This episode shows the interesting situation of time and perspective to observe and act on situations.

When Helen saw (or rather sensed rightly) Fenner’s familiarity with Maxi and saw the whole Fenner / Shell thing unreel, she hadn’t the time to nail down the suspicion as fact and Fenner had all the time in the world to twist the whole thing round to Karen.
When Karen does confront Helen about the matter, Karen is ‘too close to the situation to see what Fenner is up to.’ In Virginia’s case, she gives no one the chance to see how false her ‘disability is,’ a truly shocking moment when the character of Virginia is truly unveiled. In Thomas’s case he correctly judges that Shaz’s problem is not being bullied but lack of esteem and has the means to do something about it.

Even Gina and Mark’s attempt at closeness is up against Di’s machinations, false apology and concern though Di’s conspiring runs up Babs’ endearing though slightly foolhardy faith in the 2 Julies (motormouths both of them) ability to keep secrets.
Likewise, when Helen tells Thomas of the sexual assault by Fenner, she has the entire privacy of her office, with Thomas whose presence wouldn’t be questioned, to explain what happened, even show him a written report that she never was able with Nikki.

One highly interesting point that has struck me is that Thomas has more of a resemblance to Nikki beyond being ‘tall and dark’- facially, his rugged features don’t resemble Nikki’s fine features. What they share is a certain laconic manner, a touch of ironic understatement of phrasing. The lines ‘Sitting on the sidelines is not really my thing’’I’d say that someone’s been kicking the crap out of you on a regular basis’ could easily have been said by Nikki. They even share a similar stance, arms folded across the chest and feet apart crop up when Thomas talks to Shaz and the kickboxer expert just as Nikki accompanies Yvonne in interrogating Shaz about the missing knife in Ep 3. It lends suspicion that Thomas is attracted to Thomas but only her unconscious notices this resemblance. Her manner reverts to the way she used to behave with boyfriends and only when he is right up close at the end of the episode is her tenseness evident and she realizes Thomas’s feelings ‘maybe a bit too much.’ I recall a full analysis by ekny of the curiously jumpily filmed scene at Thomas’ flat with the very much long shot of when she kisses him which technique features the opposite of intimate closeness.

Yvonne does have that ability and time to see how false Fenner’s ‘compassion’ for Virginia is, judges rightly that there is a racket involved and, by putting out the necessary feelers, finds the truth and places this in Helen’s hands, the one time when she abandons the ‘them and us’ ideology. By contrast, it is painful how far Karen has been duped by Fenner, especially in her description of Fenner to Helen.

There is one PS and that is that Helen’s amused description of the young Thomas Waugh wanting to ‘change the world’ sounds inscrutable- is it tribute or mockery? Another thing is that her swift pen picture of the middle class male student doesn’t sound a million miles away from me except that Thomas Waugh had the Clash ‘London calling’ album and I have their first album.

I think I hate this episode even more than I hated episode 13!

There were two philosophies that I quite enjoyed, which sort of tied in with everyone's "principle for action". The first was Virginia's statement about how she managed to do her make-up, paraphrased as follows: finding your contours without a mirror. The second was the kickboxing chick's: "sometimes the best way to win a fight is to walk away".

A number of the characters tried to find their contours without a mirror, i.e. trying to find themselves or rather trying to go their inner core, but without having a hard look at themselves. First one that springs to mind is Helen. She's back in a man's arms, trying to find herself, looking for her roots. She is still confused about her sexuality and uses Thomas as her mirror to find herself instead of standing still long enough to do some introspection (looking at herself in the mirror). And what's this? All of a sudden anti-violence Helen suddenly condones violence as a way to fix something? Thomas reckons that the kickboxing would give Shaz some self esteem, which on the surface it seems as if it does. But it is such a quick fix! All that is happening in Shaz's life is that she feels like she's got what it takes to take on the bullies now - it certainly hasn't given her a much bigger or sustaining sense of self worth and/or confidence. She has only gained the tools to enable her to fight back, not better herself. And Helen "there are ways to go about things other than violence" stands by and gives the thumbs up! My jaw dropped. Slightly.

Di is still looking for love without having a hard look at herself. Does this woman know no boundaries?! She just floods it, piles on the sob story - and reveals all to a prisoner! Totally, totally unprofessional. Could this be part of her devious plan? I mean, for a start she had no guarantee that Babs would relay the story, which she nearly didn't. It just seemed sort of strange that she would pick Babs for this purpose.

Karen also doesn't want to look in the mirror and face the evilness that is her boyfriend. She prefers to win the fight by walking away (after a few threatening remarks).

*Sigh* And Nikki is absent again. At least we know she won her fights (appeal, Helen) in the end by walking away. Distancing herself, giving Helen space and keeping her nose clean in the process.

Richard, I really like your take on the idea of judging, either correctly or incorrectly. This whole episode, as you point out, is full of people making evaluations and judgments of eachother. Even the Julies get in on it with their attack on Gina for faking a pregnancy and forcing Mark to break up with Di. Hah!

I think more than any other episode where Helen and Nikki don't appear as a pair, this episode is about Helen and Nikki, because as you point out, Helen's unconscious brings Nikki into nearly every moment she shares with Thomas. I only have a few minutes right now, but I'm going to write up more about this later, because I think Helen's unconscious is by far the most interesting character in this episode.

And Richard, here I thought you identified with Dominic all these years! But it actually was Thomas all along! :)

I think this is really true about Helen. She's got so much going on inside her, and she is NOT addressing it, or examining it, or anything. She's just reacting instinctively, like when she sees Fenner's hand on Maxi's back. All impulse, no true understanding.

I had a different take on the kickboxing. The whole thing was presented as a mental thing, not a physical one. The lessons we see Shaz learn (to take things seriously, not goof around, to show maturity rather than just lashing out) are all psychological lessons, as embodied in the training for a physical sport.

As I was watching this it occurred to me that Di actually believed her own story. That's how twisted and crazy she was. She was upset, Babs was there and expressed concern, and so she unleashed a story, not for any ulterior motive, but just to express her emotional agony. And even if she knows she's fudging some of the details (and I'm not sure she does), I'm sure she's convinced of the emotional truth of her narrative.

