"And then a hero comes along...." - Or maybe not

Last year's post, Thoughts on Crime and Morality, touched on something that has continued to tease my ponderings, especially while watching DVDs of two seasons of Showtime's TV series Homeland. This is another acclaimed and award-winning series without the traditional "hero" figure at its core. A cluster of such series has emerged during the last several years, some I've watched in full, or in part, others I've only read about. Critics and reviewers tend to group these series together as shows with an "anti-hero" figure as lead character. Breaking Bad's Walter White was a classic example, as was Tony of The Sopranos. I understand the lead character of Dexter was another, and the same goes for the lead in Wired. Mad Men's Don Draper character kind of fits, but without quite as much murder, mayhem and bloodshed. There are others too.

Homeland has as its anti-hero a mentally scarred, damaged and conflicted marine sergeant and former prisoner of war in the Middle East, Nicholas Brody. Also in the photograph below, the bi-polar but brilliantly talented and insightful CIA agent Carrie Mathieson. Damian Lewis and Clare Danes play those parts superbly.

I wonder whether the cluster of these ...call 'em "anti-hero series" for want of a more accurate term, came about due to writers copy-catting, keeping up with another channels' award-winners? Or was it simply a communal need by writers and audiences to get away from old well-worn patterns of white hat/black hat, good/bad, hero/heroine syndromes ? Or... was it perhaps something even deeper, affected by events in the real world?

Anti-heroes have, of course, been around since early man first told stories to listeners sitting around fires under the moon. Anti-heroes have popped up here and there in literature throughout the centuries, as well as in film and TV nearer to our own time: think of, for instance, Rhett Butler and/or Scarlett O'Hara (Gone with the Wind), Captain Ahab (Moby Dick), Paul Kersey, the vigilante in the Death Wish film series, "V"in V for Vendetta. However, the current crop, or indeed glut, of anti-hero series, has been a definite, noticeable trend.

In past decades, movies and TV had been honour-bound to follow a code of conduct aimed at protecting the morality of audiences. The first ‘General Principle’ of the Code was :

No picture shall be produced that will lower the moral standards of those who see it. Hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime, wrongdoing, evil or sin.

Could the recent widespread popularity of anti-hero tales be a reflection of life as she is currently lived, or at least perceived, by the masses? After World War 2, in mid-20th century there was a definite moral tone around, a clear difference between right and wrong was easy to discern. The ultimate evil of Nazi atrocities was still fresh in memory; returning soldiers, airmen and sailors were templates for heroes, families were re-united, better ways of life were envisioned. During the ensuing Cold War there were tales told of spies and counter spies, with a passing anti-hero involved here and there, but as the exception rather than the norm.

From the late 20th century to today, things have not been clear-cut. We've seen undeclared wars, conflicts and occupations, with no well-defined enemy. Without much imagination, the US and the UK could even have been seen as anti-heroic nations: think Vietnam, Korea, Northern Ireland, Falklands, constant mixes and matches in the Middle East (too many to list), coming right up to Afghanistan and Iraq. There was moral ambiguity aplenty, in those conflicts, not to mention on the home front where lies and manipulations from high places came thick and fast. Sex scandals wall-to-wall, Watergate, surveillance, drone strikes, the rot and corruption at the heart of things was becoming clearer as time passed. The scales have fallen from our collective eyes...or should have! The world isn't a chummy-scrummy ol' place where Pollyanna would feel at home, with police wearing white hats, and criminals decked in black, wrongdoers, especially those in high places, always getting their just deserts. We know this, because we've seen it - not on TV or on the silver screen - but in real life.

Is there really any wonder then, that TV shows such as Breaking Bad and Homeland resonate so well for so many?

I was fascinated by both the Walter White and Nicholas Brody characters, thanks in no small part to the talent of actors Bryan Cranston and Damian Lewis.

In Breaking Bad Walter White's first steps on his "road to Hell" were taken due to his terminal cancer diagnosis, and the need to spend most of his savings to obtain the best possible treatment, meaning there'd be nothing to leave for his wife and his two children's education and welfare. Root cause: shitty US corporate healthcare system. His first steps to cooking meth, though misguided, were capable of eliciting audience sympathy due to his motive. Once elicited, that sympathy was quite hard to let go!

In Homeland's story, the audience had to feel sympathy for marine Brody, a returning POW, after 8 years of imprisonment and torture in the Middle East. We initially resented the idea that he had been "turned" - broken - by long-term tortures inflicted upon him. Through plot twists and turns our loyalties wavered a wee bit, but once some details of his captivity came to light, I for one was rooting for him all the way to the end (which we haven't actually seen, as season 3 isn't available on DVD yet, but I've read spoilers). A secret US drone attack which killed 80 children was involved in what made Brody into the damaged and conflicted man he was to become.

Those two anti-heroes were the kind of anti-heroes I prefer.

