If you've ever wondered about family life with twelve kids in the middle of Colorado in the '60s and '70s, Six Schizophrenic Brothers is for you. :) But it's less about the where and when than the what and why. It truly is a captivating story with plenty of angles and theories as to how it all unraveled. The Galvin family were brave in sharing their truth with the world and shedding light on a disease that's often misunderstood.
In terms of production, tho, the series is a bit sloppy. An obvious example is when the end credits roll before people are even done talking. (And if you're watching on Max at the default settings, you get prompted for the "Next Episode" and the window auto-exits full screen while you're still trying to make out the dialogue.) It can be frustrating, like going out to the theater and having the curtains close and lights come on before the final scene is over. What's the rush? Where are we going? Choppy editing like that limits the impact of an otherwise powerful tale. Some of the stylistic choices do the same. The Galvins' saga is presented almost like a horror flick, with brothers emerging from the shadows for their interviews as if they personify danger; as if they're monsters. The eerie vibe seems like an unnecessary jab at their poor health.
And while I don't want to over-analyze the script because these folks are trying to recall events of 50 years ago- which can't be easy- some of their claims don't line up. For one, they suggest Peter's (#10's) illness may have been triggered by seeing his father suffer a stroke, which "greatly diminished" Dad's ability to communicate/take care of himself and hospitalized him for "at least six months." But then they imply both parents are to blame for not taking care of Peter after he got sick. What was Dad supposed to do? Was he not bedridden himself? The timeline is a bit shifty like that. It's not that they're lying but they do play it loose with some details, making it tough to distinguish between exaggerated memory and objective fact. In short, I thought the series could have been tightened up in editing, style and script. Which is not to say others won't enjoy it because the subject is compelling. I just felt it had greater potential, oddly for the same reason: because the subject really is compelling.
-
As for my unsolicited, unprofessional view on their unfortunate story, I do wonder if the original source for all the mental illness wasn't the context itself: namely a single-income family with twelve blood brothers and sisters all living under the same roof. There's no textbook for how to deal with that in modern-day America. Indeed, the very first victim was the very first child- but only after all twelve were born. Seems like a clear red flag: this family's too big. Schizophrenia had never befallen their ancestors, nor has it yet appeared in any of their offspring. So it seems a safe bet that something about this *generation and this *environment spurred this *outcome. We can debate how they witnessed their dad's stroke, were abused by the priest, suffered head injuries playing sports, experimented with psychedelics, worked long hours in isolation... all as possible "triggers"- and the family does- but now we're drawing individual links to explain a group phenomenon. I'd be more inclined to look at the big picture, what with so many being supported by so few (no grandparents around either). For if the structural foundation is flawed, the home will be left more vulnerable to *any storm/trigger.
The fact that Mary (#12) is the only one who takes care of her sick brothers today reinforces that theory for me. The others seem not at all interested in holding up their end of the bargain. "We're not strong enough," they say, and that was tough to watch. I know the Galvins have endured a lifetime of trauma, but to abandon each other in their time of need is something else. It reflects a lack of empathy. After all, you hear the siblings use the word "fun" when they reminisce on their happiest times together- but never "love." Never. Their relationships seem linear and transactional to this day. So where is that rooted? Again, I'd say in a twelve-child household where everyone was used to competing for resources, attention and guidance. It affected them the same way then that it appears to affect them now- whether they're schizophrenic or not. Might this have simply been the case of too many people and no room for love?
Mary says early on that Mom and Dad wanted a large family for the sake of the Catholic Church. They felt it was their duty "to keep the faith going." It's an honorable pursuit and they're entitled to feel that way. But after all they went through and the tenor of their legacy, I can't help but think they might have been better served to prioritize child protection over wild procreation.
