“You’re a wuss — part whimp, part puss.” — House to Wilson, because he was going to Cuddy’s baby’s naming ceremony
Could House ever diagnose a patient without Wilson? It seems that the writers at House, for better or for worse, have found a formula that they think works. I’m wondering what you think….
I’m sure you’ve noticed how House finally figures out what’s ailing his patient toward the end of each episode. While Wilson is deep in conversation with House, House is half listening, half thinking about his patient — or should I say his patient’s malady, because House rarely thinks of the human being piece of the puzzle. Something Wilson says triggers a random thought in House and eureka! he’s got the cure.
In all fairness, it isn’t always Wilson that House is conversing with when he has his ah-ha! moment. It’s been known to be Cuddy and even Foreman, along with other members of the team. It does seem to be his foil Wilson most often, though. Is that making a statement right there?
Maybe it’s important that while Wilson is lecturing House about the virtues of being a decent human being, House gets hit with the diagnosis lightning bolt. Perhaps the one piece that is always missing is viewing the patient as a person, and not just a shell of a person with a medical condition.
It’s an interesting device to ponder, in any case. I used to be a bit bothered by it, but loving the formulas as I do, I’ve come to love and expect the moment when House finally figures out which auto-immune disease, rare cancer or parasite is plaguing his latest victim… er, I mean patient. What do you mean it isn’t always one of those things?
i don’t know what it is but while I do like House, I completely forgot about watching it this week. It’s not like I was watching something better – I just forgot. Not a good sign for a show.
I have a lot of complaints about House this year (the sidelining of Chase and Cameron, the “romance” between Foreman and Thirteen,), but I still love the Eureka moments. I think your explanation that House can only have them when someone takes him “out of his box” and makes him see the patient as a person, not a case is a very valid interpretation.