The West Wing Season 1 Unpopular Opinions
As I said in my Mad Men Season 1 Unpopular Opinion Post, I'm trying to go through the Mad Men and TWW seasons to describe my unpopular opinions in each season. And as I said, TWW S1 went a little slowly because I've already written about my antipathy to Danny Concanon and my love for John Hoynes.
1. I've come around to believing that I think Mandy's S1 story was well told. Mandy's arc is very believable, if one acknowledges the complications. Mandy started her tenure as a Media Consultant for the Bartlet administration with a dangerous BUT UNDERSTANDABLE combination of arrogance and desperation/insecurity. On one hand, she WAS the defacto campaign manager for what had been a fairly dangerous Democratic rival in Russel. She was used to being in charge. She ran her own outside political consulting firm. Mandy was brought in with much fanfare to be the media consultant that would whip a flailing Bartlet administration into shape.
However, Mandy *was* pretty savvy. She was the boss of pretty buzzed-about consulting firm- but they lost their one client with Russel, only to replace Russel with another all-consuming, all-important client in Bartlet who she was desperate to keep. Mandy was used to being the Boss, but she suddenly found herself, like, twenty rungs down the ladder at the Bartlet administration. Even when she was treated like a guru for image matters, she never feels in-control because she didn't have any status from which to recommend policy, which Josh never tired of reminding her.
All of Mandy's actions in S1 were consistent with her see-saw of insecurity and entitlement. However even more, Mandy's neuroses are partly a product of her position. She was hired to be the outsider image consultant, concerned with whether the Santa hats clashed with the Dickensian costumes, and she was hated for being just what she was hired to be.
I don't even think you need to read TWW S1 subversively. There's an intentional story that there's a darker side to the Bartletistas in how they treat outsiders. Their political opponents who get in some pretty excellent monologues that the Bartlet administration's smugness and bullwark political tactics are OTT and even stupidly played like Congressman Bruno. The inner people in their administration who aren't in the inner circle like Hoynes and Mandy, even legit Bartletistas who don't happen to be in the sausage-fest like CJ and Abbey. Mandy was hired as the whipping girl, eternal outsider.
Within that, I don't think Mandy did anything wrong by writing a strategy memo about Bartlet's weaknesses while she was working for Russel. Josh frequently weighed in on John Hoynes's character and political MO to Bartlet. Then, Josh weighed in Bartlet's and Hoynes's character and MO to Matt Santos, although with more respect and loyalty when he discussed Jed. You don't take a vow of silence when you work for different political operatives. Mandy is a victim here that someone hacked into her computer to obtain her memo off of her hard-disc. Fandom hates Mandy and bashes her for writing a memo that even the Bartleteers acknowledged was truthful and stated some flaws that they need correcting. You could argue that Mandy signed up for a world of unfairness- she's a media/image consultant and thus, she signed up for a job where she could be fired if Jed looks worse with her in the picture, even if it's not her fault. That's fair. However in a non-hard driving image world, Mandy didn't do anything wrong.
However, Jed was right- "Everybody. Mandy was doing her job. It's time to let her out of the doghouse." That said,Jed *said* that in Mandatory Minimums, the ante-penultimate ep of S1. I know that there were Doylist reasons on why Mandy didn't come back for S2- but I think it's very easy to believe the Watsonian explanation that Jed may have made that magnanimous declaration when he was in adorable PJs warm and fuzzy mode but really, there was no letting Mandy out of the doghouse. They were just going to tolerate her for the respectable several weeks until Danny's story about Mandy's memo blew over and not engage her for future consulting work.
2. I'm not that wild about Take that Sabbath Day. It has its charms. The first appearance of Joey Lucas. "If you'll look out the left side of the cabin, you'll see the fjords. Then we got a history of the fjords. Then we got a quiz on the fjords.
[to Bartlet] Do you have any idea how much I would like to dress you up in lederhosen and drop kick you into the fjords right now?.
