no disrespect

Discussion of TJ's most popular venture to date!
btdart
Fan
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 6:53 pm

no disrespect

Post by btdart »

Note to new readers. This thread is a development from one elsewhere in this forum entitled 'Bipolar squintern', which is now included in the 'Replacement for Zack' thread because it was about HH's intention to introduce a bipolar squintern. It was a very interesting discussion in which many of us spoke movingly about our direct and indirect experiences with the bipolar condition. Concern had been expressed that HH might be planning to use a bipolar intern for comic relief. Btdart was expressing the opposite view. Eventually we decided to use this offshoot thread to discuss controversial ideas a propos the show. Hopefully this makes the first couple of posts easier to understand! Feel free to seek out the original thread if you're interested.
Steph x

JennyLea wrote:Please don't disrespect my valid concern. It is very disrespectful. I love watching "Bones" and for the most part have few issues with what is happening.
Jenny, I never addressed you personally. I used "People, have a clue" and I regret that, that was not kind, and I am sorry if you may have taken that personally.

I still stand by everything else I said. HH has demonstrated over 4 years of shows that he and his writers can and do combine serious issues with humor better than most. It is why so many of us love the show. I can't think of one show where they used the squints to make fun of anything, maybe allow us to see their specialness through other eyes.
I especially liked the show that introduced Pej Vahdat, as Arastoo Vaziri. Bones' and others' reactions to his "prayer" breaks were handled with humor, insight, kindness and joy. It's not easy to take on religion and they did it well, in my opinion anyway.

best wishes
btdart
word count: 304

JennyLea
Fan
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: no disrepect,

Post by JennyLea »

It's all good. I am over it and all is forgotten.

I will say that in my opinion, no disrespect intended, in the case of the squinterns, HH has not combined humour and serious issues successfully. Everyone will see something different in every situation. This is where miscommunication comes in. I interpreted a statement by HH differently than what he indended. I'm not saying either interpretation is wrong, but it shows how mistakes can be made. It is just a part of everyone being an individual person. I am much more confident now in what HH would write for a bipolar squintern because I asked for clarification and he replied. This cleared up a miscomunication and created a much healthier virtual atmosphere.

I will use your example of Pej Vahdat as an example because I saw the episode much differently than what you did. What I saw was the other characters laughing at him because he needed to pray facing East at particular times during the day. I did not see one single other person attempt to identify with him or even understand his religion or why he did it. They just laughed. I actually had a hard time with that.

I'm sure that I interpreted your response different from what you intended, but I can't apologize because I do not feel that interpreting it that way was wrong. I will admit that it was a miscomunication on both parts and can now be forgotten and we can move on.

My name is Jenny, by the way and I live in Canada. Nice to meet you

Perhaps instead of disrespect this thread could be about interpretations and what each person might see in a situation. I know that throughout many other threads many people have seen things that other people haven't. For example some people have seen chemistry between Cam and Hodgins. I personally haven't seen it, but it could be there.

Steph, The ball is in your court if you want to keep this thread alive. How people interpret many things will influence communication and the effectiveness about it.

Even on bones there are interpretation issues where one character will interpret something one way and another will interpret it differently. Example Brennan's reason for not going with Sully and Angela's reason for Brennan not going with Sully.

Jenny
word count: 397

User avatar
ThyneAlone
TJ Team Validator
Posts: 2699
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Northwest UK, near Liverpool

Re: no disrepect,

Post by ThyneAlone »

Hey guys!
I'm sorry, when I closed the other thread it was because I thought discussion was finished with HH's prompt response explaining what he had said about the proposed new character. I didn't mean to stifle further interaction!

Btdart, honestly, no-one is disparaging your views or you. You have excellent points to make but were just unfortunate in saying something which could be taken personally even though you didn't mean it that way. And that was exactly what happened to Hart Hanson too.

Now that you and Jenny have sorted this out, I think that Jenny's idea of keeping this thread as an area where we talk about the more controversial aspects of Bones might work well. So I am going to try it out as a debate thread. If it looks like it's just duplicating discussion elsewhere, or if there are any personal remarks, obviously I'll have to pull it.

What I am going to do now is make a provocative statement and I'd like people to come in and argue their corner. This is inspired by what you two have already said:


"Religion as portrayed in Bones is a negative and superficial vision which is never fully explored because the main character is hostile towards it."

