A Meathead Watches Gilmore Girls (“Sadie, Sadie”)
Notes
I enjoyed my brief respite but this show ain’t gonna watch itself.
“Sadie, Sadie”
In case you’re wondering, this show finished its first season with Lorelai and Rory twirling with one another in the center of Stars Hollow, each having achieved love. Rory finally had the stones it took to tell Dean how she felt about him, that she loved him, and that he was the one that she wanted, her life at Chilton and its incessant bullies be damned. And Lorelai had been proposed to by Max Medina after he’d sent 1000 yellow daisies to…
*needles scratches across the record*
*record player bursts into flames*
*the “Oh the humanity!” guy gets to take his favorite catchphrase out for a spin*
I’m now remembering what it was exactly that motivated the respite. It wasn’t my wife and I moving, although that was part of it, and it wasn’t the holiday season, although that was also part of it, but it was definitely me having watched the first season’s finale and thinking to myself, “Ehh, what if I didn’t keep watching?”
But then she and I sat together in bed after she’d and our older daughter had endured a nasty fender-bender on an icy road and I said, “Let’s watch something…” and I scrolled to Gilmore Girls and there we were, right back in Stars Hollow, no more than a few hours after the last episode had ended.
No, literally, no more than a few hours. In fact, the second season opens with Lorelai and Rory strolling through the center of Stars Hollow, presumably very close to if not right on top of where the first season had ended. And everywhere there are yellow daisies. Lorelai’s (presumably desperate) plan to get rid of the daisies that Max Medina had flooded her workplace with was to run around frantically throwing them everywhere.
Then the weirdness begins. Patty, the town’s dance instructor, is talking to Lorelai about the proposal – because of course she already knows – and then she’s rightly asking if Luke knows. Because Luke should know, Patty insists, because Patty knows what everybody but Lorelai does: that Luke has a thing* for Lorelai. There were hints of Luke’s interest during the entire first season, including literally everything that happened during the entire first season, but some Lorelai continues to plead ignorance.
But she doesn’t act ignorant. She agrees to tell Luke and when she does, she’s wishy-washy about it, almost as if knows that telling Luke about Max Medina’s proposal would hurt Luke, but why would it hurt Luke if Luke doesn’t have a thing for Lorelai, the position she’s taken since the outset of the show? And then to confuse things even further, Luke is simultaneously congratulatory and cautious, warning Lorelai that she needs to think through her marriage plans. Because of course Luke is going to be put into a situation in which he coaches Lorelai through her engagement to Max Medina. Absolutely. Here I’ll note only that it’s a shame that the fictional Luke killed the dogs that belonged to the show’s entire writing staff, because he does nothing in this show but suffer humiliation after humiliation.
I should also add that up to now, Lorelai hasn’t actually accepted Max Medina’s marriage proposal. Rory and Lorelai go to Richard’s and Emily’s castle for their weekly dinner. Rory’s grandparents have discovered that Rory is in the top three percent at Chilton and are beyond proud, proposing a party for the following week, and they suggest that Rory bring somebody. While this is happening, Lorelai slips into another room to phone Max Medina – she wants to talk with him about what she talked with Luke about earlier: how a marriage would actually work. But in the process of trying to have this conversation – one that you’d obviously have over the phone – Lorelai realizes that she’s ready to say yes. Then she slips back into the room with her daughter and her parents and she gives Rory the knowing look of a mother-who-just-accepted-the-marriage-proposal-of-the-world’s-most-boring-man-and-also-a-character-who-has-serious-boundary-issues-with-his-teenaged-students-but-whatever and then Rory and Lorelai lie to Richard and Emily about their happiness. Lorelai doesn’t think to tell her mother that she is newly engaged.
Cut to a week later, and Rory has brought Dean to celebrate her grades. Richard is suspicious of Dean from the outset, disgusted upon his arrival and seething throughout their meal. He finally snaps, giving Dean the absolute business – here’s video evidence – about being precisely the sort of boy that Rory has no business being around. Rory is horrified at her grandfather’s behavior and rightly says so, going so far as to storm out of the house (good for her) while Richard insists that he has done nothing wrong.
Lorelai and Emily, usually the ones screaming at one another, find themselves in the middle. Lorelai says as much and is later forced to play the peacekeeper, reminding Rory that Richard’s meltdown was a result of him remembering Lorelai at the same age. She councils Rory to consider forgiveness and notes that he only go so angry because he loves her so much, a conceivably dangerous lesson to teach, but in that this is the first time Richard’s ire has been aimed at Rory, perhaps a fair one. Meanwhile, Emily listens to Richard rage incessantly about Dean’s inappropriate existence and then the phone rings.
It is Sookie calling to set up a surprise party and would Emily be available?
Emily says she will call back and hangs up, walking into Richard’s office and telling him that he will be apologizing to Rory come morning. He gurgles as he objects but before getting anything substantive out, Emily tells him that Lorelai is engaged and that she didn’t know and that she cannot stomach the idea of enduring the same ignorance of Rory’s life.
