This is a companion piece to Chuck vs. the Journal. That piece contains Chuck's journal, which he was required to write by the government, to evaluate his mental well-being. This story contains the analysis of the journal. It won't make sense unless you've read the journal.

Journal note – the episode aired on 12/15 took place on 12/24, so the events from that episode won't appear in the journal until that date.

Case #: 32e227bb8df8f072d6dcdf9170344e10

Date: Dec. 17, 2008

Report:

Abstract: Using civilians as intelligence assets or as agents has a checkered past. Often, agency's greatest highs and lowest lows can be tracked to the mercurial mental state of untrained, undisciplined individuals. This is the second report in an on-going examination of a valuable civilian asset.

Introduction: Our only interaction with the subject is through a series of journal entries. He is being required to log at least 500 words daily for a month. The eventual goal of this study is to provide a list of recommendations at the end of the report, to increase the likelihood that the asset will perform more in-line with the expectations of our agencies [4].

Methodology: At this point, we are still primarily examining the general motives of the subject and looking for obvious patterns in his journal entries. We have begun preliminary investigations into word selection and techniques, but these methods require at least 11,000 words before they become statistically relevant. For more details, see the initial report [1].

Midpoint Observations: The majority of the entries in the second time period followed the subject's established norms – exactly 500 words describing events from the day, meandering philosophical discussions based on contemplation of earlier events, articles reflecting on the unfairness of the situation, etc. The entry of the 11th broke all of those norms and demands its own analysis, which will follow the opening discussion of on-going trends.

We see continued signs of concern about finances – while discussing donations, holiday presents, changing residences, and in a variety of other contexts. We also see on-going signs of the subject's resistance to the project – exactly 500 words written in most entries. This and the vocabulary selections of the subject lead us to believe he is highly intelligent and capable, when properly motivated. The on-going theme of the importance of people is the most prevalent, however. Not a single entry dealt with purely personal issues; every day had some interpersonal relations discussed.

Even without being informed that the subject was a civilian, we would have been able to posit his role with a reasonably high expectation of success. The subject appears to have a very open personality. He discusses the difficulty of keeping secrets. We also have seen more personal disclosures and introspection events recorded at this point than we often do after a full month. The strain of keeping his double life secret will continue to be a challenge for the subject. This concern is exacerbated by the details of the entry of the 11th outlined below.

The subject appears to believe himself adrift, personally and professionally. Many entries end or move through sentiments of lack of direction or, worse, a perceived lack of control over the future. "How do I get there from here?" [6] is indicative of the subject's desire to control destiny, while admitting to an inability to envision the path necessary. One entry contemplating this directionless existence would not be unusual [3], but the subject addresses the issue in no fewer than five entries (9th, 10th, 11th, 13th and 14th). This is indicative of a potentially disturbing pattern. A feeling of lack of control is often an effective point at which to begin a conversion. Giving an illusion of control can start to influence and individual and mask their ability to differentiate between fantasy and reality. This should be watched closely.

These all combine to give the impression that the subject is lacking a mentor or other trusted individual in whom he can confide. He himself recognizes this, bemoaning the short-coming on a number of occasions. He seems to not trust Agent Casey and is too emotionally involved with Agent Walker for her to be a full confidant. The other civilians in the subject's life are all obviously unsuited, with the possible exception of Captain Awesome. The journal has provided an outlet, but all written records are subject to compromise and are therefore potentially dangerous, too. Until an outlet for his emotions are found, the subject will continue to be inordinately volatile and unpredictable, even beyond what it normally expected.

The very interesting entry on the 11th only further supports this evidence. The subject's confidence and secrecy masks do not seem to crack, like many people's do; rather they shatter into a complete surrender to other instincts and interests. This trait has been linked with additional susceptibility to dissociative fugues, depression, and long work absences. It is also very difficult to predict. For example, Agent name omitted showed this tendency. After three failed missions, one including torture, we believed him to be safely past it. Then his pet cat died, and he disappeared off grid for two years. When we found him, he was living a life as a dentist in Arizona [5]. This personality trait also makes changing any of the subject's surroundings fraught with difficulty. It is impossible to tell what might trigger a shattering of confidence. While this particular incident appears to have had very short-lived consequences (the subject's entries were back to approximately normal the next day), the next may trigger a multi-year depression or fugue.

