And George whilst the only compromise Jonny may have been able to make was to go with Jac's choice, if she hadn't made the decision by herself without consulting him I'm sure he wouldn't have been so dead set against her choice in the first place (because I do think it became a battle of wills after her pronouncement). Jonny is Emma's father and wants to be involved in her life and I don't think its too much to ask that both parents should have a discussion about who looks after their child for the majority of her (waking) life. And if she'd played it right Jac would (I'm sure) have got her way with who the nanny would be. As I've said before perception is everything and I truly believe that if Jonny had felt included in the decision-making process then the actual decision wouldn't have been as important to him - I'm sure he would have been able to see that the nanny had to be someone Jac was comfortable with.
But surely if you have your child's interests at heart, you have reasons to want to make one decision or the other. Why on Earth would any self-respecting (or child-respecting, for want of a better term) parent argue about a decision that the other parent had made, without having a good reason for the contrary? Jonny knows that Jac has Emma's best interests at heart and will make the right decision, and she is very good at making rational decisions that aren't based on subjectivity, and it did seem that his issue was more to do with himself than to do with his child. Which isn't the way that a parent should be thinking.
I'm not sure that's actually true - didn't Jonny ask, (and sounded, to me, quite reasonable and sincere when asking) at the start of the episode, if they could put off making the decision about the nanny till later? To me, at least, indicating that he wanted to discuss it, and who knows, may have been amenable to Jac's choice (or at least more willing to consider it) if he felt he'd had a say.
Which is not to say that I agree that Jonny should get his way now and pick someone Jac wouldn't be happy with having in her home, because I don't.
And George whilst the only compromise Jonny may have been able to make was to go with Jac's choice, if she hadn't made the decision by herself without consulting him I'm sure he wouldn't have been so dead set against her choice in the first place (because I do think it became a battle of wills after her pronouncement). Jonny is Emma's father and wants to be involved in her life and I don't think its too much to ask that both parents should have a discussion about who looks after their child for the majority of her (waking) life. And if she'd played it right Jac would (I'm sure) have got her way with who the nanny would be. As I've said before perception is everything and I truly believe that if Jonny had felt included in the decision-making process then the actual decision wouldn't have been as important to him - I'm sure he would have been able to see that the nanny had to be someone Jac was comfortable with.
ETA: ^^^:):):):)
ETA2: And have to say that I'm actually with Jonny on the whole nurturing thing, especially for a young baby (and the more I learn about attachment theory the more important I think it is!). And whilst I'm not saying that a male nanny can't be nurturing, Jac didn't seem to be arguing with Jonny's view that the one she'd chosen wasn't the most nurturing person they'd seen (if that makes sense?).
Your ETA2 does make sense and it did seem as though Jonny had been involved - reviewing cvs, possibly even interviewing. Maybe he kept putting the decision off and Jac was fed up of it? Not that it excuses her just over-riding him but it is possible.
I guess to be fair they haven't argued about everything - Jonny did just agree to the name for instance. I do still feel that he will look for reasons to disagree with her though - just to show that his opinion is important and will be listened to and will be capitulated to - at least sometimes.
Oh my foot will be fine - I really should have learnt that very high heels, stairs and alcohol don't go well for me by my age!
$aybe Jac would rather have a male Nanny so that Emma doesn't get so attached to a female one that she doesn't recognise Jac is her mother? She wants to remain the only female in her life - except Bonnie that she can't do anything about.
Your ETA2 does make sense and it did seem as though Jonny had been involved - reviewing cvs, possibly even interviewing. Maybe he kept putting the decision off and Jac was fed up of it? Not that it excuses her just over-riding him but it is possible.
I guess to be fair they haven't argued about everything - Jonny did just agree to the name for instance. I do still feel that he will look for reasons to disagree with her though - just to show that his opinion is important and will be listened to and will be capitulated to - at least sometimes.
Oh my foot will be fine - I really should have learnt that very high heels, stairs and alcohol don't go well for me by my age!
I'm such an old woman - for literally years now my motto when it comes to shoes has been 'comfort comes first'!! That and 'if the shoe fits buy it' (apparently I have very narrow feet [although they just look a normal width to me] so do have trouble finding shoes that fit)
$aybe Jac would rather have a male Nanny so that Emma doesn't get so attached to a female one that she doesn't recognise Jac is her mother? She wants to remain the only female in her life - except Bonnie that she can't do anything about.
