I've been rewatching the first two episodes (well, I rewatched the first ep, and am in the middle of the second ep) and the first thing I noticed was how pleasant Nikki was. In her initial scene with Bodybag on the stairs (as she is heading up to say goodnight to Carol), she gets into a slight exchange of words, but with no particular venom or hostility at all. So I started thinking about when we actually SEE Nikki's rage (like, at the level she expresses it towards Helen when she's jealous of Dominic in season 2), and the first instance I can think of is when she attacks Shell after Rachel's suicide. And this interested me, because we hear everyone speak of how unpleasant and difficult Nikki is, and we know about her crime, but otherwise we don't see it.

What we DO see is Nikki articulating an anti-prison establishment and anti-prison policy position in her early conversations with Helen (both the public one and then down in solitary). We also see her repeatedly treating Helen in a cold manner, in response to every overture of "friendship" (or, in Nikki's mind, collaboration).

I was wondering if maybe the timing of Nikki's initial rage flare-up (her attack on Shell, mentioned above) is purposeful. It happens after Trish dumps her. And then I started wondering if most of Nikki's rageful moments could be tied back to her thwarted romantic impulses, to moments when she has been rejected, or when she feels her relationship is threatened. The extreme ones certainly can:
1. Murdering Gossard
2. Attacking Shell
3. Battling with Helen in Shit Happens
4. Attacking Helen because of jealousy over Dominic
5. Fenner's attack on Helen

I haven't thought this through very far, and I already know that the above is far too simplistic, but I did find it notable how utterly reasonable and pleasant Nikki seems in these early episodes. Maybe that's just so the audience will relate to her, but I also think there is some coherence in terms of the character and when she loses control and when she doesn't. Thoughts anyone?

I don't think it's overly simplisitic, I think N's got a big problem with jealousy, plain & simple, however. It's something she's aware off--she references it at least twice during her second/last visit with Trish that I recall--and it's built in to her character, that way. I do think Helen receives the brunt of Nikki's anger throughout the series; many of her flare-ups aren't called for (certainly the way she attacks H is usually way OTT, anyway imo--the expression of her anger's very personal, not directed out there in general or at the prison service but most often *at* Helen, specifically), & H copes with them with (I've always felt) remarkable even-handedness. She addresses them when she can & walks away from the situation when there's no talking to Nikki. I never viewed that as 'controlling' behavior, just adult. It's coming from a deeply compassionate place: H knows their situations are grossly unequal & I think cuts N a lot of slack because of it.

As for N, a lot of the anger is of course justified, but the jealousy stuff is often (very much)... not. Yes, there's the uncertainty of being involved w/a straight woman, but as we all know Nikki's not such a bad catch herself. Not sure what the 'reason' might be but it's not rational--the woman's got a temper, that's all. And once she's committed to Helen, Helen's the one hope she's got; without having what Nikki herself views as absolute commitment back, she's more or less permanently off-balance. Their situation with all its attendent inequalities itself provokes her as often as it comforts, reassures her, or offers some hope for the future.

I like this a lot, and I think its very true. Because Nikki's rage doesn't just stem from jealousy (although some of the more painful examples do, obviously). I'm playing with a somewhat broader idea, which is that when Nikki is not in a committed, mutually-enhancing, fully loving relationship, she has more of a tendency towards rage than when she is. Which is akin to your idea of her being "permanently off-balance." Hence Nikki's attack on Shell in S1E5, her attack on Fenner and Dominic in S2E2 (which comes right after Helen's blow off outside on the prison grounds), even her attack on Tessa Spall (which was thoroughly provoked, yes, but which also comes at what could be Nikki's deepest apprehension about Helen's intentions--she knows Helen is coming to visit, but can't be totally completely certain of what that means, of what Helen will say, of whether Helen will even show up).

Couldn't agree more with Helen being a saint there with Nikki's flare ups.

Try and put yourself in Nikki's shoes. You know you've killed a man, but you also know you were made an example of and there was a miscarriage of justice in your case. You end in prison, a lifer. You see no light at the end of the tunnel. The injustice you saw at trial, the injustice you see women being subjected on the outside continues unabated on the inside. It's even worse here because it's an enclosed space and you are totally at the mercy of the likes of Fenner, Bodybag and Dr No-No.

Wouldn't you be constantly pissed off, with a temper like an animal caged? Look at Nikki the minute she's out, she doesn't even have the temper to run after Helen, she needs a nudge from Trish. And then she wants to take it slowly.

Everything gets heightened in prison. Especially if yuo're there for the first time. For different reason, Shaz, Denny, Yvonne, even Monica, they all have a temper in prison. Isn't partly temper that makes the two Julies scald the pimp? There are very few inmates who don't have a temper (Barbara, Crystal).

Even in later series, most lifer have a temper.

On the other hand, who could be locked up with Fenner, Bodybag, Di Barker and not get a temper? I know you have to learn to control it and you do, but you still have it. Especially when you're constantly provoked and taunted, whether for your sexuality or because you don't budge and shut up, whether just for the PO's fun or sickness of mind.

Having said all that, it's a bit of a dissapointment that Nikki isn't better at controlling her temper, her hormones, her jealousy once a gorgeous saint like Helen comes along. If hope is what she wanted / needed , than hope came. She said that much to Helen.
I wasn't expecting her to start behaving like a puppy, just learn to express things in a different way. Make the effort for Helen. It would have been an interesting character development. I always thought that when Helen sort of has a moment of hesitation over Nikki's true character, she doesn't necessarily consider Gossard's killing, but rather how Nikki has been since hope came along. Because if Nikki can't change even when she's given a hand then she's like Shell, damaged beyond repair.

. I think that works for both. In the sense that the passion between them both creates problems and solves problems.

