Newbie has two questions (help yon browncoats!) by tealcandtrip

FIREFLY EPISODE DISCUSSIONS

Newbie has two questions (help yon browncoats!)

POSTED BY: TEALCANDTRIP
UPDATED: Wednesday, March 1, 2006 04:23
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3600
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, February 20, 2006 2:34 PM

Okay, so I've been lurking for while, but two things from the series are really bothering me. Maybe some of you older, 'official' browncoats could settle the issue.

1: In 'The Message,' we find out about Tracey, a private who served with Zoe and Mal during the war. In the deleted scene from the pilot, Zoe says Mal had only Zoe left from his original platoon after the Battle of Serenity. Since Mal was in charge of Tracey before the war, wouldn't Tracey be in that platoon? So shouldn't Tracey already be dead by 'the Message'?

2: In 'Safe' did Simon's parents know, or the very least have an idea of, what was happening to River? They seem to be very uncomfortable with her coming to visit. They ignore Simon when he suggests something is wrong. They just don't seem to care about their daughter very much. Why not? Did they agree or were they worried about losing their own standing or what? After all, they seem to care about Simon enough, so why not River?

Any thoughts you have would be appreciated.

"I also hear that there's something called Firefly, which is either a canceled science-fiction television show or a new religion, I'm not clear on that. Either way, prayers for the resurrection are involved." – Lore Sjoberg

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 2:52 PM

DAVESHAYNE

Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:
Okay, so I've been lurking for while, but two things from the series are really bothering me. Maybe some of you older, 'official' browncoats could settle the issue.

Welcome. Don't know if I qualify as an official browncoat but I'll try to help with your questions.

1) Tracy was wounded at Du Khang, perhaps he was still in the hospital at the time of Serenity Valley.

2) Speculation is all I have here but I think the Tams had to have some inkling that things were not right with River. My personal feeling is that they were opposed to Simon going after River not because they thought she was safe but because they were afraid to loose both of their children. It never crossed their mind that Simon might actually suceed at breaking her out.

David

"A lot of people are asking me, you know, what exactly is Firefly? It's a tv show you morons!" - Joss Whedon

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 3:06 PM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:

1: In 'The Message,' we find out about Tracey, a private who served with Zoe and Mal during the war. In the deleted scene from the pilot, Zoe says Mal had only Zoe left from his original platoon after the Battle of Serenity. Since Mal was in charge of Tracey before the war, wouldn't Tracey be in that platoon? So shouldn't Tracey already be dead by 'the Message'?

Well, military life can be very transfery. So, although Tracey was under Mal at one point, it doesn't mean that he was under Mal at the Battle of Serenity Valley.

Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:

2: In 'Safe' did Simon's parents know, or the very least have an idea of, what was happening to River? They seem to be very uncomfortable with her coming to visit. They ignore Simon when he suggests something is wrong. They just don't seem to care about their daughter very much. Why not? Did they agree or were they worried about losing their own standing or what? After all, they seem to care about Simon enough, so why not River?

Brainwashing and self delusion can be very powerful things.

I don't think that in Safe Simon's parents ignored him when he said that there daughter was in trouble. They just didn't see it. They thought Simon was being paranoid.

The Academy probably said that it would be best to not have any contact with River for some time. At least until she got climatized. Wasn't that scene where Simon shows the letters to her parents only a couple months after River got to the Academy?

I would imagine, once they realized that River was indeed in trouble, that going up against the government was a very bad idea. I'm certain that they had heard stories of what had happened to people that did that. Thus, some self-delusion later, and they "ignore" the problem. Probably for purposes of self perservation.

That's my thinking anyway.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 3:09 PM

DARKJESTER

Well, I'll give it a shot. And welcome, by the way!

1)Remember in the deleted scene from the pilot, Zoe says that Mal commanded thirty-odd grunts at the start of the Battle of Serenity Valley. Zoe was one of the original thirty, and the only one to survive. Tracey served with/under Mal at Du-Khang, but must have been transferred or wounded before Serenity Valley.