There. What do you think?
word count: 223
"We make our lives out of chaos and hope. And love." - Angela Montenegro

jade.stormcloud
TJ Junkie
Posts: 854
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 9:22 pm

Re: no disrepect,

Post by jade.stormcloud »

I'll start it off by disagreeing. Yes, Bones is antagonistic toward religion, but Booth is not. He never wavers in his faith, despite the horrors he sees & Brennan's attempts at "logic." While Booth is the only strongly religious member of the main characters, there have been numerous other religious characters presented & generally they are portrayed as good & rational people. While Bones, the character, is negatively inclined toward religion, I do not see that "Bones," the show, has been anything but just in its representations.
word count: 86
“When once you have tasted flight you will always walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward: for there you have been and there you will always be.” - Henry Van Dyke

User avatar
ThyneAlone
TJ Team Validator
Posts: 2699
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Northwest UK, near Liverpool

Re: no disrepect,

Post by ThyneAlone »

Though it can be argued that religion is seen in a really positive light in some episodes - The He In The She is all about redemption, which I really like, and then there is the fact that Arastoo, though initially raising a few eyebrows and arousing the classic suspicion from Hodgins, shows a wonderful giving and sympathetic nature when dealing with Angela's heartbreak; and the Man In The SUV shows not only a range of attitudes to religion-based terrorism but also Brennan's sensitivity about the body being cleansed for burial - I still don't find it consistent.

As I think I've said in the Brennan thread, Bones' attitude to religion is strange considering the number of cultures on which she is an expert. There are some she respects, Islam and voodoo amongst them, even while not accepting them as valid, and some she dismisses out of hand and sometimes quite nastily. The Nordic beliefs are mocked, yet they are part of an advanced and very civilised culture (one of the first to offer women power and equality and establish a working judicial system), and when she first made the comment I seem to recall that some viewers did actually protest that this religion still had small pockets of modern practice. She has made no 'bones' about her disdain for the much more mainstream Roman Catholicism Booth professes. Yes, he is admirably true to his faith, but she is constantly knocking it in a way that occasionally causes real antagonism between them and is unfortunately sometimes used for comic effect ("Jesus was not a zombie!" and Angela's casual references to sex while in church). He is not given the screen time properly to justify his beliefs. I therefore do find the view of religion generally somewhat inconsistent and a bit shallow. Booth prays after the first encounter with the gravedigger, but not while he is imprisoned by her on a soon-to-be-exploded boat.

I thought, on the other hand, that the Priest in the Churchyard was an excellent handling of religious issues. We were shown both the loving and the rigid faces of Roman Catholicism and the worrying fact that people can adopt horrific behaviours while believing that they are acting in accordance with their faith. They even touched on the paedophilia issue with sensitivity. Yet religion, and specifically Christianity, comes out of this ep in a positive light.

Does it depend who's writing religion or is there an overriding ethos which must be maintained??
word count: 422
"We make our lives out of chaos and hope. And love." - Angela Montenegro

jade.stormcloud
TJ Junkie
Posts: 854
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 9:22 pm

Re: no disrepect,

Post by jade.stormcloud »

That's interesting, but why do you feel that Booth has to "justify his beliefs"? He believes what he believes just as everyone else believes what they believe. Angela has never justified why she believes, nor has Hodgins.

As for Booth not praying while he was imprisoned... I think he was a little busy. He's a man of action, & not one to merely sit & ask for help when he's able to make a difference himself. He seems to be very much a believer in "He helps those who help themselves." If you'll notice, they did not show him praying to save Brennan & Hodgins, either. Rather, he spent every moment working to rescue them, and then prayed at the end only to give thanks that they had the skills & the will to come through that. So many people turn to prayer because they are unwilling to take chances or do work in their own lives. They hope instead for divine intervention to come swooping down & fix everything for them. I think it's a very positive message that they show Booth not asking for anything, but instead only giving thanks.

