{"id":121,"date":"2016-03-19T23:40:01","date_gmt":"2016-03-20T03:40:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/?p=121"},"modified":"2016-03-19T23:41:45","modified_gmt":"2016-03-20T03:41:45","slug":"youre-not-my-supervisor-archer-and-anti-nationalism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/uncategorized\/youre-not-my-supervisor-archer-and-anti-nationalism\/","title":{"rendered":"You\u2019re Not My Supervisor: Archer and Anti-Nationalism"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"archervice\"<\/a><\/p>\n

When the FX TV show Archer <\/em>broadcast its 5th<\/sup> season, fans of the show knew they were in for something different. Gone were the serial episodes split between the ISIS (the International Secret Intelligence Service and not the middle-eastern terrorist group ISIL) headquarters and exotic international locations. Instead, our heroes were on the run \u2013 fleeing US supervision and attempting to cash out a literal ton of cocaine. These changes brought a far more critical view of the spy-action drama Archer<\/em> had parodied in prior seasons.<\/p>\n

One possible method to understanding season 5\u2019s message comes from Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser. In \u201cIdeology and Ideological State Apparatuses,\u201d Althusser claims that within the political sphere are multiple fighting groups. Each group promotes a different ideology that it believes everybody else should adopt. The key aspect of Althrusser\u2019s theory is that this battle is cultural. As such, this struggle is reflected in our cultural creations. In the same way that groups fight to spread their ideology, movies and TV shows do too (Althusser, 146). If Althusser\u2019s theory is correct, entertainment must be engaged in an ideological conflict.<\/p>\n

Archer: Vice <\/em>offers a particularly interesting window into this struggle because it is such a departure from the previous seasons\u2019 format. If Althusser is correct, then the show critiques and battles the ideology preached by James Bond<\/em>, Mission Impossible<\/em>, and other similar movies in the spy-action genre. But the question still remains of what Archer <\/em>subtly implies to its viewers, and how that is different from the ideology supplied by other shows.<\/p>\n

The most prominent franchise of the spy-action genre is James Bond. Archer, <\/em>and many other spy movies and TV shows, takes most of its tropes from this series. Specifically, the relationship between Sterling and Mallory is reminiscent of Bond and M\u2019s. Archer\u2019s surface aesthetic is much the same as Bond\u2019s: they wear suits, are serial womanizers, and love a good drink. Both work for government agencies that send them all over the world for a multitude of reasons, the most prominent of which is assassination.<\/p>\n

The defining trait of Bond and Archer is\u00a0their nationalities. While American spies are common across all media, the \u201cBond-type\u201d is a distinct trope with many characteristics of an stereotypical English gentleman. Archer, <\/em>the show, takes the time to make sure that Sterling Archer emulates Bond but removes all traces of being British. Sterling lacks Bond\u2019s sly demeanor, replacing it with a loud conspicuousness. Wry wit is replaced with overt sexual references and slapstick humor.\u00a0\u00a0 Bond\u2019s powers of seduction come from a careful mental game combined with physical prowess. Archer gets with women by boasting about his job and all his achievements. Bond has a \u201cmartini, shaken not stirred.\u201d Archer has whatever he can get his hands on. Even the two character\u2019s theme songs reflect on their nationalities. Bond\u2019s theme is an orchestral arrangement that plays as he walks triumphantly away from another vanquished enemy. Archer\u2019s theme, \u201cDanger Zone\u201d by Kenny Loggins, literally describes him: Archer is a danger. The slick and posh versus the crude and common cleanly divides Bond from Archer in the came clich\u00e9d way that \u201cAmerican\u201d and \u201cBritish\u201d are commonly differentiated.<\/p>\n

\"archerbond\"

Archer, top, is chaotic and uses brute force while Bond, bottom, is calmer and more refined.<\/p><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The attention to nationality changes the message of each Bond <\/em>movie and the Archer <\/em>TV show. In the modern Bond <\/em>movie Skyfall<\/em>, the climactic battle takes place on Bond\u2019s hometown estate of Skyfall in Scotland. Bond, along with the groundskeeper Kincade and head of MI6 M, are on the run from a former MI6 agent named Raoul Silva. After retreating to Skyfall, the heroes set up a series of traps and devices in order to defend Skyfall against well-armed attackers. After a long battle, Bond is triumphant in killing Silva. Unfortunately, M is killed in the battle. She leaves a Union Jack emblazoned porcelain bulldog to Bond to remember her by( Skyfall)<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The Althussarian interpretation of these events points back to nationality. Because Bond is so clearly identified with Britain, it follows that when Bond is defending his homestead he is also defending his homeland. The battle at Skyfall invokes a possible attack on England by terrorists. Furthering this interpretation is the knowledge that Silva was at one point an MI6 agent, implying that these attacks can come from the inside by people who aren\u2019t loyal to Britain. But the way that Bond survived was by retreating to Skyfall, and using the resources it provided. The ideological interpretation here is that in order to be safe, individuals should be loyal to their nations. Skyfall<\/em>, and Bond <\/em>in general, promotes staunch nationalism.<\/p>\n

Although Bond is British, and the movie does directly promote British nationalism, I believe the correct interpretation of the movie\u2019s ideology is that it promotes nationalism in general. Most audiences viewing this movie do not identify with Britain, but they do identify with Bond. As a viewer, watching Bond defend his country will not inspire you to defend Britain as well. Instead, the ideology will rub off on you to defend whichever country you support. The distinction between Bond\u2019s British identity and Archer\u2019s American identity is only important in the contexts of the character\u2019s stories. In terms of ideology, the concepts are generalized.<\/p>\n

