A Dark, Warped Reflection An

Analysis of Black Mirror

View all posts by TheLuddbrarian

Editors Note: what follows is an analysis of the first two seasons of

Black Mirror. An analysis of the third season has also been posted.

Depending upon which sections of the newspaper one reads, it is very

easy to come away with two rather conflicting views of the future. If one
begins the day by reading the headlines in the International News or
Environment it is easy to feel overwhelmed by a sense of anxiety and
impending doom; however, if one instead reads the sections devoted to
Business or Technology it is easy to feel confident that there are
brighter days ahead. We are promised that soon we shall live in wondrous
Smart homes where all of our devices work together tirelessly to ensure
our every need is met even while drones deliver our every desire even as
we enjoy ever more immersive entertainment experiences with all of this
providing plenty of wondrous investment opportunitiesunless of course
another economic collapse or climate change should spoil these
fantasies. Though the juxtaposition between newspaper sections can be
jarring an element of anxiety can generally be detected from one section
to the next even within the technology pages. After all, our devices
may have filled our hours with apps and social networking sites, but this
does not necessarily mean that they have left us more fulfilled. We have
been supplied with all manner of answers, but this does not necessarily
mean we had first asked any questions.

If you could remember everything, would you want to? If a cartoon bear
lampooned the pointlessness of elections, would you vote for the bear?
Would you participate in psychological torture, if the person being
tortured was a criminal? What lengths would you turn to if you could not
move-on from a loved ones death? These are the types of questions
posed by the British television program Black Mirror, wherein anxiety
about the technologically riddled future, be it the far future or next week,
is the core concern. The paranoid pessimism of this science-fiction
anthology program is not a result of a fear of the other or of panic at the
prospect of nuclear annihilation but is instead shaped by nervousness at
the way we have become strangers to ourselves. There are no alien
invaders, occult phenomena, nor is there a suit wearing narrator who
makes sure that the viewers understand the moral of each story. Instead
what Black Mirror presents is dread it holds up a black mirror (think of
any electronic device when the power on the screen is off) to society and
refuses to flinch at the reflection.

Granted, this does not mean that those viewing the program will not
flinch.

[And Now A Brief Digression]

Before this analysis goes any further it seems worthwhile to pause and
make a few things clear. Firstly, and perhaps most importantly, the
intention here is not to pass a definitive judgment on the quality of Black
Mirror. While there are certainly arguments that can be made regarding
how this episode was better than that one this is not the concern here.
Nor for that matter is the goal to scoff derisively at Black Mirror and
simply dismiss of it the episodes are well written, interestingly directed,
and strongly acted. Indeed, that the program can lead to discussion and
introspection is perhaps the highest praise that one can bestow upon a
piece of widely disseminated popular culture. Secondly, and perhaps even
more importantly (depending on your opinion), some of the episodes of
Black Mirror rely upon twists and surprises in order to have their full
impact upon the viewer. Oftentimes people find it highly frustrating to
have these moments revealed to them ahead of time, and thus in the
name of fairness let this serve as an official spoiler warning. The plots
of each episode will not be discussed in minute detail in what follows as
the intent here is to consider broader themes and problems but if you
hate spoilers you should consider yourself warned.

[Digression Ends]
The problem posed by Black Mirror is that in building nervous narratives
about the technological tomorrow the program winds up replicating many
of the shortcomings of contemporary discussions around technology.
Shortcomings that make such an unpleasant future seem all the more
plausible. While Black Mirror may resist the obvious morality plays of a
show like The Twilight Zone, the moral of the episodes may be far less
oppositional than they at first seem. The program draws much of its
emotional heft by narrowly focusing its stories upon specific individuals,
but in so doing the show may function as a sort of precognitive usage
manual, one that advises if a day should arrive when you can
technologically remember everythingdont be like the guy in this
episode. The episodes of Black Mirror may call upon viewers to look
askance at the future it portrays, but it also encourages the sort of droll
inured acceptance that is characteristic of the people in each episode of
the program. Black Mirror is a sleek, hip, piece of entertainment, another
installment in the contemporary golden age of television wherein it risks
becoming just another program that can be streamed onto any of a
persons black mirror like screens. The program is itself very much a part
of the same culture industry of the YouTube and Twitter era that the show
seems to vilify it is ready made for binge watching. The program may
be disturbing, but its indictments are soft allowing viewers a distance
that permits them to say aloud I would never do that even as they are
subconsciously unsure.