I think Jac has too much common sense for that. She can't seriously expect there to be no other adult females in Emma's life - at the very least there's bound to be a female teacher when she starts school, and in the meantime there will be other people besides herself and Bonnie. Jonny's family are apparently mostly female, and there's Mo. I don't think Jac has said anything to suggest that she doesn't want Emma around women.
I think Jac has too much common sense for that. She can't seriously expect there to be no other adult females in Emma's life - at the very least there's bound to be a female teacher when she starts school, and in the meantime there will be other people besides herself and Bonnie. Jonny's family are apparently mostly female, and there's Mo. I don't think Jac has said anything to suggest that she doesn't want Emma around women.
Maybe not, I was only floating it as a suggestion and was responding specifically to Wiggles point about attachment theory for babies.
It strikes me that she probably picked this guy because they have some similar interests - like extreme sports and also probably hates the idea of an overly, obviously 'caring' and 'nurturing' person in her home. She is a square peg in a round hold, stands to reason she might prefer an 'unusual' nanny as well.
Of course, other option, maybe Jonny doesn't have a problem with male nannies but just doesn't want his daughter to have one. Yes I know there's Elliot, Sacha but maybe Jonny does want to be Emma's only male role model - especially as she is likely to spend more time with the Nanny than him, at least in her first couple of years as things stand.
But surely if you have your child's interests at heart, you have reasons to want to make one decision or the other. Why on Earth would any self-respecting (or child-respecting, for want of a better term) parent argue about a decision that the other parent had made, without having a good reason for the contrary? Jonny knows that Jac has Emma's best interests at heart and will make the right decision, and she is very good at making rational decisions that aren't based on subjectivity, and it did seem that his issue was more to do with himself than to do with his child. Which isn't the way that a parent should be thinking.
But co-parenting is co-parenting = the sharing of parenting (which to my mind includes the making of important decisions). So for Jac to unilaterally make the important decision about who Emma's nanny would seems to me to be unreasonable. Not to mention almost guaranteed to wind Jonny up, when there was absolutely no need. As I've said before I really think that if she'd just included him in the decision making process (co-parenting in action!) then the actual outcome wouldn't have been so important to him. In essence, I suppose what I'm saying is that if Jac had been a bit cleverer and paid lip service to him being involved with the choice of nanny, then she would most likely have got and kept her way without all the ensuing unpleasantness. I'm sure there's a proverb/saying that sums up it nicely but can only think of the one about the hand that rocks the cradle ruling the world and 'slowly, slowly catchee monkey' at the moment, which I know aren't right
And when it comes to choosing a nanny I'd actually hope there'd be more than a little subjectivity in the decision making process. You could have someone with the best qualifications in the world who fitted your own personal person specification to the letter but if you didn't warm to them as a person or didn't think they'd gel with you/fit into your home for any reason I, at least, wouldn't take them on - sometimes too much onjectivity/rationality can be a bad thing (in my book anyway).
I'm such an old woman - for literally years now my motto when it comes to shoes has been 'comfort comes first'!! That and 'if the shoe fits buy it' (apparently I have very narrow feet [although they just look a normal width to me] so do have trouble finding shoes that fit)
You see the thing is, I find middle heels more comfortable than flats as I have a very high instep. But these were a bit higher than usual and also new so I wasn't used to them. And the alcohol aspect shouldn't be ignored! Still, could have been worse, it was the second from bottom step on quite a long staircase
Catch more flies with honey than vinegar? But that just isn't Jac's way usually is it - we saw last night that she can be nice when she wants to be - she just can't be bothered most of the time. Another saying, 'own worst enemy' and that is true of Jac's attitude as well - it rarely gets her anywhere.
I think personality is incredibly important - which is why I think the person that will be spending the most time with the Nanny should have the final say. Having had to hire people, create working teams, personality and how they react with others in vitally important. There are nearly always a couple of dozen people applying for the job that have the necessary qualifications and experience to do it will, but usually less than half of them would suit the dynamics of the department. Which doesn't mean there is anything wrong with their character or personality, but it's all about chemistry. But I know you agree that Jac should have the right to choose who is in her home - but Jonny should have a say as well.
$aybe Jac would rather have a male Nanny so that Emma doesn't get so attached to a female one that she doesn't recognise Jac is her mother? She wants to remain the only female in her life - except Bonnie that she can't do anything about.