Archer<\/em> argues against the type of nationalism promoted by Bond <\/em>in Archer: Vice. <\/em>The season begins with an attack by the FBI on ISIS, which results in the death of minor character Brett and the arrest of the main cast (\u201cWhite Elephant\u201d). This initial scene sets up the rest of the season: the disgraced ISIS agents attempting to sell cocaine in order to make some money before parting ways. I want to draw attention to two particular episodes in this season. First is \u201cOn the Carpet.\u201d In this episode, we are introduced to Slater, the shady arms dealer. Slater gives Archer, Cyril, and Ray weapons in return for the cocaine they were attempting to smuggle, and tells them to fly south. Slater\u2019s identity is revealed in \u201cArrival\/Departure,\u201d the final episode of the season. Slater is actually a CIA agent who was selling arms to a South American dictator to increase the CIA\u2019s budget. The dictator could only pay for the weapons with cocaine, so the CIA needed people to sell the cocaine for them. The ISIS agents had actually been selling the CIA\u2019s cocaine the whole time. Slater attempts to bring the ISIS agents to a CIA black site, but is disarmed. The episode ends with Mallory pulling a gun on the CIA agents and forcing them to reinstate ISIS.<\/p>\n

As Archer\u2019s defining trait, like Bond, is his nationality, we should look at these events through the national lens again. The initial crisis in the series is not an attack by a foreign group. The initial crisis is an attack by the US on an American \u2013 Archer. The breach of trust between country and individual doesn\u2019t end there. The final reveal, that the CIA had used ISIS to fulfill their own goals, also demonstrates this point. Ideologically, Archer<\/em> is implying that we should not trust our government. The government will only use you and abuse you, as they did to the ISIS agents. Furthermore, as indicated by Mallory, the only way to save yourself is to force the government to help you. That fact is reinforced by the attempted murder of the ISIS agents by the CIA once the ISIS agents had lost their utility. Archer<\/em> counters the Bond style nationalism with a grim account of government secrecy and betrayal. Archer<\/em> implores the viewer to not become a pawn in a much larger war.<\/p>\n

Archer\u2019s <\/em>anti-nationalist agenda is unique and not a result of Archer\u2019s <\/em>satirical nature Austin Powers,<\/em> another parody franchise that draws main elements from the James Bond, also advocates nationalism. Like both Bond and Sterling Archer, Austin Powers is known for his suits, nationality, and serial womanizing. But the ideology offered by Powers is in accordance with Bond, rather than Archer.<\/p>\n

Take Austin Powers in Goldmember <\/em>as a specific example. The major conflict is that Dr. Evil and Goldmember have commissioned a tractor beam (called \u201cPreperation H\u201d) that they will use to destroy the world. In the final confrontation of the movie, Austin pleads with Dr. Evil not to launch this rocket towards Earth. At the penultimate moment, Austin\u2019s father reveals that Dr. Evil is actually Austin\u2019s brother, which causes Dr. Evil to switch sides and fight off Goldmember to save the day.<\/p>\n

There are a few key details that should be included to clarify Austin Powers\u2019 <\/em>ideology. First, the rocket is very clearly made by the Japanese \u2013 a whole scene in the movie is dedicated to infiltrating the factory where it was constructed. Second, Goldmember is Dutch, and a Belgian couple raised Dr. Evil. The enemy in this movie is foreigners, foreigners who want to destroy the world with foreign technology. And the way to stop this from happening is by uniting under a British identity. Austin Powers, <\/em>while plainly parodying James Bond, agrees with Bond that nationalism and national identity is a solution to problems. Furthermore, it even identifies the specific way you should serve your country: accept the brotherhood of your nation and you will be protected from outsiders who mean you harm. Despite it\u2019s nature as a parody, Austin Powers <\/em>is on the same side as Bond in the cultural battle.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Austin Powers next to his car, “The Shagmobile”<\/p><\/div>\n

For Althusser\u2019s theory to be demonstrated, there must be an ideological war between movies within the same genre and of the same type. The traditional spy-action superpower, James Bond<\/em>, has long argued that we should submit to our country and accept our place as a member of that particular society. Even spin off media, like Austin Powers<\/em>, which parodies some of the central concepts and constructs in Bond, <\/em>advocates the same position. But Archer, <\/em>a firm fixture in the spy-action scene disagrees. It tells us to distrust our government and find our own path to safety. In doing so, it declares a cultural war on the other spy TV shows and movies.<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n

Austin Powers in Goldmember.<\/em> Jay Roach. Perf. Mike Myers, Beyonce Knowles, Seth Green. \u00a0New Line Cinema, 2002, Online.<\/p>\n

Althusser, Louis. \u201cLenin and Philosophy and Other Essays.\u201d La Pens\u00e9e (1970): 127-186. Web.17 Mar. 2016.<\/p>\n

Skyfall.<\/em> Sam Mendes. Perf. Danial Craig, Javier Bardem, Naiome Harris. Metro Golden Meyer, 2012.\u00a0Online.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhite Elephant,\u201d \u201cThe Rules of Extraction,\u201d and \u201cArrival\/Departure.\u201d Archer: Vice. <\/em>Writ.\u00a0Adam Reed. FX, 2013. Online.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

When the FX TV show Archer broadcast its 5th season, fans of the show knew they were in for something different. Gone were the serial episodes split between the ISIS (the International Secret Intelligence Service and not the middle-eastern terrorist … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1245,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-121","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/121","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1245"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=121"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/121\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":130,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/121\/revisions\/130"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=121"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=121"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=121"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}