Quote:
Originally Posted by blaise
Didn't salon run a similar kind of aritcle last year? I wonder if it was the same guy. I think it is absurd. The way he keeps using the word, "supremicist" makes it seem like it's an active goal of the show's writers and creators. As if the show was organized around a desire to further some white supremicist agenda. That is absurd. Using the phrase, "white supremicist," takes it from a people rooting for Walt because they can relate to him concept to a white people like it because they're racists level. He's not just saying the show is popular because many people can relate to Walt in terms of his race and his initial middle class existence. He's saying there's an active desire to make people say, "yeah, white people!" There's nothing wrong with creating a character that people can relate to. You're supposed to look at Walt at the beginning and think he looks like someone you might know. That's part of the show. He's the guy next door, or your teacher, and he broke bad.
For the author take it a step further and act like people's joy comes from some racial conflict where white comes out on top makes me think he just has an agenda against the show, or he just wants a reaction and he's reaching for the race card, which is the easiest way to get a reaction.
The way he refernces The Wire in the article makes me think he probably suffers from Whitlock's Wire vs Breaking Bad mentality.
|
I don't disagree with you. As many of the commentators posted in the comments on salon, it reads like a marxist/postcolonialist deconstruction straight out of academia. Nothing wrong with that, as I find it kind of entertaining to apply that lens to pop culture, whether I agree with the analysis or not.
And I'm not sure if salon ran something similar before. Most of their entertaining writers are pretty huge fans of the show, and this article was actually republished in salon from a different source (they've started subcontracting/republishing a lot of stuff from secondary sources lately).