And sorry to say this but, no matter who they pick, it's likely that Emma's first attachment figure will be the nanny rather than Jac or Jonny simply because he/she will be spending the most time with her, doing the majority of the care-giving and responding to her needs more often than either of her parants will be able to. Although I suppose this might depend on when she comes out of hospital and how much time Jac and Jonny have been able to spend with her and what they've been able to do with her in terms of meeting her needs whilst she's in there and before the nanny starts, which is one of the reasons I'm really hoping that Jac takes some maternity leave [even just a couple of weeks] when Emma is finally allowed to go home. (That and the fact that I'll feel reassured that Rosie has finally been on honeymoon)
And sorry to say this but, no matter who they pick, it's likely that Emma's first attachment figure will be the nanny rather than Jac or Jonny simply because he/she will be spending the most time with her, doing the majority of the care-giving and responding to her needs more often than either of her parants will be able to. Although I suppose this might depend on when she comes out of hospital and how much time Jac and Jonny have been able to spend with her and what they've been able to do with her in terms of meeting her needs whilst she's in there and before the nanny starts, which is one of the reasons I'm really hoping that Jac takes some maternity leave [even just a couple of weeks] when Emma is finally allowed to go home. (That and the fact that I'll feel reassured that Rosie has finally been on honeymoon)
I think that you're probably right. I've not studied the psychology of it but it just seems logical to me. I do think that perhaps sub consciously they would both prefer it to be the different gender to them so Emma does recognise the difference - if that doesn't sound too left field.
I'm not sure that's actually true - didn't Jonny ask, (and sounded, to me, quite reasonable and sincere when asking) at the start of the episode, if they could put off making the decision about the nanny till later? To me, at least, indicating that he wanted to discuss it, and who knows, may have been amenable to Jac's choice (or at least more willing to consider it) if he felt he'd had a say.
Which is not to say that I agree that Jonny should get his way now and pick someone Jac wouldn't be happy with having in her home, because I don't.
And George whilst the only compromise Jonny may have been able to make was to go with Jac's choice, if she hadn't made the decision by herself without consulting him I'm sure he wouldn't have been so dead set against her choice in the first place (because I do think it became a battle of wills after her pronouncement). Jonny is Emma's father and wants to be involved in her life and I don't think its too much to ask that both parents should have a discussion about who looks after their child for the majority of her (waking) life. And if she'd played it right Jac would (I'm sure) have got her way with who the nanny would be. As I've said before perception is everything and I truly believe that if Jonny had felt included in the decision-making process then the actual decision wouldn't have been as important to him - I'm sure he would have been able to see that the nanny had to be someone Jac was comfortable with.
ETA: ^^^:):):):)
ETA2: And have to say that I'm actually with Jonny on the whole nurturing thing, especially for a young baby (and the more I learn about attachment theory the more important I think it is!). And whilst I'm not saying that a male nanny can't be nurturing, Jac didn't seem to be arguing with Jonny's view that the one she'd chosen wasn't the most nurturing person they'd seen (if that makes sense?).
This whole nurturing rubbish & ***** wanting a say on which nanny is chosen - what on earth kind of MAN is he ?
Good God - what has happened to the modern 'man' ?
Next he'll be buying matching pink kilt and painting his nails in an effort to 'connect' with Emma - if Jac let's him ever go near her.
Catch more flies with honey than vinegar? But that just isn't Jac's way usually is it - we saw last night that she can be nice when she wants to be - she just can't be bothered most of the time. Another saying, 'own worst enemy' and that is true of Jac's attitude as well - it rarely gets her anywhere.
Sort of, but not quite. The one I'm thinking of (or quite possibly imagining!) is more about being clever than nice because I'm sure that if she worked it right Jac could get her way almost 100% of the time AND still have Jonny believing that he was playing a massive part in all the decision making.
I think that you're probably right. I've not studied the psychology of it but it just seems logical to me. I do think that perhaps sub consciously they would both prefer it to be the different gender to them so Emma does recognise the difference - if that doesn't sound too left field.
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me (especially because neither of them would have anything but the vaguest idea that that was one of their motivations)
The title is a little concerning - also it being a two parter when big things tend to happen.
Nothing has been announced but that doesn't always mean anything.
Also, I might feel a need to do one of my episode tally lists again (listing the characters in order of number of episodes appeared each season) because although I don't begrudge the actress the work, I'm sure Bonnie has appeared more than several regular cast members since she arrived which does seem a little odd.
Jonny's not a bully (as an aside, that word seems to have lost all meaning nowadays) but he's not letting himself become a soft touch either. He's not going to stamp 'Welcome' on his forehead and let Jac walk all over him just because she thinks she can . It's a tit-fot-tat scenario that wouldn't look out of place in a schoolyard, only these are supposed adults with a baby to consider.
