
Another meal, another body.
Lecter seems to entrench himself more firmly into his mind, and the show proceeds to show this development via constant psycho-analysis.
The following case initiates the distance, Will experiences between reality and his ability to trace back the motivations of the killer, and as we move on, the loss of one's self becomes the central theme for all protagonists involved, excluding Hannibal, of course. Curiously enough, we get to see a visually moving scene between Abigail and Lecter, her "father", which tells us that his ability to display empathy like other people, is so frightening that no one seems safe from him at all. A true manipulator. I'm also stunned by Mads Mikkelsen's performance, because his interpretation of Hannibal is so visually disturbing in its lack of actually displaying stronger feelings than mere amusement or mild concern. None of which is real. I'm also questioning what exactly goes on inside Lecter. The controlled movements and facial expressions give me this sense of anticipating more. And sometimes the control of one's body is even more terrifying than the actual act of using it as a weapon against others.
A totem of your own making

I find the blatant way in which Lecter approaches Will's empathy disorder very revealing, and his blunt diagnosis short and to the point. Even though I would argue that empathy disorder doesn't fully cover it, Lecter highlights the core issue that plagues Will's mind. The proof that he cannot recall a 3-hour trip to Lecter's office underlines the problem of reality vs zone. And he's aware of it and responds very strongly to the problem.
Will: I save lives.It probably does, although it only covers Will's problem on a superficial level, especially since Lecter suggests that Will cannot cope with the investigation and proceeds to retreat into himself. We can definitely conclude that Graham cannot be diagnosed with Autism/Asperger, because Will doesn't feel a lack of empathy. Additionally, the sleepwalking and REM sleep uncovers a truly horrifying perspective, as we will see later.
Hannibal: And that feels good?
Meanwhile, Abigail and Freddie Lounds discuss the proceedings of publishing her story, which isn't exactly something Lecter or Graham approve in true style of fatherly concern.
Even more problematic and a parallel to Abigail's hallucinations is Will's deteriorating state, which Alana Bloom summarizes as "unstable", after she witnessed him talking to himself. I'm not really sure what kind of message this scene wants to send.
On the one hand, it's problematic to assume that Will's mental state affects the way Alana feels about him to such a degree that she calls an involvement with him reckless.
I have feelings for you, Will, but I can't just have an affair with you. It would be reckless. It's because I think you are unstable, and until that changes, I can only be your friend.His health is treated as a deficiency undeserving of the kind of love he could eventually receive, and it's problematic to assume people with mental health issues will destroy relationships from the get-go. On the other hand, I understand her feelings regarding that matter.
As we're moving on, Crawford is turning into a ruthless interrogator. He has his suspicions regarding the death of Nicholas Boyle and investigates Abigail's involvement in it, disregarding her trauma entirely in the process. I cannot find it in me to like Crawford's approach, even though he's on the right track.

Moreover, the totem pole case reveals that the latest victim, Joel Summers, was killed by his biological father Lawrence Wells, and Will, recalling his previous conclusion about the killing being a legacy, firmly concludes that Wells didn't secure his legacy at all and simply destroyed his son for the sake of his own comfort.
The truth
The confrontation between Will and Hannibal

In this case he appeals to Will's sense of responsibility for her, while actively seeking a physical as well as emotional connection to point out that they're basically in this together. By doing so, Lecter masterfully puts them on the same level, effectively avoiding further trouble with the authorities.
On a side note, the dinner scene with Lounds puts a very ironic spin to the name "cannibal family", with her complaints about having too much meat in the salad. By the way, I'm still hungry after watching this episode. Shame on me.
Abigail's secret is fully revealed in the end, with the last scene shot in black and white, showing her approaching a girl. She confesses that she helped her father with the victims and Hannibal reacts to her confession in a truly outstanding way. In the end, Lecter's deception is so incredibly real, because he hugged her and comforted her, declaring how she's not the monster, but the victim, which gives this scene so many layers for all key players involved. We have to ask ourselves, what the definition of monster truly entails and how much it extends to Hannibal himself.