Rabbi Richie Aprile
I *have* gone to synagogue and chuckled at the cantor as the rabbi's communication director- *adorable*. The priests' ending story about the drowning mans and the signs from G-d (that were utilitarian help like a canoe or warning of a flood) is some solid well-delivered religious indoctrination right there.
However, I think it's a little slow and ponderous. The A-plot about the death penalty is just a slowly marching inevitability. It's even impossible to believe that the Bartlet administration is going to stay the execution on the first watch- and none of their maneuvers are intelligent enough or passionately-carried out enough to lend some credibility of "WHITE HOUSE STAFFERS TO THE RESCUE!" I love seeing Joey for the first time- but the hungover!Josh B-plot is just too slapstick for my taste. Then, there are no other plots. It's just the death penalty and hung-over Josh-meets-Joey. I like my West Wing cramped with like, FOUR storylines, usually with details that are part of a longer arc.
By contrast, Mandatory Minimums and Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics never seem to show up on the favorite episode lists. And maybe they're not flashy. However, I think they really deliver on what I love to see in a West Wing ep.
3. On a small note, I think Sam was an ass to Abbey in The White House Pro-Am. First, it was moronic to assume that difficult Congresswoman added the child labor poison pill amendment the trade bill just because Abbey made child labor one of her "soft" First Lady pet issues. If a Congressperson tries to do something that would obstruct an important presidential agenda on Congress like the trade bill, it's silly to blame the First Lady for giving a soft-pedal morning show on a morning show with a child with his own cause to stop exploitative child labor.
However, Sam has a lot of nerve to approach Abbey FOR A FAVOR and speak to her so disrespectfully.
ABBEY: We're thoroughly professional.
SAM: No ma'am, I don't think you are.
ABBEY: I beg your pardon?
SAM: I like Lilly Mays. I think she's top notch, you know that. You know that it was hard for us to give her up.
ABBEY: Yes?
SAM: I think you're prone to amateur mistakes.
ABBEY: [stiffly] So, my staff is professional, just not me.
SAM: Mrs. Bartlet, you can't go on national television and decide to have a kid sit next to you on a whim. You gotta vet this stuff through my office.
My goodness! Since when it is the *First Lady's* job to go down to the Deputy Communications Director and vet every interview. It's the job of the First Lady's staff to vet with the West Wing staff. If Sam is making any complaints about the professionalism of the East Wing, he should discuss Abbey's staff because, seriously, whether the Deputy Communications Director was informed of a morning show interview is pretty trivial for Abbey Bartlet who has a number of jobs as a mother, wife, doctor, doctor who teaches at medical school, AND First Lady who champions public causes and appears at functions and on morning shows. She really has enough on her plate without making sure that Sam Seaborne is in the loop on her life.
Or maybe, Sam should look inward at his sole job to control White House public relations and query why he didn't know the First Lady's media schedule.
ABBEY: What was the problem with the interview?
SAM: There was nothing wrong with the interview except it looked like you discovered
there was a child labor problem because a 14-year-old boy named Jeffery just told you about it this morning.
INCORRECT! Sam got this little back-bite because of Abbey's, "And I'm here to introduce this young man on my left, Jeffery Morgan. Jeffery helped opened my eyes to the issue of child labor exploitation around the world." However, I (and most reasonable people) read the scene as Abbey being kind to a 14-year old boy who is working beyond his age-group to raise money and awareness to end slave labor and throwing him extra credit as nice adults do and as famous, powerful people trying to raise the profile of nobodies trying to do good do.
However, I feel like Sam was read as correct even though he was completely wrong on all levels because he got the snappy last word. IMO, Abbey comes into fights with West Wing staff and Jed Bartlet with a lot of CORRECT bluster- but she loses steam in the fight because it's actually not as important to her that she WIN. She has her opinions- but if they're not being respected, she'll go back to mothering her daughters or saving lives as a cardio-thoracic surgeon or working tirelessly with her public profile to champion great causes and do substantial charity work or work her farm in New Hampshire or many things besides this win this tempest in a teapot with Sam.
