ReAction: Thoughts on the Pretty Little LiArs Summer FinAle

Last night was a big moment in television history. In my opinion, bigger than Letterman’s last show. Last night was the summer finale of ABC Family’s hit show, Pretty Little Liars. Yet this was not just any summer finale, this one was special. This was the finale where we finally learned the full identity of A. After six seasons,  130 episodes, numerous deaths, endless red-herrings, and countless plot twists, we finally know who A is.

Personally, I was quite pleased with the finale, and that thought it brought a great ending to a great era. However, some fans made clear on twitter, that they were not as happy with the ending. While I did really like the finale, and the reveal, I also see some problems with it.

A lot of fans are complaining about CeCe being A as is seems forced, sloppily put together, and isn’t very shocking. Some of course, are just butthurt that their theories were wrong, nothing you can do about that. I also was wrong, I thought A was either going to be Wren, or Maya (though a few weeks ago I scrapped all my theories and just admitted I had no idea whatsoever).

Despite what many think, CeCe being A makes a lot of sense of things and I think very well explains many of our previously unanswered questions. Honestly, I was quite skeptical, and rather dismissive of the transgender theories that began popping up after the season 5 finale. I thought even for a channel like ABC Family, I found it hard to imagine the show taking that turn. I think it establishes a good motive, and helps clear up a lot of the confusion about what happened at the lodge the night of the fire. It also makes sense of what happened to Toby’s mom (though there still remains one plot hole I’ll get to later), and the corruption of Wilden. In all, as far as the big picture goes, almost everything makes perfect sense now. I think a reason people are upset or still confused is largely due to a lack of critical thinking and imagination (yes, I just called you dumb).

I find more and more that we live in a world where we like to have everything spelled out for us and have every t crossed and i dotted. But I don’t see things the same way (not in this case at least). One tweet I saw shortly after the finale aired was someone ranting about how we never found out what happened in the doll house. ??? what?? Yes we did. A tortured the girls, made them think they were hurting each other, chipped them, and various other things. Now, did we see a minute-by-minute sequence? No. So in that sense I suppose you could say we never saw what all happened in the doll house, but again, use your imagination. We got enough information that we can figure out what kind of things happened. Not everything has to be spelled out, and sometimes things are what they seem.

Another common complaint is that we still don’t know what happened to Maya. At this point I think it’s fair to say that the explanation on the show, about Nate and True North is really what happened. Nate was obsessed with Maya and when she rejected him, he killed her and then tried to kill Emily and Paige. That’s all there is to it. Not everything is a mystery and sometimes the answers, whether you like them or not, are right in front of you. In that regard, I think Maya was more of a transitional character for Emily and was a device to help push Emily’s story, and coming out and dealing with being a lesbian. Maya’s character served a purpose and once that purpose was fulfilled the writers simply wrote in a dramatic exit.

Now, in terms of where I think the show went wrong; it’s very hard for shows to keep an audiences attention, especially when they have relatively the same plot line for 3 1/2 seasons. We saw this over on ABC with the show Revenge, which saw its ratings decline during season 3 as the same plot got dragged on and on. While season 3 of PLL is by far my favorite season, it was both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, it was full of mystery and constantly kept introducing more and more questions to build up suspense. This was followed by more questions in season 4A. Unfortunately, the writers I think, ended up raising too many questions, and as a result can never be able to fully address everything they wrote into the story. That leaves viewers disappointed as many things either don’t make sense, or the answers seem sloppily thrown together. I’m not sure I buy Marlene’s statement that she had the idea for A for years. It seems to me that somewhere in season 5 or late season 4 they came up with the idea. The reason I say this is because in season 4 we see a flashback to Toby with Ali in his room. While Ali is there, Toby’s mom comes in his room and talks to him. However, in 6×10 we see the flashback to Bethany killing Toby’s mom. The problem is that in that flashback, Charles (A) was a young boy, which means Toby would have been very little when his mom died, but then in season 4 he is a teenager and his mom is still alive. It’s hard to believe the writers did that on purpose, and more likely that they didn’t come up with the back story for A or who A was going to be until later.

In that case it makes sense that somethings would come together, and in some cases, less satisfying ways than we expected. For example, the twin theory (which I always hated anyway and am glad never materialized) which many had been promoting, gained a lot more traction during the season 5 Christmas episode where Mrs. D buys two dresses but makes Ali promise to tell her dad she only saw one. Many took this to be symbolism for someone having a twin. This is explained in 6×10 as fitting into the transgender story line, that Mrs. D bought Charles the same clothes she bought Ali so he could become a girl. Makes perfect sense, but for some who were so hell bent on the twin theory, it was underwhelming.

