Skip to main content

Jesse Armstrong: "Succession"

 As the Emmy Awards approach, I'm preemptively annoyed about "Succession." 


Some writers say that the final hour of a TV series shouldn't carry much weight; it's just one episode. There shouldn't be an obsession with the idea of "sticking the landing." But I think this is ridiculous. The ending is crucial. It's when you lay your cards on the table. A good ending should feel like a culmination; it should be sort of miraculous.


You wouldn't read Raymond Carver's "Cathedral" or Alice Munro's "Labor Day Dinner" if the final paragraphs were really, really bad. You wouldn't say, "Ah, well, we should probably hand this writer several National Book Awards, even if he/she failed to stick the landing." No, these two stories are remembered *because of* their endings. Wonderful pieces of writing become sublime in their final lines.

I had misgivings about the conclusion of "Succession" because I remembered that critics weren't crazy about Season One. We end as we begin. In the first year of the series, some critics said, "I'm not sure what the desired tone is. This feels confusing and unsatisfying." It's hard to avoid "Second Act" problems when you have this kind of opening.

I think it's absurd when people say, "The ambiguity in the final moments of 'Succession' was delicious!" By this logic, it's "delicious" not to know if Kendall attempts suicide, or if Roman's little smirk is a sign of "re-birth." I actually don't think this is a sign of profound writing. I think it's a sign of laziness; the writers haven't committed to any particular kind of ending, because they have failed to do their jobs.

It's also disturbing to me that Rhea Seehorn will lose her Emmy Award to Jennifer Coolidge. I'm already angry about this (though it hasn't happened yet).

Finally, as one viewer has observed, the best drama of this past year was possibly "Happy Valley," which earned nothing from the nominating committee behind the Emmy Awards. I have not finished Season Three, but I'm delighted by the hapless criminal (in this case, the pharmacist Faisal). "Happy Valley" always gives us a criminal who has a shot at evading capture; in Season Two, a nefarious cop was almost able to attribute his crime to a local serial killer. The interesting twist in Season Three is that we are very well-acquainted with the "innocent" man who might take the fall (Rob). We have learned to dislike Rob, and to see how, in other circumstances, he might have destroyed his own life. However, we understand that, by weird twists of fate, Rob is actually not guilty. It's strange and uncomfortable to "hope" for Rob, when we know he is generally a bad man.

Awards shows--as unjust as they are--help to clarify certain thoughts. So at least I can feel partial gratitude toward the Emmys.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How to Host a Baby

-You have assumed responsibility for a mewling, puking ball of life, a yellow-lab pup. He will spit his half-digested kibble all over your shoes, all over your hard-cover edition of Jennifer Haigh's novel  Faith . He will eat your tables, your chairs, your "I {Heart] Montessori" magnet, placed too low on the fridge. When you try to watch Bette Davis in  Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte , on your TV, your dog will bark through the murder-prologue, for no apparent reason. He will whimper through Lena Dunham's  Girls , such that you have to rewind several times to catch every nuance of Andrew Rannells's ad-libbing--and, still, you'll have a nagging suspicion you've missed something. Your dog will poop on the kitchen floor, in the hallway, between the tiny bars of his crate. He'll announce his wakefulness at 5 AM, 2 AM, or while you and another human are mid-coitus. All this, and you get outside, and it's: "Don't let him pee on my tulips!" When...
3 comments
Read more

The Death of Bergoglio

  It's frustrating for me to hear Bergoglio described as "the less awful pope"--because awful is still awful. I think I get fixated on ideas of purity, which can be juvenile, but putting that aside, here are some things that Bergoglio could have done and did not. (I'm quoting from a survivor of sexual abuse at the hands of the Church.) He could levy the harshest penalty, excommunication, against a dozen or more of the most egregious abuse enabling church officials. (He's done this to no enablers, or predators for that matter.) He could insist that every diocese and religious order turn over every record they have about suspected and known abusers to law enforcement. Francis could order every prelate on the planet to post on his diocesan website the names of every proven, admitted and credibly accused child molesting cleric. (Imagine how much safer children would be if police, prosecutors, parents and the public knew the identities of these potentially dangerous me...
1 comment
Read more

Raymond Carver: "What's in Alaska?"

Outside, Mary held Jack's arm and walked with her head down. They moved slowly on the sidewalk. He listened to the scuffing sounds her shoes made. He heard the sharp and separate sound of a dog barking and above that a murmuring of very distant traffic.  She raised her head. "When we get home, Jack, I want to be fucked, talked to, diverted. Divert me, Jack. I need to be diverted tonight." She tightened her hold on his arm. He could feel the dampness in that shoe. He unlocked the door and flipped the light. "Come to bed," she said. "I'm coming," he said. He went to the kitchen and drank two glasses of water. He turned off the living-room light and felt his way along the wall into the bedroom. "Jack!" she yelled. "Jack!" "Jesus Christ, it's me!" he said. "I'm trying to get the light on." He found the lamp, and she sat up in bed. Her eyes were bright. He pulled the stem on the alarm and b...
1 comment
Read more