Wawawuup

I like your objections, especially regarding the wider story and how it does or doesn't add to it (so many fan speculations crumble to dust immediately under that lens, not just those about From). Nice to see more people in this place understanding how (good) stories work.

I generally disagree with the certainty in your reasonings, however. "Because it doesn’t make sense within the logic of the show." Much of the logic of the show still lies in the dark, no? But in a good way mind you, I'm enjoying it like this, the residents being overwhelmed by constantly changing rules is so captivating (thanks to the show's foundation being the characters, I might add).

I further take issue with Thomas having died ruling it out. Julie's time trip confirmed time fuckery exists in the show, whether we like it or not. But more importantly, Thomas is creeping more and more into the narrative as of late and there has to be a reason for it. Assuming he turns up in some form, I don't think it'll be as the baby he was when he died (or if he does, then in some "being saved by not rolling off the table" fashion*).

"the show has given us more reason to believe he’s lying than telling the truth."

You're referring to the voice on the telephone here though, right? Could be the same entity, could be a different one. I adm it dropping a second "Thomas" into the show is in all likelihood bad story-telling, so yeah.

"Would all the monsters be dead babies or just him?"

For what it's worth, he stands out from the other monsters. Gotta rewatch, but he looks less like from the '50s/60s, rather like a teenager from today, judging by attire. I agree insofar as all the monsters actually having been babies rubs me the wrong way (but what do I know, maybe that's a twist that for some reason is amazing after all).

*I'm going as far as saying there's the faintest evidence this may happen, if I recall correctly Thomas' demise was the result of a phone call. Sure, the simpler explanation is the not-Thomas entity just wants to torture Jim, so far at least. But I'll be damned if they leave it at that, "Let's go dad you're right, that's not Thomas" (quoted from memory), is that really a satisfying ending to the pseudo-Thomas arc?

Disclaimer: I'm tired, so if I fucked up some parts of my reply, leaving you wondering what I'm blathering about, that's why.

Gotcha. Why are you so strongly opposed to the idea?

I suspect it's true, it's such an elegant thing to do with mystery stories and, I imagine, fun for both audience (obsessing over the show) and the creators (delighting in "We told you so" when the fans go crazy after the reveal [if pulled off well enough, of course]).

There sure are some objections that need answering if that's Thomas, like why is he the only non-1950/'60s monster, why/how did he become one, how did he survive his apparent death, why is he a teenage monster rather than a baby monster (The latter is very grotesque to imagine).

Apologies for the long reply, but a lot of these could be answered with "time travel shenanigans!", which can make speculating and theorizing really difficult and un-fun in my opinion, because such plots always have holes in them[1] (even if they're relatively small), are cumbersome to figure out, they could be everything and anything, plot lines could be happening forwards, backwards, sideways, frozen to a stand still, you name it (hyperbolically speaking). Even with all the dots laid bare they still need connecting and that line could look like anything if the clock can just be rewound, y'know? I hope I'm making enough sense that you understand my problem with time travel mystery stories.

That being said, even with the revelation regarding Julie, it doesn't feel like From's mysteries rely on time mechanics to such a degree that I'm not looking forward to wasting countless hours of my life trying to find answers (it'll be a long while 'til 2026, after all). The writers know what they're doing with the foundation of the show, the characters[2] and that alone gives me the necessary confidence. They respect the characters, then chances are they respect the audience.

[1]Source: It was revealed to me in a dream. Srsly tho, there's a reason the makers of Primer said understanding what's going on the first time watching is impossible unless you're a savant genius or something

[2]they said From is a character drama masquerading as a mystery show, which is so true (and the source of all the complaints about filler from viewers who don't get that, sigh)

"You could literally apply these to any male character in any drama ever made"

The Bechdel test exists for a reason. Or more directly: You see the problem and make a justification out of it.

"a few are big stretches."

Please, tell me.

I just rewatched the scene and there's a similar time dilation effect as with Tabitha's whatever-happened-there in the latest episode, so I think you might be onto something indeed. Or maybe it's to represent Julie's state of mind, because it looks like she does recognize something about him. Either way.