That's true. Di's boundaries have become so enmeshed that she doesn't know where her own narrative stops and another person's starts. This can be seen in the way she takes on Mark's feelings for Gina as his feelings for her, and also in the way that she projects her own evil qualities onto Gina. In her mind Mark feels as strongly about her (if not more) as he feels about Gina, whilst Gina suddenly embodies the evil that is actually within Di herself. In reality Mark feels nothing for Di and Gina is not evil at all.

Dear Abzug,
Helen's state of consciousness is by far the most interesting character in the show.
--sined, a frend

And arguably, if Shaz had had even one of the tools that kickboxing equipped her with as a child being bullied by her father, she mightn't have responded with such murderously stupid inappropriateness to her boss bullying her, at work.

Hehe. Yeah, I guess you're right!

Hey, microsofty, I was thinking. Given your professional expertise, is there a diagnosis for someone like Di? I mean, does she have a real mental condition, or is she just a character who the writers made crazy whenever they needed to create conflict?

OK, now, onto one of my "this is what the episode is about" thingies. It was interesting because watching the episode with an eye to writing something about it helped me enjoy it more. It made me less annoyed by infuriating storylines (Gina and Di, Fenner and Virginia) and more interested in how those stories commented on others I was more interested in (Helen and Nikki).


This episode can be viewed from a lot of angles. I really liked the idea of judging and evaluating above. But I also thought a useful way to slice things is to look at the issue of loyalty and alliances, because it creates some enlightening connections between various storylines in the episode. There are many alliances which form, or which are tested: Shaz and Yvonne, Shaz and Dionne, Fenner and Virginia, Fenner and Karen, Helen and Thomas, Helen and Karen, Helen and Yvonne, Helen and Nikki, Gina and Mark.

The whole episode seems to revolve around this idea of getting others to fight your battles for you. Many many characters attempt to do this. Shaz wants Yvonne to protect her from the Peckham girls, and she's furious that Yvonne isn't doing it. Fenner tells Karen about Helen's acusation against him, and gets Karen to confront Helen and threaten to lodge an official complaint against her. Helen allows Thomas to accompany her on her Fenner stalking adventures. But Virginia is the most striking example of this phenomenon. She's got Fenner picking up money from one of her massage parlors, she's got the Julies bringing her food, she's got Barbara and Tina packing for her, and Tina wheeling her to her new cell. We even see Fenner wheeling her around at one point. While in the previous episode we may have thought her need to rely on others was a necessity due to her medical condition, now we know, in no uncertain terms, that her wheelchair (on the surface symbolizing her lack of power and mobility) is actually the source of her control and authority. Like the wheelchair, Virginia's relationship with Fenner is much more complex. Yes, he's out there taking care of her business on her behalf. But, he has control over her: he takes his share, rather than waiting for her to pay him; he made a copy of her book; and, most importantly, he can give her the single cell she wants. It's a quid pro quo situation, where each has something over the other, and will give things and expect them in return, constantly re-negotiating the balance.

These relationships and alliances are so necessary because of the pain of isolation. This pain is embodied by Shaz. She hates being on her own, as she tells Crystal. There's too much time to think. She misses Denny desperately. But Shaz isn't the only one suffering from loneliness. Gina is similarly distraught, and when she is finally convinced by Josh to make amends with Mark, her first question to Mark is whether he loves her. His mistakes don't matter, at this point, as long as he loves her, so she can trust his loyalty.

The most isolated character in this episode, though, is Helen. In a way, all of the other storylines provide commentary on her particular struggles. Shaz's loneliness and isolation in her cell, her agonized scream of Denny's name, is cross-edited with Helen and Thomas in Helen's office, when Helen confesses to Thomas about Fenner's assault. In this way, Shaz almost seems like the embodiment of Helen's repressed unconscious emotions, where Helen could be screaming "Nikki!" if she let herself feel the agony of losing Nikki. It's impossible to miss Nikki's presence in this scene between Helen and Thomas because of the many parallels between this scene and how Helen told Nikki of the assault a few months ago. All of these parallels reveal the ways Helen is still hung up on Nikki. First, while Helen verbally told Nikki about the assault, she hands Thomas a written report, essentially mediating the experience with the written word, rather than opening up to him directly. Second, like she did with Nikki, Helen tells Thomas that this is her own battle to fight. She's swinging back and forth, like a pendulum, between isolating herself and reaching out. She pulled the same thing with Nikki, but with Thomas, she ends up swung the other way, toward the alliance, rather than toward isolation. Third, when Thomas makes a comment about the fact that Helen has kept this to herself for so long, we see a tiny flicker of guilt and secrecy on Helen's face, because, of course, she didn't keep it to herself. She told Nikki. Nikki is on her mind right now, and she's not going to let Thomas know that. To further emphasize the emotional barriers Helen is using with Thomas, we then cut to Shaz, who has wrecked her cell and blockaded the door. The frozen emotions, the mess of the cell, the furniture in front of the door--all of these serve as the physical manifestation of Helen's heart and mind, with Shaz representing the part of Helen who desperately loves Nikki and can't handle not having her.

Helen and Shaz both use similar strategies in solving their loneliness and isolation: they create an alliance with someone on the same side of the bars. And of course Thomas is the one who sees both their needs so clearly, and tries to satisfy them. He comes up with an inmate who "will be a good influence" on Shaz, not just someone who will fight her battles for her when necessary (which Dionne does that one time) but who will provide an example for another way to live her life, with seriousness, understanding and maturity. It's Thomas's bringing Dionne and Shaz together which inspires Helen to ask him out on a date. Not only that, but she agrees to meet him where he is (the dog races), just as Shaz agreed to meet Dionne where she was.

Interestingly, despite Helen's willingness to enter Thomas's world, their date is full of images of disconnection and ambivalence. First, immediately after she kisses him in the car and thanks him for believing in her and being a good man, she transforms their upcoming excursion to the races into a competition. She bets him that she'll win more at the races, thus placing them on opposing sides. Second, the early shots of them on their date (in the car, then in the stands at the track) are remarkably dark, particularly in contrast to the brightly lit race, with which their faces are intercut. Third, when they're back at Thomas's apartment, again Nikki is like a third character in the scene, as Thomas rambles on about shaking up the world a bit "even if its just their own." He then teases Helen about whether she would ever "do something out of character, cross the line." Of course, we know she has, and we know what (and who) she's thinking about--but she's not letting Thomas in, even the littlest bit. Fourth, when she senses things are about to escalate, after she's been talking marriage etc, she tries to escape, suggesting they have one for the road, and then knocking over the bottle before confessing that she wants to hear what he has to say "maybe too much." Again, it's the pendulum swinging between the kiss and the competition, to the point that it almost feels like Helen, by turning the races trip into a bet, is trying to externalize the chaotic internal battle which threatens to overwhelm her.