This personality trait also increases the likelihood that the subject will attempt to flee his role and responsibility with little or no warning. The delicate nature of a person who fluctuates so wildly in writing, with loss of discipline, points to potential problems with abrogating other responsibilities, when the difficulties become too high, instead of confronting things head-on initially.

The nature of the subject's relationship with Agent Walker has been clarified, though not resolved. He is clearly dangerously infatuated with her and wishes she would return his affection. Because the subject is untrained, determining her true motives from his perspective is nearly impossible. Knowing Agent Walker's true feelings would be an additional clue to the puzzle, which would allow a fuller examination of the nature and perceptiveness of the subject.

A danger comes in her ability to protect him. By the nature of their professions, agents are required to go into dangerous circumstances frequently. The subject professed a desire to protect Agent Walker and a willingness to die in her stead. This will exacerbate the danger of all situations, as Agent Walker must not only protect herself but must also worry about the safety of the asset. As the asset is untrained in all matters, this will inevitably lead to increased exposure to danger for both, unnecessarily.

However, because of the high probability of emotional fragility of the subject, as indicated by his inability to reasonably hide his feelings for Agent Walker in innocuous talk and the nature of the ultimate disclosure, removing Agent Walker from the situation is not recommended. Her presence may be a primary factor keeping the subject from completely abandoning responsibility to missions. Additionally, the value of the subject might need to be compared to that of Agent Walker. It is distinctly possible that her presence will be necessitated for the entire duration of the subject's mission life, that is, while the subject's continued support will be required. It may already be too late to pull her without doing irreparable harm to the subject.

The subject uses the word "real" or "really" in reference to Agent Walker or their relationship 17 times in this day's entry. His vacillation between believing that Agent Walker has shown her real self and believing their relationship might be real and the fear and belief that it is all a sham is understandable. Civilians generally have no understanding of the rigors of the training undergone by agents and how scrupulously they protect honest information about themselves or their families (though Agent Walker apparently introduced her father to the subject, which may be indicative of additional compromise on her part).

Matters of the heart are notoriously difficult to predict. Since the subject is so obviously emotional about his perceived relationship with Agent Walker, we can expect to see illogical behavior and unpredictable changes in mood and demeanor. Every action of Agent Walker is probably analyzed and searched for meanings, intended or accidental. She will probably prove the fulcrum on which his future behavior will tilt. That is dangerous but it does provide a possible method of projecting additional power over the subject.

Request for Information: The midpoint of the study period provides an opportunity to request additional information, beyond the background already presented [2]. We understand the sensitivity of all information surrounding this subject and realize that our requests may not be honored, but we cannot overstress how much additional information aids the process of understanding a subject.

The first piece of information involves the feelings of Agent Walker towards the subject. While these should not be communicated to the subject, knowing how well he is reading the situation will provide better insights into his psyche. Additionally, the potential for dangerous compromise of the agent exists and we would like to study this in greater depth. This report should come directly from Agent Walker – any information from Agent Casey would be as subject to misinterpretation as that from the subject himself.

Second, the history of the subject did not mention any episodes of dissociative fugue or significant bouts with depression. The subject has made very little mention of his past, and the past informs the future. A fuller medical and psychological profile would be advantageous.

References:

[1] Foreman, Kazlowski. "Initial Report on Case 32e227bb8df8f072d6dcdf9170344e10." December, 2008.
[2] Government Report 333722 "Initial Data on Case 32e227bb8df8f072d6dcdf9170344e10." November, 2008.
[3] Hernandez, Kazlowski, Wang. "Case study 3334ddb94c78921e61f4565ce5bebf15." NSA Special Report. June, 1986.
[4] Kazlowski. "Revised Method for Studying Subjects Without Interaction". NSA Brief. September, 1989.
[5] Kazlowski, Poulus. "Case study 5f84dfc29d684bec1db746aa491ef914 Follow-Up: On the Nature of Dissociative Fugues and Associated Traits." February, 2002.
[6] Subject's journal. "Day 13." December, 2008.