I think that some people's biggest gripe with Jonny's current behaviour and attitude towards Jac is that it has seemed to have risen from practically nowhere, and in fact he seemed to have changed his attitude towards Jac mid-episode and mid-shift! Simply because she gave a Jac-ish telling off to Bonnie for taking patient relatives to the Staff Room (when she should've taken them to the... yes, the Relatives' Room). Ever since then, he has been very angry with Jac for anything and made it very, very difficult for Jac to talk to him about anything relating Emma, even before she was born. There hasn't been any major reason why his attitude towards Jac should've changed. As kittykat would point out, if Jac had slept with Jonny's father whilst she was still with Jonny, we could understand why he is so angry with her, but as far as we know, she did not do that. Yes, she slept with Sean, not out of pure malice and she regretted it, but becoming angry for that out of the blue nearly nine months later would be a little bit weird. Especially since Jonny has not made any such implication that that would be behind his anger.
Of course at the moment Jac is behaving as badly as he is, but for some reason I can see a little bit, why she would feel that she needs to "defend" her own ground and not let Jonny walk all over her.
Raf is completely unlikeable and AAU is now on it's last legs, character wise.
Mo is two faced, but I already knew that.
Loved Arthur's aside to Zoshia "you're worse at this (relating to patients) than I am!"
Colette surely had no right to speak to a Consultant as she did and Jonny did not deserve a promotion in the (cunning) way that he got it. Missed Elliot badly in all this.
Not really lovin' Holby at the moment!
I echo your comments especially not lovin Holby at the moment, behind the scenes I am told is not a happy atmosphere and its noticeable on screen. I actually like Harry and the way the character is a terminal lowlife as it brings some excitement to AAU but I agree AAU is on its way out.
I'm a professional male nurse and I can say without lie we would not get away with speaking to a senior consultant without there being a severe bollocking in return, sure we point out possible mistakes ect but even though some are extremely arrogant there is mutual respect and to severely antagonise a consultant from my expierence has resulted in them refusing to co operate with nursing staff making our job much harder.
To borrow bladesmans name for it, **** would never ever get promotion, setting a senior member of staff up is more likely to see **** booted from his career as for C**tlette again she would have a level of unimaginable of crap directed at her for the way she spoke to Naylor if Holby was real life.
I see bovine Bonnie is still hanging around **** and sucking the life out of the viewers patience with HC.
My sack them list is as follows
Guy the pointless CEO
Mo the pointless ????? (I honestly don't know what the devil her job in Holby is)
Arthur Moonface still cannot accept that Chantelle left.
**** but then again its obvious why
Bovine Bonnie who needs to mooove to another time zone.
C**ette needs to go as well, a very poor wannabe Chrissie Williams.
Been away and it was my own fault but a shoutout to Clover for her cracking reviews.
I honestly don't know the answer to that. I don't think he is meant to be coming over as badly as most of the Audience (judging from here, HTV and just 'water cooler' discussions with casual viewers rather than fans) are receiving him. I think we are still supposed to be generally sympathetic to him, he loves his little girl and is forced to deal with a difficult woman who belittles him and makes it hard for him.
From the wording of the spoilers (past, present and future), I am getting the kind of vibe that we're meant/expected to be more sympathetic towards Jonny, but with the way he has been written and portrayed over the past months, it's very difficult to feel sympathetic towards him. Difficult to say. From Rosie's and Michael's interviews you do tend to get a feeling that maybe the situation is meant to look not-so-straightforward, aka it's not a good guy vs. the bad guy, but that everyone (apart from the baby) actually come through as rather tarnished from this storyline.
I've been thinking about why I love Jac so much when I usually do NOT like bitchy, cold, ambitious female characters.
Case in point, although I thought Connie was a great character I never really liked her. And I have never really taken to Serena - I only like her when she is with Ric, and that's when she is softer.
I put the Jac love (and I must say I hated her when she was being vile to Joseph during the LB affair) completely down to Rosie Marcel's wonderful portrayal of her and the vulnerability she shows in her oh so expressive eyes even when she is being a complete bitch.
I'm sorry to hear that things are not good behind the scenes in Holby these days, but not surprised.
I've been thinking about why I love Jac so much when I usually do NOT like bitchy, cold, ambitious female characters.
Case in point, although I thought Connie was a great character I never really liked her. And I have never really taken to Serena - I only like her when she is with Ric, and that's when she is softer.