I didn't warm at all to Tony and The Sopranos, that series didn't impress me one bit. We watched most of 3 seasons, had no wish to see more. Mad Men and Don Draper were interesting for the first 4 seasons, but it since has lost its sheen and novelty. There was no initial moral motive present in either of those series, just selfish greed for satisfaction, revenge or power. For my taste, without some semblance of a motive for which I could find sympathy, those two anti-hero stories failed. It's understandable why Mad Men has been successful, but for reasons unrelated to its anti-hero figure(s). It still remains a mystery to me why The Sopranos was such a huge hit for so long though.

Curtains For Breaking Bad

Tonight will bring Vince Gilligan's brilliant TV series Breaking Bad to its finale, titled Felina - re-arrage the letters, then listen to the words of Marty Robbins' old song El Paso. Do those lyrics give a hint of what to expect?
The song ends:

Felina is strong and I rise where I've fallen,
Though I am weary I can't stop to rest.
I see the white puff of smoke from the rifle.
I feel the bullet go deep in my chest.
From out of nowhere Felina has found me,
Kissing my cheek as she kneels by my side.
Cradled by two loving arms that I'll die for,
One little kiss and Felina, good-bye.

We're pretty certain Walter White aka Heisenberg will die, either from his cancer or the ricin he has in his pocket, or under a hail of bullets from the neo-Nazi gang who has his former co-meth-cooker Jesse imprisoned. But Vince Gilligan, creator of the series, often takes the plot along strange byways. Not much would surprise me tonight, except perhaps one of those dreadful faux get-outs such as the one about Bobby Ewing in Dallas, in decades gone by. The whole of one season's storyline, including Bobby's death, was disclosed as having been nothing but his wife's bad dream. Viewers wouldn't stand for that these days, and Gilligan wouldn't stoop to it, I feel sure.

Two links of interest, the first not only for Breaking Bad fans, but generally:
a very good piece by David Sirota. He proposes a theory I've had at the back of my mind for some time, but could never have put into words as well as he has:

Walter White’s sickness mirrors America
"Breaking Bad" strikes such a nerve because Walt's ills of body and soul are also those of our country
SNIP:

Here’s a theory: Maybe “Breaking Bad” has ascended to the cult firmament because it so perfectly captures the specific pressures and ideologies that make America exceptional at the very moment the country is itself breaking bad.

AND
A piece on Vince Gilligan's natal chart at Mountain Astrologer.

Gilligan, the show's creator has Sun in Aquarius, Uranus conjunct Pluto in Virgo. A good fit becomes obvious right there!

Whatever end awaits Walter White, and the rest of the cast, Mr White will stand as one of TV's best-remembered characters, and Bryan Cranston as having breathed life into such a complex being, giving what I think will be remembered as one of TV's most brilliant characterisations ever.

White Privilege? Asian Offence?

Racism has been a blot on mankind, and a particularly big blot on the USA's past. I guess that I shouldn't feel surprised that race remains imprinted so clearly on the consciousness of people here. Still, finding elements of racism in fictional entertainment when, really and truly it's not there, isn't helpful or wise, but seems to be the in thing just now. I recall mentioning in a blog post not long ago comments about why Dr Who is always cast as a white male (see here). At the weekend two articles at Salon touched on what the authors see as racism in TV dramas.


“Breaking Bad’s” racial politics: Walter White, angry white man
Walter's brutal meltdown shows genius way "Breaking Bad" deals with white privilege, and men who can't get enough by Todd Van Der Werff.

And

5 most offensive Asian characters in TV history
"Dads" is just the latest sitcom to employ crude racial stereotypes. Remember Ling Woo from "Ally McBeal"? by Anjana Sreedhar.

I can only comment on those of the mentioned dramas and shows we've seen.

Breaking Bad, in my view doesn't deal in racial politics or "angry white men" at all. It deals in moral decay, not "white privilege". There's nothing in the drama differentiating between the races in any detrimental way. There's a dark-skinned Latino guy who is equally as evil and "can't get enough" as is Walter White, and, as far as we know without Walter White's initial motivation to safeguard his family after his death and to pay for the best possible cancer treatment. Drug cartels in Mexico, South America, the USA and Czechoslovakia are involved - blame spread equally between contintents. Angry white man? That might be more accurate if expressed as angry 99%, colour irrelevant.

As for the "offensive" Asian depictions, we've seen Lucy Liu in all seasons of Ally McBeal and Margaret Cho in the single season of All American Girl.

Well.....we are unable to detect anything offensive in either portrayal, but then we're not Asian. Ling, Lucy Liu's character was perhaps smarter than the rest of the characters put together, richer than most and went farther than the lot of 'em - is that offensive? Margaret Cho's short-lived comedic series might have taken stereotyping of her and her family too far, but then, in comedy that's par for the course isn't it? We found the series (seen via DVD) entertaining, funny and didn't leave any bad taste about Asian Americans - rather an affectionate after-taste. Maybe that's offensive to some?

What is it about some factions in the USA who keep gnawing on this bone of race? Are they trying to drum up further trouble? It would seem so to this relative newcomer to the scene. When the ugly spectre of racism does actually raise its head it should be confronted loudly, no argument about that. Searching for it in every nook and cranny, and finding it where it is not, is not the way forward.

Red Lines In Art & In Life

President Obama's metaphorical "red line" drawn in an attempt to prevent or dissuade the use of chemical weapons, still could mean the use of military force by the USA and consequently even more killing. Seems to me to be counter-productive in the worst possible way.

We all have metaphorical red lines of one sort or another. This is being illustrated vividly by current TV series Breaking Bad.


I've mentioned Breaking Bad in a post once before, in February:
Thoughts on Crime and Morality. Since then, when we'd seen a backlog of old episodes via DVD, the series has returned to TV for its final season, a season taken in two "bites", first bite watched again via DVD, but we're now properly on board in real time on Sunday evenings for the last few episodes of all.

The story, layered and layered again as it is, never ceases to surprise us with twists and turns. Brilliant writing, even more brilliant acting, well deserving of Awards already received.

I never forget that, as Walter White, his family and his young, much abused protégé, Jesse Pinkman stumble towards what can only, logically, be a dark ending for all involved, that the insidious seed from which all this grew was lack of proper health care availability in the USA.

First we watched the "breaking bad" of a formerly mild mannered though talented chemistry teacher, his interaction with others who were either already broken themselves or on the cusp of it. The story was then about Walter White's breaking. As will always happen, once an apple turns rotten, the rot spreads.

We are now discovering exactly where, as with Obama and chemical weapons, the secondary characters each find their own "red lines". Walter White's wife, his brother-in-law and sister-in-law, all formerly presented as fine, moral, upright citizens, have at last reached their red lines and are, verbally at least, beginning to break bad.

What would it take for any of us to break bad? To consider killing, or even harming, another person? Threats to loved ones? Threats to our preferred way of life? Threats to our hubris or dignity? We wouldn't know for sure until presented with such scenarios in our own lives.

For our President, it's not a difficult choice. He can and does order drone attacks, which regularly kill innocents and children. I'd say he's broken bad already. He has the authority, now, in his own mind, to attack Syria, but is attempting to give himself cover by seeking the approval of Congress. How many of them have broken bad?

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.
Friedrich Nietzsche.

THOUGHTS ON CRIME and MORALITY

Three dramas have recently been part of our entertainment diet (one still at mid-meal). They have very different backgrounds but loosely similar themes: morality and crime, but they could hardly be called Morality Plays in the old sense: Les Misérables (book, film, musical); Breaking Bad (TV series); and Scandal (film about the real-life Profumo Affair in Britian in the 1960s.)

The stories prompt one to question commonly held rigid opinions of what is right and what is wrong. Is the law always right? Can there be moral justification for committing crime? Are crime and morality related, is crime always a moral indicator? In two of the dramas there are activities which, though against laws in place at the time, stemmed from valid personal reasons, considered by the law-breaker extreme enough to warrant his actions.

Nothing is easier than to denounce the evildoer; nothing is more difficult than to understand him.
― Fyodor Dostoevsky

Les Misérables

In Les Misérables the main character, Jean Valjean, stole a loaf of bread because his sister's children were starving. For this crime he was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment. 14 extra years and hard labour were added to his sentence because of his attempts to escape. He had broken the law, but wasn't it the moral responsibility of the governing body of France to make certain its citizens were not starving? Who would not steal bread to feed starving children? That's just the beginning. When his sentence is over he's put on probation, he has become hardened and inhumane, which is understandable. At the first opportunity he steals silver from a priest, who then forgives him, prevents his re-arrest and lifetime imprisonment, but tells him that it is on condition that, from then on, he will live a good life. He does so, changing his name as well as his lifestyle. An "establishment" figure, police officer Javert, hounds Valjean with a burning determination, obsessed by a need to adhere rigidly to the letter of the law. Javert wasn't wrong - but he wasn't right either.

A criminal remains a criminal whether he uses a convict's suit or a monarch's crown.
― Victor Hugo

Breaking Bad

In Breaking Bad, an acclaimed TV series we're watching via DVD, a highly qualified chemistry teacher in New Mexico, Walter White, discovers that he has inoperable lung cancer. He's a mild-mannered, easy-going family man. He has a pregnant wife and a teenage son who suffers from cerebral palsy. The treatments Walter White needs are horrendously expensive, will not be covered by insurance. He turns down the offer of help from a former business partner. Instead, he uses his rare expertise to begin "cooking meth" (the drug methamphetamine) and selling it, in partnership with a younger guy who knows the business. The expensive chemo therapies, paid for by ill-gotten gains from selling his high quality meth, do cause an improvement in his condition. Improved health means he's able to withstand an operation, set to cost some $200,000.....even more meth cooking and selling is needed.

