Breaking Bad - an interpretation - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Discuss literary and artistic creations, or post your own poetry, essays etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14303230
I think the Skylar-Walt Jr.-Marie hate comes from two sources. The first is down to the show: the characters aren't particularly well written or developed. It would have been good if the show had included a couple of episodes per season where their views and their pasts are better covered so we can understand more their motivations and development.

The second, however, is more down to a problem with viewers. Breaking Bad has been from day one a deconstruction of American masculinity, about Walt's inability to come to terms with the way in which his cancer will destroy his role as pater familias and to accept the help of others: he has an overwhelming need to be in control because that is what he thinks captures the essence of masculinity. Cancer threatens to emasculate him. If it was all about his family, then a route was offered to him really early on: his former partners in Gray Matter offered him a secure and well paid job in order to cover his medical bills and provide for his family after his death. But he was too proud: he wanted to do it by himself, to be a man. No, Breaking Bad is about Walt desperately trying to play the American alpha male, a role he has always secretly coveted but was always too afraid to pursue.

Having Hank as a brother in law must have been torture: throughout, Hank's condescension towards Walt is essentially the anti-intellectual condescension of a self-designated 'alpha' male to his 'beta' brother-in-law. However, even Hank does not fit fully into the commonly accepted model of masculinity because of his lack of children. The fact that this is never ever mentioned suggests to me that it is Hank who is impotent and can't bear to hear the subject mentioned: Marie's various psychoses would also seem to suggest that Hank's anger at his own failure has poisoned much of his family life. We see an example of this when Hank is almost killed by the twin assassins: crippled and confined to a bed, he thinks himself as less of a man and takes out his frustrations on Marie.

The problem is that the show's male audience identifies and sympathises with Walt's pursuit of his (supposed) masculinity, regardless of the immorality and illegality of that pursuit: they want to see him succeed because it assures them about their own gender insecurities. In a word, they are living vicariously through Walt. Therefore, they cannot but be irritated by Skylar, whose concern and worry seems to oppose Walt's (and ergo, their own) quest to secure his masculinity. Of course, looked at objectively, Skylar's actions are wholly naturalistic: what woman wouldn't be concerned that their cancer ridden husband is behaving so bizarrely and nag accordingly? What mother of two would not be disgusted and angry to find out her husband is a lying, drug dealing murderer, seemingly capable of any horror?

The phone call in Ozymandias should be interpreted through the lens. In one sense, it comes from the frustration at the woman who has denied him the opportunity to be a bread winning father (and thus, hero and dominator of the family), a key component in the model of masculinity that Walt so desperately desired. In another sense, the phone call is also a last attempt to be that pater familias, to protect his wife (and thus his children) from association with his crimes. Of course, he is going to fail in that: we know Skylar, Walt Jnr. and Holly have already been deeply damaged by his actions and will only be further condemned by his confession.

Of course, if you accept this interpretation, then the moral of Breaking Bad is that such social conceptions of masculinity (and their concomitant conceptions of feminity) are ultimately hollow and the pursuit of them will do nothing but destroy you and the people you love. Walt is left alone and once again is not in control: he is dependent on the Nazis to save his life and to condescendingly grant him his own money as charity. The idea that he became a drug kingpin to help his family is rendered void the moment Hank is killed.

Notably, Walt Jnr. is the only male character of Breaking Bad who is secure enough in who he is not to bother pursuing American alpha masculinity. He does not allow his physical disability to make him feel any less of a man. Thus, when finally confronted by the truth behind his father, he does not hesitate in doing what is morally right and phoning the police. Once again, the male audience who live vicariously through Walt can only feel disgust for this action because Walt Jr., the comprehensively unmacho cripple, is barring Walt's path to alpha status. However, what else would any teenager do on hearing his father has probably murdered his uncle and on seeing him swing a knife at his mother?

One of the best scenes in the whole series is when Walt, beaten, battered and bruised, breaks down in front of his son in a motel and tries to apologise for not being strong enough. Walt Jnr. tells him that this is the first point in long time that Walt has seemed real, has seemed like a father. The tragedy of Walt's story is that he was more of a father, and thus more of a man, when he was kind, decent and broke than he ever was during his quixotic quest to claim a non-existent social stereotype of alpha masculinity.
#14303246
It's quite baffling that it doesn't even register with the writer that the audience might feel justified contempt at Walt Jr because a deep well-founded opposition to snitching, and that many people might not consider the murder of a DEA agent reason enough for ratting on one's own blood?
#14303392
KlassWar wrote:It's quite baffling that it doesn't even register with the writer that the audience might feel justified contempt at Walt Jr because a deep well-founded opposition to snitching, and that many people might not consider the murder of a DEA agent reason enough for ratting on one's own blood?


Not baffling at all. The aversion to snitching has absolutely zero to do with class solidarity, and everything to do with a deeply atavistic tribal suspicion of outsiders. Tribalism is radically incommensurable with class consciousness, indeed it is the psychological foundation of fascism.
#14303564
KlassWar wrote:It's quite baffling that it doesn't even register with the writer that the audience might feel justified contempt at Walt Jr because a deep well-founded opposition to snitching, and that many people might not consider the murder of a DEA agent reason enough for ratting on one's own blood?


