Talk:Brenda Leigh Johnson

Untitled

• I'm going to create a page for the character Brenda Lee Johnson. I'm thinking along the lines of the page that exists for Robert Goren. In fact, I'm going to use the template "Template:LawandOrderCharacter" since there is not a character template for The Closer. Right now, I'm working in the sandbox. Anyone got any problems, email me. (UTC)ktoonen 00:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Closer"

• Biographical

(These bullets will be turned into prose, and citations will be added, by the end of the month. 02.04.2007) - I changed the bullets into text. Needs more cleanup. Charleenmerced 00:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced 22:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced - original text of cleanep up part. Will keep fixing at a later date

• They ran a Closer marathon to counter the Super Bowl. I recorded the first season, and will add more text, with episode citations, as I watch the shows. Thanks for text-ifying my bullets! Was going to do it tonight, but you saved me the trouble.  :-) This entry also needs to be linked back to The Closer, and Kyra Sedgwick's page -- assuming she has one... Cheers, (UTC)ktoonen 02:05, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• Fixed a few things. I think this article needs a little more structure and detail. I think we need to change a few things in the Habits section. Thanks for fixing a lot of the things ktoonen. I will try to keep adding info and fixing as they show more eps on tnt. Tivo usually picks them up. Also, I think the second seasons ending needs to be explained better. I couldn't remember everything so it may be a little confusing. Charleenmerced 00:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

• Thanks for adding the new info. Although I don't know if we need to differentiate bw the states she has been since that is not part (as in not shown) in the show, merely mention. So, I think it should be moved back to Prose form. Also, I think the area Problems should be renamed: maybe Work Life.

So, the Subjects should be:

Biographical (Category) , Work History (Category) Past (or Previous) work history (Sub-Category), LAPD Work History (Sub cat), Lifestyle or somehting like Personal relations or something(Category), Habits (sub-categories), Romances or Personal Relations (sub-cat) and Family (sub-cat); Trivia (Category) Charleenmerced 19:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

I like your idea about the categories. I don't really like having the endings for the second season episodes in the page... Especially since they are major spoilers. However, I don't really know the etiquite about deleting major pieces of writing that other people added. What do you think? BTW -- I had surgery, and missed a lot of TV. The upshot is that Season 1 of The Closer got pushed off my TiVo. So, I'll be adding episode tidbits much more slowly now... Ce la vie. --ktoonen 22:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

• Well, we can put the endings and then add the spoier warning. I think it is imp to have the ending cause it is imp to the progression of the story.Charleenmerced ^Talk 22:46, 22 February 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Brenda's medical symptoms

Is it me, or... Do pardon me for asking this question (possibly) the wrong way in format, but I must know. Is it me, or is Brenda pregnant in the show? She seems to show the symptoms in the show: dizziness, fever, hot flashes, stomach cramps; among the few. It's been making me curious since the start of season 3. An answer would be appreciated. Thank you (not imitating Brenda, mind you, I'm not Prevenze (though the way he imitated her was hilarious)). Neo Guyver

Early menopause is revealed during 3:8, "Manhunt". - hydnjo talk 03:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BrendaLeighJohnson.jpg

Image:BrendaLeighJohnson.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Lee vs. Leigh

I just started watching the show, but TNT has it as "Leigh" on their own web site[1], so I reverted the edit that made it "Lee." Dstumme (talk) 22:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The current plaque on her desk just says Brenda Johnson; some editors had claimed it said Brenda Lee, so that's been fixed. Drmargi (talk) 07:28, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Per TNTdrama.com's website - the correct spelling is "Lee" - if you search for "Brenda Johnson" (or Brenda Leigh Johnson and/or Brenda Lee Johnson), it all takes you to the same updates about the show - the most recent of which is, "The department is still reeling with the recent departure of Detective Brenda Lee Johnson..." (in describing the episode "Reloaded" when the department morphed into being Major Crimes). See: http://www.tntdrama.com/search/searchresults.jsp?query=brenda%20lee%20johnson&searchType=all - I was unable to find anything on this TNT "The Closer" site using the spelling "Leigh". It was also spelled "Lee" in the DVD sets' episode guides/descriptions, and I do remember seeing it on paperwork, etc., as "Lee" during certain episodes. Finally, "Lee" (vs. Leigh) would be the appropriate way to spell it if she were, as her character represents, born in the "South". 8/12/13 Tcbarnes (talk) 03:46, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

The problem we've had is that the spelling hasn't been consistent across sources or even from TNT early on. However, TNT does refer to Brenda as Brenda Leigh in some places on the site (see the farewell card, for example.) But more importantly, James Duff, the show's creator and executive producer/showrunner/head writer, etc. writes a blog (published by TV Guide) in which he routinely refers to her as Brenda Leigh. Consequently, there's been no question for some time that this is the correct spelling of her middle name. DVD's are manufactured by external companies, and they can make errors. The blog is definitive because it's written by Duff. This needs to be discussed before any changes can be made. --Drmargi (talk) 06:23, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Defining characteristic

