5.04 - Birthmarks

The one thing I've never understood about Blythe is why she didn't protect House from things like ice baths or no dinner if you were 2 minutes late. Now I have to wonder if allowing John to raise Greg as he saw fit (when he was stationed in a place where the family could be together) was because she felt guilty about the fact that he wasn't really Greg's dad. OK, without getting into details, let me make it clear that I completely understand the family dynamics going on here. (Let's just say that I found out one of my siblings was only a half sibling at my parents' fiftieth anniversary party. Made for an interesting day.) My mother was completely like Blythe. No matter how much she disagreed, her guilt played into always letting my father have the final say. They never discussed it, but what Dad wants, Dad gets. Dad thinks harsher punishment is needed to reel in a recalcitrant 12-year-old? You may not like it, but you go along with it. So you're Blythe. You have this secret guilt. And for all we know, maybe John knew about it but agreed to raise Greg as his own as long as they never spoke of it again. It's the guilt on her part, and the ultimate weapon on his part to destroy everything she's had, her very image -- potentially the love of her son if he ever found out. Now put that all in the context of a military family in the 1960s. Assuming that John House did know about his son not being his son... For all we know. he didn't (at least for the first twelve years of House's life). He "just" (mis)treated his son like he thought a child had to be (mis)treated for him to become a good, respectable, law-abiding citizen. And Blythe supposedly let it happen (assuming she knew about it, and it does look like she did) because she felt guilty for having cheated on John and, perhaps, because she knew there was a chance House was not John's son. For all we know, she was not more pressured into letting her husband do whatever he wanted to "their" son than any woman of her time was. She just did it. Because it made things less complicated for her. I am not dismissing your point of view. You may be absolutely right about John trapping his wife in an unhappy marriage and taking advantage of her guilt to let his frustration express itself in "their" son. But, so far, we have no proof that this is what happened. Because we don't know what John knew. I was particularly taken aback by Blythe's "he loved you", that refered to John's feelings toward House. Was it another lie to preserve the illusion, or did she really think that ? If the latter then it may imply that, as far as she knows, John had no idea House was not his son. On a side note, it sort of amuses me to think that House repeatedly refers to himself as a "bastard". He almsot revendicates it. He's had the conviction that he wasn't his father's son since he was twelve. He has always known that he is technically a "bastard" (an illegitimate child), and he behaves like a "bastard". I like it.

While a part of Wilson might have been scared of losing House, that certainly didn't seem like the main reason for his leaving... And I hope that it wasn't the main reason either. What Wilson said in DCE was right - House is a destructive force who ends up hurting everyone around him, and Wilson just enables those problems. Sorry if I'm beating a dead horse - let me know if I am and I'll leave the poor thing alone - but (IMO) those are not contradictory statements, and one does not deny the truth of the other. Wilson's main fear, since the bet from Detox, is losing House. House as a destructive force - or so Wilson claims and he has good reasons for thinking that - that hurts people around him, only reinforces Wilson's certainty that House one day will succeed and he will lose him. He enables and acts self-righteously exactly because he tries to avoid this outcome. But after Amber's death Wilson had to face a terrible reality, that no matter how much you try, you can't predict when you're gonna lose something. The only way he could think of protecting himself was leaving House, because, as House said, you can't lose what you don't have. Emotions are not a rational thing, so he tried to explain to House why he was leaving with a rationalization, but the true reason was: your're gonna kill yourself one day and I'll suffer all this pain again. I'll go before that because then the pain won't be so strong. Which is not true, distance doesn't cure pain and it's not selfish, either, it's a human's trait to try to prevent pain. I felt as though House and Wilson will learn nothing from this. I guess it's too soon to know that for sure. Wilson learned (or remembered) something: that he wants to stay with House not because House needs him, but because no matter how annoying and crazy are their trips, at the end Wilson is happy and has fun. House may not be the friend that Wilson once dreamed about (like the waterbed?) but he is the friend that he wants to keep on his life. I'm not sure about House but I would guess that he knows now that their relationship can be broken and that he should stop to take Wilson for granted. He admited something too, that he would take Wilson under whatever condition, even if for that he had to confess his neediness - for someone like House this is huge.

Am I the only one getting confused by the use of initials for episode names? Especially DCE (Dying Changes Everything) since it's so close to DEC (Don't Ever Change)? I have to come to a stop and remember which set of initials stands for which show. Would it be so tough to actually use the full title on occasion? Or at least once post to clarify things? For all we know, she was not more pressured into letting her husband do whatever he wanted to "their" son than any woman of her time was. She just did it. Because it made things less complicated for her. Whether or not John knew that Greg wasn't her son doesn't change Blythe's feelings of guilt or her fear that either of them would figure it out. Her guilt is going to color every action she takes, every decision she makes. She is going to question her judgment -- based on her "failure" previously -- and be more apt to be swayed to John's side in an argument because of that. But then I'm on the side of believing that the bulk of John's actions fell into the side of overly harsh discipline that sometimes crossed a line, rather than being outright abuse. He wasn't hitting his kid, wasn't breaking his bones, wasn't pushing him down the stairs. He was using military discipline techniques on a kid that was more stubborn than he was. Was it inappropriate? Yes. Do I think that Blythe -- in that time period, in a military setting and with her own guilt/judgment issues is in a place where she would outright defy John? No. Do I blame her for that? No. Do I think things would be different today in which infidelity and discipline are both seen in different lights? Yes.

