TWW: Constituencies and reliefs
Mar. 15th, 2023 11:39 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shallowness5.5 Constituency of One
I really did like this episode, they did a great job on all the slow reveals, but took issue in that Josh has been working with these people for years and years. If he didn’t like a fuss on his birthday, surely this should have been long established. I suppose the counter argument is it was the reaction he felt he needed to exhibit to the The Washington Post story about him. As was noted in the podcast, his reaction to said story was a complex one, well written and well acted.
Having noted that the previouslies were Josh/Amy heavy with a slice of Zoey’s trauma impacting on Abbey and Jed, Amy having Josh’s tie was subtle. Hrishi rightly pointed out on the podcast that Donna knew full well what had happened the night before and everything she did this ep was laden with that knowledge.
I thought they did a good job of showing why Will took the new position (and he’d pretty much got traded by Bartlet). I bought that he was frustrated by what Toby was doing (and both characters had a valid perspective, Toby who’d been there for so long wanting to think about legacy, while Will was being offered a chance to look to the future for the party.) I doubted Toby and his calendar could control the narrative. They had quite the discussion on the podcast about loyalty to ‘our guys’ and the further layer of loyalty to ‘our guys as written by Sorkin’ that some fans were feeling. I think it turns out that I was more casual, distanced by the timelag for when it would be aired over here, distanced by it being set in another country’s political set-up, and hey, only rewatching it all nearly two decades on. So, I don’t feel betrayed by Will right now, although I can see why Toby does. Hrishi went pretty deep with the metaphors of divorce versus family, while I’d just been buying the office politics and politics politics as credible.
(But Amy’s jibe about the cult around Bartlet had some merit.)
Amy was increasingly the wrong shape for her job, because we knew this push on domestic violence was her doing, not Abbey’s, and eventually Bartlet realised it. It’s a real sign of intimacy and reminder that Amy knew the Bartlets from way back when that he let slip that he’d known Abbey was hiking via Zoey, not that he’d talked to her himself.
CJ and Leo had a spat (another one) about the report. The environmental argument was made, but only in passing, but the list of energy sources was a reminder of how far renewable technology has come already for me. Another reminder of when this show was made was a reference to videos, as in VCRs, kids. It was slightly more minor than her recent unhappinesses, or perhaps it would get overshadowed by Josh’s mistake, and she chose to do as Leo wanted and publicly take her statement back despite having made clear how it looked professionally.
I kept expecting the ex-boyfriend who was calling CJ to turn out to want to talk to her about something work-related, but no, it was just there for the CJ/Toby could’ve been/maybe was, and context or contrast for when Intern Ryan tried to ask her out, and CJ had to be doubly withering because of his entitlement. (He had a moment of relative humanity when Josh asked him about reading his own press. )
Oh, Josh. The previously had reminded us of his need not to let Leo down, and he was also obviously guided by complicated reactions to the puff piece and Amy. But there was also the same old arrogance. So, despite various people advising a different approach, Josh steamrolled on.
Unlike the podcast, I didn’t buy the argument about building an expensive missile defence system that didn’t work as a deterring signal for hostile countries. (Maybe I would have had it had come from a military source.) Him wanting the jobs for his constituency, I got and Josh should have given him something. Josh’s professional mistake was further complicated by his not being able to attend to Amy, who had fired herself. (I loved that Donna was big enough to try to push Josh towards Amy at one point in all this.) It all made the finale of him walking in on the surprise party—where even the President, looking for some moment of respite, was present—with the letter of his personal failure. Potent drama.
5.6 Disaster Relief
First of all, I liked the CJ and Donna debrief on the night of the party, the content of it and the informality of it. To me, it was a big deal that Donna was coming outdoors to meet Josh, (they raised how rare it was for us to follow Bartlet on a visit out of the White House on the podcast, which it was, but this was already unusual and happened earlier in the ep.) From that and Josh’s fit of shouting, it was obvious that this was an episode where they filmed on location. The scale of the disaster scene was impressive. (Ah, apparently they did use early CGI according to the podcast.)
What became increasingly obvious this episode, (and I think had been building up in the previous one, which I’d watched just before), was how much pressure was bearing down on Leo from the staff’s screw-ups and tensions and Bartlet’s absence. I totally got why Toby was hostile to Angela being brought in – and loved that he showed his loyalty to Josh in very Tobyish ways. (As was pointed out on the podcast, there was progression.) That was a Toby who was rocked by what he felt was Will’s disloyalty. But we learned that Angela (easier to understand in the White House than some car park) had been Leo’s deputy in a previous role, so he felt she would be loyal and trustworthy, having been let down by Josh. (But we’re only invested in the past as explaining the present as viewers! This time, I was rooting for ‘our guys’.) Still, I couldn’t get too mad at Leo (even if he should totally get Margaret a more ergonomic chair).
