Originally Posted by Rhumbatugger:
“Great post surreal - this is the problem.
Syed makes his decisions and acts as he does for good reasons. His actions aren't easy or 'right', but that's as it should be in order to demonstrate his position as a conflicted gay Musilim - who feels obliged to live a lie. Syed's story is partly but importantly about how this is impossible without hurt and damage to everyone involved - including himself.
But we haven't had ENOUGH from him - demonstrating his suffering and fear and self abnegation. We have had a bit and Marc brilliantly portrays this, but it is not enough.
The sympathy for Aaron in ED was immense, despite his violence. Syed's inner turmoil should be made more explicit in dialogue - I'm hoping we will see more soon.
And whoever mentioned a big conversation with Mas - I agree, this would work well.”
Some really good posts from Surreal, Diamond and others whose names escape me right now re Syed's portrayal. I agree that there hasn't been enough time or attention given to Syed's inner thought processes BUT I tend to think that it's possible in this case (unlike Aaron in Emmerdale) that the best illustration of his dilemma comes through other people and
their reactions. Do you see what I mean? Yes, it's about Syed's conflicted feelings re his sexuality and his faith, but all the guy can continue to do is keep reiterating that it's haraam (thanks for the correct spelling Diamond). It's my personal opinion that the homophobic response from Zainab who represents the wider community (?) is designed to show us exactly what Syed faces, because I don't think that until people see that in such a visceral way they'll have any idea why he acts and thinks as he does.
The problem is that people generally don't recognise just how hard it is to be gay in this society - even when your religion doesn't have such harsh proscriptions against it. I know that it's an unpopular choice but for some people subtlety simply doesn't work and they (casual viewer) have to pretty much be hit over the head with a thing before they 'get' it hence the gay bashing option.
Another unpopular and possibly patronising opinion: if they (EE writers) were writing for US then they'd do it differently and we'd probably get what we wanted. Broad, bold, unsubtle brush strokes seems to be what the writers feel is the most effective way to get their point across. Like it or loathe it...
More to say, but will leave it there for now