As a diversion from the current debate on the relative morality of the Governor’s actions (that’s how you know it’s great TV - you never have these types of conversations after watching “Say Yes to the Dress!”), has anyone else perceived a relatively large percentage of attractive young women in Woodbury? It could just be confirmation bias, or maybe all the men are watching the walls all the time, or maybe the casting people just like hot girls, but it seems to me that I’ve noticed quite a few cute 20-somethings in the background in Woodbury. Anyone agree? Think there’s anything to this, or is it just a function of the fact that as a society we like to put attractive people on television?
Don’t forget all the light pollution. They may have a dusk-to-dawn curfew (except on zombie fight nights), but the town is still light up realitvely well at night. Depending on the local geography that could be really noticable, especially considering all the surrounding towns would be in darkness.
I don’t think there’s anything to this other than “attractive people are on tv.”
I’ve noticed a few elderly folks and children.
Are you suggesting that most of the unattractive women and the fellas not on guard duty are in the Governor’s aquariums?
This was my take as well. I half-expected him to unbutton his trousers.
Was Bite Club really staged, as the Guv’ner claimed? I thought he was just talkin’ junk at first, but I came to appreciate a pro wrestling vibe.
mmm
I think at least he was telling the truth about the teeth being pulled out. When you see Meryl and the crew collecting the zombies earlier, it shows him reaching down to the zombie’s teeth with some pliers.
Here’s the thing about morality. Even today, as I type this, a lot of geopolitical events are in motion due to in-group/out-group moral thinking. Humans are put together to apply morality within their social group, not between their group and outsiders. So it could be perfectly plausible that the muscle of Woodbury have a strict moral code that disallows murder and theft. But it only applies to Woddburyites. Killing outsiders and taking their stuff doesn’t register as murder and theft, and doesn’t necessarily indicate they’re sadistic psychopaths.
Therefore, it’s not an automatic signal that “ZOMG, these guys are eeevil and everyone should run away from their despotic rule!” On the contrary, given the extreme circumstances, it might make sense to stay in Woodbury even if you know that the Governor gunned down the soldiers in cold blood. It might even be a point in favor of staying.
As far as killing the baby, I’m pretty sure I’m at least on Team Don’t-Resuscitate. It might have been better overall if Maggie hadn’t given the baby a rubdown to get her breathing. I don’t think I could smother her in front of Carl or place her outside to die of exposure once she was up and running though.
Pragmatism is certainly easier and preferable to idealism when it’s your own ass on the line. But what if the leader’s brand of pragmatism does not produce good enough results?
Leaving aside whatever terrible secret they are going to drop on us later in the season, is Woodbury really all that great? It’s better than being covered in blood and living in a zombie infested prison, but is it sustainable? I’d argue not. Maybe they haven’t bothered to show us the farms and makeshift workshops because it wouldn’t be as interesting as Michonne getting a bad feeling about things and glaring at people for the 10th time. Maybe the writers don’t realize how much work it would take to support 70+ people for the long haul. Or maybe they are deliberately setting it up for collapse.
Woodbury is coasting along on scavenged irreplaceable industrially-produced stuff: diesel, medicine, packaged food/drink, ammo, etc. If they are going to make it after they have depleted their surroundings, they need to think like pioneers, not suburbanites. Note that there appear to be a large number of “surplus” people not engaged in any productive work. Now, THAT is suicidally unpragmatic in a survival situation. How much farmland could have been fenced off with the manpower that went into the big barbecue and zombie fight? Why is nobody organizing gangs to handle firewood gathering, agriculture, food preservation, etc?
The creation of a bubble of comfort and normalcy isolated from the outside world is good for warehousing docile, obedient people. But to what end? If there’s no plan beyond eating the last can of Spam and last guy standing shoots himself in the head, it’s sort of beside the point whether the governor is a psychopath, a megalomanianc, or a well-meaning schmuck. It’s going to run itself into the ground anyway. Maybe he realizes that he doesn’t have the resources and organizational chops to keep things from going south, and he’s just having his fun playing king while waiting for the mass Kool-ade sendoff.
