This episode has been a bit tough for me to crack, so bear with what will probably be a post full of wandering ideas. The main anxiety in the episode, it seems to me, centers around communication. But communication in this incredibly broad sense, which includes not just literal words, but also emotions, behavior, and just general fellowship (by which I mean, connections and relationships between people).

There are a ton of examples of characters who can't communicate through language, and so struggle to communicate in other ways. No one can understand Femi--they try to "get through" to her, as Nikki puts it to Helen, but they can't. However, emotionally, they understand her. They've figured out enough about her background, and observed enough about her behavior, to have a really clear sense of how much Femi is suffering. That's actually rather fascinating, when you stop to think about it. Femi could be completely isolated, with everyone leaving her alone, but she's not, and they don't. Then we've got Al, whose accent is completely incomprehensible, but when Shaz mocks her for it, Al's violent response isn't at all incomprehensible. She makes herself heard, loud and clear.

What's interesting is that the prison officers don't seem to recognize the inability to communicate amongst the inmate. Sylvia insists that Femi actually understands more than she lets on, and right before Femi gets beat up for trying to use the phone, Sylvia starts throwing all this bureaucratic language at her: read this sign, talk to your personal officer, etc. Not only is she speaking to Femi as if Femi actually reads and understands English, but she's speaking to Femi as if Femi understands Protocol, which is really another layer of meaning which is imposed upon language. In this scene, Sylvia is speaking a foreign language within a foreign language to Femi, and doesn't even seem to recognize that she's doing it. And at the risk of inciting a riot of my own, I would be remiss if I didn't point out that Helen does something just a tiny bit similar to Sylvia, when she doesn't make Nikki feel heard in that first scene about Femi. Nikki actually introduces the subject with quite a soft energy, but when she feels like Helen isn't hearing her, like she's speaking a foreign language, Nikki starts to get hostile and insistent. But the person who is really speaking the foreign language is Helen, because the truth is, she IS concerned about Femi, and yet she is keeping Nikki at a distance with OfficialSpeak, rather than letting Nikki see her emotions. In a scene shortly after, when Helen complains to Thomas that she's got 101 things to think about, the very first one she mentions, the #1 item on her list, is Femi. A problem she's already started investigating, given how much more info she has now than what Nikki told her. But that's not what she communicates to Nikki.

The natural and clear communication amongst the inmates, as opposed to the communication chasm between the officers and the inmates, is a reflection of this more general idea of fellowship, which I mentioned above. The inmates organize their lives around their relationships, be it Maxi reminding Tina and Al that they have to stick together if they want to take charge of the wing, or Julie J fantasizing about the life she and Julie S are going to have together when they're released, or Yvonne mothering and protecting Charlotte and Shaz. But it's also the more general idea of mutual obligation and caring, and this is the idea of fellowship which Nikki embraces. Nikki feels an obligation to Femi as a fellow human being, an obligation which Yvonne, very notably, does not feel.

But in the end, the prisoners are very limited as to what they can do for eachother in this spirit of fellowship. We see this visually, when Nikki is trapped behind the fencing when Femi is being attacked. We also hear it explicitly, when Nikki makes demands for things, and is told she doesn't have the right to make those demands. Demands to see how Femi is down in solitary (since when can a prisoner demand to go down to solitary to see how another is doing?!?!), demands to know from Helen that Femi is alright, and that things are being done to help her. Helen tells her in no uncertain terms that she has no such rights, and immediately Nikki is nearly as powerless and victimized as Shaz and Femi.

It seems that there is nothing worse than this lack of power, this inability to make yourself heard. It's what inspires Femi's violent action against Sylvia (Nikki narrates this moment by describing Femi as someone who's "depressed and lonely and makes herself heard the only way she can."), and it's what inspires the protest. Later, it's how Caroline convinces the Peckham girls to give up the knives, by reminding them if they stab a screw, they'll be stuck down in solitary where "no one can hear you scream." If this is what persuades the prisoners to drop their weapons, then it's clear there is nothing worse than not being about to make yourself heard.

In a way, this sort of explains the violence which pervades this episode. Al beating up Shaz for making fun of her accent. Yvonne beating up Al in retaliation. Femi hitting Sylvia. Femi getting brutally beat up by the guards. It's like this whole epidemic of violence results from the inefficacy of words. Same with the riot itself. Nikki starts the protest because her conversations with Helen have been ineffective. Helen tries to talk the prisoners down from G3 by telling them what they want to hear (that Femi's been taken care of), but then when they want more information, Helen refuses. She cuts off communication until they stop the violence and go back to their cells. But that just inspires MORE action, starting with Maxi pouring the cup of water on Helen, to the destruction of seemingly all the furniture on G3.

But we're still left with this question of why Helen, of all people, doesn't communicate better in this episode, particularly with Nikki. With everything she's been through running Larkhall, with everything she's been through with Nikki, why? There's this disjointed connection between Helen and Nikki, which really started in the previous episode. But we see the foundation for it in the first scene between Helen and Nikki in this episode. At the start of the scene, Helen thinks she knows what Nikki is asking her about: the appeal. But Nikki says no, "it's not about me." By the end of the scene, when Nikki is going off about Femi's sentence, Helen shouts back at her "I don't make the bloody law Nikki!" Both of them are distancing themselves from an identification with their side. Helen is in law enforcement, and yet she completely divorces herself from any culpability about its effects? Nikki stands up for the underdog, and yet she thinks her interest in Femi isn't about her own self? If one is so estranged from oneself, how can one communicate openly with anyone else?