Helen's fear of growing close to Thomas reflects the danger of being close to anyone, of having loyalties. Helen knows this danger well, following her relationship with Nikki and the riot. She warns Karen that the reason Karen can't see Fenner for who he truly is is because she's "too close"--that's the danger, that being too close to someone will prevent you from seeing and judging a situation clearly. It's Karen's misplaced loyalty to Fenner, her too closeness, which causes her to see Helen's concerns about Fenner as a personal attack on her. Helen wants to maintain Karen's loyalty, but it's proving to be impossible. Yvonne is another character who is wary of loyalties. She's pulled away from protecting Shaz because she's not sure she's going to be able to fulfill the obligation, that she's lost her strength. And she's concerned about the connection she sees between Fenner and Virginia (after Virginia gets moved to the private cell), seeing it as another threat to her control over the wing. But Yvonne also knows that loyalties are important for her own emotional (and physical) survival. She reaches out to Helen to help her get Fenner (in a very quid pro quo way, similar to Fenner and Virginia--is this how criminals form alliances?), and she wills herself to protect Shaz in her cell when she hears the sound of fighting. Her eyes were full of fear and apprehension, but she went to Shaz's cell anyway.

By the end of the episode, Yvonne isn't the only one who's finally ready to fight her enemies and defend her friends. Helen's on the warpath stalking Fenner at the brothels. Gina attacks Di for the final betrayal, the story Di told to Babs. And Shaz is shouting out onto the wing to the Peckham girls to come and get her. But as all the characters will learn, or do learn, there's a balance between fighting your own fight, and having others to support you and back you up. For Gina, Mark's interference in her fight against Di led to tragedy. For Helen, the outcome is unclear. But we've had a bit of foreshadowing, thanks to Dionne, who tells Shaz that "sometimes the best way to win is just to walk away" because fighting someone like Al (or in Helen's case, Fenner) can take away a part of you. Helen is at risk of losing a part of herself too, whether her integrity, or Nikki) in her battle against Fenner.

1. I'm looking forward to seeing your piece on Helen's unconscious - I got the feeling that Helen was back on 'automatic pilot' in her interactions with Thomas right up till late in the scene at Thomas's flat and thought to herself 'shit, what am I doing here- the automatric pilot isn't quite working.

There's a point that has crossed my mind and Thomas with his going to the dog races which seems (up till Helen accompanied him) a solitary activity but then again, it is a moot point whether Thomas and Nikki are both 'loners' 9', (a word Mandana has used more than once on her character) and this isn't the same as 'lonely' , possibly the opposite, as Nikki is quite capable of taking herself off on her own with a book- perhaps ditto for Thomas's dog racing. The curiosity that this is hardly 'dating material.' There's a quirkiness about the whole thing. I recall a very expressive post by ekny contrasting Sean with Thomas that 'Sean is a tight- ass whereas Thomas isn't' and to put in a rider, Nikki isn't either. While Nikki, faced with Maxi outing Caroline as a nonce, does Nikki curl up with public embarrassment? She doesn't, she grabs Maxi by the throat and threatens her, ignoring public reaction. Likewise, when Thomas blows up with Helen in the restaurant so you can hear the ripples, does he give a shit about onlookers? Parallels multiply.

2. It was a shock to me too, Abzug. I hadn't watched this episode for a long time, heard Helen reel all this off and figured, shit, this is something like me. You are right in me being a big Dominic supporter and a big Nikki fan. I need to figure this one out. :o

3. I got the feeling that all Helen's experiences came out in this scene with Fenner and Maxi which gently underlines how new Thomas is to Larkhall but credit where it is due in him with running with Helen's story.

4. I had no trouble with the kickboxing as this would teach Shaz self restraint, self control and self discipline and is Thomas doing a bit of lateral thinking.

5. I've a feeling that Di picked on Babs as she thought that Babs would be discreet and mature except that her calculations misfired.

This & what follows is outstanding, A, it was pleasure to read! Thank you. --e

The writers probably made Di a bit overly crazy at times, but she definitely has some Cluster B Personality Disorder traits.

Cluster B refers to the mostly emotional personality disorders and include antisocial, borderline, histrionic and narcissistic personality disorders. If I were to diagnose Di my first order diagnosis would be the latter, narcissistic personality disorder. My second order diagnosis would be histrionic personality disorder as she exhibits a number of diagnostic criteria for both these disorders. Notably her self-absorbedness, her pre-occupation with fantasies (where she would be someone "special" to a man that is not interested), her strong sense of entitlement, the manner in which she takes advantage of others as a means to her end, the fact that she is envious of others/believes that others are envious of her, and her totally arrogant affect. Her actions have some anti-social traits, but not enough to diagnose her as such (it mainly centres on her deceitfulness).

The histrionic traits are underlying to her narcissism and is mostly expressed through her emotional shallowness, her fantasised intentions with the people she is "involved" with, and her tendency to believe that her relationships are more intimate than they really are (Mark being a case in point). These traits all relay back to her sense of self-importance, her need to be the centre of someone's universe by which ever means at her disposal. She totally lacks the empathy needed to place herself in someone else's shoes, to consider the consequences that her actions might have on someone else. To her it is all about me, me, and me.

This is such a brilliant, brilliant, brilliant comparison! It gives the viewer a really vivid picture of Helen's inner workings, how messed up she is on the inside, how her core is screaming out to Nikki amongst the mess.

There isn't anything I can add to Abzug's brilliant piece and I was definitely intrigued with the treatise on Di.

richard, microsofty, abzug, and ekny,
I must thank you all for your comments and insights. These last several episodes are not my favorite in the show and reading the comments are almost more satisfying than actually veiwing the episodes (via youtube at this point). Thanks.

I know what you mean about these not being favorite episodes. The first time I watched BG, I watched S3E9 - S3E16 all in one day (plus went to work!) because I just couldn't tolerate any of these episodes as the last one I watched. I HAD to get to the end. And still, watching these episodes I want to rush through them to get to the good part.