As for the inconsistencies of Brennan, I won't argue with you on that. She is often lacking in understanding in ways that seem contrary to her earlier character. It's a rather annoying inconsistency. However, that was not the subject up for debate. Rather, the question was whether the show itself portrayed religion in a negative way, and I don't think it does that. However much Brennan may berate religious beliefs, the show itself generally seems to keep it in a positive light.
word count: 277
“When once you have tasted flight you will always walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward: for there you have been and there you will always be.” - Henry Van Dyke

Jude40
Conspiracy Theorist
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:41 pm
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: no disrepect,

Post by Jude40 »

Hi all

Ok, I'm gonna get splinters here, I'm gonna sit on the fence. I think that everyones's making good points and is right in way. The problem with 'Bones' sometimes is, I think, that it struggles to know which genre its trying to fit in episode to episode from quite serious drama to comedy (sometimes quite slapstick), with some quite spooky stuff thrown in occasionally. I don't necessarily have any issue with this but it can lead to some of the issues highlighted.

From a religion point of view I'm coming at this as an agnostic when you're talking about traditional beliefs and I have to say I do tend to believe more in people and what I and others can make happen, and how we can affect each other rather than anything else.

Coming from that point of view I would say the following;

'The He in the She' was excellent in its portrayal of religion and that final scene gave me goosebumps in a purely inspirational rather than religious way.

I see the point about Booth being too busy to pray in 'The Hero in the Hold' and I completely agree about the making things happen for yourself bit but, on the other hand, I think given his strong faith if he genuinely believed he was in imminant danger of death, and he did say to Teddy that he was sorry for getting him killed again, he would have wanted to pray at that point, not necessarily for help but on the belief that he might be about to enter the next life. Again I'd like to emphasise that I'm not an expert just going by those members of my family who hold Roman Catholic beliefs.

I think that, although I totally got 'Double Death of the Dearly Departed' and I thought it was hysterical (which I now some didn't) I did think that having Booth take money from the body was totally, and I mean TOTALLY against his religious beliefs (and actually against most people's moral standards) and I didn't like that scene for that reason.

I think David B does portray Booth's belief very well although I'm thinking he's portraying himself in a way 'cos those are his beliefs. I see Jade's point that he shouldn't have to justify his beliefs but, given the way Brennan behaves towards them sometimes, I think that Steph has a point in that sometimes it can be a bit one sided her way (see what I mean about that fence.)

In conclusion I think that a lot of the religious references are handled well but I do think that some of the stuff that is intended to be humerous (especially where Brennan is involved, like I've said on the Brennan thread) crosses a line a bit and I'm not sure that religion is always a good topic for such derisive humour. Having said that you are never going to please everyone, for instance I know that some people found the relationship between Angela and Roxy offensive because it was same sex which, depending on your beliefs, can be regarded as a sin (not my point of view at all btw).

I don't think you are ever going to have a programme like 'Bones' where everyone is going to like and approve of everything they do and if anyone is seriously offended then they can always switch off I suppose. I prefer discussions like this its kinda cool to see so many different opinions, after all variety is the spice of life!!!

Catch you later

Jude x
word count: 616

User avatar
ThyneAlone
TJ Team Validator
Posts: 2699
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Northwest UK, near Liverpool

Re: no disrepect,

Post by ThyneAlone »

Right, ok, I wrote the reply below simultaneously with Jude's and she posted before me, so there is going to be a bit of repetition here, especially as I'm a huge fence-sitter myself!

Jade, what you say is fair. Especially with regard to the thanks rather than the requests. Though I do think that a life-or-death situation might trigger some reaction from a person with faith, even if not a direct plea for salvation, maybe for guidance or strengthening of his own efforts or the final prayer of someone about to meet his Maker.

However, there are parts of my comment that maybe I haven't made clear. I didn't mean I wanted Booth the character literally to justify his beliefs. I want the show to give me a subtle insight into why he believes what he believes. The reason why Angela and Hodgins have not done so is that they clearly don't have lives structured around faith. The contrast between the squints and Booth is clear at the table in The Man In The Fallout Shelter, where they're all a bit cynical about the Christmas 'myth' but he is staunch in his faith (good positive, but a little diluted by the easy humour that is clearly intended in the discussion).

There is a problem with Brennan's depiction. I don't think I'm straying off the point here. I am talking about the writing, the show, that creates her rather than her personality - I think we've spoken before about our different ways of looking at the characters. I know you see inconsistencies as interesting flaws in the character whereas I get to the point of thinking the character unbelievable if written inconsistently. The difficulty with her is that she is constantly justifying her beliefs (if she is allowed to do so, why not others?) and dismissing alternatives without proper consideration. Not only does this make it a bit of an unfair playing field, since Booth has no opportunity to convince her (as he is slowly beginning to convince her about human relationships), but - and here I suspect we differ - because as she is the eponymous figurehead of the programme and a sympathetic character, we as an audience are encouraged to support her and share her views.

I don't entirely agree with the original statement, which was only meant to provoke debate and does not mirror my thoughts on the issue. I do not think 'Bones' offers a completely negative view, but neither do I find its portrayal generally positive. What I do think is the following: that the agnostic and atheist viewpoints are constantly emphasised out of the mouths of the main character and her co-workers, despite occasional welcome forays into serious examinations of religion; that her widely varying and inconsistent attitudes to other specific faiths gives to the show an inconsistent and fuzzy depiction of faith; and that sometimes religion is used as a form of light relief (I hated Double Death by the way, no other ep has shown such a clear lack of respect for religious practices or for the dead body for the sake of humour).

I feel the image of Booth's faith is intended as a foil to all this, to express the other perspective, but doesn't always succeed.

Hmm. The fence is definitely uncomfortable under my bum here.
word count: 569
"We make our lives out of chaos and hope. And love." - Angela Montenegro

Jude40
Conspiracy Theorist
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:41 pm
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: no disrepect,

Post by Jude40 »

Yea Steph very similiar points, I can totally see where you're coming from with DDotDD. Looking at it rationally (I sounded like Brennan then so not good, love her most of the time but really would not like to be like that) I can see that its one of those love or loathe episodes and a lot of the stuff could considered disrepectful depending on your point of view.

Jude x
word count: 72

jade.stormcloud
TJ Junkie
Posts: 854
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 9:22 pm

Re: no disrepect,

Post by jade.stormcloud »

In re Brennan's fuzziness, I don't consider it all character quirks. There have been inconsistencies over the course of the series in the way she treats others that I wish they would resolve. However, to me, it makes her character fuzzy, not the religions that she comments upon.

Also, I don't think that she justifies her beliefs regarding religion. She states her thoughts as if they are facts, but does not really give rationale for them. This seems no different than the way Booth operates, stating his beliefs, but no evidence. He says God exists, she says he is fictional, and neither give anything to back their claim up. Unfortunately, that is often the way of religious debate. There is not really "proof" (not the way the squints think of proof) that will irrefutably prove or refute the existence of God, therefore it all comes down to interpretation & faith.

In re "Double Death of the Dearly Departed," I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it, either. I thought there were some incredibly funny bits & some incredibly stupid and/or annoying bits. Apparently, I disagree with most people about the money issue. The moment Hodgins said he owed the guy money & then Booth said the guy owed him money, I was thinking "well, why doesn't Hodgins just give Booth the money & then it's all flush?" So, when Hodgins set the money down & Booth picked it up, I thought it was just perfectly logical & it made everyone square.
word count: 254
“When once you have tasted flight you will always walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward: for there you have been and there you will always be.” - Henry Van Dyke

Jude40
Conspiracy Theorist
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:41 pm
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: no disrepect,

Post by Jude40 »

Just a really quick comment 'cos I've already said plenty previously. Re DDofDD, I totally agree about settling the debts with the money being handed over made perfect sense but the obvious solution to me would have been, when the situation was first discussed in the car, for Hodgins to give the money to Booth and say 'there you go all debts settled now' or something.

I am probably one of the least easily offended people I know and, like I said, don't really hold any religious beliefs, and I wouldn't say I was exactly offended by the incident but I just don't think that it could ever be morally right to steal anything from a dead body, its just a bit freaky as far as I'm concerned.

I don't think it was in any way intended to be offensive btw and I do think it was just meant to be a clever way of dealing with the debt issue. I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it, just didn't particularly like it.

Anyway nearly time for bed I reckon.

Bye for now

Jude x
word count: 193

brooke34
Fan
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 6:38 pm

Re: no disrepect,

Post by brooke34 »

Hey, y'all up there on the fence. Move over.

