A New Take on The Pilot

[maggiethecat]

Is it possible, after all this time? I think so.

This starts with a comment Kyt made in the Dissed Again thread back on December 16th, and which became part of a discussion that rolled over to the Jim & Marty thread. Here’s what Kyt said:

What? People didn’t like Russo? I liked him before I made up my mind that obnoxious Dunbar was going to be tolerable (and was ultimately completely won over).

This simmered in the back of my head all during the holidays. And now I’ve rolled up my sleeves and taken a deep breath. Here we go.

This might turn out to be a discussion about character construction, and the writing -- in other words, what was on the page before the actors even drew breath. I’ll also be the first to admit that a substantial part of this may come down to that great indefinable: personal opinion.

I believe that the character of Jim Dunbar was set up -- immediately -- as being so incredibly sympathetic that we, the viewers, were meant to cut him all sorts of slack. What do we learn about Jim in the first ten minutes?

1. He is courageous and fearless, as witness his actions at the bank.
2. He suffers the consequences of his actions -- emotional and physical -- as we learn when he awakens, shaken, sweating, and obviously blind, from the bank nightmare.
3. He’s not one to burden others with his problems. He assures Christie he’s “fine,” when he’s clearly anything but, and gets out of bed and on with the day. (Sweet Jesus, give me a man who gets up before I do and makes the coffee.)
4. No slacker, he’s up at dawn for a martial arts session.
5. He is a proud man. He dresses impeccably, and will soldier through the subway and the street rather than cadge a ride from his wife.
6. He fought a year-long battle to get his job back.
7. He has a slightly goofy, self-deprecating sense of humor, as witness his attempts to lighten the tension in the squad room when he enters.
8. He is anxious to fit in, trying to engage his new co-workers by asking about their current caseload, and he takes it in stride when they freeze him out.
9. He is both restrained and open in his first talk with Fisk, but will not back down. He even gives his new boss an out: “If it turns out I can’t (do my job), I’ll leave.” We’re meant to like him for that, and I did.

When you think about it -- and again, I believe this was deliberately done by the show’s creators -- we don’t really experience Dunbar’s “bull in a china shop” behavior that could be characterized as obnoxious until subsequent episodes. The one time he comes close in The Pilot is the “gun on your hip” confrontation with Marty, and can you blame him? The conversation leading up to it is Jim's attempt to explain his position (he didn’t take his case to the media, he can still generate paperwork), and ask for a chance. “Guys, I know where you’re coming from . . .” he starts. And is met with doubt and suspicion. Again, understandably so . . . and again, I think intended to make you root for the guy.

Dunbar really is pretty low-key throughout The Pilot, still trying to use humor on Karen after she hits him with Anne Donnelly, trying to diffuse Christie’s anger that first night and finally giving up, using brains and experience to think outside the box on the Tongue Collector homicides. When he and Karen want the opportunity to interrogate Randy Lyman, watch the way he folds his arms and lets her plead their case. He knows this is a great chance to show what he’s got, but he also knows after events of the past two days that begging or pushing won’t work. And he doesn’t.

So I was 100% in the Dunbar camp by the end of the hour. And I never really changed my mind about the character. As, to confess, I never warmed up 100% to Marty Russo after his early hostility and sniping -- but again, I think this was deliberate. Jim, protagonist: Marty, antagonist. You need that grain of sand to make a pearl.

Maybe this opens up a broader question: Did our opinions about the characters change, substantially, from the way we first perceived them on March 8, 2005?

As I said, my sleeves are rolled up. Let’s talk!

[bjobsessed]

Well, more will follow after I think about it, but one thing that comes to mind right away is Marty. I didn't like him much in the beginning either, but I understood him in a different way. It has been discussed that part of Marty's hostility toward Jim comes from the fact that he may be intimidated by Jim's expertise. This does not come out until later though when Marty tells Jim he doesn't have to be right all the time.