The one thing I've noticed in myself, this time through, is that I am feeling more annoyed and resentful at (and about) Thomas than I ever did previously. I always kind of liked him before, I liked the way he treated Helen, and in certain ways, I liked her with him. She was just fun and flirty. But this time I'm impatient and annoyed. He seems bland and easy and I wish Helen was stronger, was not letting herself fall back into this. She seems almost emotionally lazy, not willing to do the hard work of building and cultivating self-awareness.

I know she ultimately gets there, and that getting there is what these episodes are about, but I kind of want to give her a smack. :)

Interesting this one, Abzug. I have noticed similarities between Thomas and Nikki but I agree with the comment about Thomas being bland. Curiously, Nikki's persona has that cool self command which is different from Thomas and very distinct, yet at the same time, Thomas simply hasn't got the Nikki fire. Comparing this last episode and Series 2/ep 13 - Series 3/ep 1. you see the date with Thomas unreeling at a leisurely yet quirky pace with no external hangups. In the case with Nikki, escaped prisoner on the run knocking on Helen's front door out of nowhere, that only adds to the sparks that was already there between the two of them, even allowing for the way their relationship slowly built up, against the odds.
First time around watching this episode, I had no necessary reassurance that there would be the happy ending, bearing in mind Shed's talent was for the unexpected. Rewatching it, you know what will happen so I have found his character easier to deal with, as a guy effectively brand spanking new to Larkhall (except for the one off Pam Jolly episode) getting into a situation which he had no idea what he was getting into (Hello, Larkhall, where everything is all askew).

Multiple choice quiz
This episode discussion has died down because:
A. The weather is beautiful and everyone has better things to do than play on their computers
B. We hate this episode! No more discussing until Helen and Nikki get back together!
C. What else is there to discuss?
D. All of the above

If you chose C, well, I'm sure there's tons of things we haven't looked at yet. I mean, Di's craziness, Helen's inner conflict, Gina and Mark's dysfunction, Fenner's criminality, Shaz's growth....

Let's get this party (re-)started. :party

Also: it's Friday, & the board's always slow on weekends. Of course, SOME people have lives & are away themselves so often they barely notice it til they come back & wanna rock, hmmmmm? ;p

And some of us are, of course, working on the CSS that ate Milwaukee. --e

Brilliant posts from everyone here. I never much liked this episode either. I watched it after having read all your posts, and this time round I got so much more out of it. Thanks guys! :)

Well I did choose 'C' as I didn't think there was much more I could add to the discussion. However given abzug's cry for help (or was it a cry for a party?). Well, whatever. I'm here now.

Again I found Di difficult to read in this episode. The only truly genuine moment I think was at the end, when Gina is stretchered away, Di looked positively distraught. I liked your suggestion, abzug, that Di actually believed most of her own sob story and just happened to confide in Babs. Though I can't help feeling that there was also some malicious intent behind it as well. I also didn't understand why Mark didn't immediately follow Di or stop her when she said that she was going "to punch Di's lights out!". Instead he disappeared in the opposite direction, though I guess he must have changed his mind quite quickly.

I loved the Helen-Shaz 'physical manifestation' idea mentioned earlier. Neither able to verbally accuse their attacker but both deal with things in a totally different way. Though at the end, Gina's disastrous kick seemed to be contrasted with Shaz's confident kicks. One causing tragedy ... one preventing tragedy perhaps?

And how did Yvonne manage to slip a note under Helen's door? Only answer I can think of is that she persuaded Josh to do it. Otherwise we're back to the Nikki-getting-access-to-Helen's-office debate again.

I assume the am dram(?) line by Bodybag meant amateur dramatics? Well, it seemed to fit both the scene and this episode as there was a lot of high drama here: shady dealings, arguments, accusations, fights, tears etc. And some of the cheesy grins, accusations and melodramatic statements seemed a little overdone but that might be coincidence. Bodybags 'Charlie Dimmock' (TV gardener who didn't wear a bra) line was funny but seemed a bizarre thing for her to actually say. Fenner, on the other hand, reacted calmly, didn't lose his cool once and very effectively manipulated Karen. Maybe because he is not an amateur in this episode (he was paid at the start)? I guess I'm partly trying to justify the inclusion of the 'Jim furtively picking up the money' scene. It didn't seem necessary to the story to show it. He could have just appeared with the money later on. And is that huge 'backdrop' type painting in Helen's office (when she and Karen were talking) new or has it always been there?

Title of the episode 'Standing up' is appropriate as it refers to both Shaz and Virginia. Possibly Helen too for intending to continue with her case against Fenner. Though I confess I didn't really see how she was intending on proceeding with it. Yes, Stubberfield was now gone but I'm not sure her situation had changed much. Or what Thomas intended to do to help. It seemed a bit empty like her "count your days Jim Fenner" statement.

Yes I noticed that as well. And there was another instance when Josh was in the office with Gina. He was standing next to a poster entitled "You are in a safer sex zone. Condoms can prevent .... list of various diseases .... & Pregnancy". The last word looked like it was in bold. I don't usually notice the posters but the one's in this episode intrigued me. When Gina was speaking, there were two appropriate leaflets visible behind her, Stress and Temper. And just before Helen confronts Fenner (as she is waiting for the prisoners to go away), she is left looking at a poster entitled "For that Big Night out ....". Unfortunately couldn't read any more of it so not entirely sure if it was a direct reference to her night out with Thomas.

ETA - My sign idea isn't so strong since I've realised they appear in other scenes. But they are particular to this episode so I still think there's something in it.

Or not: it might be a quiet way of underlining that despite its being prison, prisoners *can* get access, even when they're not 'supposed' to.

The cross-editing around Helen & Thomas's clinch with the fight scene between Di & Gina is interesting, if not telling; it might be pushing the metaphor a bit but I find it hard to resist reading it as unhappy foreshadowing at the least: Di fights with Gina and the result? is literally a miscarriage. Figuratively, this doesn't exactly position H&T in a happy heterosexual relationship mode.

In response to Abzug's asking us to 'come to the help of the party' there is
one point that comes out very strongly and that is how a Victorian prison like Larkhall is so badly suited to the needs of a wheelchair prisoner. All the flights of stairs and the designs of the cells certainly illustrate that. All the assistance that Virginia got was hastily improvised though it is strange to contrast Bodybag's 'back trouble' with Virginia sharing a cell with Babs, risking her putting her back out. I did have a lot of sympathy for the Julies, Babs and even Bodybag in this respect. You could see that Karen, with all her good will in the world, was helpless to do very much for her when coming up against the deadly word 'budget.' Shed wrote this piece very well in illustrating the reality of these problems and compounding that in revealing Virginia, not as 'the disabled one' deserving of standard sympathy but of one more element of her criminality. They both make the very real point about the problems with a disabled prisoner and tweak the plotline round very cleverly.