I'm going to agree that Brennan's complete bewilderment in the face of religion seems odd. She's referred often to the social mores and traditions of many different cultures, and has always seemed to think of them as simply a fact of life, to be studied and/or observed. She's been able to discuss such things without being unnecessarily rude or dismissive before, so why doesn't she have the same respectful distance when it comes to the Christian religion, the Muslim religion, etc.? It seems, as with many things in the new and unimproved Bones universe, why go for consistency when you can go for the cheap laugh instead? That's how I felt about the shabby treatment of Arastoo, anyway. When it comes to Booth's religious beliefs, Brennan has always reacted intolerantly, at best asking him to explain concepts like faith in an empirical manner, which is impossible, and at worst mocking those beliefs outright when she knows they have gotten him through difficult times more than once.

I say all this as someone who is not particularly religious myself, but my parents are religious, and I was raised in what is basically the buckle of the American Bible Belt. I don't have to believe everything I'm told but nor would I ever stand in front of anyone and tell them their spiritual beliefs were invalid because they didn't make sense to me.

After four years, the shtick is pretty old. It's just another version of "I don't know what that means."

Why, yes, I am slightly cranky about this. Can you tell?

:lol:



Hillarie

Oh, and btdart, thanks for coming back to clarify. :D
word count: 294

User avatar
ThyneAlone
TJ Team Validator
Posts: 2699
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Northwest UK, near Liverpool

Re: no disrepect,

Post by ThyneAlone »

OK it's been a few days since this topic was 'live', so I am going to post a fresh challenge (don't worry if you still had something to say about religion, you can still post it as long as you let us know which challenge statement you're responding to).
Here's my new one:

'The show will fall apart if Brennan and Booth ever get together as it is the unresolved sexual tension which gives it impetus and interest.'
word count: 82
"We make our lives out of chaos and hope. And love." - Angela Montenegro

Jude40
Conspiracy Theorist
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:41 pm
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: no disrepect,

Post by Jude40 »

Hi everyone

I did try to hold off responding to this 'cos I think I've already expressed my opinion lots of times but I'm gonna do it. My opinion can be summed up in ten words...

Oh for the love of God just go there already

Ok I'll expand a bit in a few points.

1. Its been four years and if something doesn't happen soon it ain't gonna.
2. Its quickly passing interesting and heading straight to couldn't care less.
3. Relationships of all types (if written well) add to a show, they don't end it, and if they went with it we might actually get some other storylines as well for a change.
4. Its nothing like 'Moonlighting' which was basically a vehicle for Bruce Willis, the supporting cast is way better and more involved and there was never any believeable chemistry between Maddie and David supposedly 'cos Cybil and Bruce hated each other.
5. The characters are single, good looking adults who are quite obviously nuts about each other so this limbo situation is just not realistic.

In case you haven't guessed I think the B&B relationship needs to go to the next level, and just for the record I mean a 'normal' relationship not the usual 'omg we had sex and now we think that maybe we shouldn't have' scenario. Oh and they need to do this soon so the show can move on from being merely a will they or won't they vehicle.

I'm not necessarily a big B&B shipper but I am finding the acting like teenagers thing irritating and hey here's a challenge to HH if he thinks that shows end when characters like this get together 'make Bones one that doesn't'

Ok thats my contribution to the debate.

Catch you later

Jude x
word count: 316

User avatar
skftex
TJ Team Validator
Posts: 2304
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 9:16 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: no disrepect,

Post by skftex »

Will the show fall apart if they get together (you mean more than it has waiting for them to get together? :wink: ). No, it doesn't have to fall apart, it can be done well. But, when writers talk about shows having problems after getting the characters together, I don't think they mean that the show suddenly was bad. And usually, it isn't bad.

The problem that usually occurs when two characters get together is that the AUDIENCE thinks it is "boring". And people got what they wanted and stop watching. That is why writers tend to think like HH and say that people don't really want it to happen. He's right, they don't. They like the tension and the IDEA of the couple more than they really like the couple usually. They don't want to see them as a couple going about every day life, that is "boring". Even when it is done well, there are still so many people that were crying for a couple to get together and when they do, they complain that the characters no longer have chemistry. I've seen it happen with several shows (Gilmore Girls is a GREAT example). Then the writers do something stupid (break them up for some stupid reason, bring in some other useless character to cause tension, etc) trying to get the audience back. THAT is when the show tends to fall apart on the writing side I think.

