I am a fan of Brooklyn Nine-Nine, at least almost all of it. What I loved the most about the series was its ability to use humour to convey important messages, without in any way diluting the message, and parking the humour aside when the scene did need a moment of non-comedic portrayal of serious emotions and grave issues. And it was not just one or two trivial issues that it covered.
Through its first seven seasons, it touched upon and went deep where necessary into countless issues that we see in the world around us. Sometimes, with just a one-liner that hit the right nerve and gave out the right message – like the time Jake ensured that his undercover role was safe by asking a passerby, “Ma’am, do you have a minute to talk about the environment?,” and when the lady walks off ignoring him, telling Amy, “See? Now no one will make eye contact with me.” In the episodes where Terry gets stopped by a white police officer only for being Black and Amy opening up to Jake about the impact of misogyny at her previous precinct, the portrayal glided from comedy to a more sombre tone, but not making it sound preachy in any way.
That – that ability to maintain the essence of a sitcom while not undermining the importance of the issues that were being addressed – was the biggest USP of this brilliant show. And I loved the writers for that and their honest conviction to the cause. Until 2020 happened, and the makers suddenly got all riled up, thinking “What if they think we are not doing enough? Maybe we should try harder to prove that we care.” And thus came Season 8, the weakest season of an otherwise brilliant series. My first reaction to watching the season, after a long, excited wait, was to think “Why on earth have they made the series sound like a documentary and the acting so unconvincing?”
No, I wasn’t looking for some cheap laughs just because it was a sitcom. I was looking for the brilliance of the previous seasons where laughs or serious discourses were organic, not forced. Whether the actors believed in the newfound tone of the series or not, they all sounded like Charles in the first episode of S8, trying too hard to prove that they understood, that they cared. And by using that as a plot point, I don’t know if they realized they were mocking themselves.
Even the new villain that they brought in was such a caricature, screaming at our faces “Yes! I am the villain! Isn’t it obvious by my unmasked villainy? Shall I make myself more villainous and stupid so that it is not lost upon you that I AM the villain, an idiotic one at that?” It was such a childish attempt from the writers that I cringed every time the villain came onscreen, more about his over-the-top portrayal and the absolute lack of any sort of subtlety than about his character’s actions. And by portraying him thus and distracting us from the real issues that should have been the focus in an organic way, I can only say that the makers failed in sending out the actual message.
Quite honestly, that is the same way I felt while watching the movie Jana Gana Mana and the cringeworthy trailer of The Kerala Story, both two sides of the same evil. But the truth is that there are way too many takers for this kind of preachy making, endorsing and glorifying one side’s beliefs and hailing them as infallible beings and villainizing the other side in a generalized, blanketed way as the inside-out evil villains. Whichever way, for people who really like a well-made series or movie, not for the hyperpolitical take it has of “What if they miss our point? So let’s make it extra obvious!” but sensible writing and acting that we can relate to, these are major letdowns, for falling prey to the trend of “box-ticking.”
One of the most ridiculous box-ticking tropes I have seen in recent years have been the all-women fight scenes from the Marvel movies, sticking out like a sore thumb, being the obvious “Let’s show some women empowerment and make the women happy” plug-in. This, coming from the franchise, with that one woman Avenger sacrificing her life halfway into the movie for the greater good and not even getting an effing memorial service at the end of the movie! “Of course, we can’t dim the glory of Ironman’s sacrifice by giving equal importance to the very same sacrifice of some menial assassin called Black Widow! But you know what we will do? We will have a scene during the endgame fight with all the women (ten, I think (gasp!)) running or flying in the same direction and give the women some much-needed goosebumps.” Guess what! It didn’t. I mean, it was so artificially fabricated that I was like, “Really??” No goosebumps, just an eye roll, trust me.
Slowly and steadily, the “box-ticking” syndrome has taken over everywhere. It was, still is, a necessity, in a lot of ways – no doubt about it! In award shows that were once “whitewashed” or never saw a female name in main categories except “Best Actress,” in shows and movies where diversity was never a part of the cast or crew, in workplaces, playing fields, everywhere. But the problem with the kind of radical box-ticking that many endorse now is the same with any other radical activism of the present day – the intent of bringing about not true equality and equal opportunities, but a role reversal where the activists dream of an “oppressed becomes the oppressor” scenario, where true “merit” takes a backseat to a “ticked box.”
And while the conscious effort put into it like the casting of a Black actress in the role of an English queen is hailed as “the freedom to have a reinterpretation of history” or “identity-conscious casting,” I can’t help but imagine the chaos that might have ensued if the same logic was applied in a reverse manner in this age. If a perfectly White actor was blackfaced and made to play the role of an Indian or African king in today’s world, we wouldn’t and shouldn’t tolerate it. Then why the double standards when the opposite happens? There again, the hypocrisy is blatant because the very people who defend this identity-conscious casting of an actual historical figure would fight against a straight cisgender actor playing a homosexual or transgender fictional character, conveniently forgetting that they are “acting” the role of a “fictional” character.
And in a country like India, the fresh breath of inclusion of people of all castes and sections into the mainstream in fields like movies is rapidly turned into a mockery by the pseudo-activists who hail an award only based on the recipient’s caste and financial standing. Even a legend of an actor who is, without doubt, one of the best in the world is belittled for receiving a well-deserved accolade only because he doesn’t fit the box-ticking criteria set by these self-proclaimed hyper-reformists.
Like in everything else, let us hope for a future where we will be able to reward merit without worrying about box-ticking. And for that, what we need is an honest wish to make a difference and aim for true equality, quite like the first seven seasons of Brooklyn Nine-Nine, not a farce, like the final season.
Related links:
Also published on Medium.
Leave a Reply