Thus, Black Mirror appears as a sort of tragic confirmation of the

continuing validity of Jacques Elluls comment:

One cannot but marvel at an organization which provides the antidote

as it distills the poison. (Ellul, 378)

For the tales that are spun out in horrifying (or at least discomforting)
detail on Black Mirror may appear to be a salve for contemporary societys
technological trajectory but the show is also a ready made product for
the very age that it is critiquing. A salve that does not solve anything, a
cultural shock absorber that allows viewers to endure the next wave of
shocks. It is a program that demands viewers break away from their
attachment to their black mirrors even as it encourages them to watch
another episode of Black Mirror. This is not to claim that the show lacks
value as a critique; however, the show is less a radical indictment than
some may be tempted to give it credit for being. The discomfort people
experience while watching the show easily becomes a masochistic
penance that allows people to continue walking down the path to the
futures outlined in the show. Black Mirror provides the antidote, but it also
distills the poison.

That, however, may be the point.

[Interrogation 1: Who Bears Responsibility?]

Technology is, of course, everywhere in Black Mirror in many episodes it

as much of a character as the humans who are trying to come to terms
with what the particular device means. In some episodes (The National
Anthem or The Waldo Moment) the technologies that feature
prominently are those that would be quite familiar to contemporary
viewers: social media platforms like YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and the
like. Whilst in other episodes (The Complete History of You, White
Bear and Be Right Back) the technologies on display are new and
different: an implantable device that records (and can play back) all of
ones memories, something that can induce temporary amnesia, a
company that has developed a being that is an impressive mix of robotics
and cloning. The stories that are told in Black Mirror, as was mentioned
earlier, focus largely on the tales of individuals Be Right Back is
primarily about one persons grief and though this is a powerful story-
telling device (and lest there be any confusion many of these are very
powerfully told stories) one of the questions that lingers unanswered in
the background of many of these episodes is: who is behind these
technologies?

In fairness, Black Mirror would likely lose some of its effectiveness in

terms of impact if it were to delve deeply into this question. If The
Complete History of You provided a sci-fi faux-documentary foray into
the company that had produced the memory recording grains it would
probably not have felt as disturbing as the tale of abuse, sex, violence and
obsession that the episode actually presents. Similarly, the piece of
science-fiction grade technology upon which White Bear relies,
functions well in the episode precisely because the key device makes only
a rather brief appearance. And yet here an interesting contrast emerges
between the episodes set in, or closely around, the present and those that
are set further down the timeline for in the episodes that rely on
platforms like YouTube, the viewer technically knows who the interests are
behind the various platforms. The episode The Complete History of You
may be intensely disturbing, but what company was it that developed and
brought the grains to market? What biotechnology firm supplies the
grieving spouse in Be Right Back with the robotic/clone of her deceased
husband? Who gathers the information from these devices? Where does
that information live? Who is profiting? These are important questions that
go unanswered, largely because they go unasked.

Of course, it can be simple to disregard these questions. Dwelling upon

them certainly does take something away from the individual episodes
and such focus diminishes the entertainment quality of Black Mirror. This
is fundamentally why it is so essential to insist that these critical questions
be asked. The worlds depicted in episodes of Black Mirror did not just
happen but are instead a result of layers upon layers of decisions and
choices that have wound up shaping these characters lives and it is
questionable how much say any of these characters had in these
decisions. This is shown in stark relief in The National Anthem in which
a befuddled prime minister cannot come to grips with the way that a
threat uploaded to YouTube along with shifts in public opinion, as
reflected on Twitter, has come to require him to commit a grotesque act;
his despair at what he is being compelled to do is a reflection of the new
world of politics created by social media. In some ways it is tempting to
treat episodes like The Complete History of You and Be Right Back as
retorts to an unflagging adoration for innovation, disruption, and
permissionless innovation for the episodes can be read as a warning
that just because we can record and remember everything, does not
necessarily mean that we should. And yet the presence of such a cultural
warning does not mean that such devices will not eventually be brought to
market. The denizens of the worlds of Black Mirror are depicted as being
at the mercy of the technological current.

