I never said Peele was omniscient. Watch Peele throughout
the series without the hatred and contempt he generates in the viewer.
I know he does, because he is not a nice or sympathetic character, he
isn't supposed to be. But, he is very good at his job and he has an awful
lot of political saavy.
Examples: "A Question Of Loyalty"--Peele was not fooled by the
attempts by Warsaw station to pin Mike with the
failed operation. Right from the beginning he realized
he was being conned.
"Opposite Numbers"--Peele is one step ahead of Neil
the entire time. He is in command of the situation
and knows how to take swift, decisive action.
I like Peele as a character, even though I don't like him as
a person. Like the later introduction of John Tower Gibbs, Neil needs
strong opposition in order to make his character's good points shine
through.
In fiction, I dislike stupid antagonists. What is the point
of triumphing over mediocrity and stupidity? Where is the victory in
beating an unarmed opponent in a game of wits? The reader/viewer has
to feel that the protagonist has actually struggled to achieve by the
end of the story.
Peele is a good career bureaucrat, not an intelligence officer,
but a manager. Since he is Deputy Chief, he has to have some ability,
otherwise he wouldn't have risen that far. Can you imagine Wellingham
agreeing to an incompetent in that position?
Ken Crist
kayuucee@cfar.umd.edu