Because why else would Helen be so concerned about Femi, so upset about the beating, and yet shut Nikki out entirely, not admit or show her concern at all? In that scene after Helen has been down to solitary, and then spoken with Femi via the translator (a scene which is such an utter relief, it made me realize how much tension they were building via the lack of communication), we see how clearly upset Helen is. But I think she's also feeling deeply guilty and responsible and upset and at least somewhat powerless to fix anything. So that when Nikki comes at her, she raises her defenses immediately. Which is so painful to watch--it's the antithesis of watching Helen and Femi finally be able to speak to and understand eachother. Helen and Nikki might as well be on different planets, speaking fundamentally different languages.

What's all this business about mothers and kids?
I don't know what to make of it. I mean, I can describe it, and show how it operates in the episode, but I just cannot figure out how it fits into this broader idea of communication and fellowship. It starts when Sylvia instructs Tina to spit out the gum into Sylvia's hand. If that's not a parent-child moment, I don't know what is. Then there's the whole emphasis on the fact that the PBG aren't "Y.O.s" anymore (young offenders). They're kids without a parent, and meanwhile Femi is a parent without her kids. And she's not the only mom away from her kids, as Yvonne points out a bit later in the episode. In contrast, Yvonne has taken on a parental role with some of the other orphans in the prison. She gives Charlotte about the most loving send-off you can imagine, she reprimands Buki every chance she gets, and she protects Shaz. Oh, and in case we missed the point about these three young'uns, Charlotte tells Yvonne that her time in prison has "been an education." Then later, Thomas tries to communicate with Femi by showing photos of himself as a kid, with his family (btw, did anyone catch the reference to Thomas being fat? Fits in SO nicely with the hunger idea in the last ep). Then he turns it into a kindergarten drawing lesson, where Femi draws her family. So now Femi isn't the mother, she's the kid. And later Buki mocks her with reference to the kid's show: "Give her a Blue Peter badge!" (Is that the second or third reference to Blue Peter in S3?). There are also two references to younger characters' fertility, their potential to become mothers. Maxi makes a rude comment to Sylvia about being on the rag, and after Al attacks Shaz, she tells her "Last girl I attacked with one of these* couldn't have babies." It's strange, I really can't figure out at all what this means.

*a plastic fork

Other Questions
--What's up with Al calling Yvonne "hen" and then Yvonne calling Al "cock" in reply?
--Why does Yvonne invest so much energy in caring for Charlotte and Shaz, and then articulate this philosophy of just looking out for #1? No matter how many times I watch this episode, it doesn't make sense to me.
--What's the symbolism of the riot scene when Helen comes to talk to the wing being staged so much like the battle over the fashion show in S1?

OK, that's all, I've rambled for long enough. I can't wait to hear from everyone else--last week's episode discussion was SO good!

Abzug, it was pleasure to read that, the material about miscommunications was really astute, thank you. Having major computer troubles, can't stay on long enough to even begin to reply, maybe tomorrow if I've x at work--just wanted to offer fulsome praise! As for hen/cock, we did discuss that last year in the Dumb Amer thread, but I can't risk looking for it now or my heap o burnin metal will just crash, I know it. Again, thanks, wonderful post! --e

Wow some great points here, abzug, as always. Just a couple of quick things.

Hen = Scottish term for a female. Can used in an affectionate manner by someone you know but more often used by complete strangers (presumably because they don't know your name!). I'm guessing this might be where the term 'hen night' comes from (i.e. a sort of 'pre-wedding' party attended by women only)

Cock = Not quite so certain on this one (other than the more obvious definitions!). Think it is an abbreviation for 'Cockney' meaning someone from the East End of London but it is definitely used as a form of address down south (i.e. England! Probably more in London). Again it can sometimes be affectionate but more often used by complete strangers. Though it does very much depend on context as it is also used as a derogatory insult!

I suspect there's probably more in the use of these terms besides the obvious Scottish/English clash.

Though we did justify her behaviour in the 'The riot?' thread as follows (though not entirely sure if this is the same scene?)....

Anyway, I'd better go off and actually watch that episode now (or at least tonight)!!

Isn't a Cock a male chicken ? Meaning the opposite of Hen.

Brilliant points, abzug. Well, as always! I find it helps unlock so much more of an episode to first read people's comments and views on that ep and then to watch it again - I pick up so much more stuff.

For now, just a quick note on the hen/cock exchange. I had a quick look in my slang dictionary and came up with the following:

Hen: A woman. A now colloquial pejorative or dismissive term which has been in use since at least the 17th century. It implies an empty-headed, fussy person, usually a housewife.

I can think that someone would apply the housewife image to Yvonne when viewed from the angle of the somewhat bored housewife that lives a one-sided life of being only interested in her kids. It has been pointed out numerous times how motherly Yvonne is towards the younger inmates. What I don't get is why Al would make such a reference to Yvonne when she's only been there 2 minutes.

Cock: 1. A term of address for men. Typically, the word is used in an affectionate, bantering way. 2. Nonsense, rubbish, as in "cock and bull". 3. Penis. Its origin is in the image of the male member either as a strutting fighter or as resembling a chicken's neck or water-valve.

My take on Yvonne addressing Al as "cock" would lean towards the first half of the first definition and maybe a bit of the third (the fighter bit) as well. But she uses it in a derogative way, recognising Al as a she-male, someone with a gender identity problem.

