The Ethics of Bad Friends and Good Art

Last updated on: August 20, 2013 at 10:55 pm by Xarissa Holdaway

The Ethics of Bad Friends and Good Art 2013-08-20T22:55:52+00:00 Xarissa Holdaway

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

“We can keep being friends, just so long as you know you’re a bad one!”

What a line. Hannah Horvath, everyone’s favorite narcissist, coked out of her mind and newly freed of her inhibitions, captured the entire ethos of the show Girls, in 15 words.

The scene came back to me when I saw yesterday’s new trailer for the next season of the show. It looks fabulous. Hannah’s cut her hair! Jessa’s reappeared from Peru/Bali/the South Bronx! The inevitable manslaughter-suicide of Ray and Shoshanna has yet to take place! Adam’s hair is weirder than ever, and Marnie’s constant subversion of the world around her continues to fly under the radar! Everyone is intense and profane and no one is ready to claim the mantle of adulthood yet. And they’re all friends, even if they hate each other for being bad ones.

Love and hate go hand in hand on this show. It’s a heady mix of recklessness, untrammeled affection, fatal boredom, blind privilege, untreated mental illness, and most of all, judgment. Everyone else is doing it wrong, not that anyone knows what right is. While the resulting explosions make for some truly great scenes, it’s the judgment part that’s key.

Hannah has been very easy to dislike, if not abhor. She’s been criticized (inside and outside the show) for her entitlement, her self-obsession, her inability to recognize the needs of the people in her orbit, and at times her outright cruelty. She—rather, Lena Dunham, the woman who writes and plays her character—has even been accused of racism.

However, “Bad Friend,” the episode quoted above, and the one right after it, “It’s a Shame About Ray,” laid Hannah bare, giving us a reason why, even at her most ridiculous points—being trailed by a junkie neighbor through a Duane Reade, yelling at a bathrobed Marnie in a twerpy artist’s house while wearing a neon mesh shirt that thoroughly undermines her ability to throw shade— she’s worth watching. For the first time, we got to see why these people love each other in spite of all their selfishness, and why they come back. Later on, Jessa sits naked in a tub with Hannah and cries, spiritually and physically raw, in the way you do when your life has fallen around your ears. Then she snorts a booger into the tub water. And Hannah lets her. If there’s a better example of the show’s interest in ‘what is’ rather than ‘what should be,’ I can’t think of it.

In a piece for Think Christian, Daniel A. Siedell argues that the art world is still chewing over that transition from the idealized world to the natural one: “the artistic establishment pillaged nature in order to perfect it, using it as a backdrop for classical and Biblical stories that shaped virtue or delighted the soul.” This process created some sublime art, to be sure. But it could also be as reductive, in its way, as the all-too-common idea that scripture exists merely to tell us how to behave. (Or that television criticism is about policing the behavior of people who don’t exist anyway.)

By contrast, the modern tide, says Siedell, “returned painting to the realm of the creation. These paintings are worldly, creaturely. The critics noticed this. One hostile critic claimed that Cézanne could even paint bad breath.”

The new breed of painters, in their dedication to capturing something about the world that was decidedly less platonic, less “spiritual,” were creating an ethic of their own, dedicated to bestowing dignity on the imperfect world. He quotes Cézanne: “You don’t paint souls, you paint bodies; and when the bodies are well-painted, dammit, the soul – if they have one – the soul shines through all over the place.”

Which is why the line “Just so long as you know you’re a bad one” landed, right in the midst of the critical firestorm over Girls, in a way that gestured as much towards the show’s place in the television landscape as it did Marnie’s mistakes. Hannah’s self-consciousness has always mirrored the show’s self-consciousness, and it was as if Lena Dunham reached out to grab us and say that we could, finally, stop worrying about whether Hannah will ever do anything “right.” To me, at least, it presented an argument for the show that didn’t require us to think of these characters as role models or cautionary tales. We’re friends either way.

Culture

ethics

television

Previous Post

August 14, 2013

Ghost Stories

Next Post

August 22, 2013 On Science, Faith, and Evidence

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category American society Art baptism Blogging Book of Mormon Book review Brigham Young Brigham Young University Bundy Catholicism Christianity Communalism Community of Christ conferences conversion correlation Culture denominations Digital History Discipline Councils diversity Doctrine Donald Trump education Emma Smith ethics family feminism fiction Film review food French Polynesia Fundamentalism Gay rights Gender global Gun politics Halloween health History Honor Code hymns Joseph Smith Kirtland Temple law of consecration massacre site military Ministering missionary moderate Mormon feminism Modern Mormonism Mormon origins Mormon War Mormonism Mormonism, politics, Romney Obama Peace politics Polygamy Pope Francis Poverty Prayer Priesthood Protestantism Race Religious freedom Revelation Reviews sacred sites Scientology Scripture Secularization See Stones sexual assault Star Wars television temples Tithing Utah violence war women's ordination

Select a Month October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 October 2017 September 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 November 2016 October 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What was the consequence of David’s sin with Bathsheba?

Select your answer to see how you score.

His kingdom was taken away Bathsheba was taken from him David was exiled Their first child died