B39-DES18
The Prisoner’s Dilemma Of Ambiguity
by Dan Schneider, 3/3/02

‘It turns out that the answer is given on a different level from that on which the question was formulated.’- Martin Buber, The Path Of Man

  In his 1989 book called The Selfish Gene, evolutionary theorist Richard Dawkins popularized a concept that game theorists had developed & kicked around for decades- that is The Prisoner’s Dilemma. Let me give a vastly simplified & lay approach to this conundrum: TPD is a non-zero-sum game about cooperation & complicity in human dealings. 2 players can choose between 2 moves, either cooperate or defect. The idea is each player gains when both cooperate, but if only 1 of them cooperates, the other who defects, will gain more. If both defect, both lose, or gain little, but not as much as the cheated cooperator whose cooperation is not returned. TPD’s name comes from a hypothetical situation: 2 criminals are arrested under the suspicion of committing a crime together. The police do not have enough proof to convict either. The prisoners are isolated from each other. The cops offer a deal to both- but separately: the 1 who rats on the other (defects) will walk. If neither accepts, & remain silent (cooperate) against the cops, both will get a slap on the wrist, because of little proof. They both gain. However, if 1 finks out, the fink will gain more, since he’ll walk; the 1 who says nothing will receive harsh punishment, since he did not fink, & with the fink’s testimony there’s now ample proof. But, if both fink both finks will be punished, but less harshly than if both stayed quiet. The dilemma is in the fact that each prisoner has a choice between only 2 actions, but cannot make the best decision without knowing what the other will do.
  For simplicity’s sake game theorists assign #s to possible punishments. Doing so makes 1 see TPD is de facto zero-sum if there is no mutual silence: both get a 0 score when both fink & the net is 0- because 0 + 0 = 0; or when 1 is silent, the fink’s reward is + 2, & the silent’s punition is -2, the net is 0 again as –2 + +2 = 0. But if both stay silent the result is a gain: each gets 1, & 1 + 1 = 2. This is the best option for the duo- but not each individual prisoner. The gain for mutual cooperation (1) in TPD is smaller than the gain for 1-sided finking (2), so that there is always the lure to fink. This assumption is specific to rational thought, alone because think of 2 tigers. In tandem they could kill an oxen over twice the size of a tapir each might kill alone. But, even were a cooperative tiger to kill a boar & share it with the uncooperative tiger, the uncooperative tiger would still have less meat than if it helped the other fell an ox. Then, again, hunting an ox is an act with a great deal of energy expended while TPD is not.
  The problem with TPD arises if both prisoners are not purely rational- if they were purely rational, they would never cooperate; assuming they were wise enough to understand they were being pitted against each other by the cops. Yet, rational decision-making means that either captive must make the decision that is best for themselves, whatever the other does. Suppose the other prisoner finks? It is eminently rational for the 1^st prisoner to fink, too. Nothing’s gained but the loss is minimized because if the tardy fink doesn’t fink he’ll be at  -2. & if the other prisoner stays silent, the presumed-early fink gains anyway, but will gain even more if the other stays silent. The rational choice, again, is to defect. The crux of the dilemma is that the best gain is counterintuitive: that is if both prisoners are rational, both will fink, & both will get nothing. But, if both act irrationally & stay silent both gain a point. This is what is known as a paradox.

Main Entry: par·a·dox
Pronunciation: 'par-&-"däks  Function: noun  Date: 1540
Etymology: Latin paradoxum, from Greek paradoxon, from neuter of paradoxos contrary to expectation, from para- + dokein to think, seem -- more at DECENT 
1 : a tenet contrary to received opinion
2 a : a statement that is seemingly contradictory or opposed to common sense and yet is perhaps true b : a self-contradictory statement that at first seems true c : an argument that apparently derives self-contradictory conclusions by valid deduction from acceptable premises
3 : one that possesses seemingly contradictory qualities or phases

  & while we are at it let me toss in 2 other definitions:

Main Entry: de·duc·tion (2)
Pronunciation: di-'d&k-sh&n, dE-  Function: noun  Date: 15th century
a : the deriving of a conclusion by reasoning; specifically : inference in which the conclusion about particulars follows necessarily from general or universal premises -- compare INDUCTION b : a conclusion reached by logical deduction

Main Entry: in·duc·tion (2)
Pronunciation: in-'d&k-sh&n  Function: noun  Date: 14th century
 a (1) : inference of a generalized conclusion from particular instances -- compare DEDUCTION 2a (2) : a conclusion arrived at by induction b : mathematical demonstration of the validity of a law concerning all the positive integers by proving that it holds for the integer 1 and that if it holds for an arbitrarily chosen positive integer k it must hold for the integer k+1 -- called also mathematical induction

  Keep these 4 premises in mind as we go onward: TPD, apparent contradiction, particulars from the general, & the general from particulars. All 4 should prove useful in this essay & if you ever watch the tv show this is about: The Prisoner.
  No, it was not a show about a jail, nor about TPD- although it may well have been. The Prisoner is in my view the greatest television work of art that I have ever seen. Whether or not it’s the greatest tv show is another debate. But if art is to entail philosophy, ambiguity, poetry, & sensory delight, then TP is without peer from the tv ranks. In fact, it will probably take its place alongside The Iliad, Moby-Dick, Death Of A Salesman, & Citizen Kane as great art that tells a story, in their respective fields. The show ran only for 17 episodes- 2 seasons’ worth in the U.K. It was created by Patrick McGoohan- an American born actor raised in Britain. PM had become an international tv star with the success of his early 1960s spy show Danger Man (Secret Agent in the USA- inspiring a Top 20 rock-n-roll theme song), but grew weary of action/adventure. He had, earlier in his career, turned down the role of James Bond- & in fact loathed the film series. 1 wonders how that film series would have differed had PM- instead of Sean Connery (an actor not in PM’s class)- been the initial JB. But, PM had both the clout & foresight to create a show that was, in a sense, a sequel, but also unlike any other show before it. It was produced in 1966 & 1967 & ran in the U.K. from 1967-68. The US would not see the show until 1968.
  It was a very expensive show to produce during its day, & ultimately was considered a financial failure. The furor over fan reaction to the series’ final episode caused PM to leave the U.K, & actively seek stage & film work stateside. The show’s brevity is 1 of the factors in its becoming a cult favorite- see my essay on the Lowest Common Denominator. But, truly, the real reason is that great art usually is not appreciated at 1^st blush- it takes time for the masses to digest & appreciate. The basic premise is that a spy resigns from his ‘agency’, is drugged, wakes up in a small ‘Village’ run by friendly totalitarians who supposedly seek only 1 thing from the ex-spy: the answer to the query, ‘Why did you resign?’ Assigned the number 6, the ex-spy is constantly being manipulated by his captors- led by a revolving set of sub-commanders called #2. Throughout the course of the 17 episodes, what 1^st seemed to be a thriller about what happens to ex-spies who know to much?, became an existential struggle between forces of good/freedom & bad/oppression. We never seem to learn the real name of #6, but many believe #6 is John Drake, the hero of Danger Man- also played by PM. This belief is bolstered by the fact that in the episode Once Upon A Time #2 (Leo McKern- the most frequent #2, & the best #2 character) calls #6 ‘Drake’. Whether a slip, or whether #2 really says ‘break’, is 1 of 100s of points of minutiae endlessly debated by TP fans over the years, at conventions, & on website discussion forums. PM has always insisted #6 was NOT John Drake- although, aside from looks, the 2 characters shared professions, used similar verbal expressions, were similarly tempered, & had a revulsion to killing &/or carrying a gun. The show also disappointed fans in its last episode’s revelation of who was #1. It was not some Bondian baddy with a pop name, but #6 himself- whether this was the character’s dream, a surreal exploit, another of the Village’s deceptions, or just symbolism &/or allegory, is yet another debated point.
  Before getting into an episode-by-episode breakdown (& the controversy over the proper order for each show) let me address the overall show, point out some highlights, & comment on some aspects- then, hopefully, see if you have borne in mind my 4 earlier points. I hope to avoid some of the mind-numbing trivia that many fans (including the Six-Of-One Society) quibble over, while losing the forest- so to speak.
  The show starts off with 6’s resignation from a spy agency, capture (I will drop the obligatory # sign from here out, for brevity’s sake & because each of the Villager’s pins only has their number- not a No. or #) by an unknown force, & being brought to the Village. We quickly find out that the 2’s are disposable. The Village’s leader (1) or leaders (?) view all its inhabitants as mere means to an end. Early episodes revolve around elaborate escape attempts & attempts to win 6 over to their side- either by force or trickery. The Village’s icon is an old Pennyfarthing bicycle. PM suggested this symbolizes a return to simpler ways. Others have said the large & small wheels represent the world & the Village respectively. Early on we have little reason to doubt that this is some Bondian-type adventure; albeit an ingenious 1.

