The Most Powerful Episode Yet
By Glen Gabbard
Posted Monday, March 19, 2001, at 10:35 PM ETWho are these people?
Dear Joel, Peggy, and Phil,
Sunday night's episode was the most powerful yet. The rape scene was extraordinarily graphic, and the writers used it ingeniously. Because of the brutality of it, the audience was wanting Jennifer to subvert the therapy process and enlist Tony's help in whacking the rapist. As they have done in other episodes, though, Mitch Burgess and Robin Green, two of the best writers, brought Jennifer to the brink of the abyss only to have her step back at the last moment. Her sobbing seemed to signal the role reversal that so often precedes a major boundary violation. Yet just when we thought she had succumbed to the "charms of a sociopath," as she described it to Elliot, she regained her composure. Her last comment, "No," which was followed by a blackout was like a thunderclap that reverberated for several minutes afterward.
By the way, I think this is the first time in any cinematic or TV depiction of therapy that a therapist actually uses her own therapy effectively to deal with her countertransference. Note also that she had chosen not to reveal her patient's name to her therapist in the same way that Tony keeps certain things concealed from her.
Glen Gabbard
The Most Powerful Episode Yet
By Glen Gabbard
Posted Monday, March 19, 2001, at 10:35 PM ETThis spring, Slate will ask Dr. Melfi's real-life counterparts to examine developments on The Sopranos
. Glen O. Gabbard, M.D., is a professor of psychoanalysis at the Menninger Clinic and co-author of Psychiatry and the Cinema. Philip A. Ringstrom, Ph.D., Psy.D., is an analyst at the Institute of Contemporary Psychoanalysis in Los Angeles and a full-time practitioner. Joel Whitebook, a practicing analyst in New York, is on the faculty of the Columbia Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research. Margaret Crastnopol, Ph.D., is on the faculty of the Northwest Center for Psychoanalysis and a practicing psychologist/psychoanalyst in Seattle. Click here to comment on Sunday night's episode. Reader Comments From The Fray:
Margaret Crastnopol hit it right on the head: we are being too easy on Melfi (or at least the portrayal of Melfi). Fact is, Tony Soprano is an idiot and she's physically intimidated by him. She's also turned on by him--which is a revolting possibility. Thing is, thousands of women are, in fact, turned on by Tony and his merry band of thugs. Crastnopol's suggestion that the doctor-patient and doctor-doctor power positioning does little to counter stereotypes of weak women being pushed around by angry, stupid men--this is all correct, too. Actually, the whole program is misogynistic and ought not be watched by anyone....yet, I'm strangely attracted to it, bad writing/acting and all. Is it that I'm that desperate for entertainment or is this representative of some deep misogyny within? Doctors, tell me: what drives us (me) to watch this thing, even when I know it's negative TV? There are too many men and women out there watching this and thinking that this is an acceptable way of life. What's wrong with us? A diagnosis, please.
--Phil H.
(To reply, click here.)
To Phil H:
There is nothing wrong with "us." But there is a problem with your formulation of the problem. To enjoy this well-written and well-acted drama, we are not obligated to find that the fictional characters pursue "an acceptable way of life." On the contrary, I would guess that 99.9% of viewers strenuously object to the way Tony puts bread on the Sopranos' table.
We enjoy the bravura plot twists, the odd contrasts, the marvelous characterizations, and the Machiavellian tactics--and the occasionally absurd results of the characters' efforts. The monstrous is combined with the mundane in a striking and amusing way. Consider Tony strangling a mafia traitor as his beloved daughter is interviewed for admission to a genteel New England college.
Millions of people have read and admired Crime and Punishment. Do you suppose they accepted the grotesque reasoning that drove Dostoyevsky's main character? Must we approve of step-patricide to enjoy Hamlet?
Relax and enjoy the series. If you feel the urge to emulate the main characters, call your therapist (or your local sheriff).
--Gary
(To reply, click here.)
On the question of the Mafia don who approved of Tony's therapy: Remember that this was a leader of the Manhattan mob. Probably they are a little more sophisticated than the Jersey crowd. Remember, it was only Junior and Tony's assumption that seeing a shrink was taboo. The New York family was probably way ahead of them.
--Aurora Duane
(To reply, click here.)
(3/15)
What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
SPONSORED CONTENT
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUpon
Is Hasan a Terrorist? And Other Great Stories From Slate This Week.
How Sarah Palin Is Dividing the Republican Party
Can We Apply the Lessons of Y2K to Swine Flu?
They Made a Movie About the Wrong Aviatrix
Jamie Foxx's New Single Is Extremely Lewd
The Week's Best Editorial Cartoons
Reader Comments From The Fray:
Margaret Crastnopol hit it right on the head: we are being too easy on Melfi (or at least the portrayal of Melfi). Fact is, Tony Soprano is an idiot and she's physically intimidated by him. She's also turned on by him--which is a revolting possibility. Thing is, thousands of women are, in fact, turned on by Tony and his merry band of thugs. Crastnopol's suggestion that the doctor-patient and doctor-doctor power positioning does little to counter stereotypes of weak women being pushed around by angry, stupid men--this is all correct, too. Actually, the whole program is misogynistic and ought not be watched by anyone....yet, I'm strangely attracted to it, bad writing/acting and all. Is it that I'm that desperate for entertainment or is this representative of some deep misogyny within? Doctors, tell me: what drives us (me) to watch this thing, even when I know it's negative TV? There are too many men and women out there watching this and thinking that this is an acceptable way of life. What's wrong with us? A diagnosis, please.
--Phil H.
(To reply, click here.)
To Phil H:
There is nothing wrong with "us." But there is a problem with your formulation of the problem. To enjoy this well-written and well-acted drama, we are not obligated to find that the fictional characters pursue "an acceptable way of life." On the contrary, I would guess that 99.9% of viewers strenuously object to the way Tony puts bread on the Sopranos' table.
We enjoy the bravura plot twists, the odd contrasts, the marvelous characterizations, and the Machiavellian tactics--and the occasionally absurd results of the characters' efforts. The monstrous is combined with the mundane in a striking and amusing way. Consider Tony strangling a mafia traitor as his beloved daughter is interviewed for admission to a genteel New England college.
Millions of people have read and admired Crime and Punishment. Do you suppose they accepted the grotesque reasoning that drove Dostoyevsky's main character? Must we approve of step-patricide to enjoy Hamlet?
Relax and enjoy the series. If you feel the urge to emulate the main characters, call your therapist (or your local sheriff).
--Gary
(To reply, click here.)
On the question of the Mafia don who approved of Tony's therapy: Remember that this was a leader of the Manhattan mob. Probably they are a little more sophisticated than the Jersey crowd. Remember, it was only Junior and Tony's assumption that seeing a shrink was taboo. The New York family was probably way ahead of them.
--Aurora Duane
(To reply, click here.)
(3/15)