Case of the Week
No court case this week, as Alicia is asked by Diane to take her place on a blue ribbon panel investigating a shooting of a black man by a white police officer. So basically Matthew Perry’s character point was, if the real facts of the case were to come out (the undercover police officers never identified themselves as police, the gun that was purpotedly the victim might be planted by one the officers), it might cause race riots in Chicago. Yup, that’s right, we should cover up injustices perpetrated against African-American victims because if the public found out, there might be riots. Bleghhhhhh. Excuse me while I go throw up. So, did Alicia recuse herself to protect Peter?
Kalinda’s Tax Problem
So her old FBI pal Lana Delaney is behind the IRS investigation. Is she really after Lemond Bishop the drug lord, or this is just her harassing Kalinda for turning down her offer to work for the FBI? Or is the show implying she’s a spurned woman who is trying to get back at Kalinda for personal rejection?
Alicia and Her Dream a.k.a Old House
Alicia and this house is getting out of control, not to mention totally out of character for Alicia. Ughhh, I hate this storyline. She almost brushed off the investigator trying to tell her about the planted gun because she was too busy talking on the phone with the current owner of the house. I don’t get this obsession with her old house. But I guess Jackie buying the house will lead to more Alicia-Jackie battles, something I’m always up for, so something good did come out of this weird storyline.
Will and Diane
David Lee: Do you know that Diane is digging this firm’s grave because of her loyalty to you?
Will: No, I didn’t know that.
David Lee: Will, I always like you, I thought you were smart, but this firm is not owned by you or Diane, and she is treating it like it is. She’s not making smart business or legal decisions.
Will: And what are the smart decisions?
David Lee: She needs help at the top. She is overwhelmed, and she can’t ask for help because she’s holding the spot for you.
Will: You want me to support you to replace me?
David Lee: No. I want you to tell Diane to make smart decisions, not based on loyalty.
This is actually a really smart move by David Lee, to appeal to Will’s pragmatism. And maybe a teeny tiny bit of ego as well, Will probably wants to believe that Diane wants to keep him as a named-partner because of how valuable he is to the firm, not because of personal loyalty. So of course, Will went to Diane, to play his usual Mr. Pragmatic role to counter what he considers Diane’s excessive idealism. And what could be more idealistic than putting personal loyalty above making smart decisions, right? Even if the personal loyalty is towards Will himself.
Will: Why are you doing this?
Diane: Doing what?
Will: Holding my seat for me.
Diane; Do you want me not to?
Will: I don’t want you holding my seat out of some misguided sense of loyalty.
Diane: Well, you’d do the same.
Will; No, I wouldn’t.
Diane: No, you would. Because it’s smart. David Lee, Julius and Eli are children, who’ve been told they can’t have a toy, which makes them want it even more. But if they got it, they would just break it. Which is why we have to keep it out of their reach.
Will: Good, as long as you’re doing it because it’s smart.
Diane: Always.
I love this relationship, maybe even more than Alicia-Kalinda. There is an element of “the lady doth protest too much” with Will’s “I won’t do the same for you” and Diane’s “I’m only doing it because it’s a smart for the firm (and I can’t stand those three bickering children!)” assertions. They are saying things they think the other person needs to hear.
verityjes 