I think Jim was pretty accruate when he and Karen are interrogating Lyman and he tells him that no one wants him there and that's why he didn't tell them about the hair. In the beginning at least, I think Marty resented being saddled with a heroic blind cop whom he felt might "hold them back" as Karen said later in relation to their partnership. I could be all wrong, but that's what I saw as I watched Marty in the early episodes. Maybe it's because of my disability that I have this take and may have nothing to do with what the writers were trying to portray. All I know is that Marty could be anyone of hundreds of people I have run into in my life--done to a "t" I might add.

By the end of the show, I had grown to like Marty quite a bit. While he is not the type of character that makes you feel warm and fuzzy, I think he was beginning to respect Jim and his abilities. (Ex. Asking him to go to the bar and then being a bit in awe when Jim left to go home on his own.) I think he would always be a bit of a pain in the butt because that was just Marty.

It would have been interesting to see how their relationship would have changed without the gun. That was one of Marty's big issues with Jim.

I also identified with Jim right away because he had to fight for what was rightfully his--a chance to prove to himself mostly--that he could still do his job and the right to try.

I am not saying I agree with the gun--I don't.

[Eyphur]

maggiethecat said:

Maybe this opens up a broader question: Did our opinions about the characters change, substantially, from the way we first perceived them on March 8, 2005?

I think my opinion of the character of Marty changed, probably during Leap of Faith. Although the way Marty treated Jim in the early episodes with his comments and whatnot was deplorable, and I would hope that people don't actually act like that, but I found it funny. As I said once before (probably on Shades) the character of Marty reminds me of Dr. Romano on ER (particularly after he got his arm chopped off).
So yes, when Marty stopped being a jerk my opinion of him changed but, I'm not sure what it changed to, and I'm not sure how I would define my opinion of Marty while watching the later episodes and what my opinion of Marty is now.

[bjobsessed]

eyphur said:

Although the way Marty treated Jim in the early episodes with his comments and whatnot was deplorable, and I would hope that people don't actually act like that.

Unfortunately, they do.

[dogma]

bjobsessed said:

eyphur said:

Although the way Marty treated Jim in the early episodes with his comments and whatnot was deplorable, and I would hope that people don't actually act like that.

Unfortunately, they do.

hoo boy,, you are soo right,, where i work,, there have been at least three incidents where several of us were ready to go to human resources citing hostile work environment,, sad but too true

[shmeep]

maggiethecat said:

1. He is courageous and fearless, as witness his actions at the bank.
2. He suffers the consequences of his actions -- emotional and physical -- as we know when he awakens, shaken, sweating, and obviously blind, from the bank nightmare.
3. He’s not one to burden others with his problems. He assures Christie he’s “fine,” when he’s clearly anything but, and gets out of bed and on with the day. (Sweet Jesus, give me a man who gets up before I do and makes this coffee.)
4. No slacker, he’s up at dawn for a martial arts session.
5. He is a proud man. He dresses impeccably, and will soldier through the subway and the street rather than cadge a ride from his wife.
6. He fought a year-long battle to get his job back.
7. He has a slightly goofy, self-deprecating sense of humor, as witness his attempts to lighten the tension in the squad room when he enters.
8. He is anxious to fit in, trying to engage his new co-workers by asking about their current caseload, and he takes it in stride when they freeze him out.
9. He is both restrained and open in his first talk with Fisk, but will not back down. He even gives his new boss an out: “If it turns out I can’t (do my job), I’ll leave.” We’re meant to like him for that, and I did.

Wow, Mags! Great summation of how Jim's character was established in the first few minutes of The Pilot! You're right. Jim was meant from the beginning to be a sympathetic character. I think they gave him flaws to try and dodge the stereotypes so often seen in more melodramatic writings of people with disabilities being oh-so-wise and perfect. Before the show started, I was afraid that they would go to the other extreme and bring us a bitter and angry character, consumed with self pity because of what has happened. Just as common a stereotype, I'm afraid. What always seems to happen in movie-of-the-week type shows about disability is that the person is bitter and horrible to the point of making me hate him, has a breakthrough, and is then so good he becomes boring and then the story is over. I've met a lot of disabled people in my life, and never have I met one who reacted in that way. That's why I was thrilled to meet Jim Dunbar, same guy he was before, but with extra hurdles to jump. Same faults. Same sense of humor. Same marital problems. It was so much truer to life than those two extreme stereotypes.

