5.09 - Last Resort

Good posts, all! Here's my take on the gun scene... Back near the end of S3, House very cockily told Lupe "I am that good" and proceeded to miss a simple staph infection which resulted in her death. As he told Foreman at the end, sometimes they are going to miss things that other doctors get: they're more used to zebras than horses. We learned that even though House is cocky about a diagnosis, he's not always right: almost always eventually right is what he claims. To me this episode was an analog of that: he felt very sure of his unspoken understanding of Jason, he thought that the guy knew House was his only hope to get the diagnosis and that that was all he wanted and he would go along with whatever path House gave him to get what he needed. Since House knew Jason had to have his cooperation to get the diagnosis, he envisioned no scenario where he would cooperate if Jason actually put others at risk. So he felt that the reason why he was giving the gun back was something Jason would understand. He basically considered it window dressing for the authorities, and I think he felt a responsibility to diagnose the guy as a sort of kindred spirit, and in the end he was wrong about what the guy would be capable of doing. I think they have House make these errors (from hubris, from being too involved, from arrogance) because they don't want him to be infallible. He's a genius but he makes mistakes, and he's got the gift for observation and interpretation of human motives, but he still is capable of trusting too much, both in himself and in people with whom he feels kinship. He is an extreme character and even though we see his genius, we also have to see the fallout when he makes errors. From the first episode, we've known he doesn't like to see patients because then he cares and he becomes a less effective diagnostician: oddly, it's not that he doesn't care but that he does that gets in his way more often.

jair and Peggy, great discussion about ethics and writing... I saw the "Last Resort" episode as the writer's attempt to force House to come clean ethically about "Dying" and to a lesser extent MLC, in addition to all his obsessional extremes about finding the answer. MLC was the seed which precipitated his more extensive ethical lapse in "Dying". House and the writers came clean in a similar way in "Emancipation" when House faced his portion of the guilt about Amber. The two episodes, "Emancipation" and "Last Resort" are like the scenes in the scrub room where the surgeons (Wilson and House) clean their hands and speak the truth at the same time. So, I still think MLC and "Dying" fall on the wrong side of the line but with vastly different extenuating circumstances that make House's actions first more and then much less understandable. I'm not sure I follow - in MLC and DCE, House was anything but obsessed with finding the solution, more justifiably in MLC. Here he goes overboard in the other direction. I wouldn't want House to lose his "one thing," but it has to operate along with all the other faculties that make him the best diagnostician around. These would include brains and logical faculties. It doesn't take a genius to consider, I get the guy now - but let's send the other two to safety just in case. With that single decision, the show clearly signalled the purpose of the gun ploy being to set up the 13 epiphany. I myself would have thought it even more effective to have House putting his judgment on the line all alone. And the entire obsession thing would have been much more powerful a few seasons ago, when that was a dominant feature of the character. They've largely dropped that since late S3, so it's kind of cheap to throw it at us with such force all of a sudden. If I allowed myself to lose my own point of reference and perspective, the show would lose half of its value to me. And discussing these issues of value makes it even more worthwhile. Peggy, about the bigger and badder syndrome, maybe it's more a case of November sweeps syndrome? We can hope. Good point; the episode was obviously made with sweeps in mind. But I've seen the syndrome in action for a while now. It's very hard to avoid when you have a character with extreme traits. I agree with Triteness that they've been pushing it with House for a while, and mostly falling flat. This episode was good, and I don't have a problem with House being fallible, but I do draw the line when the error is so egregious that the average person is left with their mouth hanging open. That seems to be the reaction on the forums that are more general TV fan and less fandom. It certainly was my reaction. Another point: The moment when we're supposed to see House identifying with the patient was very clear, and yet it felt forced. It's forced IMO for a person suffering for so long from something to say he just wants to know what it is. More realistic to me would be a frustrated patient who would say, I just want to feel better. Do anything to me, keep my gun, throw me in jail, just take this feeling away. So Jason wasn't a fully fledged character but also a device to draw this (IMO spurious) parallel to House. I still believe the episode without the 13 complication would have been written in a different, more dramatically satisfying and truly Houseian way. And it could have been great instead of good.

I still believe the episode without the 13 complication would have been written in a different, more dramatically satisfying and truly Houseian way. I think this episode was envisioned as a bottle episode right from the get go and the main tension was always going to be between House and Jason, with Thirteen the battleground. I don't think at any point the writers were looking to get House out of that room with the tension defused. We already know that the beginning concept the writers came up with was the idea of a man driven to desperation because of the US medical system. I would be very surprised if House giving the gun back was not a main story beat come up with early in the story development. It was a reversal of expectatons and a reversal of the beginning dynamics, not something that just came out of the blue. Thirteen didn't drive this episode, House's relationship to the gunman did. but I do draw the line when the error is so egregious that the average person is left with their mouth hanging open. That seems to be the reaction on the forums that are more general TV fan and less fandom. From the comments I've seen, people are pretty evenly split on whether they believed the gun situation. Polite Dissent goes back and forth, with people equally firm on either side of the question, so I don't think there's any consensus that House wouldn't do that. And I think there's not as much differentiation as one might expect between "Would House do it" and "Would I do it?" I think the writers are happy to be stirring up debate and they don't want us to assume House will act heroically nor that he is incapable of being affected emotionally.

I still believe the episode without the 13 complication would have been written in a different, more dramatically satisfying and truly Houseian way. I think this episode was envisioned as a bottle episode right from the get go and the main tension was always going to be between House and Jason, with Thirteen the battleground. I don't think at any point the writers were looking to get House out of that room with the tension defused. I don't see why it was necessary for 13 to stay in the room for them to accomplish this. We already know that the beginning concept the writers came up with was the idea of a man driven to desperation because of the US medical system. The rap on the US healthcare system AFAIK is denial of treatment because of cost containment by insurance companies, or of people being uninsured. If those aspects were discussed in the episode, I must have missed it. Based on 16 doctors and numerous tests, this patient seems to have had ample access to medical care. I know there are occasions when a doctor doesn't take a symptom seriously or misdiagnoses, but is this really the root trouble in US healthcare? I think that's very unfair to the medical profession. Even House has done it. Basically, this patient had a condition that was very hard to diagnose (though, when it came right down to it, with complete information it didn't seem all that abstruse). As a consideration of the ills of US healthcare, this is IMO a nonstarter or at best, the connection was not well established to make their point. I would be very surprised if House giving the gun back was not a main story beat come up with early in the story development. It was a reversal of expectatons and a reversal of the beginning dynamics, not something that just came out of the blue. Thirteen didn't drive this episode, House's relationship to the gunman did. Well, we disagree, because I could almost see the wheels grinding there. They first set it up with the kid's line about "It's safe now, isn't it?" but I do draw the line when the error is so egregious that the average person is left with their mouth hanging open. That seems to be the reaction on the forums that are more general TV fan and less fandom. From the comments I've seen, people are pretty evenly split on whether they believed the gun situation. Polite Dissent goes back and forth, with people equally firm on either side of the question, so I don't think there's any consensus that House wouldn't do that. And I think there's not as much differentiation as one might expect between "Would House do it" and "Would I do it?" I think the writers are happy to be stirring up debate and they don't want us to assume House will act heroically nor that he is incapable of being affected emotionally. IMO it wouldn't have been heroic to have let the others go, just commonsensical. For House on his own to have given back the gun would not have been heroic either, foolhardy instead, but it would have been a better fit to the House to whom I became accustomed in the first couple of seasons. Again I come back to using one's head and drawing a very obvious line. But I'm repeating myself, so 'nuff said on that front.

The rap on the US healthcare system AFAIK is denial of treatment because of cost containment by insurance companies, or of people being uninsured. If those aspects were discussed in the episode, I must have missed it. I think Kutner's comment on the medical system letting down people because they don't get enough access and rack up huge bills when they do, thus eventually cutting off even more people from access, was the rap on the health system. Kutner said that it didn't excuse the gunman, but you put enough people in his position and someone is going to do something inexcusable.

The rap on the US healthcare system AFAIK is denial of treatment because of cost containment by insurance companies, or of people being uninsured. If those aspects were discussed in the episode, I must have missed it. I think Kutner's comment on the medical system letting down people because they don't get enough access and rack up huge bills when they do, thus eventually cutting off even more people from access, was the rap on the health system. Kutner said that it didn't excuse the gunman, but you put enough people in his position and someone is going to do something inexcusable. Not very well elucidated, then, if that was the point of the episode.

