Iām a little drunk and tired so this isnāt going to be as eloquently written as it deserves to be, howeverrr,
I think itās evident that in the IWTV/TVL fandom, thereās this simmering debate about moralizing the characters/show vs analyzing the show through a more critical & distant lense. And it reminds me of this time in college when I gave a presentation on a controversial religious sect and I was all āwell, theyāre good because of blah blah blah, butā¦. theyāre bad because of blah blahā. And my professor interrupted me in the middle of the presentation and goes āthis is the problem with Your Generationā¢ļø, you want to moralize everything and center yourself, but you will have a more impactful analysis if you stop inputting your own opinion and just analyze what is actually happening.ā
So itās kinda like the joke of there being a āWoke 1ā era vs the (current) beginning of āWoke 2ā, you know? Thereās an emerging bend towards understanding that identity politics and moralization flattens your (our) understanding and analysis of fictional events, or of historical events, etc. Thereās an emergent recognition & reflection of how identity politics has been used by the far right & the capitalist class to keep people divided and bickering. And stating this DOES NOT therefore mean that identity politics should be trashed altogether, or that thereās no such thing as marginalization or privilege, etc. It just means that viewing things purely through the lens of identity politics is, by definition, reductionist, and that this element of this type of analysis is essentially why it has persisted for so longā¦because we talk in circles and circles and, in many cases, the result is⦠what?
In fact, Iām not even bagging on identity politics in particular, itās just the prevalent method of our time. Like, analyzing anything through the lens of any one viewpoint is reductionist. Thatās what reductionist means⦠to reduce to one thing, one viewpoint, etc. In political theory classes you may be asked to write papers on topics from the perspective of certain theories, like camera lenses, and even though you donāt agree with a particular theory, you need to write the goddamn paper anyway. It is okay, and safe, and can even be fun, to engage with art or concepts that you donāt personally agree with.
And I sorta think that this is why IWTV has become so popular, besides the good writing, etc, etc. I think, when we look back in 10 years, this show is going to be so clearly āof itās timeā [affectionate] in the sense that it forces people to battle with this idea of there being a grey area. All of the characters suck and all of them are great. Theyāre literal monsters, remember? Like, they murder people? Like just cuz theyāre hot doesnāt mean theyāre not monsters. You like Lestat despite him abusing Louis by dropping him from 5,000 feet or whatever. You like Louis even though heās creeping on some waitress. You like Claudia even though she accidentally murdered the men she dated. You like Armand even thoughā even though, even though, even though.
And I think this season so far has created the start of some fantastic discourse about the cycle of abuse. It reminds me a lot of this Gabor MatĆ© video (around the 20min mark) where he discusses how a traumatic childhood event manifests in his relationship style with his wife. And he says that doesnāt excuse him and absolve him from responsibility, but rather it makes him ask what can he do to liberate himself so that he doesnāt continue this cycle of imposing his issues onto his wife. Do you see how this is a deeper & more effective analysis than ābad man in relationship is badā?
So anyway, I think thatās the underlying reason of why this show is so popular within the broader context of our societal consciousness (for lack of a less-pretentious way to say it). Weāre being introduced to this muscle that we havenāt had to exercise in a decade, or two, or maybe never. Weāre being forced to recon with the idea of there being grey areas and nuance. At the end of the day, characters are tools in the story, in the same way the lighting or the setting or the background score are tools. You know what I mean? Itās uncomfortable and thatās what makes it interesting, it makes you chew on it. A little friction isnāt bad. And in fact, not to be dramatic, but slowly adjusting to the idea of experiencing friction is probably necessary as we descend into fascism, etc etc. And pondering about a TV show is a very safe and easy way to do that.