2) In "Safe", I think it's rather obvious that Simon and River's parents cared almost as much about their social standing as they did about their children (Gabriel's threat about not bailing Simon out again, for example). I'm sure that they loved to brag about their little River attending a special, highly selective Alliance school. And as long as they could ignore their son's suspicions, everything was fine in their world.

That's my take on those two questions. Again, welcome! We're glad you're here.

MAL "You only gotta scare him."
JAYNE "Pain is scary..."

http://www.fireflytalk.com - Big Damn Podcast

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 3:41 PM

TEALCANDTRIP

Well wait a minute... the battle of Du-Khang was seven years before the show and the Battle of Serenity was six years before... So he was injured for a year? And also... his actual message says "you guys carried me through the war", which to me suggests he was there till the end.

Also, Simon's parents seem to actively try to stave off their sons attempts to rescue River. They seem very uncomfortable with his attempts to convince them that River is not too well off. They don't even entertain the possibility. They all but forbid Simon to continue trying to help her. Is it because they're more worried about themselves than her, or because they don't believe anythings going on?

"I also hear that there's something called Firefly, which is either a canceled science-fiction television show or a new religion, I'm not clear on that. Either way, prayers for the resurrection are involved." – Lore Sjoberg

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 3:55 PM

DAVESHAYNE

Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:
Well wait a minute... the battle of Du-Khang was seven years before the show and the Battle of Serenity was six years before... So he was injured for a year? And also... his actual message says "you guys carried me through the war", which to me suggests he was there till the end.

Perhaps Tracy was laid up for the better part of a year. The wound he suffers at DK looks to me to be a back injury they can be tough. Also consider that Serenity Valley is listed as being 6 years before the events of Serenity the episode while DuK is 7 years before The Message, there is a certain amount of time elapsed between Serenity the episode and The Message. Just how much time is hard to say but less than 8 months which is how long Simon and River had been aboard Serenity the ship before the events in Serenity the movie.

Joss would it have killed you to use just a few more names? Or maybe a synonym or two? Placidity is a good word, as is pacificity. :)

Quote:
Also, Simon's parents seem to actively try to stave off their sons attempts to rescue River. They seem very uncomfortable with his attempts to convince them that River is not too well off. They don't even entertain the possibility. They all but forbid Simon to continue trying to help her. Is it because they're more worried about themselves than her, or because they don't believe anythings going on?

I think the wory is the more likely option. I entertain the notion that some of that wory is over the possibility of losing both children if Simon goes of to rescue River but others here have posted the more textually sound notion that they really were just woried about themselves. Their position in society.

David

"A lot of people are asking me, you know, what exactly is Firefly? It's a tv show you morons!" - Joss Whedon

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 5:23 PM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:

Well wait a minute... the battle of Du-Khang was seven years before the show and the Battle of Serenity was six years before... So he was injured for a year? And also... his actual message says "you guys carried me through the war", which to me suggests he was there till the end.

I do believe that you are correct about the time frame. But, are you sure that that injury didn't keep him out of the war, period? His comment would only apply to his particular involvment in the war. That doesn't mean that he was in as long as Mal and/or Zoe.

Also, just because someone says that someone else carried them through the war, doesn't mean that they spent the entire war together. Perhaps just the bulk of it. Mal and/or Zoe could have just been the ones to "show him the ropes" so that he didn't die.

Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:

Also, Simon's parents seem to actively try to stave off their sons attempts to rescue River. They seem very uncomfortable with his attempts to convince them that River is not too well off. They don't even entertain the possibility. They all but forbid Simon to continue trying to help her. Is it because they're more worried about themselves than her, or because they don't believe anythings going on?

They probably know that if Simon starts

ing around with the government that something bad will happen to him. As conjectured above, there thinking could have just been that they didn't want to lose another child.