The DEA agent in question happens to be his (much admired) uncle and his father was just involved in a knife-fight with his mother - I find it hard to believe that the audience would have questions about his 'ratting' at this point. Personally I would rat on my father as well if I discovered he had poisoned a child and was involved in the murder of another - there are some actions that break the loyalty that blood bonds bring.
#14308132
KlassWar wrote:It's quite baffling that it doesn't even register with the writer that the audience might feel justified contempt at Walt Jr because a deep well-founded opposition to snitching, and that many people might not consider the murder of a DEA agent reason enough for ratting on one's own blood?


Only lumpen degenerates espouse vulgar dogma about "snitching". Thanks for once again demonstrating anarchism's symbiosis with fascism.
#14362502
Breaking Bad has been totally hyped up!The plot comes out of a comic book.How can anyone take the series seriously!The plot is full of inconsistencies.The series becomes more outlandish as more money has been pumped into it.It's success killed it.Breaking Bad never seems edgy or realistic and is very predictable.It is just entertainment and is very good entertaining but so are other soaps.
#14362537
anarchist23 wrote:The plot comes out of a comic book.
That might be true but that doesn't mean its not a defining work of art. It is the very fact that viewers feel and identify with character attitudes that go beyond the beliefs of the writer that makes this great art. That the creator to some extent loses control of his creation.

Walt's an uncool White guy saying fuck you! to anyone and everyone that ever put him down however accidentally. A lot of men identify with that.
#14384730
Good post Kirillov - thoroughly enjoyed it.

Another interesting dynamic on the point of Walt's 'alpha-male complex' is his paternalistic relationship with Jesse. On the surface, Walt's fatherly sense of responsibility for Jesse, as pointed out repeatedly by Jessie himself, seemed to be just a cynical ploy to keep Jessie on side for his own self preservation. Yet it became evident that Walt actually succeeded in deluding himself that he really did have a sense of responsibility for him. But this was a delusion that could easily be removed when it came to the crunch - the proof of this being when Walt revealed to the nazis where Jessie was hiding - for no other reason than spite - then cruelly revealed to Jessie that he watched his girlfriend die when he could have helped her.
#14384812
Decky wrote:Dosn't he let her die on order to help Jessie tho? After all she isn't much good for him.


Walt let Jane die because Jane had threatened to blackmail him. Additionally, with Jane out of the picture, he could further manipulate Jessie.

--------------

I stopped watching Breaking Bad in the final half of the last season of the show for various reasons, but there's a lot about the show I still like. The transformation of Walt from antihero to, unambiguously, a villain, was a very cool character arc and it was acted out phenomenally. Cranston is a great actor and he did a superb job. After you either finish the show or get so far into season 6 that it has essentially wrapped up sufficiently, it's interesting to look back on earlier seasons and story arcs and see them in a new light: Gus, who seemed so villainous, perhaps now doesn't seem so bad. I found a re-watch of the Gus arc to be among the most interesting in the show because Gus is actually not a bad guy. Walter and Jessie were given plenty of cash, and I think Gus' offer to let Walt work for him was genuine. The problem was Walt: he had already gone down the path of being the antagonist of the show and it was he who kept pushing Gus and kept trying to be in charge and call the shots. What seemed like a planned out theft of Walter's recipe and Walter's eventual execution was really just Gus reacting to Walter.

The problem I had with the show was that it stopped being enjoyable to watch. There's a ridiculous level of tragedy in the show that happens nonstop, all the time, with barely any moment to catch your breath: Walter meets Jane's father in a bar, they discuss children and life, Jane dies in front of Walter, Jane's father causes an aircraft accident that spews debris all over the city; etc. By the time season 6 came around and they hijacked a train's shipment of a key ingredient to make meth, and everything finally seemed to be going right, they found an excuse to kill a child on a bike. Plenty of kids die on TV shows, I simply was sick of the Lost-style random tragedies to forcibly create tension and suspense to make the story seem gripping when it really isn't. After that point, I didn't see the point in continuing to watch the show: it's obvious pretty much everyone is either going to get horribly fucked or die or suffer lots of tragedy to make the plot seem interesting.

People who watch(ed) Lost, Breaking Bad, and the Walking Dead (notably recently) seem to confuse suspense and tension in a mediocre story for a brilliant story.
#14385174
It just occured to me: Walt's 'tragedy' was Shakespearean (character flaw), but in his own mind it was more like a Greek tragedy (victim of circumstance) - for him he was thrust into this business because of the cancer and other unforseen circumstances. Whereas in reality, he had an easy solution from the start - accept his former colleagues' charity.
#14385265
GandalfTheGrey wrote:Whereas in reality, he had an easy solution from the start - accept his former colleagues' charity.


