#ex-consector costigan

[elfietheespeon]

I'm curious to see where the Midst community's heads are at regarding this overarching mystery!

We do not have all the pieces yet, but it's safe to assume that a significant amount of the clues were present in seasons 1 and 2. It goes without saying that this is the mystery at the heart of this storyline, and there are no shortage of suspects to choose from.

(Excluding the final entry, this list has been set in alphabetical order so as to avoid personal biases)

[acaptainbyanyothername]

Jonas and Phineas made me think about a piece of writing advice I read once—that a character’s flaws are their strengths in the right context, and vice versa (ex. a selfless character can be a pushover, a overthinker character can be a brilliant analyst, etc). Both Jonas and Phineas demonstrated their primary “flaws” they’ve struggled with in the finale fight, but after all the self-understanding they’ve gone through they were finally able to harness them for the right situation to the point where they became assets.

Phineas tapped into his violent anger issues—but the source of the anger this time wasn’t fear, it was love. Look at how similar these two descriptions are:

(S1 E18: A Good Man)

(S3 E19: Balance)

Both times, Phineas is spurred into this rage by Spahr’s presence. In S1E18, it’s a violent action against a nonviolent man to prove his worth, his VALOR to Spahr. But in S3E19, it’s a violent action against a wildly dangerous monster to protect Spahr. Phineas’ initiative still comes from desperation. The determining factor is what he is so desperate for, and that’s what turns his anger from ugly to righteous. This rage of Phineas ends up saving him, making an ordinary man able to go toe to toe with Weepe’s souped-up tearror-puppeteered final form.

Phineas’ monster versus Weepe’s monster. It takes a monster to fight a monster, but this time Phineas is doing it expressly to not let it hurt anyone else. Phineas stays right in control— contrasted against Weepe, nothing but a puppet now.

Then we have Jonas Spahr. Jonas Spahr, whose primary trait has been being a passive observer, the instigator of problems being unable to step in at key moments. Watched Magdalyne Fleit get murdered by Costigan. Watched Phineas beat Sherman to a pulp. Watched the Trust subsequently abandon Phineas. Watched Imelda torture Weepe. He is a character whose largest flaw is doing nothing to the detriment of the people around him.

But in the finale, he takes action! He saves Phineas’ life multiple times (sniping the guy who shot him, diverting a spear from hitting him) until Spahr is rendered physically incapable of acting anymore, and all he can do is watch as Phineas and Lark take down Weepe.

Once again, Phineas tells him that he can handle this. And this time, Spahr BELIEVES him. It’s not like the Ginsberg arrest where he sweeps in at the last minute, this time Spahr fully trusts (hah) Phineas to handle himself. The ex-Prime Consector himself lets someone else—his ADSECLA—take the lead, and Spahr lets himself settle into the watcher he has always been. Spahr, Phineas Thatch’s designated protector, allows Phineas Thatch to protect HIM for once. That’s what makes this time different: now Spahr makes the active CHOICE to watch, listening to someone who loves him and has his best interests in mind. For the first time, this isn’t an involuntary response on his part, it’s an active choice. A success rather than a failure. And, well, he’s not quite just watching, is he?

Nope, Jonas Spahr is DEFENDING. The way he didn’t defend Magdalyne, or Sherman, or Phineas, or Weepe. Spahr has learned to take action, yes, but in this fight he finds value and defense in knowing WHEN to step in and take action versus when to trust others, step back into defensive formation, and just watch. He made the right call this time around.

Phineas Thatch and Jonas Spahr are still the same characters. Phineas’ rage and Spahr’s inaction haven’t left them, they’ve just learned when and how to use them to benefit rather than detriment.

[captainofthetidesbreath]

Not sure if I'm still in time for the asks but what is your favorite thing about your ex-husband?

My beautiful and charming ex-husband Jonas Spahr, the last—former and final—Prime Consector of the Trust! He has many wonderful and interesting qualities, but the one that I like most is that he was not until very recently someone I would describe as in possession of a spine.

This is an odd choice on its face, but it's my favorite because it is the crux and (hah) spine of his character and his arc, that he does not really have one. I've written recently a post about his narrative passivity and in the past another about that passivity as a connecting parallel between two keystone scenes. I've talked a LOT about this, and a lot of this is going to be generally repeating those posts, but I'm going for it anyway because I'm obsessed with his narrative passivity and how much work he puts into maintaining his inaction.

His historical inability to dig his heels in and eagerness to come to heel ("The Trust has you on a fuckin' leash.") is such an interesting quality against his simultaneous struggle to feel like he has agency and power over his own life and choices. It's interesting to watch him fight against a very real lack of authority and agency within the institution he serves and for which he acts as its agent among the people while watching him repeatedly shrink back into line and watch him realize that he has been purposefully enabling, allowing, and ignoring what goes on in front of him and deferring his own agency.

It's also such a fun thing about him because it feels to stand in stark juxtaposition against an apparent stubbornness and a clear capacity for conviction. He has moments where he so clearly has strongly held beliefs—and then he's so easily cowed into backing off from fighting for them. This is a man who refused to defend himself at his own trial where the government he betrayed himself for blamed him for everything that's ever gone wrong for them in the series: he simply apologized for it all. There is a sense about him that he can be incredibly decisive and effective, but he spends so much of the narrative uncertain and ineffective in everything he does or is part of because of this tendency. (In a way, he splits the difference between his mentor Costigan and his mentee Phineas.) The few times he does choose to do something, he loses momentum because he is easily frightened out of it. He lacks spine! The contradiction is fascinating to me. He's trapped in place as a narrative actor. Everything he does is in vain or futile. It is because he is maintaining and protecting his own passivity and allowing or facilitating nasty events as a means to maintain social position, even as he hates feeling trapped out of what happens around him.

It's also just SO fun because when he HAS finally done something, it's again a refusal and an immovability. But, this time, it is an active action to refuse to do as told and a choice to stand fixed in place and halt a lot of the momentum of the situation.

Jonas Spahr, for so much of the series, is weak-willed, timid, and irresolute, and it's one of my favorite things about him because it's added a lot of depth to his character and made for an interesting arc. It has been so satisfying watching him learn to dig his heels in rather than heel.

[jestersloverre]

Wow this is a very specific insult ex-consector Costigan. Do you think about this often? Did you never pose for SevUNteen magazine yourself?

[jestersloverre]

As we approach the mid-season finale of Midst season 3, here are some questions that have been floating around in my brain. Speculation is encouraged! But, no spoilers beyond the public release please.

1. Did Imogen Loxlee know about her late husband’s violent tendencies and his connection to Lark’s mother?

2. Does Jonas Spahr have a family?

3. Did Maximillian Loxlee and Lark’s mother have a relationship beyond what Lark was privy too?

4. How is ex-consector Costigan in good standing with the Trust in spite of being fired due to Breach activity?

5. What was Hieronymous’s last name before he married Imogen Loxlee?

6. What happened to the generation between Milton Fleit senior and Milton Fleit junior?

7. What is Meryl Concord up to?

This last one is more so based on theorizing and discussions with other listeners vs canon info:

8. If Imelda is in fact responsible for the moonfall, how did she get the resources to orchestrate it?