The Resignation

  Often, 6 is told that freedom awaits if he only divulges the reason why he resigned. He has much knowledge, presumably, that the other side would like. Given that PM is a British subject, it’s reasonable to assume he worked for some NATO or NATO member’s spy organization, & that the bad guys are from the Iron Curtain. But, as the show progresses it becomes clear that the actual query for 6’s reason to resign is merely a bluff. The aim of the Village is to get him to answer a question he does not want to answer. That question could be asking if he was a bedwetter as a child. The key is to divorce the man from his principles & wed him to ‘other values’. Yet, the question, Why did 6 resign?, has always been at the core of belief by those who see the show as mostly a ‘spy show’. Some point to 6’s own statements in the series, repeated in several ways. In Arrival- the 1^st show he says it was a matter of conscience. In The Chimes Of Big Ben 6 states ‘It was a matter of conscience. I resigned because, for a very long time- ’ & is then interrupted when the chimes ring the wrong # of times & he realizes he has never left the Village after an elaborate escape plan is revealed as a Village charade. In the penultimate episode Once Upon A Time 6 states he resigned because ‘too many people know too much’ & he needed to find peace. These seem to be legitimate answers- both in context of the premise- an ex-spy who is weary & jaundiced by the corruption he sees on both sides of ‘the fence’. Of course, such simple & truthful answers never satisfy the paranoid. 6 is thought to be a traitor, & possible sell-out, because after resigning he was headed toward a fancy tropical resort- or, at least, he had resort brochures in his belongings.
  Especially galling to his captors is that they know virtually every fact about 6- including many, seemingly, surreptitiously filmed ‘incidents’ in his prior life. [Devotees of the 6 = John Drake camp point out that some of the ‘filmed’ scenes from 6’s earlier life are out-takes from the Danger Man show. PM has never confirmed nor denied this point.] Yet, despite all this vast knowledge, & despite the fact that 6 is very much a man of habit (so much so that in Chimes Of Big Ben 2 responds to an underling’s comment that 6 won’t even bend a little by gloating- presumptuously- ‘That’s why he’ll break!’), the Village leaders cannot see that the only reason 6 gives is probably the truth, nor take solace in the fact that 6 even permits them THAT answer! 6 seems to be a man of deep conscience; his remarks regarding too many knowing too much seems to bolster the camp of fans who see deeper philosophies at play. 6 seems concerned with the rights of the individual- this extends to the very right to keep his true reason(s) for resignation to himself- assuming he was being coy with his brief replies. PM, interviewed for a magazine called New Video said: ‘He simply resigns as a matter of choice. He shouldn't have to answer to anyone. It's entirely his prerogative, his God-given right as an individual, to proceed in any way he sees fit. That's the whole point of it all.’
  Yet, neither the Village leaders nor the show’s fans were satisfied with such baldness- even though 6 seems to be the definition of ‘what you see is what you get’. In the episode Hammer Into Anvil a sadistic 2 vows to break 6, who likewise vows to break 2, after 2 drives a fragile female Villager to suicide. Through coincidence & scheming 6 ends up convincing a paranoid 2 into believing he, 6, has been sent to spy on 2- 2 alienates all around him & gives in to his delusions, & whimperingly calls in to his superiors to be replaced. 6 is victorious, & in fact, seems more intent- midway through the show- on destroying the Village than escaping from it. The importance of this episode is that it highlights 6’s resolve- he says exactly what he will do, & does it. Yet, still his captors sense a Machiavelli behind the straightforwardness. & for all their probing into 6’s motives for resigning we are never told why it is so damned important that they know 6’s reasons. As said, it seems to merely serve as a particular power play to separate the man & his ‘self’- 1 of many such ploys. The importance of the question- in the outer ‘reality’ of the show, & the inner ‘reality’ of the Village’s motives- is not the information 6 withholds, but stopping him from the act of withholding- period. Evidence of this is that- given their vast sore of facts about 6- surely, they could not be so stolid as to not understand 6’s motives were plain, & even plainly stated? Yet, even if 6’s stated reasons for resignation were false, he- of course- knows the truth behind his departure from the service.
  This leads us into the allegorical camp of fans who see the question of 6’s resignation in moral terms. This camp views the whole show as occurring at the moment of 6’s death via gassing in the show’s beginning- the traditional ‘life-flashing-before-the-eyes’ laced with some internal struggle- 6’s self-imposed Purgatory. The Village is therefore but aspects of 6 trying to core into his deepest part- represented by the physical manifestation of 6 in his last breath delusion. Others take it to even more extremes & claim 6 has died- but by his own hand! This seems to be a very poor coming to grips with what is seen in the show. Nowhere do we see suicidal tendencies in 6. Even his tormentors declare him a man of steel will. But another allegorical twist on the show that has more merit is the camp that holds that making 6 break his principles- any 1 of them- is the victory the Village seeks. They point to the fact that the only time 6 seems to break a principle is during Once Upon A Time when he ‘kills’ 2, after stating that he won’t kill. The Village has broken 6, therefore in Fall Out- the last episode- they release him, & (in for a penny, in for a pound) 6 goes on a killing spree & destroys everyone- including #1- i.e.- 6, himself (whom a guilt-ridden 6 conflates with the Village enemies- especially the never-seen 1!- he sees as merely the same as he is- in fact without any difference)- therefore, perhaps, verifying the suicide belief of some- only at show’s end, not start. Yet, it’s clear 6 means he will not cold-bloodedly murder. As a spy, doubtless, he killed a few enemies- if not directly, then certainly by the consequences of his actions. That 2 is revived- & not really dead- is ascribed to this being 6’s wish-fulfillment after having been beaten by the Village, & taken off into fantasy to justify his conscience’s shame. Yet all this seems a little much- even for so textured & carefully wrought show as TP. Could the Village merely be aspects of 6- or is it real?

The Village

  Since the show aired the sleepy real life village of Portmeirion, Wales (where TP was filmed) has been a tourist attraction. But fans have always wanted to know about the Village in the show. Who runs it? NATO [CIA, DIA, M16?], the Warsaw Pact [KGB, Stasi?], or is it just a part of 6’s delusion? Is there 1 Village or many? Exteriors of the Village show that it could possibly be in tropical, or temperate, climes. There is a weird similarity to the daily weather- always a chance of rain in the afternoon. Devotees of the psychological thesis- that somehow the whole series is a struggle within 6’s psyche- point to this as a key fact in their favor. Add in the fact that many of the scenes in the countryside surrounding the Village do not gibe with each other show-to-show, & this gives strong evidence for this being a malleable dream state. Or perhaps some domed in realm ala the film of a few years back- The Truman Show?
  Another contention is that the Village is real- but there are multiple Villages- each slightly different. After all, each episode starts with 6 waking up [as if, or really, anew?], & he is drugged many times in the series. This could also explain why there are different 2s. They not only occasionally replace failed 2s- but ship 6 off to Villages where other 2s reign- to give that 2 a shot to break the troublesome 6. The fact that slight differences occur in each episode- such as 6’s apartment’s door knocker sometimes being above, & sometimes below, the # 6 on the door- could evidence this multiple Villages thesis. Or it could be that the Village elders, or #1, merely want to fuck with 6’s mind- another power play? Evidence of 6’s ‘steel’ will could be seen in his willful ignorance of such trivia- perhaps he ‘knows’ things he does not even let we voyeuristic watchers know that he knows? In the series, there are a # of times where 6 plots with others & we, the audience, do not know the outcome until the Village leaders do. Is this mere dramatic technique, or evidence that 6 is really controlling not only his ‘internal’ experiences- but how outsiders (the tv audience) will view it? This could be evidence for the 6 really is 1, & 6 is in control argument.
  But, if there is just 1 Village, where is it located? In the series we are led at various times to believe it could be in England, off of Morocco, or in Lithuania. All are possible. PM has stated that the show was an Allegory, 6 was an Everyman, & the Village was Society at large. That these are aspects of the show is undeniable- whether that’s all they are- hmm….1 should never put total faith in an artist’s version of their own art. Some of my most enjoyable artistic experiences have come when others have pointed out things in my poem I never intended & did not see, yet upon re-read their take is as feasible as mine or others. The point- just because PM declaims don’t mean it’s necessarily so!
  In that light there are fans who take a very dim view of the series’ message. Instead of being a paean to triumphal individualism, they see TP as an homage to Friedrich Nietzsche’s bitter pills. There is nothing higher than the self. Who is #1?, is a superfluous query since #1 to 6 is himself. And each of the 2’s #1 is themselves. Similarly, the Butler is his own #1. #1 literally means watching out for yourself in a hostile world. The Village exists because the only thing all it inhabitants are united in is their fear that #1 (themselves) will never be recognized. Everyone is their own Prisoner & Warder. This metaphysical take finds evidence in such trivia as a sign hanging in the Village’s Labour Exchange: ‘Questions are a burden to others; answers a prison for oneself.’
  Yet, there is evidence against this take. Each of the numbered Villagers is not merely a fearful toady. 6, in fact, plots with several to escape. 1 of his escape attempts [in Checkmate] is even foiled because his paranoid collaborator saw evidence of 6’s being a fink where none existed. If the universally misinterpreted Nietzschean injunction God is dead! [meant specifically to the Christian concept, not whatever preceded us all] is seen as the show’s mantra, then 6 & all the other Villagers who attempt resistance or escape are positive evidence of personal responsibility in opposing evil. The Nietzscheans would also solace in the fact that their view of the show’s dark parable seems to evidence itself in the fact that in Once Upon A Time 2 gets 6 to violate his code against killing- as 6 may be thought to bear responsibility for 2’s death at the episode’s end. Yet, this interpretation is more easily disproved. To the Nietzscheans 6 violates his code by ‘killing’ 2, is untrue to himself, then later [damning it all] goes berserk & slaughters the Villagers, as well launching a nuclear missile. Yet, 2 is revived in the last episode (or is it 6’s delusion?) which would alleviate any guilt. But why would 6 feel guilty? Obviously 2 has been drugged by his superiors, as he dies after drinking some alcohol. 2 later echoes this suspicion upon revival. Also, this seems to be more conflation of 6 with Danger Man’s John Drake- who refused to carry a gun. In Once Upon A Time 2 states to 6, ‘Still can’t do it!’ when 6 could have lanced 2 with his sword. Some see this as a subliminal reference to Drake. Yet later in that episode 2 & 6 re-enact 6’s experience in The War, as a ball turret gunner or bombardier, & 2 even tells 6 that he killed in The War, so why not now? 6 even admits he killed in The War. But, the Nietzscheans miss the point entirely. Killing in wartime is killing, NOT murder. 6 objects to cold-blooded MURDER, not killing [although if he lanced 2 at that point few would object to its being labeled justifiable- that 6 sees it as murder is evidence of superior ethics]. Even after The War (WW2 we presume) 6 surely had to kill in his occupation, it was part of the job- even if his culpability was merely passing on information that allowed others to kill. Therefore 6’s will has never been ‘broken’, & he has no reason to go berserk & slaughter people. Clearly his machine gun raid at the end is militarily coordinated- not slaughter. Damn, 6, 2, 48, & the Butler are vastly outmanned & outgunned.
  Whatever, the Village is- real or not- in the end it is a form of  evil, if not evil- itself- in many guises. Whether or not 6 defeats the evil, in the end, or carries it with him in some sublimated way, is open to debate. But if the Village, in toto, is such a grand notion as EVIL (or lesser evils), then what about all the other smaller things? Are they real or symbols?

