Tumgik
#continuing the pre existing themes of “fuck bravery keeping yourself safe is the most important thing”
gayofthefae · 4 months
Text
"The van scene is just for Will's plotline it doesn't affect Mike" what if I said the opposite was true. What if I said it did not serve as a climax for Will because he had already demonstrated an ability for honesty, vulnerability, and the self-assurance required in his confrontation of Mike in episode 2. What if I said that it only served his story as an inciting incident for the Jonathan coming out scene - a scene which, as I've said before, was the actual climax of his season arc, which was about his queerness, not Mike.
It is a setup for Mike, we know that, but it also doesn't really directly serve Will's arc at all. It is a self sabotage - setup for season 5, but something we already know him to do. It is a transition point for Mike. And it is the straw that breaks the camel's back for Jonathan. Besides that, it speaks directly to the audience at best. But it does not serve Will. He gets nothing truly off his chest because he is not unburdened - if anything worse off because he gave up his hope, he doesn't teach us things we couldn't otherwise deduce, and it moves him no internally closer to closure.
The speech only serves for Mike to react to and Jonathan to witness (and the cinematography reflects that). The following scenes reflect that too. The only scenes of importance in either plot following that are Will's scene with Jonathan and Mike telling El he loves her. Both directly tied to the speech, Mike's more textually, and no independently actionable resolution for Will.
This was the post but I had more thoughts, per usual
Will has a theme of unactionable resolutions. In episode 2 he is honest and from there the ball is in Mike's court. His most actionable plot is the painting, which he has demonstrated the vulnerability for already but the self-prioritization required is not a line he as a character is willing to cross, something that isn't a character flaw in need of resolution given what he logically believes the effects would be. The ball is in Mike's court from the beginning and remains there. And will remain there. Will had no arc necessity to confess because not confessing exposed no character flaws (shoutout to the writers for not presenting choosing to remain in the closet as a character flaw!!!). He was put in a helpless position of heartbreak and sadness and, like all of us wanted for him, wanted to do something about it, wanted to be able to do something about it, so he tried, but ultimately realized that the risk outweighed the reward, and the cost of the reward (El) would outweigh it anyways. That is logical. He is logical. He does everything logically. He is helpless this season. And he wants to believe he isn't, and we want to believe he isn't, but he is. Because the ball is in Mike's court. It was then and it is now. And it has been since the Snow Ball, really.
Because in December, 1984, after Will's perpetual but logical inaction towards a relationship, Mike took action against one. And since, it has been his job to undo, and his job to communicate contradictory to his actions that he wants one. Inaction does not require a solution unless it is representative of a problem to be solved. Will's is not. Mike's problem is he takes protective action impulsively when he gets scared that ultimately traps and harms him and others. Mike's problem is not inaction either. If they had stayed silently pining 13 year olds forever it would not have been a character flaw on either of their parts. But Mike took unnecessary - understandable, but unnecessary - action in the eyes of the plot. One can debate whether he did it in December 1983. Or whether he did it in July 1985. Or whether he did it in March 1986 when he ignored Will, because silence is not inaction if it as an active change. But no matter when it became an unnecessary choice,
The ball is in his court because it was never in anyone else's. The ball is in his court because Will never stepped foot on a court. Will isn't playing the game, he didn't pick up a ball. He sat in the stands and watched. In March 1986, he moved to the bench and Jonathan saw him but still, he never stepped foot on the court. He was never playing the game. (Apologies. This isn't a stupid sports game)/ref.
The ball is in Mike's court because as far as actionable plotlines reflecting internal growth go, Mike and Will's relationship is and always has been Mike's plot. Will's is allowing himself to take up space; he's getting closer, and allowing himself to have Mike will be the ultimate demonstration of that, just not its purpose. But Mike's is Will.
40 notes · View notes