Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
Although I'm just quoting this post, I'm going to respond to both in kind.
None of us would have faulted Chuck had he just been honest with Jimmy. He could have told him that he didn't think Jimmy should get a job at HHM right away, that he should build a name on his own first to set aside issues of nepotism, but he didn't do that. Instead, he sent his partner down to act like a hatchet man on Jimmy's aspiration.
He could have told Jimmy that he doesn't believe that he's earned the spot yet, and he could have supported Howard's statement at the HHM meeting (instead of acting shocked at such a choice).
His cowardice and deceitfulness in handling the situation with his brother (who has also been his sole caretaker and only real advocate) is beyond the pale.
Moreover, Chuck's rationale may hold up to the viewer, but Chuck and HHM both lack the omniscience that the viewer of the show has. We know things they don't.
What does HHM know about Jimmy's prosecution of the case? They know the info he has collected and the case he's built. What do they know about the Kettleman case? That after the Kettlemans fired HHM and went to Jimmy because they didn't like the deal he got them to return and accept the deal that was previously unpalatable.
What does Chuck know? He knows that Jimmy has been busting his ass as a PD and doing good work. The shadiest thing Chuck even has a clue of is the billboard stunt.
We know about Mike's hijinks and Jimmy accepting the bribe, but neither HHM nor Chuck do, and that's integral to an evaluation of their rationale because we know they aren't making decisions with the information we have.
|
But Chuck may also have a fair amount of insight into 'Slippin' Jimmy' that the audience also doesn't have. It could very easily be that past knowledge along with the present knowledge of Jimmy's backslide with the billboard that makes him wary of pretty much everything surrounding Jimmy. If you're friends with a reformed alcoholic and you walk into his house while he's drinking a Budweiser, are you going to assume that's the only drink he's had that day? Week? Month? Of course not - you're going to assume he's fallen off the wagon outright. Chuck assumed the same of Jimmy and Chuck was absolutely right.
I'm sure we've all heard it from a parent at some point whenever we get scolded for something we didn't do - "well consider it a scolding for something I didn't catch ya doing..." Well that's kinda what we're looking at here with Chuck. It's pretty hard to say "well Chuck didn't
know about all that shady shit" when Chuck got it right and likely got it right due to decades of past experience with Jimmy.
Like I said - I absolutely agree that Chuck's deceit was what made this objectionable, but it was also exceedingly human and what makes him a well written character. If you have a willing hatchetman and you're dealing with a family member, virtually
all of us would try to use a proxy to save us from the brunt of turning away family. Why wouldn't you? I don't even have a huge problem with
that.
The only place I see Chuck truly failing as a human being was in how caustically he explained all of it to Jimmy.