Unlike many people here, I liked Marty right away. As I've said before, his type of teasing is similar to what I received from my three brothers growing up. It often had a sting to it and wasn't always in jest at all, but if you can survive that, you're in. I love Maggie's analogy of Marty being the grain of sand that made the pearl. No matter what Jim did on the job, he knew he hadn't really "arrived" until Marty accepted him. It was a hurdle much more difficult to clear than the relatively simple one of getting his job back. That was just a legal battle. His real battle was fighting for his old place in the estimation of his co-workers and he went into it knowing it would be bad because, as he said himself, he wouldn't have stood for being partnered with a blind cop back when he could see. To Jim, Marty represented having to overcome that part of himself that might have even thought the doubters were right. Had there been no Marty, had Jim fit in too easily, he may have felt they were taking it easy on him out of pity and he may never have fully trusted that he had won back his place. Marty made it all real for him and showed him when that place was finally his.

I wouldn't say my opinion of either of these characters, so well-established in the Pilot, changed throughout the series. My understanding of them deepened, but only confirmed what my gut told me all along.

[housemouse]

maggiethecat said:

1. He is courageous and fearless, as witness his actions at the bank.
2. He suffers the consequences of his actions -- emotional and physical -- as we know when he awakens, shaken, sweating, and obviously blind, from the bank nightmare.
3. He’s not one to burden others with his problems. He assures Christie he’s “fine,” when he’s clearly anything but, and gets out of bed and on with the day. (Sweet Jesus, give me a man who gets up before I do and makes this coffee.)
4. No slacker, he’s up at dawn for a martial arts session.
5. He is a proud man. He dresses impeccably, and will soldier through the subway and the street rather than cadge a ride from his wife.
6. He fought a year-long battle to get his job back.
7. He has a slightly goofy, self-deprecating sense of humor, as witness his attempts to lighten the tension in the squad room when he enters.
8. He is anxious to fit in, trying to engage his new co-workers by asking about their current caseload, and he takes it in stride when they freeze him out.
9. He is both restrained and open in his first talk with Fisk, but will not back down. He even gives his new boss an out: “If it turns out I can’t (do my job), I’ll leave.” We’re meant to like him for that, and I did.

I agree with all of those statements and after reading them one thing becomes clear in my mind. The writers (and Ron Eldard) could very easily have turned this guy into a saint. It would have been easy to slip into the noble underdog who fought his way back. That is a cliche we see often in movies and TV, here I think the writers and actor avoided it. That, in my opinion is what makes this show stand out.

admin said:

Wow, Mags! Great summation of how Jim's character was established in the first few minutes of The Pilot! You're right. Jim was meant from the beginning to be a sympathetic character. I think they gave him flaws to try and dodge the stereotypes so often seen in more melodramatic writings of people with disabilities being oh-so-wise and perfect. Before the show started, I was afraid that they would go to the other extreme and bring us a bitter and angry character, consumed with self pity because of what has happened. Just as common a stereotype, I'm afraid. What always seems to happen in movie-of-the-week type shows about disability is that the person is bitter and horrible to the point of making me hate him, has a breakthrough, and is then so good he becomes boring and then the story is over. I've met a lot of disabled people in my life, and never have I met one who reacted in that way. That's why I was thrilled to meet Jim Dunbar, same guy he was before, but with extra hurdles to jump. Same faults. Same sense of humor. Same marital problems. It was so much truer to life than those two extreme stereotypes.

Here here Shmeep, excellent point.

admin said:

Unlike many people here, I liked Marty right away. As I've said before, his type of teasing is similar to what I received from my three brothers growing up. It often had a sting to it and wasn't always in jest at all, but if you can survive that, you're in. I love Maggie's analogy of Marty being the grain of sand that made the pearl. No matter what Jim did on the job, he knew he hadn't really "arrived" until Marty accepted him. It was a hurdle much more difficult to clear than the relatively simple one of getting his job back. That was just a legal battle. His real battle was fighting for his old place in the estimation of his co-workers and he went into it knowing it would be bad because, as he said himself, he wouldn't have stood for being partnered with a blind cop back when he could see. To Jim, Marty represented having to overcome that part of himself that might have even thought the doubters were right. Had there been no Marty, had Jim fit in too easily, he may have felt they were taking it easy on him out of pity and he may never have fully trusted that he had won back his place. Marty made it all real for him and showed him when that place was finally his.