The Minutiae

  Hand-in-hand with the great Existential debates over the show are the endless little bits of minutiae. I’ve touched upon some- like whether 6 is Drake, whether slight differences in the Village in each episode represent multiple Villages, the Village elders fucking with 6’s psyche, or the psyche of 6 himself? etc. But here are some of the ‘major’ minor points of contention.
  The role of Rover- the amorphous white blob that acts as enforcer in the Village. Transgressors are subjected to a smothering by Rover. Rover was only called by that name once in the series, & some people dismiss the weather balloon (what it actually was) as merely a stopgap because Rover was intended to be a more mechanistic device, but mechanical & budgetary snafus forced the use of the balloons. In hindsight, the white blob, which is called up from the sea, & seems to change size at will, is far superior symbolically than some mere device. Some have opined its amorphousness represents the unknown fears all people carry. Others have conflated it to represent the Moon- a specific icon of fear to some cultures. In the last episode, Fall Out, folks with this view point to the fact that 6 traps 1 in the rocket as evidence that he is banishing his dark self to the symbolic fear. This is very specious, at best, since the same folk point to the spelling of Fall Out over Fallout as having hidden meaning. It does get that extreme, folks. While Rover can symbolize fear, in a practical sense Rover is the Village’s watchdog. Its roundness may be seen to represent it as the all-seeing eye. This is bolstered by the fact that Rover does sometimes appear to be independent of the Masters of the Village- if not out-&-out sentient. Others tie in Rover’s blobbiness to the lava lamps that abound in the Village. The lamps may be subliminal reminders that Rover is never too far, so WATCH YOUR STEP # __! In a poem I wrote called The Prisoner I deliberately played on this tendency of the show’s fans to imbue into almost everything by structuring the poem to look like a lava lamp with assorted bubbles (stanzas) within it.
  The midget Butler is also a bone of contention. Is his midgetry symbolic? Is he ‘the little man’ who blindly obeys whoever is in charge? This seems likely. He never speaks, & seems to almost anticipate 2’s needs. Is the Butler a mute or does he simply refuse to speak- in a Bartlebian fashion? At the end of Fall Out he arrives at 6’s house & the door opens & shuts with much the same sound as those in the Village- is this to mean that 6 never escapes? Or that the Butler was the 1 pulling the strings all along, & that 6 has taken the enemy into his fold? The Butler also seems to be both an augury when he arrives that something big will occur, & a harbinger of coming calm after a big event has passed. Other interpretations place the Butler as symbolic of Britain’s Civil Service- he’s the often overlooked element that keeps everything else running efficiently. In Hammer Into Anvil, for example, it’s not until 2 alienates the Butler that we are sure 6 will defeat him: without his minion, the leader is vulnerable. Advocates site his bowler hat & black & white umbrella as symbols of British Civil Service. The umbrella is seen as a symbol that the Butler (& the Village) see things in black & white terms, not with the nuance of 6.
  This Manichaean viewpoint of the Village is also supposedly represented by the black & white pins the Villagers wear. Initially, the colors were though to delineate the Villagers from their Masters. The Villagers (like 6) all had white (or good) pins, while the Village Masters wore black (or bad) pins. But as the series progressed this delineation ceased, perhaps in step with 6’s growing skepticism over delineating such concepts in as whacked an environment as the Village. This confusion is also seen as bolstering those who favor the ‘series as a psychologic allegory’ viewpoint by marking 6’s growing madness & inability to distinguish things. Also, some of the pins’ pennyfarthing bicycles point left, others right- why? The best explanation, in ‘materialistic’ terms, that I’ve come across in researching this piece, is that the pins (aside from bearing the #s of their wearers) are a way for the Village Masters to grant the illusion of freedom to their subjects, by letting them have decisions over trivial matters, while still withholding liberties over things of real consequence.
  Many other bits have been debated into the proverbial dust over the years. It is clear, however, that not everything can or should be read as symbolic. If everything’s a symbol nothing has any reality, then. Also, bear in mind that PM only wanted to film 7 episodes of TP but was coaxed into doing 17 out of financial obligations, so alot of the other episodes were not given the scrutiny that the ‘Original 7’ were. This, of course, does not mean that all claims of symbolism are invalid. But PM was a smart businessman, as well as artist. He knew that if you threw alot of seemingly trivial things at viewers they would imbue things with whatever they wanted; they would individuate the symbols (& the show) into something unique. They would be co-creators with a form of creative autonomy & freedom that few televiewers experience- tv is, after all, a most passive medium- you didn’t even have to leave your home to experience it, unlike film (this was the pre-VCR & DVD 1960s, recall). They would, in effect, enact what the show preached- individuality within reasonable confines! But, as fun as haggling over the devil in the details can be, what has made the show cultic are the BIG issues. I will now address some of them, & add some of my own, before going into an episodic breakdown, & wrap-up.

Who is 6?

  More specifically- is 6 John Drake (of Danger Man)? PM has always insisted NO! 6 is never named by anyone, even when he re-encounters a former fiancé. Within the context of the show this is highly odd- even his fiancé? Surely, someone must slip up? Yet George Markstein, the principle writer for the show, has always said YES. Outside the series’ reality it is apparent that PM originally intended 6 to be Drake, but gradually went about obscuring this fact when fans started expecting a James Bondian villain behind the Village. Yet, some fans have claimed that in the show’s opening sequence the ID card that 6 turns in is stamped with computerese that spells John Drake, & there is, indeed, the aforementioned alleged ‘slip’ of 2 (or actor Leo McKern?) in Once Upon A Time where he calls 6 Drake by name (or not?). In the ‘I’m not a rat’ tete-a-tete does 2 say ‘Report to my study in the morning, Drake.’ or ‘Report to my study at the morning break.’?
  Let there be no more confusion. My wife, Jessica, & I own the 10 DVD box set of TP, called The Complete Prisoner. & while on videotape it may still be arguable as to what 2 actually says to 6, on DVD it is clear: 2 calls 6 by name, he says, ‘Report to my study in the morning, Drake.’ It occurs about 18:55 minutes into Once Upon A Time. The evidence? 1) 2 says ‘Drake’ with a D, not ‘break’ with a B! I heard it, Jess heard it, & while playing the disk to a visiting Jason Sanford & his wife, they heard the D sound clearly. 2) Vocalize the D & B sounds in a mirror. You will see that your lips are parted when you utter the D sound (even followed by the R sound) while your lips are together & pursed to form the B sound (even followed by the R sound). It’s a clear distinction, & at 18.55 into the episode 2’s lips are clearly apart. A lipreader can confirm. The D sound is uttered. Jess spotted this right away. It is about 99% certain that you hear the D sound spoken, but 100% that 2’s lips form a D, not a B. 3) Right before 2 utters ‘Drake’ or ‘break’ he is supposed to have uttered either ‘in’ if he’s summoning ‘Drake’, or ‘at’ if he’s ordering 6 to meet him at a ‘break’. There is no doubt that 2 utters ‘in’ not ‘at’- both soundwise & lipwise the difference is even starker than in ‘Drake/break’. Listen & watch the DVD- it is 100% certain that ‘in’ is uttered. 4) Since 2 definitely utters ‘in’ not ‘at’ he cannot be ordering 6 to ‘Report to my study in the morning break.’ for it does not make sense grammatically nor logically. People do things AT or ON a break- not IN. But, even if 1 accepts that Anglo phraseology differs from American, in that Brits go IN breaks, not ON, the other 3 points still rule it out, as well that 2 clearly states IN. 5) The reverse, however, is grammatically & logically fine: ‘Report to my study in the morning, Drake.’ People often ask or tell people things, & append the addressee’s name afterward. Why would 2 ask 6 to ‘Report to my study at the morning, Drake.’? It’s illogical. 6) The situation, at this point in the episode, is that 2 is playacting to convince a drugged 6 that he is different authority figures from 6’s past. Here, 2 is pretending he is the Schoolmaster of 6’s Elementary or High School. In formal schools, & even rigid public schools (in the US or UK) it is customary to address young males by their family names (whether or not preceded by a ‘Mr.’ or ‘Master’)- especially when being disciplined- as the situation is aiming for. Since 6 is going back to a time long before 6 was a spy, there is a no reason for 2 (as 6’s Schoolmaster) to address him as anything but his last name- if 2 DID call 6 ‘6’ it might snap 6 back to reality, lapse him out of believing he’s an errant child, & ruin 2’s hopes for getting information from 6. 2, therefore, must call 6 by his real name- as a disciplining Schoolmaster would! Think: 2 is pretending he is someone from the past, before 6 was 6, or a spy- he was just another kid with a familial name to be addressed.
  These 6 points leave NO DOUBT. 6 is Drake, as in John Drake. He looks like Drake, talks like Drake, has Drake’s temperament & beliefs, was in the same line of work as Drake, & his captors know & call him ‘Drake’- albeit only when it’s necessary to attempt to secure information, etc. In short, if it walks, talks, & quacks like a Drake- it is a Drake! While this may shatter the belief systems of some fans, it shouldn’t. Ask yourself- is Joseph K. any less an Everyman because we know his name is Joseph? Is Ishmael any less an everyman? Is Travis Bickle? Merely because we now know 6 is John Drake (or JD) lessens his everyman status not in the least. Others have claimed 6- regardless of being JD or not- is a misogynist &/or misanthrope. As usual, they trot out a set of arguments pro & con- but I won’t address that here as that seems yet another case of minutiae run rampant.
  Yet, others have claimed that 6 is not JD, but, rather PM himself! These folk see the whole show as PM’s rejection of his persona as tv star. Others insist 6 must never be named, lest he could not be an everyman. We now know his identity & that his ‘necessary anonymity’ is not really necessary. While 6’s identity is 1 of the most hotly debated questions TP has inspired, there are others. The most obvious corollary to Who is 6? is Is 6 #1? & if 1 is not 6, then who or what is 1?

