I hated it (and got sick of it). What does "I want to make a difference" even mean? Serial killers make a difference. Con artists make a difference. Politicians think they make a difference. So what?
I understood, even then, that the statement was a kind of short hand--a way for the scriptwriters to produce an epiphany that would hopefully connect with a zeitgeist. After all, not every cliche is evil.
I still despised it. It was a throw away line and it was rarely followed up by, "Uh, exactly how am I going to do that?"
It was, in other words, a kind of performance: look at me and all my deep meaningfulness!
I found the entire plot-line entirely unbelievable, not because sociopaths don't exist but because
(1) if that character did exist, the entire show should be about that character (see Dexter);
(2) no way would that character exist otherwise: no 20-odd-year-old young man is that calculating unless something else is going on: see (1). If he isn't calculating but emotionally on-edge, he would reveal himself long before episode #whatever.
Out of curiosity, I skimmed one-to-three-star reviews on Viki, looking for anyone who actually addressed the plot and character development.
And I was reminded why I don't usually read reviews.
Instead of discussions about personality types and dramatic license, I found review after review in a tizzy about the first few episodes. Nearly all of the negative reviews used the phrase "toxic relationship." Some of them resorted to "problematic." Others used "offensive to the LGBTQ+ community."
It was tiresome and meaningless. I couldn't help but wonder, Did none of these reviewers read the other reviews before they posted? Why are they simply repeating what other people wrote? Do they actually think they are communicating anything at all?
Do they believe what they are writing? Such as the assumption that all members of the LGBTQ+ community are apparently interchangeable? If I was part of that community (and I challenge the idea that any "community" exists so seamlessly), the assumption of sameness regarding personality and attitudes would offend me a great deal more than Tharn coming on to Type, who supposedly hates him but never moves out of the dorm room even when offered a bunk by a friend.
I understand that throwing out such terms is easier--and ubiquitous. There's a reason I insist that writers back up their judgments--"It's beautiful"--with evidence--"Yeah, but what did you observe?"
What amazes me is how few of the reviewers seemed to question what they wrote, as in "Here's what I think. Many people say the same, so here's my reasoning."
A great many reviews were in other languages. I pondered if any of the other reviews stated, "Look at all those Americans--we can tell by the spelling--assuming they can tell us what we are supposed to think since they have extra-special jargon. Idiots."
If I was a fan of the series, I would certainly dismiss the jargon-filled reviews as patronizing and irrelevant and possibly Western-American-influenced. (This type of "exporting our culture for other people's good" makes the desire to export democracy look tame in comparison.)
But, hey, maybe all the negative reviews in other languages complained about the "toxic, problematic, and offensive relationships."
It's like watching the death of critical thought.