I can honestly say I never thought of it from the point of view as Marty's attitude toward Jim being kind of a initiation. I think the reason for that is that Jim Dunbar is not the type of man who would ever have been subjected to that while he was sighted. Before the shooting, Dunbar would have been the one doing the initiating. It is a credit to Jim that he takes his lumps and handles Marty with grace.

admin said:

I wouldn't say my opinion of either of these characters, so well-established in the Pilot, changed throughout the series. My understanding of them deepened, but only confirmed what my gut told me all along.

My opinions didn't change as much as the series progressed as they did with reapeated (and repeated, and repeated) viewing of the episodes. For example, initially I saw Tom as a sympathetic co-worker willing to welcome Jim into the squad. That changed after re-watching several episodes. One example is when Artie came in and thanked Jim, Tom heard him, nodded his head, then said nothing to Jim. He could have given Jim a pat on the back for what he did.

The other character I have flip-flopped on is Fisk. In the beginning he was unsupportive and then, his support for Jim seemed to increase. After re-watching the later episodes, I don't know if I think that any more. Although he never said it out loud he was aching for Jim to give up that gun. He was much too quick to accept his giving it up. They didn't discuss, bounce it off each other, Jim said he was done and that was it.

My opinion of Jim and Karen was static. My opinion of Marty softened somewhat. I still don't know my opinion on Christie.

[inuvik]

housemouse said:

The other character I have flip-flopped on is Fisk. In the beginning he was unsupportive and then, his support for Jim seemed to increase. After re-watching the later episodes, I don't know if I think that any more. Although he never said it out loud he was aching for Jim to give up that gun. He was much too quick to accept his giving it up. They didn't discuss, bounce it off each other, Jim said he was done and that was it.

I think the reason Fisk was so quick to accept Jim giving up the gun was Jim had mentioned it to him before. They did have a bit of a discussion about it earlier. Fisk was quite clear that he had to decide to keep it or not, he couldn't go half way as Fisk had to tell the higher-ups whether or not Jim had the gun, not that he was unsure.

I also think Jim is not the type to change his mind. Fisk knew Jim had been thinking about it for a long time and would not need more discussion, once Jim was able to make the decision.

[greenbeing]

housemouse said:

For example, initially I saw Tom as a sympathetic co-worker willing to welcome Jim into the squad. That changed after re-watching several episodes. One example is when Artie came in and thanked Jim, Tom heard him, nodded his head, then said nothing to Jim. He could have given Jim a pat on the back for what he did.

I was actually of the opposite opinion--I was so glad Tom didn't say anything. Jim is not a saint, nor did the do anything in the hope of recognition. I think it would have been both awkward and embarrassing for Jim. (Not to mention out of character for Tom, who didn't get involved with any of the detectives on an emotional level.)

Supposing Tom did go up, pat him on the back, say, "Good job."

Then what? Jim could have looked up, said, Thanks? Doubtful. More likely he would have said, "For what?" He pushed the kid, and Tom now knew that Jim had had a hard time and needed a lot of help, "just to go out and look for a job." He did the right thing. Yet he didn't want to.

I also think it would have thrown Jim's disability back into his face. It would have set him apart from the other detectives again, and they were long past the need for that.

It also may have put Jim and Tom's future relationship in an awkward spot. Jim's spent four months trying to prove he's as capable as anyone else. But in one line to Artie he admitted that once, he needed help and he needed it badly. Wouldn't he have then forevermore (for a while, at least) been analyzing everything Tom said, basing it off of what Tom had inadvertently overheard in a private conversation?