I'm not sure I see Nikki's reaction to Dominic & others as jealousy per se. She doesn't break into a scene when Trish confides that she's met somebody (she's got somebody). Though Trish is the woman she went to prison as lifer for, though she loves Trish. She understands the logistics of things, she's on the inside, a lifer, Trish is outside, with all her life in front of her. Of course she's not happy about it but she doesn't flip cause she's jealous.

I know it looks like jealousy with Helen, but I perceive it as fear of being betrayed yet again. Betrayed by hope not by her lover. Like she felt betrayed by the justice system. I do not read Nikki as the controlling, jealous type.
She's passionate, but I don't think she's got a temper as such or is jealous as such. Shell has a temper and is jealous to an extent.

I've been contemplating this a bit more, and I'm starting to think that for Nikki the real issue, the real irritant, is unreliability. In that first voicemail she leaves Trish in S1E2, she says something along the lines of "Pick up the phone. You said you'd be home now." Her concern is not just that Trish isn't home, but that she promised something and didn't follow through. In a way, prison is like an amplified version of this. There are rules, but they are enforced haphazardly, and petty tyrany and favoritism abounds. Nothing can be counted on at all--not being allowed to stay in your "home" (ie cell), not being able to see your visitor (I'm thinking of that heartbreaking moment with Roisin and her kids in particular), being punished on a whim. So for someone like Nikki, no wonder she essentially goes wild, becomes a caged animal as munky put it (I've used that metaphor for Nikki a few times as well--its incredibly apt).

Even Helen, with all her caring and love, can't possibly provide a level of consistency and reliability which Nikki needs, given how much the environment at Larkhall undermines it. Half the time Nikki doesn't even know when Helen is going to appear at Larkhall (particularly in S2). In fact, as I think about it, one could interpret Nikki's season 1 moments of watching for Helen's arrival outside the window as trying to approximate some level of consistency and reliability in this sort of faux, fantasy relationship that Nikki has going with Helen in the second half of season 1.

I like & agree with where you're going w/all of this but just had to get up on my hind legs & clap a bit at that last part, you're definitely on a roll. Really nice! More please miss. --e

(and yeah, I've used the wild/caged animal metaphor myself more'n once: it's especially useful when talking about the anger/rage thing, in fact, because if you couple it with Nikki's propensity for talking out of turn & putting her foot in it bec she doesn't think first, it leads you [well, me anyway] to think of her also in this way: as the kind of caged thing that might well gnaw its foot off to get out of the trap. A little visceral I know but... well. Um. It's thundering now, how fortunate, must run?)

And here I was coming to this thread to say that I was wrong about the Nikki rage resulting from thwarted romantic impulses--the first time she physically attacks Shell is actually in S1E3, not S1E5--its when Nikki is comforting Monica about Spencer's previous (and potential future) visit, and Shell makes some comment about Nikki preferring mink instead of beaver. And Nikki lunges at her and grabs her by the throat. Poor Nikki, especially after she's been like Super Nurturer, helping Zandra after her decrutching, helping Monica with Spencer stuff etc. I have to think more about this particular moment, in terms of understanding what stimulates Nikki's rage. Something about Shell interpreting something loving and caring and turning it into something sordid. I guess this plays into how prison basically turns everything into crap, which is essentially what Monica has been saying in this scene before Shell interrupts--that prison is such a nasty place and she doesn't want Spencer to see it (ie be contaminated by it).

Hi, To understand why an attractive woman like Nikki would display such unattractive traits like rage and jealousy, you have to remember the betrayal and humiliations she has endured rather patiently, which has knocked the foundations from under her and made her very diffident about everything and she doesn't trust her own powers and this she tries to camouflage every day especially where Helen is conerned. That's why she needs assurances from H all the time. a)In the Art room,"I need to know that you are not just going thru the motions" b)After meeting Claire, H:"Nikki, stop being jealous" etc. c)When N looses her cool in the garden and calls H a tart. Eventhough Helen has done everything to indicate her strong feelings for her. It's only after they have slept together that N is sure of H's love for her and gained back her confidence in herself.
Also I wouldn't call Nikki an animal (caged or otherwise) lol she's not beastly.

Just saw this thread, and i think it's a very good insight to Nikki's "rage". I did initially think that N was a calm character who is outspoken about the prison system in general, but that was it. Now you've put it in that way, it is clear that she shows her rage because of relationship issues. Although I think the attack on Shell was not uncalled for at all, Shell totally deserved it after the comment she made ("Look on the bright side, at least there's an extra helpin' today"). Nikki was dead right to call her a sick bitch and attack her. But I guess, because it wasn't long after her break up with Trisha, Nikki may have lost it a bit.

Hi i just wanna say that i think Nikki act's like that because she doesn't want to show her vunerable side so no one can have a dig at her but i like the tougher side to her.

I think its very true that Nikki lashes out when she feels the most vulnerable, which is why I think so many of her angry or aggressive moments are rooted in her anxieties about her romantic life, because that is the part of herself and her life which she seems to treasure most. Shell mocking her caring for Monica TWICE, and the second time Nikki has had another missed call in to Trisha, and she gets Shell where it hurts: by telling her about Fenner and Rachel.

I love that scene,

N: If i were you I'd worry about you're own love life. R, for Rachel.

I think there are at least two things that can set off Nikki's rage - things that have been kind of touched on in the above posts. They have to do with 2 key moments in Nikki's life: her parents rejection of her for her sexuality & Gossard's attack on Trish & Nikki killing him. Nikki's issues then are to do with trust in personal relationships and the injustices arising from corrupt and incompetent people in positions of authority.

