On a couple ways
to AmericanStudy the anti-hero at the heart of House of Cards.
It’s hard to
imagine that there are things I can say about Kevin Spacey’s Frank Underwood
that haven’t already been written and debated and re-written and blogged and
etc. Not only because of how great an individual character he is, but also because
he represents what feels like an apotheosis of one of the most
noticed and analyzed trends in TV history: the rise of the anti-hero protagonists,
whether criminal (Tony Soprano, Walter White) or crooked cop (Vic Mackey, Jimmy
McNulty to an extent), philanderer (Don Draper) or serial killer (Dexter
Morgan), to name only a handful. Frank Underwood isn’t as bad as the worst of
those (although he does one truly horrific thing late in Season 1 that I won’t
spoil here), certainly isn’t as well-intentioned as the best of them, and instead
seems positioned to perfectly embody the median
form of this now-dominant TV type.
So I won’t say more
about that side of Frank, prominent and compelling as it certainly is. Because
there are also interesting and salient ways to AmericanStudy the character that
connect him to longer-term national narratives and stories. For one thing,
while the anti-hero protagonist may be relatively new on the boob tube, a
corrupt, anti-hero political leader embraced not in spite of but somehow
because of his corruption is as American as, well, Boss
Tweed. Or Huey Long. Or Mayor
Daley. Because we the viewing audience have direct access to Frank’s most
honest thoughts, it’s fair to say that we aren’t likely to believe (as many
admirers of those politicians did) that he’s pursuing his corrupt and conniving
ends in service of the greater good; Frank is entirely open about his desire
for power on its own terms, and doesn’t speak much (if at all) about communal
or public uses to which he hopes to put that power. But on the other hand, it’s
hard to know whether any of these historical figures would have privately
admitted any good intentions either—and yet, at least occasionally, they managed to do good
while doing
bad. Perhaps Frank would be the same.
On a more
artistic and cultural level, Frank and House
of Cards could also be connected to one of our longest-running trends: for about
as long as there’s been an American democracy, there have been artistic
portrayals of threats to its fragile nature, often leveled by charming con-men.
Most of those portrayals have been more symbolic or allegorical than the
literal political setting of House: from
one of the earliest such threatening characters, Carwin the biloquist in Charles Brockden
Brown’s Wieland (1798); to one of
the funniest, the title character in Herman
Melville’s The Confidence Man
(1857); to one of the most bigoted, caricatured Jewish gangster Meyer Wolfsheim
in F.
Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby
(1925). Given how corrupt and conniving the entire world of House of Cards seems, it’s fair to ask
whether Frank poses any more of a threat than most of his peers—but given his
steady and inexorable move toward power across Season 1, it’d be hard to argue
that he’s not defined as particularly talented at conning his way to the top.
Which is as American as, well, Aaron
Burr. Just another reason to check out this very American and very
compelling show.
Special Guest
Post tomorrow,
Ben
PS. What do you
think?
Also be sure to check out Anna Mae Duane on Frank and *House*: http://annamaeduane.com
ReplyDelete