That's it for now, but I'll be back!

Shite. I meant, Helen behaves similarly to Sylvia, not Nikki. That'll teach me to read over my posts first. I edited the one above.

Thanks for bringing in the stuff from the riot thread. In rewatching the episode, I'm still not sure guilt can explain Helen's remoteness in that first scene. It would be a real leap to assume so, because we don't even SEE her with Thomas (or see Thomas at all) until after that scene. In the second Helen/Nikki scene, guilt definitely seems to be a driving factor for Helen's behavior. But I'm definitely open to being convinced.

Thanks for the hen-cock explanations. I particularly like the point about hen being related to Yvonne's motherliness. And yeah, it makes sense for the cock retort to be a reference to Al's masculinity.

I maybe didn't explain it very well but 'hen' is used differently in Scotland. Scots (particularly Glaswegians) use the term a lot as a way of addressing another woman (usually a stranger) so Al using it is perfectly plausible on the surface. For example, a shopkeeper might say "Here you go, hen" when handing you your change. But I like the idea that it is also reinforcing the motherly instincts of Yvonne (like a mother hen really).

Good point, I never thought of the she-male connection. And as liverpoolkiss pointed out, it is also the complete opposite of hen thus making an aggressive statement.

This always bothered me a bit too. I think it's got to do with Yvonne choosing the people she's close to. She doesn't protect just anyone; only those she feels close to. Because none of these were in any immediate danger - it was a big group thing - she didn't feel inclined to be her motherly self. She's not daft: she knows it takes a lot more than she's got to take on everyone at once.

Now Nikki does the complete opposite: she goes out to protect any inmate that needs protecting - not only those she feels especially close to. So this is why she decides to stand up for Femi, and against the Peckham Boot Gang.

I don't know. I did see the similarities, but there are also some differences which I think are important. In S1, there were inmates on every landing: they were all spread out. This time, they're all on G3, packed together so it's harder for the attackers (the POs) to get to them. I think it's important to note that Nikki especially is higher up than she was in S1. This could be seen as her being higher respected by her fellow inmates, or that she is further away from Helen to get through to her. Either way, it's significant.


PS: Sorry haven't been into these discussions lately guys. And apologising in advance if I lose rack with this one too.

Could it be as simple as in S1 this sort of thing brought Nikki and Helen together but in S3 it's what eventually tears them apart?

To me, watching that, I always thought in S1, Helen "got" why the inmates were so upset, she was naive and new in her position so she kinda "took it." However, by the time we get to S3, Helen has established herself and really, in some ways, has become the system she so wanted to change in S1 & 2.

My biggest problem in this episode and the way Helen handles Nikki is that she worked so hard to get Nikki onside in S1, so Nikki thinks they have some give and take because of this. She helps Helen, Helen helps her, reasonable thinking on Nikki's behalf but then when Nikki tries to get that quid pro quo, Helen refuses, showing Nikki she was right in her immediate reservations about Helen becoming AG. Even though we get to see that Helen cares and is taking action on Femi's behalf, she totally isolates Nikki and we all know what happens when Helen shuts Nikki out, just look at S2E2.

Nikki's tone is just as much at issue. It's aggressive, and she's asking for far more than she in fact does have a "right" to. She's a prisoner, and she's not entitled to the information she wants in the way & manner she's demanding. Helen may have a moral obligation to give Nikki more or different information than other inmates because she treats Nikki differently & expects her help & support, but however accountable Helen is, Nikki is as well. Nikki pushes Helen; Helen responds accordingly. There's nothing new or different about their dynamic here, other than the stress they're both under & the growing estrangement that's been building all season.

I agree ekny. The only thing that still sort of troubles me is, in that very first scene, when Nikki first approaches Helen, it's with a very kind tone, it's not insistent or presumptuous, it's sharing a concern. And Helen responds in a very disinterested way. I still can't quite figure out why, unless it just boils down to Helen being overwhelmed and distracted by her new job. Which, in the end, is probably the answer.

I just had a thought on this. When Helen told Nikki about her promotion to GG, Nikki was weary of the news - with or without good reason. Maybe Nikki was being a tad bit selfish, but for whatever reason, she didn't support Helen. Isn't that what love is all about? Supporting the one you love, no matter what, despite the fact that Nikki might suspect it was going to entail a rough ride for her. After that brief encounter after the lifers' meeting, they don't talk about Helen's promotion again. Despite the fact that Nikki doesn't support Helen as GG (and Helen knows this) we find Nikki wanting to make use of Helen's position in this encouter, albeit for the greater good. I think Helen maybe just felt used there for a moment.

I was going to take a parallet tack tp Abzug's brilliant opening post and that this episode shows a sense of dislocation, that situations aren't as they are supposed to be.

1. Fenner and Karen on leave- this leaves a dangerous gap between Helen who is further away from the wing than normal and the lynchpin of the wing, Bodybag, who is in turn, pushed up from her normal position with noone being able to keep a check on her.

2. Recapping to the last episode, you saw Helen in past episodes dealing with situations on the wing and on the level where the action was going on. In the last episode, you saw Helen closeted away from there with Thomas with their good intentions of bringing in NHS records, treating psychological conditions proiperly but 'doing good from on high.' Shed are particularly acute in having an almost Marxist approach in subjecting this to delicate criticism and that changes have to happen at all levels and that prisoners can express their own agenda.