Simon's father does seem concerned for Simon's well being, but he also cares a great deal for the larger picture of the family itself. After all, he said (paraphrase) "You're on a very slippery slope young man. If you end up here again, I won't get you out. Your on your own."

This probably is the father's tough love. Threatening the child so as to make them do what you think is best for them. I wouldn't think that Simon's father would just abandon him. I think that it's more along the lines of protecting him.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 5:31 PM

TEALCANDTRIP

It's part of the fact that they (the parents) so obviously care for Simon, that I'm confused by their relationship with River. They simply don't seem to care for her as much... Even at the beginning of Safe, the Dad acts much more fatherly toward little Simon than little River.

I don't know. Maybe Simon's love for her is so on his sleeve that it makes his parent's seem so cavalier. Or maybe it was a lack of genuine care from the parents that made Simon so protective of his sister.

"I also hear that there's something called Firefly, which is either a canceled science-fiction television show or a new religion, I'm not clear on that. Either way, prayers for the resurrection are involved." – Lore Sjoberg

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 6:03 PM

MISSTRESSAHARA

Some people in society who have children aren't all that much a part of their lives. Those in high positions are busy trying to keep their places and standing, and so they don't have the time to spend being with said children or bonding with them. Notice that the father, though proud of his young son telling Simon he was worth spending the money on him for a new (I cannot remember what it was, insert name of product here *) he didn't spend his free time with his children. But as we never saw many flashbacks of the Tams I may be stretching things.

They seemed to love their children to the point of giving them what they wanted, or what they were worth but I have a feeling the young Tams had a Nanny or Governess who actually did the raising while the parents were busy mingling with the high society cementing their position. In a way (odd as this may sound) their children was as much a way to increase their standing as anything else. And why I'm going with the theory of a Nanny or Governess stems from the girls in Shindig, those high society snobs come from an elite background that no doubt included some form of Governess. If they had slaves, you can be sure they had a Governess. In many ways Joss was reflecting the image of the Old South before the civil war. Just look up how those families societal infrastructure worked. I'm really amazed I didn't see that before.

Just imagine one of the old Southern genteel families in place of the Tams. Society at that point was very important, the American's imitating the English aristocracy. Position, placement in society, power, these are all important in politics. The Tams loved their children, I believe that, but sigmanunki got it right as well, though not so much brainwashing as in believing it's impossible that the powers that be would do this to one of their own well respected TAX paying citizens. Think Operative in terms of having blinding faith. Hell there are plenty of people in todays society who can't believe some governments would lie or hurt them.

A part of them believed, I have no doubt, but since it was a choise between the government that kept them in clover and allowed them the blissful life they had become accustomed (and risk being in some internment camp that they know they couldn't survive) or their children, who was probably raised by someone else (my own opinion) They decided to go the way of the Operative and believe in blind faith.

Just rewatch the scene where the father comes to bail Simon out. Watch and see how angry and upset dad gets. Listen to what he says. He wasn't even worried that Simon got arrested, didn't care he did it for River. He was more worried about his name being permanantly on record the moment he walked through the Stations door, and Simon throwing away his life as a doctor. Why? Because Simon's being one of the best trauma surgeons in the core raises the parents standing even more. The childrens actions reflects on the parents you see. It's a cold hard fact to swallow, but some families are like that. That's why snobs like the ones at the Shindig exist.

I'd like to think though that since those actions the truth settled into the parents psyche and they've realized how wrong they were to have turned their back on their offspring, but unfortunately it's too late. Mal's their old man now. Safe suggests this. Though now that the warrant for them is null Simon and River might stop in for a visit with the folks and see what's been up. Maybe not.

As for Tracy, well we know he was injured and had to recouperate. By the time he was better his squadron may have been given a new assignement. So Tracy was probably transferred to a different unit. And as for the quote "you carried me through the war", we know the war went on for quite a while. So he was no doubt reffering to before then. Or perhaps at some point after Du Khang he was hurt or transferred, we may never really know.