We aren't shown all of Nikki's angry outbursts, just those that are significant in her relationship with Helen and her on-going conflict with Shell & Fenner. After Nikki attacked Dockley Helen described the cycle Nikki gets into: she breaks the rules, gets put down the block and comes out more bitter and twisted than before. We don't know all the instances that Nikki breaks the rules but it seems to be motivated by the injustices and brutality of those with power. She particularly reacts against Fenner's abusive misuse of power, which has some similarities of that of Gossard. She has a conflict with Shell from ep 1. Shell seems to constantly needle Nikki for being a lesbian (in spite of her own dabbling with Denny). For Nikki I think she reacts against Shell being a bully and for colluding with Fenner, which allows Shell to have a fairly free reign with her bullying.

In series 1 I don't think it's so much jealousy of Trisha's new relationship as the betrayal of trust and support. Trisha was at the centre of the whole complex arising from the Gossard events. And Trisha was Nikki's main support and link with the outside at the beginning of series 1. In the series 3 Coming Out ep Nikki says that Helen stood by her when no one else did.

A lot of Nikki's anger towards Helen is to do with not fully being able to trust her motivation/position on both the prison hierarchy & her sexuality. Both those issues get intertwined at times. In series 1 ep 1 Nikki is first angry with Helen for supporting/glossing over the neglect of Carole - Helen seems to be avoiding dealing with the corruption of those in authority that put Carole's life in danger.

Later Nikki gets to like the way Helen seems to be on her side and against Fenner. However, her moments of anger are when Helen supports the abusive system (the squat squad - Nikki's anger then was against the abusiveness of the system). At one moment Nikki vents against Helen by shouting out from her cell that Helen's "just like all the rest" even though she thinks she's different.

In series 2 Nikki's jealousy (of Dominic especially) is the result of the difficulty of conducting a relationship with someone who is not only a part of the prison hierarchy but also has a heterosexual history - the two are bound up togther. It stretches Nikki's ability to trust Helen (her comment about heterosexual women being too used to manipulating men so that they are not trustworthy). Her criticism of Helen being 2-faced refers to this lack of trustworthiness.

In series 3 Nikki has some anger witrh Helen's treatment of Femmy - here her issue is with Helen's position in the prison hierarchy. Nikki's biggest outburst in that series is when she goes back into prison at the beginning of the series. Here she feels Helen has betrayed their relationship plus that there will be no hope for their relationship because Nikki has too much time to serve. But here she vents her anger at the prison system/authorities as the root cause, not at Helen.

Anyway, overall I think the triggers for Nikki's anger differ a little in each series, but the basic cause are these issues in which Nikki's sexuality and her sense that the system is corrupt and allows abusive behaviour are frequently intertwined. It is not just about relationship issues on their own, but how the injustices within the official system impact on those relationships.

Hi campgrrls, I like your analysis a lot, particularly the way you tied in Nikki's rejection by her family to her reactions to arbitrary rule enforcement and punishment. It gave me an added perspective on one of the confrontation scenes between Helen and Nikki when Nikki is in solitary during S2E2 (Shit Happens). There is a moment when Nikki is behaving in a very child-like, petulant, whining sort of way, when she complains to Helen that "They were chucking my books around." Its such a pitiful pathetic moment, really, in the way that it shows Nikki totally unable to tolerate or overcome her disempowerment. The books of course represent not only her independent intellectual life, but the spiritual reinforcement Helen has provided her. Helen draws this association explicitly ("You only have those books because of me") and then continues with a very parental-type threat of punishment: "Any more of this crap and I'll take them away!" In this exchange, the cruelty of parental punishment (in its utter control, its arbitrariness, its formerly soul-giving and now soul-destroying potential) hits Nikki in the core of her suffering, intertwining all her issues with treasuring her romantic connections, suffering when they are threatened or contaminated by arbitrary or corrupt authority, and having that authority simultaneously be her one source of love and nurturing.

yes, that it where I was coming from: that Nikki's rage or jealousy don't come from the fact that she has a bad-tempered character and neither from the fact that she is the jealous, possessive, controlling type.

I'm not sure though that it has to do with Nikki's sexuality as such. Her sexuality seems incidental, just the thing that defies the majority's comfort zone and makes her vulnerable to exploitation and cruelty. It could have been that she wanted to marry a black guy, or that she was a Nigerian refugee that didn't speak English.

Oh, I definitely agree. I think that's part of why I used the word "romantic"--to try to emphasize the emotional aspect of things, and how important Nikki's relationships are to her, how much she feels they need protection from the discriminating and oppressive world. And that would be true no matter what kinds of relationships she had, as long as they weren't with white heterosexual men.

I was chatting with my aunt yesterday. I recently loaned her my BG season 1 dvds because I thought she'd really like the show (she's a lesbian, she's been involved in the theatre for a very long time and so I figured she'd appreciate the writing and acting, and plus she's a romantic, so....). Anyway, she's watched only the first two episodes, but when I asked her what she thought about Nikki, she said she was struck by how the character is so victimized, with the implication being that she sort of embraces her victim status. We then discussed how much dignity and power Nikki always maintains when she's victimized or mis-treated (when she's being strip-searched by the DST, in the "listen darling" scene which we've discussed in that other thread), but even so my mind keeps coming back to this idea of Nikki as victim. Because I think there is really something to it.

We've talked about how much Nikki hates injustice, how she fights for the underdogs etc. But there is definitely a way in which she clings to this idea that she is so abused and mistreated, and uses that to never make things better for herself. Some examples of this which occur to me right off the top of my head:
1. Not reporting the Tessa Spall incident so she can stay on enhanced
2. Convincing herself that Helen is cheating on her (ie mistreating and abusing her like everyone else does)--this is the biggie, of course
3. Blaming Helen for the torching of her cell in the Pam Jolly ep in season 3
4. This idea of Nikki as victim could also explain why she's so passive when it comes to accepting breakups, first from Trish, and then from Helen (at least, the breakups that occur in season 3, that is)

In season 1, the initial connection between she and Helen begins when Helen breaks Nikki's I'm-such-a-victim cycle by not sending her down to solitary after Nikki attacks Shell. And then Helen continues to give Nikki special and privileged treatment which further elevates Nikki from her victimhood. But of course even Helen can't overcome Nikki's insistence on remaining an abused victim. In a way I think she clings to it in order to maintain some sort of moral high ground--its the whole playing-the-martyr thing which Helen points out in S1E5.

I don't want anyone to think I regard Nikki negatively because of it. I think the show clearly depicts Nikki's attitudes and behaviors as resulting from the institutionalized abuse of the justice and prison systems, so I suspect were she on the "outside" these particular personality traits would diminish significantly (although they wouldn't disappear). There's a reason that powerless groups emphasize martyrdom--its the one source of power still available when all else has been taken away.

I've caught onto this post recently and I couldn't agree further with the point that it is what Nikki has come to rely on (and in Larkhall there isn't much) that is let down that really gets to Nikki- example being of Trisha not being around to answer Nikki's phone call and Dominic apparently pursuing Helen - a double instance as Nikki has got to trust Dominic.

One really interesting scene for me was after Helen told Nikki about Fenner sexually assaulting her when Nikki went into the Po's room. At the start, Nikki's voice was almost childlike until she built it up to the point where she terrorised Fenner with the thought that she might stab Fenner with a broken bottle. She used a double playoff of what Shell did to Fenner and what she actually did to DC Gossard. You sense that there is really a powerful head of steam of bottled up rage yet Nikki did actually control it in terms of stopping short of the brink and at the same time directing to scare the hell out of Fenner. His reaction was being in his worst nightmare of a specific female reaction.

In this situation, I must admit that my sympathies were more with Nikki than Helen. Logically, Helen was right in feeling that she had no recourse and couldn't press charges though the reality might have been different. From Nikki's point of view, she was being asked to do something that was clean against her nature.
Any thoughts on this one?

I've been recently rewatching series 3, so the scene in the POs office is pretty fresh in my mind at the moment.


Nikki really did want Fenner to suffer because of what he did to Helen and I loved how she terrorised him with the bottle. Especially naming Dockley and making him sort of relive the attack.

I have huge respect for her in this scene because not only does she show her undying love for Helen, but she also shows her respect in the way that she realises she might be getting out soon. She knew that actually attacking Fenner there and then would have completely thrown her appeal out the window, so I think she was actually thinking about Helen's hard work and how she'd been "working her arse off".

I think Nikki was a bit shocked when all that kind of back-fired and Helen said that the appeal was in jeapordy plainly because she had "terrorised" him, even though she didn't actually touch him.

It seems to me that Nikki is channeling Yvonne at that point. It seems more like something Yvonne would do than Nikki.

Never looked at it like that, but yeah i suppose its true. Yvonne's the one you'd expect tp taunt people like that and yet not actually do anything lethal.

When I first saw that ep, I really thought Nikki was gonna do something utterly stupid and completely jeapordise her appeal. I was shocked to be honest when she said, "If I wasn't getting out of here, it'd almost be worth it" because it showed how much she was actually thinking (about how her actions would be used against her, and how Helen would react).

The thing I love about this scene is that Nikki uses her reputation for rage as a weapon, rather than her rage itself. And it proves a much more powerful weapon. It IS very Yvonne-like, because a big part of Yvonne's power comes from the fact that when she intimidates someone, that person knows Yvonne will take the action to back it up.

Oh definitely. She's actually very calm in this scene, Fenner's just shittin it because he knows what Nikki's capable of and he's already aware of the fact that she's never been his biggest fan.

I hadn't thought of the comparison with Yvonne but it is a very illuminating comparison. This was a scene where Mandana excelled in gradually building up the scene and being utterly convincing.

Newbie here :)

Coming to this thread a little late, but here goes:

I think I have a different perspective on Nikki's rage which I don't think has been discussed.

I see Nikki's rage as a loss of control about her life. She has been making life choices for herself since she found herself on the street at the tender age of 16. But not only did she make very good choices about her life (i.e. not ending up on drugs, a prostitute, or in jail as so many street kids at 16 do), but she managed to build her life out of the gutter and into being co-partner in a thriving business, and in a long term relationship with the woman she loves. It speaks of a woman who is fiercely independent, enterprising, has integrity and lived her life on her own terms i.e. being an out Lesbian.

Then she was sent to jail for "life" for murder. Once that happens, all of what I've discussed above is taken away. The prison system beats her down by taking away every imaginable decision. This is where I think her rage is coming from.

She rages against injustice because she is a woman of integrity, not just for herself, but for everyone else as well. I think the reason why Nikki got so upset about Femi is because it was a microcosm of that loss of control about her life. Not knowing what's going, not knowing the language, in a foreign country, not knowing the routine, etc just pushed Nikki's buttons beyond the pale. She strongly identified with Femi's situation not only because she's in it herself, but because Femi's situation is a worse case scenario from her perspective (6 kids etc).

Meanwhile, Helen blows her off when Nikki said she had a right to know. Helen treated her as Governor versus prisoner rather than as if Nikki asked her girlfriend what's going on. Helen could have handled that better. In my mind, this is where the riot really started. OTOH, Nikki knows in the back of her mind that the "peaceful protest" could escalate and pit her directly against Helen (and the System), which is why she is reluctant at first to lead the cause (the pool table scene). But she goes on with it because it's a cause she feels so strong about. The protest escalates into a riot of prisoner vs the System but also Nikki vs Helen. Nikki needed to know what happened to Femi because it would give her some semblance of control by easing her worst fears (it was deja vu re Carol's miscarriage), and she was asking that from Helen. But Helen, who had her own reasons and insecurities, couldn't give it to her.