3. Nikki's accustomed 'work relationship' with Helen. While Helen was talking at length about the problems with Femi, she shut Nikki out of the loop, as if she will only deal with liason with people of power and forgetting that Nikki actually has that informal power- she is being seduced by her position. It might be a part explanation of what drew Helen to Thoma. Nikki's evidence of seeing Femi assaulted is startlingly rejected by Helen who at one time would be totally trusted. Nikki's tone of voice is pushy at times yet shifts around to be more reasoning yet it gets nowhere. From the opening moment, that past easy communication, especially unspoken, isn't there.

4. Despite Helen's promotion, the 'same 'shit that goes on' is something that 'makes Nikki sick'. Nikki is chafing at her role of 'keeping her head down and keeping her nose clean when Femi is battered by the prison officers. She is torn in wanting to act, not wanting to make things bad for Helen and pressured by Crystal (whose protest worked last time- the hunger strike) Babs and the Julies.

5. Despite Helen's power, she is impotent or constrained in demanding a real enquiry into how Buki was assaulted- she sees what has gone wrong but is less able to do something about it than when she was Wing Governor when she would have been (a) around more and (B) would have pushed it further.

6. The disjuncture between Nikki's urgently requested help for Femi's language problems and Helen's appearance of doing something 'in due course.' Helen's reply is painful on the ear. In reality Helen knows there's a problem , gets to use an interpreter, but keeps Nikki out of the loop.

7. The lead up to the demonstration shows that Nikki has learnt from Helen- in the very first BG episode she says 'you should all be sacked' and this time that 'those responsible should be disciplined' which is a dead ringer for Helen's call that 'Fenner should be suspended pending an enquiry' and Nikki's requests of Helen in private and in the protest have that same structured feel. I've always felt that the influence between them runs two way. Helen is thrown partly as she is hearing herself speak.

8. What is interesting is that while Nikki talks forcefully during her position as spokesman, her demands are actually moderate ,restrained and achievable. She isn't asking anything that Helen couldn't grant.

9, THe surface of G Wing, with Shell as chief trouble maker is very quiet but Shed suggest a brooding atmosphere of discontent in the run up. Yvonne says that it was time that it kicked off and wasn't supporting Nikki.

10. Nikki, Babs, the Julies and Yvonne have been used to being the muscle and brains to keep order on the wing. The arrival and intervention of the Peckham Boot Gang at least temporarily overthrows that so the row really kicks off way beyond what they wanted and Nikki for once is unable to make her voice heard on the wing.

I must admit that I wax lyrical seeing the protest in action, to the auithentic touch of Nikki standing on a chair to speak, the sit down to 'We shall not be moved' of non violent protest like early CND marches. My all time heart stopping moment is Nikki going down on her own to confront the PBG and hangers on with their knives and relying on only her ability to talk them out of their action. She is outnumbered and not certain of her influence but that is supreme moral courage in acting this way.

Interesting point, Microsofty. Because isn't this also the same general time-period when Nikki does her whole--oh great, you're at the top of the shitpile speech? Which, um, not perhaps the most fuzzy pat on the back. So it's possible there's been a subtler pattern of expectations around support that Helen's had which preexists this little contretemps.

I love this idea, first because I think it's right on the money. And second, because it also plays into this idea of language vs action. Can you understand something if you're not there, observing the behavior? Nikki can describe what's happening all she wants, but it's like the language-only technique can't possibly get through. Helen needs to SEE it, the bruises, the fear, etc like when she goes to visit Femi in solitary. Which is why she the translation is ultimately successful, not just because the language-barrier has been overcome, but because Helen is sharing the experience, not just hearing about it.

I know you've mentioned this in the past, and I totally missed it (AGAIN!) when I was watching. But it's such a wonderful illustration of Nikki's evolution over three seasons. It's also a demonstration of the fact that no matter how much the prisoners understand and use OfficialSpeak, they're still not truly heard, and can't use OfficialSpeak to effect. Hence, the use of "you should all be sacked" or the personal and wing-wide violence which erupts in this episode. So the fact that this scene is staged so similarly to the S1E1 scene highlights that old addage: the more things change, the more they stay the same. Nikki is still a prisoner, no matter what her relationship with Helen, no matter how much self-control she's gained, no matter how much she's learned to speak their language. And so she's still stuck shouting down to Helen, listening to Helen shout back up at her, and no way to overcome that gulf.

Thank you for mentioning this, because the more times I watch the show, the more I start taking Nikki for granted, in terms of her heroism. She truly is an exceptionally courageous character--I'm hard-pressed to think of another one even close on any television program.

1. I hadn't thought of that twist that you shouldn't have to see or experience something to make it real but it is a sad fact that this happens- how clearer could Nikki put it that Femi was assaulted.

2. I groaned when both in the riot and the very first episode, Helen days that Carol / Femi 'are fine.'

3. Amen to that point.

I ought to say that I entirely agree with the previously discussed notion of Yvonne's maternal feelings and, to answer Abzug's first query why she doesn't share Nikki's wider concern is that she'll look after her and 'her own- i.e. those whom she feels a bond. She's still 'us and them' to the screws and doesn't share Nikki's wider concern, especially towards 'that prat Stewart.' There's also a feeling that somehow Yvonne's fight with Al has, for the first time, made Yvonne somehow doubt her tough reputation.