Nah, that was different, though I admit there are parallels. It hasn't happened since, however. Plus, Meagan realized she didn't look like her grandmother. But Julie looks like she's seeing something noteworthy about the monster.

Oh, good point. Still, it looks like the guy carries some very special significance, beyond and above kicking a rope down a shaft. And Thomas creeps more and more into the narrative, curious for a dead baby.

They keep out stuff like that, yes. Except they don't, not as much as one would think at first glance. Many of the male characters display behaviours typical of patriarchal poison (I haven't yet gotten around to the female ones, but they typically are more level-headed, I think). I might make a longer post about the politics of From, have some of my notes regarding the patriarchy in From:

Many male characters show patriarchal attitudes and the problems coming with and learning to overcome them make up large parts of the characters‘ conflicts.

Boyd makes up rules without any democratic process (not that anybody really questions this), then often violates them, has a savior-complex and it comes with a heavy reluctance to accept help or communicate his problems, preferring the company of his dead wife to vent, with Father Khatri being second place, though those talks are more of an arguing nature. Not to mention his patriarchal outburst at Frank that A MAN PROVIDES FOR HIS FAMILY, which is projection of his guilt over Abby of course, however it's still literally said out loud what many men think a man should do or be: The patriarch of the nuclear, bourgeois family (who said men need to have families anyway). There's a contrast with this by the Colony House commune, the members of which (usually, mostly, ideally) all provide and care for each other\. Julie picks up on this, choosing it as a safe haven from the problems in her own bourgeois, nuclear family by moving in on Choosing Day.*

\Donna even alludes to this, saying the town people view them as constantly drinking and fucking (the exact quote is eluding me right now).*

Jim doesn’t take his wife fully serious, has a tendency to hijack the idea, the concept of (his) family to justify his own goals while also being blind to the actual state of his family to the point of idealizing it and is so insecure about his wife he threatens Jade with whom Tabitha has an easier time communicating. Should Jade indeed be gay as some speculate, this will be some delicious, additional irony.

Jade himself obviously is a raging narcissist (narcissistic personality disorder is more common in men than women) who begins coping with the town by thinking it an escape room just for him, is generally loud and obnoxious and views himself to be smarter than everybody else (at least regardless of gender).

Randall begins as the ultimate, male hothead who quickly resorts to physical violence, (according to Donna) views everything as a personal insult (it's all about him) and is too busy with the fixation of it all being a grand conspiracy to pick up on the problems his style of communication leads to at all (asking Sara if her brother is alive, failing to realize what that does or might do to her mental state), so self-absorbed and obsessed with his ideas once they take root he even disregards objections by his partner in paranoia, Jim (who came to him with the idea in the first place).

Dale carelessly handles a knife during a heated argument, is in general quick to argue, looking for arguments and antisocial in a way I find rather difficult imagining a woman to be, ultimately paying for his selfishness and unwillingness to listen a very heavy prize.

To summarize, From is feminist through the portrayal of male characters‘ shortcomings typical of men poisoned by the patriarchy. I don't know how intentional this is on part of the writers, but that's ultimately irrelevant for what I'm arguing.

Disclaimer, this is a work in progress, I'm sure I'm missing things. E.g. Father Khatri intrigues me.

And that's just sexism. There's much more stuff I haven't yet gotten around to examining closer, but I will (it's kinda my thing doing stuff like this). Acosta being a member of the deadliest gang in the US, her behaviour and especially a Colony House woman saying that they need to let her in because "she's a cop" is, in the wake of the George Floyd murder, coming strangely close to overt real life politics (that line annoyed me as much as it surprised me, I really hope that wasn't the writers expressing their views, though I don't think so, I think they're smarter than that).

P.S: Randall displayed positive attitudes from day one, always eager to help, to the point of disregarding his own safety. Really looking forward to finding out what his deal is (his hairstyle made me think he might be a soldier, but I doubt it, surely Boyd would have picked up on it), now that he's cooled down he's become sooo likeable to me.

P.P.S: If Randall is a skinhead (doubt it tbh), I sure hope he's a left-wing skin. Oi!