In other instances, when Trisha broke up with Nikki, again she had no control over a major life decision. If they were both on the outside, Nikki would have been more aware of Trisha's unhappiness sooner, or of course, it might not have happened at all (not that I'm objecting to Trisha and Nikki breaking up :D ). The point is, Nikki lost a major part of her life ("you've all I've got!") without having any say in Trisha's decision. Trisha made the decision for Nikki long before Nikki knew anything about it. No wonder she attacked Shell Dockley!

Nikki's jealousy re Dominic is also her not having any control over things that effect her life, like what Helen is doing on the outside. I think Nikki felt that if they had both been on the outside, Dominic wouldn't have been a threat at all. But she couldn't control the situation from the inside. Knowing first hand (if she was on the outside) would have given her that control. IOW, it was about the knowing, not about controlling who Helen can or cannot see (which I think Helen misread). Helen not telling Nikki about her initial get together with Dominic caused Nikki not to trust what Helen told her from there on. She needed to assess for herself (in person), something she couldn't do, but something that was a normal course of things before she went to prison. So she rages against Helen (with jealousy) for making her feel so powerless. Same as Trisha.

Another instance -- when Helen brings Nikki back to Larkhall, Nikki rails against the locked door. I think she's in a rage because she had one big chance to take back control of her life and it was thwarted by Helen. Nikki has no faith (or very little) that the appeal will come through but she does it for Helen. (Well, okay, Helen traps her but not the point). However, Nikki's rage is not against Helen (as we see how relatively calm she is when she talks to Helen in the office), it's the System and her loss of control about her life decisions that she's raging against.

I don't mean to make it sound like Nikki's a control freak, because I don't think she is under normal circumstances. I just think that someone with a personality like Nikki's, i.e. so strongly independent and in control of her life since she was 16, then to suddenly have that yanked away from her for what is possibly the rest of her life. Well, she just can't handle it.

Anyway, I hope that wasn't too convoluted :)


Nikkhele

Welcome to the board, Nikkhele, and great post. I agree pretty much entirely with your assessment of Nikki and the source of her rage and anger. I've often likened Nikki to a caged animal--if she wasn't locked up, she'd be fairly sedate, even-keeled, but once she's trapped, she becomes wild. (Others have used a similar metaphor--I'm definitely not the only one who has conceived of Nikki this way.)

This might be the one place where I would quibble with your take on the character. Nikki's jealousy is not a new thing for her because she's in prison. Remember the second scene with Trish in the visiting room? They're talking about Trish getting the shower fixed, and how she should have had a woman do it (rather than a man) and then Nikki acknowledges that Trish didn't want to make her jealous by having a female plumber in the house. Its a very telling moment, because even this early on, they're clueing us into a personality trait of Nikki's that will be the future source of friction between Helen and Nikki. She's not jealous because Helen didn't communicate well, or keep her in the loop about her interactions with Dominic. She's jealous because, well, we could speculate why Nikki's a jealous person, but its characterological, not circumstantial.

Back a few months ago we had that discussion going about Nikki being a reader, not just of books but of people. And how she's such a good reader of people, always looking into subtle behavioral clues to understand what someone is thinking and feeling beneath the surface. Its part of why she knew Helen was interested in her before Helen even knew it. And its also why she is quick to see Helen as being unfaithful, first with Claire, and then with Dominic. She draws conclusions from very little (or very subtle) information, and while those conclusions are usually accurate, sometimes they overstep, they draw too much of a conclusion. In a way, this corresponds with your idea about her need to assess in person, and her inability to do so given the restrictions of Larkhall, but takes it from a slightly different angle. Anyway, take a look at the thread--its pretty interesting.
http://z4.invisionfree.com/Nikki_and_Helen...p?showtopic=186

I particularly like your post, Nikkhele. Nikki is most vulnerable if she is denied the opportunity to assess a situation for herself, be in control of a situation and also having far too much time on her hands. When Nikkio was running the club, she had all three. Your post places the situation in its rightful place against the personality. Personality seen on its own can be a dangerously innaccurate explanation. It's also worth checking out Babs observation to Nikki that 'being in Larkhall makes you paranoid.' i.e. the situation not the person.

What is of great interest is the extraordinary level of self control and capacity for delicate negotiation Nikki has in the riot situation when she is trying her best to negotiate decent terms for Femi, dealing with pressure from the Peckham Boot Gang's lunatic fringe and also trying her best to retrieve the situation for Helen.
She does fine with a winning hand and is extraordinary in dealing with an (initially) losing hand.

Another strong feeling I got which backs up abzug's point about the 'caged animal' is the feeling on seeing Nikki in the club that a casual onlooker would never know that Nikki had done time.

You may have a point here, I'll have to think about it some more. Another thing I noticed in the exchange with Trisha, is when she tells Nikki there's someone else, she says "Please don't be angry with me, Nik". It's implies Nikki has a bit of a temper. That actually scared me more than the jealousy comment, which almost seemed like a joke. The point I'm making is that I see these traits exacerbated to the extreme in prison. Nikki has these traits but while in prison, her utter powerlessness in not being able to make her own choices drives her crazy.

Another instance I can think of is when Helen transfers Caroline. Nikki's rage comes out full force because she feels she's making her own choice to get involved with Caroline (without all the facts but that's besides the point). But then, Helen (through the System so it's personal and professional), takes that choice away from her by deciding on her own what's best for Nikki. Meanwhile, Nikki feels like she can't even make her own choice about a small bit of happiness due to what she perceives as Helen's petty jealousy, so her rage is front and centre.

