Why The Walking Dead should focus more on the “Atlanta three”: Rick, Daryl and Carol
As The Walking Dead has just lost one of its last original characters, some fans have been asking for a return to focusing on the “core” cast. We have a look at how the relationships between the last three survivors of the original Atlanta group, Rick, Daryl and Carol, have been relatively neglected in the past.
The decision to kill Carl on The Walking Dead has sparked many discussions about what many fans believe is a problem with the series: the lack of focus on the “core” characters that fans care about most. Many viewers seem to feel that, if the show is to keep its soul and identity, no more core characters should be killed off. Some critics also agreed that killing main characters should only be done sparingly, and only if the death brings real value to the story. Even some of the cast members, in particular Norman Reedus, have suggested as much.
How the opportunity for a credible Rick/Daryl rivalry was missed
There are countless examples of how character development of the core characters has been overlooked, but one instance in which it particulary struck me was during this rather unconvincing fist fight between Rick and Daryl in season 8. Now, I was actually one of those fans who believed that introducing some kind of conflict between Rick and Daryl could be a very interesting path to take. That was my first thought when Norman Reedus teased a “rogue” Daryl in season 8.
We all love Rick and Daryl’s “bromance”, which initially offered a nice counterpoint to the Rick/Shane rivalry. Unlike Shane, Daryl never really questioned Rick’s leadership. He would offer advice, sometimes honest criticism in private, but would always give him his full support to whatever Rick decided in the end. He also had no interest in being a “rival” – as his lack of self-confidence meant he could not imagine himself as the leader of the group. This was an interesting relationship but, after several seasons, it became rather static and left some of us yearning for at least a little conflict between Rick and Daryl.
There was one opportunity in particular that, in my opinion, the writers really failed to capitalize on: Rick’s decision to banish Carol from the prison in season 4. For the first time in a long time, Daryl seemed to be truly mad at Rick, and with good cause. After all, everyone was aware of his very close relationship with Carol, and as one of Daryl’s closest friends, Rick must have known that his decision would affect Daryl greatly. It would have seemed perfectly natural, and not at all contrived, to use this as a basis for an emerging conflict between Rick and Daryl.
Why? Because it gave Daryl an excellent reason to be mad at Rick and to question his actions, both personally and as a member of the group: personally, because as a friend, he could have expected more consideration from Rick; and as a member of the group, because Rick’s banishment of Carol was a unilateral decision, made when he wasn’t even supposed to be the “leader” if the group anymore (it was the “council”). It is difficult to imagine a more perfect way to introduce a credible conflict based on both personal, and what we could call “political”, reasons.
Sure, we know why this emerging conflict eventually came to nothing: just as Daryl, who was visibly angry, was on the way to talk to Tyreese and confront both him and Rick about the issue, the Governor attacked the prison and the group was broken. This was, however, a choice by the writers, and it did not mean the issue could not be raised again after the group was reunited at Terminus.