Helen's start of an alliance with Yvonne it is of high significance. Up till now, Helen had got immense satisfaction in getting 'to the top of the shit heap' and the institutional power that it gave her. At the end of the day, she was still up against the presence of Fenner and, to get rid of him, legally. Even though she was Governing Governor, it gave her no help in pushing her charge of sexual assault against him. Up till now, Thomas was her ally. In trying to get rid of Fenner with what came to light about Virginia, Helen starts to come round full circle in seeking unofficial help from a prisoner. All Helen's accumulated experience comes to the fore as she knows that Yvonne is the one to help her out. knowing Yvonne's sharp instincts and her contacts on the outside. In this situation, Thomas merely accompanies her instead of being instrumental as in solving Shaz's problems. There is the strange situation of Nikki being literally out of the picture as Helen pretends to herself to focus on Thomas, yet, as has been so well explained before, Nikki is subconsciously there and perhaps, in the attempt to nail Fenner, Yvonne is acting as a sort of proxy for Nikki.

I had a look at the next episode recently and can see how the original elements of BG that were there at the beginning start to come round full circle and makes sense of this episode and the last as an 'intermission'. These sow the seeds for the finale.

E. I find it really difficult to engage with this episode.

Again everything feels so superficial and out of place. After reading the previous posts, a big contrast between Nikki and Thomas struck me. Thomas is such a safe option, apart from the fact that he is a male and on the same side of the bars. In trying to compare the two, I found that they both seem to have strong convictions. The big difference between them is that Nikki acts on her convictions, whereas Thomas has this facade of acting. He participates in student uproars for something that he seemingly believes in (and which wouldn't land him in any hot water), Nikki acts on her convictions by going to the extreme - killing someone for what she believes in (right vs wrong). Thomas believes that "sitting on the sideline" isn't really his thing, but in essence that is exactly what he is doing. He reads Helen's report, says a few words implying that he will act on it, but he doesn't. Nikki on the other hand acted on the information almost immediately, by threatening Fenner. Thomas likes to create the impression of an activist, which he really isn't. He does everything in moderation; he never sticks his neck out. In contrast, we've seen Nikki sticking her neck out time and time again, really acting on her feelings. Thomas is a man of words, Nikki is a woman of action, she isn't "really the soppy type".

I don't agree that "Nikki isn't really the soppy type". In spite of Nikki's denial, her note and some of her words to Helen imply that she is indeed the soppy type! Or can be anyway.

I agree with the rest of your post though. It is spot on. Nikki comes over as more passionate than Thomas. After Helen tells Nikki about the assault, you can see she wants so much to comfort Helen and punish Fenner. As you said, the first opportunity, she is in there, threatening Fenner. Thomas said all the right words but there didn't seem to be any plan of how he was going to help or even giving the same kind of emotional support.

Though I don't think Nikki intended to kill Gossard. She just wanted to stop him. But I'm sure she would have jumped in to defend Trisha without a second thought. Not too sure I could see Thomas doing the same thing in that situation. Maybe?

Interesting one this, microsofty. I certainly agree that Thomas was safe for all the reasons you say, and certainly Nikki is more passionate than Thomas and that her feelings come very much to the surface and really is 'the soppy type.' Both Helen and Thomas were at the top of the tree, Thomas being Senior Medical Officer and presumably, in charge of all the nurses and junior doctors and having a say in medical records. Within the demands of the prison system, they could come and go as they please, inside and outside work which was such a contrast to Nikki and Helen in prison.
To be fair to Thomas, Helen made it clear that the fight with Fenner over the sexual assault was her battle, which he respected. Helen told Nikki not to take the matter further and, quite understandably, she set out to intimidate Fenner which Helen gave Nikki a bollocking over. There's all the difference between the reality of Nikki seeing Helen's traumatised state and Thomas reading the report.
I've always regarded both Thomas and Nikki as basically law abiding- it's just that Nikki was placed in the wrong position at the wrong time and, has been stated elsewhere, 'acted in defence of another.' Furthermore, Nikki had to act with what was to reach. A convenient rolling pin to hand would have settled the matter in a low key way, Gossard knocked out cold instead of dead. She was placed in an emotionally creating extreme and acted instantly. You could say that Thomas in punching Fenner in Ep 16 laid himself open to disciplinery action except that he went into Shed's 'black hole.' The other instance of Thomas sticking his neck out was his very blunt criticisms of Dr No No, going against the loyalties of the medical profession, as relayed by Helen word for word to Karen.
I have wondered about Helen's speech starting with 'you're such a rebel' and her brief description of Thomas's history. From my experience, not every student took part in a protest or sit in (though I did). Thomas must have pursued his studies diligently in order to get to where he was and at the same time, went on protest marches, a very laudable activity and, at the risk of being very cheeky, I am putting in a very blatent commercial for the anti war march on Sunday June 24th outside the Labour Conference at Manchester. :D

The truth was that Helen, Nikki and Thomas were all rebels in their own ways- it's just that their rebellions were integrated in different ways into their personalities and how their lifestyles evolved, in Nikki's case starting from expelled from boarding school for 'lesbian activities' and disowned by her family. The objecxt lesson of this is that you start from where you stand in life.

Wow, great posts everyone!

I wonder if this is meant to emphasize the contrast between training in martial arts and beating people up? There's been some very legitimate questioning of why Helen would support Shaz's training, and maybe this is yet another way to show the distinction between the two? As well as the risk everyone runs by engaging in any sort of battle. I mean, ***SPOILER WARNING: SEASON 4: when Shaz ultimately uses her martial arts skills, it leads to a very bad set of outcomes, both for Maxi and for herself.

I know what you mean. I've been puzzling over this too. The only explanation I can think of, which is kind of lame, is that it's necessary to show him getting the money because that's the foundation of the scene with Virginia where he tells her he already took his share. So without the first scene, the power dynamics between Virginia and Fenner are less clear, and we aren't quite as aware of the things he holds over her.