Thanks for pointing me to the other thread. Great reading!

Oh, absolutely. One of the big themes in the first few seasons is how hard it is to be normal in such an extreme, closed-in, restrictive environment. This is true for the screws as well as the cons.

I've also been thinking about certain audience members' concerns about Nikki being "co-opted" in season 3. That Helen essentially "tames" her, getting her to improve her behavior and stop being an agitator. Its a very interesting issue because people place lots of value judgments on it. How "radical" is Nikki? Can a person work within the system successfully? Can a person work within the system and be radical? Why is it so important that we be able to think of Nikki as radical--ie why is radical a good thing?

I think the reason people feel like radical is a good thing for Nikki to be is because the system (ie Larkhall, as representing the system as a whole) is so clearly deeply corrupt and evil. So if you're fighting against this system, trying to change it or tear it down, then you are obviously Good. On the other hand, we've got Helen, who is working within the system, and actually achieving some success. The lifer's unit, Pam Jolly, her handling of Femi etc. In fact, we could presume that if Helen wasn't being blackmailed by Fenner and stayed on at Larkhall, she might have been able to change quite a bit as the number one. So the show seems to have a fairly positive view on working within the system--which is not a radical perspective at all. Some of us might disagree, but it does seem to be the show's philosophy.

I think this is highlighted even more when we see how Nikki suffers when she does take radical action. The instances I'm thinking of are at the beginning of S1 with the stuff with Carol and then Rachel, and then of course the riot and Femi. In both cases, Nikki acts as outside agitator and suffers severely on a personal level for it. It winds up being self-destructive behavior for her--she ends up down the block, she loses her girlfriend etc. The riot in particular is an interesting example, because first Nikki tries to work within the system (talking to Helen on two occasions etc), but she can't--its not permissible for someone without power to try to work within the power structure. Or, its permissible at times, but that permission can be withdrawn on a whim. So the show definitely has a concern about what options are open to the cons, who can't work within the system, but have to suffer it. With Nikki, it becomes a situation where she chooses to help herself personally (through her classes, privileges, her relationship with Helen etc) rather than focusing on helping the community. This could be a potentially depressing outcome for this character, but on the other hand there's a sense she would have destroyed herself in the meantime, been a martyr to the community of the cons, in a fruitless fight against the system.

In some ways, characters like Yvonne and Pat solve this problem more effectively, by creating their own alternative power structure and then maintaining control through that.

Which is all a roundabout way of saying that it seems too simplistic to say radical = good, and therefore Nikki's lack of aggressive agitation in the later seasons is a bad thing. I think Shed is trying to take a more nuanced view on tactics for change, and pointing out some of the problems with being a radical agitator, just like they point out some of the problems with being part of the system. Its interesting that Helen's role inside the system is what prevents her from having personal happiness, while Nikki is only able to get personal happiness by being more accomodating of the system. That contrast makes for a much more complex message on these themes.

First, I wanted to thank you for that excellent post, very nuanced presentation of the problems inherent in their relationship. I agree with your conclusions, esp that working within the system as presented through the figure of Helen isn't necessarily a cop-out or compromise, and neither is, per Nikki, trying to work with the system. And that Shed fairly presents the latter as far more problematic bec of all the extreme power imbalances, etc., but that there's nothing in itself 'bad' abt striving for some middle-ground in approaching a given situation, so long as the wished-for goals are kept in sight and the approach has a reasonable chance of meeting them.

I was talking w/a friend abt some aspects of S3 & had another thought abt this that seemed relevant so am lifting the pertinent bits from that correspondence w/apologies to my friend for quoting meself. ;)


Something I haven't seen come up in any discussion of Nikki & Helen's dynamic: it's taken for granted that Helen advances her initial attempts at finding a way to get Nikki 'on her side' and to some extent 'uses' her later solely in order to further her own professional interests. I've never felt that's a fair or very generous reading of Helen's actions: after all, she recognizes something immediately in Nikki that we do too, as audience: that Nikki's got the makings of a really good leader. That's what their first confrontation is in part about, innit? A reluctant leader, but a natural--and one who truly cares about the rights of others, is not just in it for her own reasons or agenda. I believe it's entirely within Helen's compass to legitimately want to see Nikki put herself forward--constructively--on her own behalf as well as that of other prisoners. She never asks Nikki for help for things she doesn't believe Nikki cares about too, that's something she takes as a given throughout: that working for the betterment of women's lives on the inside is something they're both about.

So in that way, I'd suggest the riot is in fact an extremely logical outcome to Nikki & Helen's involvement in terms of their respective roles and conflicts within the prison system. In fact, it's pretty much perfect as a compact dramatization of how far you can go (and no farther); and why & how things go wrong.

Anyway, the point is that this idea abt Helen maneuvering around Nikki, although initially viewed suspiciously by Nikki (and thus, the audience) as a means to further her own goals, always but especially later has (to me) an element of impersonal interest in it: leadership is something Nikki's good at, it's a skill, and like all Helen's other attempts to encourage Nikki to do what she's good at, likes, and has a real strength in, it seems to me this very much also falls into that category. Her encouragement isn't manipulative, yes she wants a prisoner on her side, but she also wants Nikki to use those leadership skills. We see this tendency expanded esp in S2 with her job change; Helen does in fact encourage other women in their strong suits wherever possible, for their sake, not her own.

I agree with you abzug that BG does present some nuanced egs of the dilemmas of working within and outside the "system" in order to bring about change. I've never subscribed to the criticisms of Helen as someone who controls Nikki, whether for her own personal satisfaction, career aims or in order to "do some good". However I have used the word radical in relation to BG - generally I've said I thought the 1st series or so was quite radical, but by series 3 there was a backing off from being so groundbreaking. I think your questions about the radicalness of characters are very good and thought-provoking ones.

