Oddly touching, oddly disturbing...

[hmpf]

I'm still in the grip of the Evil Real Life Monster, but occasionally I watch bits and pieces of HL in between. Today I watched the scene in Rev. 6:8 where Kronos and Methos meet Silas in the woods.

I found myself oddly touched by Methos' reunion with Silas, and disturbed on a number of levels. Touched because his joy of meeting Silas after such a long separation is so obvious. (Btw: he says it's been "over a thousand years", which seems to suggest he met Silas again at least once after the parting of the Horsemen. Interesting. Or perhaps it refers to Silas and *Kronos* parting ways then. Yeah, that makes more sense, I think.) Anyway. So, Methos is *really* happy to be seeing Silas again; I don't think that's him pretending. It's hard to fake a laugh like that. Although... who knows. Still. I choose to believe that in that one moment, and probably *only* that one moment, Methos really lets his guard down and gives in to the joy of being reunited with a very old friend.

Which brings me to the disturbing part. On one level I'm disturbed because Silas represents a part of Methos' past that, at some point, Methos was obviously very eager to leave behind, and isn't too thrilled to have catching up with him now. So, how can he be so unequivocally happy, even if he likes Silas a lot? Shouldn't there be a lot of very uneasy feelings, even if there is also happiness? And, from the look and sound of it, it's such a strangely *innocent* happiness, too. Something in my brain says 'does not compute' when I think about (former) mass-murdering psychopaths(?) having a happy, and, for that moment, totally non-sinister, reunion...

And on another level I'm disturbed because, Methos being Methos, he must have plans of playing MacLeod against the Horsemen already. So that means he must at least be considering the option of betraying Silas in the near future (although I'm willing to believe that he fooled himself into believing that perhaps this needn't result in Silas' death). And all the while he's acting like for the past millennium or so he couldn't wait to play happy little Horsemen with Silas again.

Whatever's going on inside Methos in that scene, it has to be a strange, and probably painful mix of emotions. Trying to imagine it only makes my brain go 'does not compute' again, which, frankly, is a result I often get when seriously trying to think about Methos' inner life. (But that's part of the fun, too.)

All of this, of course, brings us to some familiar conclusions: 1.) Methos is probably the greatest double-dealing bastard there ever was, and you shouldn't trust him not to betray you to your death even when he's obviously very happy to see you. And 2.) Methos must have an incredible ability to cope with inner contradictions and conflict.

Comments

[steelvictory.livejournal.com]

And that's why we love him!!

[amonitrate.livejournal.com]

Dunno, I would go with 2 over 1. I think he's probably not thinking of betraying Silas at that point. I never believed he was acting out of a well-thought-out plan at that time. He seemed to be reacting, instead, trying to stay one step ahead of Kronos, and mostly failing. So not manipulating as much as playing damage control. He seemed to look at Silas differently than the other two - yes, I think he genuinely *liked* Silas. Kronos he admired and feared, and Caspian he just felt distain towards. My interpretation is that he probably wasn't counting on MacLeod at that point, but hoped MacLeod would be a way out.

Though the master-manipulator theory has just as much evidence, I'm sure. That's the fun thing about Methos.

[sylviavolk2000.livejournal.com]

And in the episode "Methos" he seemed to be reacting on the fly to everything. Improvising. Of course, what he does in one episode may not be symptomatic of the way he'd behave at another time.

I'm kind of reluctant to consider the early Methos eps 'canon'...

[hmpf.livejournal.com]

I mean, yeah, they obviously are, but rather too often I get the impression the writers didn't really know what they wanted to do with the character yet, and so some of his actions seem to be a bit 'off' - at least to me. (And possibly also to the writers, in retrospect - Methos' remark in 'The Messenger', about the false Methos offering Richie his head because "he knew you wouldn't take it" seems a bit like the writer(s) offering us another explanation for Methos offering his head to Duncan more in keeping with 'later Methos', kind of a very subtle bit of retcon.

Anyway... what I meant by 1.) was not so much that he had a working plan by that time - I just think that he must have been trying to keep all his options open, with the preferred option probably being any option that did *not* involve becoming a Horseman permanently again. That does not make him the Master Manipulator (or perhaps it does - perhaps the true art of manipulating people is being able to improvise in all situations), but rather the Master Improvisator who will not shy from betraying even the people he loves if it will help him to achieve his goals. And I can't imagine him not having at least a few vague ideas on how to do that by that time.