Love your analysis of the signs, Cassandra. I so wish someone would interview the art designer of this show, because these little crumbs are SO intriguing.

I've always been one of those people who thought the revelation that Virginia was NOT disabled actually undermined their attempts to depict the difficulties disabled prisoners do have. However, I'm coming around a bit on this, because I think there's a sense that even if someone is an evil criminal mastermind, they still deserve handicap access. So they sort of took one of the more vile, exploitative characters, almost to make the point more emphatically--even if you don't like these people, even if it's not someone like Nikki, this is still a problem.

This is a good point, as if Thomas talks the talk, but Nikki walks the walk. Yes, Nikki has more real things to fight against (rapists, corrupt prison officers and prison regimes etc) than Thomas does, but there's still a sense that his battles (the political activism) are a reflection of his general principles, but don't reflect the passion of his heart. I mean, they do, in that he wants the world to be a more fair place, but he's not fighting for himself or those he cares about. It's hard to say whether that might actually be considered MORE noble than Nikki....

It's curious, this occurrence, because was Thomas protecting his own honor, or Helen's? In Nikki's case against Gossard, it's clear, but in this case it seems like a guy fight, where Thomas is trying to assert his manhood. (I'm still glad he did it though!)

Great point!

Yes I guess it does have a lot more impact if he collects the money before meeting Virginia. Also it may have been a way of tying in the next episode where Helen is trying to catch Fenner visiting the same massage parlour. It still seems a bit odd, particularly with the furtive looks that Jim used. How to make yourself look more guilty in two seconds flat! Don't quite understand why he didn't behave normally unless having stepped up a gear in his criminal dealings, the tension was getting to him?

I don't quite understand Yvonne in this episode with regard to Helen. I remember being confused at her attitude to Helen at the riots with the line ".... and that prat Stewart an' all" I think it was richard who kindly pointed out that Yvonne had had no dealings with Helen so was unlikely to think of her apart from the rest of the screws. Okay, so now I don't see why her attitude towards Helen would have changed or why she thinks Helen is looking for a way to get rid of Fenner. She might have sussed from their body language that Helen and Fenner are at odds but I don't see why she thinks Helen would be interested in her information. Have I missed something?

This debate has livened up nicely now. I've edited it as my post and Cassandra's sort of met in mid stream.

Thomas's form of rebellion comes out of a deliberate lifestyle choice- he could have been your self centred jobsworth but chose not to be. The problem is that, unlike Helen and Nikki, nothing is known of his family background- he could have equally been carrying on a liberal tradition or reacting against his family's conservatism. He made a deliberate choice to work in the prison service where his qualifications would enable him to do very nicely in civilian life. His choices are intellectual but one that he has feelings for and is genuine enough.

Helen's form of rebellion is to show her father that she matters and what it does- hence both her ambition and her desire to do good (though her 'sense of duty' actually affirms her father's values in a secular form). It is in a spirit of self affirmation which embraces the area she chooses to work in. Her eventual choice at the end of Series 3 was that, if she couldn't please her father, she would please herself as to who she was. This has been gradually evolving in different areas of Helen's life at different stages.

Nikki's is one where she can not be anything than who and what she is, a form of self realisation that is passionate and compassionate and her lesbianism is who she is. She has got there way ahead of Helen and her rebellion is in a form of opposition to what is life denying. She has a sense of universality which makes her spokeswoman for others- in solidarity with her sisters and in opposition to blind authority. There is a sense of vivid distaste of talking about Gossard (to Monica in Series 1) that even when Gossard was hanging round the club, he gave her the creeps. You get the feeling that she has run across a number of arrogant male bullies of whom the latest examples are first Gossard then Fenner.

Coming back to earlier points, I got the feeling that Fenner sneaking out from the house he and Karen share to run the brothels highlighted his furtive personality- where in hell did Karen think he was going- to see a man about a dog????? he gets a kick out of the illicit, the furtive and despite living with Karen, ends up making a play for Maxi and has this compulsion to cheat on women.

In response to Cassandra, it's safe to assume that Yvonne knows pretty well everything in Larkhall (except for Nikki and Helen) and knows Helen loathes Fenner. Yvonne may thing Helen is a 'stuffed blouse" (if you see what you mean) but probably thinks that Helen is Yvonne's best chance of finishing with Fenner- she has been known to make temporary alliances for limited purposes, Fenner for instance.

I got the feeling that Fenner's mere existence made Thomas's flesh creep, that he was a threat to Helen and because of assaulting Helen- something in common with Nikki although he chose to be in opposition to Fenner while Nikki and Fenner clashed from day one. His reasons for hitting Fenner was as a result of one taunt too many, protecting Helen's honour and a bit of 'guy fight.'

Thomas punching Fenner stood out to me as extremely significant for a few reasons.

1. Thomas's freedoms as a man are made more evident. If a female work colleague like Helen or even Di were to slap Fenner, I doubt he would have just sat back satisfied.

2. Thomas's freedoms as a free person are also made more evident, he's definitely not a prisoner at that moment, he can hit Fenner without the concern of serious reprecutions, he is allowed his passionate response to being wound up. (I mean did anyone else feel a passing twinge of fear the moment Thomas punched Fenner, as if suddenly Thomas could be thrown down the block).

3. I don't think protecting Helen's honor had anything to do with Thomas's actions, I think it was just a response to Fenner exposing his own maliciousness both toward Helen, and then toward himself (Thomas).
I think Thomas showed his complete indifference / or some would say acceptance of lesbianism when he helped Helen see herself and ended his relationship with her. I think for Thomas lesbianism does not need to be tolerated, it just is. I guess you could think Thomas was upset to have Fenner say Helen's a cheater, but I don't think that's what sparked Thomas's fury, Thomas even blew that one off... I think it was when Fenner exposed how he'd forced Helen to resign, and then decided to shove it in Thomas's face that Thomas felt it for himself.


Come to think of it, back to some earlier comments....
Nikki felt Helen's experiences as if they were her own, that's a huge difference between Nikki and Thomas.

Interesting points here, Ladder.

1. It is against Fenner's nature to be thumped by another guy and just accept it as a later altercation SPOILER ALERT in a later series shows. However, Fenner knew that he'd set the cat amongst the pigeons regarding Helen and Thomas and he got malicious amusement out of that one.