I don't think he is, but that's just me.
LOVE YOUR RECAP and Episode Analysis!!! <3
ReplyDeleteI agree with your insights, including the idea that Hannibal himself isn't really a monster, as I think his introspection and value to culture and his ability to emotionally reach out completely contradicts ruthlessness that I would associate with "monster".
I had to do a little a little smirk at the scene when one of the victim's surnames was revealed to be "Lamb" ;)
:D Yes, it's quite the tricky thing to label someone as a monster and that applies to Hannibal as well. Monster also kinda reduces the layers a character can have, and it firmly places this character into the category "evil". And I'd never do that with Hannibal.
ReplyDeleteI didn't really see the Alana/Will scene as Alana saying that Will's mental instability is going to ruin their relationship. Consciously going into a relationship with someone who is CLEARLY mentally instable like Will takes a lot of effort and thinking. It's not as simply giving the love the person needs/deserve, but it's also protecting yourself from the eventual heartbreaks/headaches. Alana is a doctor, she already said that she has a professional curiosity, if she starts a relationship with Will while he needs to treat himself she's going to end up being his shrink instead of girlfriend. It will be a relationship that isbound to end badly.
ReplyDeleteWill needs help, he needs to get treated, but the only one who can do that is him, and that's kind of how I saw that scene. Alana is being honest, is coming forward and with that she's subtly giving Will a little push into WANTING to get better.
Well he's a monster and he is evil. I don't see how giving the title will cheapens his complexity. He's a very complex character, very interesting and I love him to death (my favorite villain forever and ever), but he IS a monster, a very complex, insane, intelligent, fabulous and evil monster.
ReplyDeleteThey only way IMO your statement can be true, is if you acknowledge we are all monsters. It's not that I'm condoning killing, but IMO the point of Thomas Harris work is point out that there are killers, and there are killers...and normalcy is in the eye of the beholder...
ReplyDeleteHannibal's actual back story is exceptionally tragic and it points out the way trauma reshapes us to try and take control of what we don't understand. -There's sometimes rationality to it. It's sociopaths that would be considered more monstrous because they tend to more apathetic, something Hannibal is not. Even the books puts Hannibal's states of reality as levels in castle...the beautiful upstairs and the dungeons below...
Culturally, Monster is a word we associate with the non intellect or the non feeling, as it's a word that alienates, segregates, and dehumanizes, despite it's actual definition, which relates to something being "abnormal".
One of the best books I ever read was "Madness and Civilization". It Chronicles how humanity has labeled what they fear/the unknown as "sick", "Mentally ill", and how we have treated those that we view as different and how it may only lead to more alienation.
I heard an interview with Mads Mikkelsen where they ask him if Hannibal is a monster. His responds was that he hope´s Hannibal isn´t this way because of a bad childhood, Hannibal is smarter than that. I hope he is right. I love they way Mads is such a mild Hannibal, though you always sence his evil side right underneath the surface.
ReplyDeleteWhich is ableism by the way. Mental illness and the subsequent discrimination in media against people with mental illness is so frequent and rarely identified for what it is. The label monster comes easier simply because of the sensationalism that pervades our society. No one says, killing shouldn't be condemned, but Hannibal's back story reveals the layers that are necessary for people to understand that a label intended to strip him of his layers is simply not the whole truth.
ReplyDeleteExactly! Well said! :)
ReplyDeleteI guess it just depends on what one's definition of ruin is, because as even your own conclusion seems to be something beyond inconvience. Alana had also described the pursuit of it as something "reckless" and "crossing a line". That IMO is not just because it would be tough to deal with, but because their relationship would forever change and could lead to disaster or ruin on both their parts mentally, physically, and professionally.
ReplyDeleteAlana is smart enough to know that her feelings could cloud her professional judgement and in Will's state, that is disastrous Plus even if Alana could handle it, there is also the Jack Crawford issue, as this episode again points out how men in similar professions don't respect her judgement and Jack Crawford, whether the audience wants to consider his job or his ethics as the right thing or not, is proving a powerful force of discrimination. Alana and Will are constantly being used/manipulated (Hannibal/Jack Crawford) and being alienated which puts them on the same boat...
