Father Pearse J. Harman

It' the same featureless blue corridor as before, but this time, there are still people about in it.

Nobody, however, is paying any attention to them: two women with papers under their arms are chatting to each other, and a man is wheeling a trolley of scientific equipment into an open door.

Father Harman holds the door of the supply closet open for Javert.

It's a long, institutional, blue corridor, with medium brown office doors on either side. All the corridors on this floor look the same; they exude an aura of complete uninterestingness that a simple white corridor never could.

Even the light has a blueish tinge to it.

The sole occupant of this particular corridor is, at the moment, Father Pearse Harman, wearing his long dark coat and carrying some books and a small laptop computer. He opens one of the doors (which actually leads to a supply closet), steps inside, and closes it behind himself.

Dr. Angela Marsh, who has just turned the corner, stares and shakes her head. What is Pearse always doing in there?

I like to stay very clear about the problematic aspects of my charries -- starting with Teja, whose canon has been weighed down with problems by history, even though the text iself is quite innocent for its time.

Watching 'Ultraviolet', I kept wondering about what the hell they were saying with their treatment of the vampires, and where the story was going before its unfortunately incomplete ending. Lovely actors, interesting story, some hairy contemporary problems addressed from an unusual angle, fascinating characters -- but what is the take-away message from it all? Might it even be that we're supposed to doubt the ostensible moral of the story?

Apparently, I'm no the first person to ask themselves that. There is even an academic paper about this very question. One that proudly quotes Slavoj Zizek, so it must be the Real Thing. I'm not going to join Questia to read just the one paper, but yes, somebody managed to make a relevant statement about the moralised conflicts of recent history using 'Ultraviolet' as an example, and got published in a peer-reviewed publication. Good for them.

Dehumanising is what we must do in order to calmly eliminate the enemy; if they're not people, there is no reason to feel compunction over whatever we inflict on them. That is what 'Ultraviolet' is about -- quite overtly so, even, in the episodes with a) the experimental vampire baby and b) the episode with the pedophile and the child vampire. And among the personnel of 'Ultraviolet', Father Harman is the most ruthless neo-conservative hardliner (at least where vampires are concerned; with everything else, he can afford to be quite liberal as it doesn't really concern him), the one who formulates the team's ideological underpinnings, and the one who makes sure there is no deviation from the ideology and the ruthlessness. Yes, he is the inquisition -- and the true faith he's upholding is 'Code Fives are not people'.

I am aware of that, and it's not going to change, as that is what makes the character interesting.-

Also, their vague but menacing government-Vatican joint venture must be avidly using GCHQ-collected data.-