2. Thomas wouldn't be thrown the block like a prisoner, agreed, but Fenner could so easily report it to Karen who would be duty bound to start official proceedings. It is a disciplinery offence, no doubt. The reason there was no twinge on Thomas's behalf was partly because the audience liked seeing Fenner flattened and Thomas hardly got sympathy for coming in between Helen and Nikki.

3. This is a point of real interest. Thomas had been betrayed by his divorced wife and was sensitive on that score- not a million miles from Nikki in that area of sensitivity. He got angry as he believed Fenner's version of 'shagging for months' (typical exaggeration) while Helen had never mentioned anything before about Nikki. His rant at Helen in the restaurant reflected his feelings prettyy well.

Your bit, Ladder,where where you say "I think it was when Fenner exposed how he'd forced Helen to resign, and then decided to shove it in Thomas's face that Thomas felt it for himself."
That does really hit this on the mark though I need to rewatch.

Wasn't that Helen who went WITH a man to see about a dog, some dogs?
Couldn't help that and more on the dogs latter.

At first I didn't think the Gina/Mark/Di storyline interplayed with themes of the episode. On it's own, their story plays very well by itself. Their storyline as it unfolds in this episodes has a beginning, a middle, and an end. It can be complete in itself, especially as it plays out for Gina. Gina to me has always been a companion character to Slyvia. The tough gal PO who's got everyone's number and the sarcastic one-liners to go with that knowledge. I don't know if Gina comes back or not as a character. If not, this storyline is a swansong for the character and the actress...when else do we get to see Gina so vulnerable and not in control. She gets to go through a whole cycle of knowledge, reaction, emotion and then counterreaction again once she hears from Julies what Di has said.

But then think more, the Gina/Mark/Di triangle paralells another in this episode. Accusations and lies...we have alot of that going on in this episode. The whole Gina/Mark/Di triangle is structured around this. Then also, the Fenner/Helen/Karen exchanges build around accusations and lies. Helen yells at Fenner that she will not tolerated him "man handling" the prisoners. He counters with "is that an accusation?" When he gets to Karen first, of course, Helen's comment has escalated to "she accused me of molesting a prisoner." Once Karen confronts Helen with what Fenner has told her, Helen quickly corrects Karen characterizing what she said as "telling tales" to Fenner's prechance "to tell lies."

For the protagonist in both these triangles of accusations and lies, it does not end well. Gina goes out on a stretcher and Helen is put on notice with the threat that if Karen gets so much as a hint that Helen harrasses Fenner again that will be the end of her. Now at this point, Helen is the victim who is found gulity. Like so many women before her who have been sexually assaulted, they are not believed and infact further victimized by a patriarchal system which doesn't believe them.

Dumb American here...I'm thinking, what does the title mean? What does fronting up mean? That's not a phase used in Southern California vernacular. So I ask the question to google..."what does Fronting Up mean? Best answer: Means you are putting on a show rather being yourself. Humm, wonder who that could be talking about? Well, certainly Di, the not so tough Shaz, then Fenner, of course, but we all know Shed means for the real "putting on the show rather than being yourself" is reserved for Helen and the laying all over Thomas on the couch thing at the end...

Dang takes me too long to write. Have a couple more comments and observatons but I'm the one in charge of din din tonight. I will leave you all with one last gem....could be in "the what's in a name" thread...Molly Leopard....the dog Helen loses on....it's a shoe...LOL...

I like this comparison between Helen and Gina a lot! Especially because, of course, both of their accusations are in fact true, no matter how much everyone else around them thinks they're overreacting--they're not. And then the parallel between Fenner telling lies to get Karen on his side, and Di telling lies to get Barbara and the other prisoners on her side. Both stories demonstrate so clearly how just because you're right and true, doesn't mean you're going to win--in fact, having right and truth on your side might set you up to fail.

This is a great post by solitosolano. If it weren't for this , the Di Gina Mark storyline would have trundled along in a disconnected way from the thrust of the main storyline while this post connects them up nicely and makes some point to the cross cutting between the two in the narration.

The dog races is an odd place for Thomas to take Helen. Am I right in thinking that dog racing is still predominantly a male sport (unlike horse racing which is more family/couple orientated)? Richard pointed out earlier that it was hardly dating material and that it seemed to be a solitary activity for Thomas. It does seem very strange, and out of character, that he didn't change his plans and take Helen elsewhere, particularly since he wasn't meeting anyone there.

So why did the writers choose this particular setting for their date? There was a short discussion about this on another thread (The Point Of The Dog Races Runnerbird Scene). The suggestion was made that the dog races represents a completely different world for Helen but she finds fun it and I think from the point of view of the story, it advances her relationship with Thomas. It was also suggested that the racetrack was symbolic of pursuing a relationship? I guess dog racing is all about the dogs chasing the lure (artificial rabbit). Except for Helen's choice of dogs, which always seemed to lose. Maybe showing she doesn't fit into this 'male world' or a hetrosexual relationship?

And a perfectly acceptable reason why the name might appeal to a woman. However I remembered that a "Molly House" was a sort of early gay bar and knowing how devious these writers are, I looked it up. A "Molly" is an ancient term for a homosexual and of course a leopard is a type of big cat. Anyway I thought it was really amusing that out of all the dogs that Helen could have picked, she picks the odd-one-out, the 'gay cat' .... simply because she likes the name! :)

ETA - Have added a bit more on the name in the "Whats in a Name" thread.

Hilarious! I love it! And I'm totally convinced this is what the writers intended.

I absolutely agree with Cassandra's theory- it would be fitting for Shed to sneak in this obscure reference into BG.

Cassandra has picked up a very real point of why the dog track and I understand the symbolism that she describes. I groaned when I first saw this sequence of BG, thinking why in God's name did Shed write Helen in visiting the dog track? Years ago, I came across guys of my acquaintance who do that and hadn't got the faintest idea of their fascination but then again, the modern obsession with following football goes right past me also . I got the idea that this might be Thomas identifying with a working class bloke activity but then again I might be wrong . I got the definite sense that this was the day of the week that Thomas intended going to the dog track before Helen broached the idea of them going out and, only in conversation were the two ideas combined.

You got the feeling that, if Thomas was dating Helen, it was done in a very circuitous roundabout tentative fashion. It had the feeling of, as with going to the conference, of Helen being 'taken away from herself' in completely novel circumstances and unexpectedly finding enjoyment in it.