Wow, my post wouldn't end. It just went on and on... I usually never have such meaningful convo's like this.... I think I've grown...

If I'm a bitch, then life just got interesting

I'd just like to edit this post for one more comment, I reread what you said about the father caring more for Simon than River, and yes, looking back I see it too. Remember in the time of these high class societies male children were looked at as the promise and continuation of the family line, while the daughters were seen as someone to marry off to another high end family. Not to say the parents thought less of her since he replied

River: "When do I..."
Dad: "Many years"

And they do spend the money sending her to the best Academy in the core. They couldn't have known the Academy would turn out to be The Assasin's Recruitment Guild.

I stand by my opinion though that it's a matter of keeping their place, thus remaning blissfully ignorant.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 6:19 PM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:

It's part of the fact that they (the parents) so obviously care for Simon, that I'm confused by their relationship with River. They simply don't seem to care for her as much... Even at the beginning of Safe, the Dad acts much more fatherly toward little Simon than little River.

I don't know. Maybe Simon's love for her is so on his sleeve that it makes his parent's seem so cavalier. Or maybe it was a lack of genuine care from the parents that made Simon so protective of his sister.

And it surprises you that a father will relate to or speak more to his son than his daughter? The older son that he can relate to? EDIT: The son that he actually had to speak to about important matters about in that scene?

You really seem to be stuck on this parents not caring about River and/or Simon thing. Are you going to consider anything else? Or are you stuck in your thought that this is true and there is nothing that anyone here can say that will change your mind?

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 6:46 PM

TEALCANDTRIP

It's just my initial take on the scenes. I just wanted to see what other people, who may have thought or debated the issue before thought. No offense, and I'm not particularly cemented into any viewpoint yet.

"I also hear that there's something called Firefly, which is either a canceled science-fiction television show or a new religion, I'm not clear on that. Either way, prayers for the resurrection are involved." – Lore Sjoberg

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 7:04 PM

DAVESHAYNE

Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:
It's just my initial take on the scenes. I just wanted to see what other people, who may have thought or debated the issue before thought. No offense, and I'm not particularly cemented into any viewpoint yet.

Eh, we live for these discusions. Well I do at any rate and enough other people get involved with them that I suspect I'm not alone. Hearing other viewpoints is never not good.

David

"A lot of people are asking me, you know, what exactly is Firefly? It's a tv show you morons!" - Joss Whedon

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 7:10 PM

RHYIANAN

I always got the impression that the Tams thought that River was taken care of at the academy and that Simon was just throwing things out of proportion. Do you remember what their mother said when he confronted the Tams about the letters? It was something to the effect of "Oh, she's just playing another one of her games with you".

Part of this perception could be because they were raised by a nanny or governess (as stated above) and that the Tams didn't really know River as well as Simon. Therefore, since he knew her better, he picked up on her pleas for help while they were pretty much blind to them.

So because they truly didn't think that she was in trouble, the conversation with the father trying to keep Simon from saving River was more of him saying "you've got something good here, don't throw it away for no good reason."

Social standing is also big with the Tams, but I don't actually think that they just abandoned their daughter...They were just too occupied with other things to actually realize she was in trouble.

Wash: Yeah, but psychic? That sounds like science fiction.
Zoe: You live on a spaceship, dear.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 7:41 PM

MISSTRESSAHARA

Quote:
Originally posted by Rhyianan:
I always got the impression that the Tams thought that River was taken care of at the academy and that Simon was just throwing things out of proportion. Do you remember what their mother said when he confronted the Tams about the letters? It was something to the effect of "Oh, she's just playing another one of her games with you".

Part of this perception could be because they were raised by a nanny or governess (as stated above) and that the Tams didn't really know River as well as Simon. Therefore, since he knew her better, he picked up on her pleas for help while they were pretty much blind to them.

