell-rant, I want to consider what could possibly have motivated Will to make such a stupid choice. No - actually, it's not stupid. It's a wise career move, to attach yourself to someone who has a hope of winning the election. It is, however, completely inconsistent with Will's character. This is a man who ran an election for a dead candidate! Is it really conceivable that he would choose Bob Russell?!
The more episodes I see of season 6, the more convinced I am that Will Bailey was replaced by an alien pod person while he slept. He's not alone: in the episode where Toby is trying to find a new press secretary, he interviews a man who is actually rather capable. CJ vetoes his choice, saying that this man "has no soul". He was grown in the same pod as the Will-replacement: capable of attaching himself to anyone or anything that will advance his career, rather than what he actually believes in.
I offer as evidence the sanctity of marriage act (or however that's called on the series) - the rider attached to the budget in Season 6. Will thinks that his candidate should stay quiet.
I'm going to let you think about that for a second, and then just move on without belabouring the point that this isn't Will Bailey. Certainly not the Will Bailey we met in California.
Season 6
I have trouble with the position that Will is in, with the person he chooses as his candidate (compare this to Leo's reasoning of why he chose Jed Bartlett), and with his inconsistent characterisation and personal 'convictions'. I have even more trouble with these things in Season 6, where the focus of the show shifts squarely onto CJ Cregg and how everyone else is coping with leaving the West Wing. Admittedly, this is a limited focus from Will's perspective because 1) he has already left the West Wing and therefore there is no need to explore this issue with him, and 2) he doesn't really have much of a relationship with CJ other than backing his lacklustre candidate through Russell's determination to jump on the bandwagon of every passing controversy. The more we see of him the more all I can think of is: how dull. How limited. The President solves the Middle East (a subject that I'm likely to come back to after I see how it plays out in the rest of the season), is paralysed, starts North Korea nuclear talks, and an asteroid is going to hit the earth and kill everyone. And all Will can think of is how to get his candidate into a photo op with the President and how many times to mention that Russell was playing tennis when he heard the news of the President's paralysis.
I am currently about half-way through Season 6, and I have realised that I can accept these limitations. I cannot, however, deal with Will as a viable character anymore.