I think the problem was simply that the show took too long to reveal who A was. We all thought they had done it in the season 4 summer finale with the whole Ezra reveal. And frankly, that would have been a good time to do it. I think mid to late season 4 or early season 5 was the best time to reveal who A was. Unfortunately, ABC Family renewed PLL through season 7 and thus I think writers had to sacrifice substance for time. That’s why 5A is in many ways completely useless in the big picture. Most of it is just Hanna having drinking problems, and Caleb being really traumatized. We can only take so much of that before it just becomes tedious. In that sense 5A was by far the worst part of the show. To be quite honest, most of 6A was like that too. There were very few concrete answers until 6×10. If there were any, they came within the last 3 minutes of the show (meaning the other 37 minutes were just time killers).

When you drag something out for so long, and let people’s imaginations run wild, by the time you actually end up revealing, it’s going to be underwhelming no matter what. I honestly think regardless of who A turned out to be, it would still have people disappointed because it just took so long to reveal and people got frustrated. We’ve thought of almost every possible scenario (including the transgender theory) and at the reveal it was kind of like, “oh, ok. lots of people have thought that.”

In the end, it was a great finale, but not without flaws. There are plot holes, but given the pandora’s box of questions the writers opened, I think it all fit together quite nicely. Lots of things make sense now and in hind sight it’s not hard at all to figure some of it out (so maybe they have had the idea for years). Regardless, I loved the finale and definitely loved A’s story. The only thing I would change is shortening the series and revealing A a lot sooner and cutting the pointless stuff out.

One other thing that I really didn’t like, was that Sara Harvey was revealed to be both Red Coat AND Black Veil. For no apparent reason. Again why I think they threw this together later rather than earlier. Originally I think they never intended us to meet Sara Harvey, but since it brought up so many questions they threw her in the mix spur of the moment. Again, they started too many fires to be able to put them all out adequately.

That being said, I can’t wait to see what 6B and season 7 bring. While 6A ended with tons of answers, it also ended, in true PLL fashion, on a cliff hanger. I guess I wouldn’t have it any other way.

–M

The Difference Between Religious Studies and Theological Studies

Frequently when I tell people that I am a religious studies major, one of the first questions out of the gate I am presented with, is whether or not I want to be a clergyman.

During this past spring break, I went with a friend Richard to Miami University in Ohio for the school’s infamous, “Green Beer Day.” There we stayed with some friends of Richard’s who were students there. Through conversation it was revealed that I was a religious studies major and of course, within 10 seconds I was asked, “so do you want to be like, a priest?”

For years I have found religious history and scholarship to be absolutely fascinating, and yet I myself, have grown less and less publicly religious over the years to the point where the only times I step foot in a church are when I go home for winter break, and when I desperately need a bathroom.

When most people learn I’m a religious studies major, they assume I’m probably the super religious type who prays before meals in public, does daily devotions, and wears those cheesy Jesus shirts:

In reality though, nothing could be farther from the truth, and frankly theology to me is just something I have no interest in.

There is a vast difference – and i wish more people knew what it was– between studying religion as history, anthropology, and literature, and being a seminary student studying theology and faith.

While I find the history of theology, for example, the history of early Christology, or Ancient Near Eastern beliefs, to be incredibly interesting, I don’t have a use for personal theology.

To me, theology is more of a study regarding god, spirituality, and concepts of god in one’s life.

Religious studies on the other hand deals with history, literary analysis, and logical argumentation.

For example, people who read the Gospel of Mark through the lens of religious studies, might look at the historical context of when the text was written (social, and economic conditions of 1st century Palestine), as well as Greco-Roman religion, Ancient Judaism, and the kind of literature of the time. As such, one will most likely come to a radically different interpretation of Mark than someone who has been raised uber Christian and has been taught to read Mark through a theological lens.

Another difference between the two, is nicely summed up by Christine Kraemer in an article written on Patheos.com.

Theology, by definition, is written by insiders: practitioners of a religion who are articulating their personal religious or spiritual convictions within a like-minded community.

The insiders she refers to here, would be people like ministers, priests, chaplains, and seminary students.

She then contrasts that with a view of religious studies:

Religious studies is different in a number of ways. Religious studies can be (and often is) written by people who are at least partially “insiders” (in other words, they practice that religion or are at least sympathetic to it). But religious studies scholarship is written to specifically include readers who are “outsiders,” those who have no previous knowledge of or investment in the tradition.

While theology is by definition practiced by people who are members of a religion, one does not need to be a member of a religion to practice religious studies.

Then I suppose, the follow up question would be, “if you’re not very religious, why study religion at all?” Again, it mostly stems from an unexplainable interest that developed at a young age. Besides, there are numerous non-believers who study religion and are scholars in the field. To name a few: Robert Price, Bart Ehrman, Hector Avalos, and Richard Carrier.

Mine stems from an early interest in the history of religion, specifically Judaism and Christianity based on documentaries on the History Channel (for example, Banned From The Bible), and novels such as The Da Vinci Code, and The Last Templar.

There are stark differences between theological studies and religious studies. The former emphasizes personal faith, concepts of God, and how to view the world, and act, as a person of faith, while the latter is strictly an academic discipline stressing history, literary criticism, and anthropology.

Admittedly the two can overlap from time to time, but they are none the less two separate houses. I only wish more people knew this fact. And once more, for the record, NO I do not want to be a priest!

–M