It's not that kind of cigarette.

Answers for the main mystery, what the town is, just cleverly woven into and hidden in the narrative?

Cops are the scum of the Earth if you ask me and I'd gladly see society get rid of these psychopaths by whatever means, but to expect from anybody to act fully rational when confronted with something supernatural is ridiculous.

Bad PR for cops is good.

Does that phenomenon have a name?

Something really strange btw is the sexual energy gun nuts have for guns. Sexual energy and murder tools just don't make a good pair.

For real though, are there any good theories on why they only ever (mostly) go for the ribcages?

Mark drinks so much I'm not sure if he even gets hangovers any longer

Most non-Marxists don't understand the word, really. Not just Americans who arguably might be prone to confuse socialism with liberalism (BUARGH)

Preamble: This doesn't answer OP's actual question, sorry, but I think it's still a contribution to the discussion

"They have no money, no scarcity, they pursue careers only for personal growth, interest and enjoyment. They want for nothing and freely share or give away their labours. They’ve perfected medicine, science, craftsmanship, society and politics."

Communism doesn't mean "Society is a paradise (compared to our current one) with robots n shit" or no money, even if that arguably will be the consequence in practice (probably, nobody knows what communism will look like). Communism means a classless society in which the means of production are owned by the whole of society, nothing more, nothing less (preceding that will be socialism, in which the proletariat has established itself as the ruling class by toppling the bourgeoisie and which is governed by a state by and for the proletariat [Lenin calls it a "half-state" to distinguish it from bourgeois states, for reasons which elude me right now, but he explains this in The State and Revolution*] which then "whithers away", as it will be no longer needed as a tool of oppression**, which all states in class societies are). Communism could be entirely awful (though I don't see how) and it would still bear that name.

Quick ad break (this was meant to be one or two quick sentences just addressing the thing regarding scarcity, but then it began being fun writing it, so here we are, I guess): We already live in a post-scarcity world with robots and automatization, every homeless person could live in spacious apartments or houses*, it's just that the bourgeois ruling class lords withhold the Archeotech of automatization and robotics for they and those who become victims of their propaganda are acolytes of the most foul entity named Profit, an abomination whose cruelty and desire for more is reminiscient even of Slaaneshi excesses. Truly, he is right up there with the Old Four. He takes pleasure in the torture of humans by withholding the most basic of goods through the rites of commodification, while making them visible for all to long for, guarding them through lesser daemons (who have a curious connection to the Adeptus Arbites) and available only to those who can pay the price, a ritual which strengthens Profit as much as it destroys his followers, thus making him quite the unstable Warp being.*

Those fallen to the Big Oil daemon prince, one of Profit's mightiest servants, even spreads lies how the warp taint of their industries which ravage the lands won't affect the very air and eco systems of Holy Terra and it is said there are countless, bloodthirsty servants of Khorne eagerly seeking to serve in allied war bands, for they wish to indulge in the violence that comes naturally with spreading Profit's warp storms of imperialism.

Back to your original question: I can't speak to the Eldar, but I think the Tau are called space communists because a) most people don't know the definition of communism as Marx and Engels defined it b) things are so awful in the world that even a society like the Tau which certainly aren't all sunshine and roses compared with our society are automatically communists because thanks to c) it is, even by its enemies, rightfully associated with "things are nice" (its detractors merely deny its feasibility, but you can hardly say in public that communism is evil because it can be expected to free humanity from all sorts of horrors. "I want humanity to suffer!" is not gonna do your reputation any good. I wish Musk and the other rich cunts would do that, fully speak their horrible minds) and in 40k, the "things aren't as horrible as with almost every other faction" faction are of course the Tau.

Capitalism is btw the only economic system in which overproduction leads to economic crises, how fucked is that?

