This woman did not impose that awful genocidal war on them. She was one young woman living through a terrible time and from her own recounting, she was forced into doing horrible things that haunted her for the rest of her life. The Jennings themselves have murdered at least as many people as she did under a lot less duress.
And for the record, the Soviets were more than willing to allow the Nazis to wage war on the rest of Europe and commit genocide, so long as they didn’t attack Russia. Stalin was betting on the fact (stupidly) that Hitler would respect their non-aggression treaty just long enough for Stalin to build up his own army and attack Germany himself.
Also, it’s not like Stalin didn’t know a thing or two about committing genocide.
Does anybody else get the impression that if the Jennings came clean to Henry that his reaction would be to say “Cool” in the exact same tone as when he saw the mail robot?
I have been seeing a surprising amount of reaction online, including from professional critics, arguing that the woman they killed was basically an innocent. Her husband? Sure. But her? No way. She was 16 when her war crimes started, which is not exactly a child (a 16-year-old who commits murder in the US is almost guaranteed to be tried as an adult); she was presumably older by the end, if she notoriously killed thousands of Soviet POWs.
I agree that the woman wasn’t innocent, but Gabriel would probably have said that no one was innocent back then. Everyone did terrible things to survive.
It’s almost beside the point for me. My reading s that she was a distraction, a cheap way for the increasingly desperate KGB to recover face after the wheat debacle.
If you want a view; how could a 16-year old not be traumatised way into PTSD by having her family killed in front of her. She was literally surrounded by her whole community laying dead around her. The Nazis used her like a toy, first to shoot then to fuck. She had no one, she had nothing. It was hell on earth.
I agree. The writers were definitely not positing that shooting her was an act of justice. On the contrary, the incident only continues this season’s theme of the corruption that’s rampant in 1980s Soviet society.
Who do you think the KGB was trying to recover face toward?
One of the parallels we’re to make is that the KGB and the FBI are rather alike in some ways - the lower level workers have no idea how many people even work there, nor what they’re doing other than “something for the good of the country.”
These two ops are incredibly unrelated - the wheat hand has no idea what the stumble-across-WWII-era-war-criminals hand is doing, and neither knows a damn thing about (for example) the biological weapons hand. It’s a centimane where the digits are very, very unrelated to each other.
Also, how was the wheat thing a debacle? They got drought-resistant, pest-resistant super-wheat. That’s a massive win. The part of the KGB responsible for the wheat operation is probably having a kvass party with tangerines.
Amarinth wrote: **Also, how was the wheat thing a debacle?
**
The wheat thing was a debacle because the Soviets were paranoid and called it completely wrong about the US trying to destroy the Russian food supply. They figured that out too late, and at the expense of an innocent lab worker. Yes, they salvaged something out of it, but only after it went sideways.
I’m not keeping a body count but would add those guys she killed in 1941 were going to die one way or the other, the Nazis were just using the young girl for entertainment.
From the perspective of the KGB - they have a giant step forward in wheat technology. No assets were harmed (and in fact, so far as they know, they’ve got agents in place to get the next modification). No covers were blown. Also, their intel is going to be stronger because they now know how to interpret previously sent data (and who to trust in the future) So what that some nameless American lab tech died? that’s not their problem. For them, this was a win. This was the opposite of a debacle.
From the perspective of that guy’s wife (parent/child/lab partner) - it was a horrific act of violence that will haunt them forever. But, again, that’s only a teensy part of how the Russians are going to judge whether this was successful or not.
That doesn’t fly. Anyone manning gas chambers at Auschwitz could have said the same thing: “If I didn’t do it, someone else would have.”
That’s a very strong statement, given that there is pretty much incontrovertible proof you are wrong, at least when it comes to showrunners Joel Fields and Joe Weisberg. And it’s pretty much impossible, on this show especially, for “the writers” to have a perspective completely contrary to theirs.
On the Americans Insider Podcast that dropped today, Fields said the following, starting at the 4:11 mark, in the presence of his writing partner Joe Weisberg:
I actually wouldn’t have gone quite that far, but there it is. (You can’t cite death of the author here, because you were making an assertion about what the writers intended.)
Oh, c’mon. You think the KGB kvass party was ruined because of one lab worker, and a few weeks of a few people being on the wrong track, but still leading them to golden information?
Yeah - brutal. Don’t see how anyone could be expected to do a “job” like theirs.
Minor nitpick of the week - Phillip “remembering” his childhood from a perspective he couldn’t have experienced… Was surprised they were so harsh about the neighbor kid - a lost cause. Liked the agent’s description of why his job sucked.
What was it the woman was supposed to have done? I know Claudia said she killed a number of people, but the way I heard her talk she said she was basically liquored up, raped, and she was telling the Nazis things. I didn’t get that she admitted to killing anyone, and not hundreds or thousands of people.
Did she ever actually admit to killing people and I missed it? Hell, I thought she WAS the wrong person but only admitted to parts of it since she knew they were going to kill her and she didn’t want her husband killed too. That was a hard scene to watch.
The woman was viewed as a collaborator. Didn’t matter that she was as much a victim of the war as her family. Punishing her for 40 year old “crimes” was not the mission objective here. Ordering her execution was a test of P&E’s commitment. It’s also a classic example of propaganda and methods used by the Communist party to coerce and maintain loyalty and obedience to the Soviet ideals. Those who fail to comply are traitors.
Like having to continue to manage the wheat scientist and accountant, this mission was a way for Claudia to punish and torment P&E - something she clearly enjoys.
Phillip was on the money about why Paige took those pictures of the pastor’s dairy. She wanted to see her parents’ reaction to what he wrote about her. It was simple manipulation and punishment by an insecure teenage brat who isn’t mentally strong enough to handle the situation she finds herself in. She resents her parents for “ruining” her life.
Finally, what the fuck is Elizabeth thinking with that “Let’s just go home” bullshit? She’s going to destroy her kids’ lives by dragging them to Russia? This is all about her and her starting to lose her faith in the mission but wanting not to become someone she’d consider a traitor.