The West Wing S5

[coalescent]

The West Wing used to be set in another world. Their maps didn't match up exactly with our maps. There was some overlap, of course, but there was also room for places like Qumar; places that you suspected allowed the writing staff to be bolder in their statements about foreign policy than they might otherwise be able to get away with.

Their people didn't match up exactly with our people, either. Their people were better than us, from Jed Bartlet on down. Smarter, funnier, more moral. More linguistically dextrous. They were everything you wanted politicians to be. That's why we loved them. Realism was hardly the point. It's not that the show was escapism--quite the opposite, it was often piercingly insightful--it's that it was aspirational.

The West Wing was the closest thing to a fiction of ideas I've ever seen on TV, to the point where sometimes the characters were little more than talking heads. Those smart, funny, moral people would argue passionately with each other about what the best solution to a given policy issue might be. Often they didn't win, but that was hardly the point either; what mattered was trying, and debating, and caring.

Then, at the end of the fourth season, Aaron Sorkin left.

I've just finished watching the last of the season five episodes that Dan sent me. That was episode 21, 'Gaza'. The name was a worry to start with; the episode itself was a disaster.

I don't know why I was expecting anything else. The rest of the season had been more or less a disaster, too, right from the season premiere. '7A WF 83429' lacked the Sorkinesque dialogue, the quickfire debate, the sense of proportion. Even the lighting was darker, moodier. The one element recognisable from earlier seasons was the use of music over the last few minutes of the story, but this time it seemed crass and obvious (and by the end of the season the gambit had been used so many times as to have become self-parody).

I saw good things in some of the other early episodes, though, even while the plots were becoming larger than life, becoming about events rather than policies--the federal government being shut down over a budgetary dispute, for instance. But in hindsight, it's clear that The West Wing changed dramatically the day Sorkin left; and the second half of the season spiralled down from 'disappointing' all the way into 'bad'.

When the episodes weren't about Big Issues--Toby single-handedly reforming social security, or someone setting off nukes in the Indian Ocean--they were about ludicrous character development--the revelation that CJ had an affair with Hoynes, for instance, or the suggestion that Abby Bartlet was developing a drug problem, or the absurdly forced tension between Toby and Will. When they deigned to feature debate at all, it was clunky, clumsy stuff; take the 'science is good!' rhetoric of 'Eppur Si Muove' or the soundbite-friendly take on global trade presented in 'Talking Points'. There was no nuance, and no joy. Every character developed feet of clay.

And we won't talk about the muppets.

(There was also one almost-exception: 'The Supremes', a hugely enjoyable episode about the appointment of a new Supreme Court Justice. For forty-three minutes the spark and the wit and the glory in process as well as results all seemed to be back, even if not quite at their former heights. Then they went away again.)

All of which leads up to 'Gaza', the penultimate episode of the season. The title sounds alarm bells all on its own; this is The West Wing colliding with our world, with our politics. The end product is possibly the most structurally and politically confused episode the show has ever produced.

The West Wing has frequently delighted in telling its stories nonlinearly; flashbacks are an integral part of its lexicon. Here the structure is flabby and awkward. As for the politics: 'Gaza' is the episode that forced me to realise, once and for all, how far the pendulum has swung. No longer is The West Wing about the politics of aspiration. Now, it's about the politics of sensation.

The West Wing used to be set in another world. More's the pity, it still is.

(I had a morbid desire to find out what happens next; it sounds about as bad as it could be. Then I made the mistake of looking at some episode synopses for season 6. Hoo boy. There really is always a lower place.)

Comments

Hmm...

[applez.livejournal.com]

I don't know whether to be happy or sad that you are coming around to my view about WW... :-/

Re: Hmm...

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

If you held this view before the start of the fifth season, there are not the words for how wrong you are. :-p

[tinimaus.livejournal.com]

There really is always a lower place.

I was going to say "you realize this now after all your time on usenet and with Tim", but then I thought that it is somehow worse when I happens to a once beloved show. Shame.

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

At least it's got so bad that I'm actually giving up. Not just dropped a few notches but still been basically ok, sometimes, on a good week ...

[tinimaus.livejournal.com]

I never got into it because of its scheduling. What I saw of the early stuff I really liked. Now that it's gone downhill they are showing it at a more sensible time. How annoying is that.

And if you think S5 is bad...

[xsabx.livejournal.com]

S6 appears to be topping even that. However, looking at LJ, there seems to be a new 'generation' who are picking up and getting into the show at it's present level. Lord knows what they're gonna think when they go back and watch the re-runs in the US on Bravo...

[hawleygriffen.livejournal.com]

If you didn't enjoy 'Gaza', I don't think you'd much like the finale, either. And, boy, it was a mistake looking at the synopses. I wish I hadn't. :/

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

And, boy, it was a mistake looking at the synopses.

I actually find it hard to believe they're real, even after this past season ...

And no, I don't want to see the finale. I wouldn't mind seeing 'Access', though, since Dan didn't supply a copy of that either, and it sounds vaguely interesting, if potentially gimmicky.

[hawleygriffen.livejournal.com]

I actually find it hard to believe they're real, even after this past season ...

You wouldn't find it hard after watching the finale, if that's... no help at all to know.

If only the rest of the season could have been like The Supremes.

My mind is unmade up on Access. I'm afraid I have no copy to lend. Do not htink you're missing too much, though.

[veggiesu.livejournal.com]

I wasn't sure whether to read behind the cut, given that I've not seen beyond the first few episodes of season 5. The I decided that it's going to be so long until I get to see it that a few spoilers won't matter.

the revelation that CJ had an affair with Hoynes, for instance, or the suggestion that Abby Bartlet was developing a drug problem, or the absurdly forced tension between Toby and Will

This made me glad I cleared The West Wing off the tivo - these are storylines I just don't want to see. I'm not sure I want to see any more West Wing ever... I'll stick with my DVDs, and console myself with the fact that we were lucky to get what we did. Intelligent TV series are few and far between (just look what happened to Firefly), so to get the amount of West Wing that we did, before it got hamstrung by idiots and fools - well, we have *something* to be grateful for. Not fucking much, but something.

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

Watch 'The Supremes' if it's ever repeated at a convenient time. Don't bother with the rest (although Iain and Mr Poulter may be along in a minute to argue with me on that).

At least there's new Carnivale in the spring ...

[veggiesu.livejournal.com]

I've not seen any Carnivale - I don't appear to get the necessary channel :-(

[iainjclark.livejournal.com]

I must note, however, that the CJ and Abbey things are not major storylines at all - just brief elements of particular episodes. They do seem a bit odd - especially, for me, the CJ one (since the other was as much about Leo's past as Abbey's present) - but they're used in passing as part of an overall story. They're not the focus of the show beyond a brief C-plot.

The Will and Toby thing is just unfuriating, though. Will really has been kidnapped and replaced by a Space Alien since Sorkin left.

[itchyfidget.livejournal.com]

Yes, there really always is a lower place. I just got done watching Season 5 and the first few eps of Season 6, kindly sent to me by groolover. I haven't posted about it because it felt like such a difficult, painful thing to do, like dissecting a friendship that's gone bad.

What the show has become is just desperately sad. The West Wing is - was - my all-time favourite show. But since Aaron Sorkin left, it's become ER. Every week we see the equivalent of a helicopter crashing into the building. The lightness and deftness of touch is gone. The humour, which used to be smart and uplifting, barely rises above gallows-level most of the time, and is leaden. And we've left The West Wing more times in one series than Sorkin's script managed in four.

THE SUBTLETY IS GONE, MAN!

*cries*

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

Every week we see the equivalent of a helicopter crashing into the building.

Yes! That's exactly it.

And we've left The West Wing more times in one series than Sorkin's script managed in four.

Yeah. And let's face it, the format doesn't work when it goes out on location.

*cries*

I know. I know. :(

[ajp.livejournal.com]

The subtlety is gone; but that doesn't mean that the show is bad.

It's certainly not what it was before, there can be no doubt about that; it's not the same show. But I don't think it's fair to say that it's bad.

It may be intellectually less rigorous than it was before, but (frankly) it's still a heck of a lot better than anything else on tv.

[despotliz.livejournal.com]

Now all the West Wing fans know why Iv'e been cursing the name of John Wells since Season 5 of ER. BECAUSE HE'S SHIT. Or possibly because under his rule the subtle, character based drama of ER got changed by plotlines with all the subtletly of a smack on the head from a baseball bat, stunt casting was everywhere, and there were car and train and helicopter crashes galore just for the sake of them, and not because they actuallyhad a role in the plot.

OK, that feels better. I don't think I'm going to watch the rest of TWW season 5.

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

*hugs liz*

[hawleygriffen.livejournal.com]

I guess I'd gotten used to it with ER, and it just became fun to watch the show to mock and snark. But, with West Wing, I don't wanna do that. The more I read of next season's synopses, the more it looks like melodramatic fanfic.

I think you're wise not to watch the rest.

[wg.livejournal.com]

The summaries are just depressing. We downloaded S5, but stopped watching it ourselves about half way through when it just got too bad (this is why you don't have the season finale, as we forgot to get it or lost it once we had).

I love these characters, and watching them behave so totally wrong is very hard. Eurgh.

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

I can't work out if character-that-apparently-resigns actually leaves the series or not. If they do, it's a crying shame (but fair play to the actor for just wanting out, I guess).

[ajp.livejournal.com]

The title sounds alarm bells all on its own; this is The West Wing colliding with our world, with our politics.

Actually, on this - I can't help but agree with you. I am not a fan of this, the "real world" gets in the way of the stories. "Collision" is a good word.

No longer is The West Wing about the politics of aspiration. Now, it's about the politics of sensation.

That's a nice line; but I'm not sure it's quite true. Don't forget the West Wing has always been about playing with ideas that you would never (or rarely) see in reality. Under Aaron's stewardship we saw an assassination attempt, a huge "non-disclosure" scandal, an American plot to assassinate a terrorist leader (and head of State), and the kidnapping of the President's daughter. I really don't think it's fair to claim that none of these events has a sensationalist element to them.

Are any of those really any worse than the events of "Gaza"? I agree that there is the issue of the collision with the "real world" into these; but to accuse the show of "sensation" now, is to overlook the finales to the first four seasons.

When the episodes weren't about Big Issues--Toby single-handedly reforming social security, or someone setting off nukes in the Indian Ocean--they were about ludicrous character development--the revelation that CJ had an affair with Hoynes, for instance, or the suggestion that Abby Bartlet was developing a drug problem, or the absurdly forced tension between Toby and Will. When they deigned to feature debate at all, it was clunky, clumsy stuff; take the 'science is good!' rhetoric of 'Eppur Si Muove' or the soundbite-friendly take on global trade presented in 'Talking Points'. There was no nuance, and no joy.

Toby and Social Security

I agree that was not the show's finest hour. There's plenty wrong with that episode.

Nuclear weapons tests in the Indian ocean

Actually I don't understand the (very vocal) objections to this. Yes to suggest that the Israeli's could secretly have a Nuclear submarine, was somewhat ridiculous; but to suggest that they might test one of their nuclear weapons - isn't too far fetched, I don't think. Remember that the central element of the story (an Israeli submarine-launched (conventional) missile tests in the Indian ocean) was a real news story.

the revelation that CJ had an affair with Hoynes

That was weak plotting, but I don't hate it as much as many people do.

he suggestion that Abby Bartlet was developing a drug problem

It's too early to know what they're doing with this; but there is some interesting potential.

the absurdly forced tension between Toby and Will.

That I must admit, I do not like.

the 'science is good!' rhetoric of 'Eppur Si Muove'

It was over simplified; I'll grant you.

the soundbite-friendly take on global trade presented in 'Talking Points'.

I didn't like that episode all that much, but more because it failed to win the arguments it presented.

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

Under Aaron's stewardship we saw an assassination attempt, a huge "non-disclosure" scandal, an American plot to assassinate a terrorist leader (and head of State), and the kidnapping of the President's daughter. I really don't think it's fair to claim that none of these events has a sensationalist element to them.

Ah, but two things come into play here: firstly (with the possible exception of Zoe's abduction) none of them were handled in a sensationalist manner, whereas I think similar plotlines this season have been; and secondly, I can cite more examples of this sort of thing for season five than you can cite for the other four seasons put together.

[iainjclark.livejournal.com]

Like Andrew, I think that lack of subtlety and consistency are flaws, but do not necessarily make for a bad show. It remains one of the few shows in TV that even bothers to pay lip service to debating these issues, let alone reaching any conclusions.

If I had to pin down the changes since Sorkin left it's these:

* Inconsistency of tone - the show flops back and forth from one week to the next, with characters not always feeling the same as in the preceding episode. This improved as S5 went on, though.

* Less wit and sparkle in the dialogue. It *can* still do clever and well written dialogue, but rarely (i.e. The Supremes) does it feel like Sorkin's penmanship.

* Willingness to change the status quo. This is not *necessarily* a bad thing, because Sorkin could be too cautious in this area. Endless "let Bartlet Be Bartlet" speeches, but never any chance to change or accomplish anything. In this respect the odd Victory for our guys is quite velcome, and counterbalances their many ongoing defeats and frustrations.

* Shift to the Real World. This is something you note, and it's again not one that strikes me as bad, because the show can tackle head on some unfomfortable political situations. I don't see it as sensationalist (I mean, seriously, assassinating the head of a foreign state, and kidnapping the President's daughter *weren't* sensationalist?) but as a different approach to making the show relevant.

* Will Bailey is an Evil Clone Who Must Be Killed.

* The show has lost that perfect, Camelot quiality. This is perhaps the most problemmatic change, and the haicest to overcome for most viewers. It's just not nice watching Our Heroes fail to get along, and fail to be the noble people we've seen them be. If I have a major disappointment with the show it's this.

* ...and this: the "dumbing down". I want to be clear on this - IMO, in no way is the show *aiming* to be dumber, or less subtle, or more populist; it's aiming for Smart. Many weeks, to a surprising degree, it achieves it. Many weeks, to a surprising degree, it doesn't. Early in the season Bartlet in particular seemed to have lost all his communication skills, but thankfully they made a return later on in the year. It's a wider problem than that though - some episodes really do pin down an issue and make it squirm, but many just wave at the issue on the way past. I think you’re very hard on ‘Eppur Si Muove’ which was both subtle and intelligent, with some interesting arguments between Bartlet and Ellie (and hey, even the Muppets sub-plot wasn’t too bad!)

Many of these things are clearly flaws; p,roblems with the show now compared to the show as it once was. But some are merely differences. Overall I’d say that if (and it’s a big if) you can compartmentalise the old show into a nice little box and leave it pristine and untouched in your head, then there’s much to enjoy in S5 of The West Wing. Think of the current season as an inferior spin-off, even. :-)

If however you simply can’t divorce the show *now* from the show *then*, you’ll inevitably be disappointed. Not because it’s always worse than the old show, but because even when it’s good, it’s still very different. There’s a reason everyone likes ‘The Supremes’ – it’s because it feels like Sorkin wrote it. That’s the exception. Personally I’d argue that ‘Gaz’a is a fine episode too – just one Sorkin would never have written.

[iainjclark.livejournal.com]

Gah. Sorry for all the typos in the above. A combination of typing a mad rant, and having my computer slow to a crawl while burning a CD at the same time. :-)