For me, that scene, showing Tom acknowledging it to himself, that was the point, Tom internalizing a couple things Jim didn't want them to know, but that they needed to know (that he wasn't infallible, that he was a good guy, etc).

Oh, goodness--sorry--I didn't know I felt so strongly about that little moment of the show. ;D

The other character I have flip-flopped on is Fisk. In the beginning he was unsupportive and then, his support for Jim seemed to increase. After re-watching the later episodes, I don't know if I think that any more. Although he never said it out loud he was aching for Jim to give up that gun. He was much too quick to accept his giving it up. They didn't discuss, bounce it off each other, Jim said he was done and that was it.

I didn't quite see it as "aching." Especially when he didn't jump on it the first time Jim brought it up. He actually stepped back, respected Jim's opinion, and told him it would be final, and to take his time. I know he didn't want him to have the gun, but he didn't jump on it. And when Jim said it a second time, he knew that would be the final answer.

[awlrite4now]

maggiethecat said:

This might turn out to be a discussion about character construction, and the writing -- in other words, what was on the page before the actors even drew breath. I’ll also be the first to admit that a substantial part of this may come down to that great indefinable: personal opinion.

Yes, it does.

I believe that the character of Jim Dunbar was set up -- immediately -- as being so incredibly sympathetic that we, the viewers, were meant to cut him all sorts of slack.

I didn't find him "incredibly sympathetic" at the get go. I had to learn to like him. Just like I had to learn to like the other characters on the show. It wasn't until about 3 shows in that I really started to LIKE Jim. I credit the writers of the show for this, because they put enough friction in the series to keep me on the fence for a while.

What do we learn about Jim in the first ten minutes?

1. He is courageous and fearless, as witness his actions at the bank.
2. He suffers the consequences of his actions -- emotional and physical -- as we learn when he awakens, shaken, sweating, and obviously blind, from the bank nightmare.
3. He’s not one to burden others with his problems. He assures Christie he’s “fine,” when he’s clearly anything but, and gets out of bed and on with the day. (Sweet Jesus, give me a man who gets up before I do and makes the coffee.)
4. No slacker, he’s up at dawn for a martial arts session.
5. He is a proud man. He dresses impeccably, and will soldier through the subway and the street rather than cadge a ride from his wife.
6. He fought a year-long battle to get his job back.
7. He has a slightly goofy, self-deprecating sense of humor, as witness his attempts to lighten the tension in the squad room when he enters.
8. He is anxious to fit in, trying to engage his new co-workers by asking about their current caseload, and he takes it in stride when they freeze him out.
9. He is both restrained and open in his first talk with Fisk, but will not back down. He even gives his new boss an out: “If it turns out I can’t (do my job), I’ll leave.” We’re meant to like him for that, and I did.

True, all this info is presented to us. But my opinions about the guy were not all cast in concrete by the first ten minutes. It took me longer than that to care about him.

When you think about it -- and again, I believe this was deliberately done by the show’s creators -- we don’t really experience Dunbar’s “bull in a china shop” behavior that could be characterized as obnoxious until subsequent episodes. The one time he comes close in The Pilot is the “gun on your hip” confrontation with Marty, and can you blame him? The conversation leading up to it is Jim's attempt to explain his position (he didn’t take his case to the media, he can still generate paperwork), and ask for a chance. “Guys, I know where you’re coming from . . .” he starts. And is met with doubt and suspicion. Again, understandably so . . . and again, I think intended to make you root for the guy.

Of course. They don't want us to HATE the main character right off the bat.

Dunbar really is pretty low-key throughout The Pilot, still trying to use humor on Karen after she hits him with Anne Donnelly, trying to diffuse Christie’s anger that first night and finally giving up, using brains and experience to think outside the box on the Tongue Collector homicides. When he and Karen want the opportunity to interrogate Randy Lyman, watch the way he folds his arms and lets her plead their case. He knows this is a great chance to show what he’s got, but he also knows after events of the past two days that begging or pushing won’t work. And he doesn’t.