Regardless, Woodbury is not valuable as an ally or trading partner. Until they become a permanent, well-defended, surplus-producing entity, they are just low hanging fruit to be pillaged by whatever superior force shows up first. They were able to housebreak Merle and the henchmen, so it’s not like there’s no history of letting in potentially dangerous men. The town needs a critical mass of phyically fit, skilled, discplined people; the most pragmatic course for a competant leader is to figure out who they are and how to safely assimilate them. Automatically killing all men is only a good choice if maintaining a doomed autocratic cult is more important than long term survival.
How funny is it that as I was reading your post one of my lightbulbs burned out? At this point it’s been almost a year since the dead started to rise; I think Woodbury does have farms & workshops offscreen, we just haven’t seen them yet. Long-term their way of life isn’t sustainable. Sure they have solar panels, but it’s impossible for them to make more solar panels, and eventually their last light bulbs will burn out. Still they’re alot better set up for really long-term planning than Rick & company are.
BTW since it’s been almost a year shouldn’t it be getting really, really hard to find usuable gasoline & diesel now? How long does it stay usuable just sitting in storage tanks or in cars?
Automatically killing all men is a bad choice. Automatically killing large, well-armed integrated groups is likely a good choice. It’s much easier to assimilate (and evaluate and eliminate, if necessary) one or two men who are strangers to everyone else than it is to do so to a large group.
The big caveats might be that a loner might be a loner for a very good reason, or that a previously-extant band has by necessity done some vetting of its members.
It’s a bit of a catch-22. Woodbury is vulnerable without warfighters. But serious warfighters in any real number are too dangerous to bring in because of that vulnerability. So, they make do assimilating second-stringers like Merle and preemptively killing the guys who could make them genuinely secure. If they had a military unit from the beginning, they could safely recruit any new ones they found.
Much gets more, but poor stays poor.
I feel compelled to point out that I rapidly started reading Odesio’s posts in the voice of Mr. Mackey from South Park: “Murder is bad, m’kay?”
They can assimilate mixed-gender groups with relative security, training those men as your soldiers. Rick’s group is a prime example, or Herschel’s group before Rick & Co. showed up on the farm.
Relative security compared to a band of all guys, that is. But even mixed-gender groups isn’t a guarantee that the men won’t go on a rampage. I’m thinking back to the beginning of the series, where two of the men were Crazy Merle and wife-beater guy. That group would have been harder to bring in, and the irony is that they already did bring in Merle.
Well thanks. I will bow out of the conversation so as to avoid annoying anyone.
Well, I enjoyed the conversation. What’s the point of having a discussion if everybody agrees?
Girl Wonder got a little miffed when I made a reference to this. For the most part, Michonne shouldn’t have been able to see exactly what the Governor was doing. She was at a bad angle, and the room was darker than the outside, meaning that the window would have acted more like a mirror to her; she should have seen a reflection. It would had to have been brighter in the room for her to see anything, and she was standing in bright daylight.
[QUOTE=Superdude;15701739she was standing in bright daylight.[/QUOTE]
Glaring at the window.
I swear she would glare when she…in a romantic situation.
What’s the point of comparing me to an insufferable character from South Park? I’m not bowing out because people disagree with me.
I agree with you about the Governor.
The Mr. Mackey thing was kind of funny, m’kay?
Don’t leave me alone here voting for the Gov being a murderous bastard.
I think the question is “Is morality the result of a stable society that is one of the first attitudes to disappear once instability occurs?” Is it just a relativity type of thing? I personally believe when something is wrong (such as premeditated murder) then it remains wrong regardless of the environment in which it occurs.
I realize I am probably in the minority here, but I think history will back me up. When a group is in “survival mode” justification rules, whatever gets you through the night.
The idea that there are absolutes is sort of silly. Would it have been wrong to commit premeditated murder on Hitler in 1932? Would history be on your side there?