I agree that that's an interesting question (and relevant to several shows I'm watching and thinking about). As you say, it's not as if Rachel is mentally ill in the sense that she can be diagnosed as having X, but she's certainly not emotionally healthy and you're right that that's much more a matter of circumstance than of her own personality.
It's generally a hard question, but IMO, the Jeremy-case actually makes judging him more black and white than I'd judge most people who were genuinely hurt by an emotionally unhealthy person and responded with an furious, hard-to-watch embarrassing tirade of hurt and anger.
Rachel is the damsel Manic Pixie Dreamgirl unbalanced when Jeremy was looking to rescue her and sweep her off her feet for a romance. Rachel was the evil kind of "She didn't sink, so I know she's a witch" maniacal crazy when it was about condemning her in front of the entire crew. Rachel was the kind of crazy that you should infantalize to protect others when Jeremy ran to her mother to make his own civil commitment to protect straight men who could be into her or whatever. Basically, Jeremy was riding whatever definition of mental illness he felt like applying to Rachel to suit his own purposes.
Generally, I think victims of mentally ill people, especially ones who can't be pinned with diagnosis, have their right to confront the person who victimized them- even if the audience (in show or out of show) should have more sensitivity as the non-victim to what the perp may be going through. However, Jeremy wasn't just confronting Rachel for hurting him. He used her emotional problems, every step of the way.
They're encouraged to attack each other but she's praised and rewarded for destroying them. And yes, that's a choice that she's responsible for, but at the same time it's one that she's been pushed towards (literally in the pilot episode, when financial and legal considerations compel her to go back to her old job) - which is probably true of a lot of mental illnesses. REPLY
Right. Many of the contestants behaved worse and worse, the longer they were on Everlasting. Anna started off as such a sensible woman- but she became more and more brittle, prone to attack other women, less secure, nastier, you name it until the Adam/Rachel thing brought her back to her senses to she could get back in touch with the family-oriented down-to-earth professional woman that she used to be. The toxic femininity on steroids world of Everlasting is really bad for everyone.
Still, though, the contestants' increasingly bad behavior lends some forgiving perspective to the Everlasting crew. However even the mice trapped in the maze figured out how leave gracefully when Adam broke up with them or how to even assertively quit this nasty business because it was the right thing to do (Maya, Anna). Quinn and Rachel kept being drawn back to the show season after season, but they should look at Britney as their contestant-mirror.
It's generally a hard question, but IMO, the Jeremy-case actually makes judging him more black and white than I'd judge most people who were genuinely hurt by an emotionally unhealthy person and responded with an furious, hard-to-watch embarrassing tirade of hurt and anger.
Rachel is the damsel Manic Pixie Dreamgirl unbalanced when Jeremy was looking to rescue her and sweep her off her feet for a romance. Rachel was the evil kind of "She didn't sink, so I know she's a witch" maniacal crazy when it was about condemning her in front of the entire crew. Rachel was the kind of crazy that you should infantalize to protect others when Jeremy ran to her mother to make his own civil commitment to protect straight men who could be into her or whatever. Basically, Jeremy was riding whatever definition of mental illness he felt like applying to Rachel to suit his own purposes.
Generally, I think victims of mentally ill people, especially ones who can't be pinned with diagnosis, have their right to confront the person who victimized them- even if the audience (in show or out of show) should have more sensitivity as the non-victim to what the perp may be going through. However, Jeremy wasn't just confronting Rachel for hurting him. He used her emotional problems, every step of the way.
They're encouraged to attack each other but she's praised and rewarded for destroying them. And yes, that's a choice that she's responsible for, but at the same time it's one that she's been pushed towards (literally in the pilot episode, when financial and legal considerations compel her to go back to her old job) - which is probably true of a lot of mental illnesses.
REPLY
Right. Many of the contestants behaved worse and worse, the longer they were on Everlasting. Anna started off as such a sensible woman- but she became more and more brittle, prone to attack other women, less secure, nastier, you name it until the Adam/Rachel thing brought her back to her senses to she could get back in touch with the family-oriented down-to-earth professional woman that she used to be. The toxic femininity on steroids world of Everlasting is really bad for everyone.
Still, though, the contestants' increasingly bad behavior lends some forgiving perspective to the Everlasting crew. However even the mice trapped in the maze figured out how leave gracefully when Adam broke up with them or how to even assertively quit this nasty business because it was the right thing to do (Maya, Anna). Quinn and Rachel kept being drawn back to the show season after season, but they should look at Britney as their contestant-mirror.
Reply
Leave a comment