However I think there's a difference between saying a programme is radical and that a character is radical - though in BG's case there's some overlap. I think the implication of some interpretations is that the programme is as radical as it's characters.... However I don't always think that is the case. For me what is really radical about BG1 is that the lead characer develops a lesbian relationship with another central character, and that this is tied up with the desire of both of them to work to change, improve of overthrow an oppressive and abusive system.

I think the programme is most radical when it both exposes abuses of women in society & the prison system, and when people (largely women) join together in a joint resistance against the system. I never thought of Nikki or Helen as being particularly radical on their own. What is very radical is that they unite across the boundaries in the prison power structure to try to expose and resist a system that works for the benefit of "the old boy network." It's a direct challenge to the patriarchal class structure.

That old boy network was a simplified representation of a patriarchal system, but it made it explicit that the problem was with the system and not just one or two evil screws. Subsequent series have had radical moments IMO, but there's been a step back from exposing an abusive system. It became much more about individual stories and about one particicularly nasty screw.... and the Helen-Nikki story got moved away from the centre. Fenner still represented the prison system subtextually, but the main text tended to represent him as acting in isolation and miraculously getting way with it. There also have been moments of women working together to right wrongs. The series 3 riot was a good eg of solidarity amongst the inmates. Nikki & Helen really wanted the same thing for Femmi but became opposed in their way of going about it. However the reasons for this were more to do with their individual relationship than to do with how the "system" or prison and social structure is abusive to someone like Femi. It was kind of implied but not really exposed explcitly and not fully put in the wider context.

Now progs that IMO have really opposed a corrupt and destructive social/political or organisational structure are Edge of Darkness, Between the Lines, and from the first ep Ghost Squad. (Also Firefly -watched Serenity last weekend) EoD didn't show the good guys winning, but it showed the consequences of nuclear power in the hands of political powers who misuse it and conspire against it's own citizens who try to expose it. That abuse of power was also tied up with changes in industry and the social-economic structure. All that was front and centre in the prog., so that viewers were drawn into making sense of the issues and questioning what was going on politically at the time. BTL also exposed corruption, systemic short-comings and implicated the press in the way such activities are portrayed. It put it all in context. Ghost Squad ep 1 showed how good people can get drawn into a culture of corruption, and how dangerous it is for one of the workers to try to work out and apprehend the person or people responsible for the violent effects of such corruption - all front & centre again.

Serious political issues were raised in BG1 - with lesbian sexuality at the centre of class and gender inequalities & systemic corruption. The viewers could not help but engage with them. In later series viewers are sometimes invited to ponder on the political issues, but more often they can just focus on individual stories and struggles between good and evil without thinking about the context that produces the abuses..... until maybe it become more central in series 7.

Why is it important to be radical. Well it's important to me. When I was young in hippy times I thought a better world was on the horizon. Somethings have got better eg attitudes to homosexuality. But many things have got worse. There was a time when there were Brit TV progs that truly questioned the status quo and engaged with crucial political issues of their time. But from sometime in the 1990s Brit TV shifted to being more ratings and commercially focused. At the same time I found working within the Brit education system extremely frustrating. It's a major part of why I gave up a secure job, stable relationship and comfortable house to move back to this part of the world... eventually to become a poor grad student. I haven't had a permanent job since, but understand and identify with dilemmas of working within the system, and some of the powerlessness of working at the margins in casual, poorly paid jobs.

For me BG is always watchable in the way the Prisoner Cell Block H was watchable - foregrounds stories about women, and sometimes with ground breaking lesbian characters. But BG1 was special in a radical way that lifted it beyond a watchable show. Since then it has slipped back to being a watchable show with radical moments and a fragmented portrayal of the wider context. And given the current state of the world & TV I find it a bit discouraging - discouraging that BG took a step back and that progs like Ghost Squad, and Whedon's Firefly don't last more than one series.

Anyway ep 2 of Ghost Squad tonight.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. I actually brought up the topic above not in response to some of your posts about whether the show was radical, but in response to arguments like the one made by Jenni Millbank (which you disagree with, if I recall) about Nikki's own power and the concern among viewers that she was co-opted. That interpretation has never sat well with me, but it was something I hadn't yet explored. But yes, the idea of whether the show itself presents a radical viewpoint is only tangential--I would argue it doesn't present a radical viewpoint, because of the potential it presents for working within the system, particularly as a person (Helen) gets more power. Of course, Helen doesn't have the power she needs--she's still controlled by the patriarchy (ie Fenner) up until the very end.

But don't you think a show like BG is suggesting that there are "non-radical" ways of bringing on that better world? I don't think a radical perspective or action is the only thing that can bring on change. That's where this idea of exploring whether change and reform can be brought on from within is so important. And I think BG answers this question with a qualified yes.

I entirely agree that Helen's motives in seeking Nikki's cooperation
What is noticable is the change from the start of Series 1 where there is truly an 'us and them' situation between the prisoners and prison officers. Nikki's main complaints about the prison officers is that they don't listen to what prisoners say, that they get disbelieved when a prison officer's account differs from it, the way that things get covered up and the gross favouritism that operates. I've also had the feeling that Nikki despises the prison system with the sneaking feeling that as a businesswoman, used to handling responsibility, that she could run the place better than they could. The effect of Nikki and Helen working for the same objective from opposite sides of the prison bars is manifest in Series 2 and part of Series 3 that this tension is very much eased. Only Bodybag and Fenner get singled out for contempt.
While Nikki comes over as 'troublemaking' it is because reasonable requests are denied which fuels Nikki's feelings of anger. The other side of the coin is that Nikki never forgets a kindness done to her and repays this in similar coin- this is distinct from her growing feelings for Helen and the power of the storyline is that both strands in the storyline work so closely together.
It is noticable how completely the combination of Nikki, Babs, Crystal and the Julies are taken aback by the way that the Peckham Boot Gang took advantage of their protest which started off by the very small mistakes that Helen made in not talking to Nikki in the first place about Femi. Shed wrote that storyline very cleverly that the communication breakdown set Nikki and Helen apart even though they were working for the same goal for Femi.