This whole thing with House's dad is blowing my mind. This is from way back in season 1, "Maternity": Jill: Um, Doctor? Please. Me and my husband wanted to have a kid soon, but… oh, God. Like four months ago we had this really big fight. He moved out. I did something stupid. House: One-night stand? Jill: Ex-boyfriend. House: I’ll schedule you a paternity -*test*-('"), too. Jill: I can’t let my husband know. House: Does the old boyfriend look like your husband? Jill: Yeah… House: Then just have the kid. He’ll never know. The most successful marriages are based on lies. You’re off to a great start. Holy. Crap. :shock:

Am I the only one getting confused by the use of initials for episode names? Especially DCE (Dying Changes Everything) since it's so close to DEC (Don't Ever Change)? I have to come to a stop and remember which set of initials stands for which show. I am completely with you on this. We've been trying to come up with a way to ask people to do it other than making it a rule. People know which episode they mean when they write it but the reader has to stop and translate. Other than the pair you cited, my favorites are: MR/RM; WH/HW and TS/TS/SM/TSM/TM. And, back on topic, with House's obsessive nature, he tends to be an all or nothing person. That's why he translates Blythe's affair (or one night stand) as her hating John. But it is perfectly possible that she loved her husband and made one, albeit major, mistake. And, whether or not John knew that Greg wasn't his, the constant physical reminder of that mistake would affect how she reacted to John's ideas on child-raising. I have a lot more sympathy toward her failure to protect Greg if it was due to guilt than I do if it was solely because she didn't want to make a fuss. It seems like John treated Greg the way you would treat a marine recruit. You're physically hard on them. You break down their egos to rebuild them as a member of the group rather than an individual. The problem was that Greg wasn't an adult being trained to survive a war, he was a child. And what would be appropriate treatment for the former was abusive in the latter case. that was Doris Egan's point in her interview with me (with David Foster and Egan together). She argued that House Sr. was abusive, in her opinion, but the argument could be made on the other side that soldiers have been (for example) sleeping outside for thousands of years, some as young as 12. John would have a rationale for everything. They made a specific choice not to make the abuse physical. I agree Poeia that Blythe's reluctance to get involved makes sense in light of the truth. She would have had major guilt over her infidelity and disproportionate gratitude that John is raising him at all, and not make them both pariahs within the military community.

It was not appropriate for House's boss to drug him so that Wilson could kidnap him and force him to attend. Aside from the legal issues (which tend to be ignored by House anyway), how is whether House attends his father's funeral any of her business? I think two ends were accomplished with the drugging: hopefully getting House to the funeral and I think most importantly to Cuddy, getting House and Wilson in the same car with Wilson willing to talk to House. As soon as Wilson called Cuddy about the funeral, he made a move that created an opening in the wall he's erected against House. I think Cuddy jumped on that and opened the crack to something wider with the drugging plan. She knows these men, she knows how important they are to each other and I think she was pretty sure House would not hold it against her when he woke up in a car with Wilson. I think his smile told us all we needed to know on that :D . They do in dysfunctional families but in many families, parents realize their children have grown up and both parent and child adjust to the new relationship. House hasn't lived at home for over 30 years, much longer than the time he lived with his parents. Blythe appears to be functioning 40 years in the past. I think most families would fall under dysfunctional by that definition, since old relationship dynamics die hard, especially at family reunions, but by any definition, the Houses are dysfunctional. Blythe is functioning under current relationship dynamics in her family. It was a situation House himself created, both by humiliating Tritter and contributing to his vendetta and by doing illegal things (forging Wilson's name and stealing the dead guy's drugs) that enabled Tritter to take him to court. The judge threw out the case because Cuddy lied for him so the prosecution couldn't prove the case. Cameron broke the MRI machine because she couldn't get the information another way; Tritter actually was the one who escalated the situation when he assaulted House, the judge knew Cuddy was lying but thought that Tritter's vendetta was the real crux of the problem, as she said to him, and Cameron broke the MRI because she refused to accept that putting a man twice the allowable weight on it would break it, even though everyone around her told her it would. She didn't get the information she wanted because the MRI broke. The writers usually make situations complicated with shades of grey. House as a destructive force - or so Wilson claims and he has good reasons for thinking that - that hurts people around him, only reinforces Wilson's certainty that House one day will succeed and he will lose him. I think we also saw that House is not just a destructive force in Wilson's life and that Wilson is capable of his own destructive actions, so Wilson actually re-evaluated the black and white view he had of their relationship in the premiere as filtered through his grief. Which is what I always thought it was.

