I hold to sort of an Occam’s Razor theory of literary/film analysis: don’t make it more complicated than it needs to be. Just a reminder of the fact that Red said he learned about Tom from his forger. Red also said that Gina Zanetakos was “taking the fall” by fingering him (1:6). I mean, would Red, who is entirely adept at money-tracking, put money that could be easily traced to an off-shore account of his in boxes clearly marked with her scar sign that Tom also used when sending her photos intended to incriminate him? Don’t forget that Liz was persuaded by this that Tom was innocent when Tom clearly was NOT innocent.
Also, how would Red have gotten the murder weapon to put in the box? Did Tom or Gina return a dirty pistol to him? Even if they had done such a thing, would Red have kept it and put it in a box with money that could be traced back to him?
I’m sticking with the more straightforward view that Red and Tom’s “about us” relationship occurred late in the game, soon after Tom’s imprisonment began. Ezra may have figured it out or Red deduced it when he said he did, when he realized that Lizzie had a “Secret Santa” source as to where Berlin kept his money (2:2 Monarch Douglas Bank).
Red’s character is consistent. When he can give a straightforward answer to a direct question or needs to respond to an incorrect assertion, he does so, very often with a simple yes or no. “You’re a monster.” “Yes.” Or “You put Tom’s picture in Gina’s apartment.” “No.” If someone asks him a direct question that he doesn’t want to answer, he’ll say something non-responsive: “That’s a pretty blouse.” Or “Who decided on this paneling?” Or “So you went with the gray” (lol). If he needs information, he asks for it precisely. “Tell me what you saw” (not how you felt). Then with Sherlockian precision, he presses on, “He’s Serbian Orthodox; he wouldn’t have a tattoo.” Spader says his haircut reflects this no-nonsense attitude.
Yes, Red lies, but his lying is minimalist, not superfluous, and he has a clear sense of priorities. In particular, he will lie (or kill) to protect Lizzie’s life. I assume there are other things among ‘those which he holds most dear,’ though I’m not sure what. Naomi, perhaps. Maybe I’m naïve to see it this way, or lazy – too lazy anyway to want to rewrite huge parts of Season 1 to explain away Tom’s pointing a loaded pistol at Lizzie’s head.
[Original; not cross-posted at WSJ Speakeasy]
![Full Frontal. [The Blacklist 9:2 The Skinner, Conclusion] Photo by: Will Hart/NBC (cropped)](https://i0.wp.com/blacklistdeclassified.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/FDED7693-078D-439A-8A0D-E5C799B6279C-e1635660632194.png?w=396&h=650&ssl=1 "FDED7693-078D-439A-8A0D-E5C799B6279C")
2:8 Decembrist: Occam’s Razor (11/13/2014)
Tags: @NBCBlacklist, about us, Angel Station, Blacklist, Boone, drama, Elizabeth Keen, evidence, forgery, Gina, gun, James Spader, Keen, Liz, Lizzie, Lizzy, Megan Boone, murder, NBC, Occam's, Occam's razor, Ockham's, Okkam's, parsimony, passports, razor, Red, Reddington, serial, Spader, standards, The Blacklist, TheBlacklist, Tom, TV, weapon, Zanetakos
I hold to sort of an Occam’s Razor theory of literary/film analysis: don’t make it more complicated than it needs to be. Just a reminder of the fact that Red said he learned about Tom from his forger. Red also said that Gina Zanetakos was “taking the fall” by fingering him (1:6). I mean, would Red, who is entirely adept at money-tracking, put money that could be easily traced to an off-shore account of his in boxes clearly marked with her scar sign that Tom also used when sending her photos intended to incriminate him? Don’t forget that Liz was persuaded by this that Tom was innocent when Tom clearly was NOT innocent.
Also, how would Red have gotten the murder weapon to put in the box? Did Tom or Gina return a dirty pistol to him? Even if they had done such a thing, would Red have kept it and put it in a box with money that could be traced back to him?
I’m sticking with the more straightforward view that Red and Tom’s “about us” relationship occurred late in the game, soon after Tom’s imprisonment began. Ezra may have figured it out or Red deduced it when he said he did, when he realized that Lizzie had a “Secret Santa” source as to where Berlin kept his money (2:2 Monarch Douglas Bank).
Red’s character is consistent. When he can give a straightforward answer to a direct question or needs to respond to an incorrect assertion, he does so, very often with a simple yes or no. “You’re a monster.” “Yes.” Or “You put Tom’s picture in Gina’s apartment.” “No.” If someone asks him a direct question that he doesn’t want to answer, he’ll say something non-responsive: “That’s a pretty blouse.” Or “Who decided on this paneling?” Or “So you went with the gray” (lol). If he needs information, he asks for it precisely. “Tell me what you saw” (not how you felt). Then with Sherlockian precision, he presses on, “He’s Serbian Orthodox; he wouldn’t have a tattoo.” Spader says his haircut reflects this no-nonsense attitude.
Yes, Red lies, but his lying is minimalist, not superfluous, and he has a clear sense of priorities. In particular, he will lie (or kill) to protect Lizzie’s life. I assume there are other things among ‘those which he holds most dear,’ though I’m not sure what. Naomi, perhaps. Maybe I’m naïve to see it this way, or lazy – too lazy anyway to want to rewrite huge parts of Season 1 to explain away Tom’s pointing a loaded pistol at Lizzie’s head.
[Original; not cross-posted at WSJ Speakeasy]