Tag Archive: Social Commentary


This post is my second and last part of the series “Sci-fi Speaks Of Us”. View the first part here.

The rough “Black Mirror” is a three part television drama series which aired in December 2011, which was created by the British journalist and passionate satirist Charlie Brooker. He was the writer for the first episode, “The National Anthem”, which was a political thriller. In “The National Anthem”, a prime minister is more or less pressured into having sex with a pig on live television. Peer pressure is also a heavy theme in the second episode of “Black Mirror”, co-written by Charlie Brooker and his wife, Konnie Huq. The final episode, “The Entire History Of You”, was however handled by comedic writer Jesse Armstrong.

All of the episodes took place in different realities and settings, but as Mr. Brooker himself said: “They’re (the episodes) are all about way we live now – and the way we might be living in 10 minutes’ time if we’re clumsy”. When explaining the title of the series, “Black Mirror”, Mr. Brooker stated: “If technology is a drug – and it does feel like a drug – then what, precisely, are the side-effects? This area – between delight and discomfort – is where Black Mirror, my new drama series, is set. The “Black Mirror” of the title is the one you’ll find on every wall, on every desk, in the palm of every hand: the cold, shiny screen of a TV, a monitor, a smartphone.”

“15 Million Merits” stars Daniel Kaluuya as Bing, who lives in a depraved dystopia where everyone is forced into harsh physical toil, the only escape being to earn enough money to enter a TV talent show called “Hot Shots”. Overweight people are stigmatized by obligatory yellow clothing, being the lowest class in this fictional society. Commercials are constantly forced upon people in their homes, where the walls are all screens – you can skip them only if you pay. In the overly commercial society, Bing lives a lonely life until he meets Abi, a sweet natured young woman who has a beautiful singing voice. Enchanted by her voice, Bing convinces Abi to appear on “Hot Shots”. Abi does, she sings and moves the audience to tears, but unfortunately the jury is not pleased. Abi is then pressured into a rotten deal and Bing is left heartbroken. Eventually, Bings broken heart eggs him on to find a way to speak out against the unjust system…

The “Black Mirror” episode “15 million Merits” offers social commentary in its finest form. Through a tragic love story, Mr. Brooker and Ms. Huq tackle issues as sizeism, commerciality, the cost of privatization, the dysfunctional dream of celebrity and peer pressure. The world created in “15 Million Merits” is due to the people’s obsession with fitness and materials, neglecting any depth. Both Abi and Bing try to bring some form of feeling into the viable world they live in only to conform into the system by the end. “15 Million Merits” is honest in its depiction of humans: some people do want to rebel against systems that are cruel. Simultaneously no one’s completely immune to peer pressure and thus lose their rebellious or unique nature.

The extreme prejudice towards overweight people imagined in this Dystopia is pretty chilling to watch. A newly morphed and highly exaggerated form of prejudice found in this future of the media image is one which we can readily recognize, the prejudice against people of a larger girth and bigger bodies. Our common stereotype that overweight people are food obsessed and total slobs is inflated in by the politics of distraction in this dystopian moment and the population of this time are served video games and television shows where this stereotype is used as the misguided focus where citizens are encouraged to humiliate and underscore their misconceptions of the large sized among them. “15 Million Merits” addresses the danger points of marginalizing people for their body types in our society (or any type of prejudice) and shows us how viewing the “other” in our midst is used by an oppressive society to distract the populace from the actual horrors being carried out upon them and us. The subtle and constructed loathing that which leads to plus-sized people being viewed as less worthy citizens and persons is used by the weighty hand of the dominating social system to defer the majority from seeing, and recognizing, the tangible arrangement of subjugation forced upon them.

Along with this indictment of the politics of prejudice this wonderful episode also delivers a scathing and exact depiction of reality television. Mr. Brookner seems to nestle with the beliefs of satirist Bill Maher who once said: “reality television is nothing but cruelty and people enjoying cruelty”. Imagining if cruelty were used by the system to make of a person’s life only this as the founding principle of existence, Mr. Brookner and company explore the politics of distain and how this forms the core of existential emptiness.

