I’m
always excited when the televisual powers-that-be launch shows that fit nicely
within my academic theories so this year’s debut of two new programs featuring
crisis-averting political narratives about the “behind-the-scenes” actions of
the White House thrilled me. NBC’s State of Affairs debuted after CBS’s
successful launch of Madame Secretary
and therefore had a relatively high bar set for it. So, I wasn’t necessarily surprised when it
didn’t live up to the hype.
I
wanted to like the show. As a longtime
fan of Grey’s Anatomy, I still have a
soft spot for Katherine Heigl and wanted to see her make a successful
transition back to television and to drama after her last decade of
unremarkable romantic comedies. (Don’t
get me wrong, I’ve seen just about every one and tolerated them well enough,
but still feel they did nothing to develop her acting career). I wasn’t sure if I could buy her in this new
role as Charleston Tucker, the president’s daily CIA briefer, but I was willing
to try. And, as I thought, it was hard
narrative to swallow.
In
some ways the role isn’t unlike what she’s been playing lately as most of her
romantic comedy roles find her playing a serious, uptight, smart (though
oftentimes simultaneously ditzy) woman opposite a chauvinistic or buffoon-like
male lead. And so part of this new
persona wasn’t too removed from all that as she again plays a professional,
serious, female at odds with her male counterparts. She also got to resurrect her role as a
distraught romantic mourner (ala Grey’s
Anatomy and the popular Denny Duquette storyline), as the pilot revealed
that Charleston is not only the president’s briefer but she was also to be her
daughter-in-law prior to her son’s sudden death (which occurred while they were
all ambushed in a convoy in Kabul during a pre-election campaign circuit).
I
almost gave up on the show after the first few episodes but I hung with
it. I still feel the acting is a bit
strained and I don’t yet like the characters as much as I do those on the other
new Fall programs I am following, but the plot is intriguing enough that I’m
tuning in to see if could live up to its potential. (For example, critics note that Alfre Woodard
is being underutilized in her powerful role as the first black female president
of the United States of America).
In
all truth, the show is really a collage of all the recent post-9/11 narratives,
which makes it a bit unoriginal. But,
perhaps because I like all those shows State
of Affairs is unabashedly borrowing from I’m able to enjoy it. It’s episodic “national problem of the week”
set-up is very similar to Madame
Secretary and its pacing and attempt at filmic aesthetics reminds me of The Blacklist (especially with the start
of each episode setting up the plot issue at hand). The subplots about political power struggles
mirror various moments from House of
Cards. The storyline concerning a mole within the
counterterrorist unit recalls any given season of 24. And the show is most
definitely trying to add some soap operatic melodrama into its mix in ways that
seem almost Scandal-esque. But, most of all, the main plot parallels Showtime’s
Homeland.
There
are echoes of Homeland’s Carrie Mathison
(Claire Danes) in State of Affair’s
Charleston. While Carrie suffers from bipolar
disorder, the first episodes show Charleston suffering from PTSD as she
struggles to recall the events leading up to her fiancé’s death. Both are even shown using a similar problematic
coping mechanism: alcohol-infused one
night stands. [Spoiler] Like Homeland, State of Affairs also focuses on the
reliability of a CIA asset. Three years
prior to the narrative start of State of
Affairs, Charleston’s off-the-books field work included attempting to turn
a high profile terrorist, Omar Fatah (Farshad Farahat). He was released with Charleston convinced
that their “enhanced interrogation methods” had successfully worked, despite
her partner (and later lover), Nick Vera (Chris McKenna), believing otherwise. When it is revealed that Omar Fatah was
present at the attack on the convoy, Charleston then feels all the more
responsible for her fiancé, Aaron’s death.
This is further complicated when her memories return and she realizes
that Fatah pulled her out of the convoy to safety and then shot Aaron in
self-defense.
I’m
not sure I’m exactly endorsing this show, but I suppose if one didn’t have time
to watch all the exemplary programs State of Affairs steals from that this
could serve as a short cut substitute.
And, perhaps it will still grow into something of its own.
The most pressing question I was left with as I caught up this show that had been taking up room on my DVR, was the one I always wrestle with: why are these post-9/11 political/governmental rescue shows so popular? Their sheer numbers are impressive and the number of accolades some of them have acquired are equally so. It’s a question that I’m not sure I can quite answer even on an individual level: do I watch because I enjoy seeing how these shows fictionalize the everyday headlines (of debates concerning torture, privacy rights, drone strikes, and oil pipelines)? Do I enjoy the catharsis of watching worst-case scenario perils thwarted by fictional political figures that often seem as corrupt and inept as our real ones? Do I like their cooptation of the action genre or, in some cases, the postmodern genre blurring? Despite their insistence that we’re a nation in perpetual danger, do I like the comfort they provide in promising that we’ll always overcome it? Do I like their political critiques and attempts to provide exposure to geopolitical concerns? Do I like that, in some small way, they don’t let us use entertainment as pure escapism as they conjure up recurring thoughts of the September 11th attacks.
I’m
not sure why I watch or why the masses watch, but I’ll keep trying to find the
answer that satisfies me… even if it means watching Heigl wear pearls and red
lipstick while playing one of the most prestigious intelligence-gathering figures.
No comments:
Post a Comment