Conservative Psychologist: Why representation matters in popular media.

The issue of representation is important in popular media yet it is problematic, divided on the basis that media does not affect real life decisions which makes the issue seem irrelevant. It has often been pointed out that on screen violence is not enacted out despite viewing numerous films portraying destruction of life and property. The commonsensical appeal of this claim might seem obvious yet representation is not an issue of imitation nor is it of mere inclusion.

Fictional worlds created by mass media are often thought of as unreal and devoid of the social context in which they are created. This claim often makes the issue of representation seem absurd. If popular media is only a means of entertainment then accurate portrayals are seen as hindering the plot. This could not be further from the truth creating fictional characters is a deliberate act on the part of the creators it is far from accidental.

The challenge to create fair and ethical representation comes from feminist, postcolonial, queer, disability rights theorists demanding the same right to a be treated with dignity. The influence representation has on our understanding of the world should not be underestimated. Chimamanda Ngozi Adiche in her now famous speech cautions us against the ‘danger of a single story’, as an African woman studying in the west being constantly thought of as a starving African of charity advertisements brought to light how the entire continent was viewed. Similarly other individuals of minority groups have encountered negative stereotyping through their representation. In light of this evidence it would be futile to argue that representation does not matter or have an influence.

A large section of popular media plays into easy tropes, black men dying first, stalking a woman till she says yes, LGBTQ people looking and behaving in an awkward promiscuous manner. These aren’t part of a few exceptional films or comics this the majority of mainstream media. While the entertainment value of these stories is not being questioned the intention and underlying prejudice is. Theorists such as bell hooks and Stuart Hall question the intent of the fantasy being portrayed. Questioning representation and the fantasy they are meant to convey is at the heart of the issue. To bell hooks choices made by directors, artists, writers and photographers are important. Choice which has been reduced to the personal is (re)politicised by hooks who claims choice are not made in isolation but are a product of racial political, historic and economic forces. Neoliberal ideology would have us think otherwise. The physical screen then takes on the projection of our fantasies which as hooks points out fulfil our desires. Sexual, racial and economic exploitation on screen are indicative of how we are limited in our imaginations. A good example of this would be the show sense8, which has been critiqued on the grounds that it does injustice to minority characters. Similarly comic books take on a similar trope a white, able bodied man with a past trauma saves the world. The appeal of the genre must not be underestimated. These are popular and even cultural landmarks to dismantle the assumptions on which they stand on would seem counterproductive. We are used to a certain narrative one in which there are heroes and villains, damsels in distress, where the guy gets the girl. The comfort found in popular narratives in indicative of why alternative cinema is still a small-scale industry.

Restoring the order of things a popular narrative does not challenge preconceived notions of society around us. Prejudices and violence in our everyday life are projected onto the screen and vice versa. The process works both ways. Take James Bond for instance a fictional spy whose is often seen as unprofessional to people who work in this field. Bond is British, upper class, well-spoken, intelligent, heterosexual cisgender. His life is glamorous he kills foreign villains who threaten the British way of life and manages to find women who are attracted to him. Bond represents a strong heterosexual male desire. His actions are a glamourised version of foreign policy which has systematically destroyed lives. When contextualised the same characters seem disturbing and almost villainous.

Popular media is rooted in trade, economic forces that govern its production and propagation must not be forgotten.

An urgent economy slices through protocols of entertainment and opens onto a critique of ‘trade’ and of commercial imperatives that drive the Culture Industry. Where frequency of representation cannot annul the complicity of critics, the self declared impresarios of distraction, the purveyors of content, the advocates of lyrical and sonic seduction and the facilitators of fabulous ‘flavours of transnational capital’, all owe a great deal to the multicultural trick that sells exotica as race relations and visibility as redress. John Hutnyk

Producing commercially viable entertainment is a priority which had lead to either ignoring ‘alternative stories’ or adapting them in such a manner that they scarcely resemble their origins.

In her now iconic graphic novel Dykes to Watch Out For Alison Bechdel has two unnamed characters talk about the kind of films they would like to watch. The strip titled ‘The Rule’ has now come to be known as the Bechdel Test. Consisting of three rules

1 It has to have at least two women in it,

2 Who talk to each other and,

3 About something besides a man.

While this test was never meant to be a serious commentary on representation, nevertheless when used a lot of Hollywood films failed to pass these criteria. Other minority groups to monitor the treatment they receive on screen have adapted the test accordingly.

Representation is not just the mere inclusion of minority characters, a vague understanding of political correctness it is an ethical stance to treat fictional characters with dignity.

Footnote: The Rule aka Bechdel Test