I have read all the books, but I must admit that it has been so many years that I did not remember all of that. Thanks for refreshing my memory! :-)
ReplyDeleteMads also says in the interview that what is interesting about the series vs. the movies is that we see Hannibals private moments oppose to when he is captured and he can play with the people around him more obviously. I also have to agree with that.
The relationship between Will and Hannibal is even more interesting than the one between Clarice and Hannibal in the movies in my oppinion. I loved their scene in this episode where Hannibal puts his hand on Wills shoulder and says "it is the right thing to do".
Sure!
ReplyDeleteI agree!!XD I love seeing the more introspection of this relationship and/or other relationships he tries to have. It gives way more humility to Hannibal than the films have, which I think is a real accomplishment! I really hope we get a second season. It went beyond any expectations I might of had for it. It makes me want to get out the books again and rethink it! :)
I absolutely adore AH's portrayls of Hannibal - even more than MM's, but I think the different ways both actors portray Lecter matches the period in their lives they're in. They are in a way different, AH's Hannibal is in jail, he's revealed to be a cannibalistic serial killer and while his true nature is still there, he has to play a different game. He's exposed, he's known, he can't be the same Hannibal from before.
ReplyDeleteMeanhile MM's Hannibal is still free and manipulative in his subtle unknown way. He's still "just" a psychiatrist, essencially a good person trying to do what is best for everyone. The game he's playing is in a completely different level.
I can't acknowledge we are all monsters because we are not cannibalistic serial killers. While, you know, Hannibal is.
ReplyDeleteJust because you give the word "monster" a diffrent connotation doesn't change who Hannibal Lecter is.
ReplyDeleteActually it does, because human perspective of reality is argumentively often"subjective".
ReplyDeleteWe describe and learn by comparison and/or segregation. Things even like colors are names "we" give them to understand the similarities and differences between them, but thenn we further it by other associations which changes from culture to culture over time...
For instance Immanual Kant (Critique of Pure Reason) often tried to point out factual identity/truths verses other identities or truths...
"All black Houses are Houses, but not all houses are black" Is one of his most famous examples of this concept....
However one could also argue what exactly a house is and we would all have more specific definitions of what that is, and some of us would further the association with "house" with family and what family is...So a church could be a house (house of warship), a school could be a house (house of education), a tepee or motor home could be a house (a portable house). And then there would be people that would argue that we would have to trace the word "house" back to it's roots/origins which means they could argue whatever that culture's definition of it was...
Cultures tend to put "stigmas" on words that takes away from their actual meaning. Monster is surely one of them, as is sympathy Syplothy is considered a negative word as it implies one feels sorry or pity for another, where "empathy" means you can "feel" and "relate" to what the other person is going through--you don't think you're better than them, but equal...
To your other response:
" I can't acknowledge we are all monsters because we are not cannibalistic serial killers. While, you know, Hannibal is."
You might find Hannibal a monster based on what you think a monster or acts of monstrous is/are, such as the act of serial killing and eating other people...
But one point that is made in the episode by Freddie Lounds is that we all are a pathological to some degree. (There's a spectrum)
You don't have to be a serial killer or a cannibal to destroy someone else's life or shatter their state of reality (see what Jack Crawford is doing to Will and what Alana worries about doing to him) and it doesn't mean there can't be any humility or civility in something diabolical. Hannibal is in the middle of these things, because he is someone who understands what it is to be human, as part of being human is questioning, suffering, and learning how to survive in world that isn't perfect, is flawed, and can be volatile. It's just he takes it to a level of genocide attempting to create his ideal of perfection. He is written to beautifully contrast the lines between the primitive and the civilized as human beings have been BOTH.