I put the Jac love (and I must say I hated her when she was being vile to Joseph during the LB affair) completely down to Rosie Marcel's wonderful portrayal of her and the vulnerability she shows in her oh so expressive eyes even when she is being a complete bitch.
I'm sorry to hear that things are not good behind the scenes in Holby these days, but not surprised.
I'm the same. I didn't like Connie much either (though I am prepared to give her a clean slate when she joins Casualty) and I initially really hated Serena, although recently she has grown on me as she has been a lot more likeable.
I think (and I've talked about this before) that was I love about Jac (besides Rosie Marcel's incredible portrayal) is that underneath the spikiness and the arrogance, the woman is completely fair. She takes no prisoners and tends to be incredibly harsh, but at the same time if someone has actually done really well, that respect for them is there. I feel like she respects people who earn it fair and square. I really enjoyed her ongoing relationship with Oliver, and I remember that there was one episode when Jac wasn't there and Oliver had to work with Greg - Greg messed him around and teased him a lot and Oliver got fed up with it, and Greg was like, 'Come on, you've been working with Jac Naylor! She's far worse!' Oliver responded, 'She isn't, actually. She respects me as a colleague.' I didn't even like Oliver that much, but I have to say that he and Jac completely understood one another, and their working relationship was one of the best I have ever seen on this programme.
Also with the patients (and especially patient relatives), Jac sometimes winds them up initially, but by the end of the episode they usually respect her. Of course there is the argument to be had that this is just to wrap up the storyline and possibly not reflective of what would actually happen in a real hospital, but I think that her characterisation does make it quite credible actually. She is exceptionally straight-talking and doesn't beat around the bush at all. She gives her (often very frank) opinion on what they should do, but she doesn't overstep the mark where that is concerned. Her relationship with Elliot's patient and his wife recently was very interesting (the one who didn't want to get his parents involved in a transplant). Elliot respected his decision from the off, whereas Jac made it very clear that she certainly wouldn't recommend his course of action. She didn't go overboard in order to persuade him, but she told him some home truths, and eventually he chose to have the operation. Also, I thought her dynamic with the wife was interesting. Jac said that she couldn't force him to do it and the wife said, 'But there isn't anything stopping me calling his parents, is there?' and Jac said no, there wasn't. I feel that she managed to get him to have the operation without ever overstepping the mark, which was more than Elliot was able to do. Also, she rarely gets involved with patients' personal lives. One thing that hasn't been brought up here is Jonny's little phone call passing on a 'message' from the patient to the oboe player asking to meet up. That is just interfering, and is absurdly unprofessional. Jac would never do something like that, quite rightly so.
Loved your review Clover, a delightful and witty analysis of this week's episode.
With regards to this week after a re-watch, I know Harry was totally out of order with the Bariatric patient and his lack of sympathy was appalling but I still find myself rooting for him over Raf who I find is not liking Harry because of his background. I really don't like Raf, he reminds me of a weasal, he thinks young doctors have to go through some ritual torture and have to come from tough backgrounds before being accepted that they are serious in their profession.
AAU is pure dross at the moment, there is no excitement or witty banter there.
I still like Jonny, even though he was behaving badly and trying to score points against Jac. I still don't think he is a malicious kind of character. They both were bad as each other. I thought Joseph was more vitriolic towards Jac in the past. The only downside is seeing Bonnie every week, we don't really need her on Darwin tbh.
I can't believe I am saying this but I am only a teeny-weeny bit warming to Guy (yes there is something wrong with me) and Collette is too condescending and trying to be like Chrissie mark II. Zosia is much more agreeable and I think she works well with Digby.
ETA: Sorry, if I have repeated myself, my mind is playing tricks with me, haha)
Curious, one of the posters say, behind the scenes at Holby set is not as amicable as it usually is. I always got the impression from every actor who has worked on the programme that HC was the best tv show ever to work on. Are there more changes to come? You don't think there is a re-think to move HC to Cardiff again?
I have a criticism about Louise Delamere, she can act, but her voice can't, it niggles me.
Harry is an idiot
And the scottish one who seems a bit shouty is annoying, I don't even know his name but why is he here? Good for him for shouting at Harry, but I'm not a fan.
Eloquently put, george and I agree wholeheartedly.
There is a fairness and an honesty to Jac, even when she is "caught out" as she was with Colette, there is no game playing or making excuses for herself, just a wry smile of acknowledgment.