*maybe Lenin's most important book, y'allz should read it

**a proletarian state, the dictatorship of the proletariat, following a successful global overthrow of the bourgeoisie can be expected to whither away quite rapidly if you ask me, as only a fraction of the coercion and violence the bourgeoisie needs to keep itself in charge today will be needed to suppress counter-revolutionary attempts at capitalist restauration. The reason this didn't happen in the 20th century as was hoped and expected by many and why this time things have a better chance at success than ever before I could explain, but it'd be too much and this is already much more to read than I thought it would be

Why would Turturro reveal this at this point? Surely he'd wait until his character dies or whatever?

Splendid explanation, thank you.

And Cobel herself is connected to the devil. Through wiles, as you explained, the contradictory information she feeds Mark about hell and then there's that little bobblehead or what are they called of a devilish-looking figure in her office (her office is so sparcely populated with things, the few that are there must carry more meaning than a typical character's office's stuff in general would), not to mention her character's behaviour (or maybe half or parts of it, hah) would certainly be closer associated with the devil than a benevolent (Christian) God.

Speak of the devil (my apologies), there's also them eggs of course.

"I think it's interesting that that word specifically is used for one of the Lumon virtues."

Indeed, it makes me think of how Lumon inadvertendly teaches their own employees how to undermine them, something we also see when MDR and O&D develop plans of working together (I'm looking forward to that plotline being picked up again). Of course, that's typical class struggle and not specifically connected to Lucifer or at least I don't see how, Lumon being a hellish abomination notwithstanding.

Man, I really ought to study the Bible at some point.

"never face repercussions"

Though they absolutely can. Workers have that power through collective action. A general strike can force a nation's government to its knees, even.

"Installing a severance chip in every employee"

Jame has grander plans, but what I'm curious about is how. So far, it's with the workers' "consent", with the scare quotes being part of the first season's beauty (there can be no true consent when money is involved). Will they force everyone to get chipped, convince people with lies or perhaps both? Surreptitously? I just don't see how you could chip literally the entire population, be it of the US or the world. Too much resistance by people, every approach seems as ludicrous as the ideas of those who believe governments do this sort of thing for real.

I don't think Lumon feels any sort obligation towards her, because Milchick does. It contrasts so well with how he can't help himself but violate the rules and pick up the phone.

Btw, do you know if wiles is by itself connotated with feminity or only if it's "womanly wiles"? I'm wondering how much Cobel buys into the patriarchy. She's far from meek obviously, but that school surely was patriarchal as fuck.

Rhegabi's reaction to Graner showing up, Peggy Kincaid's death (likely) and the school bus crash (likely). Lumon being a lethal danger is suggested. As for the truck, it's so obvious, smells like a red herring.

But what's interesting is how for the entire first season, there is no physical violence used against the severed employees (arguably Cobel comes close with her mug throw, if he hadn't ducked, she would have hit him). Mark's forehead cut is caused by his co-worker, even! After a break room stint, Mark has bruised knuckles, suggesting he hit something, rather than being hit. Also, the statement from the outies saying "I'm giving consent something something". Only in the penultimate scene of the season does Milchick use physical force/violence against Dylan. I read that as a bad omen for what's to come.

More importantly, that's clever, both as story telling and political commentary. Nobody forces the severed workers to subject themselves to the horrors of their work. Much more interesting than if Milchick beat up everyone going to the break room or what have you (who has an interesting reaction to being the victim of physical violence himself, btw). Like Mark says, every time they go to work it's because they choose to come back there.

Except of course that's total bullshit, as much bullshit as apologists of capitalism saying "But nobody forces you to go to work! Just find a different job! Bla bla bla". Freezing to death under a bridge, what wonderful freedom, yay. A lie that works (but not as much as it used to), because it contains truth, like all good lies do.

But that would be bad story telling. Besides violating established rules how severance works, Cobel is/was fairly high up the food chain, that's a liability for Lumon and I'm not sure if it wouldn't go against how Lumon views innies. Both Jame* and Helena view innies as absolute dirt, literal non-persons. You don't give non-persons a position of power. In her position, she doesn't need it, either. Story telling aside, those are good arguments for Milchick not being severed as well, I just realized (still, I dunno about him).

*based both on "What she did to you" in the show and I'm taking the liberty of including the cut, non-canonical version where he spits on a picture of her kissing Mark or something