Andor Andor Episode 2.03 Discussion Thread (Spoilers Allowed)

I kind of felt her speech to her daughter was also kind of a speech to herself.

 

I disagree that it's there to avoid backlash. The writers of this show are not shying away at all from the fact that this is an arranged child marriage, with all of the cultural coercion that comes with that.

The scene is there as a heart-wrenching re-statement of Mon's tragedy as she agonises over the fact that she has orchestrated something that she believes to be deeply wrong, to her own child no less, and tries to stop it at the last possible moment. It's in some sense the right thing to do (before you consider the calculus of the risk to the Rebellion of calling the wedding off), but it's too late. The path is already set.

 

It’s also heavily consistent with her character. Remember how reluctant she was to do this at first. And then when Tay starts betraying her, she starts to see the futility of these extralegal decisions and paths. And so she takes that opportunity to reverse what she’s done to her daughter, as that decision led to another mess, and prepare to jump ship. Made perfect sense for her character and the story, even without the perceived logic of Disney not wanting to offend 2025 sensibilities.

 

I think this highlights the very difficult position Mon and her (at this point unknowing) family are in. I agree that morally Perrin is the least good of the two parents with his "at least the trains run on time" attitude which is also reinforced by his privileged position in life. However, if they did things the way he more or less wanted, Mon Mothma's family unit would remain safe and out of harms way. Whereas:

She's gonna lose her family because of this.

So which is better, keeping your head down and family safe by not challenging authority, or doing so and losing everything you hold dear? I don't think Mon had very much, if anything left at all, when she gave her speech to to the rebellion soldiers in RotJ.

 

But therein lies the nuance. Mon was also "keeping her family safe" via the marriage deal. Safe from the consequences of her financial support for the rebellion, that is. So it's not an either/ or thing. Like most decisions in life, it's complicated.

 

Watched it again and not seeing 2 at all. You guys seem so sure.

I’m hoping there is an episode guide or interview which tells us soon. The mom not wanting her daughter to date the kid from Andor’s crew seems to be there as a way to keep those two hanging out in the cornfield. And the Imperial Officer tells Bix they counted all the visas in the zone and know there aren’t enough left for them to be legal works. Why would he lie to protect an informant?

 

I also had trouble seeing that...people were saying that the mum telling the daughter to get inside was a sign of it but from a woman pow i saw a mum noticing the creepy look of the imperial officer towards her daughter and telling her to put herself to safety and out of his line of sight because mums know instantly from afar those type of guy and she sensed the risk...that's how I interpreted it...

 

Since some of you have been waiting to hear my opinion about it, frankly, I think the last scene of this episode was a way to truly set up the motivations of the characters to eventually sacrifice their own lives by stealing the Death Star plans. We have to know and see just how evil the Empire was and how it personally affected the lives of the people they oppressed. Which I think makes their story in Rogue One that much more meaningful, as opposed to just being the typical good guys vs bad guys. And that particular scene was a way to do that and have it not be the typical good guys vs bad guys. I think it was a solid choice actually.

 

Yeah, I don't sense a hint of 2 at all. Kellen's wife is protective of their daughter, and she sees the auditors, not the immigrants, as wolves. When the Imperials arrive, she shepherds her daughter into the market, not to protect the daughter from the heartbreak of watching Wilmon being taken away, but because the mother does not want the Imperials preying upon the daughter in the manner we see one prey upon Bix.

 

Perhaps. But they also made it a point to say that Beela's mom didn't like "toolies" like Wil coming to her house. So I do think it was implied that she asked her daughter to go inside for that, and perhaps other, reasons. Could be multiple reasons why she said what she said.

Right. But then there's also the detail of Wil saying that Beela's mom doesn't like having "toolies" at her house. It's the two moments together that lead people to arrive at this interpretation.

 

"I don't like toolies. Their hands are greasy and grimy and oily, and it gets everywhere." -- Aneth

 

1. I don't see Perrin as motivated to protect his family, I really don't see this as what he is trying to accomplish.
2. Parents who tolerate immoral behavior and shield their children from consequences raise children that are constantly getting themselves in trouble, and generally don't live good lives. Encouraging his child to neglect the suffering of others, even have disdain for those that put others first, is not good parenting. We already see the attitude that Leida is developing, and it leads no where good.
3. Mon wants her daughter to have a life free of oppression, not just free of pain. Her actions are all about creating a better world for her daughter to inherit. Mon wants Leida to be a human being dissatisfied, Perrin wants her to be a pig satisfied.

 

Amen. If more people in the world saw things Mon's way, we'd be in a much better place.

 

Oh most definitely complicated and nuanced. Even tho she, (and we, as viewers) know she is doing the right thing by supporting the rebellion, it is wrong in the eyes of the law and puts her family in danger, hence even being put in the position of having to marry off her daughter to a family she despises (the father, anyway) in order to protect them from a problem she instigated, although you could further argue that the oppression of the Empire instigated her to act in such a manner in the first place and then the argument becomes somewhat circular.

I don't either. But the way he wants to live is less likely to cause harm to his family, thus by happenstance being protective, whereas Mon is actively engaging in treason, righteous as it may be.

Yes and the former will destroy the family for the right reasons and the latter will preserve the family for the wrong ones. Which just goes to show the difficult position Mon is in and the tragedy that is likely coming for her family.

 

Anethken Silowalker.

 

Umm… Bail Organa. He’s been portrayed as nothing but a warm, loving and supportive father to Leia.

 

I really love how this show has delved deep into Mon. Who'd have thought we'd have gotten this and we'd it be done in a compelling fashion?

 

I just said this to my 9 year old son today (he knows most of the Andor and the plot but hasn't seen season 2 yet). I think they should do an Admiral Ackbar and General Madine story next. What have they sacrificed to get to where they are in another 9 years from now (ROTJ).

 

Fred is churning out bad takes like his life depends on it.

 

The one exception, lol

 

How many other "rebel agents" have we seen as parents? Just Mon, Han, and Leia, as far as I can tell.

 

Hera Syndulla you can argue, them Leia, Han, Mon, Poe's dad.

 

OK, and she wasn't portrayed as a bad parent.

 

She took her child to a battle, he could have died.