Who is 1?

  This question can be approached as allegory or literally. PM has stated that he always worked under the notion that 6 was 1. He seems to not distinguish between the literal & allegorical by stating this. It certainly is a more satisfying choice, artistically, than having 1 be a Goldfingerian archfiend. In the unmasking scene near the end of Fall Out 1 is seen 1^st in a monkey’s mask & then as 6. He cackles wildly as 6 chases him up the ladder & out a hatch that 6 locks from within. The face underneath the monkey mask is clearly PM’s. But we’ve seen the Village use a doppelganger before, in The Schizoid Man episode. Could it be Curtis, come back to exact revenge? Others claim Curtis was killed by Rover at the end of that episode. But we’ve seen more than 1 supposed corpse re-animate in the series- including 2 earlier in Fall Out. Of course, the Village heads could have merely surgically altered yet another man to have 6’s face. Others claim that 6 is 1, & furthermore that 6 HAS TO BE 1! It’s not only those who view the show as an internal dialogue within 6 that feel this way. Those with a more materialistic viewpoint offer as evidence this exchange that starts each show (save 2):
6: Who is #1?
2: You are #6.
  The debate is over whether there is a comma between the ‘are’ & the ‘#’ in 2’s reply. If there isn’t (as in most shows) then 2’s retort is in concert with his/her disdainful mockery. But in the opening to the penultimate episode Once Upon A Time (which is the last & definitive exchange) 2 (played by Leo McKern) definitely adds the comma! This is a definitive acknowledgement that 6 is 1- the issue of 6 & 1 being PM seems to be mooted. The only real question is whether 1 is a part of 6’s subconscious that is mocking him, or part of the real world that is acknowledging 6’s complicity in all their malfeasance. But why the monkey/ape mask? Is this symbolic? & of what? Some believe it represents the inner beast just under the surface of the rational man. This seems to be a decent interpretation. Also, 1 has seemingly made a ‘monkey’ out of 6 throughout the series- then literally sticks his (6’s) face in it! It also may be a taunt (regardless of whether 6 & 1 are the same person)- 1 is ‘aping’ 6. To ape is to mimic. After this ploy, 1 ups the ante as 6 rips off the monkey mask, & takes his aping to its logical end- he is the spitting image of 6! Some who believe in the fantasy/delusion theory take this as the ‘breaking point’ for 6- where he goes irrevocably insane, not the ‘killing’ of 2 in the prior episode. But there may be good reason to take the Psychological interpretation. Consider that in Fall Out the President (a former 2) says ‘All about you is yours’ & ‘We are all yours’- does he mean not just the Village is 6’s for the taking, but that they are a part of 6? It could be.
  Yet, the question of 1’s reality was a query PM obviously never wanted a definitive answer for- again, let the masses imbue & co-create! But here’s an aspect of the debate I’ve not heard, & it would delight many a numerologist. If 1 assumes that 1 & 6 are indeed fractured parts of a whole (literally, psychologically, or metaphysically), the next question should be: what happens if they are joined? Or what do 6 & 1 add up to? Well, 6 + 1 = 7. 7 is the proverbial lucky #. It is also a prime #. There were also 7 Wonders of the World- not 6 or 1. As a whole, the 2 ½s of the person known as 6 & 1 (even if just ‘aspects’ of the same person) would be complete, self-contained, & perfected. This bolsters the claim that the bereft 6 is an Everyman- just 1 piece short of perfection. Regardless, numerology always lends intrigue, if not insight. But if 1’s identity is purposely unknown, or- more likely- unknowable, surely his top henchmen are not as elusive?

Who is 2? (Who are the 2s?)

  At series end, after 6, 48, 2 & the Butler escape from the Village we see the 4 protagonists go their separate ways. 48 takes to hitchhiking, 6 & the Butler head towards 6’s home, but 2 heads toward the Parliament building in London- as if he is a high-ranking member. Some have taken this as definitive proof that the action was, in fact, real, & that all the 2s were members of Parliament & aligned with the Western powers’ intelligence agencies- i.e.- the Masters of the Village. Certainly, some of the 2s mention being in positions of power elsewhere. The fact that the 2s come & go yet still remain stuck on the monomaniacal task of breaking 6 is also seen as symbolic of the replaceability of leadership- corrupt or not. Yet, taking the material view, it could very well be that all the 2s are just those stooges we call politicians.
  On a metaphysical level the 2s are tools in which 6 can explore his own psyche. In fact, if this whole series is the internal machinations of 6’s consciousness then the 2s are parts of 6, & their mutability reflects the internal whims of 6, himself. Some have claimed that since 6’s focus shifts, during the course of the series, from wanting to escape to wanting to destroy the Village, that this represents some masochistic impulse within 6- he is 1, after all! They point to the fact that there are times when 6 could have possibly escaped successfully, yet chose to stay, out of spite for the Village & 2? This also leads to viewing 6 as 1 since he, therefore, is the 1 ultimately responsible for staying in the Village. Others see 6’s defeat of 2 in Once Upon A Time as either 6 breaking his principles (in a material view) & killing 2 (but we’ve seen that view is silly & flat wrong), thereby losing to the Village, or they see a symbolic treatise on madness: that JD has snapped (at show’s start) dehumanized himself into a number, & episode-by-episode seeks to regain his humanity, even as another part seeks to destroy himself even more. Knowing 6 is JD makes this interpretation no more or less possible. It may just be that TP can be viewed on multiple levels, with all having some validity- even where the possibilities clash.
   Another related point, however, that is not so ambiguous is the supposed ‘exhilaration’ scene in Fall Out, after 6 & the Butler have dropped 2 off at Parliament. Devotees claim that after they park their truck in front of Parliament a bobby cop stops 6 on a corner. As music is playing we cannot hear the conversation but it is claimed 6 is so excited over having escaped & beaten the Village that he is sharing his joy by explaining it to the bobby. But there is no evidence for ‘exhilaration’. 6 is demonstrative, but because the bobby is likely questioning why he & the Butler have parked their truck in such a questionable place. 6 is more likely telling him, ‘You ain’t gonna believe this, but….’ But, there is another question of identity that has never been asked, to my knowledge- at least not on websites or in books on the show. That question is:

Who is THE PRISONER?

