Lovely points, everyone.
Now let's see...to rehash the discussion about the introduction of Lindsay's character: It would be better to have a cast of characters that is well-written and developed, even if that means that there are more men than women. When Aiden left, Hawkes was moving into the field, so technically they didn't need to bring in a new CSI at all--the numbers would have been the same. But the writers clearly thought that only having one woman on the show was a bad idea, hence bringing in Lindsay (a good point in principle, if only it was executed well on the show). The problem with that came when they didn't take time to really flesh out the character before the season began, and they seem to have tried to do so over the course of the season, which has led to Lindsay seeming inconsistent and sometimes downright baffling because the viewers never get a real sense of who she is and where she's coming from. /rehash
Anyway, the whole point of doing that was to come to this (talk about going around my arse to get to my nose ): Sometimes I wonder if perhaps the inconsistencies with the character have to do with the different writers--what I mean is, maybe they didn't have a very clear idea of who Lindsay was from the beginning (just a general, 'she's a nice girl from Montana and she has a dark secret'), so when it came time to write the episodes, each of the writers took the liberty of portraying her in whichever way they personally saw fit. That could explain some of the glaring discrepancies in Lindsay's character throughout the season (considering that there have been more than ten different writers this past season). In "Zoo York" we were told that she spouts off random bits of trivia when she's nervous, but I can't say she's done that at any other point in the season to qualify the statement (that I can recall)--true, she did rattle off some football statistics in "Super Men," but she didn't seem particularly nervous to me (and I thought the line was aimed more toward furthering the Danny/Lindsay dynamic than anything else considering Danny's follow-up line). That's certainly only one example of how the character hasn't stayed consistent, but you see what I'm getting at. It would be interesting to see how the different versions of Lindsay correspond to different writers. (And it's also interesting to note that Peter Lenkov co-wrote both "Zoo York" and "Super Men"--coincidence? Perhaps not. ) That doesn't excuse the fact that they should have had a better idea of who the character was going in, but it could at least explain what went wrong. (Then again, looking at it with regards to the writers could just prove that nobody had a frickin' clue what was going on most of the time. :lol Of course, I don't really know anything about how shows like this are written and what not, so...
I wouldn't have had such a huge problem with the changes in the character if I felt that they were leading to a more defined idea of who Lindsay is--instead, it's just going from one awkward superficial identity to another. Hopefully the writers will get together before season 3 and decide exactly who Lindsay is and how she will act. We know that they are capable of doing so because the other characters are well-developed (even though Danny has toned down a great deal from season 1, you still get a sense that he's fleshed-out), so I'd like to see them put their skills to work on Lindsay.
***
By the way, I just looked at the writers for the different S2 episodes on IMDB and I have to say that I don't really see a pattern there...nothing like putting a theory forward and then debunking it before anyone else has a chance to. :lol:
Now let's see...to rehash the discussion about the introduction of Lindsay's character: It would be better to have a cast of characters that is well-written and developed, even if that means that there are more men than women. When Aiden left, Hawkes was moving into the field, so technically they didn't need to bring in a new CSI at all--the numbers would have been the same. But the writers clearly thought that only having one woman on the show was a bad idea, hence bringing in Lindsay (a good point in principle, if only it was executed well on the show). The problem with that came when they didn't take time to really flesh out the character before the season began, and they seem to have tried to do so over the course of the season, which has led to Lindsay seeming inconsistent and sometimes downright baffling because the viewers never get a real sense of who she is and where she's coming from. /rehash
Anyway, the whole point of doing that was to come to this (talk about going around my arse to get to my nose ): Sometimes I wonder if perhaps the inconsistencies with the character have to do with the different writers--what I mean is, maybe they didn't have a very clear idea of who Lindsay was from the beginning (just a general, 'she's a nice girl from Montana and she has a dark secret'), so when it came time to write the episodes, each of the writers took the liberty of portraying her in whichever way they personally saw fit. That could explain some of the glaring discrepancies in Lindsay's character throughout the season (considering that there have been more than ten different writers this past season). In "Zoo York" we were told that she spouts off random bits of trivia when she's nervous, but I can't say she's done that at any other point in the season to qualify the statement (that I can recall)--true, she did rattle off some football statistics in "Super Men," but she didn't seem particularly nervous to me (and I thought the line was aimed more toward furthering the Danny/Lindsay dynamic than anything else considering Danny's follow-up line). That's certainly only one example of how the character hasn't stayed consistent, but you see what I'm getting at. It would be interesting to see how the different versions of Lindsay correspond to different writers. (And it's also interesting to note that Peter Lenkov co-wrote both "Zoo York" and "Super Men"--coincidence? Perhaps not. ) That doesn't excuse the fact that they should have had a better idea of who the character was going in, but it could at least explain what went wrong. (Then again, looking at it with regards to the writers could just prove that nobody had a frickin' clue what was going on most of the time. :lol Of course, I don't really know anything about how shows like this are written and what not, so...
I wouldn't have had such a huge problem with the changes in the character if I felt that they were leading to a more defined idea of who Lindsay is--instead, it's just going from one awkward superficial identity to another. Hopefully the writers will get together before season 3 and decide exactly who Lindsay is and how she will act. We know that they are capable of doing so because the other characters are well-developed (even though Danny has toned down a great deal from season 1, you still get a sense that he's fleshed-out), so I'd like to see them put their skills to work on Lindsay.
***
By the way, I just looked at the writers for the different S2 episodes on IMDB and I have to say that I don't really see a pattern there...nothing like putting a theory forward and then debunking it before anyone else has a chance to. :lol: