After a months-long reckoning of the real-world implications of fictional entertainment as a result of the #MeToo movement, something big is happening.
Both the entertainment industry and viewers are realising what endorsement means.
I’ve been waiting for this moment since the likes of Harvey Weinstein, Louis C.K., and Kevin Spacey started to fall, and Hollywood began to hold a mirror to itself, questioning everything from how the characterisation of women in the films of Quentin Tarantino set a dangerous precedent, to why Woody Allen still has a voice.
How do our most popular forms of entertainment make the most horrific things OK?
This reconsideration of what it means to give a person who is dangerous or abusive – whether they be sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, or bigoted in any other way – is not just limited to the claims of sexual violence, harassment, and rape levelled against people such as Weinstein.
Rather, it’s to all voices in the industry that hide behind words and phrases like ‘controversial’, ‘brutally honest’, and ‘no one can take a joke anymore’ to excuse their normalisation of hate.
One such person was Roseanne Barr, who until recently was the creator and star of one of the most popular shows in network television history in the United States, revived earlier this year to record-breaking ratings.
During its original run in the 1990s, Roseanne was hailed as groundbreaking for its depiction of a working class family and for being a rare show centred on a female character. But when the show was announced as the latest television nostalgia trip, there was some understandable trepidation.
There is a reason for progress, after all, and that is to further our understanding of the world around us. What was revolutionary 30 years ago has since been left in the past, these once significant cultural products now not indicative of progress that has been made.
To revive Roseanne, early 90s middle America politics intact, where the lead character is a mere on-screen extension of its increasingly vocal Trump-voting creator, would not only mean giving Barr a voice, but handing her a megaphone to normalise those ideals.
Barr tweets right-wing conspiracy theories, and these days those politics are synonymous with the close-mindedness that drove Donald Trump into office and society further apart. Is that responsible?
But Roseanne’s revival season aired, ratings steadily declining (the finale drew about half the viewers the premiere did) but still a large success, ensuring renewal. Then, there was the racist tweet aimed at a former staffer of Barack Obama, which made US network ABC take notice, immediately cancelling the show and labelling Barr’s comments as “abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values”.
In the past, money would’ve taken precedence over morals, the show’s high ratings offering enough of a promise of revenue to see out another season. Indiscretions such as Barr’s have previously been written off as disconnected from an on-screen persona, a misdemeanour that has no bearing on what they create or wider society, and that their continued employment doesn’t mean endorsement of their behaviour – remember the likes of Woody Allen, Johnny Depp, and definitely Donald Trump.
Reading the news in 2018.
These onscreen personas have escaped scrutiny until now, divorced from reality, and would usually resume as normal once the furore dies down. There is still progress to be made, and it remains to be seen whether the cancellation of Roseanne is replicated with other creators who cross a line.
But what has begun is promising. The answer to whether creator and character can be separated are clear here, when those lines are blurred from the outset and the same statements are made to millions of viewers weekly. Actions from people such as Barr refract in our current culture of bullying and hate, and letting them go unchecked is to accept them without question. Finally, actions have consequences.