![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Is DCI Chandler a good detective?
Oct. 28th, 2012 07:06 pmI've just finished watching the 3rd series of Whitechapel. I get that they were sort of forced to find a reason to hang on to the Ed Buchan character because he's the link to the history of the Whitechapel area and was a pivotal character in the first and second series. But DI Chandler's reason for bringing him into the fold was if they look to the past crimes in Whitechapel that will give them a lead on the crimes they're currently investigating.
As a broad theory, that's true enough. Certain types of criminals do have patterns, otherwise profiling wouldn't be such an important tool. But the idea that if some murderer used a particular poison in the 1800's then a killer in 2012 will have the exact same motivation and pattern seems a bit of a stretch. (although it does give them a chance to witter on about those historical crimes, and many of them are darned interesting.)
Getting back to Chandler though. He's not a detective, not really, although he's now working as one. He was fast tracked through the Met to be a politician. Until his 'disgrace' over the failure of the New Jack the Ripper case he was destined for great things. He hasn't done the street time necessary to develop his instincts the way his Sgt or any of the people working under him have. Presumably, most of the advanced coursework he's done has been in managing investigations rather than the nuts and bolts of investigative work itself.
Could it be said that because he doesn't have a detective's imagination he's using Bucham and the archive as a crutch until he can develop skills he lacks?
Will he find the confidence to think for himself in the coming fourth series?
I wonder these things because Chandler is such an antithesis of the stock television DI. He's not seasoned. He's not really suited for the job. He apparently loves his work, and he's a very dedicated officer, but he's just not cut from the same cloth as a Luther or even a Barnaby.
I find Whitechapel an enormously entertaining television series. But it's not seamlessly constructed, although it is (evidently from the commentary) extensive researched. But listening to Chandler rationalise his hiring of Ed Buchan really made me scratch my head.
As a broad theory, that's true enough. Certain types of criminals do have patterns, otherwise profiling wouldn't be such an important tool. But the idea that if some murderer used a particular poison in the 1800's then a killer in 2012 will have the exact same motivation and pattern seems a bit of a stretch. (although it does give them a chance to witter on about those historical crimes, and many of them are darned interesting.)
Getting back to Chandler though. He's not a detective, not really, although he's now working as one. He was fast tracked through the Met to be a politician. Until his 'disgrace' over the failure of the New Jack the Ripper case he was destined for great things. He hasn't done the street time necessary to develop his instincts the way his Sgt or any of the people working under him have. Presumably, most of the advanced coursework he's done has been in managing investigations rather than the nuts and bolts of investigative work itself.
Could it be said that because he doesn't have a detective's imagination he's using Bucham and the archive as a crutch until he can develop skills he lacks?
Will he find the confidence to think for himself in the coming fourth series?
I wonder these things because Chandler is such an antithesis of the stock television DI. He's not seasoned. He's not really suited for the job. He apparently loves his work, and he's a very dedicated officer, but he's just not cut from the same cloth as a Luther or even a Barnaby.
I find Whitechapel an enormously entertaining television series. But it's not seamlessly constructed, although it is (evidently from the commentary) extensive researched. But listening to Chandler rationalise his hiring of Ed Buchan really made me scratch my head.