However it changes how people perceive him. And that's a big difference to me
ReplyDeletegreat post. Agree with everything you said :)
ReplyDeleteThank you for pointing this out! I've seen mentally unstable people try to get better through being in a relationship but it doesn't really work like that. As you said, if you yourself are that unstable, you might end up dragging your partner down with you. And you need to want to get better, 'even' without a romantic partner, but certainly the help of a good friend is just as important :)
ReplyDeleteOf course there is. I'm not denying Hannibal is a killer and doesn't do horrific , but my point is that the act of killing or being "ill" should rarely be a black or white subject (That is why we have a criminal justice system with various laws and categorization of crime and punishment), as Freddie Lounds behavior and profession is rather hurtful to others, not to mention she could potentially lead more people to their deaths, by over exploiting things and not letting the FBI/Other law enforcement to their jobs, as she pretty much disrespects everyone for the sake of what she thinks the truth is. (She values truth, or story over saving lives)
ReplyDeleteIMO Thomas Harris novels and by extension even what Mr. Fuller here continues to show us is that not all killers are inhuman and not all non killers don't hurt other people. Often times in his novels, especially when we get into the times of Clarice Starling, there are seriously disgusting corrupt people in the FBI that Starling has to with...There are also times where Hannibal does do things that are more heroic and even, just like Dexter, the act of serial killers killing serial killers could be perceived as a type vigilantism.
We are so far removed because of technology and science that we easily can forget what it might of been like to not have all those things...to beg the universe and/or God(s) for rain or sun or to go hunt for food. (Not having what you need or love can be "traumatic") Cannibalism is often in some cultures ritualistic (it's about a type of communion or offering) , which rituals are something we take for granted, but looking at something like Dexter's opening sequence, that is what those writers have put back into modern perspective, our repeated actions which are a type of ritual and/or belief in the name of what we believe, such as the act of eating a certain kind of meal in the morning hours...It no longer means what it once might have to some of us, but the fact that we forget to question the act of eating 'breakfast' is the point I'm making about not being able to connect to our pasts, which to me is monsterous, but this is something Hannibal understands. (but in his case, unless Fuller changes the back story, cannibalism directly relates to his childhood). The act of killing and eating and sharing meals are some of oldest actions, rituals, and/or traditions humanity shares, with or without dressing it up or whatever it is we think we should or should not eat. We are all a little guilty of ethnocentrism.
The point is that we live in a society which needs certain rules to function. Sure, you can view serial killers killing other serial killers as a form of vigilantism. There's always the question of "if the law enforcement can't do it, why shouldn't I if I help other people by doing it?". However, it is against the law, because if people randomly started killing others because they suspect they're guilty of something, without even a trial, it will lead to chaos. (Which is, as far as we know, besides the point in Hannibal for Hannibal himself)
ReplyDeleteAnd of course it's not always killers who hurt other people. There's also rapists, muggers, wifebeaters, torturers, (extreme examples, of course), then there's bullying, domestic violence, etc etc...There's little-big monsters in all of us and we struggle to keep them in check. (Which is, incidentally, Will's problem during the series, brought on by his empathy. The fascination of 'evil')
I actually have no problems with the thought of eating human meat per se, I could really care less, but I do have a problem with killing a human for that. I liked Abigail's father with his whole "we have to use everything from their bodies" philosophy because I think it's a good point, animals we slaughter for meat shouldn't go to waste. Honour your food. And I guess Hannibal actually enjoying the meal he's cooking, sharing it with others and spending time and effort on preparing it sends a good message, especially for a culture that thrives on fastfood. But just think about this: Would you like to have him live in your neighbourhood?
Look I don't disagree we that we don't need criminal justice system or that I do not believe in Due Process.