And Josh had messed up bigtime and deserved some punishment, but as Donna launched an operation to save his ego, Leo had removed his responsibilities but left him his title, his staff and a sense of hollowness. Josh still tried to fix things Joshily. Ryan recognised the force of Donna when she’s looking out for Josh and was sympathetic.
We also got to see Russell stepping up politically and the outlines of how Will’s new role would work – no different in terms of turning up for walk and talks and meetings and a new reason for Toby’s aggro towards him.
CJ had won her point about letting Bartlet look presidential, and the timestamps for the trip were amusing as Uncle Fluffy appeared and connected, but we were also seeing it through CJ and Charlie’s eyes as the logistics had to scramble to catch up. And there was all this stuff in Washington that Leo really wasn’t qualified to deal with, what with the military’s understandable gripes and international affairs, on top of what I’ve already covered.
And CJ called her president and work dad out on it, on all of it, and it was great. Go, CJ! [Edited for typos 30/5/25.]
I found I’d saved this link to a real The Washington Post article from 2018 about nostalgia for The West Wing, specifically channelled through The West Wing Weekly podcasts. It’s around the time of their live tour when they were discussing the end of season 4.
I really did like this episode, they did a great job on all the slow reveals, but took issue in that Josh has been working with these people for years and years. If he didn’t like a fuss on his birthday, surely this should have been long established. I suppose the counter argument is it was the reaction he felt he needed to exhibit to the The Washington Post story about him. As was noted in the podcast, his reaction to said story was a complex one, well written and well acted.
Having noted that the previouslies were Josh/Amy heavy with a slice of Zoey’s trauma impacting on Abbey and Jed, Amy having Josh’s tie was subtle. Hrishi rightly pointed out on the podcast that Donna knew full well what had happened the night before and everything she did this ep was laden with that knowledge.
I thought they did a good job of showing why Will took the new position (and he’d pretty much got traded by Bartlet). I bought that he was frustrated by what Toby was doing (and both characters had a valid perspective, Toby who’d been there for so long wanting to think about legacy, while Will was being offered a chance to look to the future for the party.) I doubted Toby and his calendar could control the narrative. They had quite the discussion on the podcast about loyalty to ‘our guys’ and the further layer of loyalty to ‘our guys as written by Sorkin’ that some fans were feeling. I think it turns out that I was more casual, distanced by the timelag for when it would be aired over here, distanced by it being set in another country’s political set-up, and hey, only rewatching it all nearly two decades on. So, I don’t feel betrayed by Will right now, although I can see why Toby does. Hrishi went pretty deep with the metaphors of divorce versus family, while I’d just been buying the office politics and politics politics as credible.
(But Amy’s jibe about the cult around Bartlet had some merit.)
Amy was increasingly the wrong shape for her job, because we knew this push on domestic violence was her doing, not Abbey’s, and eventually Bartlet realised it. It’s a real sign of intimacy and reminder that Amy knew the Bartlets from way back when that he let slip that he’d known Abbey was hiking via Zoey, not that he’d talked to her himself.
CJ and Leo had a spat (another one) about the report. The environmental argument was made, but only in passing, but the list of energy sources was a reminder of how far renewable technology has come already for me. Another reminder of when this show was made was a reference to videos, as in VCRs, kids. It was slightly more minor than her recent unhappinesses, or perhaps it would get overshadowed by Josh’s mistake, and she chose to do as Leo wanted and publicly take her statement back despite having made clear how it looked professionally.
I kept expecting the ex-boyfriend who was calling CJ to turn out to want to talk to her about something work-related, but no, it was just there for the CJ/Toby could’ve been/maybe was, and context or contrast for when Intern Ryan tried to ask her out, and CJ had to be doubly withering because of his entitlement. (He had a moment of relative humanity when Josh asked him about reading his own press. )
Oh, Josh. The previously had reminded us of his need not to let Leo down, and he was also obviously guided by complicated reactions to the puff piece and Amy. But there was also the same old arrogance. So, despite various people advising a different approach, Josh steamrolled on.
Unlike the podcast, I didn’t buy the argument about building an expensive missile defence system that didn’t work as a deterring signal for hostile countries. (Maybe I would have had it had come from a military source.) Him wanting the jobs for his constituency, I got and Josh should have given him something. Josh’s professional mistake was further complicated by his not being able to attend to Amy, who had fired herself. (I loved that Donna was big enough to try to push Josh towards Amy at one point in all this.) It all made the finale of him walking in on the surprise party—where even the President, looking for some moment of respite, was present—with the letter of his personal failure. Potent drama.
5.6 Disaster Relief
First of all, I liked the CJ and Donna debrief on the night of the party, the content of it and the informality of it. To me, it was a big deal that Donna was coming outdoors to meet Josh, (they raised how rare it was for us to follow Bartlet on a visit out of the White House on the podcast, which it was, but this was already unusual and happened earlier in the ep.) From that and Josh’s fit of shouting, it was obvious that this was an episode where they filmed on location. The scale of the disaster scene was impressive. (Ah, apparently they did use early CGI according to the podcast.)
What became increasingly obvious this episode, (and I think had been building up in the previous one, which I’d watched just before), was how much pressure was bearing down on Leo from the staff’s screw-ups and tensions and Bartlet’s absence. I totally got why Toby was hostile to Angela being brought in – and loved that he showed his loyalty to Josh in very Tobyish ways. (As was pointed out on the podcast, there was progression.) That was a Toby who was rocked by what he felt was Will’s disloyalty. But we learned that Angela (easier to understand in the White House than some car park) had been Leo’s deputy in a previous role, so he felt she would be loyal and trustworthy, having been let down by Josh. (But we’re only invested in the past as explaining the present as viewers! This time, I was rooting for ‘our guys’.) Still, I couldn’t get too mad at Leo (even if he should totally get Margaret a more ergonomic chair).
And Josh had messed up bigtime and deserved some punishment, but as Donna launched an operation to save his ego, Leo had removed his responsibilities but left him his title, his staff and a sense of hollowness. Josh still tried to fix things Joshily. Ryan recognised the force of Donna when she’s looking out for Josh and was sympathetic.
We also got to see Russell stepping up politically and the outlines of how Will’s new role would work – no different in terms of turning up for walk and talks and meetings and a new reason for Toby’s aggro towards him.
CJ had won her point about letting Bartlet look presidential, and the timestamps for the trip were amusing as Uncle Fluffy appeared and connected, but we were also seeing it through CJ and Charlie’s eyes as the logistics had to scramble to catch up. And there was all this stuff in Washington that Leo really wasn’t qualified to deal with, what with the military’s understandable gripes and international affairs, on top of what I’ve already covered.
And CJ called her president and work dad out on it, on all of it, and it was great. Go, CJ! [Edited for typos 30/5/25.]
I found I’d saved this link to a real The Washington Post article from 2018 about nostalgia for The West Wing, specifically channelled through The West Wing Weekly podcasts. It’s around the time of their live tour when they were discussing the end of season 4.
no subject
Date: 2023-03-16 01:58 am (UTC)The episodes I can't really comment on as you're deep in the period I don't remember much of - though I think Disaster Relief is the one where Josh yells at the Capitol building in a huge fit of cringe? - but the tech!! The two things that date the show the most to me are the tech - the big TVs everywhere, the old style computer monitors, the flip phones!! - and, more subtly, the enormous width of the men's ties, especially in the early seasons.
I remember at one point during early S5 on the podcast they talk about how different the show feels in the immediate post-Sorkin eps due to the first four seasons having a very 'us against the world' feel, that even when the characters disagreed with each other you still felt that they loved and supported each other and would always be a big semi-happy family, while that disappeared entirely in early S5. The new writers were a lot more willing to explore more negative emotions and reactions, and maybe it is more realistic than Sorkin's idealism, but...it's also a bit depressing. I agree that Will didn't deserve the hate for 'switching teams', though! It cracks me up how Josh Malina's response is basically, 'yeah, I was just happy I still had a job, I would have played anything they put in front of me.' You can't say he isn't honest!
no subject
Date: 2023-03-18 12:18 pm (UTC)Heh. Yes, it is.
The two things that date the show the most to me are the tech - the big TVs everywhere, the old style computer monitors, the flip phones!! - and, more subtly, the enormous width of the men's ties, especially in the early seasons.
And the pagers! But, yes, the tech and some of the fashion do date it, and sometimes the geopolitical/social details jump out at me. I don't know how older teenagers and young adults viewing it percieve it.
It's true that this far more fracuted and fractuous team as family is more depressing - they fought to hard to win this second term and what are they doing with it? It's dramatically engrossinging, and, as you say, perhaps more realistic, but quite..brave to change tack so much, given everything.
It cracks me up how Josh Malina's response is basically, 'yeah, I was just happy I still had a job, I would have played anything they put in front of me.' You can't say he isn't honest!
Heh, yes, and given that he faced and faces so much fannish negativity, it's probably healthier for him.