So I was 100% in the Dunbar camp by the end of the hour. And I never really changed my mind about the character. As, to confess, I never warmed up 100% to Marty Russo after his early hostility and sniping -- but again, I think this was deliberate. Jim, protagonist: Marty, antagonist. You need that grain of sand to make a pearl.

Maybe this opens up a broader question: Did our opinions about the characters change, substantially, from the way we first perceived them on March 8, 2005?

As I said, my sleeves are rolled up. Let’s talk!

We are doing just that

[kytdunne]

maggiethecat said:

I believe that the character of Jim Dunbar was set up -- immediately -- as being so incredibly sympathetic that we, the viewers, were meant to cut him all sorts of slack.

I'll buy that Dunbar was meant to be set up as a Good Cop with enough balls and determination that we get a glimpse into why this blind guy wants to go back to such a job, and more, why we should invest some time in finding out if he makes it.

I didn't find him particularly sympathetic. Antagonistic would've been closer to my mark. But understanding the stress he was under, I was intrigued enough to see if I would/could like the guy enough to care how he did.

maggiethecat said:

What do we learn about Jim in the first ten minutes?

Tackling just the list for the moment...

maggiethecat said:

1. He is courageous and fearless, as witness his actions at the bank.

Let's add in foolhardy, apparently suicidal to abandon cover like that, and ready to drag his partner into the same behaviors. (Some concern there, too, about Dunbar's attitude toward Terry, though that eventually came clear, it was bizarre at the outset).

maggiethecat said:

2. He suffers the consequences of his actions -- emotional and physical -- as we learn when he awakens, shaken, sweating, and obviously blind, from the bank nightmare.

That was cause for concern. If he's ready to go back to the job and he's having nightmares, maybe he ought to re-think things. OTOH, had to cut him some slack again and wait to see if this was going to be a repetitive behavior (a bad sign) or not. As it turned out, I chalked it up to first-day-back jitters.

maggiethecat said:

3. He’s not one to burden others with his problems. He assures Christie he’s “fine,” when he’s clearly anything but, and gets out of bed and on with the day. (Sweet Jesus, give me a man who gets up before I do and makes the coffee.)

This just came off as a guy who had a goal and wasn't going to pause to feel sorry for himself and whine about things even if the wife thought it was a good idea to chat.

maggiethecat said:

4. No slacker, he’s up at dawn for a martial arts session.

Good. He's serious. He's been tackling the skills needed to be a cop.

maggiethecat said:

5. He is a proud man. He dresses impeccably, and will soldier through the subway and the street rather than cadge a ride from his wife.

He seemed a bit well-dressed for a cop, but didn't pay much attention until I learned the wife was in fashion, then chalked it up to her. Did think it was 50/50 whether or not it was a good idea that he didn't want to have the wife drop him off at work (dependency flags potentially going up for coworkers).

maggiethecat said:

6. He fought a year-long battle to get his job back.

That's one of the points that made him seem worth giving a chance. That he was so passionate and determined and self-confident to go for it, no doubt against a lot of opposition.

maggiethecat said:

7. He has a slightly goofy, self-deprecating sense of humor, as witness his attempts to lighten the tension in the squad room when he enters.

Awkward, but no surprise there.

maggiethecat said:

8. He is anxious to fit in, trying to engage his new co-workers by asking about their current caseload, and he takes it in stride when they freeze him out.

Pushy guy. But he'd done his homework.

maggiethecat said:

9. He is both restrained and open in his first talk with Fisk, but will not back down. He even gives his new boss an out: “If it turns out I can’t (do my job), I’ll leave.” We’re meant to like him for that, and I did.

Dunbar was realistic enough to recognize that he may not be able to do the job (without Bettancourt, he couldn't have), but also competent enough to believe he could. Nice contrast and that's where the interest in wanting to like the character came in. But like him for it? No.

You bring up an interesting set of interpretations on the character from the outset.

Kyt

[mlm828]

I actually ended up liking the character of Jim Dunbar more than I'd expected, based on what I'd read before the series started. Yes, there were plenty of things in the Pilot to make us like the guy, but, objectively, we saw quite a few negative aspects of his character, too. Such as:

• He cheated on his wife.
  