The Jury of “Hot Shots”

It is this deployment of prejudice and emptiness by a system, far removed from the living experience, which fuels and is critiqued in the horrifying future Mr. Brooker and Ms. Huq illustrate here. And, sadly, one which is most readily seen in the trajectories and moments of our lives lived now and the political and corporate systems which hope to contain us.

While the story line in “15 Million Merits” is great, the acting is also superb. Daniel Kalyyla and Jessica Brown Findlay are perfect in their roles as lonely outsiders, trying to find a connection in an isolating and media deadening world. (Spoiler alert!) I truly felt for the Bing and Abi as an unlucky couple, which made the ending all the sadder.

“15 Million Merits” is a must see for Science Fiction lovers.

Konnie Huq and Charlie Brooker

“Family Guy” is a pretty unique animated show that awakes many different emotions in me– some very good, some very bad. The show is a true, surrealistic rollercoaster. I enjoyed the shows first couple of seasons, but honestly have hated the last couple of seasons, due to repetitive nasty hits at overweight women and badly written characters. I digress though.

The series centers on the Family Griffith, who is contain of Peter, the usually dimwitted, politically incorrect, child-like, and spiteful main star, his phenomenally beautiful wife Lois, and their three children. The oldest is the outcast, brutally bullied teenage daughter Meg, the early teen Chris who like his father is a bit slow, and the evil genius infant Stewie. The family also has, of course, a pet: the talking, wise human-like dog Brian, who this post will be about.

Brian, despite being the pet of the family, functioned as the voice of reason for the earlier years of the show. He was portrayed as a liberal, reasonable and unhappily in love with Lois as well as a bit of a drinker, though intermittently. Brian was shown on several occasions as being critical of religion, but it wasn’t until the seventh season, in the episode “Not all dogs go to heaven”, when the series finally “outed” Brian as an atheist. In the Episode, Brian, due to Meg’s sudden conversion to Christianity and attempt push to bring Brian into the “flock” of her church (and their form of Christianity), gently laughs and states: “You’re barking up the wrong tree, Meg. I’m an atheist”. When watching this episode, I was at first blush overjoyed at first at this radical act (seeing how being non-religious is still taboo on TV), but then began to reconsider what this act would mean and my first hesitations seem born out after the show’s recent episodes featuring Brian as the main protagonist which show character flaws wildly out of synch even for this genre. I cannot but wonder: is Brian really a positive portrayal of atheism? Or does his character just re-enforce negative stereotypes or images of us non-believers?

***Spoilers may be below!***

Let’s first look at how the writers of “Family Guy” talk about the experience of being an atheist in the States. “Not all dogs go to heaven” was a brilliant episode in this case, showing all the prejudice Brian meets after Meg gossips to the whole town about his atheism. Brian is not allowed to go to from such divergent venues as liquor stores to libraries, and is ridiculed on TV for being “worse than Hitler”. Admittedly, some of the discrimination may seem exaggerated; however there is something unsettlingly true in the depiction as well. To some religious folks, not believing in god is the worst possible sin, making us even worse than serial killers or mass murderers (especially if the criminals happen to believe in god). This is a pretty extreme belief and actively held by some, and which is portrayed comically in “Family Guy” when the intensely religious News-People announce Brian to be by far worse than Hitler.

Brian also gets brutally (yet only verbally) attacked by Lois and Peter after his confession. Lois states: “We believe in god in this family!” which showed how sometimes even people close to non-believers can be unsympathetic and dismissive to a theoretical structure struggled to be achieved. Brian gives even in to this pressure to “believe” temporarily, pretending to have “found god”, since he can’t take the peer pressure. But after witnessing Meg burning books about science (since she feels they are contrary to the “statements of God”) Brian gives a harsh talk to Meg, crushing her belief. The speech is devastating to Meg, since Brian points out some painful things to Meg about her life and how that is really what has spawned her beliefs. To this Brian then gives a more hopeful, comforting speech. The whole episode, in my opinion, is a perfect way of telling not only what it can sometimes feel like to be an atheist, as one can in a cartoon, but also is good in showing that Brian is a caring person, crushing the stereotype of the heartless cold atheist.