Anyway, what I'm saying is, getting a couple together doesn't make the show fall apart, it makes the audience fall apart!! Of course I don't mean the whole audience falls apart (just like the whole audience doesn't necessarily care if they ever get together) but the SQUEE audience tends to drop off when characters get together because that is THE reason they were watching in the first place usually.

Anyway, that is my take on it. :)
word count: 326
Blessed are they who see beautiful things in humble places where other people see nothing.-Camille Pissarro

Jude40
Conspiracy Theorist
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:41 pm
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: no disrepect,

Post by Jude40 »

I totally agree with the fact that some people think its boring when couples finally get together and I can see that there may be a risk of losing viewers as a result but I also think that its getting a bit unbelievable now and that the show is focussing way too much on the B&B relationship to the point that if people lose interest in that then they are at risk of losing the show, although I'm thinking the two planned seasons could see it run its course anyway.

I agree there is a fine line between keeping the 'tension' going and taking it too far and I know HH has already acknowledged this. However, I do think that if a relationship started to develop there are so many opportunities that could open up and I'm thinking any relationship involving someone like Brennan would be far from boring. To be honest I did love the chemistry between B&B, although it was never central to me watching the programme. Now I find that drawing it out so much is actually putting me off watching. I just want them to concentrate on the crimes and the other characters more and let any and all relationships develop naturally, its a risk I know but hey maybe its a risk worth taking and I think the show would be better for it.

Just my opinion of course and there is always the chance that they could go there and it could go badly wrong but I just think there's a chance that may happen if they don't.

Anyway, we'll just have to see what they give us, should be interesting.

Catch you later

Jude x
word count: 289

User avatar
skftex
TJ Team Validator
Posts: 2304
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 9:16 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: no disrepect,

Post by skftex »

Oh Jude, I do completely agree with you about that, that the longer they draw it out the less believable it is.

I do like Booth and Brennan, though I have to admit I'm not one that REALLY cares if they ever get together. So I tend to lean towards wanting them to concentrate on the crimes and other characters all the time anyway, because they did the mixture of characters and cases sooooooo very well the first two seasons.

And of course there is always the risk of them doing B/B getting together completely wrong and the show really falling apart because of the writing...but I think it's been leaning that way for a while now anyway. ;)

Sharon
word count: 123
Blessed are they who see beautiful things in humble places where other people see nothing.-Camille Pissarro

User avatar
ThyneAlone
TJ Team Validator
Posts: 2699
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Northwest UK, near Liverpool

Re: no disrespect

Post by ThyneAlone »

Right, here's a more TJ-related one - what do you all think on this score?

Jack and Angela should both move on and find other partners. Their relationship has not worked - it atrophied over the long period of the headlong rush into marriage and the ludicrous husband-seeking arc - and it would be better for both the viewer and the characters if they did not get together again.
word count: 69
"We make our lives out of chaos and hope. And love." - Angela Montenegro

Jude40
Conspiracy Theorist
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:41 pm
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: no disrespect

Post by Jude40 »

I didn't think I would say this but I actually agree and from what I've been reading in the latest spoliers it looks like Angela is moving on at least for the moment. I don't think they are looking at either of them being in a serious relationship at the moment though because of the progression in the B&B relationship and I'm thinking that is probably a good idea, too many love affairs and its at risk of becoming a bit of a soap opera.

That doesn't mean that Jack can't have a bit of fun though, he's only young maybe he could play the field a bit. Maybe they should do 'The Bachelor' again with Hodgins!

Whatever happens I do agree with Steph they are better off not being a couple.

Jude x
word count: 142

jade.stormcloud
TJ Junkie
Posts: 854
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 9:22 pm

Re: no disrespect

Post by jade.stormcloud »

I'm still a Hodgins/Angela shipper. Their relationship ended badly, but was going so well for a long time. I think they could still build something between them if they choose to. Maybe they will, maybe not. Even if they do, it might not be for a while. No matter, I'll probably always carry a bit of hope for them.
word count: 62
“When once you have tasted flight you will always walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward: for there you have been and there you will always be.” - Henry Van Dyke