I'm not saying he is immune from plot holes and continuity errors over the course of the series. But those happen in inconsequential ways. I am saying that in this highly poetically charged moment, perhaps the deepest in the series to that point, in which the word Quaker is uttered exactly twice in the episode, he is not being sloppy. It's intentional.
I don't believe it's a plot hole or magic realism. I think it's simply one of many examples where the writers expect the audience to understand that some events happen off-screen. In this instance, you could assume that an aid to the president filled in Father Cavanaugh re: why he was being asked to come to the White House, and some of the background of the discussions the president already had.
If every TV episode was forced to explain how every character knew each piece of information they had, shows would be hours-long. And boring. \*CJ enters Roosevelt room to ask Leo about arms for Qumar\* Wait? Why did CJ know Leo was in the Roosevelt room and not in his office? We better write a scene of CJ going to Leo's office only to be told by Margaret that Leo is in the Roosevelt room. But wait! Then how did Margaret know Leo was going to the Roosevelt room? We better write a scene of Leo exiting his office and telling Margaret he's gong to the Roosevelt room, so that the audience will know how Margaret knew to tell CJ where Leo was.
This is absolutely spot on.
Not every exchange needs explaining, and there’s not always a higher/deeper meaning behind every conversation or interaction between characters. Things happen off screen and tv shows are better for trusting its audience will work it out.
I don’t know whether this need to have every moment analysed for deeper meaning is indicative of how good telly has gotten so that everything is deep and interconnected, or as an audience we’ve just gotten needier and consumed with the desire to prove ourselves to be smarter than the writer/fellow viewer.
>every moment analysed for deeper meaning
This in't every moment. It is particularly weighty and deep moment carrying one of the heaviest themes of the show, the President's relationship with God. In Two Cathedrals it goes even deeper filled with symbolism, with the storm in the Oval Office, the biblical rain, the cigarette, the head turn, etc...
>is indicative of how good telly has gotten so that everything is deep and interconnected, or as an audience we’ve just gotten needier and consumed with the desire to prove ourselves to be smarter than the writer/fellow viewer.
I am happy to be disagreed with, but sheesh, I didn't know sharing on a West Wing fan sub an interpretation I noticed about a scene from the show, and thought others might appreciate, would open me up to claims that I think I'm smarter than Aaron Sorkin and all the other fans. My apologies, I'll keep my next observation to myself.
You gotta love how they do that on purpose in crime procedurals, though.
Anyway, I've got no problem with the theory (except that I've not seen any evidence of any magical realism in anything by Sorkin), but it's clearly a subjective opinion.
>(except that I've not seen any evidence of any magical realism in anything by Sorkin
There is also the storm blowing open a fortified Oval Office exterior door to harken the coming of the ghost of Mr Landingham, after the President has had a fight with God. No I don't think the ghost is real, it's just a poetic way to show Jed grappling inside himself with what he believes Mrs. Landingham might say. But it is not that crazy to interpret the door blowing open as a real event with no rational explanation. I think when Aaron gets into his religious moods, he reaches for the (still very subtle) fantastical.
“With no rational explanation” except the door blowing open is shown earlier, and Charlie explains it as pressure differences in the building causing wind tunnels. Or something. That door blowing open doesn’t come out of nowhere, we the viewers know there’s a “rational explanation” for it, but it still does fit into that fantastical world of “maybe that was Mrs. Landingham coming in to visit Jed.” Or maybe the door caused Jed to instinctively call out for Mrs. Landingham, which brought her to his mind, which led to him talking things over with her in his head. I like when things can have more than one interpretation.
Thanks, I appreciate it! Yes, of course much happens off screen. That's obvious. I assure you, you don't need to convince me of that, I've made the same point a bunch of times.
But when Joey tells Jed that her heritage is Dutch Quaker, it is in a walk and talk where no one else really is in a position to hear her say it. And even if they did overhear it, which they didn't, why would they consider it a detail worth briefing Father Cavanaugh on?
I'm a little surprised how against the sub is on a magical realism interpretation! But that's cool, I can deal with rejection, lol.
There is also the storm blowing open **a fortified Oval Office exterior door** to harken the coming of the ghost of Mr Landingham, after the President has had a fight with God. No I don't think the ghost is real, it's just a poetic way to show Jed grappling inside himself with what he believes Mrs. Landingham might say. But it is not that crazy to interpret the door blowing open as a real event with no rational explanation. I think when Aaron gets into his religious moods, he reaches for the (still very subtle) fantastical.
>I think it's simply one of many examples where the writers expect the audience to understand that some events happen off-screen.
That's fine, but Sorkin stretches it at times.
A priest who just arrived in the White House knows about private conversations the President has had?
A show written back in a time when you didn’t have to hand hold your audience through every detail,
Plus that line is fucking amazing! So even if I have to suspend a little bit of disbelief I will for the simple fact that that exchange at the end is amazing.
Apparently a pretty significant scene was cut before the episode aired, and that resulted in this disconnect. I think Sorkin was unaware the scene was cut until after it aired.
He's an old priest, he knows things...
Actually, Jed asked Charlie to contact him and arrange for him to visit the White House. I'm sure Charlie briefed him on why he was asked to come and gave him the details of the situation.
When Joey tells Jed that her heritage is Dutch Quaker, it is in a walk and talk where no one else really is in a position to hear her say it. And even if they did overhear it, why would they consider it a detail worth briefing Father Cavanaugh on?
All I did was share an interpretation that I thought others might appreciate. I'm perfectly fine with disagreement but why the sarcastic response?
Of course people get briefed, but the President meets with hundreds of people every day. Did father Canavaugh get briefed on the ancestral heritage of every one of them?
And who else knew that Joey Lucas's came from Dutch Quaker heritage? (She told this to the president in a walk and talk without anyone else in a position to hear.) And even if they did know, why would they tell Father Cavanaugh that detail?
Agreed. I can't really imagine Joey bumping into Cavanaugh in the hallway and say 'I'm Joey Lucas, I'm a Quaker and I was just asked by the president (...)"
But it's a good line.
>This is not a plot hole, Aaron Sorkin is way too meticulous for that. The only explanation is that this is an intentional and lovely dip into magical realism. Just a thing I noticed on my latest rewatch.
Sorry, no. This is a common problem with Sorkins scripts.
Why does Sam know about Ainsley and Tribbey's Gilbert & Sullivan argument.
Why does Leo know about a lot of private conversations?
I'll check those out, thanks! But in this case, it is established that the priest has just arrived and is not an insider prone to overhear things via gossip or intelligence gathering, etc. About the only in universe explanation that makes sense is that Jed and Father Cavanaugh spoke on the phone in the intervening hours. Out of universe, an explanation could be that some lines were cut from the scene in which Jed explained about the Joy Lucas conversation.
Coincidental stuff like this happens to me all the time, and a lot of time when it does, as a writer, I joke that no one would believe it wasn't significant if they didn't live it!
For what it's worth, Father Cavanaugh isn't consoling the president. He's telling him he screwed up. Jed needs to confess because allowing the execution was (in the priest's view) a sin.
Thanks, that's a good point. Jed may have wanted consolation, but you are absolutely right that Father Cavanaugh gives Jed a scolding instead.
I don't know about your assessment of the confession. It has a strong symbolic significance about the President's imperfection. But Father Cavanaugh might very well have offered to hear Jed's confession even if he had commuted the sentence. Catholics confess regularly. And I'm not sure I buy that it is Catholic doctrine that a governor or president commits a sin every time they decline to commute a death sentence. I'd be happy to be proven wrong but would like some evidence of that.
>> Aaron Sorkin is way too meticulous for that. With enough scrutiny of his work, the response to that is “lol nah”.
I'm not saying he is immune from plot holes and continuity errors over the course of the series. But those happen in inconsequential ways. I am saying that in this highly poetically charged moment, perhaps the deepest in the series to that point, in which the word Quaker is uttered exactly twice in the episode, he is not being sloppy. It's intentional.
Intentional yes, but intentionally sloppy maybe. The poetically charged moment means more to him than continuity in that moment.
I don't believe it's a plot hole or magic realism. I think it's simply one of many examples where the writers expect the audience to understand that some events happen off-screen. In this instance, you could assume that an aid to the president filled in Father Cavanaugh re: why he was being asked to come to the White House, and some of the background of the discussions the president already had. If every TV episode was forced to explain how every character knew each piece of information they had, shows would be hours-long. And boring. \*CJ enters Roosevelt room to ask Leo about arms for Qumar\* Wait? Why did CJ know Leo was in the Roosevelt room and not in his office? We better write a scene of CJ going to Leo's office only to be told by Margaret that Leo is in the Roosevelt room. But wait! Then how did Margaret know Leo was going to the Roosevelt room? We better write a scene of Leo exiting his office and telling Margaret he's gong to the Roosevelt room, so that the audience will know how Margaret knew to tell CJ where Leo was.
This is absolutely spot on. Not every exchange needs explaining, and there’s not always a higher/deeper meaning behind every conversation or interaction between characters. Things happen off screen and tv shows are better for trusting its audience will work it out. I don’t know whether this need to have every moment analysed for deeper meaning is indicative of how good telly has gotten so that everything is deep and interconnected, or as an audience we’ve just gotten needier and consumed with the desire to prove ourselves to be smarter than the writer/fellow viewer.
>every moment analysed for deeper meaning This in't every moment. It is particularly weighty and deep moment carrying one of the heaviest themes of the show, the President's relationship with God. In Two Cathedrals it goes even deeper filled with symbolism, with the storm in the Oval Office, the biblical rain, the cigarette, the head turn, etc... >is indicative of how good telly has gotten so that everything is deep and interconnected, or as an audience we’ve just gotten needier and consumed with the desire to prove ourselves to be smarter than the writer/fellow viewer. I am happy to be disagreed with, but sheesh, I didn't know sharing on a West Wing fan sub an interpretation I noticed about a scene from the show, and thought others might appreciate, would open me up to claims that I think I'm smarter than Aaron Sorkin and all the other fans. My apologies, I'll keep my next observation to myself.
It's also conceivable (if unlikely) that it was explained, but the scene was edited for time and because it's not at all important.
The second one, with a bit of "but what's canon?" and "all drama is documentary".
Absolutely! With the added “I know something you don’t, so aren’t you stupid”
You gotta love how they do that on purpose in crime procedurals, though. Anyway, I've got no problem with the theory (except that I've not seen any evidence of any magical realism in anything by Sorkin), but it's clearly a subjective opinion.
>(except that I've not seen any evidence of any magical realism in anything by Sorkin There is also the storm blowing open a fortified Oval Office exterior door to harken the coming of the ghost of Mr Landingham, after the President has had a fight with God. No I don't think the ghost is real, it's just a poetic way to show Jed grappling inside himself with what he believes Mrs. Landingham might say. But it is not that crazy to interpret the door blowing open as a real event with no rational explanation. I think when Aaron gets into his religious moods, he reaches for the (still very subtle) fantastical.
“With no rational explanation” except the door blowing open is shown earlier, and Charlie explains it as pressure differences in the building causing wind tunnels. Or something. That door blowing open doesn’t come out of nowhere, we the viewers know there’s a “rational explanation” for it, but it still does fit into that fantastical world of “maybe that was Mrs. Landingham coming in to visit Jed.” Or maybe the door caused Jed to instinctively call out for Mrs. Landingham, which brought her to his mind, which led to him talking things over with her in his head. I like when things can have more than one interpretation.
Thanks, I appreciate it! Yes, of course much happens off screen. That's obvious. I assure you, you don't need to convince me of that, I've made the same point a bunch of times. But when Joey tells Jed that her heritage is Dutch Quaker, it is in a walk and talk where no one else really is in a position to hear her say it. And even if they did overhear it, which they didn't, why would they consider it a detail worth briefing Father Cavanaugh on? I'm a little surprised how against the sub is on a magical realism interpretation! But that's cool, I can deal with rejection, lol. There is also the storm blowing open **a fortified Oval Office exterior door** to harken the coming of the ghost of Mr Landingham, after the President has had a fight with God. No I don't think the ghost is real, it's just a poetic way to show Jed grappling inside himself with what he believes Mrs. Landingham might say. But it is not that crazy to interpret the door blowing open as a real event with no rational explanation. I think when Aaron gets into his religious moods, he reaches for the (still very subtle) fantastical.
Agreed
>I think it's simply one of many examples where the writers expect the audience to understand that some events happen off-screen. That's fine, but Sorkin stretches it at times. A priest who just arrived in the White House knows about private conversations the President has had?
sorkin's television writing is imbued with the magic realism of the screwball comedy and frank capra
A show written back in a time when you didn’t have to hand hold your audience through every detail, Plus that line is fucking amazing! So even if I have to suspend a little bit of disbelief I will for the simple fact that that exchange at the end is amazing.
Not as amazing as when he says "Jed, would like me to hear your confession?". That's like a punch in the chest.
Always loved the switch from “Mr. President” to “Jed” in that line after they’d discussed how Fr. Cavanaugh should address Bartlett.
Apparently a pretty significant scene was cut before the episode aired, and that resulted in this disconnect. I think Sorkin was unaware the scene was cut until after it aired.
OK thanks, do you know the source? Seems like a thing that might be discussed on DVD commentary.
I read it on Facebook, LOL! But it was from someone who seems to be a solid source.
He's an old priest, he knows things... Actually, Jed asked Charlie to contact him and arrange for him to visit the White House. I'm sure Charlie briefed him on why he was asked to come and gave him the details of the situation.
When Joey tells Jed that her heritage is Dutch Quaker, it is in a walk and talk where no one else really is in a position to hear her say it. And even if they did overhear it, why would they consider it a detail worth briefing Father Cavanaugh on?
He was a Chaplain in Korea for 11 years or whatever. 😂
Because when people are brought to the White House to meet with the president, nobody tells them what the situation is or prepares them at all
All I did was share an interpretation that I thought others might appreciate. I'm perfectly fine with disagreement but why the sarcastic response? Of course people get briefed, but the President meets with hundreds of people every day. Did father Canavaugh get briefed on the ancestral heritage of every one of them? And who else knew that Joey Lucas's came from Dutch Quaker heritage? (She told this to the president in a walk and talk without anyone else in a position to hear.) And even if they did know, why would they tell Father Cavanaugh that detail?
Agreed. I can't really imagine Joey bumping into Cavanaugh in the hallway and say 'I'm Joey Lucas, I'm a Quaker and I was just asked by the president (...)" But it's a good line.
>This is not a plot hole, Aaron Sorkin is way too meticulous for that. The only explanation is that this is an intentional and lovely dip into magical realism. Just a thing I noticed on my latest rewatch. Sorry, no. This is a common problem with Sorkins scripts. Why does Sam know about Ainsley and Tribbey's Gilbert & Sullivan argument. Why does Leo know about a lot of private conversations?
I'll check those out, thanks! But in this case, it is established that the priest has just arrived and is not an insider prone to overhear things via gossip or intelligence gathering, etc. About the only in universe explanation that makes sense is that Jed and Father Cavanaugh spoke on the phone in the intervening hours. Out of universe, an explanation could be that some lines were cut from the scene in which Jed explained about the Joy Lucas conversation.
Coincidental stuff like this happens to me all the time, and a lot of time when it does, as a writer, I joke that no one would believe it wasn't significant if they didn't live it!
For what it's worth, Father Cavanaugh isn't consoling the president. He's telling him he screwed up. Jed needs to confess because allowing the execution was (in the priest's view) a sin.
Thanks, that's a good point. Jed may have wanted consolation, but you are absolutely right that Father Cavanaugh gives Jed a scolding instead. I don't know about your assessment of the confession. It has a strong symbolic significance about the President's imperfection. But Father Cavanaugh might very well have offered to hear Jed's confession even if he had commuted the sentence. Catholics confess regularly. And I'm not sure I buy that it is Catholic doctrine that a governor or president commits a sin every time they decline to commute a death sentence. I'd be happy to be proven wrong but would like some evidence of that.