Meg trying to convert Brian

Brian was portrayed in a positive light during most of the output of the show. He had his flaws, but always came through with reason, compassion, and self-reflection underlying his thoughts and actions. It was in Season Eight where Brian started to become decidedly more odd and began a run of doing questionable things with little intellectual nuance or moral underpinnings. Take as an example of this the Episode “Brian writes a bestseller”, from Season Nine. In this episode Brian is depressed over his published novel doing so poorly, stating to Stewie that only trash literature and phony self-help books make it big. To prove his point he writes one himself and publishes it. It becomes a bestseller, making Brian famous and rich, sweaping him away to the hinterlands of fame, recognition and media adulation, and making him along the way into an arrogant, megalomaniac and mean spirited person. He comes to treat those around him as mere props to his existence (including Stewie who has facilitated his empty rise) and who seem to be considered by him now mere objects to satisfy his random and arbitrary desires. In particular harsh scenes, Brian is shown yelling at Stewie and verbally abusing him for anything that annoys him. This, in a number of painful scenes brings Stewie to tears and self doubt over his supposed lack of abilities to gratify the chance cravings of Brian.

The episode’s climax comes when Brian is invited onto “Real Time with Bill Maher”, a real show hosted by one of Americas most famous non-believers. Maher trashes the book heavily, making Brian confess that he wrote the best seller in a day, and that he doesn’t really believe in anything written in the book. Maher then tells Brian that he is the lowest of the low, since if one is going to bullshit; they should have the “honesty to stand by their bullshit”. Brian, coming somewhat back to his normal self after the harsh critique returns home where he talks a little to Stewie saying that he knows the book was dumb and his behavior inappropriate in extreme.
However, even at this point of the narrative – where a reasonable lesson has been learn and self-reflection is re-imposed by the awareness of the emptiness of his fame – Brian openly admits he will not apologize to Stewie for mistreating him. Here Brian is made into a truly horrible person, who not only doesn’t apologize after treating someone so poorly, but also a person who is actually so arrogant he refuses to learn from mistakes.

Brian at this juncture of the show (and others which are embed in these later seasons, and which can be recounted, but will merely “add” to the direction being taken in this case episode presented here) is made into such a terrible person that it is quiet imperative to reconsidered whether it is good his character is one of the few out-ted atheist characters on TV or not. Since there are so few atheist protagonists around, it is important that at least some of the more famous ones would not strengthen the stereotype that we’re morally-vacuous, empty-elitists, and intellectually-devious self-gratifies which no genuine concern for others beyond the narrowest of evil self-interest who wish to contaminate and spoil. Brian, in this episode, in bodied the stereotype to a max.

Brian was also shown to perhaps not truly stand for any of the opinions he’s expressed in the show, since he abandoned them all in the episode “Excellence in Broadcasting”. Brian, in the episode, becomes a republican and so conservative, he actually tries to go and waterboard – torture – a Democrat (the” supposedly” more left-leaning, worker-supporting party in the United States). Lois pinpoints in the episode that Brian has a need to go against the stream, to always have the more “unpopular” opinion. If that is the case, and Brian really gets all his opinions that way, does that mean he is only an atheist since they are a minority? Not only does this make Brian seem childish, but makes everything he said in previous episodes unimportant. So it is impossible to take his atheism seriously.

There was also the misfortune of Brian actually trying to force Lois to kiss him (maybe even more) in “Play it again, Brian”, a episode from season six. This act of creepiness and slight (though significant) violence towards a woman was before he was outed as an atheist (in a later season), which in a way makes him a lost case as a “model” for an acceptable and representative non-believer from the start.