There it is – enough of a thread to keep our attention. Emily is a character who knows the score and acts accordingly. Her daughter didn’t think to tell her mother that she was engaged. It didn’t cross her mind as far as we know. That is how little Emily’s encouragement/approval/knowledge matters to Lorelai. To be fair, we’ve seen Emily easily earn that sort of exclusion. She has at times behaved in truly contemptible ways. Here though is her breaking point: to risk being cast as far afield from Rory’s life as she has been from Lorelai’s is simply too much for her, even if the cost is telling Richard to stand down.
—
I’ll be back to doing two episodes at a time after this one. I found that to be a useful mechanism of cycling through the first season.
—
*Massive erection
You’re a good man, Charlie Brown.Report
Kudos on writing a post long enough that I had long forgotten that there was an asterisk, and was thus surprised and amused to encounter a M.E. underneath it all.Report
I had the exact same experience, and giggled like a junior high kid.Report
It’s kind-of interesting to see romantic fiction (stereotypically consumed by women) analyzed through the ME lens. I read (I think on Sully’s Dish) about the new version of Pride and Prejudice, and the ME moment was Elizabeth walking up, windblown and with muddy skirts and face aglow from the exercise, as the ME moment for Darcy.
For women, and I think this has much to do with cultural conditioning, ME is more a glow in the belly, and attributed to the possibility of Romantic Love™; we’re not supposed to feel/recognize overt sexual attraction. I hope this is changing in both directions; hope of romantic love as more a recognized response for the boys, and overt sexual attraction more recognized for the girls.
I do know this will alter my future viewing/reading habits to better recognize men’s ME moments, and those times when women’s romantic-longings are actually the female variation of ME.Report
I spent this entire post putting serious thought into the meaning of ME. I couldn’t figure out what it was. Then I finally did.
Two masters degrees everybody! TWO OF THEM!Report
Well, at least you finally rose to the occasion. Sometimes when we get older it takes a little prick to spur our memory. If you’d never gotten it, that would have been pulling a real boner.Report
I hear women talking about M.E. moments all the time. Hell, my girlfriend cannot see Nick Newman on a television screen without having one, and talking about it. Twitter is full of women talking about their M.E. moments. And there’s no confusing them with romantic longings. These are definitely straight up M.E. moments. (A common Twitter thing is for women to post pictures of men and then drool over them collectively. Very much like men have been doing since the dawn of time.)
Thinking about it, I’ve heard women talking about this sort of thing since I was old enough for the girls/women I was around to be talking about it. Now, it may be the case that often in fiction, women’s M.E. moments are represented as romantic longings, but in real life, at least in my experience, women are really up front about it, especially with each other.Report
@chris this is why I said ‘stereotypical,’ it’s also something that has changed greatly during my life time. It’s much easier to say ‘he’s hot,’ without having to go to needing romantic love to feel that then it was (at least in TV and fiction) just a few decades ago. To put it another way, conditioning sort of had girls (at least this girl) thinking that hotness = romance, and there are all sorts of stereotypes and plot ploys not only showing that, but portraying women who responded to ‘hot’ instead of ‘romance’ as fallen and damaged.
But I really don’t want to entangle in the how-women-are here; we do that too often; I was intrigued by the how-men-are.Report
Ah, I got ya.Report
@chris and just to point out the obvious, but that equating romantic love to ME moments was, pre-contraception, probably rooted in the the somewhat twisted wisdom that if you got preggers, you wanted it to be with someone you actually did love and could spend your life with who would be a responsible father. That’s the weight of biology absent modern contraception, in a world focused on male inheritance. That’s not to say there couldn’t have (and weren’t) other models, but our notions of lineage and male heirs and all that resulted in this particular model for most people.Report
RE: the How-Men-Are – I’m not sure that ME and romantic love are all that easily disentangled for (at least a lot of) men either, despite the usual stereotypes.
I clearly remember many, many days (less frequent now, as I am exhausted most of the time, and older all of the time) when I felt ‘lovesickness’ in the pit of my stomach for every reasonably-attractive female that I passed on the street between the ages of say sixteen and sixty – each one had at least one feature that I found attractive, and I felt a palpable *loss* and deep sadness (like, seriously, almost tears, and despondence) as each receded into the distance and I knew I’d never see them again, never speak to them, never touch them, never fall head-over-heels into a torrid affair with them. Gone forever, and we never even knew each other…
Realistically? That mess is M.E. all the way; a biological imperative to spread my seed far and wide with abandon.
But that’s not how it *felt*, in the moment (not saying there were no sexual fantasies or feelings; but those were liberally admixed with less overtly-sexual ones and more thoughts like “I wonder what *she* likes? I wonder how *she* talks? What does it sound like when *she* laughs? Maybe she would love me and I would love her and we’d be happy always.”)