Over time Walter White becomes hardened psychologically, he meets and does business with criminals and drug lords, as well as dealing with dark thoughts of his own early demise. He is closely involved in murders, multiple deaths, and other crimes directly and indirectly, as well as ensuring that more young lives are destroyed via drug use. We are only at Season 3 (of 5) so I cannot say how it will unfold, but Walter is gradually being turned to stone, morally, mentally and emotionally by results of his crimes.

When a man, before innocent, commits crime, he passes, by a sudden transition, into a new world. The significance of all objects around him is changed; the laws of association in his own mind are changed; a viper is born in his breast which stings and goads him. Sounds that he never heard before ring in his ears; a violated conscience turns avenger and scourger;--the foe is within him. Were it merely an external enemy, assaulting the criminal from without, perhaps he might be fled from, resisted, bribed, or would at last remit his inflictions through very weariness of tormenting. But not so with the consciousness of wrong.... It will not sleep, nor tire, nor relent.
HORACE MANN, Thoughts

Breaking Bad, though its crimes are on a far more serious level from those in Les Misérables raises similar questions. If you were diagnosed with inoperable cancer with, at most, months to live, no means to pay for expensive treatment, and had the skill to make meth (or carry out some other illegal activity), so that your family would not be left with huge medical bills, with likely loss of their home. Would you forgo treatment and face certain death within months, or use your skills, illegally, to make money enough to finance your treatment? There are other similarities to Les Miz too: Walter White's brother-in-law, Hank, is leader of a DEA (drug law enforcement) team pursuing some new mysterious meth-lord. So, Hank = Javert. Walter White takes the alias "Heisenberg" for his meth-dealing persona; Jean Valjean used "Monsieur Madeleine".

In Breaking Bad I see another immorality equal to, or worse than, that of Walter White - the lack of a proper, affordable health care system in the USA, such as is available in most other developed countries, where citizens would not face bankruptcy if catastrophic illness hit them. That is the single, over-riding, wrong which spawned though hardly justified, Walter Whites' huge crimes.

The more insidious kind of crime is writing the laws that make your crimes legal.
― Brandon A. Trean

Wrongs, crimes, immoralities are like trees and plants, they grow from a tiny seed, develop roots that spread, often in unexpected directions; stem and branches grow, bear poisoned fruit and they too, over time, spread beyond anything a person looking at that first tiny seed could have envisaged. In both Les Misérables and Breaking Bad "the seed" can be identified in societal wrongs: deliberate uncaring mis-management by government or ruling body.

Scandal
Circumstances of the third drama, the movie Scandal are somewhat different, and relate to a real-life slice of immorality - and vice rather than crime. It could stand as a morality play for politicians and powerful wealthy guys who like to prey on young women. The Profumo Affair from Britain's early 1960s, is storyline of the film. The film almost certainly skews and embroiders some facts for better dramatic effect. It can tell only basic facts we were allowed to know about the affair. There will be much more still hidden, and will remain so if certain powerful individuals have their way.

John Profumo, Britain's disgraced Minister for War was at the centre of this scandal, which had potential to bring the entire government down. Profumo was one of Dr. Stephen Ward's "clients". I see Ward as "the seed" in this story, for it was from his activities that all other actions grew. Oddly, some saw him as "fall guy". In acting as a high society procurer of young women for the Great and the Bad, Ward had no extenuating circumstance. He apparently did what he did just for the hell of it, and because he could. He wasn't in need of money, a successful osteopath with a client list filled with some of the wealthiest individuals in the UK.

Profumo, in betraying his wife (film star Valerie Hobson) and carrying on a affair with Christine Keeler, one of Ward's "young ladies", thought his powerful position made him invulnerable. There have been many men in similar situations since, there were many before, and will be many more in the future. Profumo, though, was particularly careless in that his chosen extra-marital lover, Christine Keeler was also extra marital lover of a Russian naval attaché, the pair were also introduced by Ward. Minister for War + Russian naval attaché : hot sex + cold war = alarm bells! The young women involved, Christine Keeler and of lesser importance Mandy Rice-Davies, were not forced into doing what they did. They were showgirls from poor backgrounds, willingly coerced, hankering after more bright lights and good times. They were teenagers - not an excuse, but a fact to be taken into consideration. There are no good guys or gals here, nor even any good intentions by bad guys. When eventually arrested Stephen Ward was accused of living off immoral earnings, he committed suicide rather than go to jail.
(Photograph: Ward and Keeler. Getty Images.)

The vices of the rich and great are mistaken for error; and those of the poor and lowly, for crimes.
~Lady Marguerite Blessington