NoTalentHack
Corrupting Influence
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2022
- Posts
- 2,589
In my take, which starts about a month after the ending of the original February Sucks, I treat the original as Jim relating the events to his therapist. This helps to explain both why he has no insight into Linda, among other things. It helps square why Jim doesn't really understand why Linda did what she did and then what she continues to do afterwards, both because Jim needs help understanding and because he's been in the bubble of a toxic relationship for so long that he can't see it (or her) for what it is. It's only through therapy (along with some sage advice from his personal trainer) that he starts to pick it apart. As a meta bonus, it was also therapy for me, letting me get that damned story out of my head.Exactly. Linda had to believe she was “the same as always” because the alternative was admitting she torched her marriage for one night of ego-stroking with a walking endorsement deal. That line “I’m back, same as I always was” isn't innocence. It’s self-preservation. If she acknowledged what she really did, she’d have to live with it. So instead, she rewrites the script and expects Jim to act like it’s the same play.
And yes, she feels flat because we only ever see her from the outside. That’s the cost of first-person. We don’t get her inner monologue. But maybe that’s the point. This was never her story. She’s not the protagonist. She’s the catalyst. The earthquake. You don’t interview the tornado. You survive it.
