Written by Dennis Stephens
Have you ever found yourself watching an episode of Breaking Bad and rooting for Walter White as he ruthlessly climbs his way to the top of a meth dynasty? Or forgiving Don Draper for his unfaithfulness to his wife and overt sexual harassment in the workplace? Or how about laughing along as the gang from It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia ruins yet another unsuspecting person’s life who’s only wrong doing was being introduced to such an ensemble of terrible people? What is it about these characters that make us seemingly abandon our moral compass and not only relate to, but empathize with, them? To explain the current anti-hero phenomenon, we need to take a structural approach at analyzing why they are so appealing to viewers, and what value we gain from seeing morally ambiguous protagonists.
The structuralist approach sees characters more as a vessel of virtues. The character as an individual is not as important as the set of ideas the character represents. I think this is a much more apt way of analyzing anti-heroes because we are not so much invested in the character itself, but the moral jump rope they play between right and wrong. The character itself is not as important as the message they are trying to portray. We try to understand why characters make immoral decisions and justify those decisions because of their typically less than ideal circumstances.
One reason anti-heroes are more appealing characters to viewers is because their moral ambiguity closely matches our own. A typical protagonist always knows right from wrong and has the courage to follow through with the morally right decision. This, however, is not always the case in real life. By simply acknowledging that, albeit sometimes in extreme and exaggerated circumstances, anti-heroes become more relatable. This ambiguity is also more entertaining to watch, more complex, more real. It also allows for a sense of wish fulfillment. Normal life is so heavily dictated by rigidly sticking to societal norms. Antihero characters resent these societal rules to a certain extent. So, to see people playing outside of those rules, you can live vicariously through them. This can be an almost cathartic experience for someone who always finds themselves having to play by the rules.
Exaggerated moral “wrongness” makes us feel better about our own moral shortcomings- “at least I’m not as bad as them.” Watching people make terrible decisions or ruin their own lives can be a delicious form of entertainment specifically because it makes us feel better about our own decisions and character. The concentration on the characteristics come into play here. By allowing some distance between ourselves and the character, we do not necessarily feel the guilt or shame we might if we closely identified with them and their motivations.
On the other end of the spectrum, seeing these awful characters get their comeuppance or get slapped by consequences can fulfill the sense of justice we inherently hold. A deep sense of satisfaction can come from seeing someone, even someone fictional, get what is coming to them. And since we are not identifying closely with these characters, since they are not an individual, but a collection of ambiguous or negative traits, we are not as likely to feel pity for them or shame if we somehow identify with them. This can be especially satisfying since there are so many things that seem to be out of control in a person’s day to day life.
The structuralist approach works so well in the analysis of antiheroes primarily because we are so unlikely to truly identify ourselves with a character that inherently displays negative traits. People are much more likely to empathize and realize a whole character that they see as primarily good, or with understandable motivations. The moral ambiguity which mirrors our own, the convenience of being able to feel better about yourself compared to the character, and the sense of satisfaction that comes with seeing fairness and justice play out are all reasons people love to watch antiheroes. A collection of traits, rather than an empathetic character, is a readier vessel for our own moral fumbling. And it allows a more abstract and nuanced relationship with the character than one where you simply see yourself reflected back.
Criticizing Culture 