I thought this episode was a bit slow in terms of plot development, especially for a penultimate episode. But the more I thought about it, the more I wanted to talk about the interesting themes addressed here.
In general, we understand that this series is about a group of very wealthy people who are kind of oblivious to the problems of those who they might consider "below" them in the hierarchy - economically, racially, sexually etc. They live with these power structures and often suffer from them as well.
I think this episode really drives home these points, the title of course being from Greek mythology about those who eat a white lotus and live their lives in a hedonistic stupor, unaware of the real problems in the world around them.
As we look at the individual character scenarios, we can see how this plays out. Let's take the Tanya/Belinda relationship. Obviously, Tanya clearly violates the boundaries between client and service provider. Tanya wants to bring the energy felt in a spa session into real life, partly because she is in desperate need of someone to validate her. But essentially, she quickly starts taking advantage of the power relationship between her and Belinda - takes her to an expensive restaurant that Belinda likely can't afford. Knowing or asking nothing about Belinda's life or family. And then she dangles the possibility of opening a business in front of Belinda's nose - a real chance for her to rise professionally. But this is obviously not a serious offer, nor should one really consider going into business with someone one meets on a 1-week vacation. Belinda is passionate about what she does and envisions services that can help all women, of different classes and races. Tanya is not really phased by any of it. In fact, it's hardly just a simple mistake that Tanya thinks BLM stands for Black Lives Matter and NOT Bureau of Land Management - because to Tanya, she understands the basic concept - but not how it plays out in real life - in the sense of she has little interest in Belinda accept for momentary gratification. During the first dinner, Belinda expands a little about this - about racial inequality etc. But this is all lost on Tanya, who at one point says, "I want to use you!" Belinda, for her part, seems to be trying to feed Tanya the buzzwords she wants to hear and ensures a lot of really cringe-worthy behavior to achieve her goals. She understands Tanya is an emotional, selfish wreck, but swallows it all for the career prospects.
Or if we look at the Moosebachers: You have Nicole who has had to fight her way to the top in a male-dominated world but yet lets so many injustices slide right in front of her. She worries that the straight, white male can have hardships these days, but fails to insist that her own son be able to sleep in the hotel room (or at least get him his own room). Her husband also laments about the privilege of straight, rich, white males and wonders if they should suffer, not enjoy vacations etc. But he truly lacks empathy for those not in that position and resents being in the shadow of his wife, while really benefitting from the life style. As much as Nicole speculates that the straight, white man should not be left out and should not be discriminated against, she makes life mainly about herself and her career, not even sure if we know much about what Mark even does.
Then we have Paula. Yes, on the surface, she is one of the have-nots. Not white, not nearly as rich, resentful about being second in a world controlled by the patriarchy but yet she lacks the empathy to see the practical implications of her philosophy: She resents the Moosebacher's power yet was delighted about being one of the cool folks who can be nasty to everyone else, gleefully makes Rachel feel bad about her status and role in her marriage. She buys drugs which are, on their face, an exploitive industry and she takes a plane to a rich and extravagant resort, Worse, she tries to "help" Kai by explaining he is taking away from the rich, but not understanding she can saddle him with a criminal record, hurt his ability to make a living and put stigma on his people that they steal etc. Etc. She is so concerned about cultural appropriation yet lacks the empathy to understand that these people still need to make a living. Ultimately, she is just the other side of the same coin: a lot of ideology, not a lot of practical empathy for others.
The Shane/Rachel dynamic is pretty clear but I wanted to talk about the Shane/Armond feud. It becomes clear early that this is more about power for Shane than a room. He is very angry because Armond does not immediately acknowledge him or he feels he's been victimized by people he's been an a**hole to before. But what is interesting is the weapon he finally feels he has against Armond: sex. Yes, from what we know, what Armond did was a very, very inappropriate thing, having sex with an employee. But from Shane's perspective, he might not even have recognized Dillon as a staff member, it could have been a consensual relationship, it was after business hours etc. Curious that Shane has so many legitimate gripes against Armond but he is downright giddy about this - it is sexual shaming. Remember, Shane is someone who breaks rules all of the time - throw the German couple out! Has no problem barging into an unanswered door after business hours. The sex shaming is an unfortunate way for him to use his power, especially since a Google search would have likely gotten him to the corporate office. We also see a bit of sex shaming with Paula - Olivia's comments become more and more like an interrogation, "Who is this guy you're having sex with?" - She's an adult and people hook up on vacation all of the time, also with staff. But Olivia tries to make it sound almost derogatory, in part because it is something she Can't have.
Basically no one comes off as blameless in this show. I'd say Quinn is perhaps looked on most positively - he gets aware from the family who ignores him and takes a genuine interest in what is happening to real people in their real lives. Rachel is also a "good" character but one who realizes too late that a marriage can be a huge study on a power structure, the role of a woman in modern society who is expected to be a trophy wife etc.
The series does an excellent job at demonstrating that the personal is also the cultural and the political. So, while I rate this episode lower for action, I rate it quite high in terms of the complex social issues it addresses in its story-telling and character development. I look forward to the final episode and season 2, with a new cast and location.