I read this whole article, and basically shocked to the bone at the absence of the single most obvious fact: that Brenda is a liar and a manipulator. This is her defining characteristic, and I'm not going out on some limb here. I realize that in the area of arts and literature there are all kinds of interpretations of things. However, this is not some borderline or debatable case! The character was written that way VERY conspicuously. It would be like saying that it is debatable that the defining characteristic of Charlie Brown was that he was a loser, or debatable that McGyver was resourceful. It's completely ridiculous! One could argue that she is selfish, thoughtless and inconsiderate, but those would not be defining; as those characteristics do not influence every episode nor her every relationship. She has, however, lied in every episode, to almost every single other character. She is certainly only second to the Jon Lovitz character, and I defy anyone to name any close third place character who rivals her for second. Greg Bard (talk) 05:41, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

This is your interpretation of the character and how she was written. Promotional material for the show and numerous interviews with its creator don't comport with your views. She is a trained, highly skilled interrogator determined to get her man, and James Duff has long said that is her defining characteristic. Without question, she is willing to lie or manipulate to get a confession, a practice that is perfectly legal. But that's far from all she does; the last episodes simply concentrated on the consequences of those few instances where she did so. If you want to make a statement such as you did, you must provide a reliable source (not a critic's or viewer's opinion) that this is what the show's creator has intended. --Drmargi (talk) 07:31, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

There is no "promotional literature" for peanuts that describes Charlie Brown as a loser, and yet there it is in the lead paragraph of the article. (I only looked it up after I wrote the preceding paragraph --it's that obvious). Furthermore, no one in their right mind would ask for some reference to support that Charlie Brown is a loser, or that MacGyver is resourceful. For anyone to miss these facts would basically be unthinkable, and that is the situation we have here. Charlie Brown isn't even portrayed as a loser in every appearance, so therefore Brenda is more of a liar than Charlie Brown is a loser. I've watched every episode at least twice. Brenda lies in every episode, and anyone who has watched the program with any degree of attention has no choice but to agree (What are you talking about the last few episodes for, have you not been paying attention the whole time?) Yes, the practice of police lying to suspects is legal, and that supports that it should be noted. One could argue that understanding that police will lie to you is the primary lesson to be learned from the program (certainly that is my POV, but I am not inserting that into the article. All I am inserting is the objective fact that her most notable characteristic is her lying and manipulating). I'm sorry, but this isn't even debatable, nor is it a borderline case. It is completely unthinkable to have an article about Brenda Leigh Johnson and not mention prominently that she is a liar and a manipulator.

Furthermore, the portrayal of police on popular television programming in our society is almost universally sympathetic to the police. It is all basically pro-police, pro-authoritarian propaganda. The Closer is no exception. The audience is lead to believe that this Brenda is wonderful, and we should stay out of her way, and give her whatever resources she needs, civil rights be damned. Even the Internal Affairs character Raydor is portrayed as universally hated, when any person with any notion of civic accountability knows that keeping police abuse accountable is in the public interest. If you intend to gloss over the fact that she manipulates suspects, that is, in effect you pushing a pro-police, pro-authoritarian agenda. I think you need to rewatch the series from the beginning, and not interfere with this edit until you do. Greg Bard (talk) 08:33, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

What's clear to me is that your views of the police are coloring your perceptions of the character to a marked degree. What they do on the Charlie Brown article is for the editors there to work out; it isn't relevant here. What is relevant is that you are clearly POv pushing, and attempting to redefine the character through a filter that represents your own view of the police and the portrayals of police on television. Your perceptions of Sharon Raydor only serve to make this clearer; in her earliest episodes, she was an adversarial character, a long way from universally hated, but has evolved considerably since then (have you watched any of Major Crimes?) You persist in viewing your opinions as objective, but I reiterate: they are not. They are highly subjective, and as such, are POV, particularly since they run counter to the way the character has been described by her creator and the show's producers from the beginning. That you don't know what I'm referring to when I referred to the final episodes indicates you're unaware of a well publicized primary thematic element of the final season.

Equally inaccurate are your perceptions of my knowledge of the show. I'm not going to defend when or how often I've seen any or all of the show's episodes (oh, if you only knew how wide of the mark you are); it simply doesn't matter. Neither my viewership of the show or my views of the police are open for discussion. You've been asked for a source to support your edits. That's not unreasonable when an edit is controversial and/or appears to reflect an editor's own views. You're far too experienced an editor to expect that POV-editing at this level will stand, and should know to leave this article at status quo (that is, as it was when your controversial edit was reverted to the standing version) until this is resolved. --Drmargi (talk) 14:53, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brenda Leigh Johnson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070206212503/http://alt.tnt.tv:80/closer/closer.shtml to http://alt.tnt.tv/closer/closer.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)