His former friend and business partner was indeed offering to cover all medical expenses and to sign him on for an actual job with the company. I'm sure it would've been decent money. Knowing this from the start undermined the legitimacy of the plot for me.
#14385267
His former friend and business partner was indeed offering to cover all medical expenses and to sign him on for an actual job with the company. I'm sure it would've been decent money. Knowing this from the start undermined the legitimacy of the plot for me.
But that's explained multiple times; it's a pride thing. He feels emasculated already in twenty different ways. To accept the handout would be tantamount to castration.
#14385635
Accepting the handout would be accepting the charity of the very same business partners that he believes ripped him off back in the day, the ultimate humiliation: We got rich off our collective work, cut you out, and now we want to make amends throwing you a bone. Very many people wouldn't be too thrilled about going along with it.
#14385682
Lightman wrote:But that's explained multiple times; it's a pride thing. He feels emasculated already in twenty different ways. To accept the handout would be tantamount to castration.


Duh. Of course it's pride. That's obvious to everyone who watched the show. The fact that he had the easy way out for his family, and could have easily secured the ability to pay for his children's college rather than spend as long as he did in the show worrying and stressing over whether he could indeed manage to get the money, while avoiding being killed or arrested and having his drug money confiscated, undermined the legitimacy of the plot for me. It was just completely stupid from the get-go.

You have to be a massively dumb person/character to pass up on a free ticket to completely secure your family's future, and the future of your children, in the hopes (eventually he did manage to make lots of money but that took long enough) of being able to become a drug lord while avoiding getting killed or arrested. Walter himself was not a stupid person; he made some bad choices and made some stupid mistakes but he wasn't written as an idiot, and that decision he made in the beginning is massively stupid. This was just written very poorly and could have been resolved with added depth if they had someone better at writing plots. Of course it related to pride, but it seems pretty obvious to me that it was just not written very well considering, in general, he's a very clever, intelligent person, which makes that initial decision very much not in-character.
#14388894
Great analysis. I would also like to add the aspect of Walt being the ideal "self-made" businessman, who starts out in the desert and procures the best product on the market in a jiffy, using nothing but basic equipment and his accumulated know-how - the epitome of ideal American enterprise. At least to me the desert demonstrated a parallel to the dawn of the American oil industry and the California gold rush, in which (some) people made their fortunes from their own hard work and by relatively primitive methods. What Walt really wanted was recognition for his skills, and to prove to himself and others that he could have been successful and respected on society's terms if he hadn't spent his life confined to jobs for which he was highly overqualified, in order to spend time with his family.

Although Walt entered the drug business in order to take charge over his family's future, he also wanted a confirmation of his own skills - he wanted to make sure he wasn't just a drone without practical or independent function. As the seemingly proficient Jesse is stunned by the purity of Walt's meth, Walt knows he's right - but that's not enough. Walt also craves recognition and respect, and so he leaves his meth blue as a brand trade mark (he could probably have avoided the colour at a later point if he so desired). He also assumes a pseudonym to give his product a "creator", rather than having his meth appear as produced by some anonymous Mexican cartel.
Bulaba Jones wrote:
You have to be a massively dumb person/character to pass up on a free ticket to completely secure your family's future

People don't always act rationally, especially not if social conventions or your own dispositions prevents you from accepting such an offer without question. Walter wanted to show his crippled son how to make it "in the real world" without relying on outside assistance to live. Regardless of how stupid that position might be, Walt wanted to ensure his family's future - and his son's independence is just as important as the family's financial demands; if not more so. Raising your son "right" (i.e. to be tough and on your own) is also extremely important to the American masculinity.
#14393770
Breaking Bad was written in the style of a Greek tragedy, in that it was about a character who wasn't completely evil or a psychopath at the start, but due to a fatal flaw (in Walter's case, pride and a feeling of powerlessness), became more and more corrupted until his life and those around his were torn down and destroyed. The fact is, his initial motivation really was to provide for his family after his death, and was prompted by the knowledge that he wouldn't live much longer.

The one thing I think that would have made the end of the series better would be if he hadn't managed to get some of the money to his family. In the end, he was successful in his initial goal, even though his whole family was torn apart and everybody hates him. I guess it would have been a better karmic ending if just before giving the money to his former business partners, it was seized or destroyed somehow. Still, it was satisfying to see Walt get the Redemption by Death in the final scene where he kills all the people connected to the meth business, and also dies.
#14393774
Breaking Bad was written in the style of a Greek tragedy, in that it was about a character who wasn't completely evil or a psychopath at the start, but due to a fatal flaw (in Walter's case, pride and a feeling of powerlessness), became more and more corrupted until his life and those around his were torn down and destroyed.

Actually, that's the definition of a Shakespearean tragedy, BoK. A Greek tragedy is about the power of fate, of circumstances - we are all playthings of the gods &c. Shakespearean tragedy is about how people manage to fuck up even a good thing....

I don't care who I have to fight. White people wh[…]

America gives disproportionate power to 20% of th[…]

World War II Day by Day

Yes, we can thank this period in Britain--and Orw[…]

This is a story about a woman who was denied adequ[…]