'Bones': Just Don't Call Him Shorty

The new season of Bones celebrates Bones' extraordinary high-achieving rationalism, and nevertheless chastises her when she tries to apply her reason to relationships.


Airtime: Thursdays, 9pm ET
Cast: Emily Deschanel, David Boreanaz, Michaela Conlin, T.J. Thyne, Tamara Taylor, John Francis Daley
Subtitle: Season Seven Premiere
Network: Fox
Air date: 2011-11-03
I'm not normal, I'm extraordinary.

-- Bones (Emily Deschanel)

The Bones Season Seven premiere finds Booth (David Boreanaz) and Bones (Emily Deschanel) beginning their new life together. Now visibly pregnant with Booth's child, Bones approaches their relationship and family plans with her trademark rationality. Whether dealing with her own hormone-induced mood swings, their living arrangement, or their marital status, Bones' instinct is to use reason to make decisions. She wants to be cool and clinical, like she is solving cases. But Booth wants her emotion and empathy to rule the day.

In presenting these seeming opposites, the new storyline repeats the series' longstanding formula, Bones as both unique and typical. What's changed is the manifest effort to domesticate her: while the show celebrates her extraordinary high-achieving rationalism, it nevertheless chastises her when she tries to apply her reason to relationships. (In this, it recalls Bewitched or I Dream of Jeannie, those ancient primers of extraordinary women's corrections.) Bones, for all its philosophical discussions of what's "normal" or not "normal," again treats Bones as a charming eccentric whose difference only serves to reinforce them for other people.

In the seventh premiere, "The Memories in the Shallow Grave" (airing Thursday, 3 November), Booth wants them to buy a house together. Bones, predictably, thinks anthropologically. Citing her own paper on the Iroquois, she lectures Booth that in that tribe, the men moved in with the women. "But we're not the Iroquois," Booth points out.

She presses onward, describing how that tribe was matrilineal: women owned property and managed society. Besides, she argues, since she's more rational and -- no small thing -- has more money than Booth, Bones thinks she should decide where they live (read: her apartment). She's shocked when Booth replies, "You know what? We're family, Bones. Even you should know what that means." While granting Bones the ability to contextualize their tensions culturally, the narrative nevertheless chastises her insensitivity to her vulnerable male, and by the way, re-naturalizes what "family" means.

Bones becomes a problem Booth has to solve. His solution comes in the next episode, "The Hot Dog in the Competition" (airing Thursday, 10 November), where he convinces her to switch roles and adopt his point of view. Again following the show's oft-repeated formula, he prompts her to express emotion and she then treats him and others more sensitively. The simple binary of their reason versus emotion, rationality versus passion dynamic is only exacerbated by the pregnancy. Yes, we get it: this is what would happen if Spock hooked up with Kirk.

Even as it wrestles with these familiar themes, the series expands the roles of supporting characters. Angela (Michaela Conlin) and Hodgins (T.J. Thyne) have their infant son Michael in daycare at the Jeffersonian, and Angela keeps sneaking him into the lab to see Hodgins, against boss Cam's (Tamara Taylor) wishes. The baby proves irresistible: Bones watches and learns, Angela urges her to overcome her fears, borne of her own negative foster care experiences as a child.

The new season also introduces a new character, Cam's new lab intern, Finn (Luke Kleintank), a troublemaking 18-year-old who completed his undergrad degree while in juvy and will have his Ph.D. by age 20. He's got a thick North Carolina accent, red hair, and a Carolina Mudcats baseball hat (not the Durham Bulls, too cosmopolitan a minor league baseball reference). Hodgins keeps calling him "Opie" to put him down. In turn, Finn calls Hodgins "Thurston." Is this a 1970s Disney movie?

When Cam asks Finn why he's so smart, he replies, "Some people are born with a knack for shootin,' some singin,' I've got a knack for thinkin,'" Asked why he was in juvy, Finn says, "A few mistakes when I was a sprout, but now I'm as honest as the sunshine on the back of a honey bee." When discussing a case with Cam, Finn says he found "something here that is as odd as my cousin Bobby," then insists he should have realized a key fact in the case because he "grew up eating barbeque."

"Not ain't, isn't," instructs Hodgins, "This is the Jeffersonian, not a fishin' hole." Finn comes back: "Excuse me, sir, but elocution was not on my application. And it doesn't seem to bother anyone else here how I talk, so I'm gettin' the feelin' you're just doin' it to make me feel bad, 'cause I'm different than ya, which right now, is makin' me feel pretty glad." The lesson is obvious, but Finn goes on, "Just because we speak different, don' mean we can't understand one another. After all, we both speak science. And that's all that's important in here. Right?" After he exits, Cam punctuates the showdown: "Oh, snap!"

Still, and as always, doing good work earns a team member respect. When Finn discovers key evidence, he and Hodgins establish "an understanding," where they can trade friendly insults. When Hodgins says, "Quick, what's a Southern colloquialism for shock and amazement?" Finn answers, "Well, hack my legs off and call me 'Shorty.'" Hodgins laughs, "Well, Shorty, we got ourselves some evidence."

As Hodgins' prejudice is apparently solved by the end of the episode, it looks like we'll be stuck with the one-dimensional Finn. I'm bored and offended. Good trick, Bones.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.