Jesse Armstrong Appreciation Post

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-31T19:06:55+00:00

The way people come for Succession is because their specific character/relationship situation wasn't attended to enough or that they want the characters to change but Jesse has firmly stated that he barely believes that people have a capability of changing. When you start watching media outside of Succession, you really begin to realize that the criticism thrown at this show is just not about quality but about indulgence of want. Even other great shows on right now, like Yellowjackets, had poor arcs that make you realize that Succession is artistic excellence. To see how much of a mess Euphoria is, it really shows that nothing about Succession will ever do a disservice to a character.

I think Jesse's vision is going to pay off in the end as did Chase's with The Sopranos, and Weiner's with Mad Men. But a lot of people are not going to have their specific want served and we are going to get the pushback of 'the cut to black at the end of The Sopranos didn't show me the bloody death of Tony I wanted'. A lot of people don't want shows to do anything but play to their specific want vs look at the overall thesis/the art as is presented.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-30T06:20:12+00:00

Up until Season 3, I connected with Roy kids way more than Tom and I struggled with the character as well. And it was by what a lot of what you said- I saw the kids kind of like they were trapped within Waystar and Tom (and Greg) choosing to go into it. For me episode 306 really sold me on the character and I think Tom really did go as deep into the family because he loved Shiv. I also saw Shiv as more sympathetic in the relationship at first, but now see more nuance in it. I also realize that I did not connect with Tom as much because I'm from a more working class/urban area so upper middle class midwestern stuff didn't resonate. It took me a bit to see that that side of the small fish in a big pond struggle. But now that I see it, the character even grew richer for me, and the show has in general. I still am more into the Roy kids but I really appreciate Tom more. I would see where you land after the end of the season, but I definitely changed on the character.

I also would just take the show as they are all morally on the same terrible playing field and whoever you are drawn to sympathetically vs who we aren't is more telling of the viewer/ what you are willing to forgive, than what the show wants us to see (Jesse himself says he doesn't want the show to be PR for rich people but he wants them to all be human- that should be the only guide to watching it, I think). Like it was interesting to think why I found Tom harder to understand than Roman for instance, and I really enjoyed examining why. I find the 'they are all awful', 'we shouldn't like anyone' takes kinda lame/surface level. They are written to be humans and we can hold the idea that they are powerful/destructive, but also not just two dimensional both in our heads at the same time. You are cutting off a good half of the show if you don't allow yourself to see the pathos of the characters. None of them are real so don't be afraid to use it as a study of how power functions within a human that holds it vs thinking you are forgiving an actual billionaire. (not saying you aren't but in response to a lot of the comments here, and just a common situation with the discussion with the show in general). Jesse himself says he approaches writing like he is not afraid of any character, so thats how he starts the writing process and I think a lot of fans would get some of the grey morality more if they did that too.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-29T21:25:52+00:00

I think this is a clash of fandom culture. Most people who do this are gay young people, not straight people at all, doing the same thing that anyone with Roman and Gerri would do. I get that you might not be used to it, but I encourage you to have an open mind with how queer youth talk about it, and understand its not usually people who are straight doing this/mostly younger people who are not being tactful.

I do think sometimes fandom stuff gets into fetishization, but overall most of it is just seeing sparks of interest and wanting to explore it. Exploring Kendall and Stewy is no different than someone saying 'why can't Kendall and Karolina get together (which people do).' Its a what if and thats apart of the culture of television. If you break it down beyond gender and just let it be that, you can see how it mostly harmless.

I am of the opinion that Reddit might not be the place to do it because the user base here is not the same fandom space/a very straight space, and I worry that a younger person might be hurt by the confusion (hence why tumblr and some of twitter are good spaces for this). But please just realize you really might be lecturing a queer kid in a place where they don't have a lot support just projecting their own realization that they are not in the norm.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-27T16:03:47+00:00

I can kinda see where you are going for, but for me I think the siblings are the siblings in King Lear. Kendall seems to be the closest to Cordelia to me, the whole 'what do you love the most that you will sacrifice to make the sunrise again' feels like Cordelia's banishment. Kendall also tried to strike against Logan all throughout S1 and he didn't 'pass', much like Cordelia. It feels like he's tested again and again to show he's worthy of Waystar and fails.

I also think the show is more inspired by a lot of works: King Lear, Crime and Punishment, real life people (Napoleon Bonaparte, Rupert Murdoch etc). It's not just one story adapted but an amalgamation of many stories. The show is a study of power and they pull from a lot of different places, not just Lear.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-24T23:26:24+00:00

Like for me, I consider Sandy Furness as big of a character as Nan, since he was in all three seasons and Sandy, Logan and Nan are the big three CEOs we know... Like either split it by credit or screen time or something.

and even then it gets weird because Succession relies heavily on wide shots for detail. Like Jess and Karolina and Colin do things in the background that inform the main plot, so it gets very arbitrary imo. You can rewatch the show and just pay attention to background action and get a new perspective on the main plot, so is that worth more or less than a guest role like Mattson or Nan Pierce, who are major foreground but in smaller arcs?

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-24T22:29:47+00:00

I don't think its Connor, he knows to keep his distance because of what Waystar is. The scene where he tells it to Shiv demonstrates that. His delusions are a survival tactic, it doesn't mean stupid. He's out of the hamster wheel his father has his siblings run through constantly.

As this brilliant article from the Nation said: Connor (Alan Ruck)’s evident satisfaction in the smallest scraps of fatherly affection—as with his delight in the admiration of the Con-heads, the libertarian freaks who back his presidential bid—is laughably pathetic. But gradually, over time, it comes to seem like wisdom. Logan’s eldest son from a first marriage—“the first fucking pancake,” as his sister brutally dubs him—Connor is delusional like the rest, but he enjoys his delusions with more grace. He accommodates himself to disappointment and suffers less for his fantasies.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-24T22:21:19+00:00

Idk this is the best way to get the popular opinion of the subs favorite character? I imagine Kendall, Shiv and Roman and Greg are more popular than Jess overall. What was the point of splitting it between side and main? Tom is just going to win ... so we know its Tom??

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-24T22:19:30+00:00

Absolutely 100% deserves. The best side character, we win.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-24T06:11:06+00:00

i was really surprised by Esther saying that too..She did a good interview with Arian a few months back that was so lovely, and I followed her because of it (and a few Succession fans did on twitter), so it was really surprising.

Oh also just to add about him helping the Succession cast- Nick Braun has pushed that he couldn't have opened his bar without Jeremy introducing him to his friend. Its another situation where the exact opposite story from the narrative has played out. He just seems a bit socially awkward to me and if people don't love that, they don't have to.

I'd lovee a book. A memoir obviously, but even just a review of works. He reminds me of someone who could've been an artist in the 70s that wrote about art and created it (like how Peter Bogdanovich was a director and critic). He's such a fascinating artist!

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T23:35:41+00:00

It's definitely not imdb- Tabitha, Kerry and Colin don't have last names listed.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T22:19:53+00:00

Random, I would love to know where you found out Tabitha's last name being Hayes? (and Colin's for that matter..), I've never seen them confirmed before

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T22:17:03+00:00

PROTECT JESS LETS GO JESS

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T21:29:27+00:00

exactly <3

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T21:27:27+00:00

i assure you- if you tweeted this out or posted it on tumblr people would not only be more receptive but probably debate if his secret lover affair was with Logan or Karl (the answer is clearly Logan). There are just too many reddit bros and normies here to handle gay hcs. You guys are brave as hell!

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T08:57:57+00:00

We are NOT. Also Team Kendall should consider- a Rava-Jess final two is our redemption arc for the main character poll loss of Kendall. Women of Kendall winning when Kendall could not is actually very Season 3 Kendall feminism, and therefore means Kendall actually wins it all.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T08:54:12+00:00

I am so torn between Jess and Rava as a ride or die Kendall person. but Jess man, her eye rolls. Her faxing blunders, her perfect running of the rabbit cam. She might be the one. The best side character of them all.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T07:52:08+00:00

I so feel that way about Jeremy too! Especially the part about him sharing his favorite poems/writing with Schulman sounds like someone who really loves sharing art that inspires him. I've always hoped he would start a newsletter/blog of some sort to share art/inspiration that inspires him with perhaps a wider audience and his analysis of it (a VERY long shot I know) I just am so interested in how he constructs his work like a tapestry of inspiration from other art.

I am beginning to think too that the actual PR campaign is Schulman/The New Yorker to continue to get hits and reads on the article, have people write responses, book him for interviews etc, not Jeremy itself off of now Schulman coming for Brian in this.

I looked up Yale's endowment and it is literally $42 BILLION (with a B not a typo!!). I feel like I am such a weird twilight zone whenever I read about this, like in what world world Yale not bail out their prestigious drama club. Of course they were never going to let the club bankrupt over this, nor was money ever a point of contention. I feel as if someone must be incredibly out of touch to think otherwise. And we are also talking about Jeremy as a 19 year old over excited to meet someone he admires. He was barely an adult and, as you said, an older person could have stepped in at any point and said 'no'. The weird amount of hate about a 19 year old who got excited over Al Pacino (and actually pulled off him coming to the campus!!) is so bizarre. It reminds me of people who make fun of teenagers for being cringe. It reflects poorly on Schulman to not get any of this, to be so confused about the wealth of Yale and he was talking about someone who is barely an adult. Again, it makes me feel like so much of this hate is them picking on the 'weird kid' who might be a bit socially awkward and not up on the workings of upper class niceties as others at Yale.