1. I've come around to believing that I think Mandy's S1 story was well told. Mandy's arc is very believable, if one acknowledges the complications. Mandy started her tenure as a Media Consultant for the Bartlet administration with a dangerous BUT UNDERSTANDABLE combination of arrogance and desperation/insecurity. On one hand, she WAS the defacto campaign manager for what had been a fairly dangerous Democratic rival in Russel. She was used to being in charge. She ran her own outside political consulting firm. Mandy was brought in with much fanfare to be the media consultant that would whip a flailing Bartlet administration into shape.
However, Mandy *was* pretty savvy. She was the boss of pretty buzzed-about consulting firm- but they lost their one client with Russel, only to replace Russel with another all-consuming, all-important client in Bartlet who she was desperate to keep. Mandy was used to being the Boss, but she suddenly found herself, like, twenty rungs down the ladder at the Bartlet administration. Even when she was treated like a guru for image matters, she never feels in-control because she didn't have any status from which to recommend policy, which Josh never tired of reminding her.
All of Mandy's actions in S1 were consistent with her see-saw of insecurity and entitlement. However even more, Mandy's neuroses are partly a product of her position. She was hired to be the outsider image consultant, concerned with whether the Santa hats clashed with the Dickensian costumes, and she was hated for being just what she was hired to be.
I don't even think you need to read TWW S1 subversively. There's an intentional story that there's a darker side to the Bartletistas in how they treat outsiders. Their political opponents who get in some pretty excellent monologues that the Bartlet administration's smugness and bullwark political tactics are OTT and even stupidly played like Congressman Bruno. The inner people in their administration who aren't in the inner circle like Hoynes and Mandy, even legit Bartletistas who don't happen to be in the sausage-fest like CJ and Abbey. Mandy was hired as the whipping girl, eternal outsider.
Within that, I don't think Mandy did anything wrong by writing a strategy memo about Bartlet's weaknesses while she was working for Russel. Josh frequently weighed in on John Hoynes's character and political MO to Bartlet. Then, Josh weighed in Bartlet's and Hoynes's character and MO to Matt Santos, although with more respect and loyalty when he discussed Jed. You don't take a vow of silence when you work for different political operatives. Mandy is a victim here that someone hacked into her computer to obtain her memo off of her hard-disc. Fandom hates Mandy and bashes her for writing a memo that even the Bartleteers acknowledged was truthful and stated some flaws that they need correcting. You could argue that Mandy signed up for a world of unfairness- she's a media/image consultant and thus, she signed up for a job where she could be fired if Jed looks worse with her in the picture, even if it's not her fault. That's fair. However in a non-hard driving image world, Mandy didn't do anything wrong.
However, Jed was right- "Everybody. Mandy was doing her job. It's time to let her out of the doghouse." That said,Jed *said* that in Mandatory Minimums, the ante-penultimate ep of S1. I know that there were Doylist reasons on why Mandy didn't come back for S2- but I think it's very easy to believe the Watsonian explanation that Jed may have made that magnanimous declaration when he was in adorable PJs warm and fuzzy mode but really, there was no letting Mandy out of the doghouse. They were just going to tolerate her for the respectable several weeks until Danny's story about Mandy's memo blew over and not engage her for future consulting work.
2. I'm not that wild about Take that Sabbath Day. It has its charms. The first appearance of Joey Lucas. "If you'll look out the left side of the cabin, you'll see the fjords. Then we got a history of the fjords. Then we got a quiz on the fjords.
[to Bartlet] Do you have any idea how much I would like to dress you up in lederhosen and drop kick you into the fjords right now?.
Rabbi Richie Aprile
I *have* gone to synagogue and chuckled at the cantor as the rabbi's communication director- *adorable*. The priests' ending story about the drowning mans and the signs from G-d (that were utilitarian help like a canoe or warning of a flood) is some solid well-delivered religious indoctrination right there.
