Then was It 'cause of Lack of Integration? Matt Roush' Take on Z-lash

Matt Roush in his weekly Q&As airing on 30 May deals with some psychological reasons for Zach having chosen to be 'the' bad guy. To tell the truth, I can see his points.

[Only admins are allowed to see this link]

Question: I actually liked the Bones reveal of Zack being the Gormogon's apprentice. If they were going to have one of the characters be the apprentice, he is the only one that makes sense. Zack, to me, is a genius child in an adult body. Obviously, he was immature socially and not at the same social level as other people his own age. He was childlike, and who better to manipulate than a child. He is the only character that I would believe is capable of being turned. The only thing I did have an issue with is if he hadn't killed the lobbyist, they could have brought him back into the fold eventually. Through therapy with Sweets, they could have explored why he became the apprentice. Which I guess they could still do, but a murder rap is a little harder to beat (unless you're Brennan's father). I will find it interesting to see how the team reacts to the fact that none of them had a clue he was the apprentice till the end, and how they interact with and "trust" each other now. — Cynthia W.
Matt Roush: After earlier saying that virtually no one liked this storyline, I guess I should have expected to hear from defenders. Some good points here, although I tend to side more with Karen L.'s take. She wrote: "Unlike many, I'm perfectly fine with the concept of the Zack reveal on Bones. It's the execution that bothered me. I understand the writers' strike screwed things up, but why not have the Gormogon-revisited storyline be a season-ending cliff hanger, and then have the Zack reveal next season? I could have really enjoyed the twist if it hadn't been so rushed and had been better supported."

I'm not sure I ever would have bought it completely, but it was the clumsiness of the finale that really threw me as well. And I'll give the final word for now to Brett H., whose analysis qualifies as the most, shall we say, heartfelt. He explains, in part:

"The show at its core is about the need as human beings to integrate and sometimes supersede cold logic with a warm heart. That is the basis for the sexual tension between Booth and Bones as well as the foundation for the best relationships on the show. They have used Bones to show the positive, and yes messy, impact of moving in a heart direction. I think they wanted to show the negative impact of not being able to move in a heart direction. Zack was the character who couldn't connect at a heart level. He was dedicated to cold logic and saw little if any value in anything else, which made him capable of horrible things while being able to rationalize it."