ReplyDeleteMy original argument was about the definition of monster verses the way it's culturally used in relation to determining if Hannibal is one. I felt @Andrea 's response implied she felt that Hannibal was a monster in a very cut and dry/black and white way, which I disagreed with, as I agree with @Veronika K. , as she stated in her beautiful recap, that she doesn't feel Hannibal is a "monster". I tried explain that IMO the point of Harris work is to point out the idealism and subjectivity of culture and civilization through the story of Hannibal, as I find Hannibal relatable and even likable, which to me contradicts the traditional traits that culture often identifies with "monster", which then makes one rethink what is to be human or a serial killer and the way we behave towards what we don't understand or what we fear and Harris/Fuller also complicates/muddies that idea by making Hannibal personable and person who is capable of understanding other people, as this is also makes him so dangerous, because his humanity disarms his victims.
AWesome recap Veronika, I really loved it too, I am a big fan.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good job.
Cannot agree more
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for the great points.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mads, you and DArthLocke4, and the way Mads Mikkelsen brings Hannibal to life is admirable, EXCELLENT.
ReplyDeleteTRUE.
ReplyDeletethanks :)
ReplyDeleteThanks! It's not that I do not enjoy AH's. I really use to believe that I couldn't see anyone else as Hannibal and that scene in Hannibal with the Pigs has to be one of my favorite movie scenes of all time, but MM just feels more naturally European-Elitist-Intellectual. There is something in his voice and body language that I find more charming or captivating, but again it also is different time in Hannibal's life, but I am very much enjoying it. :)
ReplyDeleteMads does it in a way that is so subtle which makes you crave for more. It's really really frightening and fascinating at the same time
ReplyDeleteWell said, I am with you.
ReplyDeleteI am really hoping for a second season aswell. This surely the most interesting new show on TV. I wonder how long they are gonna keep torturing us.
ReplyDeleteTrue, I am enjoying it too, MM just feels more naturally European-Elitist-Intellectual, is an excellent definition to the way he is.
ReplyDeleteThere's a difference between having pathological tendencies and acting upon them. I think describing someone who kills people to eat them, even though he is not starving, and feeling no remorse about it whatsoever as a 'monster' is not really that far off. Nobody ever said 'monsters' couldn't be complex or have reasons for what they do. But man I guess you could say Hannibal's superego kissed him goodbye a long time ago.
ReplyDeleteThat's interesting. Guess he's never read "Hannibal Rising".
ReplyDelete(Fuller could take a different direction of course, but I hope he doesn't, since he's gone out of his way to make grand allusions to things in some of the other novels and films, which IMO I felt his origin story solidified the other stories told first and the motifs and themes Fuller continues to barrow from them.)
*****MAGOR BOOK SPOILER/Origin Story Spoiler:
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
Hannibal lived in castle Lector in Lithuania during WWII. He was WELL educated... His father had to move his family out into their Hunting Lodge in the woods during a winter of the war, as Hitler and the Soviets invaded. His parents were killed near the lodge, as a soviet tank invaded, and he had to try and take care of his little sister Misha...But starving German soldiers come to the lodge...they eat his sister in front of him....then the Soviet Union later finds him and takes him back to his castle which is now a Soviet Orphanage...
This is what solidifies Harris' themes/motifs in his novels about Deer, Hunting, The Woods, Birds, and other farm animals and is the reason why he becomes a cannibal. It's explained in "Hannibal" that Clariece Starling is being held in the place of Misha in his mind and as long as time can not move backwards (he often knocks over a tea cup to make sure it can't be put back together again), then he will never kill Starling. --Fuller's Red Dragon prequel (this show) has done a wonderful job at reusing this material with Abigail Hobbs and having the audience experience Will's abilities, as it is that ability that would "ruin" Hannibal -- and what he holds deer, errrr I mean dear. :)
Personally I like MM's portrayal better than AH's, because it's more believable as AH's voice I think sometimes gave him away, granted Hannibal at this time is more low keyed, but IMO this portrayal better suits the novels well. Hannibal has monstrous moments, but like the point I was making before, and actually the Tabloid Journalist points out at dinner during this episode, we all have varying degrees of pathological behavior...But it's in cases like these, where Harris and by extension Fuller's work shows us how hard it might be to draw the line and if can really know where the line is between monster and human?! (and or identifying and dealing with 'abnormal' behavior) There are times in the books/films where Hannibal can be very heroic...