A rather delayed thought on Angel: "The Girl In Question"

[bktheirregular]

I've seen people complaining about the treatment of Andrew in that last episode, specifically how he ended up with two ladies on his arm at the end, when he was supposedly clearly established as gay in earlier episodes.

I am reminded of something from Doonesbury, about the character of Zonker Harris. People would write to Garry Trudeau and ask about Zonker's orientation. Trudeau's response would be that, in Zonk's case, it was more a question of disorientation.

In "Buffy", Andrew was clearly immature, quite frankly clueless, and flailing to figure out who and what he was. He attached himself to the Trio, then clung to the Scoobies like a lamprey when it was his only survival option, convinced himself that he was going to die in the last stand against the First Evil...

...only he got to live. And is getting a chance to figure himself out. Becoming someone nobody would expect him to be. Spike got caught off-guard - and was impressed - by Andrew's double-cross earlier in the year.

Polonius said, "This above all, to thine own self be true." But to be true to yourself, you must first understand yourself, to a degree. Discover yourself. Experiment. Try and find out what you might be, to better understand who you are.

I think that was the point of Andrew's parting shot in "The Girl In Question": that while Spike and Angel were still hung over things in the past, other people were moving on, becoming different people.

How to put it? What was the biggest pre-conception about Andrew Wells?

And if one can emerge from adolescent confusion and discover that one is gay, why is it hard to believe that one could emerge from adolescent confusion and discover that one is straight?

My two cents' worth. And that's probably overvaluing it. *g*

Comments

[tv-elf.livejournal.com]

Whereas I just thought it was normal for him to have f** hags. It's a girl thing, I guess. If you want to go out dancing, but don't want the drama of getting ready for and going on a date, you find a gay guy to go with. He'll keep you safer than just going on your own, plus if a skeezy guy tries to proposition you, you have a "date" to use as an excuse.

[diannelamerc.livejournal.com]

That was pretty much my take on it too, however I'm quite open to the proposition that he's still trying things out and figuring out who he is.

(If he'd had a real girlfriend/SO, I'd have assumed he had settled out as either straight or bi -- surprising, but given his previous level of random flailing, perfectly believable. As it is, with the unreal giggling-girl-on-each-arm routine, I'm going with him just having too much fun playing James Bond -- either with f** hags, trying-it-out girl dates, or both.)

As to his earlier preferences, he really came off as too immature to call, IMNSHO. I think he was showing more of a pre-teen/ developmentally-delayed hero-worship than sexual preference or attachment. He may have been thinking/acting gay because he was not actually a preteen and thus looking at the guys he was hero-worshiping in a different light. That may or may not ultimately turn out to be a permanent leaning, but at this point I still wouldn't call it either way.