However, I think it's a little slow and ponderous. The A-plot about the death penalty is just a slowly marching inevitability. It's even impossible to believe that the Bartlet administration is going to stay the execution on the first watch- and none of their maneuvers are intelligent enough or passionately-carried out enough to lend some credibility of "WHITE HOUSE STAFFERS TO THE RESCUE!" I love seeing Joey for the first time- but the hungover!Josh B-plot is just too slapstick for my taste. Then, there are no other plots. It's just the death penalty and hung-over Josh-meets-Joey. I like my West Wing cramped with like, FOUR storylines, usually with details that are part of a longer arc.
By contrast, Mandatory Minimums and Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics never seem to show up on the favorite episode lists. And maybe they're not flashy. However, I think they really deliver on what I love to see in a West Wing ep.
3. On a small note, I think Sam was an ass to Abbey in The White House Pro-Am. First, it was moronic to assume that difficult Congresswoman added the child labor poison pill amendment the trade bill just because Abbey made child labor one of her "soft" First Lady pet issues. If a Congressperson tries to do something that would obstruct an important presidential agenda on Congress like the trade bill, it's silly to blame the First Lady for giving a soft-pedal morning show on a morning show with a child with his own cause to stop exploitative child labor.
However, Sam has a lot of nerve to approach Abbey FOR A FAVOR and speak to her so disrespectfully.
ABBEY: We're thoroughly professional.
SAM: No ma'am, I don't think you are.
ABBEY: I beg your pardon?
SAM: I like Lilly Mays. I think she's top notch, you know that. You know that it was hard for us to give her up.
ABBEY: Yes?
SAM: I think you're prone to amateur mistakes.
ABBEY: [stiffly] So, my staff is professional, just not me.
SAM: Mrs. Bartlet, you can't go on national television and decide to have a kid sit next to you on a whim. You gotta vet this stuff through my office.
My goodness! Since when it is the *First Lady's* job to go down to the Deputy Communications Director and vet every interview. It's the job of the First Lady's staff to vet with the West Wing staff. If Sam is making any complaints about the professionalism of the East Wing, he should discuss Abbey's staff because, seriously, whether the Deputy Communications Director was informed of a morning show interview is pretty trivial for Abbey Bartlet who has a number of jobs as a mother, wife, doctor, doctor who teaches at medical school, AND First Lady who champions public causes and appears at functions and on morning shows. She really has enough on her plate without making sure that Sam Seaborne is in the loop on her life.
Or maybe, Sam should look inward at his sole job to control White House public relations and query why he didn't know the First Lady's media schedule.
ABBEY: What was the problem with the interview?
SAM: There was nothing wrong with the interview except it looked like you discovered
there was a child labor problem because a 14-year-old boy named Jeffery just told you about it this morning.
INCORRECT! Sam got this little back-bite because of Abbey's, "And I'm here to introduce this young man on my left, Jeffery Morgan. Jeffery helped opened my eyes to the issue of child labor exploitation around the world." However, I (and most reasonable people) read the scene as Abbey being kind to a 14-year old boy who is working beyond his age-group to raise money and awareness to end slave labor and throwing him extra credit as nice adults do and as famous, powerful people trying to raise the profile of nobodies trying to do good do.
However, I feel like Sam was read as correct even though he was completely wrong on all levels because he got the snappy last word. IMO, Abbey comes into fights with West Wing staff and Jed Bartlet with a lot of CORRECT bluster- but she loses steam in the fight because it's actually not as important to her that she WIN. She has her opinions- but if they're not being respected, she'll go back to mothering her daughters or saving lives as a cardio-thoracic surgeon or working tirelessly with her public profile to champion great causes and do substantial charity work or work her farm in New Hampshire or many things besides this win this tempest in a teapot with Sam.