I want to like Brian’s character. Aside from Dr. House from “House” (who is a total stereotype of the mean, miserable atheist) and Dr. Temperance Brennan from “Bones”, Brian is one of the most mainstream portrayals of atheist in popular culture. Yet his character was made so completely unlikeable and unreliable in the later seasons of the show, it feels like a disfavor for non-religious people that Brian was ever made a openly atheist character.
Seth Macfarlane, the creator of “Family Guy” and voice talent of Brian, also made his other characters, Haylee Smith and Roger the alien from “American Dad!”, atheist. But even these characters don’t really do much for the atheist community. Haylee is bland and hardly does anything memorable, and Roger is a sociopath who seems able to be anything which can temporary satisfaction.

What is lacking from popular culture is an atheist character that is portrayed as likeable. Few Medias have done this.
Daria Morgendorffer, from the animated series “Daria”, was done well, and somewhat outed as an atheist in the last season. Also Mal from “Firefly” was a good atheist character: anti-hero who despite some flaws was a good person. However, these shows have been cancelled or are off the air now. I was hopeful Brian would be the next Daria or Mal, but no such luck. Seems like we atheists have to wait a little longer for a more positive depiction.

“The Boondocks” was an animated television series that aired from 2005-2010. It ran for three seasons with the third and final season taking a full two years to complete. The show starred the unusual and charmingly abrasive Freeman family, which is composed of a grandfather and two grandchildren, all with extraordinarily strong characteristics, and all African-Americans. The main protagonist of the series, Huey Freeman, is a ten year old of Marxist inclination who attempts, always, a rational view of everything around him with a sharp economic/political and critical/analytical eye. The show, and most specifically the first season, centered around Huey’s criticism of  US politics, evaluations of black culture, especially Rap, Hip Hop, and pop culture, and ferreting out the hidden racism in the culture around him. This was the shows high point; Huey’s thoughts and tragicomic reflections on his encounters with a” back-words society” (a backwards society based on a language of oppression) were witty and thought-provoking. “The Boondocks” first season, and the last five episodes of season two, really dared the viewer to confront their own ideas and prejudices. Huey Freeman as a character alone was a challenge, alone, in following his moving ideals and ethical values. The creator of the show, and majority writer of the episodes, Aaron McGruder, often used Huey as an alter-ego to represent his ideas and critiques.

The other main protagonists of the series were the eight year old Riley Freeman who represented the misguided direction of consumer-oriented and culturally controlled black youth. His arrogant admiration, near worshipping of mainstream popular Rap culture was a mainstay of the series. Riley’s penultimate dream is of one day becoming a real “Gangsta”, meaning a rich as hell, tough-guy criminal. McGruder uses Riley as a foil to talk about the pitfalls of a self-destructive and negating black culture for its young members, and is exactly the opposite of the Black Culture of Affirmation and Progression Huey typifies.

Robert Freeman is the somewhat neglecting Grandfather of the two young boys. He spends most of the show looking for a girlfriend, never really succeeding. He often is as misguided as Riley, even, at times, taking Riley’s bad advice instead of the sage admonishments of Huey. The boys, however, both express overt signs of affection towards Robert; even if it’s not quite clear, in turn, what he feels towards them.

“The Boondocks” plied a diverse field of themes from the Iraq War, to homophobia in Black culture, to mainstream capitalism. Sadly the final season lost the show’s original charm and political edge. Yet, even if the last bits were a letdown, there have been few gutsier attempts on TV.


Aaron McGruder

Even if I love this show, I have to admit that one thing that always bothered me was its portrayal of women. To be fair, McGruders representation of women wasn’t always bothersome. Before the TV-show, “The Boondocks” was a comic strip McGruder solely penned. The comic strip (whose characters and themes were explored, also, in the animated show) often featured strong, independent, secure and rational women. To point out how this divergence takes place between the mediums – in the strip series, Riley had a female teacher called Mrs. Petterson. She was a smart no-nonsense lady who treated Riley as an equal and no differently than the others in her predominately white class. Mrs. Peterson never was want to put up with his bad behavior and responded to it always with reserve and fairness. She was shown as a reasonable white person working within the school staff; while the principle and Huey’s teacher Mr. Petto were shown as soft-racists who couldn’t handle the idea of community with, teaching as equals, or even justly interacting with black students. Mrs. Peterson, however, gives little thought to Riley’s ethnicity and is concerned only with his behavior in the teaching environment.