In general, we understand that this series is about a group of very wealthy people who are kind of oblivious to the problems of those who they might consider "below" them in the hierarchy - economically, racially, sexually etc. They live with these power structures and often suffer from them as well.
I think this episode really drives home these points, the title of course being from Greek mythology about those who eat a white lotus and live their lives in a hedonistic stupor, unaware of the real problems in the world around them.
As we look at the individual character scenarios, we can see how this plays out. Let's take the Tanya/Belinda relationship. Obviously, Tanya clearly violates the boundaries between client and service provider. Tanya wants to bring the energy felt in a spa session into real life, partly because she is in desperate need of someone to validate her. But essentially, she quickly starts taking advantage of the power relationship between her and Belinda - takes her to an expensive restaurant that Belinda likely can't afford. Knowing or asking nothing about Belinda's life or family. And then she dangles the possibility of opening a business in front of Belinda's nose - a real chance for her to rise professionally. But this is obviously not a serious offer, nor should one really consider going into business with someone one meets on a 1-week vacation. Belinda is passionate about what she does and envisions services that can help all women, of different classes and races. Tanya is not really phased by any of it. In fact, it's hardly just a simple mistake that Tanya thinks BLM stands for Black Lives Matter and NOT Bureau of Land Management - because to Tanya, she understands the basic concept - but not how it plays out in real life - in the sense of she has little interest in Belinda accept for momentary gratification. During the first dinner, Belinda expands a little about this - about racial inequality etc. But this is all lost on Tanya, who at one point says, "I want to use you!" Belinda, for her part, seems to be trying to feed Tanya the buzzwords she wants to hear and ensures a lot of really cringe-worthy behavior to achieve her goals. She understands Tanya is an emotional, selfish wreck, but swallows it all for the career prospects.
Or if we look at the Moosebachers: You have Nicole who has had to fight her way to the top in a male-dominated world but yet lets so many injustices slide right in front of her. She worries that the straight, white male can have hardships these days, but fails to insist that her own son be able to sleep in the hotel room (or at least get him his own room). Her husband also laments about the privilege of straight, rich, white males and wonders if they should suffer, not enjoy vacations etc. But he truly lacks empathy for those not in that position and resents being in the shadow of his wife, while really benefitting from the life style. As much as Nicole speculates that the straight, white man should not be left out and should not be discriminated against, she makes life mainly about herself and her career, not even sure if we know much about what Mark even does.
Then we have Paula. Yes, on the surface, she is one of the have-nots. Not white, not nearly as rich, resentful about being second in a world controlled by the patriarchy but yet she lacks the empathy to see the practical implications of her philosophy: She resents the Moosebacher's power yet was delighted about being one of the cool folks who can be nasty to everyone else, gleefully makes Rachel feel bad about her status and role in her marriage. She buys drugs which are, on their face, an exploitive industry and she takes a plane to a rich and extravagant resort, Worse, she tries to "help" Kai by explaining he is taking away from the rich, but not understanding she can saddle him with a criminal record, hurt his ability to make a living and put stigma on his people that they steal etc. Etc. She is so concerned about cultural appropriation yet lacks the empathy to understand that these people still need to make a living. Ultimately, she is just the other side of the same coin: a lot of ideology, not a lot of practical empathy for others.
The Shane/Rachel dynamic is pretty clear but I wanted to talk about the Shane/Armond feud. It becomes clear early that this is more about power for Shane than a room. He is very angry because Armond does not immediately acknowledge him or he feels he's been victimized by people he's been an a**hole to before. But what is interesting is the weapon he finally feels he has against Armond: sex. Yes, from what we know, what Armond did was a very, very inappropriate thing, having sex with an employee. But from Shane's perspective, he might not even have recognized Dillon as a staff member, it could have been a consensual relationship, it was after business hours etc. Curious that Shane has so many legitimate gripes against Armond but he is downright giddy about this - it is sexual shaming. Remember, Shane is someone who breaks rules all of the time - throw the German couple out! Has no problem barging into an unanswered door after business hours. The sex shaming is an unfortunate way for him to use his power, especially since a Google search would have likely gotten him to the corporate office. We also see a bit of sex shaming with Paula - Olivia's comments become more and more like an interrogation, "Who is this guy you're having sex with?" - She's an adult and people hook up on vacation all of the time, also with staff. But Olivia tries to make it sound almost derogatory, in part because it is something she Can't have.
Basically no one comes off as blameless in this show. I'd say Quinn is perhaps looked on most positively - he gets aware from the family who ignores him and takes a genuine interest in what is happening to real people in their real lives. Rachel is also a "good" character but one who realizes too late that a marriage can be a huge study on a power structure, the role of a woman in modern society who is expected to be a trophy wife etc.
The series does an excellent job at demonstrating that the personal is also the cultural and the political. So, while I rate this episode lower for action, I rate it quite high in terms of the complex social issues it addresses in its story-telling and character development. I look forward to the final episode and season 2, with a new cast and location.
