Tru Calling - Conclusion

[chuckro]

Because the show never "ended," and the writer comments don't actually shed any light on a final storyline (probably because they didn't have one), I was musing on how the story would turn out.

The thing is, there are only two real conclusions (beyond the "no ending / they continue this way forever" cop-out): Tru/her backer are right and fate should be changed, or Jack/his backer are correct and fate must stick to the original script. Now, Tru was winning when the series ended, as she'd been going for six months before Jack caught up with her--fate had already been changed, as tens (or possibly hundreds) of people had been saved who shouldn't have been. But okay, fine, we established that this universe is very hard to alter in big ways, so maybe each of those is only a small step off the beaten path and you need those and more to add up to something massive, so the continuing struggle matters.

The thing is, if keeping fate in-line is Jack's goal, then he's a total hypocrite. He does things that change fate (on rewind days) all the time--winning money, rearranging players, giving people information they shouldn't have. It's fairly obvious that these should have almost, if not more, impact on fate in the long term than people dying, but that doesn't matter to him or, apparently, to the power that backs him.

Also, while they keep talking about the "consequences" of Tru saving people, and the Jensen storyline was obviously set up to explore the consequences of saving someone who doesn't ask for help, we never see any short-term consequences between the preferred timelines of Tru's backer and Jack's. Especially since the timeline the characters will eventually see will be somewhere in-between the two.

So if you get right down to "Fate should be changed" versus "Fate should not be changed", Tru has already won. If she never saves another person, fate has already been changed. The universe is off the rails, even if only in a tiny way. If I were ending the series, I'd write a speech where someone explains that--and his hypocracy--in clear terms to Jack. As long as Tru and her Calling exist, as long as days rewind, his work is for naught. Jack then has two choices: Accept that fate can be changed and that's okay, or kill Tru. And we know how Tru's father dealt with this problem, so the answer, and the series finale, is clear.

Comments

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

I think one of the things that bugged me is that they really ignored the "show don't tell" rule. Jack gives the same damn earnest lecture about interfering with fate every other episode. He's portrayed as rational, and he clearly sometimes regrets that he feels his job is necessary. But the writers never show us why he has this conviction. Maybe they would have later. But even the Jensen thing doesn't answer the question. Clearly you shouldn't save someone who didn't ask for it. But not exploring the consequences of saving someone who asked is a cop out. Having a sense of mystery is all well and good, but there's a limit to how many times you can have someone believable earnestly tell you something that contradicts your moral center without having a smidgen of proof one way or another.

[chuckro.livejournal.com]

It was a religious argument, really--neither of them had any proof that their way was better beyond earnestness. ("Passionate sincerity") The writers seemed happy with it that way. Which is why I brought up the idea of a precognitive character as an interesting world-shaker.

Actually, I wonder if the show would have worked better if they introduced Jack in his own stand-alone episode early on, and he was given the mission to make sure that Fate stays on the true path during these temporal "hiccups", and we saw him as a second protagonist, instead of a "friendly antagonist". What we got was him starting as evil, then moderating to affably evil, then finally to misunderstood. Had they started with the idea that both sides could be right, the show would have been stronger for it.

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

I think it could have actually been as strong with the intro they did - you introduce someone as evil, and then turn it around to make you question whether the protagonist is actually the evil one. But it would require clear indication of Tru saving someone making things worse.