  If you’re saying- it’s 6, of course; well- the proof? & I don’t refer to whether 6 is John Drake or not, but to whom does the show’s title refer to? The only reference that 6 is The Prisoner comes from the tv company’s media brochures & press kit. But, as an artist & a thinking person I am loath to trust a press kit over the work of art itself. As far as I know the show itself never directly calls 6 The Prisoner. A prisoner, perhaps- but not THE Prisoner. This is not a semantic point. & I do not believe it is an accident, considering the level of meaning weft into each episode. But if you take it as such, then acknowledge that all the points preceding this are also just as semantic. What I mean is- all the Villagers who are not in cahoots with 1 & 2 are just as legitimately A Prisoner as 6 is- I mean, who’s to trust a mere promo anyway? & there clearly are people in the Village who are as imprisoned as 6- for 1 of 6’s escape attempts (in Checkmate) is foiled by a fellow prisoner (The Rook) who suspected 6 of setting him up for a fall, only to wrongly betray 6 preemptively. Yet, more philosophically, the term The Prisoner could just as aptly be applied to the Masters of the Village as well: the Butler, the assorted doctors & run-of-the-mill minions, the Supervisor, 1- but most especially the 2s. Since there is a 2 in every episode it’s legitimate to claim so. At several points in the series 6 tells 2 there is not much difference between their situations. Certainly the 2 whom 6 defeats in Hammer Into Anvil is every bit the pawn that 6 is; & far more fearful. It could also refer to 6’s being The Prisoner to himself, & even to the viewer imprisoned by all the show’s ambiguities. Certainly the show has succeeded marvelously at imprisoning many viewers over the years. The 1 thing that is clear is that the art itself- the show- leaves it ambiguous as to just whom the title refers to. 6 is never explicitly called The Prisoner, whereas he is always referred to as 6. The oddest thing about this point is that no one else has brought up this seemingly central question, despite vociferous arguments over far more mundane & trivial things- as well as heated debates over other central points, such as:

Does 6 really escape at the end?

  The final episode ends with 6’s ascension to freedom after his praise by the Village President & his masked toadies. He finds out that 1 is himself. He rescues 2 & 48 from their imprisonment &, along with The Butler, the quartet blast their way out of the Village with machine gun fire, & escape via the truck where 2 had earlier ‘died’. They head toward London & drop off 48, who starts hitchhiking, drop off 2 at Parliament, then the Butler & 6 arrive at his home where he initially had been drugged & kidnapped at series’ start. 6 drives off in his Lotus & the Butler enters 6’s home. The door automatically opens with much the same sound that the Village’s doors’ open with. Some take this as proof that 6 never really escapes & that the war within him is only starting its psychological cycle again. Another noted point is that 6’s home address is 1 Buckingham Palace & the 1 on his front door is prominent- even as it opens & closes for the Butler. It is believed by some that this is also symbolic proof that 6 is 1! Meanwhile the series ends with 6 speeding down the highway in his Lotus 7 car- a mirror image of the series’ opening scenes. The cycle is complete & Fall Out, according to some, is the last & 1^st episode of the show! Not only does 6 NOT escape, but he CAN NEVER escape! Call it Hinduist philosophy, the Dantean Inferno, or Nietzscheanism, but 6 is doomed. At least that’s the Symbolists’ viewpoint.
  Some say 6 did escape- but only to madness. This goes back to the belief that 6 violated his (& JD’s) ethics by ‘killing’ 2 & then slaughtering the Village Masters. But we’ve seen the problems in this POV! Others say that if 6 is 1, he has triumphed in his right to be an individual- but it is a triumph over a part of himself, which mean a part of him has lost, is suppressed, & also defeated at the SAME time. It is merely an illusion that governments or others control our destinies.
  Others don’t see madness but death. This is also problematical- especially if it’s argued as a suicide. But the evidence used is that no one gives 48 a lift as he hitchhikes, 2 is not recognized in the street, nor are 6 & the Butler. Yet, clearly the bobby in the so-called ‘exhilaration’ scene notices 6 & the Butler- & their truck! So, this is hardly proof. Others in the ‘suicide’ camp point to 6’s change from wanting to ‘escape’ at series’ start to wanting to ‘destroy’ the Village (aspects of himself, after all? evidence of MPD?) in later episodes. Yet even in the early episode The Chimes Of Big Ben 6 warns 2 (in this view, yet another part of the ‘real’ 6’s psyche, just as the embodied 6 we see is just a part of the ‘real’ 6’s psyche, too): ‘I plan to escape & come back.’ 2 is stunned: ‘Escape & come back?’ 6 retorts: ‘That’s right- escape, come back, wipe this place off the face of the earth, obliterate it- & you with it!’ This is seen as the earliest & most provocative statement in the suicidalists’ camp. But it’s still thin. But whether 6 escapes or not, what has become of the Village? All the residents- prisoners & warders- seem to have fled. A rocket or missile has been launched- to the Moon? Or is a nuclear exchange under way?

Does 6 destroy the Village, himself, or both?

  Alot seems to hinge on the fate of the Village- whether seen as part of 6’s psyche, or in a material sense. A rarely commented on aspect of the series’ end is the last show’s title: Fall Out. Note that it is not Denouement, nor Endgame, nor something more apt &/or poetic. Could it be that Fall Out refers to nuclear fall out?
  ‘But it’s mere allegory & symbolism- especially in the last episode.’ would be the retort of the more ethereal minded. Yet, is it all allegory? Is there nothing that the Symbolists & Psychologicals can point to as materially real? Allegory must be rooted in the real- without the real it’s just gibberish. ‘The allegory is for the real world that you & I, the viewers, inhabit!’ is the Ethereal rejoinder. But that seems a stretch, especially since we, now, conclusively know 6 is JD- a ‘real’ character outside TP’s reality (albeit still a fiction to we in the real world!). So there must be at least 1 material or literal thing going on in the show- even if 1 claims it was all JD’s dream, fantasy, or life flashing before his eyes at the moment of death (by his or another’s hand), or perhaps something even more consequential?
  Could it be that TP is really an allegory of the cosmic human ‘self’ on the precipice of nuclear annihilation? Well, perhaps. Many view the place where 1 resides underground as a rocket. After all, 48 & 2 are held captive in tubes with the word ORBIT on them. These partisans also point to this exchange from The Chimes Of Big Ben (after the 1^st & last 2 episodes, undoubtedly the most important in the series): 6: ‘The whole earth as the Village?’ 2: ‘Yes, that is my hope. What’s yours?’ 6: ‘I’d like to be the 1^st man on the moon!’ 2: (roars with laughter). But, beneath the wittiness of this exchange (& note that 3 of the 4 most important episodes feature the Leo McKern portrayal of 2!) some see human yearning- Selenephilia. Recall, how we saw that some see Rover as symbolic of the Moon. Therefore fear & desire are inextricably bound up in the ethos of TP. Some also see the vehicle as definitely a rocket to the Moon (an age old yearning to rid oneself of burdens). Yet, a lot more supports the idea of pending nuclear annihilation. There is the last episode’s title, the fact that the missile is housed underground (ICBMs are, space launches aren’t), the fact that the Villagers may not be escaping the Village but heading madly for shelter, that death seems to be the end that befalls all: those killed by the rebellion of 6, 2, 48, & the Butler, & Rover’s apparent death. Add to that that the interpretation of the quartet being phantoms (by some) is not hindered by this view. Nor is the interpretation that 6 is bound to destroy the Village (see above) affected by this view. The Village is therefore the McLuhanite ‘Global Village’- literally Earth. In this interpretation nothing is left; even if taken as Mind destroying Matter.
  But, we’ve seen the flaws in many of these POVs. But, here is another interesting but unasked question. Regardless if it is a nuclear missile or a rocket to the moon, regardless if 1 is 6 is JD, etc.: is 1 rocketed away, or does he escape?

Does 1 escape at the end?

  The word too might be appended at the end of this last question, because some see 6 as escaping & triumphing. If we view 1 as 6, on any level, then obviously he escapes, is trapped forever, dies, or is dreaming right along with 6/JD. But if they are separate entities, whether a doppelganger or Bondian supervillain or whatever- what is 1’s fate? Taking whatever tack hinges on these facts: after 1 is revealed under the ape mask, he is chased by 6 around a table & then up a ladder into a porthole. He then slams it shut on 6, who does not attempt to open it. 6, instead, locks it from the inside. Is 6 locking 1 into an upper compartment or locking him outside the vehicle?
  Unfortunately, even the slow motion of a DVD does not solve this. You cannot tell whether 1 is ‘outside’ or in an upper compartment. If he’s been locked in an upper chamber the question turns to- is 6 locking him into a rocket that will rid the earth of the fiend forever? Or is he locked into the tip of a nuclear warhead- destined to be the 1^st to die in the Apocalypse? Conversely, if he is ‘locked out’- is 6 locking him out so that he will never reach his chimera- the Moon? Or is he locked out & destined to die in the Fall Out of nuclear death? For 1’s sake it seems that being seen as an aspect of 6 is a far preferable end to being seen as independent, for even if 6 is mad or suicidal, at least 1 will be there, forever with him. Without their destinies dovetailed, well, 1 is the biggest loser of them all.

What is the show all about?

