Well! Good riddance to bad...er, rubbish! What an appropriate place for Nat to be - in the bin with the rest of the trash! But Pat seems to be taking it all in her stride, she really is a hard nut, she arrived back on the wing not even looking slightly shaken! Regardless of the nature of Nat's crimes, her seemingly self-satisfied smug smile at bedtime, was a little disturbing. What I would have expected from her, would be a resigned grimness, at having done what had to be done, but her response seemed to be something different - a hint of cruelty perhaps? Maybe, unlike Nikki Wade, Pat Kerrigan is a "cold-blooded killer"!

This series seems to be loaded with unplanned pregnancies! Now we have another revelation that Vikki was more or less forced to have an abortion, because Lou didn't want to have to look after her baby! Well, hello! Looks to me that despite her protests to the contrary, she is trying to hang a guilt trip on her sister, which leaves me wondering if she is even telling the truth about not being able to have any kids, as a result of complications. But Lou had better watch her back, because she's clearly up to something! And we have some more revelations about Lou too - although her assertion that she now only drinks on special occasions, didn't seem to tie in with the direction that they were pointing us in at the beginning of the series! It's all rather curious this whole Lou and Vikki story.

The smile really reminded me of Nikki's triumphant smile at the end of season 1, when she knows that Helen and Sean have broken up. I don't think the parallel is an accident, and I think we're supposed to be a bit disturbed by Pat's enjoyment of her triumph. We still don't know the whole story of why or how she killed her boyfriend, and I must admit this murder of Natalie makes me think it wasn't quite as much in self-defense (and therefore not as justified) as we may have thought. Now I'm thinking Pat's first murder was more of the premeditated variety, like in the Dixie Chicks song "Goodbye Earl." Previously I had kind of assumed he had come at her and she had fought back.

Now, can anyone recall what Yvonne looked like popping peanuts into her mouth after Renee Williams died? She seemed a bit triumphant herself, if I am remembering right....

This is a really interesting observation. Every time motherhood has come up on the show before this season, it has been to show us characters who desperately want to have children, raise their own children etc. In roughly chronological order, you've got Zandra who took an incredibly reckless risk to try to hang on to her baby. Then Helen expressing her desire for children. Crystal and Buki in season 4, combined with Roisin and her self-destructive yearning to be with her children. Shell in S5, being totally torn apart when her baby is taken away. Yvonne's always presented as the maternal sort, Sheena in S7 etc etc. The only character who was anti-children in any way (I don't include someone like Nikki in this category, who struck me as rather neutral about having children) was Di--who alternated between desperately wanting to have a baby, and having an abortion. Typical of a psychopath. :)

But this season is a HUGE shift, showing us two relatively sympathetic, non-psychotic characters who had no interest in raising a child, and in fact, wound up doing some very hurtful things to avoid having to raise a child. This contrasts in particular with a character like Buki, who was pretty repugnant until it was revealed that she had a child, and was very eager to take care of others' children until she could get hers back. In that scenario, maternal instinct was like a signifier of Goodness. So now they are showing us another side, where it can be acceptable for a woman to just not want children, for whatever reason, and that doesn't make her evil or bad or psycho.

I think this is yet another example of a character being duplicitous or dishonest. Which is really something they are exploring pretty heavily this season. I mean, even just in this episode, you have Pat deceiving the Julies about her plan for Natalie--they clearly didn't think she was going to kill her, but Pat clearly planned to do so the entire time.

Speaking of Pat murdering Nat, that's the aspect of the episode which has really been sticking in my head, it's the part I've been ruminating on the most. I found it really intriguing that Pat's whole plan involved tricking Natalie into hiding in a bin bag, which meant that she'd never have to look at Natalie when she killed her--it would be a faceless attack on a lump in a bag. It seems to me that this was a purposeful strategy, so Pat could avoid being really face to face with her victim, and therefore avoid the real truth of what she was doing. But instead, of course, Natalie knows she is being tricked, and so their battle winds up being much more gladiator-like (see, I'm prescient with these images!), with the close confined "ring" in which they are fighting, the improvised weapons, the fight to the death etc. I thought it was the best-staged fight scene I have seen on BG (which isn't saying much, but still).

The other aspect of the murder which has stayed in my head is the way it intruded on the wedding blessing. It felt very much like a contaminant, like it was undermining the very beautiful moment that Julie S had planned for her son. And not just in the obvious ways (ie rushing to get started), but in the more subtle ways, the fact that Julie S was focused on her son and the blessing, rather than on the Get Natalie plan, and that Julie J had this sort of divided loyalty situation going on, where she wanted/needed to help Pat, but she also wanted to keep the event special for Julie S. Great acting on the part of both the Julies really highlighted this tension. I actually found myself really mad at Pat for coming up with this whole scheme!!!! She made a day which was supposed to be about life (with the heavily pregnant Fidelity emphasizing this symbolism) into something about death.