Excellent point abt Yvonne, Richard--the show spends some time illustrating how badly shaken by the experience Yvonne has been. She's not a kid anymore, & taking on someone like Al costs her. And that, above all, has to be borne in mind throughout when assessing what's up with Yvonne. Basically, my feeling's always been: if she doesn't view an individual as "family", then she doesn't care. Period. And "family", for her, is halfway between the mafia-thang and the maternal-thang. Like Nikki, Y's internal code is very consistent. Unlike Nikki, it's got a much narrower focus--and a much more limited set of rewards/reprisals as set responses to how people behave towards her.

I've watched this ep with this question in mind and in the process developed a few thoughts on this. For one I think it goes to show the influence that kids have on a parent's life. Parents with kids are not free to do as they like anymore, they have a responsibility towards their children, they have to consider their children at all times, they are in essence bounded by their children. The same influence filtered into Larkhall with the arrival of the PBG. Since they cannot be regarded as YO's anymore, they must be what? around the age of 18, 19? Yet, these kids come into an established network, infiltrate it, and then take it over just as a kid would do in an adult's (parent's) life. And as with kids, they don't make use of an extensive vocabulary to establish their presence, they make use actions - in this case mostly violence. Typical school yard bullies who pick on the smallest person, Shaz. And what does Shaz do? She goes and hides under her "mom's" bed, just like any kid would do who is scared of a monster. And "mom" takes on the monster and defeats it. All instances of very strong non-verbal communication.

Then we move onto the start of the riot, and on a wing of about 90 adult women, we are left with only 6 women who still think and behave as adults while the other 84 women are out of control, behaving like kids on a playground left without supervision. They feel anonymous and invulnerable. They start acting more like lower animals (dare I say small children?), and they become highly impulsive and unreasoning in their actions. They all (except our 6) have a loss of a sense of individual identity - they look up to the "strong, influential kid" to provide them with a sense of direction. Nikki's only mistake was that she tried to reason with them like an adult would, using words. Caroline steps up, or should I rather say steps down to their level and matches their foolish action with an insightful action. She uses non-verbal communication to strengthen her verbal argument and only then do they believe her, when they can see that she's right. Nikki could have used the very same argument as Caroline did, but without actions to back up her statements, the kids wouldn't have believed her. Children need to see or feel the consequences of their actions before they learn from it, they don't have foresight like adults do.

And after a tough day at school, running wild, what do the big kids do? They have a slumber party! To me that was just plain funny.

I agree microsofty. I've just finished watching the episode, after reading abzugs initial post, and I had a similiar(ish) take on it. I haven't quite formulated all my ideas but thought I'd post what I had.

To me this episode was all about kids - how they communicate, behave, relate to each other, are treated and the problems that they face. As abzug pointed out there are a lot of references to kids.

Even in the initial Helen & Nikki scene, you could argue that Helen was a little childish in her attitude - almost storming off after "I don't make the law".

Femi, who can't understand or make herself understood, is like a little, lost kid who is scared and bewildered. This is emphasised by the two Julies who offer her Smash (mashed potato, convenience food) which I always associate as a kids food. Thomas himself is a big kid, running through the playground (yard). As a kid, he is able to communicate with Femi through picures and simple drawings. When stopped from phoning, Femi throws a 'temper tantrum' and is physically punished for it.

Helen promising "no one is going to hurt you" like she was comforting a small kid, maybe after a nightmare or bullying.

Bodybag is the strict grownup, enforcing rules but who has no idea how to treat or talk to children. Though her face looked like a little kid when Helen offered her the temporary position of 'acting principal'.

The Peckham Boot 'Gang' is your typical, mouthy troublemakers - bullies, making mischief, stealing other kids toys (watches?) and of course starting your basic riot.

The peaceful protest reminded me of a school playground as microsofty already suggested. Emphasised by the chanting, playground fight, phrases such as 'Head Bloody prefect' and the childish prank where Maxi pours the water over the Headteacher (Helen). Even Helens comment that "they will give up when they are hungry" seems more appropriate for kids rather than cons.

Yvonne is the mother hen, looking after her brood.

Shaz is the frightened, bullied kid.

Charlotte transferred to open prison - maybe for 'good behaviour'?

The rest of what I had, microsofty expanded upon already (and a lot better I should add!). Any thoughts?

ETA - Wasn't sure about the drug counselling line - it might have been a joke or it might have been serious. Tempted to think microsofty is right in that she did some drug counselling as part of her qualification 'almost in another life' ( i.e. decades ago).

Wow, thanks guys! I feel much better now, because it was this piece which didn't quite fit. But as with all things (like Thomas chomping his peanut butter sandwich), the piece which doesn't fit winds up being the key to understanding the episode. Is it a stretch to say that the episode shows that when there are obstacles to communication (be they externally imposed, or internal), it's natural and perhaps even expected that human beings will descend into communicating the way children do: with tantrums, by acting out, by abusing others etc. Perhaps that's why Yvonne is so upset after her run-in with Al: she's not a kid anymore, and she's not interested in solving problems the way a schoolyard bully does.

I like your childhood regression idea, abzug. You've summed it up well and I think it fits quite neatly with the episode.

As for Yvonne, this is certainly the most plausible explanation of her behaviour so far. I also didn't understand her attitude to Helen in this episode with the line "It's about time those bloody screws had a good scare .... and that prat Stewart an all". Is there any reason why she might have said that?

I am very impressed with microsoftly's 'kids' metaphor which certainly explains a lot in what is going on. One interesting point is backtracking to the very first episode of BG where Nikki directly tapped into the anger felt and the situation didn't blow off. This could be because Helen was there very quickly and the prison officers didn't provoke the prisoners. This time around, Nikki was undertaking a more ambitious project in seeking restitution for Femi rather than making a protest.