that was Doris Egan's point in her interview with me (with David Foster and Egan together). She argued that House Sr. was abusive, in her opinion, but the argument could be made on the other side that soldiers have been (for example) sleeping outside for thousands of years, some as young as 12. John would have a rationale for everything. They made a specific choice not to make the abuse physical. And a terrific interview it was Sasmom, I loved it especially the bits about John House and Greg House's relationship and the acknowledgment that John House wasn't trying to be abusive, he didn't come home drunk and beat the crap out of Greg, he had reasons for doing what he did. House may have spent a night outdoors because he complained about his room or his bed, and I can see John getting upset about that and throwing him outside and telling him that there are others in this world that are worse off then him, who don't have beds, etc. etc. and teaching House a lesson in a really inappropriate way. It goes back to Daddy's Boy and John House's comments that Greg just doesn't know how lucky he is, or something along those lines. It makes their relationship far more complicated, a lot of deep waters emotionally on both sides. I understand House's anger and complicated view of life a lot more, but I also don't see John House as having been deliberately evil or abusive. He probably thought he was doing what was best for Greg, even though it wasn't. It's tragic really.

Thanks Hugh_Lover. I think Wilson had some time to think and cool off, and realize that House is someone he cherishes in his life. The fact that being with House no matter how crazy the road trip was was as much fun as he's had in months says what Wilson gets from House. Wilson's an oncologist, around death and despair all the time. He treats it matter-of-factly. Wilson never pities House, and that's maybe one reason why. And why House tolerates him. But Wilson has no real joy in his life either, and when House (for all of his own sadness) has the ability to shove it aside and be playful--something that perhaps wilson ONLY gets from House. That's why he came back. I love it.

We don't know that Blythe felt any guilt at all. While it is a reasonable assumption, plenty of people do "bad things" without feeling guilty about them. And it doesn't have to involve hitting to be abuse. I thought the documentation line was in there specifically to point that out; psychological abuse is every bit as damaging (although ice baths sound pretty physical to me). Nor does it have to be intentional -- how many child abusers do you think set out thinking "Hmm, I think I'll abuse my kids today"? They all think they've got good reasons for their actions; they all think they're justified. And far too many of their spouses can come up with a laundry list of justifications too. Doesn't excuse their behavior. House to me has always seemed to have a fairly clear vision when it comes to the complicated realities of the world. If it really was just a case of spending one night outside because he complained, do you really think the adult House would consider it worth remembering? Do you think the child House wouldn't have considered it a treat? And I can't even think of a context where forcing a non-feverish child into an ice bath could be considered reasonable. I don't remember the exact quote, but House says something somewhere along the lines of "Having no way of knowing your answer is wrong doesn't make your answer right. It's still just plain wrong." John could have had the very best intentions in the world; that doesn't mean his behavior wasn't just plain wrong. This is actually the reason that I really really wanted them to specify some sort of clear, unarguable physical abuse in House's background -- I wanted the documentation. Because I didn't want to see fandom or Wilson (or Blythe) dismissing the power of psychological abuse or coming up with wiggle reasons to say John was a nice guy anyway.

We don't know that Blythe felt any guilt at all. While it is a reasonable assumption, plenty of people do "bad things" without feeling guilty about them. Like sociopaths? I don't picture Blythe as falling into that category, and I can't imagine any reason why she wouldn't feel guilty. This is actually the reason that I really really wanted them to specify some sort of clear, unarguable physical abuse in House's background -- I wanted the documentation. Because I didn't want to see fandom or Wilson (or Blythe) dismissing the power of psychological abuse or coming up with wiggle reasons to say John was a nice guy anyway. I never expect "House" to give us a pat, clear answer on anything. From day one, this is a show that has lived in the gray areas. It's a show that asks us if you have to be a nice guy to save lives. It's a show that challenges you to accept that there is no black and white. And I don't think anyone here has ever called John a "nice guy." What I am trying to say is that House's childhood and everything that took place in it is extraordinarily complicated and complex and cannot be explained away by simply one word. I don't think John's treatment of Greg explains why House is the way he is anymore than I think House's use of Vicodin explains everything about him now. I think House's childhood is a marshy minefield of memories and Daddy (and Mommy) issues, and I, for one, am grateful that they did not attempt to explain anything about that minefield.