• He persuades his partner to lie to their boss and withhold information about a case (admittedly, it's because he doesn't want the case pulled from them for bogus reasons, but it shows the lengths he's willing to go to).
  
• He basically highjacks the "Tongue Collector" investigation and continues to investigate (along with his partner) after the boss pulls them off the case and warns him about highjacking the case (again, showing the lengths he's willing to go to).
  
• He fuels the conflict with Marty by challenging him to take the gun, which only creates further animosity when Marty realizes he can't win and has to back down. In my opinion, it's reasonable for Marty to question how Jim is going to prevent a perp from just taking the gun, and there were less-confrontational ways Jim could have dealt with the issue. (That said, I think the way he dealt with it was entirely in character. Besides, from a dramatic perspective, the scene is great; you can almost see the testosterone coming through the TV screen).
  
• There are serious problems in his marriage, resulting in part from his unwillingness or inability to communicate with his wife and allow her to be part of what he's doing (this is not to say her actions don't play a role, but we're talking about the character of Jim here).
  

And we see other negative aspects of his character in later episodes, for example, the disastrous dinner party and projecting his guilt onto Christie in "Four Feet Under" and his defensiveness about the gun and arguing with the Chief of Ds in "Seoul Man."

So why did I end up viewing Jim Dunbar as basically a sympathetic character who sometimes did things I didn't like? Part of it, I'm sure, is that it would have been too big a risk, even for the creators of Blind Justice, to make the main character too unlikeable or unsympathetic. Another part of it is Ron Eldard's ability to allow us to see the humanity in the characters he portrays, even those who are a lot less likeable than Jim Dunbar.

[shmeep]

I love how "listy" everyone is all of a sudden! Excellent points, mlm! You're right. He's baaaaad! Now I will forever hate him.

Actually, many of those faults listed are part of why I liked him to begin with. Not the adultery, although it did humanize him, but I thought it was gutsy for the show to have a Blind guy with so much gall.

I didn't go into the show liking or disliking Jim Dunbar (all drooling aside--well, most of it), but I did go in thinking how wonderful it was that his character was so complex. We could have watched for ten years (*sigh*) and never fully understood why he did all the things he did. Just like a real person. Nothing was black and white with him. Mags has pointed out his strengths while mlm has pointed out his weaknesses and they are both accurate pictures of the man. His strengths don't make me love him and his weaknesses don't turn me against him. As a compete package (with very nice wrapping) I find him utterly fascinating.

[maggiethecat]

Woof! What great stuff to chew over. As a matter of fact, there's so much that I don't want to -- or can't -- wrap my brain around it all at once, so I'm going to start with a couple of points Kyt made in response to my list. (For some reason the boxes didn't copy with the Quote function, so bear with my formatting, please.)

1. He is courageous and fearless, as witness his actions at the bank.

Kyt's response:

Let's add in foolhardy, apparently suicidal to abandon cover like that, and ready to drag his partner into the same behaviors. (Some concern there, too, about Dunbar's attitude toward Terry, though that eventually came clear, it was bizarre at the outset.)

Just more proof, as though we needed it at this point (!), that everyone has a different take on this show and the characters.

Foolhardy? Suicidal to leave cover? What choice did Dunbar have, really? As far as we can tell, everyone else on the scene is either dead or wounded. There is one excruciatingly brief window of opportunity, when the gunman runs out of ammo. At this point, Dunbar has safe cover behind a car, and Terry is behind the corner of a building. Terry -- from what Dunbar says to him -- has a clear shot. By not taking the shot, for whatever reason, Terry forces the issue. Call it what you will -- quick thinking, experience, confidence in his shooting abilities, or testosterone -- I believe Dunbar had no choice other than to do what he did. Wait safely behind the car until the gunman had a chance to reload? Considering all the damage he's already done?

So I still qualify Dunbar's actions as the very definition of courage: To do what must be done despite the cost to oneself.

Moving right along . . .

2. He suffers the consequences of his actions -- emotional and physical -- as we learn when he awakens, shaken, sweating, and obviously blind, from the bank nightmare.