Speaking of Fidelity, I liked that David didn't dump her just because of the stuff she said about Julie S. And that Julie didn't make him feel like he should. His line about her having a good side I thought was very apt--it's kind of the philosphy of the show, isn't it? Particularly this season, where everyone seems to have both a good and a bad side.

It's very strange to see that the difference between Lou and Vicky seems to be that fate enable Lou to get to the 'right track' (if somewhat wobbly) and Vicky, the one time trainee teacher went onto the 'wrong track.' Theree is certainly very well drawn sisterly conflicts, that there was the makings of a reconciliation until Lou made the (not unreasonable) remark about attention seeking and on the other hand, Vicky's plans for Dr Dunlop. It was very interesting to see Joy being incredibly sympathetic to the Julies with her own daughter weighing on her yet at the same time, her defences crumbling turning her to drink.
And, yes, the very prescient comment about the gladiatorial theme where both Natalie and Pat had the same scheme to do away with the other. Pat's almost unnatural calm after the event is very noteworthy as was the limits of Lou's tolerance when she found out that Mandy had not 'counted' Natalie back in.
Curiously enough, the character of Fidelity seemed like someone out of Footballer's Wives and David showed a lot of strength in dealing with the situation - the wedding/ blessing was the first in Larkhall not to be one of unmixed joy but marred by Julie J's intervention but the plans which were at the back of them.

What a fantastic episode!

The fight between Pat and Nat was great. Pat's smile at the end though did have me a little disturbed - it made me think that she really went out to kill Natalie in the first place. When the fight was taking place, I thought it was purely self-defence - i.e. Pat was thinking, "Well she's not gonna stop here, it's either her or me". But at the end of the ep, I felt as though that was Pat's plan all along.

After last night's ep, I was even more convinced that Lou's job is just that to her - just another job. When she got the phone call about Natalie's "escape", she sort of laughed it off to Vicky. She didn't seem too bothered about losing a prisoner. And instead of doing some sort of investigation, she just told Mandy to get out then and there. But then again, Mandy was careless in the situstaion. But I still think that Lou's not taking her responsibilities too seriously.

Oh, I definitely thought it was her plan all along to kill Natalie. Otherwise, why would she have stabbed the bag she thought Nat was hiding in? She conceived the whole scenario so that she could attack Nat with no one else around, with Nat trapped in a helpless position. Of course, Nat was not as stupid as Pat had hoped, so they had to have the huge battle to the death. But Pat intended to kill her regardless--the whole plan was designed to help her do it. I think the idea occurred to her when Nat asked Pat why she didn't give her the lethal dose, and accused her of having too much of a conscience.

In a way, you're absolutely right about this. It's not just her reaction to Nat's escape, but the fact that she wears jeans, etc. Not only is she not dressing for success (in contrast to Helen, when she was wing gov, or to Joy's pantsuits), but she shows through her clothes that she couldn't care less how people perceive her. But on the other hand, she does seem to care about the women and their welfare, as her treatment of Janine and Stella demonstrated. So I think for her it comes from a more emotional, human place, rather than a law-and-order place.

Interesting debate about Lou. I've got the feeling that both Helen's and Karen's lifestyles put some distance between themselves and the prisoners that they are in charge of while fully accepting that they feel real sympathy for them (I am arguing that Helen's relationship with Nikki is a 'one off' in terms of the person, not the status), In other words, there is a correctness in manner about them. Frances was different to some extent as her lifestyle as an undercover cop was perhaps too realistically done in the vice trade. Lou has her sister who is a much more visible presence to her, not to mention her friends whom Lou spends time with in keeping track of Vicky. The outside world is much more real to her than for other wing governors so that she doesn't take on the colouration of the prison institution. It isn't stated but it will be worthwhile seeing what steps Lou has to take as the storyline of Natalie's death unfolds.
Ultimately, I agree with abzug as Lou's style comes more from Lou rather than adopting an 'official persona'.

abzug, I can't imagine that they would intentionally be drawing a parallel between Nikki's smile of satisfaction at the demise of Helen & Sean's relationship, and Pat's self-satisfied smile at having just killed Natalie in cold blood, unless you mean as a means of contrasting the two moments and therefore the two characters. Because regardless of whether or not Pat ended up having to kill Nat in self defence, as you have pointed out, her initial intention clearly was to murder her in cold blood. Not only that, but to attack a basically defenceless Natalie, who would have been tied up in the bag, and would be unable to fight back - so her intention was not for their battle to be anything quite as evenly balanced, as the gladiatorial combat which it became. Your assessment of their battle being gladiator-like, is perhaps enhanced by the fact that the weapon which Pat arms herself with, the garden fork, is reminiscent of the tridents which the Roman gladiators used!

In the light of your "fondness" for both Nikki and Pat, abzug,I've been thinking about how different the two characters are, and also the nature of their crimes. For my part, I find it very easy to defend Nikki for her crime. Nikki to my mind is presented almost as a heroic figure, a miscarriage of justice, who has been unjustly sent to prison, for saving the woman she loved from being raped - there is something noble and honourable about that; she wasn't defending herself, she was defending someone else, and has been made to sacrifice her own liberty, and her life as she knows it, for an extensive period of time. And there is no sense from her, when she is telling either Barbara or Claire about the events of that night, that it was her intention to kill Gossard. It is only her statement to the police, made in the heat of the moment, that gives the impression that she felt no remorse for what she had done - we have a very different image presented to us. For me there is never a sense that Nikki is a danger to anyone, not to Dockley, and not even to Fenner, who she would have had the greatest reason to do away with. Even when she threatens him after Helen's assault, she uses his own mental frailty in the wake of Shell's attack, to inflict most of the damage on him, I can't imagine that she would ever have contemplated killing him in cold blood.

Pat on the other hand is a different story, and as you point out, although we don't know anything about the circumstances of her killing her boyfriend, it would be a lot easier for me to imagine, as you suggest, that she did in fact plan to kill him. Unlike Nikki, there is a sense of danger about Pat, she has none of Nikki's vulnerability, she seems to be genuinely tough, whereas Nikki's seeming toughness, is just a facade, a survival stategy. But Pat has proven herself to be pretty ruthless in dealing with the nun, and now Natalie. On both of these occasions, she has set herself up as judge and jury, and in Natalie's case, as executioner too. She doesn't hesitate to deal out Pat Kerrigan style justice, and while we may be sympathetic to her cause, and even be cheering her on in some ways, there is nevertheless a sense of disquiet for me, about her ruthlessness. And she would be quite a scary person to have in society, because if she decides that something or someone is bad, she appears to have no qualms about meting out justice as she sees fit.

Regarding the unplanned pregnancies in this season, I was thinking that it is quite interesting, that they have presented us with the three possible options which a woman would be presented with, when faced with an unplanned pregnancy. Vikki's abortion, and therefore death of the baby, Joy's decision to give birth to the baby, but to put her into care, and not keep her, which means that even though the child was alive, she was to all intents and purposes dead to Joy, as she didn't have a relationship with her. And finally David and Fidelity's baby, which they intend to keep and be loving parents to. Julie, who is herself a good mother to David, is also delighted by the news of the pregnancy, and it is probably her example as a parent, which makes David determined to be a good parent to his own child. In contrast, while I can't remember any mention being made of Joy's parents, there seems to be an absence of parents or parental example, in the case of Vikki and Lou, as Lou seems to be the one who has been, and still regards herself to be responsible for Vikki.

Wonderful post, JAMBF. And yes, this is exactly what I meant--the moments are so vastly different, yet staged in similar ways, and therefore highlight the enormous difference between Nikki and Pat.

You are GOOD! I hadn't thought of this at all, but you're totally right about this imagery. I was also reminded of Buffy (the Vampire Slayer) when Nat came at Pat with the wooden stake, and I wonder if we are supposed to think that Pat is a bit "undead"--not really alive or feeling or part of this world any longer, yet still roaming the halls for all eternity (that's essentially what a life sentence is, isn't it?).

I couldn't agree more. And very well put. The interesting thing about Pat is that she has also been portrayed as very noble and heroic (like Nikki) at times--with the nun, with her help with Sheena and her baby, with exposing Natalie as a nonce to the wing etc. But she also has this vicious almost inhuman side, and no matter how furious Nikki became, we never ever saw her as inhuman or vicious.

Agreed about the danger, but I think Pat is shown to be vulnerable, particularly with Sheena, and her unwillingness to open up, to love and let herself be loved.

I rewatched the episode tonight, and had a thought about that funny camera technique they used at the very end when showing us Nat's corpse. In one take, the camera carries us from the door of Pat's cell, winding through the prison, all the way to the body. I think it was to emphasize the fact that while Pat thinks she has freed herself and the world from Natalie, they are still very much connected, tied together.