Like sociopaths? I don't picture Blythe as falling into that category, and I can't imagine any reason why she wouldn't feel guilty. No, like the millions of people who just think their actions aren't that bad and were contextually justified, who think their selfish motivations outweighed other people's concerns. I don't think anyone's suggested that, say, the Enron guys were sociopaths. And there are plenty of abusers, cheaters, criminals of all sorts and just plain jerks who don't get their names in the papers and aren't clinical sociopaths but who also aren't wracked with guilt over their actions. I do think it's reasonable to assume that Blythe felt some level of guilt and that affected her actions on some level. I just don't see any indication in canon that guilt was a major driving force in her actions. And if it were, I still wouldn't be able to accept it as an excuse -- I can see fear of the practical aspects as a sympathetic reason for her failure to protect her child at the time, but I can't sympathize with guilt.

I loved this episode and I am so happy to see H&W back together again. For the last few days I've been thinking about why I loved it so much and my conclusion is that it's because IMHO it was so true to the characters. Ever since WH (which I loved, btw), I was getting so frustrated with the whole 'victim House' thing like he was some Lifetime movie heroine getting beat up by evil Wilson or his evil dad or evil Cuddy or whatever. It never rang true to me. This episode presented the real House, warts and all, with no excuses for his behavior, even if some excuses are warranted. House has had bad stuff happen to him but he's done some bad stuff himself. Ultimately he's the hero because he saves lives but he's a deeply flawed hero. And that makes him so much more interesting as a character. The writers could have gone the conventional route and had House face up to his past, learn from it and grow. Yawn... at least IMHO. House doesn't change. He doesn't grow. This makes him interesting to watch. In real life if he was your friend you'd want growth or give up and go away but he's not real so he remain damaged. I also love how the writers skated the thin line between evil daddy and strict daddy. It makes the family dynamic so much more interesting. It would be easy to have made John House into the fanfic evil jerk who drunkenly beats the heck out of his kid every night but that's been done and is ultimately boring.

I can see fear of the practical aspects as a sympathetic reason for her failure to protect her child at the time, but I can't sympathize with guilt. I think that the guilt she may have felt would cover a lot of ground, with no clear separate divisions--she'd have felt guilty for cheating, whether she loved the real father or not, she'd have felt guilty for putting John in a position of raising a child that was not his, whether he knew it or not, she'd have felt guilty for bringing her son into such a complicated family dynamic, especially when things didn't go well between her son and John, she'd have felt guilty that she didn't react to the abuse by either really or even threatening to leave, because of how such an action would have affected her ability to support her son, never mind how she would have been perceived as a divorced woman by many people in that era. Lots of guilt and no clear way to make everything better--I can sympathise with Blythe even as I wish she'd made different decisions. I do agree with you that everyone justifies what they do when they do it and that doesn't excuse abuse. It's a classic situation with abusers that they feel that if the other person would just not do X, then they wouldn't do Y and therefore Y is a reasonable response. I also think that the writers may have steered the case clear of physical abuse, but what we know of still ranks as child abuse and probably, even at the time, was not something that Blythe would have freely discussed in many circles or felt easy about. Forcing a child into an ice bath or to sleep outside as punishment, even in the late fifties, early sixties, was not normal child rearing practice. She made a decision when she kept silent and I wouldn't mind some exploration of how that affected her relationship with her son.

The possibilities regarding Blythe are: 1. She was abused by John too and was therefore powerless to stop him. I do not believe this. 2. She agreed with the way John treated Greg. 3. She was a stereotypical 1960s housewife who didn't believe in contradicting her husband. 4. John was the disciplinarian in the family and she was the one who made nice-nice. 5. She felt guilty about the affair and therefore did not oppose John's treatment. You may have others to add. I think #4 or #5 are the most likely. If it was #4, she does deserve blame. If it was #5, I have sympathy for her. After we first learned about the abuse in One Day, One Room, I saw Daddy's Boy differently. After this episode, even more so. Every time House spoke, his father corrected or chided him. He was a professional in his mid-forties. No wonder what he wanted to hear from his father was "you were right." Apparently John literally never said it to him. House: Actually, yeah. I uh... I have to take a rain check. John: Aww, plans have been made. Wilson made 'em. House: I asked him to cancel. I'm dealing with kind of a complicated case right now, so... John: Well, we'll just come back when things aren't so out of control. House: My team is busy. John: So that means you can't eat? Come on, let's grab a bite in the cafeteria. Then... John: So, besides work, what you been up to? House: Not much. John: You always say that. Not much. House: It's always the answer. Dad: Any new babes you might want to tell me about? Blythe: Leave him alone, John. House: Got a new motorcycle. Might have seen it out front, it's orange with a gigantic scrape. Dad: Is it the one in the handicap parking? House: Yeah. Looks like crap, but it drives great. Dad: Last I checked, you still have two legs. House: Actually, three Dad: You know what your problem is, Greg? House: Shifting gears? Dad: You just don't know how lucky you are.

View Full Version: 5.04 - Birthmarks