Or maybe showing Helen's chase to convince herself that she is heterosexual, where Thomas would be the lure and Helen the dog in the race. As far as I understand it, the lure is like a carrot in front of a donkey's nose - used to set off the animal. But just as the donkey never reaches the carrot, the dogs never actually catch up with the lure - just as much as Helen's chase of Thomas (and the "normal" world of heterosexuality) is futile. She might run the race, but she will never reach the goal (the lure, being "normalcy" for Helen).

This idea is further emphasised (imo) by the type of betting that takes place at these races. I had no idea how it worked, so I did a bit of research. The betting system used is called pari-mutuel betting where all the bets are placed in a pool. Taxes are deducted as well as a house fee and then the pool is shared between all the bets placed. Apparently only skilled players are ever able to win any money, but after all the deductions, very few people ever win a large profit. It might be that my reasoning here is way too farfetched, but it seems as if Helen is not only betting on the loosing dog all the time, she also doesn't stand a chance of actually winning on the "bet" she placed on Thomas. She isn't a skilled player and after all the deductions - the intensity of her feelings for Nikki vis-à-vis Thomas being a "quick fix", i.e. giving up Nikki and real happiness or staying with Thomas and a perceived happiness - her relationship with Thomas would offer her no tangible profit. There is just no way that she can really gain anything from a long-term involvement with Thomas, her bet is misguided.

Nicely stated, Microsofty. I thought Helen choosing the longshot reflected her subconscious need to have her relationship with Nikki work out. In front of her "the perfect man" the favored to win dog. Yet, she's still betting on and cheering for the underdog, and so was the audience. We wanted Helen and Nikki back together, even though it seemed like there was no hope, and that Thomas was winning. So, the race not only represented Helen's inner feelings, but the viewing audience's as well.

Oh, I like this idea. And the fact that Helen's dog is always at the back, trailing behind the pack maybe reflects how reluctantly she is pursuing heterosexuality as her heart isn't really in it. Ironic then that she picks a dog that represents homosexuality, which ties up with Route66's point that subconsciously Helen is still betting on and cheering for the underdog (Nikki). And of course no matter how fast you run round a racetrack, you always end up back exactly where you started from.

Thanks for the betting info, microsofty. I'll cross it off my '50 Ways to make more money' list. Interesting that Helen insisted on betting on a sport where making a profit is near impossible. I've forgotten what the actual bet was now. Was it profit?

Awesome interpretation of the dog races from everyone. I don't have anything to add, I'm just cheering from the sidelines. :party

I have no idea. The Parimutual betting system seems quite complicated, there are all kinds of bets you can place to attempt to increase your chances of a win.

I seem to recall a discussion in another thread about Helen's drinking habits, where it was stated that she used to drink before being able to engage with Sean on an intimate level, and only drinking after being intimate with Nikki. There seems to be a repetition in her drinking pattern (or drinking behaviour) with Thomas. She started consuming alcohol at the races, had at least half a bottle of Vodka and a puff from a joint at Thomas' place, before having a sort-of emotional connection with Thomas. Getting stoned would have further passified her emotions, made her disconnect. Yet she started coughing from it and said something about her comfort zone, or sticking to what you know. Could this be another symbolic gesture on Shed's part to show that Helen is going to again cross over to something that in essence makes her feel uncomfortable?

I love all the ideas of the dog track and especially the idea of Nikki being the 'long odds' on which Helen is betting and, otherwise in the logic of the dog track, Helen being unable to play the game. There is certainly a persistent drinking theme with Helen, being under stress in Series 1 after Monica's funeral (?) and 'drinking Thomas under the table' at Conference plus the drinking at the dog track while with Nikki, there was only the glass of wine (?) after they's slept together- peeking forward to the next episode, Helen refers to having a 'whole bevvy load' as she has once referred to before. I thought Helen's reference to 'crossing the line' and 'sticking to what you know' was a nicely placed ironic commentary as, unknown to Thomas, Helen has 'crossed the line' only his way isn't hers.

Yep, I caught that the same way too. Like going to the dog track, taking a toke offered up by Thomas was another attempt by Helen to crossover to "his side." You've all been there when you're trying to go along with someone. When she gaged on the smoke and said the the line "sick to something I know" I wasn't thinking so much Helen sicking to drinking, but rather sticking to the heteronormative behavior model. Only in the end, it doesn't work for her.

The last scenes between Helen and Thomas (intercut with a wrap up of Shaz pounding her chrest in her cell and Gina being carried off on the stretcher) contains catch phases about "crossing the line", being a rebel, wanting to "stray", "sticking to something I know", all things that Helen is constantly warring with herself about.... Then Helen says a line I still can't figure out where it comes from, in her character or in the writing of the production. Can someone help me out here? After Helen's last attempt to avoid intimacy with Thomas, spilling the bottle, he asks doesn't she want to hear what he has to say? Her reply "Maybe a bit too much" seems too genuine to me, like it IS true, that she wants to return in like Thomas' feelings for her. Does "normal" Helen just think this is the way to be and act...the easy follow through of being with a guy? Is she trying to mirror Thomas' comment to his marriage gone bad, "like moves on"? Helen asks, "And has it?" Is this how she's trying to answer the question in her life? By going along with the flow? Then again, the tv worker in me suspects there's plenty of Shed ambiguity built into the script/dialog to keep the viewership going crazy ie. is this the end for sure of Nikki and Helen. I have to think there's some of this built into the script.

Backtracking alittle. I think Helen accepting a night out with Thomas at the dog track is not so far fetched. She was the one who asked him out the following night. When he said he had plans and then immediately recipocated the invitation to include Helen in them, it was completely believable if Helen was looking to spend time with Thomas that she would do just that...it was the company which was important, not the activity.

The bet between Helen and Thomas was whoever LOST their bets on the dogs would have to buy the drinks afterwards....instead, when Thomas "wins" the bet between them because Helen's dogs lose, the payoff changes to drinks at his house....so metaphorically Helen really loses because we all know what happens when you go "to my place". She looks resigned yet relieved as they set off into the darkness from the seats in the stands.

Lastly, on this Helen "stick to something I know theme", I point out, as I'm sure those of you familiar with BG longer than I long ago knew, Helen is such a top. LOL. S1e? with Sean; S2e13 the deleted scene; here; and finally S3e16 moving Nikki out of the sidewalk to against the wall.

Nice research, I definitely felt there was a connection between the dog she chose and Nikki, I just had no idea what a connection!!!