‘Homeland,’ ‘House of Cards’: Reflections of Our Vision of the World

The immense success of television series featuring political topics reflects our mix of fascination and fear regarding our international system; a useful tool to understanding geopolitics.

Television shows are to our time, they say, what serial novels were to the literary world of the 19th century: an endless source of entertainment and discussion. At dinner parties, it has become essential to spread one’s knowledge of this new cultural front.

“Tell me what show you watch, and I will tell you who you are.” Irony – or snobbery – aside, the genre earned its credentials a long time ago. You could go so far as to say that television shows have become necessary tools for understanding the world, as well as domestic and global politics. For example, to understand the conflict that exists between Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel and President Obama on the subject of Iran, referencing television shows may be the most useful shortcut. “Bibi” is still in season 3 of “Homeland,” in that he is completely obsessed with Iran, whereas Obama has already moved on to season 3 of “House of Cards” and is incorporating the Russian threat into his strategic plans.

In reality, television shows are just as revealing of the debates in our societies as they are of our fears and hopes. These shows can be a foreshadowing of our future as well as a reconstruction, often idealized, of our past. Julian Fellowes, the creator of perhaps the most popular series in the world, “Downton Abbey,” recently questioned the reason for his success. Why is it that millions of people – from Europe to the United States, reaching as far as Asia and including, I have to admit, the author of this piece – are so interested in the adventures of the Crawley family and its servants? Is it nostalgia for a past that no longer exists and has been reconstructed with the greatest attention to detail, or perhaps fascination with the social relationships that might exist within an English estate?

According to Julian Fellowes, in our chaotic world, there is a nostalgic longing for order and an unconscious need for strict rules. This is what “Downton Abbey” offers to a disoriented, if not distraught, public. The television show is like an exotic retreat in space – an English castle – and time, from 1912 to the mid-1920s. Are we also like the heroes of “Downton Abbey,” between two worlds, unaware of the profound changes that are about to take place and eager for refuge from the present, not to mention the future?

Isn’t the contrast that can be seen between the show “The West Wing” and “House of Cards” the best possible introduction to the real dysfunction of American politics? “The West Wing” nostalgically depicts the presidency as it should be, under the leadership of a cultured and compassionate man. “House of Cards” abandons the world of ideals and enters into another universe that is hardly exaggerated in its dark vision. It leaves the world of Corneille for that of Racine.

In France, didn’t the television show “Engrenages” [“Spiral”], the only one to have succeeded in the international market, prepare its viewers for the tragedies of January 2015? Doesn’t season 5 in particular – with its dark and clinical portrayal of suburban migration, responding to the complete cynicism and verbal violence of the relationship between justice and police, with dialogues that seem to come straight out of Parisian “power dinners” – constitute the best introduction to the sickness of French society?

In Denmark, it is common to hear that the country’s main problem is that the prime minister in office doesn’t possess the qualities of Birgitte Nyborg, the heroine of “Borgen,” the idealized prime minister in the very popular Dutch series about a woman in power.

However, if there is a show that is subject to very serious debates inside foreign affairs departments throughout the Western world, it’s “Game of Thrones.” Does this series encourage a realistic vision of the world by emphasizing the role of force in its most brutal forms?

Has it, perhaps, encouraged jihadi in their barbaric method of decapitation, practiced abundantly in the show? Or does this series offer instead a reflection on the limits of force? In fact, “Game of Thrones” mixes – with the help of very large financial resources – ancient mythology and traits of the Middle Ages to achieve an authentic geopolitical analysis, which seems to reflect (in a relatively accurate manner) our mix of fascination and fear when it comes to today’s international system.

The United States doesn’t have a monopoly on TV shows, but isn’t the mirror of the world that they offer distorted by America’s unquestionable dominance in the Western world?

Do Chinese or Russian leaders take the time to watch shows like “House of Cards” or “Game of Thrones” to understand from the inside the evolving mindset of their rival and enemy? At the level of leaders, I don’t know, but when it comes to their close counselors, the answer is a resounding “yes.” Many of them pay close attention to the plots and patterns of these shows and disguise their “professional” interest as a quest for entertainment (unless it’s the other way around). In short, the “seasons” have become key to understanding geopolitics in the era of globalization.