User blog:Mattalamode/A Second Opinion: The Candidate

Huh. Well, this is awkward. But a man does what he has to do. And when you get an episode like "The Candidate," one that some people have literally claimed responsible for destroying the show's legacy (alright, so a little hyperbole for the sake of drama), there's no better chance to jump at the opportunity. You'd think discussing something that caused this much sheer discord would be a fun challenge, but at this point, it's just a complete minefield of unsightly proportions, and whether or not I successfully navigate it might as well be a metaphorical life or death situation. (Again, hyperbole is great and effective.)

I will say this much as a preface: I really enjoyed the episode. It worked so well because, while it utilized political satire (something which has led to wobbly episodes in the past), it didn’t do so in an aggressive way that was trying to hit us over the head in some patronizing manner; comedy was graciously at the forefront, albeit carefully funneled through a satirical lens. That’s, more often than not, the secret to the best episodes of the show.

Now, considering everybody’s got some sproutage in their pants attacking this episode, I thought I’d try to dissect every counterpoint one by one, just for the sake of further establishing my position and helping to iron out all the frustrating misconceptions everybody’s getting off to. Oh, and before we start, as always, I'm open to discussion and/or virtual fisticuffs in the comments section.

First of all, the most annoyingly persistent strand:

Point A: “'The Candidate' is a lousy satire of Hillary and Trump!"
So here's an interesting one: a lot of people have seen "The Candidate" as a satirical take on the 2016 US election, let alone a poor attempt at one. And if we're looking at the episode as such, it doesn't do a great job there.

But... perhaps the reason the show is being so lousy and broad in satirizing them both is because, and hear me out, they legitimately aren't? "The Candidate," simply put, is a broad assessment of what politics fundamentally is, having Gumball and Anais butt heads as two caricatures we know all too well. One one hand, you've got Anais, the intelligent and adept leader who alienates her audience, and on the other, you've got Gumball, the unabashed outsider who is woefully inept but manages to mobilize the people nonetheless. These are persistent archetypes for a reason: they've been unchanging throughout all of history to a point of acceptance.

The reason we have these perceptions is by virtue of the current political climate. Granted, that most certainly gave a hand in the episode’s creation, but the episode works under a sense of universality; this is an issue that is everywhere, and it's not going anywhere, either. And before anyone says I'm in denial, as I'm sure the Pavlovian lust for arguing craves, keep in mind that this is a British show that's almost consistently tackled broad targets–as Guy brought up, even "The Nuisance" only referred to Trump through a visual aid rather than writing in any matter to truly allude to him (which is still an issue, but I digress)–and I don't see why that pattern would change. Say what you will about how occasionally shaky the outcome is when the show tackles political satire, but it always retains a broad scope.

Point B: "The depictions of the splits in political ideologies were reduced to straw men!"


Okay, so nobody who commented on the episode was able to phrase this in a good way, and I'm not really smart enough to do so myself, but a lot of people had issues with how the episode stratified the varying types of voters in politics: you've got Tobias as the prototypical rich kid (which I suppose isn't new), Idaho as the conservative-ish country bumpkin, Banana Joe as a conspiracy theory nutjob who learns from ".ru" websites diametrically opposed to the "lamestream media," Clare as an irritable millenial, and Darwin trying to bring up climate change and constantly being ignored. I actually think, though, that a lot of it was pretty clever. (There's also putting the parents in the position of worsening the state of affairs for their children rather haphazardly, so that's a fun layer on top of everything else.)

A large proponent of this is the fact that the applications of these caricatures onto the characters actually make sense. Idaho has always been a country bumpkin that clings to tradition (a topic that was fully explored in its own episode); Clare has always been whiny and stiff to other people's points; Darwin has always been sidelined and ignored throughout 90% of his roles in trying to express some rational point (criticism or valid point? You decide); and Banana Joe is Banana Joe, for a lack of a better way to phrase it. The show is taking advantage of the cast that it has and experimenting with them in a meaningful way, and the fact that some of this even becomes integrated to a broader extent makes it all the more fun. Even if Tobias is rich and always uses money as a solution to his problems, for instance, you can't knock it when it actually works.

If there's one thing I can agree with, it's that Clare is the weak link here. The purpose she serves is obvious, but there's nothing engaging to it: she's written to be insufferable, and in the process, she ends up insufferable. Considering how generally savvy Gumball is as a show, too, seeing them use the fleetingly-relevant terminology of "woke" and "on fleek" is both fairly cringe-inducing and immediately dates the episode. Realistically, it's something I can accept in its intent but find disagreeable in its execution. With that being said, though, that's the only area where I'll concede.

Lastly, just because it's out there:

Point C: This season and by extension my favorite show is RUINEDDDD
Alright, so this one really peeves me off. That, of course, is at the lack of a slightly stronger term that I'm not allowed to use on this website. I mean, I guess I'm an authority here. I have power. What are you gonna do, huh? It pisses me off. Be the change you want to see in the world.

This is also great timing because I was legitimately considering writing a post about the first quarter of the show. In brief, it would've boiled down to, "This is currently one of the strongest starts to any season the show's done, and so long as the show continues to hit note after note, I think we're in for one heck of a ride." This, of course, is in hilarious contrast to the people who feel like a part of their soul was the subject of organ theft.

Look. I understand that everything is highly subjective and that not everything is for everyone. As long as something exists, people will bear disagreement over it; that's just something we, as humans, do. And that's totally fine! But to say that one episode (or a handful of episodes) are singlehandedly responsible for destroying everything that the show once was is frustratingly melodramatic. This isn't a problem with the show, it's a problem with the beholder, and that's just looking for places where the show stumbles (or stumbling is perceived) to self-confirm.

It's even being claimed that the show has begun structuring episodes around making a point which... when has the show not done that? Everything is structured with intent. These are all strangely vacuous arguments that both sound potent and mean nothing, and people are burying themselves deep into them because, again, they think it true in a way that supports their own stance.

But back to the more good, non-argumentative stuff.

I also want to take this moment to mention something a friend of mine, Normie, said about the episode, believing it to illustrate what Season 6 has been like so far. And I honestly feel obliged to agree: with "The Candidate," we're seeing the show trying to establish a more firm position on how to handle these sorts of issues following the general falling-out that was Season 5's earnest but uneven attempts. The show knows to bite off as much as it can chew, and there's a sense that it's in control and knows exactly what it wants and how to achieve that, and that equilibrium is wonderful to bear witness to.

And that's something that's become especially vital in how the season's conducted itself; even if some episodes might not have landed very great, I'd be hard-pressed to find one that's flat-out aimless. The show is spectacularly recognized right now in what it's been trying to do, especially with so many seeking to close off the show's longest-running story arcs. We've seen characters finally evolve beyond that which weighed them down–Tobias learns what friendship actually is, Hot Dog Guy and Gumball trace the root of their awkwardness, Alan and Gumball finally understand one another–as well as the introduction of a story into the narrative, playing out in "The Vegging" as a fun cliffhanger delivered with hilarious indifference. Just because things are ending, the show reminds us that it doesn't mean it has to be any less fun.

That's honestly all I have to say. It's good to be back writing stuff on the Wiki, and I'm looking forward to staging a more formal, slightly different comeback soon enough that'll knock your freaking socks off and dissolve them at the threads. (Can't knock hyperbole when it works.) Stay tuned.

For the last A Second Opinion article regarding "The Slap," CLICK HERE. And if you want to see a few more notes on "The Candidate," CLICK HERE.