The one key person there was Maxi and I'm not sure where she fits into the kid or adult action. She was inciting the crowd to childishness but there she was (a) being very calculating and (B) had the advantage over Nikki and co of surprise and tipped the whole thing into unruliness. I could be equally persuaded into seeing her as evil adult or evil child.

Regarding Yvonne's remark, she never saw Helen up close and saw a self righteous side of her and was into 'us versus them' mode and possibly the way that Nikki saw Helen at the time of the first episode.

A couple of last points is that, rewatching the episode, I got the feeling that Helen is partly to blame in handling the situation in appearing on the surface to be unresponsive. Bodybag bears the majority of the blame and you wonder how things would have gone on if Karen or Fenner had been there. After Helen evacuated the prison officers from the Wing, she sharpened up considerably and held off Bodybag's inane 'show them who's boss'

I copied some relevant bits and pieces from Wikipedia on Transactional Analysis. I believe the whole thinking behind TA is very much applicable to this episode:

[TA] introduces the idea of a "Life (or Childhood) Script", that is, a story one perceives about ones own life, to answer questions such as "What matters", "How do I get along in life" and "What kind of person am I". This story, TA says, is often stuck to no matter the consequences, to "prove" one is right, even at the cost of pain, compulsion, self-defeating behaviour and other dysfunction.

At any given time, a person experiences and manifests their personality through a mixture of behaviours, thoughts and feelings. Typically, according to TA, there are three ego-states that people consistently use:

Parent ("exteropsychic"): a state in which people behave, feel, and think in response to an unconscious mimicking of how their parents (or other parental figures) acted. For example, a person may shout at someone out of frustration because they learned from an influential figure in childhood the lesson that this seemed to be a way of relating that worked.

Adult ("neopsychic"): a state in which people behave, feel, and think in response to what is going on in the "here-and-now," using all of their resources as an adult human being with many years of life experience to guide them. While a person is in the Adult ego state, he/she is directed towards an objective appraisal of reality.

Child ("archaeopsychic"): a state in which people revert to behaving, feeling and thinking close to how they did in childhood. For example, a person being told off by the boss at work may look down and feel shame or anger, as they used to when being told off as a child.

Every person has all three these interchangable ego states as part of their personality. The ego state that would dominate at any given time depends to a large extent on the situation and can be influenced by the dominating ego state of the other person one is transacting with. Typical examples of TA in this episode would be a dominating Parent in Bodybag, which elicits the Adult in Nikki, but the Child in most of the other inmates. When Nikki approached Helen in the yard to ask about Femi, she was approaching it as Adult-Adult, but Helen's Parent came out looking down on Nikki's Child "you don't have a right to know" (because Parents don't need to explain their actions to Children). Two different styles, both of them classic examples of the Parent-Child transaction, takes place between Yvonne and Shaz (nurturing, security-giving), and Yvonne and Buki (criticising).

If anyone is interested to read more on TA, the whole article on Wikipedia can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_analysis

I'm going to have to reverse my position on this. I think the beating up of Al was Yvonne's last action as an adult/parent, and it took so much out of her that she was like fuck it, I'm going to have fun like all the rest of these kids, screw responsibility or taking care of anyone. Hence the give-the-screws-a-scare attitude.

Microsofty, this TA framework is incredibly interesting! And it does seem to fit remarkably well. To carry the ideas a little bit from the jargon, the idea would be that those who are trapped in a caring dynamic that has a power differential (ie parent-child, guard-inmate), are going to struggle to not be trapped in a dysfunctional style of behavior and communication, one that is very instinctive and deeply-seated. The PBG suffers this about 10x over, because they are both young (children), and heavily institutionalized (inmates). Meanwhile, Nikki thought she was beyond these particularly communication and behavior dynamics, but she's really not, as proven by Helen's treatment of her, and the officers' treatment of Femi, and the riotous behavior of the inmates. The circumstances, be it peer pressure (Nikki) or work pressure (Helen) conspire to keep everyone stuck, incommuncado.

You know, as I'm thinking about it, the thing that's most helpful in this TA framework is the idea that behaving like a parent is just as dysfunctional as behaving like a child. But in the world of BG, that's not completely true. We're supposed to admire Yvonne's sendoff for Charlotte. So loving parent = ok, but disciplining parent <> ok (Bodybag with the gum, Yvonne beating up Al, Helen dismissing Nikki).

I agree. You can, after the fight with Al, Yvonne is absolutely shattered. And, in a later episode, she mentions that she thinks she's "past it". She thinks she's getting too old for all this "I'm-protecting-everyone-like-their-mother" routine.

I know I'm slipping again in the discussion, but just wanted to say this little bit :)

I think Yvonne beating up Al wasn't just to help Shaz... she was trying to hold on to her status as "Top Dog" and knew the PBG were going to challenge this but I also think she did it for all the women on the wing.

Yvonne ruled over the wing fairly, unlike Shell did or Maxi Purvis would have. So her actions that night, though it took all the fight out of her, really, in the end, helped everyone.

What I found most interesting where Yvonne was concerned in this episode is the scene where Nikki is talking to Maxi about her and her poxy mates. What did Yvonne find so interesting about this exchange? Did she want to see if Nikki could handle and diffuse the situation, or was she sizing up Maxi? Come to think of it, it kinda reminds me of the scene from "Tough Love" when Helen is watching Nikki and Caroline from the window. The women in power watching over Nikki.