  This is the big superquestion! Several websites quote old PM as stating: "I tried to create a first-class piece of entertainment, but I hoped it has truth too, because here also I was concerned with the preservation of the individual and his liberty. The stories were all about one man, one scientist's great unflinching battle for survival as an individual in a macabre world in which every move was watched by electronic eyes and all his neighbours were suspect. He had to live under wraps all the time. His individuality was constantly threatened, even his sanity." As is typical of PM- & to be fair, all artists of real value- nothing is really explained- such as the reference to 6 as a scientist?
  Of course there are political themes- & these cohere within & without the personal. We see how societies in general work- all have aspects of the Village. This is whether it is society of humans OR a society of the human mind. Inevitably, it is also about how rebellion is dealt with in any society. Fall Out illustrates this most pointedly in its 3 versions of rebellion. There is 48’s folly of youth- he rebels because it is a natural consequence of maturation (& good fun) before he settles in & becomes ‘a good little Villager’. His rebellion is tolerable because countless rebellions of this sort have been launched & subdued, lest there be no one left for the next generation to rebel against! He is coddled, sung along with (we all know his siren song of youth), even laughed at. Society sees aspects of themselves in him. But, most importantly, he is no real threat. 2’s rebellion is more unsettling & strikes more deeply at the notion of society. He was a powerbroker, or at least a figurehead of power. He commanded fear & respect. Society has an awe for him, even after his fall from grace. He challenges the ultimate power- he looks 1 in the eye & does not flinch. For this he must be banished, but society knows there are always more 2s who might rebel! If 48 is youth & 2 is age, if 48 & 2 are aspects of rebellion from within society, then 6 is the ultimate outsider- he is the most dangerous. 6 is, whether materially a man (JD), or just an aspect of the ‘real’ 6’s psyche- the Ultimate Outsider: The Other! He is to be reviled, feared, pilloried, destroyed! Society has tried to destroy, seduce, pervert, convert him, but he refuses all supplications! & he is none the worse for the wear (in certain interpretations). He gains in strength during his rebellion. A war of attrition will not subdue him. Unlike 48 his rebellion has purpose. Unlike 2, he is not a traitor to a society he grew fat on. He never was in THEIR society! Consider this moment from Degree Absolute (during Once Upon A Time): 2: ‘Why did you resign?’  6: ‘I didn’t accept. Why did you accept?’  2: ‘You resigned.’  6: ‘I rejected.’  2: ‘You accepted before you resigned.’  6: ‘I rejected.’  2: ‘Who?’  6: ‘You’.  2: (startled) ‘Why me?’ 
  6 rejects 2 both for his place in society & for his symbolism as society. Of course, 2 is stunned, what with his earlier preachments against the lone wolf. Confronted with what seems a superior alternative society then needs its Jeffersonian cleansing by blood: society capitulates & seeks guidance from its superior. Or does it? Upon capitulation 6 is asked to bestow his wisdom. each time he utters the word ‘I’ the Greek chorus of the faceless society either is so rapt with awe that they accept blindly by assenting ‘AYE!’ & do not hear 6’s wisdom, or they mock him & reject him by withdrawing to themselves, chanting ‘I’! Willfully or not, although the leadership bows, the mass of society is unable to change. Freedom is an illusion because all are locked into their patterns- even 6 as the Cassandra of the individual. After all, absolute individualism is anarchy- a worse fate than being imprisoned by the dictates of a corrupt society. The Village (society), after all, has never made secret its belief that individuals are the products of their society, not that the society is a product of its individuals.
  Still others believe in the Psychological or Symbolic versions of the tale, or that it’s merely a Surreal Post-Modernist fable- allegory or not. Either of these ideas can support the Fantasy/Madness/Dream/Last Moment Of Life/Ethereal modes, as well. Supporters quote this from Dance of the Dead: 2: ‘If you insist on living a dream you may be taken for mad.’  6: ‘I like my dream.’  2: ‘Then you are mad.’ Herein 1 of the pitfalls of using quotes- or pieces- from within a piece of art. The ‘dream’ referred to is most likely not the R.E.M.-type dream, but dream as an ideal. It is clear that on some level we are dealing with a bit of a morality play, however well disguised at times. I must return to my earlier opinion & voice my own belief as an artist, that PM obviously intended that many of these things could & should be read into the show, as part of making the viewer co-creator: lace a work with enough ambiguity, leave some blanks, then sit back & smile as the masses imbue. This is art as entertainment FUN, no doubt! For both the artist & the audience. PM’s real point, I think, is that people will believe what they want, regardless. I say this as an artist, not just a fan; & I think this has a lot more weight than many of the other interpretations which satisfy only parts of the varied conundra. Plus, Occam’s razor, it’s the only POV that satisfies all the allotted premises.

The Show’s Episodes

  As stated earlier, there were only 17 episodes of TP produced & aired. There were several others planned, as ITV- the British tv network wanted 20-30 episodes, yet PM wanted only 7. Somehow, they compromised at 17. Yet, the shows were produced & aired in different orders. I won’t touch upon the many interesting behind-the-scenes anecdotes of production, because they are not really the purview of this essay. Instead I present 4 different versions of the series order. There are several other versions online at the many TP websites, but these are the 4 most compelling & discussed. 1^st is the order they were originally broadcast in the U.K. The 2^nd ordering is that to be found in the 10 DVD The Complete Prisoner DVD set my wife & I own. The 3^rd is the order surmised on the Yale University The Prisoner U.S. Home Page: http://pantheon.cis.yale.edu/~rdm/pris.html . The 4th is from the 1989 book The Prisoner by Alain Carrazé & Hélène Oswald. I will not discuss the debate over why or why not certain episodes must follow or precede others. All the arguments have demerits & credits. But, for simplicity’s sake, since the book follows the original airdates of the shows I will give a brief synopsis of each episode, plus my own 1-100 rating. 1^st the competing orders of the shows, then my take.

***1) Arrival: We get the whole TP backstory in the 1^st few minutes. A spy resigns, heads home, is gassed by a man in a hearse, wakes up in a replica of his house, except that it’s in an unknown Village controlled by a leader called #2. The spy is then called #6. He retorts with his famous speech about being a man, not a #. 6 tries to escape, only to be mauled by Rover. 6 is hospitalized, sees an old cohort from the spy biz named Cobb. Cobb ‘dies’ & a 2^nd #2 appears. Then, via helicopter, 6 attempts a 2^nd escape, only to find he cannot control the helicopter. He is forced to land back in the Village. This episode sets forth almost all the basic themes of the series (especially the worthlessness of the individual- note episode 1 has 2 #2s!), is quick-paced & exciting. The viewer is very much drawn to tune in to the further adventures of 6! Rating: 95 of 100.

***2) The Chimes Of Big Ben: See this essay’s epigraph for the key to this episode. 2 plots an escape with a prisoner named Nadia (not all the prisoners are mere #s!). 6 wins an art competition by constructing an abstract sculpture whose constituent parts are obviously a small boat. That none of the art judges catches on is a brilliant comment on critics’ refusal to see the obvious. He & Nadia have an amusing repartee during their escape from the ‘Lithuanian’ Village. But she merely leads 6 back into the Village’s web. 6 believes he is back in London because his ex-bosses (clearly, on a material level- this episode proves the Village is the domain of the Western powers!) return & disbelieve his kidnapping tale & return after months. (Some take this mention of being gone for months to put the show later in the series.) 6’s reaction to their interrogation leads to a great soliloquy, & a slipup by 6’s ex-bosses. 6 resigns himself to being betrayed & being back in the Village. Leo McKern (the best of the 2s) makes his 1^st appearance. This is great art! Rating: 99/100

***3) A, B & C: An excellent episode with a devastating end- 6’s high point of the series thus far. 6 is drugged by 2 & a female doctor (14) to relive in dream a rendezvous he had 1 night with 3 supposed agents for the other side- A, B & C. The hope is to have 6 reveal in dream what he will not in reality: why he resigned. 6 resists as each of the 3 meetings escalates the pressure exerted upon him. By end 6 has vanquished his foes. As he lies helpless in reality, in his dreams (which 2 & 14 can see upon a screen) 6 gloats, as all he was doing on that occasion was taking a vacation & (as he was wont to do) toying with the other agents. 2 is humiliated. Rating: 97/100

 ***4) Free For All: A devastating episode on the folly & illusions of democracy. 2 acquires a female friend (58) who speaks little English. He learns that the annual election for the position of #2 is about to commence. He is cajoled into running. He makes real promises, but the populace is indifferent. He learns that by speaking in vacuities his popularity soars. A scene between 6 & 2 reporters in the jalopy driven by 58 is priceless. To his surprise 6 wins election as the new #2. The old 2 concedes & 6 proceeds to announce he is freeing the Villagers. They act indifferent. 6 tries to escape but is swarmed by a mob. 58 takes her place as the new #2. Her demeanor & farewell to the old 2 suggest that the Village is actually run by the East. Power means nothing if the masses do not really care who leads them. Rating: 96/100

***5) The Schizoid Man: A great episode. 6 is drugged & subjected to torture to switch his handedness from right to left. A doppelganger named Curtis is brought in to pose as 6, as 6 (upon waking) is now referred to as 12. The fake 6 (clad in a white outfit- as opposed to 6’s black Village duds throughout the series) claims 12 (the real 6- 2 x 6 = 12- double 6; got it?) is an imposter. An impressive duel- physically & psychologically- ensues. Near episode end Rover accidentally ‘kills’ the fake 6 (or does he reappear in Fall Out?). 12 (the real 6) assumes his place, & is helicoptered out of the Village. Yet he is quickly returned. Why? 2 trips 6 up with a bit of information about Curtis that 6 assents to wrongly. 6 loses, but barely- & not how the Village intended. Rating: 99/100

***6) The General: Some fans dislike this episode because it is less about 6, & more about the methodology of the Village Masters. The title refers a supercomputer (that room-sized staple of 1960s fears- considerably less powerful than a modern desktop!) whose purpose is to re-educate the Village prisoners into Orwellian bliss. 6 calls its goal the creation of ‘knowledgeable cabbages’- for knowledge is mere facts, wisdom is how to best apply facts. Here, 6 for the 1^st time, seems content on beating the Village- rather than escaping from it. The General- seemingly omnipotent- crumbles as 6 dooms it to a Möbian death with the 1 unanswerable question: ‘Why?’. This is perhaps the best existential episode & a dandy! It also foreshadows that all this spy & escapist hoodooery has deeper implications. Rating: 95/100

