Added: 30 July 2010, and viewed 694 times
Gen Rodriguez
It continues, the hypocrisy. Weak parents expecting their children to be, on the one hand stronger than they are, on the other, weak enough to succumb to them.
In recent weeks, we’ve seen Lucas continue to lie to everyone, to himself even, caught up in religious fanaticism as the only way to justify his actions – the only way in which he can come to be pardoned. He uses his son to justify his existence outside of prison; both he and Patrick agreed that ’the boy needs his father’. Needless to say, had Patrick known at the time that his father is actually a serial murderer who seeks God’s exoneration rather than His forgiveness, he would not have felt this way. Lucas, whilst on the surface fearful for Jordan’s welfare and how he is seen in the ’eyes of the Lord’, is far more absorbed by his own worries. Everything he does is with himself in mind – he has become nothing short of self-obsessed, paranoid about being found out and concerned over whether God is truly willing him on on whether it is the other way around. He is essentially using his son as a cover (along with his religion), to legitimise his actions which are inspired mainly by fear. He is a desperate man.
Meanwhile, in the Masood household, God was abused once more as Masood sought to placate his son by handing him his grandfather’s Qu’ran to demonstrate his pride in him. Exactly how proud Masood could have been of Syed in this moment, when he still blamed him for the near destruction of his family, is something that suggests impure motive. Rather, through feeling insecure about what he was asking of his son (to overcome his sexuality), he sought to manipulate him via emotional blackmail. Anything to make him obey his parents, create no fuss, remain with his family who demanded he be someone he wasn’t. Like Lucas, Masood is trying to spin many plates – in his case, trying to placate his wife, keep his family together, be true to his faith, keep respect among his peers and most of all, simply get through this with as little collateral damage as possible. His motive may be purer than that of his extremist neighbour, but again, it is the son left suffering when his needs are recognised only in the form of tokenism.
Away from commandments and tenets, Phil Mitchell looked towards the Queensbury Rules for assistance. Despairing of his prison-bound son, fearful for him over how the ’wuss’, the ’pansy’, would cope in juvenile detention, like a true pro he brings out his trusty boxing gloves again so that Ben may fight his way to masculinity. He flips between making a ’man’ out of Ben and wanting to go on the run with him – an idea that everyone else categorically disagrees with, including Ben himself although his will is predictably ignored. Phil’s (rational) fear over Ben’s welfare ’inside’ finally spills over when Ben – trying to find any positive he can about his detention – expresses an interest in joining dance classes whilst inside. Unfortunately, this leads to his father berating him to the point of humiliation, and yet Ben continues to show little disillusionment in his father. In fact, just before he is due to be sentenced, he depends on him expectantly for comfort, support and strength.
The difference between the latter two fathers and Lucas (not to mention Archie, who still haunts his eldest daughter from beyond the grave with his childhood sexual and psychological abuse of her) is that Phil and Masood, although in very mistaken ways, are genuinely trying to at least do the right thing. Phil did what he did to protect his son who he knows is prone to being bullied and is a fairly sensitive boy. Masood, despite seemingly ignoring his son’s needs and contributing to what was a constant decline in his self-esteem, does appear to hold a genuine belief that if he could keep the family as a unit, strong, the family could eventually help each other through their ’problems’. The overriding problem with these to fathers is pride and guilt. Both their senses of pride were threatened with the idea of having an effeminate or gay son – what would others think of them by cause of their sons’ behaviour? And what role did they play in their sons turning out this way? Phil was at his wits’ end trying to fathom how a person like himself could raise a son who liked to dance, who couldn’t fight his own corner, who spoke of feelings rather than of fisticuffs. Masood, who had expressed that he knew one’s sexuality was not a choice, struggled with the fact that his son would act upon these feelings at the expense of the family’s reputation which meant everything to his beloved wife. Furthermore, as a man – like his Mitchell counterpart – who has a very rigid idea of what being a ’man’ is, the archetypal ’head of household’ authority figure – that his son’s choice of partner was a dominant male sent him into all sorts of conflict. What had he done wrong, parenting-wise, to raise such a son?
But the irony is that liberation for Ben and Syed has come in getting away from their fathers. Ben’s incarceration could actually, in the long-run, be better for him and his self-esteem. Instead of having a father stifling him with antiquated ideas of masculinity, he can re-invent himself and furthermore, learn to depend on himself for all the things he expected but was denied by his father. Equally, Syed now lives with a man who accepts him for who he is, who does not demonstrate love conditionally but encourages and supports freedom, independence and a growing self-esteem. It would not be foolhardy to suggest that should Jordan come to emerge from his father’s terrifying influence (not to mention neglect) which is mainly based on scaring him with constant threats of the wrath of a violent God, he will also be better off. Allowing these boys/young men to become fully-fledged independent, strong, confident men who feel loved and cherished for who they are, is the best these fathers could do for them. But it is seemingly away from said fathers that these sons will best achieve that, just as Ronnie can begin to find liberation through catharsis and support now that her own abusive father is six feet under.
A pictorial farewell to Barbara Windsor
Bradley Branning - In Conclusion
Pat and Peggy - the final curtain for Walford’s double act
Walford Web catches up with Dominic Treadwell-Collins
Kenny: Series 2 feels more real.
It’s Diederick Santer’s turn in the Spotlight
Bryan Kirkwood talks to Walford Web
Walford Web meets Adam Woodyatt - Part 1
Simon May faces the glare of the Spotlight
We relaunched our site in February 2010. Since the relaunch we've found that most of the site looks and works really well, but the top of the page was a bit messy and uninteresting. We've changed a few sections as an experiment.
The menu at the top of the page is still exactly the same as on other pages of the site and everything else is largely in the same place as before. It's just a bit more colourful, and we hope it's more attractive.
Walford Web, The Home of EastEnders on the Internet since 1997 is © 2010 John Swallow. This is a not-for-profit, unofficial site with no connection to the BBC.
Please take a few moments to review our Privacy statement.
All BBC supplied images on this site are the property and copyright of the BBC or licensed to the BBC for publicity purposes and all rights are reserved. No subsequent use of these images (other than private use) in any form, is permitted without the prior written agreement of the BBC or license owner.
Important: if you have been contacted by someone claiming to represent Walford Web, please verify their identity by logging a ticket in our Helpdesk system. We do not cold-solicit photographs from agencies, articles etc. or request other services. Please do not provide such services to anyone claiming to represent our sites without checking first.