Could that mean that Sloane had an affair with Irena and Syd was the outcome? Of just Syd finding out about the affair is shocking? I really, really don't want Sloane to be her father, but what do you think? :blush:
i can't believe i'm about to say this...but if it turns out to be the case, i don't think i can watch anymore
I guess I don't understand why everyone is so upset about Sloane possibly being Syd's dad. There have been clues since the beginning so it can't be the shock that's upsetting people. It doesn't change the fact that Syd does and will always consider Jack her dad. She loves Jack, he loves her...biology won't change that. Biology does not equal being a parent. Ask anyone whose been adopted by loving parents. I think if he is her dad, it will just add new layers and nuances to her existing relationships. She may have to look at Sloane as a multidimensional person...which is always hard to do. It's easier to say/think he's evil and leave it at that. It's much harder to incorporate all the facets...his love for his deceased wife, his use of torture to get what he wants, his protection of Sydney, his taunting of her. Characters are ALWAYS better when they are not straight-forward
The problem I have with it is that they've spent the whole series building up the relationship between Jack and Sydney, and the cheesy soap opera-ness of making Sloane Sydney's biological father completely degrades what they have been doing. Plus, it's icky.
I agree with pretty much all of this and will add this: One of the other points that was made unfaltering clear in S2 was Sloane's blind devotion to Emily. The spoiler really doesn't convey a whole lot regardng whether or not his "affair" was an affair because he was already married to Emily or the person he had the "affair" with was married. If he wasn't married yet to Emily, my point is lost. But if he was married to Emily, I think that flies in the face of how the writers portrayed Sloane and Emily's marriage and love for one another. Also, I believe (and yes, I'm not the only one to have posted this elsewhere) that Ron Rifkin was vehemently against the storyline of his character being Sydney's father. And that although it was contemplated a long time ago, it was also denied as being an option a long time ago. I, for one, am glad. I also must agree with the poster above who stated that one does not have to have a biological parent/child relationship in order to feel that bond. That being said, I do not believe that the bond between Sydney and Jack was anywhere NEAR the bond that they have now up to and including S2. Bringing a question of parentage into their relationship is, without a doubt, soapy, to say the least. And my last point is a reiteration of a post that Har wrote over at the SD1.com boards just reworded in my own words: Just because Sloan had an affair and that that affair would be a shock to Sydney does not automatically make it a question of parentage; nor does the idea that Sloan feels he has a deep connection to Sydney mean that he believes he is her father. Deep connection does not necessarily mean familial connection.
Don't forget that Sloane always considered Sydney a daughter, watched over her, etc.....but also remember that in either episode 19 or 20 of season 2 (I think it was "End Game") Irina says that she doesn't want to hear about Sloanes love for Sydney...this could either be that Sloane is the father, or isnt,...I doubt he is though...but if he was, rewatching season 1 episodes would make everything seem like....more sense, lol
uhm...i think that sloane had an affair with Katya. when she was on the phone with him he seemed pretty shocked that she was contacting him ...yet he knew right away who she was. perhaps lauren is their daughter?
After watching S2 completely, I truly believe that Irina said this because she knows that the only reason Sloane truly cares for Sydney has to do with her being a MAJOR piece of the Rambaldi puzzle...In other words, "Don't talk to me about your love for sydney [I know it's a self-serving love, so don't try to blow smoke up my *ss]."
I believe it has now been confirmed from many sources that this "affair" of sorts is with Dr. Barnett, the CIA shrink. I think this will greatly effect Sydney because she has told quite a lot to Barnett and now Sloane has a source to the CIA, a bigg one. And, as Ariana Kane said in season 2 "More information has been leaked through pillow talk than through torture." Hence, why it will effect Sydney. Maybe Barnett is a double, we'll see, but for now, I don't believe that Sloane is Sydney's father and see no way that JJ will go that way.
6. With that in mind, there’s some debate among Alias fans: which of you is really Sydney’s father? Rifkin: Oh, Victor’s the father. Garber: Listen, who knows anything on this show? We get the scripts every week and we’re as surprised as the audience. This is a question from the interview in Emmy Magazine with Ron Rifkin and Victor Garber. There were ten in all, but all the others seem to have been posted on this site before in some way or another. It seems like the actors themselves don't even know what's going to happen!
The only thing that would turn me off of Alias is if they make someone other than Jack Sydney's father. That relationship is the foundation of the show. Having it not so serves no purpose other than shock value.
I totally agree with that. I would be so disappointed and upset to find out Sloane is Syd's father. I read what someone said about having to see him in a new light..but what kind of man, especially one who professes so often to love her, could have submitted her to the kind of torture and brain washing the Convenant did to her. I'm sure everyone has seen the Kristen spoiler about the head of the Covenant. If that proves to be true, then he knowingly and willingly had her held and attempted to brainwash her. There is no getting over that and Syd has the mentality to want to get to know her parent's regardless of things they may or may not have done..we saw that with Irina. I usually have good gut feelings about the direction the show will take and for once I hope I'm right this time.
I've been thinking about this and I now think that making Sloane Syd's dad won't happen. Why? Because it's too obvious, too easy and like someone else said...too soapy. Yes they have given little clues about him being her dad but I know think that it was just tv mis-direction. Many many shows intentionally lead people in one direction to make a conclusion seem obvious only to jerk the viewers in another direction at the last second. Sloane won't be her dad because it's just too easy an out. On another note, I thought the Sloane-Barnett sp? affair was still to come...not in the past. I don't think Syd has to worry (much) about Barnett revealing her emotions to Sloane because a psychiatrist risks losing their liscense if they violate confidentiality.