***7) Many Happy Returns: Silence & prime-time Television? Yes, this episode starts with about 20 minutes of it. The Village is deserted & 6 escapes via sea, has adventures & returns to his London home- now owned by a Mrs. Butterworth. They connect & 6 returns to his superiors (different ones than in The Chimes Of Big Ben). They disbelieve him. He convinces them & with the help of an RAF pilot he locates the Village near Morocco. As soon as he spies it he is jettisoned & parachutes back to the Village. The people return, as does Mrs. Butterworth- with a birthday cake. She is wearing the pin of #2. Another episode that rocks- albeit more on a ‘surface’ level. Rating: 95/100

***8) Dance Of The Dead: 6 is a pawn of death itself. The female 2 (Mary Morris- next to Leo McKern the most memorable 2) has a female henchwoman (240) get too involved with 6. 6 meets an old acquaintance from the biz, a corpse- which is later fobbed off as 6, & a bizarre Star Chamber which passes a Death Sentence- a Living Death sentence. This is the most Surreal episode to this point. Very detailed & multi-layered. Another foreshadowing episode that all may not be a straight-up spy tale. Rating: 96/100

***9) Checkmate: 6 plots another escape. This well-plotted & superbly acted episode is about trust. 2 befriends a fellow prisoner- 58. He searches for ‘loyal’ comrades. He organizes an escape by sea but is betrayed by 58 because 58 thought 6 was a pawn of the Village Masters because of his own arrogance made his cohorts feel he was only out for himself- not them. This episode foreshadows the self as his warder. 6’s downfall is largely his own. His looking out for ‘#1’- himself- is his undoing. Get it? An important & pivotal episode- also aired smack-dab in the middle of the show’s run. Rating: 98/100

***10) Hammer Into Anvil: The series is now heading into the home stretch. This is the 1^st episode where 6’s explicit goal is not escape but destruction. After the most sadistic (& simpleminded) 2 yet pushes a young girl to suicide, 6 vows to avenge the girl’s death & destroy 2, who likewise vows to destroy 6. Through a variety of means 6 feints & fools 2 into believing that he- 6- has been sent to report back on 2. Only the later Once Upon A Time featured a more explicit enmity between 6 & a 2. 2 eventually alienates his aides & slips into paranoia. 6 persuades him to turn himself in- he has failed. This is 6’s finest moment to date. Rating: 95/100

***11) It’s Your Funeral: A bit of the Stockholm Syndrome is seen in this episode. 6 uncovers a seeming assassination plot against 2 by a younger successor 2 (who was the 1^st 2 at episode’s start- the reason for the switch mid-episode may not only be a key to this episode but a foreshadowing of the series’ denouement). The old 2’s life is saved by 6, but perhaps the reason is not like of any of the 2s, rather 6 does not want retribution for the plot doled out against ‘innocent’ Villagers- even though they may be his warders as well. An episode that requires re-watching because it seems much more straightforward than it is. Has time passed or is manipulation the key? How many ‘real’ #2s are in this episode? On the surface this seems a victory for 6- but he’s really been co-opted, in the most effective manner yet, without realizing it. Rating: 95/100

***12) A Change Of Mind: Here we see that the Village Masters’ powers really lie with their stupefied captives, who are ready to turn on a dime on anyone declared ‘unmutual’. 6 is drugged & led to believe he is lobotomized after he is preyed upon by a mob (& earlier, by a couple of ‘muggers’), yet he succeeds in turning the violence against 2 in the end. The mob turns on 2 & attempts to lynch him. 6 wields real power this time (unlike in the prior Free For All). That he chooses to wield it against 2, & does not choose it to escape reinforces the idea that 6 is really out for #1, after all. Some see optimism in 6’s ‘victory’, others pessimism in the fact that the Village’s sickness is not merely with the Masters, but like It’s Your Funeral this is a very subtle episode that can easily be misread as a screed. Rating: 96/100

***13) Do Not Forsake Me, Oh My Darling: After the back-to-back ‘subtle’ episodes we now embark on the 3 consecutive ‘Surreal’ episodes. The series gets more & more complex with each episode & this 1 marks a ratcheting up of the artistic content. We know we are not in Kansas (or the Village) anymore as even the show’s traditional opening is different. PM was filming a movie during the time this episode was filmed- thus the ‘real’ reason another actor played 6. His mind has been transferred to another man’s body (a twist on the earlier The Schizoid Man), & he must seek out the Professor behind the method, so to get his own body back- apparently the Village little doubts that 6 wants to remain in an older man’s body- thus exchanging freedom for a few years of living. 6 brings the Professor back to the Village, & with a few twists, ends up back in his own (PM’s) body. The Professor, meanwhile, escapes in the other man’s body. This episode is as subtle as the preceding 2 & impressive (especially considering its mother of invention provenance), & heralds the series’ end in several different ways. The actor (Nigel Stock) who is 6 for most of this episode, is no PM, but does an OK job of acting; but the show does drag a bit in the middle but its start & end are impressive. Rating: 92/100

***14) Living In Harmony: The ‘Western’ episode. Again, the show’s opening departs from the usual. 6 is in a psychodrama with a killer archetypally named ‘The Kid’- played by the actor (Alexis Kanner) who would later play 48 in Fall Out. He defeats The Kid & the ‘town’ yet is betrayed by the woman who loves him, & shot dead. This is all a drug-induced dream, however & The Kid (really #8) rues the failure of he, 2, & 22 (the woman who betrays 6 within the dream & is killed by The Kid). 8- 2³ (cubed)- ends up killing 22 (2 x 2 or 2²?) in ‘real’ life, & then kills himself. 6, who’s awakened to view this all, is helpless as she dies in his arms. But is this death real? & since 8 later resurfaces as 48 (or 8 x 6- numerologists’ heaven?) & is very much alive (& later unrecognized- it seems- by 6) does this mean that this episode is a dream within a dream, 1 later forgotten by 6 in Fall Out? The Möbius strip is constricting- into a noose? Ostensibly a throw-away episode, this bit of Surrealism again ratchets the art-quotient of the series to greater heights. Rating: 95/100

***15) The Girl Who Was Death: Ostensibly a bedtime story 6 reads to previously unseen Village children, this whacked-out episode breaks the ‘4^th’ wall & foreshadows the series end. A mysterious blond tries to kill 6 over & over, then retreats to her ICBM home where her daddy is Napoleon. 6 saves London from being nuked & a frustrated 2 (Napoleon in the tale) is foiled as he had hoped 6 might drop his guard with children, yet he tries to subvert the Village’s youth. This 2 later turns out to be the President in Fall Out. Whether this was a demotion or promotion we are not sure, but while we have seen more than 1 2 in some episodes, this 2 (Kenneth Griffith) is the only 1 to appear in more than 1 episode (outside of Leo McKern), although not as 2. Note how, as in the previous episode, a main character (this time 2, not 8) returns in the series’ finale. This episode has many overtures that foreshadow Fall Out, yet are easily overlooked. Witty, fun, & truly Surreal. Rating: 95/100

***16) Once Upon A Time: This is really the 1^st part of a 2-part finale. The Leo McKern 2 is back & haunted by his, & other 2s’, failures. They mock him from the screen. The Butler is a target of his wrath. Vowing to break 6 2 calls up his superior & asks to be allowed to go to Degree Absolute to break 6. This is a week-long torture test where either 6 will break & die, or 2 will! A series of scenes from 6’s life are play-acted out (including the revelation of 6’s ‘true’ identity!) but, in the end, 6 emerges victorious, 2 is ‘killed’, & the bald bespectacled Supervisor (after 6, & the Butler the most ‘regular’ character in the series) promises to take 6 to 1. Victory seems in the bag & its totality seems near. The acting in this episode is superb & the writing equals anything in prose or poetry. This is art at is absolute finest! It is at once Surreal & in-the-gut material. Rating: 99/100

***17) Fall Out: I’ve detailed much of this end episode in the above questions the series arouses. In short: 6 is proclaimed an ‘individual’ by the Village Masters, is offered freedom or power, his wisdom leads him to reject this false choice for ‘knowledge’- Who is 1? He unmasks 1, sees it may or may not be himself, saves 2, 48, & the Butler (who align with 6), he escapes from &/or destroys the Village &/or the world, & then returns ‘home’. the series ends with him racing down a highway in his Lotus 7 sportscar, just as he started the series. The probable conclusion is that the whole series has occurred in a fraction of a second as 6/JD (John Drake) is heading to resign his post as Danger Man. The whole series may well be JD’s own misgivings about how his superiors will react to his sudden resignation- in effect, TP is then the internal projection of JD’s fears opened up for the world to see. 17 episodes which may take place over a year or 2’s time, crammed into a fleeting millisecond of angst. After all, as Colonel George Taylor (Charlton Heston) in Planet Of The Apes (another 1968 classic) says: ‘Time bends. Space is boundless. It squashes a man’s ego. I feel lonely.’ The loose ends (& inconsistencies- intended or not) rank this episode just a notch below its lead-in. Still, what a show, what an idea, & what execution. Bravo! Rating: 98/100