Kyt's response:

That was cause for concern. If he's ready to go back to the job and he's having nightmares, maybe we ought to rethink things. OTOH, had to cut him some slack again and wait to see if this was going to be a repetitive behavior (a bad sign) or not. As it turned out, I chalked it up to first-day-back- jitters.

I will start by admitting a genuine soft spot for all sexy male characters who are "either displaying or trying to mask the obvious signs of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder." Heh. First-day-jitters . . . or a very clever way for the Blind Justice creators to open with an action sequence in which we are shown just what kind of cop Jim Dunbar was, and how he was injured in the line of duty -- both important character elements that were established in a remarkably short amount of time and without any boring expository dialogue.

Skipping to the end . . .

9. He is both restrained and open in his first talk with Fisk, but will not back down. He even gives his new boss an out: "If it turns out I can't (do my job), I'll leave. We're meant to like him for that, and I did.

Kyt's response:

Dunbar was realistic enough to recognize that he may not be able to do his jon (without Bettancourt, he couldn't have), but also competent anough to believe he could. Nice contrast and that's where the interest in wanting to like the character came in. But like him for it? No.

Well, we're in the personal interpretation area here, but I did like him for that first scene with Fisk, very much. That, I think, is where I started to like him a lot. Let's face it -- Fisk hits him with everything, and in fairly short order. Not that he shouldn't have, but it was Dunbar's restrained responses I found so engaging. Of course, he would have been a Class A idiot to be anything but, but you could clearly see the strain. No one wants to go out on the street with you, do us all a favor and stay in the squad room, you're carrying a gun? All the doubts and suspicion for which Dunbar had no doubt prepared himself for a full year are here in this one conversation, and I think he plays it as well as he could given the circumstances. (I also believe that at this point, Dunbar truly believed that his gun would only be used "for a struggle up close." How else would have he been able to get the waiver? That he was able to stick to this for no more than some 24 hours -- that his old instincts came to the fore unwittingly -- is another topic.)

Opinion? Probably. To me, Dunbar's demeanor in Fisk's office exemplified grace under pressure. His unwillingness to back down despite his precarious position was one more reason for me to warm to the guy.

That said, it was the final scene on the street with Karen that sealed the deal. Dunbar is open, he's smart and intuitive, he's genuinely sweet, he's funny, and he dares a bit of flirtatious behavior knowing that she distrusts his moral fiber. At that point? I was counting the minutes to the following Tuesday, and kicking myself for not having taped it.

Basically? I liked that Jim Dunbar was prickly and complex and had enough baggage to fill the hold of the Queen Mary. I liked that he was a bit of a mess. Made him damned interesting. Still does.

[greenbeing]

maggiethecat said:

2. He suffers the consequences of his actions -- emotional and physical -- as we learn when he awakens, shaken, sweating, and obviously blind, from the bank nightmare.

Kyt's response:

That was cause for concern. If he's ready to go back to the job and he's having nightmares, maybe we ought to rethink things. OTOH, had to cut him some slack again and wait to see if this was going to be a repetitive behavior (a bad sign) or not. As it turned out, I chalked it up to first-day-back- jitters.

I will start by admitting a genuine soft spot for all sexy male characters who are "either displaying or trying to mask the obvious signs of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder." Heh. First-day-jitters . . . or a very clever way for the writers of the show to open with an action sequence in which we are shown just what kind of cop Jim Dunbar was when he was at the top of his game, and learn how he was blinded in the line of duty -- both accomplished in a remarkably short amount of time and without any boring expository dialogue.

One issue I've recently started thinking about was about the writer's choice to turn the bank scene into a nightmare. I'd always accepted that that scene is precisely how we saw it played out. But a couple weeks ago, I started thinking about the form. A dream by nature changes reality. So this isn't even just Jim's view of what happened, his conscious opinion, but this could even be skewed by his unconscious prejudices. The lack of flying monkeys makes me think the scene is pretty close to what actually happened. But the very mode it was presented in makes me question the validity of the truth. If it had just been a flashback, I'd believe every word of it. But it is a dream...