[lannamichaels]

I'm not so sure that even Methos could plot that much in advance. I think telling Kronos about the other horsemen at the end of CAH was his Plan X. Don't think he realized he'd need to kill Silas until the monkey scene.

Well, I don't think he was plotting ahead in the sense of...

[hmpf.livejournal.com]

'having a definitive, step-by-step plan on how to proceed'. But I can't imagine that he didn't think about possible outcomes of his actions at all. Outcomes, plural. That probably includes ones that wouldn't harm Silas as well as ones in which he gets killed. I'm not saying Methos deliberately planned for the latter, but he must have been aware that it would be a possible, even likely, outcome once he dragged MacLeod into it all. And he's beginning to leave a trail for MacLeod by the time they're in Romania to break Caspian out of the loony bin, which, I assume, is only a short time after they've collected Silas. And I really can't see him offering to lead Kronos to Silas and Caspian in the first place without having *any* kind of idea what he's going to do next. I'm not saying there was a definitive plan at the time, but certainly, beginnings of plans must have been brewing in his mind. I see him as pretty much playing it by ear, but even if you're playing it by ear you have to be aware of the options. And one of Methos' options at the time, and a not too unlikely one, is betraying Silas in the process of saving his skin.

Mind you, Methos' actions in CaH/Rev are disturbing no matter how you look at them. He really seems to be basically throwing a coin to decide if he's going to go back to mass-murdering with the Horsemen, or stay on the straight and narrow with Duncan MacLeod. His 'betraying' the Horsemen is only making sure that more than one outcome of that coin toss is becoming possible; it guarantees nothing. He only seems to make a decision to throw his lot in with Duncan at the last possible moment.

Trying to phrase what I *really* mean more clearly...

[hmpf.livejournal.com]

(*g*)

I think what bothers me is that I *think* Methos is ready to betray pretty much anyone at the drop of a hat if the stakes are high enough. Which, on the one hand, is a very sensible 'skill'... but on the other hand makes him a frelling unpredictable, unreliable friend.

Re: Trying to phrase what I *really* mean more clearly...

[amonitrate.livejournal.com]

hmm. I see why this bothers you. I just can't see him that way, I guess. It's a totally valid view of the character, though. I tend to see him as consistently saying one thing but doing another. I think he's pragmatic enough to do things we might think are morally over the line (standing by while Caspian kills the doctor), but I've never been convinced he would have become the Horseman again. Sins of omission, perhaps, rather than commission.

If Silas hadn't been sent to kill Cassandra, I'm not sure Methos would have fought him. And until the moment Kronos saw him fighting Silas it seemed to me that Methos was mostly on the defense, holding Silas off rather than actively trying to kill him.

Anyhow, maybe I'm choosing to view him through rose-coloured glasses.

Oh, I think...

[hmpf.livejournal.com]

... he probably would have sabotaged the Horsemen *some* way if it had come to that. I agree he probably wouldn't have gone back to a thousand years of terror. But I'm not sure he would have stopped them right away, because too obvious a bit of sabotage might get him killed...

>If Silas hadn't been sent to kill Cassandra, I'm not sure Methos would have fought him.

I agree. I think he wouldn't. But I think we both know that Mac would probably have killed Silas, then, and I *don't* think Methos would have stopped him. He probably would have tried, but try convincing Duncan of sparing an unrepenting Horseman of the Apocalypse! The moment you set MacLeod on the trail of some evildoers, we all know what happens. And Methos did set him on that trail.

Anyway... to be a bit more precise about what exactly bothers me: I think it's not so much the fact that sometimes Methos will betray friends but rather, that sometimes he will, and then sometimes he goes and takes downright stupid risks for them. He's so inconsistent in his survival policy! *g*

Re: Oh, I think...

[amonitrate.livejournal.com]

true. He does take risks that fly in the face of his so-called survival instinct. I agree he probably would not have gotten in the way of Mac killing Silas, much like he didn't stop him from killing Byron.

He's pretty inconsistent about most things, except maybe that he'll do anything to protect his immediate loved ones - even sacrificing those he may have loved in the past.