And I agree that Jonny sticking his nose into that patient's business was totally uncalled for. It may have been meant to be cute, but came off as cringeworthy imo.
Comments
But surely if you have your child's interests at heart, you have reasons to want to make one decision or the other. Why on Earth would any self-respecting (or child-respecting, for want of a better term) parent argue about a decision that the other parent had made, without having a good reason for the contrary? Jonny knows that Jac has Emma's best interests at heart and will make the right decision, and she is very good at making rational decisions that aren't based on subjectivity, and it did seem that his issue was more to do with himself than to do with his child. Which isn't the way that a parent should be thinking.
Your ETA2 does make sense and it did seem as though Jonny had been involved - reviewing cvs, possibly even interviewing. Maybe he kept putting the decision off and Jac was fed up of it? Not that it excuses her just over-riding him but it is possible.
I guess to be fair they haven't argued about everything - Jonny did just agree to the name for instance. I do still feel that he will look for reasons to disagree with her though - just to show that his opinion is important and will be listened to and will be capitulated to - at least sometimes.
Oh my foot will be fine - I really should have learnt that very high heels, stairs and alcohol don't go well for me by my age!
I'm such an old woman - for literally years now my motto when it comes to shoes has been 'comfort comes first'!
I think Jac has too much common sense for that. She can't seriously expect there to be no other adult females in Emma's life - at the very least there's bound to be a female teacher when she starts school, and in the meantime there will be other people besides herself and Bonnie. Jonny's family are apparently mostly female, and there's Mo. I don't think Jac has said anything to suggest that she doesn't want Emma around women.
Maybe not, I was only floating it as a suggestion and was responding specifically to Wiggles point about attachment theory for babies.
It strikes me that she probably picked this guy because they have some similar interests - like extreme sports and also probably hates the idea of an overly, obviously 'caring' and 'nurturing' person in her home. She is a square peg in a round hold, stands to reason she might prefer an 'unusual' nanny as well.
Of course, other option, maybe Jonny doesn't have a problem with male nannies but just doesn't want his daughter to have one. Yes I know there's Elliot, Sacha but maybe Jonny does want to be Emma's only male role model - especially as she is likely to spend more time with the Nanny than him, at least in her first couple of years as things stand.
But co-parenting is co-parenting = the sharing of parenting (which to my mind includes the making of important decisions). So for Jac to unilaterally make the important decision about who Emma's nanny would seems to me to be unreasonable. Not to mention almost guaranteed to wind Jonny up, when there was absolutely no need. As I've said before I really think that if she'd just included him in the decision making process (co-parenting in action!) then the actual outcome wouldn't have been so important to him. In essence, I suppose what I'm saying is that if Jac had been a bit cleverer and paid lip service to him being involved with the choice of nanny, then she would most likely have got and kept her way without all the ensuing unpleasantness. I'm sure there's a proverb/saying that sums up it nicely but can only think of the one about the hand that rocks the cradle ruling the world and 'slowly, slowly catchee monkey' at the moment, which I know aren't right
And when it comes to choosing a nanny I'd actually hope there'd be more than a little subjectivity in the decision making process. You could have someone with the best qualifications in the world who fitted your own personal person specification to the letter but if you didn't warm to them as a person or didn't think they'd gel with you/fit into your home for any reason I, at least, wouldn't take them on - sometimes too much onjectivity/rationality can be a bad thing (in my book anyway).
You see the thing is, I find middle heels more comfortable than flats as I have a very high instep. But these were a bit higher than usual and also new so I wasn't used to them. And the alcohol aspect shouldn't be ignored! Still, could have been worse, it was the second from bottom step on quite a long staircase
I think personality is incredibly important - which is why I think the person that will be spending the most time with the Nanny should have the final say. Having had to hire people, create working teams, personality and how they react with others in vitally important. There are nearly always a couple of dozen people applying for the job that have the necessary qualifications and experience to do it will, but usually less than half of them would suit the dynamics of the department. Which doesn't mean there is anything wrong with their character or personality, but it's all about chemistry. But I know you agree that Jac should have the right to choose who is in her home - but Jonny should have a say as well.