Two other thoughts about film techniques. Well, one thought--it has to do with voiceovers. We had two in this ep: Janine writing her letter (which, for the first time, made me glad that we didn't hear what was in the letter Nikki wrote to Helen!), and Joy heading off for leave. Other than in the whodunnit sequences after Fenner's murder, I can't think of another time the show has used voiceovers.

Although, interestingly, even the examples I mentioned above are not examples of voiceovers used to let us "hear" a character's thoughts. It's more of an editing technique, using dialogue from one scene/location, and overlaying it with visual from another scene/location. The closest use of voiceover to reveal interior thoughts is Janine's letter, but she's actually writing it at the moment we hear it, so it's just another form of external communication. But, still significant to note, given that we've had a million and one letters in 8 seasons of Bad Girls, and never ever have we heard the text of one read as a voiceover.

I guess this is a long-winded way of saying they seem to have moved quite far off from the insistent realism of the show's earlier seasons, in terms of staging/camera, dialogue, etc, where we didn't get to see or hear something unless it happened.

The last posts by abzug and JAMBF have covered a huge amount of ground. The only thing I can add to it is that Pat's ruthless side is similar to Yvonne in this respect in terms of Atkins values- for instance in killing Renee Williams or 'the pizza delivery special.'
There were occsasions when Nikki got physical but that was with bare hands in the heat of the moment and justifiably so. Pat is far more premeditated and controlled. That air of calm control was very striking after killing Natalie when that would be least possible to keep up as a facade.
It also struck me very forcibly that Pat was choosing as her weapon a gardening fork from the very same prison job that Nikki did. You gained the impression, possibly illusory, that the tool had been cleaned and sharpened. The gardening job has connotations of nurturing which is very much Nikki (except the one instance when Nikki accidentally hurt her hand) and also Pat in her softer moments.
The 'compare and contrast' motif is nowhere more apparent than here.

That's a good point about the voiceovers abzug, and you're right about being glad not to have heard what Helen wrote in her letters to Nikki - it seems rather heavy-handed, and I think I prefer to use my imagination! (And yours, in your Fanfic letters!;) ) The interesting thing though, is that there seems very little point to us knowing the content of Janine's letters, it's not as if they give us any significant information. Whereas hearing the content of Helen's letters would have been far more relevant to us in giving us information as to how their relationship was progressing, in the absence of Helen. With Janine and Donny, we can see how their relationship is progressing, so the letter content is irrelevant.

As far as the camera tricks are concerned, it is strange because Shed have stated that they expect us to use our imaginations to some extent, to fill in background stories, and explain certain events, as there isn't sufficient time to fill in every single detail - and we are still required to do that a lot of the time in this series. But then at the same time they employ all these film techniques to spell some things out to us! All in all, I think I prefer the "insistent realism" of the earlier series!

Richard, I like your point about Pat's weapon, the garden fork, being the same thing with which Nikki injured her own hand. I wonder if this doesn't serve to highlight another difference between the two of them - that often Nikki's anger and aggression, ends up hurting her more than it hurts others (other than Helen on occasions), either physically (as it does here), or emotionally, or in her being punished for her outbursts. Whereas Pat's anger and aggression is usually directed outwards, and other people usually suffer the consequences of it.

When you put it that way, I suppose you're right. I guess Pat wanted to kill Nat but she didn't really fancy the whole confrontation of a fight. I think Pat is actually a col-blooded killer, unlike Nikki, because she is capable of killing again. Whereas Nikki didn't actually plan to kill Gossard, Pat is someone who went out to take someone's life. I think this is the major difference between Pat and Nikki.

Truthfully, Janine's letter seems meant as a joke more than anything else. Her faux old English poetry is really laughable--and that must be intentional. The only thing it seems to be showing us is how trite her feelings for Donny are. Or, how poor her ability to express them is. Perhaps she's practicing what she's learning in her English class? ;)

Seriously, you are putting two and two together for me again and again in this episode! Great point about the contrast between Nikki harming herself and Pat harming others. Again I think it comes down to the fact that Pat seems to have shut off so much of herself that she can't be hurt any longer. She can feel anger at Nat's actions, but her suit of armor is just SO thick by now. Nikki never really developed one at all. And it's clear which one of them survives (and thrives?) more in a prison environment.

I was just watching some H&N clips from S2-3, and it struck me again how no one in S8 seems to want to get out of Larkhall. There isn't anyone who has any life on the outside, anyone waiting for them, nothing. And without that, it becomes hard for the audience to remember how awful it is to be locked up in prison. I mean, Julie S is the only one who really has anyone outside of Larkhall, and she didn't even miss out on his wedding! And meanwhile you've got all these prisoners with rich emotional lives and relationships inside: Stella finds her long lost mother, Janine has fallen in love, etc. It just makes things feel out of whack, like prison ain't such a bad deal--and without that, some of the inherent tension/conflict which drives the series just disappears.

And on that note, I am heading out of town on vacation for a week. I may be able to check the board once more early tomorrow, but then I am offline for a week! So enjoy discussing ep 7 without me, and I'll jump right in on my return.

I've noticed that as well. In the earlier series, everyone talks about wanting to get out and what they're going to do when they get out. Everyone seems to love prison in this series!

Abzug, hope you have a good vac.

That's a good point about the change of attitrude of the prisoners. I can understand Tina having everything on the inside and nothing on the outside but she is exceptional that way. Julie S has David on the outside but she has got so used to him appearing from time to time. Julie S's children only 'appeared' in that distorted form when she had an untreated bipolar condition. There just isn't any awareness of the outside by Darlene and Janine. Natalie has made her attempt at escape whereas the same idea hasn't really occurred to Pat. The Costas have accepted their lot once again. It can't be argued that these prisoners are more institutionalised than for Series 1 prisoners- that doesn't hold up so I am baffled.

Enjoy your break anyway, Abzug. I'm sure you'll be refreshed when you return.

Back at the top of this thread, many many months ago, we were discussing Pat's very self-satisfied look after offing Natalie. I said:

Now that we're nearing this episode on ITV3, and we've started discussing Renee Williams, I wanted to revisit this discussion about Pat and Nat. In particular, I've been thinking a lot about ekny's comment that Renee Williams' murder is similar to Fenner's murder in that many many people had a motive, many many people made an attempt, and in a way it's almost incidental who dealt the final blow.

With Nat, of course, although many people hated her, there was not this same group effort, and I think that may be what's always unconsciously bothered me about it. When you've got a whole group working together to murder someone, it's sort of like a form of the jury system. It's not just one person who has decided the other deserves to die--it's the entire community (ie the jury of the victim's peers, as the American constitution puts it). And that seems to have more moral weight, to be more justified, to be less like vigilante justice.

Pat, on the other hand, doesn't wait for the community to come around and work with her. She's like a lone crusader. But no matter how much Natalie deserved it, this aspect of her murder will always bother me--even if Pat was right, it's not right for her to be judge, jury and executioner.

Very well put, Abzug. :clap

This comparison of Abzug's is such a good one. When you compare Renee Williams and Natalie Buxton, both were about as dangerous as each other. Natalie Buxton had a black belt in karate while Renee Williams had that very dangerous female gangland boss aura yet it was left to Pat to do her vigilante work by herself. I suppose that in Series 2, there were a collection of strong characters like Yvonne, Crystal, Denny, Nikki whereas Pat just had the backing of the Julies and the others were more passive. I think I've got this right though I'm open to correction.

I think it's probably got a lot to do with the fact that there were far more strong characters - who we believed would be capable of the deed - in series 2 than there were in series 8.

That's true, but there's still something about it which makes me morally uncomfortable. Like, it was ok with Renee and Fenner because MANY people thought they should die, to the point that those many people took action. But with Nat, while many people may have wished for her to die, only one person took action. You could argue the Julies are more passive, etc etc, but it was actually the Julies who killed Fenner in the end, so when they want to make something happen, they can and do. So I think there will always be something that troubles me about Pat acting alone and executing Natalie.

Probably what you're getting at, Abzug, is the idea of a fair trial, hence your reference to a jury system. Of course, being in prison, there are obvious limits to the practical possibilities. The nearest there came to that as an explicit was when Yvonne called for a meeting when Shaz and Denny were found out to have played the trick on Buki of the 'Phil McCrackin' letters to her. I thoroughly understand your reservations about the 'individual vigilante' idea as it depends solely on the fairness and good judgment of that individual. Vigilante justice in the wrong hands can and has done real harm.

Hm I agree that Pat killing Natalie Buxton seems to be more morally troubling than the murders of both Renee Williams and Fenner, but at the risk of sounding like a certain unsympathetic PO a murder is a murder is a murder. I have issues with the idea that just because more people where involved (or could have been) in the murders of Fenner and Renee they seem more justifiable. Not because I have an ounce of sympathy for either of them, but I don't think murder is more valid when done by a group or even by a society. Especially not by a society actually.