Another example is the neighbor Sara, a white woman who is married to a black man. The couple are both lawyers who have a single, biracial child, Jazmine. Within the marriage, McGruder positions Sara as the reasonable one and somewhat more open minded than her spouse. Even when Huey tells fairy tales to her daughter with alternative and exaggerated social commentary, and in confronting inappropriate behavior in the School staff (in regard to ethnicity), Sara is shown as fundamentally open while simultaneously being socially and ethically unfaltering. McGruder has Sara even go as far as to vote for a third party in the US elections, something Huey expresses as a brave and radical thing to do. In the Strip, then, Sara represents all the characteristics of female pure awesomeness and empowerment!
Sara shows up in the Television show too, and this is where the problem begins.

As Sara in the comic strip was intelligent and strong, Sara in the television show was a painful thing to behold. The first episode of the animated series to delve into her personality was, “Tom, Sarah and Usher” (Ep. 2, s. 2), and portrayed her as an immature, giggling spouse who continually embarrasses her husband in public. When she meets the singer Usher in a restaurant, while she and her husband Tom are celebrating their anniversary, Sara starts to go “Fan-girl” on Usher, leaving her husband to sit alone at their dinner table. Another horrid example of this behavior McGruder gives her, in the animated series. Is from “It’s a Black president, Huey Freeman” where Sara acts hysterically and is consumed whole in the Frenzied Idol Worship of Barack Obama. McGruder turns Sara from one of the most fully expressed mature grownups in the Comic strip to a simpering and vacuous gender pacesetter in the animated series.
Other examples of poorly portrayed women McGruder proliferates within the animated series are Luna, a young black woman Robert dates. Luna typifies the stereotypical bitter woman who takes her disappointment from past relationships and embeds it in all the other relationships around her. Not being complete in herself as well, Luna is propelled to take bad advice from her “girlfriend” and apply it to her world and relations.

And, lastly, a predominantly large and obvious number of female side characters who meandered across the Boondocks Universe either were to be women marked as prostitutes or (music) video vixens.
Yet, luckily and in the end, Boondocks was too deliver one episode that made up – well, almost! – For these near misogynistic portrayals.

The second season featured an episode titled “The Story of Catcher Freeman”. This episode features three stories about a man named Catcher Freeman, and legendary ancestor in the Freeman family tree. While Robert and a (self-hating) black man named Ruckus tell the tale of Catcher Freeman as one of a tough, strapping, and ultimate masculine Hero, Huey discovers that the true hero of the Catcher Freeman chronicle was a woman of no small skills and spontaneous bravery named Thelma. In this episode McGruder shows us that even when women are the historical and human motivators of Action and Belief they get no credit and, indeed, become invisible to the world. McGruder also makes this episode an insightful mockery of men’s daydreams of always, and continually, being the Center of the World and the Creators of History.

Given this, it is obvious McGruder’s way of portraying women is erratic and problematic. At times his Gender politics is right on, while at other times his view of the female borders on misogyny.

Why is this the Case in Boondocks? Perhaps McGruder often becomes seduced, trapped and contained by certain clichés and stereotypes of women that exist inside a specific ideological location in the Black community (or even American community in general). There will always, and often, be a dangerous interplay between culturally ingrained ideas about gender and those which are rationally confronted by the individual. How this plays out in the secondary field of ethnicity is the problematic which McGruder confronts in the Animated Series and where this gender vision comes out as lacking verses the Comic Strip which comes through with flying colors in regard to gender and the ethnicity of the characters.

“The Boondocks” as a whole is an extremely impressive and important show. The first season was totally unapologetic in its social commentary and the animation was brilliant and unique (highly informed by anime). The second season has its moments of flight and whimsy as well, with the highlight of “The Story of Catcher Freeman”. “The Boondocks” is historically important as it is one of the first (PJ’s by Eddie Murphy being the first) and undoubtedly the best televised animation centered on African-American experiences and has a critical and analytical view of this culture.