The Problem of Spooks: Part One

[dweomeroflight]

I've been meaning to write Spooks meta forever but I kept putting it off because I have so much to say, not all of which is complimentary. I love Spooks as a show (most of the time), I love the characters, the actors and the whole "spying thing." I based the title for this post off Neil Gaiman's 'The Problem of Susan': a critical response to C.S.Lewis' treatment of Susan Pevensie in the Chronicles of Narnia. This is because I believe as a writer that critical engagement with a text is important.

In a later post, I will look back and highlight things that have been problematic for Spooks for awhile now (circa s4 and 5) but first I really think I need to deal with Spooks, series nine as myself and the_silverdoe keep spamming up our flist's entries with random Nine Meta and I feel sorry for my poor flist.

There has been so much fandom wank over series nine. So much so that it is very difficult to have an opinion on the matter anywhere but your own blog. It was this wankery that had me leave the forums due to refusal to allow alternative opinions and fan silencing. I was labelled weird things like "intellectual snob" for pointing out the very obvious... "Lucas and John SAY WHAT?" But the thing is, I'm not one to be silenced and I feel like if I just write this all out I will feel alot better and stop annoying everyone with my meta left, right and centre.



Ah. Spooks series nine. Was Lucas North in 9.7 and 8 a character assasination? Was it a case of deconstruction? I don't know if the answers to these questions particularly matter and I don't know if I would go that far myself because what I care about is the quality of the writing itself. What does matter is wether or not the story made sense. Wether or not this made for a logical progression from s7 through to the final reveal in 9.8. The simple answer to this is that no it did not.

And now on to my s9 fandom gripe. There seems to be an odd perception amongst certain people in Spooks fandom that if you disliked Lucas is John story you must be a batshit crazy Armitage Army supporter, or at the very least a person who doesn't mind the odd fantasy about RA and therefore got unjustifyably annoyed when his character ceased to be the hero (the writers seem to number amongst these people from one interview in particular). Such an assertion is frankly idiotic. One can be invested in a character without them being your favourite one or being their fangirl having sexy dreams about them. One can have a favourite character who is bad (HELLO BELLATRIX LESTRANGE/or closer to Spooks spygran/Connie) and still like their character and storyline. It's a very simple equation. Things just have to make sense.

The problem with Spooks series nine and Lucas is John is that without a lot of magical explaining away and filling in gaps yourself it didn't make for an understandable plot. Spooks s7 established an ambiguous plotline re Harry and Lucas and Russian prison and trust issues. This was kind of continued on the side in s8, but mainly Lucas' dedication and loyalty to the team was emphasised. Therefore, the logical plot progression from this point is to have a storyline involving Russia and Harry and the morals and ethics of torture and spooking and most importantly loyalty. Series nine wildly sidestepped this dangling plot thread by creating a new convoluted plot. I'm not saying the plot could never have worked with alot of thought, but never in eight episodes with two new characters in Maya and Vaugn plus a suitcase plus fake file Albany plus Chinese involvement it was all too much! For any writer to coherently manage! Not only that, we were told that Lucas had somehow repressed his personality and had faked being someone else for years, the ultimate betrayer, despite the shows previous insistence on his excessive loyalty. And MI5 had never noticed this.

At this point I will quote another blogger because they said this so much more eloquently than me, Lucas North... Nowhere Man, Mr In Between, The Man Who Never Was. All are fitting, I think, because there are no concise means to capture this enigma in a vortex of illogic that was Lucas' ill-fated storyline and character in Spooks Series 9. When Maya said in 9.8 "You know how I knew it was the truth? Because for the first time you made sense," I agree with Vicky Frost at The Guardian. That's bloody optimistic Maya. Lucas makes less sense than ever before.

The blogger goes on to say, Many have commented on the complete abrogation of this character by the middle of Series 9 for the sake of introducing a psychopath who can't be a psychopath, imaginatively named Bateman. Who is John Bateman? Lucas' alter ego? A split personality? No, he is a remorseless murderer who dreamed 15 years of a noble and self-sacrificial life as an MI 5 Agent, who, then, willy nilly, went back to killing without conscience for the sake of true love and an innocence he never possessed. Lucas/John was all over the place as hestia8 pointed out. One second he was cold blooded and hyper organised and devilishly intelligent. The next he was a snivelling coward with a soft heart who just wanted "To be someone." Well so do I writers, so do I. But I didn't think killing someone would give me my dream identity.

Nothing that happened to not-Lucas could ever be tragic. Nothing was. That he escape or died? A mere bagatelle. After all his banging on, not-Lucas slipped quietly away, unmourned. There was nothing tragic about any part of his life. Not Lucas=John just sos you know ;) And every word of this rings true. John was a cipher, a blank slate, a black spot of evil to prove a point. And this is the reason I suspect, that many fans said they felt nothing when he died.

Now we get onto what is most relevant to me: With the advent of John, the only thing truly tragic about Lucas is that his story was never played out. It was replaced. And Lucas ceased to exist. But all of John's suffering belonged to Lucas and will always belong to Lucas of Series 7 and 8. Not only have the writers ignored the trajectory of Lucas in s7 and 8, they have also ruined fans perceptions of him in those earlier seasons. How difficult is it to block out John now we have seen series nine? How is it possible to seperate Lucas from John when nine is the only complete answer about his character that we will ever get? As the blogger writes, Lucas is not even dignified with any sort of ending, never mind a noble one. He doesn't go out with a bang or a whimper. Meanwhile, the character of Bateman, absurdly, can only pretend to have Lucas' qualities, and pretend to have his emotions and behaviour, like some overgrown sock puppet.


The Lucas is John story is an enormous copout, not just for Lucas/RA/Harry fans, but also and here's the part I wish certain people would get into their thick skulls anyone who was remotely interested in and invested in the Lucas storyline As Spooks has always sold itself as a character ensemble show, it is logical to assume that people are following more than one characters storyline. When a main characters storyline makes about as much sense as inviting Darth Vadar with his deathstar to your wedding, can you blame fans generally, RA fans or otherwise, for getting miffed?

Which brings me to another point. One three star Amazon reviewer wrote a lukewarm but still positive review about Spooks Nine mentioning that in the past it had been claimed that the scripts highlighted the actors talents. In this case, the person wrote, it was a case of the actors salvaging the script. And on the Spooks forum another, more critical person, wrote that the situation with Spooks had always been one of "high hokum fun," as PF said, and really, when have most of the situations ever been strictly believable? No, what anchors people to Spooks is the characters the one constant is connecting with the characters whichever ones they may be.

The Spooks nine writers made the mistake of using ridiculous plotlines with a ridiculous character progression (and it worries me that they seemed to have not learnt from this in terms of s10) and for some fans this has completely shattered both faith in the show and the beliveability factor. Before there was a realness to the characters, they were knowable. With the Lucas storyline there is no believability if you watch the show in sequence, we are not graced with the knowable in how John operates as Lucas, and this leaves us with what? Writers who effectively can retcon any story they like without caring what the fans think because there is so much wankery over the whole thing. And ultimately this is my problem with those who attempt to shut people like me down when we point these things out, when they claim us all to be either elitist snobs or Armitage Army Crazies; these Spooks fans silence an entire section of their own fandom and at the same time, give the writers legitimacy; legitimacy to do the whole thing all over again, perhaps with an even more popular character, with just as little respect for invested viewers.

Storytelling matters, and shock value won't keep fans forever. Have some respect for the show, for its characters, and for your audience who watches it,who would like some answers and would like to not have their intelligence insulted. I'm not saying writers should write to please everyone. They shouldn't. But they do need to respect that the audience is invested in longrunning characters, characters who already have a backstory that has yet to be explained and who already have certain canon traits set out. Respect is not an exclusive right handed to a privelaged few in the audience, it should extend to everyone, regardless of if they are involved with the Armitage Army gang or not. Lucas fans have just as much right to expect a sensible character trajectory for Lucas as Ruth fans expect the same for Ruth, Harry fans for Harry. Their opinion as hardcore RA fans, my opinion as a general Spooks fan, is perfectly as valid as yours.


And on that note I leave you with a question. If it had been Harry with the double life or even Ruth how many people would still be lauding the existential genius of the writers?

Comments

[zulu-ottawa.livejournal.com]

You know, I have fears the writers are going to mind-bend us with regards to Harry's character in S10. :/

IDK. People were very dismissive in the midst of S9. They didn't want to hear your opinion, only deeming Lucas' character as assassinated and being melodramatic. Yes, it was a little faith shaking that the writers went to such extremes, but for me it wasn't the last straw. I was miffed with the plot-line, and its lack of logical explanation, because I had liked Lucas as a character, and I had wanted to know more about Russia/loyalty/trust issues with Harry that had been set up so well in S7 and 8. It seemed to me that the writers felt the need to outdo themselves, thus jumping hurdles into the ridiculous. And no, I don't want my intelligence insulted by illogical plots, but I am patient enough to not cry assassination and give up on the show entirely.
Of course we want sensible character arcs, and we want good endings for our favourite characters. We get attached, and naturally we want to be able to accept their exit from the show. The problem with Lucas' arc was that it became so muddled and ridiculous that I ceased to care. After a certain point, I was apathetic to his actions, motivations, because I could see no reasoning for them and didn't have the energy to try to puzzle out something with seemed nonsensical. It was also a problem of there being new writers, who hadn't written Lucas in his beginnings so didn't quite know what they were dealing with. Neil Cross created a very different character from what S10 writers created. Of course they will always be some discrepancies because everyone's interpretation is different, but these were so extreme Lucas became a character I didn't care about anymore. He wasn't intriguing, because the plot-line I had been interested in, Russia and his loyalty, was dropped. His enigmatic quality was gone, which for me, as a viewer, had been invested in, and wanted to figure out. That apathy it created was a great disservice to the character by the writers. The character from S7 had seeming moral conflict, S9's did not. This 'John' was Lucas' antithesis, foil, whatever. He was the opposite of all the qualities I'd cared about in the character. I didn't care if he wasn't the hero, because in my mind he never quite was, I was more just disappointed with how the writers treated it, with their shocks and twists, instead of, as you say, good solid storytelling. Because for me, this show isn't about the action, though that has increased throughout the years. It's about the characters, and how the job affects them/their lives. It always has been about that, as it was intended in it's infancy. I want that notion to be respected, whoever may be writing the plots.

[dweomeroflight.livejournal.com]

PLEASE NO. NO. PLEASE.

I do understand what you are talking about re the assasination-that's why I didn't want to go there. I am more interested in how anyone who puts their head above the pulpit to say Lucas is John cheated viewers, regardless of how big an Armitage fan they are, is silenced. And I haven't given up on the show either... for three main reasons;
a) s6 was the pits and then s7 really was SOMETHING
b) NICOLA WALKER NICOLA WALKER NICOLA WALKER
c) DIMITRI DOING SOMETHING SQUEEE
But if writers continued to be cavalier in this sense I would possibly give up.

That apathy it created was a great disservice to the character by the writers. The character from S7 had seeming moral conflict, S9's did not. This 'John' was Lucas' antithesis, foil, whatever. He was the opposite of all the qualities I'd cared about in the character. I didn't care if he wasn't the hero, because in my mind he never quite was, I was more just disappointed with how the writers treated it, with their shocks and twists, instead of, as you say, good solid storytelling. Because for me, this show isn't about the action, though that has increased throughout the years. It's about the characters, and how the job affects them/their lives. It always has been about that, as it was intended in it's infancy. I want that notion to be respected, whoever may be writing the plots.

THIS. THIS INTO INFINITY. It's not about being in love with RA, its not about questioning wether or not its character assasination or the show jumping the shark etc, its about new writers coming in and showing little respect for long term viewers, Lucas fans or previous writers. Fior no discernable fucking reason.

[zulu-ottawa.livejournal.com]

Let's not talk of that any further.

a) S6, don't even. But S7 - SPYGRAN. MOSCOW. ROS.
b) AMAZING AMAZING AMAZING. EVEN CRYING, she's STILL AMAZING.
c) AND BEING SMILEY AND HARDCORE ALL AT ONCE.

YES. I think that was really at the heart of it all. Hopefully the writers have realised for S10 that we don't want everything to be shock and awe and explosions, but somehow I'm still wary.

[tigertrapped.livejournal.com]

With the advent of John, the only thing truly tragic about Lucas is that his story was never played out. It was replaced. And Lucas ceased to exist. But all of John's suffering belonged to Lucas and will always belong to Lucas of Series 7 and 8

Brava. Good post, thanks for it.

[dweomeroflight.livejournal.com]

Thanks so much! It had to be written somewhere.

[shezan.livejournal.com]

You sent me here, WITH GOOD REASON. Excellent post indeed.

I could buy treason from any number of much-loved characters. You know my theory about Harry, which I base on a number of elements over the seasons - his friendship with Bernard Qualtrough; his lovingly quoting Marx's "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoléon Bonaparte" in "The Russian" (I think it was) - terrific writing, good old Karl, BTW; even Harry's complicated relationship with Tom Quinn. I could and did buy it from Connie. I could see Adam losing himself into a strange maze of sex, lust, false post-colonial guilt (Adam the Arabist), you name it. Ros, who STARTED OUT as a traitor. And let's not start with Tom, hero of a time when Spooks was splendidly written and the only explosions took place in the minds of the protagonists.

But Lucas had been beautifully structured as more of a straight-arrow than the ambivalent others, refined and defined by his Russian prison; used by his masters here; betrayed by his wife; become "the other" in many ways because he understood the Russians so well (Dershavin!) and at such a basic level. Russian prison was supposed to have stripped him of all the non-essentials - and now we're told he maintained a disguise there, and that his core personality, simultaneously corrupt and base, that lesser and murderous wastrel, was also the most resilient thing about him? DOES. NOT. COMPUTE.

I've always believed that when Lucas mentions his father, the Cumbrian Methodist minister, it's Armitage's character diary injected into the screenplay; but the producers chose to go with it. Armitage himself did some of his finest acting (HEAR ME YOU CAPTAIN AMERICA TOSSERS?) with the kid in the safe house, with his minute pause whe he realises the boy hasn't a clue what Methodism is. (As character development for both of them, it was sublime.) Now you're telling me this kind of body language - so much more convincing thatn the patriotic speeches to Connie - was faked by the Bateman-shaped nonentity inside? GET OUTTA HERE. Bad writing, sloppy homework from the new writer, who obviously COULDN'T BE BOVVERED TO READ THE SERIES BIBLE.

[dweomeroflight.livejournal.com]

Thanks for commenting :)

I am writing an enormously long one shot Lucas aus9 fic right now about prison and Ros and spying and well everything and John just can't come into it. John was a cipher who ultimately signified nothing. He meant nothing, could never mean anything, because we were never shown how he worked.

Ah s7 and 8 Lucas. I love you. I always will.

[moth2fic.livejournal.com]

Good post!

I certainly felt 'cheated'. It wasn't in the least the same as Connie turning out to be a mole or any other 'twists' we have had. This was character A suddenly turning out to be character B and the two had nothing in common. Character twists usually take the character in unexpected directions that can be explained with hindsight etc. but don't normally turn them into other people. It will, I think, lead to a lack of trust in the writers. If Lucas was actually John, why should we believe in Harry or Ruth - or anyone else? It was a step beyond the murky world of spying into the bizarre universe of a psychopath and as such it was not compatible with the 'normal' Spooks storyline.

It seems to have been a strange attempt to create a dramatic plot line and a 'different' exit for RA. For me, it didn't work. Also, I hated the Maya character - the way they used an intelligent woman as a cardboard prop.

My affection for Spooks is largely based on the way well developed characters deal with (but don't necessarily answer) moral questions thrown up by current political trends. Whether these characters turn out to be 'good' or 'bad' I expect them to remain themselves.

I will continue to watch (when I can) - to see where they go with Harry and Ruth, who are my 'favourites' anyway - but I feel wary and distanced.

[dweomeroflight.livejournal.com]

Thanks :)

It wasn't in the least the same as Connie turning out to be a mole or any other 'twists' we have had. This was character A suddenly turning out to be character B and the two had nothing in common. Character twists usually take the character in unexpected directions that can be explained with hindsight etc. but don't normally turn them into other people.

THIS. YES!!! If you're going to turn someone into something else at least have the seeds laid down early so we can have our aha! moment. There's no reason why Lucas couldn't have been the bad traitor... but they had to use the canon that was already there to build off. Maybe they need some lessons in fic writing 101 ;)

It will, I think, lead to a lack of trust in the writers. If Lucas was actually John, why should we believe in Harry or Ruth - or anyone else?

ARGGGH YES EXACTLY. Why should we believe or trust in any chatracter if they can all become unknowable and unexplained at the drop of a hat? Also, if those writers touch Ruth in s10 I will hate them forever and ever.

Whether these characters turn out to be 'good' or 'bad' I expect them to remain themselves.
Yes. It's what zulu_ottawa was saying above. Regardless of how action packed spooks gets, the central theme has remained the same ie how different people deal with the moral grey areas of being a spy. Lucas is John was not about the cost of being a spy (regardless of what the s9 special feature tries to tell me) because he was bad before he was in MI5. He was apparently a rotton apple to start with.

I feel very, very wary too :/ I love Ruth to bits. They better play fair by her or I give up.

[moth2fic.livejournal.com]

If they turn Ruth or Harry into unknown quantities they will have lost me...

I would have had no problems with Lucas turning out to be a traitor, a double agent, programmed by his torturers, anything like that. But John, the 'rotten apple', as he was portrayed by Vaughan and by himself, was someone who would not and could not have behaved the ways Lucas did for so long, so the plotline negated much of the previous seasons. I was never particularly 'invested' in Lucas but I did find his original character interesting and credible.

Yes, they need a course in fic writing:

Dear Script Writers,
Standing a story on its head is not the best way to deal with a sudden need to write out a character. Even if you've had enough explosions, for now, and the character desperately needs to run away to film The Hobbit, you can do better than that! Also, it is courteous to your audience to stay within whatever genre you have chosen. The John story was nothing to to with the world of spying!

[the-silverdoe.livejournal.com]

Dear, this post is so made of win!
Almost everything I think and ever wanted to say about this horrible storyline is there! At least we can meta spam this post now. ;)

Therefore, the logical plot progression from this point is to have a storyline involving Russia and Harry and the morals and ethics of torture and spooking and most importantly loyalty.
YES, YES, AND YES! When I read articles about s9 before the airing, and they talked about loyalty, I thought it was going to be about Russia, and Lucas and Harry finally having a confrontation, because there is something about this storyline that is unfinished, and we will never know what the key to Real!Lucas's story was. That's what angers me the most. That and the fact that the writers didn't give a sh*t about us and the previous writers who created Lucas. Like I said in another comment, I believe in ethics in writing. Apparently, they don't.

Not only have the writers ignored the trajectory of Lucas in s7 and 8, they have also ruined fans perceptions of him in those earlier seasons. How difficult is it to block out John now we have seen series nine? How is it possible to seperate Lucas from John when nine is the only complete answer about his character that we will ever get?
I'm not sure I agree with this point. I've been re-watching some s7 and s8 eps and I only see Lucas, I don't think about John, and for a simple reason: RA didn't/couldn't act in the same way in s9. So my percerption of real!Lucas stops the moment his acting changes. Therefore I don't see John at all when I watch him in s7, I just keep thinking "We will never know what happened to him and it's a shame".

No, what anchors people to Spooks is the characters the one constant is connecting with the characters whichever ones they may be.
Absolutely. What's fantastic about Spooks is that basically it only takes me one ep to like a character because they're so well-written. But if we have to look at them and think "Is he who he is supposed to be? Is he for real or just a joke?" then it doesn't work anymore.

But they do need to respect that the audience is invested in longrunning characters, characters who already have a backstory that has yet to be explained and who already have certain canon traits set out. Respect is not an exclusive right handed to a privelaged few in the audience, it should extend to everyone, regardless of if they are involved with the Armitage Army gang or not.
I agree. They decided to destroy Lucas, but not Ruth or Harry. They made the easy choice, and that's unfair to people who liked Lucas. Although I am really, really scared for Harry in s10. Same thing I said before about Real!Lucas's storyline not being resolved, and here you reach the point that matters the most to me: our investment as viewers in the characters. This is why I felt betrayed. They took the liberty of erasing everything that had been built, and therefore erased emotional bonds as well. Because I couldn't care about s9 Lucas, he was not Lucas anymore. And yes, I have emotional bonds when it comes to characters. I always do, every book, every movie, every TV show, I relate to characters and invest in them. And writers should never be allowed to destroy that. I mean these bonds wouldn't have been destroyed if the story had made sense. I still love Connie, still loved Ros in s6 (though I hate the storyline, but for other reasons), and you mentioned Gisborne at my LJ, well I still liked Gisborne after the s2 finale because it made sense. His character wasn't destroyed. Lucas was, and there was no way we could keep any connection to him, they erased it all.

[the-silverdoe.livejournal.com]

Wow, essay. But I'm not finished, sorry. The last thing I wanted to say about investment in characters, was the "I already know you and therefore relay on you" point, as I call it. Let me explain. Spooks is a show in which characters always end up gone, or dead. What do we do/what do I do when a character I loved is gone? I invest all the more in the characters I already knew and who are still there.
9.1. Ros is dead and I missed her terribly, I know I'm not the only one. Lucas was meant to replace her as Section Chief, it was the logical thing. Therefore I think we should have been able to trust him and rely on him as a replacement for Ros, at least for a few episodes , as we already knew him and, for some of us, cared for him as a character. What did the writers do? They invented a massive unbelievable betrayal from the character we were supposed to emotionally rely on in this series. How was it supposed to work? I felt like I couldn't rest.
I think, in a psychological way, readers/viewers need to be able to depend on a character they trust in order to carry on with the story. But, here: no more Lucas, Harry not knowing what to do anymore and drowned in his not-relationship with Ruth storyline, therefore he couldn't be badass Harry anymore and save the day. Ruth was brilliant but obviously on the verge of depression, Beth was not to be trusted immediately, and Tariq's only the techie. The only character left was Dimitri, hence, imo, the massive investment in Dimitri from the fandom. And I know, I did it too!
And this is another reason why we didn't/couldn't accept this storyline imo, added to the other many obvious reasons you wrote about. :)

If it had been Ruth or Harry? I think more people would've been angry. Many people say: "Oh yeah, Lucas, it was bad", but don't really care. I think it would've been totally different for Ruth and Harry.
Although, personnally, with a good and decent storyline, relating to Cyprus and all, I think Ruth could have become bad and I wouldn't have minded, I could have enjoyed it if it had made sense, of course !
Harry... I don't know. Believable or not believable, I don't want him to be bad. Because I emotionally rely on him from the very beginning. It's Harry, for God's sake. In the end, he's the hero of the show, the only one who's always been there. Please, don't touch Harry. My little heart needs him to remain the same.

(I am sorry about the massive comment. They wouldn't let me post it all in one comment! I guess I needed to say some things too. Great, great post you wrote! I'm going to create a "Spooks meta" keyword in my memories and put this post in it. ;))

[dweomeroflight.livejournal.com]

The problem of character investment and Spooks is something that has been problematic for awhile now due to various writers refusal to give backstories to the entire cast eg Zaf, Tariq, Dimitri, Ben... the damage was already done in previous series. In nine we could invest in Lucas, Harry or Ruth effectively as characters who had proper backstories. There was no stability from the start. Lucas was evil/up to no good, Ruth was depressed and Harry was whinging about his mid life crisis. There was no solid rock to keep the whole thing together. I invested in Dimitri more because of the amazing fics I read with him, then because of his actual story in the series. I add most of the fic stuff as canon now :P

Funny you should mention Ruth and Cyprus. I was dead set certain that was the line they would take at first. I have a meta fic about it on the backburner. I would have liked that storyline too if it would have made sense. NO. Much as I dislike Harry, he could never be actively bad. Morally dubious yes but bad no!

YAY FOR BEING MEM'D.

[dweomeroflight.livejournal.com]

Alas, I still have SO MUCH more to say re previous series and also the s8 and 9 problem with cardboard cutout women. Stay tuned ;) META SPAM. LET'S SEE HOW MANY COMMENTS WE CAN GENERATE!

there is something about this storyline that is unfinished, and we will never know what the key to Real!Lucas's story was. That's what angers me the most.
Yes! One of the Spooks forumers described it as being like a football match with a star player where everything was lined up perfectly for goal (ie the Russia/Harry/trust/torture trajectory) and then the star player got bored and couldn't be bothered to kick the ball into the goal and missed completely in another direction (Lucas is John). The star player then wonders why everyone on his team is angry at him. I can't wait to find some Harry/Lucas fic meta on this subject. Eventually I will get around to writing some.

You have a point re rewatching seven and eight but I know many will find it hard to unremember. Yes, for me though Lucas is forever trapped in space and time, waiting to be remembered by some writers somewhere so the rest of his story can be told. That's a pitiful waste. Unncessarily so.

This is why I felt betrayed. They took the liberty of erasing everything that had been built, and therefore erased emotional bonds as well. Because I couldn't care about s9 Lucas, he was not Lucas anymore.

Me too. Lucas is John is Nothing. He is the quote from Macbeth personified.
"It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."
I disliked the s2 Robin Hood finale because I thought it was a case of show suicide (this turned out to be true... I mean what was that show without the Guy/Robin/Marian love triangle. Those writers shot themselves in the foot but the characters retained their belivability, their realness).
But NotLucas! was a case of somebody who you could never ever care about because he was never ever explained. Why did he act as he did? How did he operate as the character Lucas? And more importantly, why did Lucas always feel so much more real than his supposed real personality of John. As a writer, you've got to make us believe in the characters and their stories. John was an enigma, a cipher, a question mark. The show even said so. "I am nothing," he said to Harry. No Lucas, you were and could have been so, so much more...

[shezan.livejournal.com]

My Series 10 is that Lucas was always Lucas, but built up the "John" backstory with a secret branch of the JIC in order to trap Harry, who's the REAL mole, has been betraying Britain for decades. (See my reasons above.) The various characters-from-his-past were SBoJIC agents acting. John/Lucas did not die when he jumped, BTW; he was picked up by his team. Meanwhile Harry flounders, Mission Accomplished. The End.

[the-silverdoe.livejournal.com]

I can't wait to find some Harry/Lucas fic meta on this subject. Eventually I will get around to writing some.
I wanted to write a whole s9 AU fic about this, but I know I won't have the time, so maybe I'll just write an AU s9 ending, like you did with your Dimitri fic. I can't stop thinking about this storyline, I wanted it to be developed so badly!

I didn't like the RH s2 finale either, but I think it's a good example of an unpleasant storyline that made some sense, unlike Spooks s9. I do agree that it was show suicide, and actually I've been thinking about AUs to this one too! But s1 and s2 Guy wasn't erased from the surface of the earth by this, unlike s7 and s8 Lucas in s9.

And more importantly, why did Lucas always feel so much more real than his supposed real personality of John. As a writer, you've got to make us believe in the characters and their stories. John was an enigma, a cipher, a question mark. The show even said so. "I am nothing," he said to Harry. No Lucas, you were and could have been so, so much more...

Absolutely. And this is why I say it this John thing wasn't meant to be. Lucas was built as a character, he made sense and he had enough background not to need this storyline. John was a superficial, non-existent character. Lucas was a proper character. That's all.
I've re-watched 8.8 recently, and, honestly, didn't the s9 writers watch it? The whole speech he has in Sarah's hospital room when he says she betrayed humanity in general and she disgusts him. He can't become John Bateman in the next episode. He just can't. Especially with the liar storyline they came up with. If Lucas had been John, he would never have said that. not like that, anyway. He was meant to be so much more, and we will never know...

[aletheia08.livejournal.com]

Not only have the writers ignored the trajectory of Lucas in s7 and 8, they have also ruined fans perceptions of him in those earlier seasons.
YES. THIS. I very much agree. I tend to ignore season 9, if only because it taints everything he did in seasons 7 and 8. I agree with pretty much everything you said here.

And I realize I'm right in not reading writers interviews where they try to justify their plot twists because they often manage to be condescending to their own audience (Prison Break and SGA come to mind)

[dweomeroflight.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the comment :) That's why I prescribe to Nia's school of Spooks which says Ros got out of the explosion and Lucas is actually on a desert island with her somewhere living it up ;)

Yes. I knew when the link was posted to the Spooks forum my blood was gonna boil but curiosity killed the cat. Even if they meant some of the stuff as a joke, it came off very patronising.

[shezan.livejournal.com]

No, no, no, Ros is really living it up with Andrew (baby!HomeSec. Because they were SO ADORABLE together.)

Hello Dear,

[jenjen2111.livejournal.com]

Hello Dear,
Please i will like you to write to my Email Box(jenjen4ray211@yahoo.com)so that i will send my picture to you and i will tell you more about me and i will like to know you more,
Thanks MISS Jen,PLEASE CONTACT ME I WANT TO KNOW YOU(jenjen4ray211@y a h o o.com)

[hestia8.livejournal.com]

I may well make a comment now and then come back with more at some point - not sure if I can get all my thoughts sorted into sensible order as I have been vaguely planning my own s9 meta for a while but not got further than planning!

I thought the series was a mess, but I think I came to that much later than most people. There are some really good episodes - 904 and 905 particularly - and even some really good parts of the John storyline (the episode with that American girl - 906 I think, oh and the ending of 905 I LOVED). I think up until about 907/908, it could have been salvaged, and there were some interesting aspects to the John/Lucas plot (mostly to do with Vaughn).

I would have preferred another one of those war-for-Lucas'-soul type plots, even though they'd done that twice already (Arkady and Oleg), because the main difference between Vaughn and Harry was legitimacy. Harry's MI5 and the writers' hero (WHY??), Vaughn is a private contractor and dodgy. Um, ok. It's all very well finding Lucas setting off the bomb in Dakar horrifying, Harry, but you had your own people do that on a commuter train in 601. You upgraded from attacking someone who threatens your people (Oliver Mace, 505) to killing them outright (Arkday 702 & Blake 901). Who the fuck are you to judge?

I think also this series really brought home to me that I had a significantly different view of Lucas to practically everyone I spoke to. The appeal of Lucas for me was never that he was the straight arrow or anything like that, but how trapped he was, and how everyone around him knew what he'd been through and was still happy to manipulate him for their own ends (especially Harry). He never managed to be his own person after coming back. He might not have been such a straight arrow anymore, but no-one ever gave him enough of a break for him to find out.

Of course this was still ruined by the end of s9, but I don't think it bothered me in quite the same way as it did others. The shoddy plotting did, though. You're utterly right that there was just too much in the mix, and I'm really not sure why. You'd think they could have at least chosen between hoplessly naive, terrible planner John and cold psychopath John. I think picking one of those and sticking with it would have done a lot to salvage things, tbh.

I also think (and I did do meta on this at some point in s9, so won't bang on) that s7 may have been enjoyable, but it was not an example of plot hole-free writing. There are some HUGE plotholes/leaps of logic required to make that series work, no matter how good the characters were. So again, maybe that's why it didn't bother me so much (the less said about series 6, the better).

[dweomeroflight.livejournal.com]

Sorry for the late reply but lj has been crazy for me of late due to the DDOS attacks.

I was the same as you actually. It wasn't until 9.7/9.8 I realised "uhoh they really aren't going to do this thing properly are they?" I thought Vaughn was interesting and I LOVED the Ruth storyline! I liked 9.1, 9.4, 9.6 and the Ruth parts of 9.7 best. The individual episodes were usually ok, it was the fact that the major storyline made no sense by the end of 9.8 that got my goat.

Haha oh Harry. The writers pet. Yes, I hear you. I think everyone thought that was what was going on. For one special moment in 9.7? where it turned out that Harry knew Vaughn I really thought it was a massive ploy by Harry to test Lucas or Harry was going to be a REALLY big bastard. As it is I don't really get why they chucked that bit in because it became rather redundant.

I never saw Lucas as a straight "hero" either. I always found him to be rather ambiguous especially in s7 and thought he could turn either way BUT USING THE CANON ALREADY THERE. RUSSIA PEOPLE. RUSSIA. I agree with you though, everyone manipulated Lucas. He needed people to tell him what to do. He was the worst choice for section leader out because he needed to have direction. Otherwise he f***ed up.

My argument I guess is that yes s7 and other series have had plot holes, but they weren't ones that involved entire character arcs. Yes, Juliet s6 made no sense but that was only for one episode and then we could all forget about her. Lucas is an entire three series. THREE. That's a lot of selective forgetting going on on the writers part.

[hestia8.livejournal.com]

Same for me, no worries! I was sort of surprised the comments even posted...

You just reminded me about the Ruth thing, actually! I don't know how but I had forgotten the waste of her arc - I was so sure that heading towards s9 there was going to be some sort of Ruth/Lucas showdown in which he panicked/was a psycho (delete as appropriate) and she beat him with her massive brainpower, and then he just went and kidnapped her and then drugged her. Such a waste of potential.

I'm so sick of Harry, honestly. It's coming dangerously close to killing the show for me - if he starts series 10 with no consequences from 9 I may just break something.

Either of those plots would have been good!

I think they were a bit lost when HN left at the end of s8, because the Ros and Lucas relationship worked really well - TBH I never understood when people called Lucas an alpha male either, because he always worked best/happiest under Ros' direction, which seems to me to go against the idea of being an alpha.

There was so much they could have done with Russia *sigh* I could have got four episodes out of Oleg alone. But wasting possible Russian assets is something of a them (Arkady 702, Sarkiisian, 80..1 or 2, Oleg 804 - so much information, gone!)

Yeah, I can see your point (well, most of Connie's doesn't hang together if you do much more than glance at it, but I put that down to a lot of different writers), I'm not sure why it didn't bother me as much as most beyond that I seem to keep being out of step with fandom. IDK. Possibly I am becoming immune, having sat through this nonsense for so long, possibly it just wasn't as bad as series 6 and that's my benchmark for awfulness, lol.

I think I was more frustrated than anything because it *could* have worked, with a bit more thought. You could still have made Lucas the bad guy (and I do get that people would still be unhappy with that), but it would have made sense. I can think of about five ways of amending the plotlines or rewriting it entirely off the top of my head.

[hestia8.livejournal.com]

Also, I was much less invested in Lucas than in Tariq by midway through s9 if not earlier, so I was also frustrated a bit by a) how he was sidelined and b) how difficult it was to get people to talk about Tariq (and I totally get why - no development, newer characters with more to do, Ruth & Harry still very important etc etc).

I do not have high hopes for the new series, but maybe I'll be wrong. Maybe he'll get to do his job AND get a bit of development on the side now that Lucas and Ros aren't hogging the limelight.

[dweomeroflight.livejournal.com]

I hear you on Tariq. So frustrating! GIVE HIM SOME PERONALITY TRAITS WRITERS.

Re the last bit: from what I have heard and read, I doubt it alas. I figure if my s10 hopes are as low as possible, things can only pick up :P