Re: Disapprove?
Mark Foss (mhfoss@web.apc.org)
Tue, 17 Mar 1998 09:27:23 -0500 (EST)
>
>>Gayle writes:
>>
>I disagree that Neil was being objective and logical in this
>>episode. He was acting out of fear. It was quite obvious that Alan
>>Denson was too sensitive to be a sandbagger. He knew it and told Neil.
Willie knew it and told Neil. Neil was afraid of losing him, and chose to
manipulate Denson, and terrorize his fiance, indirectly causing both their
deaths.
>>
>Leaving aside the issue of Neil's morality in terrorizing Denson's finance,
I have to disagree with the idea that Denson was "too sensitive" to be a
Sandbagger. Yes, he rushed back to London to comfort Sally -- which shows
some sensitivity. But he did decide to stay in the Section -- which shows
(arguably) he's just like all the other Sandbaggers: choosing respect over
love (fear of intimacy), as Diane might say.
>
>I do agree that Neil was acting out of fear, and that he indirectly caused
both their deaths. Isn't that ironic? If Neil had just trusted his own
intuition about Denson, he would have come around on his own. He was so sure
about Denson: "I thought I knew him." Intuition (as opposed to logic) is not
one of Neil's strongsuits.
>
>At the same time, the episode shows how Neil is a mirror image for
Wellingham -- think of C's comments about W's use of innuendo and
photographs to force the resignation of a key MP. Neil is critical of
Wellingham for this kind of manipulation and C says it's "nothing short of
blackmail"; Neil doesn't seem to see the irony.
>>
>>
>