A Sorkin-related question, mostly for the ladies

But they both felt really badly about it later.

 

Double Down: You'll "probably" never watch? Is that how it works? 'Objection! Overruled. No, no, no, no, you see, I'll probably never watch again. Oh, well if you'll probably never watch, let Sorkin take a moment to reconsider.

Zeke: I got it on the record.

Double Down: Yes, you've also got Sorkin thinking that, even though you're afraid of Josh Malina, it may take even more than his weaselly face coming out of Amanda Peet's birth canal to keep you from watching this show. You threaten him once to scare his drug-riddled mind into thinking you might leave. You keep after it and throw in qualifiers like "probably" and suddenly it looks like a bunch of wimpy journalist tricks and he reintroduces Mandy to Studio 60. It's the difference between newspaper criticism and internet criticism. Christ you even had PopeDirkBenedict suggesting that Sorkin might have Malina be Simon's gay lover!

Fenian_Bastard: He made a mistake, DD. Let's not relive it.

 

As always, DD, it's an honor.

You're the Weird Al of highbrow television and lowbrow message-board-posting.

 

Was that during Sorkin's run or after?

 

Ainsley was during, C.J. was after.

 

Well, it supposedly happened during but was written in after.

If that makes sense.

 

Aren't most people flawed in some way? I think I'm a pretty good person, and probably a little boring, but I know what my major flaw is and I know what my main "quirk" is. If somebody wrote me as a character in a TV show, they'd certainly use that flaw and that quirk to dramatize my circumstance.
I think what you're talking about makes Sorkin a dramatist who searches for some sense of realism. As for Sorkin's women "needing" men, I don't see how it's different that President Bartlett "needs" the first lady.

 

I thought it would have happened before the time period of the show. But my point is more that Sorkin didn't write that.