And sorry to say this but, no matter who they pick, it's likely that Emma's first attachment figure will be the nanny rather than Jac or Jonny simply because he/she will be spending the most time with her, doing the majority of the care-giving and responding to her needs more often than either of her parants will be able to. Although I suppose this might depend on when she comes out of hospital and how much time Jac and Jonny have been able to spend with her and what they've been able to do with her in terms of meeting her needs whilst she's in there and before the nanny starts, which is one of the reasons I'm really hoping that Jac takes some maternity leave [even just a couple of weeks] when Emma is finally allowed to go home. (That and the fact that I'll feel reassured that Rosie has finally been on honeymoon)
I think that you're probably right. I've not studied the psychology of it but it just seems logical to me. I do think that perhaps sub consciously they would both prefer it to be the different gender to them so Emma does recognise the difference - if that doesn't sound too left field.
This whole nurturing rubbish & ***** wanting a say on which nanny is chosen - what on earth kind of MAN is he ?
Good God - what has happened to the modern 'man' ?
Next he'll be buying matching pink kilt and painting his nails in an effort to 'connect' with Emma - if Jac let's him ever go near her.
And trouble in Jon-nie paradise - what a shame!!!
Sort of, but not quite. The one I'm thinking of (or quite possibly imagining!) is more about being clever than nice because I'm sure that if she worked it right Jac could get her way almost 100% of the time AND still have Jonny believing that he was playing a massive part in all the decision making.
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me (especially because neither of them would have anything but the vaguest idea that that was one of their motivations)
Nothing has been announced but that doesn't always mean anything.
Also, I might feel a need to do one of my episode tally lists again (listing the characters in order of number of episodes appeared each season) because although I don't begrudge the actress the work, I'm sure Bonnie has appeared more than several regular cast members since she arrived which does seem a little odd.
I think that some people's biggest gripe with Jonny's current behaviour and attitude towards Jac is that it has seemed to have risen from practically nowhere, and in fact he seemed to have changed his attitude towards Jac mid-episode and mid-shift! Simply because she gave a Jac-ish telling off to Bonnie for taking patient relatives to the Staff Room (when she should've taken them to the... yes, the Relatives' Room). Ever since then, he has been very angry with Jac for anything and made it very, very difficult for Jac to talk to him about anything relating Emma, even before she was born. There hasn't been any major reason why his attitude towards Jac should've changed. As kittykat would point out, if Jac had slept with Jonny's father whilst she was still with Jonny, we could understand why he is so angry with her, but as far as we know, she did not do that. Yes, she slept with Sean, not out of pure malice and she regretted it, but becoming angry for that out of the blue nearly nine months later would be a little bit weird. Especially since Jonny has not made any such implication that that would be behind his anger.
Of course at the moment Jac is behaving as badly as he is, but for some reason I can see a little bit, why she would feel that she needs to "defend" her own ground and not let Jonny walk all over her.
I echo your comments especially not lovin Holby at the moment, behind the scenes I am told is not a happy atmosphere and its noticeable on screen. I actually like Harry and the way the character is a terminal lowlife as it brings some excitement to AAU but I agree AAU is on its way out.
I'm a professional male nurse and I can say without lie we would not get away with speaking to a senior consultant without there being a severe bollocking in return, sure we point out possible mistakes ect but even though some are extremely arrogant there is mutual respect and to severely antagonise a consultant from my expierence has resulted in them refusing to co operate with nursing staff making our job much harder.
To borrow bladesmans name for it, **** would never ever get promotion, setting a senior member of staff up is more likely to see **** booted from his career as for C**tlette again she would have a level of unimaginable of crap directed at her for the way she spoke to Naylor if Holby was real life.
I see bovine Bonnie is still hanging around **** and sucking the life out of the viewers patience with HC.
My sack them list is as follows
Guy the pointless CEO
Mo the pointless ????? (I honestly don't know what the devil her job in Holby is)
Arthur Moonface still cannot accept that Chantelle left.
**** but then again its obvious why
Bovine Bonnie who needs to mooove to another time zone.
C**ette needs to go as well, a very poor wannabe Chrissie Williams.
Been away and it was my own fault but a shoutout to Clover for her cracking reviews.
From the wording of the spoilers (past, present and future), I am getting the kind of vibe that we're meant/expected to be more sympathetic towards Jonny, but with the way he has been written and portrayed over the past months, it's very difficult to feel sympathetic towards him. Difficult to say. From Rosie's and Michael's interviews you do tend to get a feeling that maybe the situation is meant to look not-so-straightforward, aka it's not a good guy vs. the bad guy, but that everyone (apart from the baby) actually come through as rather tarnished from this storyline.
Case in point, although I thought Connie was a great character I never really liked her. And I have never really taken to Serena - I only like her when she is with Ric, and that's when she is softer.
I put the Jac love (and I must say I hated her when she was being vile to Joseph during the LB affair) completely down to Rosie Marcel's wonderful portrayal of her and the vulnerability she shows in her oh so expressive eyes even when she is being a complete bitch.
I'm sorry to hear that things are not good behind the scenes in Holby these days, but not surprised.
I'm the same. I didn't like Connie much either (though I am prepared to give her a clean slate when she joins Casualty) and I initially really hated Serena, although recently she has grown on me as she has been a lot more likeable.
I think (and I've talked about this before) that was I love about Jac (besides Rosie Marcel's incredible portrayal) is that underneath the spikiness and the arrogance, the woman is completely fair. She takes no prisoners and tends to be incredibly harsh, but at the same time if someone has actually done really well, that respect for them is there. I feel like she respects people who earn it fair and square. I really enjoyed her ongoing relationship with Oliver, and I remember that there was one episode when Jac wasn't there and Oliver had to work with Greg - Greg messed him around and teased him a lot and Oliver got fed up with it, and Greg was like, 'Come on, you've been working with Jac Naylor! She's far worse!' Oliver responded, 'She isn't, actually. She respects me as a colleague.' I didn't even like Oliver that much, but I have to say that he and Jac completely understood one another, and their working relationship was one of the best I have ever seen on this programme.
Also with the patients (and especially patient relatives), Jac sometimes winds them up initially, but by the end of the episode they usually respect her. Of course there is the argument to be had that this is just to wrap up the storyline and possibly not reflective of what would actually happen in a real hospital, but I think that her characterisation does make it quite credible actually. She is exceptionally straight-talking and doesn't beat around the bush at all. She gives her (often very frank) opinion on what they should do, but she doesn't overstep the mark where that is concerned. Her relationship with Elliot's patient and his wife recently was very interesting (the one who didn't want to get his parents involved in a transplant). Elliot respected his decision from the off, whereas Jac made it very clear that she certainly wouldn't recommend his course of action. She didn't go overboard in order to persuade him, but she told him some home truths, and eventually he chose to have the operation. Also, I thought her dynamic with the wife was interesting. Jac said that she couldn't force him to do it and the wife said, 'But there isn't anything stopping me calling his parents, is there?' and Jac said no, there wasn't. I feel that she managed to get him to have the operation without ever overstepping the mark, which was more than Elliot was able to do. Also, she rarely gets involved with patients' personal lives. One thing that hasn't been brought up here is Jonny's little phone call passing on a 'message' from the patient to the oboe player asking to meet up. That is just interfering, and is absurdly unprofessional. Jac would never do something like that, quite rightly so.
With regards to this week after a re-watch, I know Harry was totally out of order with the Bariatric patient and his lack of sympathy was appalling but I still find myself rooting for him over Raf who I find is not liking Harry because of his background. I really don't like Raf, he reminds me of a weasal, he thinks young doctors have to go through some ritual torture and have to come from tough backgrounds before being accepted that they are serious in their profession.
AAU is pure dross at the moment, there is no excitement or witty banter there.
I still like Jonny, even though he was behaving badly and trying to score points against Jac. I still don't think he is a malicious kind of character. They both were bad as each other. I thought Joseph was more vitriolic towards Jac in the past. The only downside is seeing Bonnie every week, we don't really need her on Darwin tbh.
I can't believe I am saying this but I am only a teeny-weeny bit warming to Guy (yes there is something wrong with me) and Collette is too condescending and trying to be like Chrissie mark II. Zosia is much more agreeable and I think she works well with Digby.
ETA: Sorry, if I have repeated myself, my mind is playing tricks with me, haha)
Curious, one of the posters say, behind the scenes at Holby set is not as amicable as it usually is. I always got the impression from every actor who has worked on the programme that HC was the best tv show ever to work on. Are there more changes to come? You don't think there is a re-think to move HC to Cardiff again?
Harry is an idiot
And the scottish one who seems a bit shouty is annoying, I don't even know his name but why is he here? Good for him for shouting at Harry, but I'm not a fan.
There is a fairness and an honesty to Jac, even when she is "caught out" as she was with Colette, there is no game playing or making excuses for herself, just a wry smile of acknowledgment.
And I agree that Jonny sticking his nose into that patient's business was totally uncalled for. It may have been meant to be cute, but came off as cringeworthy imo.
Collette's voice annoys me too, its too monotonous, I just go into a coma when she speaks.
Hahaha I'm glad someone agrees with me ;-)