Please don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying that Lizzo’s music is less deserving of critical attention than Radiohead or Kendrick Lamar or Joni Mitchell. Nor that Tuca and Bertie’s exploration of female friendship is somehow less ‘important’ than Bojack Horseman’s treatment of male depression (which, by the fourth season, becomes about the least interesting thing about Bojack anyway).
And it’s not as if these critics are making this stuff up, either. Hanawalt has explicitly said that Pastry Pete was inspired by some of the creepy male gatekeepers in the comic book world. By the end of the season, we realise why Bertie is so anxious, and we’re deep into the jelly of trauma, abuse and recovery – albeit in a storyline that involves a battle with a giant crab on a lake made of jam.
But that episode reclaims the right to be silly too. It features a wise owl (voiced by Isabella Rossellini) who makes delicate little dioramas out of broken shells. “I fill the shells with scenes from my life and dreams and I take it all very seriously,” she tells Tuca. Before bursting out laughing. “Just kidding! I like jokes.” Jokes! Remember them?
What I mean is, there is something a little absurd in this clickbaity tendency to judge all culture in terms of its political relevance. Anyone would assume that the most worthwhile thing art could do would be to comment on #MeToo, or empower the big-bottomed community – and the rest of the stuff (the funny stuff, the weird stuff, the stuff that you can’t quite get out of your head) were mere padding.
As Rebecca Liu has argued in regard to writers such as Phoebe-Waller Bridge, Sally Rooney and Kristen Roupenian, emerging female artists are often weighed down with an imagined “significance” relating to some message of empowerment – and not allowed simply to exist on their own terms.
There is an obvious problem with the “issues” approach when it comes to art made by women and minorities – it’s another form of ghettoisation. To frame Tuca and Bertie as a post #MeToo drama says: “Hey, don’t watch this if you’re not with the program!” People don’t tend to say that kind of thing about Game of Thrones.
Lizzo, meanwhile, clearly finds it all a little constraining:
All these fucking hashtags to convince people that the way you look is fine. Isn’t that fucking crazy? I say I love myself, and they’re like, ‘Oh my gosh, she’s so brave. She’s so political.’ For what? All I said is ‘I love myself, bitch!’
It all marks an impoverishment of our wider critical discourse – an unintended consequence of trying to expand it. Back in 2012, the Stanford professor Sianne Ngai wrote a fascinating book called Our Aesthetic Categories in which she attempted expand critical theory beyond traditional categories like “beautiful” and “sublime”. She chose to examine three “marginal” categories that had emerged in our late-capitalist era: “cute”, “zany” and “interesting”.
If you look at the sort of content people share on social media, you might see what she was getting at: we judge kitten pix “cute” and long-reads “interesting”. And then it becomes tempting to consider other categories too: “relatable” “relevant” and “problematic” are labels that crop up, over and over again. And they’re not necessarily positive.
The reductive charge of being “problematic” has already condemned the 1990s sitcom Friends in the eyes of half of the internet: so hard to look past the privilege of its all-white cast! And that’s before we’ve talked about the fat-shaming or homophobia. Vintage Simpsons episodes are newly vexed, thanks to the problematic portrayal of Apu. And can you listen to Strangeways, Here We Come anymore, given Morrissey’s views on immigration? Many people can’t.
But if “problematic” politics are enough to condemn songs and shows we might once have enjoyed (Johnny Marr’s guitar be damned!), the inverse must also be true. A show like Tuca and Bertie must be good because it’s coming from the right place politically, and because it has relevant things to say. It’s also doubtful it would have been commissioned prior to #MeToo.
But “relevance” of this sort is primarily a media category, not an artistic one. It’s what a journalist sent to interview an artist might be (regretfully) expected to wheedle out. It’s what makes for a hot take on Twitter. But it isn’t usually why most of us turn to art.
Artists can take us away from this world and point towards other possible worlds. It would be nice to think they could aspire to irrelevance – the sheer pleasure of creation. There’s nothing particularly relevant about John Coltrane’s saxophone on My Favourite Things and this is why I never tire of it.
So, sure, listen to Lizzo because she’s body-positive. But also because her rhymes are delicious and she’s as funky as a dog in shades. And it’s OK to watch Tuca and Bertie because it’s silly and playful and sexy, the talking plants really are something, and the cartoon form allows Hanawalt to go to places where conventional TV can’t go.
In collapsing the boundaries between human and animal, animal and vegetable – even animate and inanimate objects – it seems to me that Hanawalt has done something miraculous and Goddesslike. She has imagined a new world. So let’s not drag her back down to this one.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe