Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Journal of Popular Television, The
  4. Volume 11, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 11, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 2046-9861
  • E-ISSN: 2046-987X

Abstract

We pursue the consequences of temporal complexity for character development in (2015–22). We advance this argument by attempting an Aristotelian reading of but then show some of the deficits that follow from transferring this methodology from theatrical to serialized televisual character. Following this, we highlight some of the deficits of a judgemental approach to character that appear within the narrative of , and we propose instead to understand serialized character development ateleologically. This distinction introduces the relevance of a feminist ethics of care, which we believe provides a more relevant frame for the moral evaluation of serialized character. In contrast to the absolutism of universal principles, a feminist ethics of care orients one to understand those for whom one cares in ‘relational contexts’ that emphasize specific, material and concrete conditions. This dichotomy between judgement and care is dramatized within through the interpretations that two characters bring to an extended deceit. Just as the discursive and diegetic complexity of the series prompts viewers to continually re-frame and re-evaluate Jimmy McGill, Jimmy likewise regularly uses a similar move of misdirection during his scams in which he invites other characters’ judgement about one aspect of his performance while accomplishing his actual goal by other means. Jimmy routinely invites judgement through taking on personae that he ultimately discards, reserving and preserving evaluation of his authentic motivations in continual acts of deferral. If Jimmy is ever rehabilitated, he arrives at such a possibility through an authentic confession directed towards the person who has cared most for him, Kim Wexler. Ultimately, we believe that uses the structure of its serialized discourse to endorse the moral attention and responsiveness that are characteristic of a feminist ethic of care, rather than a system of characterization based on a teleological, final judgement that sees character from an endpoint looking backwards.

© 2023 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/jptv_00105_1
2023-12-05
2025-12-05
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Brown, D. W. (2019), ‘Dreading the future: Narrative dread in Better Call Saul and contemporary television’, NECSUS: European Journal of Media Studies, 9:1, pp. 231–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Else, G. F. (trans.) (1967), ‘Preface’, Aristotle Poetics, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, pp. vi–xii.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Kenny, A. (trans.) (2013), Poetics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Kolb, L. (2017), ‘The crumbling patriarchy and triumphant feminist ethic of care in Breaking Bad’, in K. S. Decker, D. R. Koepsell and R. Arp (eds), Philosophy and Breaking Bad, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 109–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Lucas, D. W. (ed.) (1981), Aristotle Poetics, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Mittell, J. (2015), Complex TV, New York: New York University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Mittell, J. (2020), ‘Better Call Saul: The prestige spinoff’, in J. Mittell and E. Thompson (eds), How to Watch Television, 2nd ed., New York: New York University Press, pp. 13–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Noddings, N. (2013), Caring: A Relational Approach to Ethics and Moral Education, 2nd ed., Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2019), ‘Feminist ethics’, 27 May, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-ethics/. Accessed 3 January 2023.
  10. Tedesco-Barlocco, B. (2020), ‘It’s (not) all good, man: Better Call Saul and the nostalgic reconstruction of an ever-longing character’, Adaptation, 13:3, pp. 358–77.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Better Call Saul (2015–22, USA: AMC).
     [Google Scholar]
  12. ‘Bingo’ (Season 1, Episode 7; 16 March 2015).
  13. ‘RICO’ (Season 1, Episode 8; 23 March 2015).
  14. ‘Pimento’ (Season 1, Episode 9; 30 March 2015).
  15. ‘Rebecca’ (Season 2, Episode 5; 14 March 2016).
  16. ‘Inflatable’ (Season 2, Episode 7; 28 March 2016).
  17. ‘Chicanery’ (Season 3, Episode 5; 8 May 2017).
  18. ‘Lantern’ (Season 3, Episode 10; 19 June 2017).
  19. ‘Winner’ (Season 4, Episode 10; 8 October 2018).
  20. ‘Bad Choice Road’ (Season 5, Episode 9; 13 April 2020).
  21. ‘Hit and Run’ (Season 6, Episode 4; 2 May 2022).
  22. ‘Black and Blue’ (Season 6, Episode 5; 9 May 2022).
  23. ‘Axe and Grind’ (Season 6, Episode 6; 16 May 2022).
  24. ‘Plan and Execution’ (Season 6, Episode 7; 23 May 2022).
  25. ‘Fun and Games’ (Season 6, Episode 9; 18 July 2022).
  26. ‘Nippy’ (Season 6, Episode 10; 25 July 2022).
  27. ‘Waterworks’ (Season 6, Episode 12; 8 August 2022).
  28. ‘Saul Gone’ (Season 6, Episode 13; 15 August 2022).
  29. Breaking Bad (2008–13, USA: AMC).
     [Google Scholar]
  30. ‘Better Call Saul’ (Season 2, Episode 8; 26 April 2009).
/content/journals/10.1386/jptv_00105_1
Loading
  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): feminist ethics of care; fictional character; narrative theory; serial characterization; seriality; spin-off; television

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test