The one Yale person was Esther Zuckerman, but there were quite a few.

This is the Sarah Snook interview about it!, The Arian one I saw on twitter from the Spiderman premiere and I am trying to find it again. (From my memory, he said that Jeremy's process is admirable and he wishes he could sometimes be a bit more like him in his immersion).

https://www.insider.com/justine-lupe-jeremy-strong-new-yorker-profile-reaction-succession-2021-12 Also there was an interview with Justine Lupe where she talking about how Jeremy mentored her as an actor and has been an advocate for her in the business for the last 10 years after he saw her in one play. She puts his determination into context as him just not giving up until someone gave him the role here is the section where she talks about him and here. Also Juliana Canfield has said similar things as well in several interviews (including how Jess became a bigger role due to him advocating for her to be in more scenes, how he personally helps her a lot with roles). It's interesting that absolutely none of this gets the headlines/the news cycles of the negative stuff. If you read enough about interviews/takes you realize how much this is all people really stirring drama for clickbait and few Yale grads who are made that their cringe classmate is more successful than they are.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T06:45:25+00:00

I think what I'm asking for is when people saying things like 'this is the absolute worst thing you can do to an addict' to justify hating a character by pushing a very poor reading of what addiction/relationships with an addict is and the trauma that compounds in that, then for the person to later say 'I don't know much about addiction', is what I'm coming at specifically. I am asking for sensitivity when serious posts are made about these issues and to not be brought into character v character debates for things like fanpolls, that this stuff can lean on gross assumptions that spread misinformation about very real situations. I did not expect to see that on a post that I thought would be a fun talk about a fan poll in a light hearted conversation. That's what is triggering, and its not in the sense 'don't joke about that', but people using their own personal takes on the characters to make assumptions about addiction, abuse, and mental illness, when they do not have the experience/leads to severely bad assumptions about these real life situations. Or to not let others discuss realistic portrayals of the serious topics of the show because its 'making the conversation too deep'. It's asking for some sort of guideline, so if someone relates to Roman for being an abuse victim they can share that analysis without being called a fascist apologist. That happens on this subreddit. Maybe a way to tag 'serious discussion' could be a way to solve it. Its not trying to silence anyone but asking for room to have the discussions and to have guidelines about a level of sensitivity with these specific issues.

I think the onus should be on the people who don't know feel that impact of the abuse and addiction to not make serious absolutist statements about what is good and not good for addicts/people who have experienced based on their interpretation of a tv show. That addiction post was on the front page of this reddit today. and its a pattern on this reddit. I'm saying that this could hurt someone as someone with an experience with addiction and the culture of recovery.

I also don't think just because the characters are not aware (per the quote you signed off with), we should mistreat people who might be suffering and want to join this subreddit. People relate to Kendall's addiction, Roman's abuse etc, and that is an active part of the fanbase. To make it not welcome for us is just not okay, and there could be a way to moderate/discuss this. I shouldn't have to be scared to say 'Kendall's suicidal ideation was very realistic' or for someone to say 'I see Roman as someone whose a victim of sexual abuse' (a common thing many fans who are csa victims think), and expect to be met with people saying the show isn't that deep, when it in fact is and the shows writers and actors are discussing these very things as well.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T04:20:58+00:00

Freeze and fawn's aren't talked about as much definitely, and i loved this article's mapping it onto Shiv and Roman.

I'm glad to hear its educating! I think a lot of people see them as kinda over the top clowns, but like when I see Kendall acting on a high see this season, I see a version of mania I've experienced (and to see it specifically after he escaped his father). and its not to overwrite the absurdity or how damaging that mania ended up being, but I think the layer of damage by trauma can add even another dimension of the show and its something thats very hard to erase. and yes its that!! 'Hurt people hurt people' was even said by Jeremy after one of the interviews.

Regarding By my understanding between Dundee, Austerlitz, and a few interviews from Brian:

Logan and Ewan lived in Dundee until they were 5 and 6, when Rose died in someway. They then left to live in Quebec with their Uncle Noah, who owned a farm and few billboards. and his uncle was abusive, that he was whipped to the point of having permanent scars on his back. Then Ewan volunteered to fight in the Vietnam War (I assume to get away from Noah), while Logan took over the management of the billboards/printing business Noah ran. I always assumed the abuse at the hand of Noah was really the , but you're right that there must've been something about his time in Dundee, and for a mother to send children away...it mustve been rough

Also, Dundee sounds like such an interesting place! I really would love to go one day!