The rap on the US healthcare system AFAIK is denial of treatment because of cost containment by insurance companies, or of people being uninsured. If those aspects were discussed in the episode, I must have missed it. I think Kutner's comment on the medical system letting down people because they don't get enough access and rack up huge bills when they do, thus eventually cutting off even more people from access, was the rap on the health system. Kutner said that it didn't excuse the gunman, but you put enough people in his position and someone is going to do something inexcusable. Not very well elucidated, then, if that was the point of the episode. I wouldn't say that was the whole point of the episode. I think the point of the episode was to explore whether House could and how he would work if there was literally a gun pointed to his head. However, Kutner was pointing what could potentially drive a person to that point, which would have made the situation more believable, YMMV.

Not very well elucidated, then, if that was the point of the episode. What House would do and why was the overall point of the episode. What might drive the gunman was a thread.

ITA. To me the point of the ep was to show how far House would go to get an answer. He had plenty of opportunities to stop the gunman (the most obvious being when he was given the gun), but he wouldn't stop until he had solved the puzzle, (putting his -and others'- lives in danger). Kudos to Thirteen for critisizing how obsessed with puzzles House was... it had gotten to the point where he was commiting a crime (by handing the gun back and continuing the unsafe guinea-pig trial on her). I was glad she didn't just go along with whatever House said, and decided that what House was doing wasn't right and that it shouldn't be his chocie to put her (and the other hostage's) life in danger. I hate it when the characters pass off House's actions as "House being House". It's nice when they stop to think that, hey, this sort of behaviour isn't always acceptable.

I wouldn't say that was the whole point of the episode. I think the point of the episode was to explore whether House could and how he would work if there was literally a gun pointed to his head. However, Kutner was pointing what could potentially drive a person to that point, which would have made the situation more believable, YMMV. Not very well elucidated, then, if that was the point of the episode. What House would do and why was the overall point of the episode. What might drive the gunman was a thread. I should have said, if that was the writers' starting point for the episode, which jair mentioned upthread. I realize that wasn't the entire point of the episode. If they were intending to comment upon the US healthcare system, though, I think they missed the mark.

I don't think the general audience bothers to think deeply about it. Again, JMO. You know, I bother to think deeply about it, and it makes sense to me, but that's JMO. Here's the thing: to me, the writers are giving me a character that refuses to be defined by my rules. They're continually giving me new views of a character who goes further than I thought he would -- but yet I can see the characterization line that they drew between what I knew then and what I know now. They know the character better than I do, and I love it when they challenge any preconceptions I might have about House or any of the other characters. I am with you on that one Namaste.

Well said Namaste. House is the protagonist but he doesn't know that. The last thing he tries to be is a hero, of any sort. He just tries to do his job the best he can: that's all he really has, or so he thinks. So it's fascinating to see what this guy will and won't do, under stress, for fun, or to save a life. His motives, his reasoning, his ideas, his actions are always interesting and even when he screws up or when he is way out of bounds for most of us, his lateral thinking ends up making sense. He doesn't discard ideas to be nice, he just wants what works. There is a purity to this character that's impossible to pin down, but it's part of what makes him compelling and keeps us interested enough to stay engaged with the show. Yay, show!

Oh, come on . . . House and Lisa couldn't even have hugged when he got out?? Throw us a hug at least! This was ok . . . just watched it on Hulu cause I was napping when it first aired. Yeah, the whole giving back the gun thing was so dumb. Yes, I know why he did it, but come on. Wow Hugh looked so beddable in this ep. Holy shit.

Can anyone who has access to their dvr go back and pretty please transcribe for me House's conversation with Taub? I feel like I can make an argument based on it, but I don't want to do it if I'm using my faulty memory. :)

Can anyone who has access to their dvr go back and pretty please transcribe for me House's conversation with Taub? I feel like I can make an argument based on it, but I don't want to do it if I'm using my faulty memory. :) Do you mean for this to go in the "Let Them Eat Cake" thread?

View Full Version: 5.09 - Last Resort