  Before I wrap up this essay by returning to the 4 premises mentioned earlier: TPD, apparent contradiction, particulars from the general, & the general from particulars, let me add in a few thoughts.
  TP is a great work of art. Unfortunately, tv is no different from any other arts medium in that rarely is greatness recognized off the bat. People always whine about tv’s Wasteland, yet have tuned in regularly for such dull crap as Friends or the Cosby Show. People say they want boldness- even poetry, especially in these contemporary postmodern times. Yet, when confronted with 1 of the boldest works of art ever put forth, people whine that they may actually have to think & not be passive. They reject it. 1 might call this the Stanley Kubrick Syndrome. It’s no surprise that the other great piece of visual art that reigned in 1968 (along with TP & Planet Of The Apes) was Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. TP is also a great work of philosophy. Fundamentally it deals with the nature of reality, yet politically it also deals with the idea of rights (civil & human), which (if we are honest) we all know are a human law of invention, not a natural law of immanence. Now think: why is it that philosophy is 1 of the few endeavors more scorned than poetry? Because it’s all ideas- it is inert. Art is ideas in motion, & the visual arts are the most accessible forms of art. & TP is a masterpiece of the visual arts in its philosophy. This DVD set (The Complete Prisoner) should ensconce itself on your shelves filled with Plato, Nietzsche, Holderlin, & the boys. Also, as to what it’s all about, again- the point is open, & please put not too much stock in PM’s explanation as artists are wont to missing the results they put out for they concentrate too much on the intent- plus, all artists of any worth are accomplished prevaricators- often willfully so. PM’s art is served well by disinforming his public. So confused were critics & the viewing public that in all the years since I can think of only 2 tv shows that have some commonalities with TP- meaning its influence was limited.
  The 1^st was American PBS’s 1979 telefilm The Lathe Of Heaven, wherein the main character suffers a horrific trauma & literally lives within a dream- or does he? The other was the UPN network’s 1995 1 season show Nowhere Man- starring Bruce Greenwood. In it a photojournalist takes a photo of a supposed Latin American execution & finds out his whole life may have been a charade. While not ‘imprisoned’ like 6, the character- Tom Veil- seeks to regain his life by hitting the road to prove he is sane. TP & The Fugitive are the 2 dominant influences on this show- & it often paid subtle & overt homages to both. Unlike TP, however, this show was to be a regular series, but was canceled before its 1^st season was over. This prompted the producers to wrap up the show hastily at 25 episodes. The result was an ending which aped TP’s, but with none of the emotional impact, nor surrealism. What a shame, because the show was far superior to the Star Trek: Voyager show it aired after. & though dreams are a province film has often plumbed, about the only successful film of recent vintage that I would say is comparable is Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 1990 Martian sci fi opus Total Recall. In that film Schwarzenegger’s character is truly his own worst enemy! Another noteworthy point re: TP is that it may very well have been the 1^st real ‘miniseries’ to air in the US. While the 1970s saw Rich Man, Poor Man, Roots, The Holocaust, etc. make miniseries a staple, TP should truly be seen in their genre- after all, it was planned to be only 17 episodes long- about 14 hours of tv- shorter than Roots. Seen in that light it has still more significance. PM had the smarts to lace ambiguities throughout the show. 1 almost feels he was conducting an experiment & must’ve loved the control he/the show had over his/its fans. As I’ve stated, I think the best interpretation is that the whole show takes place in a moment of 6’s mind (whether JD or not) as he is either heading to resign, contemplating the ‘fall out’ of such a deed, or merely off on another adventure as Danger Man. It’s not that unusual a trope- it’s even classic, & since the penultimate episode is the last to start with 6 ‘waking up’ the series can be seen circularly with 6 forever dreaming (dead?)- thanks go out for that possibility, too.
  Another little mentioned aspect of TP, as art, is that it is a nearly perfect piece of metacriticism on conspiracy theories in general- whether they’re plausible theories as in JFK’s assassination, or wacky theories involving aliens, Jewish bankers, & that lot. In fact, part of the show’s ‘cult status’ feeds off of that frenzy. Refer back to all the queries I have addressed, & the many others I have not (see assorted books & websites for what I mean). But if that does not convince you that this brilliant work of art also doubles as a brilliant piece of metacriticism, maybe this will: re-read my exposition of 6 as John Drake, get the DVD for yourself, & confirm what I say, & you will see I am correct. Wanna bet that my exposé is ridiculed by the TP cultists? In fact, the show inspires factions of fans who refuse logic & definitive proofs in whatever defense of their beliefs- no matter how wrong they are. Ain’t art wonderful?
  Let me end this essay by possibly pulling a McGoohan (I shan’t wrap things too tightly lest suffocate them- or am I feinting now?) & returning to the 4 points: apparent contradiction, particulars from the general, the general from particulars, & lastly TPD. As we’ve seen TP is chock with contradictions real & apparent. We’ve also seen these contradictions are often served by allowing the viewer to make deductive & inductive conclusions which not only are at odds given certain different information, but often from the same information. & before using TPD in a metaphoric way re: TP, consider this: the title, as we’ve seen is not necessarily specific to 6. Therefore let us consider 6 & 2 (or any other Villagers) to be eternally pondering the other's moves. 6 as the non-fink & the 2s as the finks who consistently win round after round- until the end. The 2s have all the perks, yet they all seem to have a not-so-secret envy of 6. What changes to allow the still seemingly non-finking 6 to win? (Or does he?) That may be the actual key question of the series, also never pondered before without the idea of TPD. Also, consider that TPD operates (theoretically) under unchanging rules- TP may or may not; & may or may not be self-consistent with its own consistency (or inconsistency).
  In the end it may well be that the ambiguity which damned TP’s initial critical & public reception is the very thing which has proven to be its salvation. After decades of intermittent appearances the whole show can be owned for the price of a decent VCR or boombox. Trust me in that it is a much more sound investment you will mine over & again through the years. On reflection, perhaps there is no dilemma after all. Then, again, I told you I was gonna pull a McGoohan- or was that a McGuffin?

L’Envoy

  A year or 2 ago I wrote a poem The Prisoner as part of my ongoing series of Le Bestiaré poems. Unfortunately the poem is so visually complex & my technical skills so meager that I cannot properly display it on this website. However, if you email me from Cosmo's home page I will gladly email you a WORD copy. It interspersed fragments of dialogue from TP with parts of an unnamed 1968 Presidential candidate’s convention nomination speech. The dialogue fragments identified 6 as THE PRISONER, despite my pointing out in this essay that the show’s title does not necessarily refer to 6. So why not represent 6’s dialogue as 6:, rather than The Prisoner:? Simple. 1- I did not own the DVD set then & copied the dialogue directly from The Prisoner by Alain Carrazé & Hélène Oswald. The book referred to 6 as The Prisoner in its dialogue. 2- the realization that the show’s title did not necessarily refer to 6 had simply not occurred to me then. A final point re: the poem- I made express use of the shape of the page, & the poem’s visual quality, when I was writing the poem. The reason was so that some of the stanzas would give off the feel of a lava lamp, or Rover rising from the deeps. Other than that, enjoy!

Addendum:
From: Jason Sanford
Subject: the Prisoner
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 09:08:06 -0700 (PDT)

Dan:
  I finished watching the Prisoner a few days ago and you are correct--it is a damn good series. When I see you tonight we can discuss it.
  However, I have a bit of bad news regarding your "Drake" hypothesis. The DVDs you lent me are subtitled and to my observation are totally accurate to the spoken dialog. I did not see one instance when the subtitles didn't match what was being said. When subtitles are this accurate it usually means someone worked from the original scripts.
  Anyway, in the scene in "Once Upon a Time" where #2 two supposedly says the name "Drake", the subtitles list this sentence: "Report to my study in the morning break."
This doesn't mean the Prisoner isn't Drake, but this part of your arguement may need to be reexamined.
Jason

To: Jason Sanford
Subject: the Prisoner (fwd)
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 16:44:48 +0000

  BTW- how'd you get that subtitle feature- we looked all over for it? 
  Actually, if that's true, it does nothing to my argument, because 1 of the many 'known' factoids is that McGoohan, after the fact, has produced many scripts & info that is contrary to the original series- as it was broadcast. The head writer, George Markstein- who often battled with PM over who wrote what & who conceived what- swore that 6 was always Drake & that 'he' wrote that particular episode b4 being fired. Although the penultimate episode it was really written as the last & 13th ep. of season 1. Markstein did not come back for season 2's final 4 ep's after a split w PM- basically over Markstein's desire for 6 to be Drake & PM's desire to anonymize 6. The DVDs are the original sound masters, supposedly, & 2 clearly utters the D sound- you heard it & after 2 dozen listens (w all the benefit given to the B sound- for it wd be more 'poetic' if it were not Drake)- 2 says 'Drake'- his lips also clearly form a D in slo-mo- not a B! Jess & I watched it over & again- there's no doubt. My other logical points also still apply & are not touched by this fact.
  But, I will add yr observation as an addendum- in fact,  I predicted in the pce that TP-philes wd nitpick to death. No doubt, since Markstein is dead, PM saw to it that the subtitles wd read 'HIS' way- he simply forgot to redub & redigitize the tape- or did he? PM loves controversy! What a great fuckin' show! DAN

Return to Bylines    Cinemension