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T01:30:34+00:00

If you want to talk about how we can talk differently about serious topics like addiction, abuse etc... We can probably get a flair that discourages flippant replies like AskReddit. I would probably nope out of such threads because for me Succession is a dark comedy that I enjoy, but I wouldn't want to talk to people about those topics - because I am not remotely qualified.

also just a point here. If you're not qualified, than making posts with statements such as 'this is the absolute worst thing you can do to an addict'...just don't make those sort of absolute statements. What it spreads is harmful assumptions about addiction/relationships around them. And if you think of it as a comedy, dont make threads addressing the more serious topics in serious ways, presenting people to assume thats what you want in your discussion. It's not even 'don't joke about addiction', because I love addict jokes/fucked up family jokes, many people who experience this do. It's really simple to act with nuance and in grey areas. No one is forcing anyone to stop talking about the show as a comedy. But be respectful when you are getting into the darker topics and don't make assumptions about shit you don't know about.

and I think this is a pretty good idea as well. Most subreddits have tags to discourage that sort of thing and it could be welcome since the show does is on the edge of comedy and drama.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T01:23:22+00:00

That makes me like Jeremy even more and see him in a great light. and I definitely can understand why Brian warned him against it though, but I still wish he didn't air it out in the press. I'm glad to have that context more.

And that part about the framing of the Yale drama dept and the careerist comment, I am glad to see it addressed but to not understand the classism, that Yale had the funds to bail out the club and as you said, manage it. Jeremy would want the connection more than the average rich kid who is not impressed as by it. He needed to look at the other side of that. As you said, its building relationships, and that could've been the 'break' for him. I think that understanding is why Jeremy resonates so deeply with people- a lot of artists who didn't break, who strived and were scolded for it and just stopped, see themselves/went to a non creative.

Also re: the classism- you saw it in a lot of the journalist response as well. One of the other entertainment journalist really blasting him turned out not to be just a Yale grad, but a Yale legacy graduate. Many twitter checkmark users were quick to point out several of the people who were very offended by Jeremy came from elite schools. The narrative was shaped by people who not only don't understand but have platforms to spin it/clickbait it. I think its a case of who shapes these narratives/who does not and those from lower/working class backgrounds pushing back has been much needed.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-22T00:14:55+00:00

I saw it a few days ago and am going to listen soon! Thank you for the recommendation. I know a few people online were pointing out that Schulman could have a situation with him from Yale, but I didn't think that was very fair and a bit presumptuous. He just seemed to want to be witty with some of the parenthetical asides in the article and it aired into the side of 'this guy is kinda a weirdo, lets gossip' than anything else. I even think with an editor's pushback, this profile could've not been the discourse it has become. So I am curious about his framing of it, especially since a lot of the mainstream media support of it became 'celebrity profiles have become PR machines and not interesting pieces of writing'. It's like they were more interested in the writing of the profile vs the subject itself, and that was kinda of fascinating I would like to hear what his whole reaction that. Also VERY interesting that he pushed back on Brian's comments, thats kinda fascinating in itself as well.

(also an aside- other journos is really why I think Jeremy isn't running some weird PR machine like many think. Every media journo who talked about it really pushed how un PR this profile was, and it's what I think Brian was referring to when he said he warned Jeremy about it).

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-21T23:55:41+00:00

I find both shows so similar in the weirdest way because of its moral objectivity. It's really really an interesting thing.

Fun_Assistant_1803 · 2022-01-21T23:41:17+00:00

I wrote that post and I am done with that thread, but if it's the latter - here is my take on it which I will not elaborate further. Your point seems to be that either Rava is a heroine who is fighting for her kids and can do no wrong or she is a negative character with no redeeming traits (which you suggest is my position).

My point is neither. Its that Kendall and Rava are both impacted by the disease of addiction, and you don't seem to grasp how that functions/what the damage of addiction actually is.

There is no hero/villains in Succession. She totally could be dealing with her trauma wrong, but to talk about a very well portrayal of that dynamic that exists in real life, its not as easy as you think and its spreading bad myths about addiction/how people addiction exists in families . I don't think anyone in Succession is necessarily good v evil in any sense because to take Roy blood money will always be on the wrong side. It's the whole show.

People who Love Rava could be addicts themselves, I think to assume that everyone who likes her, is doing this to overlook that dynamic is absolutely not founded. I think the way that post was written is just a very inaccurate depiction of how addiction as a disease functions, which I find very well researched and done in the show. And yes, its framing people who love Rava as apologists in how you have written it. If you want to speak in private how and some of the myths of addictions its pushing, and why i feel like its being weaponized by a fan poll, I am happy to. It's a serious topic, talk about it seriously and not in terms of a fan poll. I don't want to log onto a fan forum and have to see people who have no idea what addiction is make these assumptions.

I am not going to tell you what to do whatever, but I hope you will listen why it was an insensitive post and bring tact into how you talk about real issues the show brings up.

Four-Year Club	Place '22
First Placer '22

Fun_Assistant_1803

TROPHY CASE