So because they truly didn't think that she was in trouble, the conversation with the father trying to keep Simon from saving River was more of him saying "you've got something good here, don't throw it away for no good reason."

Social standing is also big with the Tams, but I don't actually think that they just abandoned their daughter...They were just too occupied with other things to actually realize she was in trouble.

Wash: Yeah, but psychic? That sounds like science fiction.
Zoe: You live on a spaceship, dear.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'll agree with that up to a point. I do believe they loved her, it's obvious by seeing that they would let her go to a school of her choice. But my point in that they wanted to remain ignorant of any possible trouble shows in that they never really tried to find out.

Ok, so yes they thought River was playing a little game with Simon. I think of kids who go to camp and scream at their parents to come get them one day, then write how wonderful a time they're having and hate to leave. But for Simon's sake, just to ease his mind, I would have expected them to at least check up on her. Maybe they did, maybe the Academy made a censored tape showing that River loved it there and was excelling. Maybe they talked to the officials of the school who marvelled over her brilliance and gave them a glowing report; my point being that they were willing to believe that things were fine, that nothing could be wrong, and that thier son and daughter were playing a game, and let it rest. Bad example, but there are people today that are willing to turn their heads than believe someone close to them are hurting their children.

But as parents you would think, seeing how upset Simon is over the so obvious clues, that they would at least consider the possibility something may be wrong. The man went to the level of talking with people from the underground. How much more proof do those parents need to see there may have been a problem?

I stand by blissful ignorance. They love them for sure, but an enemy of The Alliance they do not want to be. And after the break out you know they dis-owned the both of them. *sigh* People, even in families, can be short sighted.

If I'm a bitch, then life just got interesting

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 7:58 PM

THEREALME

Regarding the Tracey question, it is possible that Mal and Zoe are the only ones left from a particular platoon (an organization of perhaps 30 soldiers) and that Tracey was a member of a different platoon in the same company (an organization composed of perhaps three platoons). So they could fight together in the same (larger) unit, while Mal and Zoe could be the only ones left from the smaller sub-unit.

Also, as casualties mount in a war, shattered remnants of units might be combined into battle-worthy units. So, perhaps Mal and Zoe are the only ones left from the platoon as it was at the START of the war, and maybe Tracey joined them later.

TheRealMe, First Officer of the Sereni-Tree

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 20, 2006 10:29 PM

TEALCANDTRIP

A few more thoughts:

Here's the transcript from the deleted scene:

SIMON:Mal was there with you.

ZOE: He was my sergeant. In command of thirty-odd grunts -- five days in, there were so many officers dead he commanded two thousand. Kept us
together, kept us fighting, kept us sane. By the time the fighting was over he had maybe four hundred still intact.

SIMON:That's a hell of a --

ZOE:I said the fighting was over. But you see they left us there. Wounded, and sick, and near to mad as can still walk and talk. Both sides left
us there while they 'negotiated the peace'. For a week. And we just kept dying. When they finally sent in Medships, he had about a hundred and
fifty left, and of our original platoon, just me.

Now I'm not a military person at all, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. But I read this as: at the BoS, Mal was sergeant of a platoon of thirty privates. We know at some point in the war (less than a year before the Battle of Serenity, my guess is 6-8 months before), Tracey was one of a private under Sergeant Reynolds. In the Message, Tracey actually refers to Mal as Sarge when their CO goes all cowardly lion.

So I have to go with Dave's theory that Tracey was too badly wounded at Du-Khang to be one of the thirty at Battle of Serenity.

"I also hear that there's something called Firefly, which is either a canceled science-fiction television show or a new religion, I'm not clear on that. Either way, prayers for the resurrection are involved." – Lore Sjoberg

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 21, 2006 2:21 PM

DONCOAT

My personal feeling is that the Tams (senior) were in denial about River's situation. They simply were unable to believe that an Alliance school would harm their daughter.

Let's bring it into a more familiar context. Note: I'm not trying to make any sort of political point, just to give an example.

Think of Gabriel Tam as a prominent local attorney (of our time) who is active in many civic organizations, including (perhaps) the currently in-office political party. He sincerely believes in the things that party stands for.

Now he's approached by someone high up in that party and told that his daughter has been accepted into a highly selective new school for gifted children that's run by a consortium of the party and several megacorporations (say, Microsoft and DuPont). Naturally he's thrilled and honored by this distinction. He happily agrees to send her and brags about it to all his friends (who are also active in the party organization).

So a few months go by, and all of a sudden he's confronted by his son with a wild claim that his daughter is being abused and harmed at school. His evidence? Some ambiguous comments in the girl's letters.

Now, how is Gabriel Tam likely to respond to these claims?

I don't have any problem at all believing that he'd react just exactly as he does in 'Safe'. The idea that HIS government would do anything bad to HIS daughter is simply unthinkable. It's much easier to conclude that his son is stressed out at work and having a touch of paranoia. He'd be more likely to send Simon to a shrink than take his claim seriously.

As to the issue of Tracey, I'm with those who suggest that he was either injured or had transferred out by the time of Serenity Valley. If his wounds at Du Khang (or elsewhere) were serious enough to land him in a hospital for a while, it wouldn't be at all unusual for him to be attached to a new unit upon his release.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don't disagree on any particular point.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 21, 2006 5:15 PM

PENGUIN

One thought that I had concerning the Tams feelings towards River. There are some cultures that value boys above girls. Perhaps what happened to Simon mattered more to them than what happened to River.

Just a thought...

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 21, 2006 7:56 PM

TEALCANDTRIP

Ooh ooh ooh, in particular, doesn't the Chinese culture value boys over girls? Americans seem to be going towards an ever more equal boy-girl culture (even if we're not there yet, you have to admit it's better than it used to be). I wonder how merging with a culture that values men over women would have an affect on that.

Saffron, though her particular story was a lie, makes it clear that the handling of women is enough like property on some worlds that her story was plausible. And Mal is somewhat surprised, though he does accept that it could happen, that some men would even kill wives that don't please them.

Then again we have Zoe and Wash... and it's clear who wears the pants in that relationship. Still, is Zoe so strong in part because she had to overcome those prejudices early in life?

"I also hear that there's something called Firefly, which is either a canceled science-fiction television show or a new religion, I'm not clear on that. Either way, prayers for the resurrection are involved." – Lore Sjoberg

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:18 PM

NCBROWNCOAT

Doncoat,
The scenario you described also is similar to the attitude that most children received when they complained that a priest sexually abused them (if they ever did complain)
The parents likely would react, "Father such and such would NEVER hurt my son, don't you say such things" and we now know how much was going on.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:35 PM

MALBABE

I think you hit it right there. Simon's love for River both overshadows all else, and is a direct reaction to the "stilted" lifestyle they live with their parents. I think their parents are very social conscious, and this ran their parenting from birth, with both, causing them to have a very tight relationship together.

"I aim to misbehave."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:40 PM

MALBABE

I agree that the male child would have dominance in this instant, part of the issue, also, could be that River is so very genius, she intimidates the parents (or the father, in this case) and that has the dad leaning towards Simon over River.

"I aim to misbehave"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 1, 2006 4:23 AM

BLINKER

Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:
In 'Safe' did Simon's parents know, or the very least have an idea of, what was happening to River? They seem to be very uncomfortable with her coming to visit. They ignore Simon when he suggests something is wrong. They just don't seem to care about their daughter very much. Why not? Did they agree or were they worried about losing their own standing or what? After all, they seem to care about Simon enough, so why not River?

There's an interesting fanfic that speculates on exactly those questions:

http://www.fireflyfans.net/sunroomitem.asp?i=3997&nid=5868

_________
Sliders: Gate Haven - http://slidersweb.net/blinker

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE