jesterkoops

[jesterkoops]

I think people who insist that innies and outies are separate people are also deep down very uncomfortable with the idea that inside all of us there is the potential of becoming pretty shitty people given the environments/circumstances/events shaping our lives.

So it's easier to pretend CheGuevara!Helly or sunshine Mark S are not the same as Helena Eagan or Mark Scout than to consider life can turn Helly and Mark S into Helena Eagan and Mark Scout. Also because that means you are forced to empathise with Helena Eagan and Mark Scout, i.e., shitty people, which is something else people are very uncomfortable with.

[jesterkoops]

severance, 2.10 "cold harbor"

excerpts from the official screenplay

[jesterkoops]

Gwendoline Christie and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau + audio commentaries

[jesterkoops]

probably my favorite parallel in the whole show (after the shared smoke one which genuinely cannot be beat by anything in the world) they are both such deeply concerning people <3

[jesterkoops]

I realise a lot of the discourse around Markhelly vs Markgemma treats this as a classic ship war, but I realise that is sort of missing the point.

I don't think Markgemma is supposed to represent simply a past/old/alternative relationship, it's supposed to represent a past/old/alternative identity for Mark first and foremost.

We often focus a lot on how the dynamics between Mark and Helly and Mark and Gemma are different (as I have done myself here), but the point is: they are not just different because Helly and Gemma are different women and complement (or not) Mark in different ways, but because it is a different Mark. Many of the juxtapositions are not about how differently Helly and Gemma approach Mark, but how differently the two versions of Mark approach his partner.

The most glaring example is o!Mark's lack of interest in what his partner has to say: and note that this does not happen just with Gemma but with Alexa too! When he tells her she's from Minnesota instead of Montana, it's the ants vs plants all over again. This lack of attention to what his partner says is a feature of his personality, which might relatively harmless in the beginning but as the relationship progresses and the stakes and difficulties increase, it becomes a big deal. "I'm nervous"/"I said I love you", and so on.

Contrast this with i!Mark's laser focus on Helly's needs, his making it his mission to make sure she's happy, his not giving up even when she was at her most confrontational and pushing him away and not giving him an inch. It's obviously hard to say if i!Mark's attention to his partner's needs and ability to listen and respond appropriately is because of Helly or because it's a personality trait, because he's never been with another woman. But I would guess it's likely the latter.

And it makes me wonder: if the premise is clearly that the innies are the outies minus their life experience and conditioning, what in o!Mark's life caused him to become such a polar opposite of his innie when it comes to relationships? That is the biggest mystery at the moment to me, because with Helena it's pretty easy to understand how and why she turned out the way she did. But Mark? Is it all down to his relationship with his "misdiagnosed alcoholic" father that we don't know much about? Was it something about his parents' dynamic that imprinted on him? Is there more?

[jesterkoops]

the way zufu is modeled after the severed floor can be so personal

[jesterkoops]

I was re-reading this super long, 2-parter analysis of Chikhai Bardo and while I wouldn't go as far as OP in saying Mark and Gemma's was never true love (more on this later), or that it was all based on looks, I think it's a really good breakdown of the way I also perceived that episode and the reason why I'm so puzzled it seemed to have people suddenly romanticise their relationship and put it above everything and anything, forgetting 2 seasons of storytelling in its favour.

Putting this under a cut because it got way longer than I anticipated.

I think one reason why people are so touchy about any criticism or MarkGemma is that they embody the quintessential average heterosexual relationship and marriage. The relationship dynamic that more than any other is held as sacred in our society. To the point that I don't think people even pay attention to what is being shown because the moment you say "these two people are married and here is the montage of their story" they automatically project all those conditioned preconceived beliefs about what the relationship must be by virtue of being a marriage.

Never mind the statistics on divorce demonstrating that marriage doesn't automatically = some grand epic love. There is a reason half of relationships/marriages don't last and that is because they are often just build upon the motions of meet -> attraction -> date -> relationship -> marriage -> children (maybe), and don't withstand the impact with reality once it does hit. May the reality be life's hardships or discovering sides of the other person that the person smothered or downplayed in order to please and appeal to the partner during earlier stages in the relationship.

Which is exactly what we see in this episode. Like OP said, there's never any grand moment that makes you go "yes! these two are so made for each other!". It's all bland stuff that could be applied to any generic straight marriage out there. Granted, I don't think that you need one grand moment to cement a relationship as true love. I think this can be built upon small, every-day gestures, and by enduring difficulties and working through them together. I would go as far as to say that it isn't true that to tell a good story you necessarily need those epic romances; that there can be a good story in an everyday romance too. Everyday love, everyday pain, everyday struggles, can be compelling. To paraphrase what Dan said about what he likes about Markgemma, choosing to stick together when things get tough can make for a good story.

But that is kind of the point: sticking together is very different from growing together, or working things out together. Many people choose to 'stick together' and live unfulfilled marriages for the rest of their lives. And that is where their relationship was headed in this episode: Mark and Gemma weren't working through anything together. They were sticking together on paper while drifting apart on an emotional and human level.

One thing in particular that I find very off-putting about their dynamic is how as soon as things get difficult, Gemma is the one pining for attention and love from a distracted and uninterested Mark. Yes, she calls him out once about being an asshole, but for the most part she is just there waiting for his crumbs, and having to remind him to show her the affection she is showing him.

Having said that, and here is where I disagree with OP, I don't think Mark and Helly's is real love and Mark and Gemma's isn't. I think they both are real love, just different kinds of real love.

I think Mark and Helly's is the one that is build to last from the get go, simply because it is based on something that is just part of who they are as people that makes them not just compatible in terms of what they have in common (like their morbid sense of humour), but in terms of how their personality traits fit with the other like pieces of a puzzle and fill in the gaps the other is lacking: Mark is avoidant, but Helly is incredibly confrontational and doesn't let him get away with ignoring problems. She is IN HIS FACE like a dog with a bone whenever something is troubling them. And Helly is impulsive and destructive in that impulsiveness, but Mark is protective and knows how and when to throw water on that fire. He pays attention and is IN HER FACE whenever she tries to burn shit to the ground. What one needs to thrive is what the other is naturally inclined to provide.

Mark and Gemma's is the kind that isn't built to last from the get go, because its foundations are not based on nature, they're based on nurture - in this case the nurturing of society and the steps the average relationships goes through, with all the expectations that go with it. They are not innately made for each other, they have to work at it. It's the kind of love that can only last if both parties put an awful lot of work into it, because they don't complement each other in a way that comes natural to them. So, in a sense, this ordeal with Lumon might very well be the kick in the butt Mark and Gemma needed to sort their shit out. That it might make Mark realise what he had and took for granted, and truly make a change. It might make Gemma realise that she needs to hit him with a chair across the head when he acts like an asshole.

BUT.. and here comes the biggest but of all..

Mark created a version of himself that does not remember Gemma, never loved her, and now not only desperately loves someone else, not only is that someone the consciousness of the heir to the company that kept her in a basement for two years, but he has that "built do last" relationship with her. A relationship that is going through massive ordeals and is only growing stronger as a result. So now Mark might want to make all the changes in the world to be a better husband to Gemma, but not only he needs to put all the awful lot of work I mentioned above, but he needs to do it against the pull of THAT kind of relationship.

That is why I think the odds for their relationship aren't great. Not because they don't love each other, but because I don't know that it's a love that can withstand what's coming at them. Especially when it was already struggling to start with.

[jesterkoops]

Helena Eagan during the ORTBO.

me in the. me in. the. uhm.

[jesterkoops]

severance + favorite character: helly r. for @helenaeggan

[jesterkoops]

It’s funny how some people dismiss imark and helly’s relationship simply because “they’ve only been together for like a month.” their relationship dynamic is what mark and gemma should have experienced. imark and helly actually communicate. when imark is acting out, helly calls him out, and he listens. imark helps helly stay grounded. when helly feels insecure, he reassures her. they don’t let problems linger, they tackle them head on and sort it out.

their relationship is so beautifully written. the narrative deliberately wants the viewer to see this, but people are completely missing the point and dismissing the significance of their relationship.

[jesterkoops]

Helena Eagen & Mark Scout Severance, S02E06

[jesterkoops]

And I mean, of course Helly wants what's best for Mark, but for MARK S not Mark Scout. She already did the selfless thing by laying out the facts to him: that he might have a chance at living out there, one that they might never have together because she is Helena. Had she really been selfish she would have tried to convince him to stay instead of pushing him to consider o!Mark's offer. I mean, she even admitted to the thing that she loathes more than anything, which is that she and Helena are the same person! How can you say she didn't do all she could, even as it was painful for her.

But, ultimately it is i!Mark's decision.

And while o!Mark's offer was worth considering, it is by no means the only objectively best choice for i!Mark. She knows it means essentially risking death (because that is what will happen if o!Mark doesn't reintegrate) to go be with a woman that means nothing to him. Why on earth would she "push him through the door" for that? And what does that say about the people who want her to do it, that they don't give a fuck about what that means for i!Mark so long as o!Mark gets what he wants?

“I don’t like the direction Helly’s chatecter took in season 2.I miss season 1 Helly”.Well stop scrolling tiktok and watch the show.Helly was depressed and directionless.She hated her own existence to the point she wanted to be free even through death.Now she has things she cares about and people who accepts her for who she is.”Helly wouldn’t be selfish enough to run away with Mark S.She knows what’s at stake.”Oh wake up.Any women you know wouldn’t choose a random man/woman she doesn’t know or care about over her best friend/boyfriend/love of her life.That’s not selfishness.That’s self preservation.Also if you wanted Helly to be a sacrificial tragic lamb whose job was to die to push Mark towards rebellion that tells me volumes about how you consume female chatecters.

[jesterkoops]

The funny thing is, the after scene has so many microexpressions in every single millisecond frame, one more hilarious than the other, that I can't choose a favourite, but I think Helly here comes close to seizing the title:

before and after

[jesterkoops]

Doing a rewatch with my friend and I noticed a few things in 2x01-03.

They DID move the security/control room. The old security room is now being used to host the family visitation suite. Where they moved it though, is unclear. It makes sense that after the OTC they would try to get that away from the innies but that throws a wrench into my theory about the innies controlling the contingencies in S3. At the same time, it seems odd to me for next season to start with the innies just all getting Glasgow Blocked immediately. So I wonder how they're going to play that. Maybe the point is that they cannot Glasgow Block them all because that would mean awakening all the outies on the severed floor which would be a complete disaster, perhaps more difficult to control than having the innies down there. People seem to assume that it's as easy as flipping a switch and then the outies will happily walk out and go back to their lives, but I doubt it. Imagine the PR mess they would get into if the outies could actually see the severed floor, understand what goes on, and have dozens if not hundreds of people who are not supposed to meet on the outside suddenly in close proximity. And perhaps the Glasgow Block is something that can only be activated before the outie goes down to the floor? That's why it's called a "block"? Because it blocks the switch before it happens?

Confirmation that Helena did not watch the security footage to watch Helly so she could better imitate her: the board didn’t decide to give Helly back to Mark until after Mark had already been back at work for a few days and sabotaged his new team. When Helena watches that footage, it was right after the gala; she was watching because they said something about checking the footage to figure out who they might have talked to/how they pulled it off. And she was already curious about Mark (post-hanging/stopping the tape on him walking down the hall), so she probably used it as an excuse to snoop on him (at one point she's glancing off to the side to check nobody's coming, as if she's not supposed to be watching this/she's focusing on the wrong things).

Mark likely comes back to work because he's curious about Milchick telling him he found love down there. This is such a subtle detail that flies under the radar. There might be a tiny tiny part of him that is starting to wonder if Gemma is alive, but at that stage he's still denying that's possible and it's not really a focus of his. Milchick convinces him with the whole "he found love/the solace will reach its way to you out here" spiel. Which means Mark is curious/starting to be open to moving on.

[jesterkoops]

Britt Lower as Helena Eagan and Adam Scott as Mark S.

SEVERANCE 2.04 "Woe's Hollow"

[jesterkoops]

I think the fundamental issue with people who struggle to see a Helena redemption arc is that they keep forgetting Helena is Helly. Helly is Helena stripped of all the baggage and conditioning. Helly is the potential inside of Helena. In a sense, the show sort of spoils her arc from the very beginning, because once you understand Helly's been inside her all along and that the show is about becoming whole by embracing all parts of yourself (and the JOY in that, as per Dan's words), you understand that's the direction she's inevitably headed in.

ETA: And, actually, here I come with yet another of my Jaime Lannister/Helena Eagan parallels. I think Helena's arc, much like Jaime, is more of an identity than a redemption arc. Both of them are more passive bystanders of their father's/family's atrocities than active participants, especially by virtue of the fact that they're both fairly young (especially Helena; being 30 in modern times is different than being 30 in medieval times) and so wouldn't have been in a position to make any decision when most of said atrocities went down.

So their journey isn't so much about redeeming themselves for things they've done (because they've done little) but to distance themselves from their fathers and the baggage their fathers' name carries. To become their own person and make the choice to live by their own ideals. Redemption is sort of baked into it by virtue of the stuff they've gone along with, but it's only a component of it. It is primarily about identity.

But too many people confound their fathers crimes with their characters simply because they are main characters and their fathers aren't, so they literally embody the 'sins of the fathers' trope. So of course people that look at Helena/Jaime and see Jame/Tywin are incapable of conceiving a redemption (unless it ends in death).

[jesterkoops]

The Music Dance Experience is officially cancelled. SEVERANCE 1.07 - “Defiant Jazz”