Thoughts on T-Bag

[Calena]

im in doubts,because rest of his family was strange and i think that maybe he wouldn´t be killer,but still i think he never would part of normal society..

While that's certainly true, judging from what I've read in books and seen in movies Alabama might not be a place where what we call "normal" is the norm. If you get what I'm saying. It's deep South and from what I can tell (again just movies and books - never been there, although I'd love to visit one day) people there just think differently - in a more conservative, wild west way. That doesn't mean of course that they approve of child abusal, T-Bag sure had a hard fate there.
I guess you could say Michael had it "better", at least he had his mother's love and he knew Linc loved him, even if it didn't much good for Michael as far as he knew (he didn't know that Linc borrowed the money for him so he could go to university).

[candyrose]

He may target younger people because they are roughly the age he was when the abuse started or became much worse....it's sort of an association with his own childhood and he looks at them differently than most because he grew up with a different view of people that age....most would see children...but in a sense he sees them as potential pleasure providers.
I think it all goes back to having a source of support and a degree of normalcy and drive. T-bag didn't have any real social roots, where Mikey at least had a few. And then there is the fact he came into that money, at Linc's expense....so he was able to turn his life around....unlike T-bag. And although we can argue that one turned out well and the other didn't....I wouldn't necessarily say Mikey was mentally healthy. He obviously had problems of his own and eventually became emotionally unavailable to others, which I attribute to over protectiveness of himself....
I do like the flashbacks as well, but I think with Lost it makes more sense to rely on them more heavily. With PB, we needed only enough to show they weren't the 'bad" guys we thought they were...and we needed to see they weren't too different from Mikey in several, key ways. I mean, if you look at Sucre, for example, and just hear why he landed in prison...it sounds bad...makes him sound dangerous even...but if you look at how it went down and why he did it....it's harder to think of him this way...you see a guy who just did something incredibly stupid

[helps]

While that's certainly true, judging from what I've read in books and seen in movies Alabama might not be a place where what we call "normal" is the norm. If you get what I'm saying. It's deep South and from what I can tell (again just movies and books - never been there, although I'd love to visit one day) people there just think differently - in a more conservative, wild west way. That doesn't mean of course that they approve of child abusal, T-Bag sure had a hard fate there.

yeah...i think i got it...i think that you´re right...better i´m sure...there are many countries and different mentalities around the world...so it´s hard to say what will be consider as normal and what wont...actually i like how we say "nothing is normal...and what is normal is actually abnormal"....

[helps]

I do like the flashbacks as well, but I think with Lost it makes more sense to rely on them more heavily. With PB, we needed only enough to show they weren't the 'bad" guys we thought they were...and we needed to see they weren't too different from Mikey in several, key ways. I mean, if you look at Sucre, for example, and just hear why he landed in prison...it sounds bad...makes him sound dangerous even...but if you look at how it went down and why he did it....it's harder to think of him this way...you see a guy who just did something incredibly stupid

i know...actually you´re right...it´s different retros in Lost and PB....i just wanted to say it wouldn´t be bad if we would get some retros again...for example about Whistler or Susan B...i would be curious about that,because i dont think so that Susan is just bitch without some reasons...she probably had hard life,too...

[candyrose]

yeah...i think i got it...i think that you´re right...better i´m sure...there are many countries and different mentalities around the world...so it´s hard to say what will be consider as normal and what wont...actually i like how we say "nothing is normal...and what is normal is actually abnormal"....

Really, there is no concrete definition of the word "normal." It reminds me of an assignment I once had in which we were instructed to define the word in 10 words or less. For some people, this was rather difficult, and many people didn't get credit for it. I wish I had held onto that thing..don't remember what I or others said...anyway....normal is completely subjective....it varies according to the person's experiences and what they generally accept to be common thought, occurrence, and behavior....so if you look at it this way...normal is not a rigid, concrete description with validity....it is merely an opinion held by an individual or a group.....based on their on perceptions and how they relate them to their own experiences. And, if you really want to go further....it is a way of oversimplifying people and things in an effort to make judgments of their value.....a way to include or exclude them from one's life.....

i know...actually you´re right...it´s different retros in Lost and PB....i just wanted to say it wouldn´t be bad if we would get some retros again...for example about Whistler or Susan B...i would be curious about that,because i dont think so that Susan is just bitch without some reasons...she probably had hard life,too...

I think at least with Whistler we will need some sort of flashback to fill in the blanks...it's one thing for him to let things slip and see future actions...it's another to see his involvement in the Mikey-Linc situation prior to Sona--if there even was an involvement in it. He obviously knew who the brothers were and was well aware of the situation...to the point where he knew more than most would...more than the average Joe, sitting at home, watching the news......I think we need to see his past in order to understand him better...while I thought T-bag's flashback scene was very interesting....and as I stated in previous post, it definitely provokes some thought...I don't think it was as crucial to understanding his present motivations.....with Whistler, this is different....

[helps]

Really, there is no concrete definition of the word "normal." It reminds me of an assignment I once had in which we were instructed to define the word in 10 words or less. For some people, this was rather difficult, and many people didn't get credit for it. I wish I had held onto that thing..don't remember what I or others said...anyway....normal is completely subjective....it varies according to the person's experiences and what they generally accept to be common thought, occurrence, and behavior....so if you look at it this way...normal is not a rigid, concrete description with validity....it is merely an opinion held by an individual or a group.....based on their on perceptions and how they relate them to their own experiences. And, if you really want to go further....it is a way of oversimplifying people and things in an effort to make judgments of their value.....a way to include or exclude them from one's life.....

wow...it seems that you had only interesting assignments at school...that´s pity that you don´t remember what you or others wrote,because describe world in 10 worlds...it sounds almost impossible...
agree...it´s totally subjective...i like your point and have to agree with it that it´s a way of oversimplifying people in effort to make some judgments over others....and that´ s why i think that people would never accept T-Bag as component of society...when i see him on TV,so i like him and he really make me smile etc...but when i imagine to meet him somewhere on the street...omg i would run away...it´s sad,because maybe he wouldn´t be so bad if his father didnt abuse him...but i think he would seem to me strange...and so there is where problems start...prejudices,xenophobia,maybe discrimination....the most of all prejudices,because i have some image in my head what is "normal",what seems to me strange and than i make my decision accordance with that...

I think at least with Whistler we will need some sort of flashback to fill in the blanks...it's one thing for him to let things slip and see future actions...it's another to see his involvement in the Mikey-Linc situation prior to Sona--if there even was an involvement in it. He obviously knew who the brothers were and was well aware of the situation...to the point where he knew more than most would...more than the average Joe, sitting at home, watching the news......I think we need to see his past in order to understand him better...while I thought T-bag's flashback scene was very interesting....and as I stated in previous post, it definitely provokes some thought...I don't think it was as crucial to understanding his present motivations.....with Whistler, this is different....

yea...this is true and i hope that we´ll get some retro about Whistler...how he met Susan B in fact...why is he so important that they had to get him out of Sona...has he ever been fisherman....he works for company...but i´m curious what is his assignment...it seems he isn´t as Paul or Alex...he has some special assignment....i hope that we´ll clear answers about him...hehe..maybe he´s boss of company...lol

[candyrose]

Yes, I can see this....even if his father hadn't abused him, it would still be distinct from the group and rejected to a certain degree....I think with his experiences with this father....it affected his reaction mechanisms...