Skinner's Zero Summed Up

Is ‘Zero Sum’ really zero sum?

them0vieblog.com says this:

Even the title of Zero Sum alludes to the hollowness of Walter Skinner’s deal with the devil, his moral compromise that has no demonstrable benefit and severe demonstrable harm.

While it is difficult to disagree with this assessment of Skinner’s predicament, does it describe a zero sum game?

In ‘Momento Mori’, Assistant Director Skinner made a deal with the CSM in the belief that the latter could provide the cure to Scully’s cancer. There is an issue worth highlighting here. A character also known as ‘Cancer Man’, who wasn’t able to cure his own cancer (cf. ‘Talitha Cumi’), supposedly has the wherewithal to cure an Agent who is dedicated to working against his objectives. What was Skinner thinking?

Even if, after Skinner compromised his moral and professional position, the CSM did indeed provide the cure still this would not be a zero sum situation. The essence of the zero sum game is that resources are both known and fixed. What the winner wins is equal to what the loser loses. In ‘Zero Sum’ what is won by the CSM and what is lost by Walter Skinner and how are they equal?

It isn’t even accurate to say Skinner has no demonstrable benefit by episode end. Mulder demonstrates that he is reliable and to be trusted. That seems to be quite a big win and explains Skinner’s determined efforts to aid Scully and Mulder in ‘Redux I’ and ‘Redux II’.

Upon testing Skinner’s gun, the ballistics technician states that it is “without doubt” the murder weapon. He then asks, “So where’d you find it?” With a significant look between himself and Skinner, Mulder answers, “In a sewer grate… around the corner from the crime scene. Sometimes you get lucky.” Skinner certainly has just got lucky. And he’s about to get even luckier as the ballistics tech informs the pair, “The serial number – it’s been filed clean off. Well, unless forensics pulled a print, this gun is virtually untraceable.”

By episode end, we have a fair idea of what Skinner had to lose, would have lost if not for Mulder. We have no idea what the CSM had to gain.

The simplest zero sum game takes place between two players. Each knows what is at stake and have fixed resources with which to play. In no way does episode depict such a scenario.

Imagine, if you will, five guys playing poker. Each has paid five dollars to enter the game and the winner takes all. This is zero sum as each player knows the stakes being played for, no communication about strategy occurs between them and the winner takes home only the $25 in the pot. Contrast this scenario with Robert Patrick’s losing at poker in Season 2, Episode 6 of ‘The Sopranos’. Because the resources in the game played in ‘The Happy Wanderer’ are not fixed, Patrick’s character, David Scatino, loses far more than he can pay. This is not zero sum.

In making a deal with the CSM, Skinner is as much out of his depth as Scatino is playing poker with the Mafia. While he could easily have lost as much and more than Scatino, Skinner ends the episode with a big win, the knowledge that he can trust Agent Mulder. Almost makes all he has just gone through worthwhile.

I think it was Doyle Brunson who said, “Poker is a game of chance played with skill.” * This would work as a definition of a zero sum game. Would probably also work as a good definition of the game of life.

* If you can confirm Doyle Brunson actually was the author of this quote please let me know.