The thing is: saying THIS stuff out loud *almost* sounds more insane/dangerous than the standard “He’s horny and just wants to eff anything that moves” cliches. THAT’S normal, right?
This is actually a topic I’d love to hear Veronica talk about, because she’s had a view from both sides of the fence. I don’t subscribe to this old idea that these things are somehow simpler or easier for men. I may not always understand what women are going through, but man, lemme tell you, they sometimes have no idea what goes on in these heads (heh) of ours either.Report
Glyph,
Actually, you’re either getting a nice fun patina of “I am a Nice and Good Person” over the instincts… or you’ve got more girl in your head than you think (Not At All Uncommon for Smart Kids to be “in the middle” on brain chemistry).
The instincts, as I’ve had them described to me, tend to key in on scent, and be more focused on “sex NOW, figure out how!” Of course, there are tons of ways to tweak/suppress/modify instincts… (not to be completely crass about it, but… %fullness has a lot to do with guys getting horny — if we can talk about women making different choices at different times of their fertility cycles).Report
@glyph as a teenager, I spent time at both my parents homes, different towns, and so had friends in both places; separated by time while at the other parents home; this is common now, but was still relatively uncommon in the ’70’s.
One night, at my Dad’s for the weekend, I went out on a blind date. Had an awesome time, smoked a little, drank a little, made out a little. Didn’t think much of it one way or the other; nice guy, but nothing that spoke of deep interest to pursue. I go home to Mom’s, don’t get back to Dad’s for a month (forever in teenage time.) Only to discover that this boy I’d dated once had built up this incredible myth about me; the things I liked and didn’t like, the things I’d do and my morals and . . . it was horribly shocking, but that zic had almost nothing in common with this zic. That zic was in a deeply committed relationship with said boy, something this zic knew absolutely nothing about. He was the only time I remember being overtly cruel to someone; partly self defense to reclaim my own identity, partly to shock him into seeing that his fantasies of another person really shouldn’t be imposed on that person.
At the time, I also recognized that what he did to me, in his own head, was no different then the tween fixations I’d had on certain TV/music/movie stars; hours fantasizing about love with them, totally inventing a person on a few crumbs of knowledge and experience. So yeah, I don’t think there’s much difference between men’s responses (interpretations of romantic love) and women’s either. It sort of amuses me that the weirdness of going to the binaries — men this, women that, in our cultural stereotypes. Diss the good, loyal, loving men as boring, diss the wild girls as damaged goods. ‘Cause boys get lucky, girls get shamed.
it’s just preggers.Report
Going on memory, but: I do recall that Lorelai doesn’t know Luke’s lady split, and Luke does not bother to mention it until after the proposal has been accepted. So in Lorelai’s world, Luke is unavailable.
I go back to the parallel constructions here, as well; Luke and Dean are cut from the same cloth, at least in Richard and Emily’s eyes, and the welcome Dean receives is deeply embedded in ‘potential mate’ filters Lorelai has; and even though she rebels against her parents and their lifestyle, rebelling doesn’t wipe out all that conditioning. That’s a very big part of how and why she doesn’t recognize Luke and her ME responses, both male and female, to him.Report
Zic,
I am very interested in the concept here of unavailability which at least accounts for the possibility that Lorelai really does know the score between the two of them, but ignores it because of Rachel. I find that possibility quite interesting.Report
There are two things — first, Luke’s unavailable, and his unavailability is reinforced by the Emily/Richard conditioning of the type of man that’s acceptable. Both sort of act in concert, was my take; it’s pretty obvious that on subconscious level, there’s some attraction; these are Lorelai’s constraints on not to going there.
I don’t remember if it’s already happened, but the first time Emily sees Lorelai and Luke together, she actually comments on it, but of course, nobody pays attention to Emily.Report
Welcome back! Good to hear from you again. Don’t make us wait so long next time, okay? I re-watched Seasons 5, 6, and 7 while you were gone. 😉Report
Moving from one home to another is a TERRIBLE hobby that I do not recommend.Report
I used to laugh at the concept of Kindles and Steam. Then I thought about moving my books and games again.Report
I haven’t had to do that in a little over seven years. The memory is foggy. Good luck to you. Hope it salves some of the pain to know that I missed you, meaning these columns seeing my beloved show through such fresh, honest eyes. Not sucking up or anything. 😉Report
I didn’t interpret Lorelai’s silence as not thinking about telling Emily, but rather not wanting to deal with her disapproval. (“Really, Lorelai? A high-school teacher?”) Putting it off is a fairly dumb strategy, since when she does tell, she’ll get that plus “Why did you keep this from me?” and possibly “Were you ashamed to tell me about this man? I don’t blame you.”, but having to face Emily always turns Lorelai into an emotional teen-ager.Report
Also, if you could make the next review either one or three shows, it would keep you in sync with the AV Club reviews (which are always two shows), which I find handy.Report