After watching some of the latest streaming shows, I began to wonder why almost every new streaming movie (especially Netflix) seems to feature a cast of flawed characters performing morally dubious acts.  Then, over the holidays, I watched in succession It’s a Wonderful Life (1946), Miracle on 34^th St (1947), and The Best Years of Their Lives (1946).  As you might imagine, there was a huge contrast between the new Netflix movies and movies made right after WWII.

 A huge number of shows and movies are now available on streaming services.  Since they usually tell you the date each show was released, it is pretty easy to compare shows from different eras.

You probably already know what I am going to say. Nobody needs a survey to understand that older shows and movies are more likely to have idealized characters who try to do good, while newer shows and movies are more likely to feature characters who are up to no good.  There is some variation among current providers; e.g. the Hallmark channel is more likely to feature do-gooders and happy endings, while Netflix leads the league in ne’er-do-well characters who immediately get in trouble and stay there.  Actually, the first thing you notice about the Hallmark channel is the number of older movies they show.  There are obviously not enough new movies with admirable characters and happy endings being produced to keep the Hallmark channel in business for more than a week.

I don’t think anyone would claim that the trend I describe is not occurring.  But, you could ask some questions about this trend. Is this a bad trend? a good trend? neither?  Good or bad, is seems likely that the movies are likely to continue to depict more-and-more flawed and sleazy characters for the next littl while, Maybe things will cycle back at some point.  

Other than making people like me sad, what is the significance of such a trend?

Most people don’t study aesthetics, and are satisfied as long as they know what they enjoy or don’t enjoy, and where to find what they enjoy.  For me, it’s nice to find something I enjoy, but, as I found myself watching old movies more-and-more, I wanted to understand what is really going on.  Something has been changing.

You could go nuts reading theories of aesthetics. Critics get into so many details they usually lose sight of the basic questions like:  What is the purpose of art? What makes one good and another not so good?  I think it’s fair to say that art that fulfills its purpose is good.  So, the purpose of art is the important question.

One idea (realism) is that art’s purpose is to imitate life.  The more exactly and completely art depicts life, the better it is. In other words, art is supposed to describe “what is”.

Another idea (idealism) is that art supposed to depict life as it “could be”, or as it “ought to be”.  Another idea (nihilism) is that art could depict life as it should not be, what we should avoid.  (Netflix seems to be moving distinctly in this direction.)

If you think about it, you can probably divide most movies and shows into one of these three categories.  Maybe you like one approach better than another or can rank order them in your order of preference.

Another aspect of dramatic art worth touching on is plot and action.  The first guy known to have developed a theory of aesthetics, Aristotle, said that dramatic art has a special ability to depict growth and development over time, that the potential of a person or thing defines what it is, and provides the driving force for its existence and development. Everything strives to “grow into” its potential, and that potential defines what a thing can become.  For example, the potential of an acorn is an oak, because that is what it can become.

According to Aristotle, this growth and development toward the potential of a person or thing  “the plot” or the action of a show or movie.  

If you combine these ideas, you get a simple picture.  A show or movie can be interesting and enjoyable if it depicts something as it really IS, as it OUGHT TO BE, and or as it OUGHT NOT to be.  It is especially interesting or enjoyable if the plot or action advances a person or thing from an early stage toward the potential that the person or thing can become.

I think all that pretty much makes sense.  So, here is my question?  Why have shows and movies over my whole life been moving away from depicting people and things as they ought to be.  Instead, they have been moving toward depicting things they ought not to be, or, at best, as they actually are?  More-and-more, in my experience, shows and movies, especially Netflix, tend to depict people and things as worse than they actually are, and the plots tend to show them getting even worse as things develop.

I don’t really know why things are moving as they are, but I have a few suggestions.

One suggestion is that, increasingly over this period of time, the market of purchasers of entertainment media has been getting younger and younger.  Maybe the younger and less mature you are, the less likely you are to want to be told how you “ought to be”.  Certainly, grown-ups lost control of entertainment media sometime during the 20^th century.

Another suggestion is that changes in shows and movies are reflective of an overall trend against idealism across all the arts including, music, painting, and novels.   Maybe?

A final suggestion is that colleges and universities and the popular news media, for their own reasons, seem to be telling people that “things are actually much worse than you thought”.  So, coming out of this exposure, maybe younger people are drawn to movie plots that tell the same story as the media and their professors.

Maybe we’re getting closer to the truth when we attribute negative portrayals of almost everything in current movies to our culture where media, teachers, and politicians are constantly telling people things are worse than they actually are.

The famous World Health Organization doctor and scientist, Hans Rosling, recently capped his brilliant career by writing a world-renowned book entitled Factfullness: Ten Reasons We’re Wrong About the World – and Why Things Are Better Than You Think.0

I think perhaps Hans Rosling already had the answer to my question.

Categories: Commentary, Culture, Philosophy