Yes! But maybe I wouldn't go as far as labelling it as dysfunctional. TA can get a bit technical, I'll try and steer clear of jargon.

Both the adult and the child ego states are split into two halves. The Parent state is split into the Critical Parent and the Nurturing Parent, whereas the Child state is split into the Natural Child and the Adaptive Child.

The Nurturing Parent represents the more affirming and more pleasant qualities of what parents and society do for a person. The Critical Parent behaviours generally represent the corrective behaviours of real parents and the prohibitive messages of society. (Yvonne would be a Nurturing Parent most of the time, whereas the screws would be Critical Parents most of the time).

The Natural Child ego state represents the playful part of human behaviour, from infancy to old age (the wine making episode). The Adaptive Child ego state represents human response which has some negativity in it, some resistance, some reaction and some deeper hostility (the riot).

For example, in a typical Larkhall transaction the Critical Parent state of a screw would elicit an Adaptive Child response from an inmate, as was the case with the riot.

Does this make any sense?

Oh, it definitely makes sense--I think I'm pretty clear on the theory. I didn't use "dysfunctional" in the clinical sense, more as a word to encompass the inability for certain characters to communicate clearly and effectively in this episode.

But yes, it's good to see a distinction drawn between positive "parent"-"child" interactions (Yvonne-Charlotte, Thomas-Femi), and negative ones (Yvonne-Al, Sylvia-PBG, Sylvia-Femi, Helen-Nikki).

I was a bit afraid of a mob uprising as a result of categorising N&H's relationship in terms of a Critical Parent (Helen) in transaction with an Adaptive Child (Nikki), but yes, it is most definitely true of them!

*Phew!* Am I glad you raised it first, abzug!

Great discussion going on here.

Thanks for posting the TA info, microsofty - really interesting stuff and fits well in this context. Only one trivial question - is there any significance in changing quickly between adult & child , other than situation (e.g. one minute Nikki is the adult, the next she is the child)? I couldn't tell from the info if rapid fluctuation between the states was normal.

OK! Though I'm not sure I would consider Yvonne beating Al up as a 'parent' attitude. To me it came over more as two kids fighting .... with Yvonne giving Al a typical 'Glasgow kiss' (headbutt). I agree her reaction later with 'scare the screws' doesn't make sense if she has supposedly become an adult.

Thanks Richard. You're right, I guess Yvonne didn't really have much contact with Helen so is unlikely to think of her apart from the rest of the PO's.

Yes, I think if she wanted to only help Shaz then she might have approached it differently. To hold on to her status, the best option was to take direct, physical action.

Not sure I have much more to add to what I said previously other than it now puts the 'hen' & 'cock' exchange into context - two kids calling each other names. The tooling up with knives scene was also appropriate as sadly knives seem to be the weapon of choice in the playground nowadays.

ETA - Almost forgot the Britney Spears & Ricky Martin lines said by Gina. I never understood the relevance of them but they now make sense in the context of kids/teenagers

Am now off to raise the mob ....... :)

Microsoftly has done a really great job in introducing Transactional Analysis into this discussion which is enormously helpful as are all the following posts- for instance, when everyone in the previous episode watched the fireworks display everyone was in Natural Child mode. The debates run all the more healthily from a diverse strands of thought being fed into the mix and the way they are received open mindedly.

Oops sorry, I deleted my double post. See below.

Rapid fluctuation is quite normal, yes. It depends on the transaction though, and wouldn't necessarily mean that if your parent comes out, I will immediately become the child in response. For example: Yvonne was the Nurturing Parent towards Shaz (wanting to protect Shaz) but at the same time she was also the Adaptive Child towards Al (during the fight) while Al was also in Adaptive Child mode, as you've pointed out ("two kids fighting"). The type of ego state response therefore largely depends on the context/situation as well.

Did I answer your question? (I'm not to sure now).

Yes, thanks microsofty (adult). You did answer the question and I (child) understood what you were getting at!! :)

This observation and most of what has been analyized and shared here make me realize why I find S3 painful to watch. The "dsyfunction" whether by abzug's or microsofty's definition is uncomfortable to sit thur. Whereas S1 was filled with newness, exploring, flirting, and S2 filled with uncertainty, yet possibility, S3 devolves to the quagmire leading to the upcoming riot.
The unequal status and power of the inmates vs the screws and "I am the system" or "I am the law" are getting hard to take.

I agree, solitasolano. I also hadn't realised it until you pointed it out!

I had a couple more ideas about this episode. They are connected to the 'kids/regression' theme but I think they are separate ideas in their own right. Apologises if I'm off base here.

Firstly there's the idea of violence itself. There are lots of different types in this episode. More than expected.

Bodybag pushed to the ground by Femi ..... (accidental)
Femi being beaten by the PO's ..... (abuse/PO brutality)
Al threatening, bullying & beating up Shaz ..... (assault)
Yvonne beating the shit out of Al ..... (battery)
The riot fight with the PO's .... (riot)
Tooling up with the knives .... (offensive weapon)
Verbal arguments . .... (brawling)
Throwing the chairs etc ..... (property damage/hooliganism)
Di's mum was mentioned .... (domestic violence)

The idea of violence is backed up by lots of phrases in the dialogue. Words such as 'smack', 'hit', 'battering', 'kick the shit out of', 'do her', 'restrain', 'fight', 'kicking', 'attack', 'assaulted', 'disciplined', 'violence', 'stabbed', 'waste her' and even the innocent mashed potato, 'Smash', all evoke the idea of violence.