Thus, and here is where the problem truly emerges, the episodes can be
treated as simple warnings that state well, dont be like this person.
After all, the world of The Complete History of You seems to be filled
with people who unlike the obsessive main character can use the
grain productively; on a similar note it can be easy to imagine many
people pointing to Be Right Back and saying that the idea of a
robotic/clone could be wonderful just dont use it to replicate the
recently dead; and of course any criticism of social media in The Waldo
Moment or The National Anthem can be met with a retort regarding a
blossoming of free expression and the ways in which such platforms can
help bolster new protest movements. And yet, similar to the sad
protagonist in the film Her, the characters in the story lines of Black Mirror
rarely appear as active agents in relation to technology even when they
are depicted as truly choosing a given device. Rather they have simply
been reduced to consumers whether they are consumers of social
media, political campaigns, or an amusement park where the show is a
person being psychologically tortured day after day.

This is not to claim that there should be an Apple or Google logo

prominently displayed on the grain or on the side of the stationary bikes
in Fifteen Million Merits, nor is it to argue that the people behind these
devices should be depicted as cackling corporate monsters but it would
be helpful to have at least some image of the people behind these
devices. After all, there are people behind these devices. What were they
thinking? Were they not aware of these potential risks? Did they not care?
Who bears responsibility? In focusing on the small scale human stories
Black Mirror ignores the fact that there is another all too human story
behind all of these technologies. Thus what the program riskily replicates
is a sort of technological determinism that seems to have nestled itself
into the way that people talk about technology these days a sentiment in
which people have no choice but to accept (and buy) what technology
firms are selling them. It is not so much, to borrow a line from Star Trek,
that resistance is futile as that nobody seems to have even considered
resistance to be an option in the first place. Granted, we have seen in the
not too distant past that such a sentiment is simply not true Google
Glass was once presented as inevitable but public push-back helped lead
to Google (at least temporarily) shelving the device. Alas, one of the most
effective ways of convincing people that they are powerless to resist is by
bludgeoning them with cultural products that tell them they are powerless
to resist. Or better yet, convince them that they will actually like being
assimilated.

Therefore, the key thing to mull over after watching an episode of Black
Mirror is not what is presented in the episode but what has been left out.
Viewers need to ask the questions the show does not present: who is
behind these technologies? What decisions have led to the societal
acceptance of these technologies? Did anybody offer resistance to these
new technologies? The 6 Questions to Ask of New Technology posed
by media theorist Neil Postman may be of use for these purposes, as
might some of the questions posed in Riddled With Questions. The
emphasis here is to point out that a danger of Black Mirror is that the
viewer winds up being just like one of the characters : a person who
simply accepts the technologically wrought world in which they are living
without questioning those responsible and without thinking that
opposition is possible.

[Interrogation 2: Utopia Unhinged is not a Dystopia]

Dystopia is a term that has become a fairly prominent feature in popular

entertainment today. Bookshelves are filled with tales of doomed futures
and many of these titles (particularly those aimed at the young adult
audience) have a tendency to eventually reach the screens of the cinema.
Of course, apocalyptic visions of the future are not limited to the big
screen as numerous television programs attest. For many, it is tempting
to use terms such as dystopia when discussing the futures portrayed in
Black Mirror and yet the usage of such a term seems rather misleading.
True, at least one episode (Fifteen Million Merits) is clearly meant to
evoke a dystopian far future, but to use that term in relation to many of
the other installments seems a bit hyperbolic. After all, The Waldo
Moment could be set tomorrow and frankly The National Anthem could
have been set yesterday. To say that Black Mirror is a dystopian show
risks taking an overly simplistic stance towards technology in the present
as well as towards technology in the future if the claim is that the show
is thoroughly dystopian than how does one account for the episodes that
may as well be set in the present? One can argue that the state of the
present world is far less than ideal, one can cast a withering gaze in the
direction of social media, one can truly believe that the current trajectory
(if not altered) will lead in a negative directionand yet one can believe all
of these things and still resist the urge to label contemporary society a
dystopia. Doom saying can be an enjoyably nihilistic way to pass an
afternoon, but it makes for a rather poor critique.

It may be that what Black Mirror shows is how a dystopia can actually be a
private hell instead of a societal one (which would certainly seem true of
White Bear or The Complete History of You), or perhaps what Black
Mirror indicates is that a derailed utopia is not automatically a dystopia.
Granted, a major criticism of Black Mirror could emphasize that the show
has a decidedly industrialized world/Western world focus we do not
see the factories where grains are manufactured and the varieties of
new smart phones seen in the program suggest that the e-waste must be
piling up somewhere. In other words the derailed utopia of some could
still be an outright dystopia for countless others. That the characters
in Black Mirror do not seem particularly concerned with who assembled
their devices is, alas, a feature all too characteristic of technology users
today. Nevertheless, to restate the problem, the issue is not so much the
threat of dystopia as it is the continued failure of humanity to use its
impressive technological ingenuity to bring about a utopia (or even
something better than the present). In some ways this provides an echo
of Lewis Mumfords comment, in The Story of Utopias, that:
 it would be so easy, this business of making over the world if it were
only a matter of creating machinery. (Mumford, 175)

True, the worlds of Black Mirror, including the ones depicting the world of
today, show that creating machinery actually is an easy way of making
over the world however this does not automatically push things in the
utopian direction for which Mumford was pining. Instead what is on
display is another installment of the deferred potential of technology.

The term another is not used incidentally here, but is specifically meant
to point to the fact that it is nothing new for people to see technology as a
source for hopeand then to woefully recognize the way in which such
hopes have been dashed time and again. Such a sentiment is visible in
much of Walter Benjamins writing about technology writing, as he was,
after the mechanized destruction of WWI and on the eve of the
technologically enhanced barbarity of WWII. In Benjamins essay Eduard
Fuchs, Collector and Historian he criticizes a strain in positivist/social
democratic thinking that had emphasized that technological
developments would automatically usher in a more just world, when in
fact such attitudes woefully failed to appreciate the scale of the dangers.
This leads Benjamin to note:

A prognosis was due, but failed to materialize. That failure sealed a

process characteristic of the past century: the bungled reception of
technology. The process has consisted of a series of energetic,
constantly renewed efforts, all attempting to overcome the fact that
technology serves this society only by producing commodities.
(Benjamin, 266)

The century about which Benjamin was writing was not the twenty-first
century, and yet these comments about the bungled reception of
technology and technology which serves this society only be producing
commodities seems a rather accurate description of the worlds depicted
by Black Mirror. And yes, that certainly includes the episodes that are
closer to our own day. The point of pulling out this tension; however, is to
emphasize not the dystopian element of Black Mirror but to point to the
bungled reception that is so clearly on display in the program and by
extension in the present day.

What Black Mirror shows in episode after episode (even in the clearly
dystopian one) is the gloomy juxtaposition between what humanity can
possibly achieve and what it actually achieves. The tools that could widen
democratic participation can be used to allow a cartoon bear to run as a
stunt candidate, the devices that allow us to remember the past can ruin
the present by keeping us constantly replaying our memories yesterday,
the things that can allow us to connect can make it so that we are unable
to ever let go energetic, constantly renewed efforts that all wind up
simply producing commodities. Indeed, in a tragic-comic turn, Black
Mirror demonstrates that amongst the commodities we continue to
produce are those that elevate the bungled reception of technology to
the level of a widely watched and critically lauded television serial.