God, what a great observation, Richard, that's so beyond on target it's not even funny! Thanks, gave me a much-needed laugh this morning. --e

Well with her businesswoman background, she probably could do a pretty good job of running the prison! Now I'm not saying Helen wasn't good at her job, but I don't think Nikki would have let people like Fenner or Stubberfield overpower so much in the way Helen did in the beginning.

Overall I agree with you on this. But I think there is one example which is the one which troubles people, where Helen doesn't just ask Nikki to help her (and allow Nikki to make her own decision) but instead pushes her into it a bit, first with flirtation, and then with a slightly cranky reaction to Nikki's hesitation. Of course its the Pam Jolly incident I am thinking of, and even in light of your very astute analysis, it still troubles me a bit. Nikki doesn't want to help Helen with Pam on the wing. She thinks Pam is going to create problems for the wing and therefore for Helen. Helen doesn't really hear Nikki's concerns though--she's got all cylinders going on this one, and I think as an audience we're supposed to find it troubling. So Nikki goes along with Helen's wishes, against her own.

So the question in the Pam Jolly incident is how much weight should we give to the conclusion, when Nikki acknowledges that Helen was right? Even if Nikki is happy in the end that she did what Helen wanted, does that erase the core problem, which is that she did what Helen wanted and not what she wanted? I don't really have an answer to this question, and maybe there isn't one. The only thing I know is that we are supposed to be slightly troubled by the dynamic between H&N in this episode, and I am.

Hey Abzug, you know I'd reply in more detail if I could but can't today, apologies. Will just say for now this is one of the times we *do* see Helen apologize back, which is hardly a small deal. We're never asked to question her sincerity when she apologizes: she means it. As for slightly troubled, I agree w/your estimation that H's on semi-auto here, this is right in the middle of the season & she's kind of talked herself into believing she can straddle these two worlds, pull off this whole balancing act she's got going, so she's not really hearing Nikki try to voice objections, she just wants her to say Yes.

But I guess my doubts on this are not the same as the ones you phrased thus:

I'd make a distinction between what they personally might have wanted, emotionally, from each other, & what their beliefs about *Pam's* situation mean in terms of an approach. As such it's an excellent example of some of the things that've come up recently... Nikki's aware that Pam is very large, with the kind of strength fueled by mania that's especially dangerous: Pam, plainly speaking, can be physically hazardous to other women, not only herself. We've seen this borne out: P's attack on Shell (who's not incapable of some measure of self-defense). Helen wants to get at what she sees to be Pam's core problems: lack of psychological diagnosis in case her condition is treatable (twelve years w/o any such treatment is in itself a gross miscarriage of justice, and the woman who plays Pam is good enough to give us an excellent sense of how this character has suffered over that time, esp during the extended interview w/Thomas), and some attempts (where Nikki comes in) to alleviate P's extreme isolation.

In short, Helen's worried about cause; Nikki, about effect. So I found the mutuality of their apologizing very fitting. Helen acknowledges Pam can be physically dangerous; Nikki acknowledges Pam needs help, friends, & treatment.

Shit. You see... this is why I was staying OFF today! so much for not a lot of detail. Erm. Sorry to hit & run? --e

I've been thinking about this a lot today, and from the above definition, it would seem that a show like The L Word would be considered radical. The character of Bette and her romantic life is central to the show. She is shown repeatedly to be an activist, fighting against the prudishness and homophobia of the government, society etc. But I think we would all disagree with this particular conclusion. In the end, these things are awfully hard to define, to pin down.

Oh, absolutely. And in bringing up the example, I am referring to the latter, not the former. But I'm still not sure why that means you don't share the doubts I do. Is it because Helen also comes to understand Nikki's side, and not just the other way around? Its funny because I totally forgot that Helen apologized for the Pam Jolly business. I wonder why that is? What was it that made me remember Nikki's apology but not Helen's? Some emotional, non-rational reaction, the pain of seeing Nikki accommodating Helen after the one time she tried to stand up to her? Its very strange the way things can get altered in one's memory.

A fair comment. I think I didn't include some of the other features that I have in the past when talking about BG's pushing of boundaries. In comparison with L Word I think BG1 is more radical because, in addition to what I said before, it is made for Prime Time free to air TV, and targets a general population. It doesn't make being lesbian a central focus of the show, but puts other political issues at the centre. That's part of why I consider it to be radical & pushed the boundaries. The BG style also is a contributing factor - based in a mixture of soap and Brit social realist drama conventions.

Bette may be pretty central to the L Word, but in the series I've seen, the main focus was on Jenny. Furthermore BG1 was more built around struggles against a patriachal and abusive system. In contrast social activism must be built around the Bette character rather than the show as it's not something I'm strongly aware of in the series I've seen (ie series 1 & 2).

The scenes with Pam are very interesting. I got the feeling that Helen was focussed on a distant horizon that Pam is treatable and could be different. Nikki's attitude is interesting. She realises that Pam is one of Helen's 'crusades' and up till now invariably participates in them. In this case, Nikki has her doubts in terms of Pam being able to be turned round, in her own ability to look after Pam on the wing and in the sense that there are dangers in Helen's crusade that it would blow back in her face. She goes along with Helen on sheer loyalty, not in terms of conviction.