Caroline is the exception with her self-defence routine.

Not sure what conclusions to draw here yet. Also fireworks & PBG at the end of the last episode led to into the 'child regression' theme here. Maybe similiarly the domestic violence of Di's mum leads to the idea of violence in this episode?

The second idea is about rules and regulations. Fits in a bit with the school playground idea as well.

Gina interrogating the PBG.
Bodybag throwing her weight around after her new promotion
Bodybag and the gum scene ..... (laying down the rules)
Femi's trial ....... (failed by the rules)
Charlotte being shipped out ..... (bypassing the rules)

Phrases in the dialogue such as 'sense of duty', 'the bloody law', 'one rule for them and another for the rest of us', 'reviewing Femi's case' and so on.

I'm sure there's maybe a third idea about who has the most power in this episode and ringleaders but not sure if we've covered that already?

I like this a lot, because it's simultaneously a contrast with the anarchy and violence of the riot, while also being its own version of the same emotional phenomenon. And on top of that, fueling the fire of the riot. The idea that you can inflict violence with rules and regulations, if you will. Violence the way Bodybag says to Femi things like "Can't you read? Don't you know the rules?" when clearly Femi can't and doesn't. And Violence the way Helen feels the need to protect her hierarchical position against Nikki's influence, leading to an emotional violence in the form of her outward dismissals of Nikki's concerns about Femi.

And of course it ties back into the idea of language and communication, and the OfficialSpeak we talked about upthread, being its own foreign language that the prisoners can never truly master and use effectively. Huh. In a way it's like Femi is the embodiment of ALL the prisoners, in that she can't speak or understand the language of her oppressors. Neither can any of the inmates, who arrive in Larkhall and find it a bewildering experience with its own language and rules. And neither can Nikki, no matter how much she approaches Helen in just the right way, or demands that the officers who beat Femi should be "disciplined."

ETA: Oh, wanted to add one other thing on a totally different topic. For the first time I noticed a very subtle yet important Caroline moment. After she's gotten the PBG to drop their knives, and she walks up the stairs to G2 or G3 or whatever, and Nikki is following her, Caroline has this look in her eye. It's a look that says "It's working! I've got her snared in my net." Her eyes say she's hyper-aware of Nikki following her, and is glad about it. Noticing this was the first time I saw Caroline's full calculating nature. She was wonderfully subtle about it, because when she turned and faced Nikki (after Nikki had chased her), she had the vulnerable, "I'm so sweet and weak" look back on her face.

Uhm, something is tugging at the confines of my mind here, but I can't quite get to it...

Thomas flirts with Helen and Helen responds while at more or less the same time Caroline flirts with Nikki and Nikki responds. Yet N&H are still "together" at this point in time. Thomas is straight and we can assume that Caroline is sort of straight, because she talks about her boyfriend. They both flirt with the idea of having a fling/relationship with a straight or semi-straight person when they are not straight (well, OK, Helen is obviously still confused here, so we'll excuse her for the moment). Were they just both looking for alliances on their respective sides of the bars? Someone whom they perceived as powerful, with the ability to change things for the better? And why does this happen in tandum?

Someone, please help! Why is this bothering me so?

I think you've got the answer right here. I don't see either one of them as really flirting in this episode. But they are building allies and support. They're both in a bit over their head, Helen because she's finally gotten to the position she wants, Nikki because she's gotten screwed over by her friends and enemies. Either way, both are gasping for air a bit, and they each see somene who is holding out a life preserver. Of course they're going to reach for it, and with a huge amount of thankfulness.

I'm not sure what you mean about them happening in tandem. Are you talking real time, or episode time? Because Nikki doesn't connect with Caroline til the end of the episode, while Helen's semi-flirty moment with Thomas happens at the beginning of the episode, so I didn't get the feeling that the writers were drawing a particularly strong parallel between them. In real time, they seem to be about 2 days apart, or maybe just one day apart. So in those terms, yes, they both seek out support elsewhere at generally the same time. Which makes sense, really, because the convergence of previous events (long-term minimal communication, Fenner's assault on Helen, Helen's promotion) have led to a situation where their mutual needs aren't being met by eachother. Helen needed support in her new job, Nikki denied her that. Nikki needed support in helping a helpless prisoner, Helen denied her that (at least outwardly).

Abzug's third paragraph draws a line through the Helen Nikki storyline to date and I can see why Nikki is being more rebuffed by Helen. What is an interesting point is just how much Nikki's lack of enthusiasm for Helen's promotion affected Helen. I give Helen credit in searching out for what was on Nikki's mind (who reacted on total gut instinct) and eventually came to an amicable end of the conversation. Thomas, with little previous history, would take Helen's new status at face value and be more encouraging.

When Caroline pulled Nikki out of the jam, Nikki would react with her usual gratitude- to anyone doing it and especially as her other friends weren't supporting her. I must rewatch the scene Abzug describes as I am sure Caroline was as calculating as described.

There's another factor to stress and that is the promotion itself. Helen is almost bound to fall victim to the 'new promotee' syndrome and overcompensate- it is a widespread reaction where someone who has been doing the job awhile will be more relaxed in their approach. It explains a lot of her specific reactions- perhaps to handling disagreements with her ideas. What is also interesting is just why Helen needs to seek a new ally in Thomas when Nikki has been an ally for so long- is it because he is likely to be more uncritical and if so why bearing in mind that he has a mind of his own?