The future depicted by Black Mirror may be startling, disheartening and

quite depressing, but (except in the cases where the content is explicitly
dystopian) it is worth bearing in mind that there is an important difference
between dystopia and a world of people living amidst the continued
bungled reception of technology. Are the people in The National
Anthem paving the way for White Bear and in turn setting the stage for
Fifteen Million Merits? It is quite possible. But this does not mean that
the reception of technology must always be bungled though
changing our reception of it may require altering our attitude towards it.
Here Black Mirror repeats its problematic thrust, for it does not highlight
resistance but emphasizes the very attitudes that have bungled the
reception and which continue to bungle the reception. Though Fifteen
Million Merits does feature a character engaging in a brave act of
rebellion, this act is immediately used to strengthen the very forces
against which the character is rebelling and thus the episode repeats
the refrain dont bother resisting, its too late anyways. This is not to
suggest that one should focus all ones hopes upon a farfetched utopian
notion, or put faith in a sense of hope that is not linked to reality, nor
does it mean that one should don sackcloth and begin mourning.
Dystopias are cheap these days, but so are the fake utopian dreams that
promise a world in which somehow technology will solve all of our
problems. And yet, it is worth bearing in mind another comment from
Mumford regarding the possibility of utopia:

we cannot ignore our utopias. They exist in the same way that north
and south exist; if we are not familiar with their classical statements we
at least know them as they spring to life each day in our minds. We can
never reach the points of the compass; and so no doubt we shall never
live in utopia; but without the magnetic needle we should not be able
to travel intelligently at all. (Mumford, 28/29)

Black Mirror provides a stark portrait of the fake utopian lure that can lead
us to the world to which we do not want to go a world in which the
bungled reception of technology continues to rule but in staring horror
struck at where we do not want to go we should not forget to ask where it
is that we do want to go. The worlds of Black Mirror are steps in the wrong
direction so ask yourself: what would the steps in the right direction look
like?

[Final Interrogation Permission to Panic]

During The Complete History of You several characters enjoy a dinner

party in which the topic of discussion eventually turns to the benefits and
drawbacks of the memory recording grains. Many attitudes towards the
grains are voiced ranging from individuals who cannot imagine doing
without the grain to a woman who has had hers violently removed and
who has managed to adjust. While The Complete History of You focuses
on an obsessed individual who cannot cope with a world in which
everything can be remembered what the dinner party demonstrates is
that the same world contains many people who can handle the grains
just fine. The failed comedian who voices the cartoon bear in The Waldo
Moment cannot understand why people are drawn to vote for the
character he voices but this does not stop many people from voting for
the animated animal. Perhaps most disturbingly the woman at the center
of White Bear cannot understand why she is followed by crowds filming
her on their smart phones while she is hunted by masked assailants but
this does not stop those filming her from playing an active role in her
torture. And so onand so onBlack Mirror shows that in these horrific
worlds, there are many people who are quite content with the new status
quo. But that not everybody is despairing simply attests to Theodor
Adorno and Max Horkheimers observation that:

A happy life in a world of horror is ignominiously refuted by the mere

existence of that world. The latter therefore becomes the essence, the
former negligible. (Adorno and Horkheimer, 93)

Black Mirror is a complex program, made all the more difficult to consider
as the anthology character of the show makes each episode quite
different in terms of the issues that it dwells upon. The attitudes towards
technology and society that are subtly suggested in the various episodes
are in line with the despairing aura that surrounds the various protagonists
and antagonists of the episodes. Yet, insofar as Black Mirror advances an
ethos it is one of inured acceptance it is a satire that is both tragedy and
comedy. The first episode of the program, The National Anthem, is an
indictment of a society that cannot tear itself away from the horrors being
depicted on screens in a television show that owes its success to keeping
people transfixed to horrors being depicted on their screens. The show
holds up a black mirror to society but what it shows is a world in which
the tables are rigged and the audience has already lost it is a
magnificently troubling cultural product that attests to the way the culture
industry can (to return to Ellul) provide the antidote even as it distills the
poison. Or, to quote Adorno and Horkheimer again (swap out the word
filmgoers with tv viewers):

The permanently hopeless situations which grind down filmgoers in

daily life are transformed by their reproduction, in some unknown way,
into a promise that they may continue to exist. The one needs only to
become aware of ones nullity, to subscribe to ones own defeat, and
one is already a party to it. Society is made up of the desperate and
thus falls prey to rackets. (Adorno and Horkheimer, 123)
This is the danger of Black Mirror that it may accustom and inure its
viewers to the ugly present it displays while preparing them to fall prey to
the bungled reception of tomorrow it inculcates the ethos of ones
own defeat. By showing worlds in which people are helpless to do
anything much to challenge the technological society in which they have
become cogs Black Mirror risks perpetuating the sense that the viewers
are themselves cogs, that the viewers are themselves helpless. There is
an uncomfortable kinship between the tv viewing characters of The
National Anthem and the real world viewer of the episode The National
Anthem neither party can look away. Or, to put it more starkly: if you are
unable to alter the future why not simply prepare yourself for it by
watching more episodes of Black Mirror? At least that way you will know
which characters not to imitate.

And yet, despite these critiques, it would be unwise to fully disregard the
program. It is easy to pull out comments from the likes of Ellul, Adorno,
Horkheimer and Mumford that eviscerate a program such as Black Mirror
but it may be more important to ask: given Black Mirrors shortcomings,
what value can the show still have? Here it is useful to recall a comment
from Gnther Anders (whose pessimism was on par with, or exceeded,
any of the aforementioned thinkers) he was referring in this comment to
the works of Kafka, but the comment is still useful:

from great warnings we should be able to learn, and they should help
us to teach others. (Anders, 98)

This is where Black Mirror can be useful, not as a series that people sit
and watch, but as a piece of culture that leads people to put forth the
questions that the show jumps over. At its best what Black Mirror provides
is a space in which people can discuss their fears and anxieties about
technology without worrying that somebody will, farcically, call them a
Luddite for daring to have such concerns and for this reason alone the
show may be worthwhile. By highlighting the questions that go
unanswered in Black Mirror we may be able to put forth the very queries
that are rarely made about technology today. It is true that the reflections
seen by staring into Black Mirror are dark, warped and unappealing but
such reflections are only worth something if they compel audiences to
rethink their relationships to the black mirrored surfaces in their lives
today and which may be in their lives tomorrow. After all, one can look into
the mirror in order to see the dirt on ones face or one can look in the
mirror because of a narcissistic urge. The program certainly has the
potential to provide a useful reflection, but as with the technology
depicted in the show, it is all too easy for such a potential reception to be
bungled.

If we are spending too much time gazing at black mirrors, is the solution
really to stare at Black Mirror?

The show may be a satire, but if all people do is watch, then the joke is on
the audience.

Editors Note: an analysis of the third season of Black Mirror is also

available.

Works Cited:

Adorno, Theodor and Horkheimer, Max. Dialectic of Enlightenment:

Philosophical Fragments. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2002.

Anders, Gnther . Franz Kafka. New York: Hilary House Publishers LTD,
1960.

Benjamin, Walter. Walter Benjamin: Selected Writings. Volume 3, 1935-

1938. Cambridge: The Belknap Press, 2002.

Ellul, Jacques. The Technological Society. New York: Vintage Books,

1964.

Mumford, Lewis. The Story of Utopias. Bibliobazaar, 2008.

Related Content

A Mechanical Moses
Riddled With Questions Interrogating Technology

Can We Have Our Cake Without Soylents Goo?

The Good Life or The Goods Life

Are We Technologically Literate

Advertisements

Related

Don't like what you see? - A review of Season Three of Black MirrorIn
"Civil Liberties"
There's an Apparatus for That - Reflections on Vilm Flussers book
Post-HistoryIn "Culture"
Do Robots Play Solitaire When the Boss Isn't Looking?In "Culture"
About TheLuddbrarian

I have no illusions that my arguments will convince anyone. -

Ellul librarianshipwreck.wordpress.com @libshipwreck