“Fleabag” and “Ordinary People” refer to TV characters that are easily confused.

Much of the media present on today’s television channels and streaming services suffers from moral and ideological oversimplification, a product of viewers’ escapism from the everyday dilemmas that real life presents. Therefore, viewers are looking for TV shows that raise moral questions with clear and satisfying answers to make up for what is actually lacking. Because it pays to pamper viewers, screenwriters often create television shows that feature impeccable protagonists and reprehensible antagonists, drawing sharp lines between arbitrary categories. . good and bad. This meets the criteria of simplicity, and indeed gives the audience a temporary respite from the chaos of life, but sometimes at the expense of the authentic expression of humanity, which is the basis of profound art.

The portrayal of good characters who take responsibility for their bad choices is essential to developing a moving story, and just as important as the portrayal of villains with redeemable motivations. Considering these two aspects of her at the same time, the character can be broadly categorized as follows. good or bad It becomes obsolete. Freed from the need to play a moral role, they are simply characters, or perhaps even humans.

Two shows from the past decade exemplify this practice of giving major characters wrong positions and making choices that undermine their notions of basic good. “Fleabag” and “Normal People” depict characters who not only make big mistakes, but also find forgiveness through regret, apology, and hard-won growth.

“Fleabag” and “Ordinary person” They are similar in some superficial aspects, including the British setting, thorny romantic relationships, and depictions of mental illness. But the thread of raw humanity that threads each moment on screen is exactly like them.

Both shows give their characters room for error and bridge the gap between the characters and the audience, as the protagonists reveal themselves to be more human than many characters in other series.

Fleabag, written by Phoebe Waller-Bridge, chronicles the harrowing life of an unnamed woman. Her anonymity is unremarkable, as she is referred to only as Fleabag, and her title is fundamentally dirty. Fleabag is messily navigating her life as she faces unpleasant but common challenges. Sexual excess, unfulfilled dreams, infidelity, sadness, and mental illness are among her most prominent enemies.

Waller-Bridge does a good job of conveying Fleabag’s struggles without painting her as a mere victim of circumstance or wearing rose-colored glasses. She doesn’t shy away from showing the horrible things Fleabag has done in the name of self-interest, and instead shows the difference between Fleabag’s desire to be kind and her actions that suggest otherwise. Lean into the unspoken conflict of. At the same time, Fleabag’s desire and boundless love exude in every scene, a testament to the goodness she possesses but often goes unheard of.

The first season of “Fleabag” centers on the challenges Fleabag faces as she struggles to keep her guinea pig-themed cafe afloat after the death of her co-owner and best friend Boo. As Fleabag deals with the loss of Boo throughout, the circumstances of her death remain elusive until the final episode, when viewers learn that Boo walks into traffic and Fleabag accidentally sleeps with her boyfriend. I learn that he took her own life. After an entire season of Fleabag grappling with grief, guilt emerges.

The entire show is filled with implicit questions about forgiveness, such as who deserves forgiveness, how to get it, do the consequences of wrongdoing prevent forgiveness, and how to live without forgiveness.

With this knowledge, viewers are able to reconcile the mean, grief-stricken, flawed Fleabag of the previous episode with the Fleabag capable of causing untold pain, and learn how to reconcile such inherent contradictions. You need to adjust your meaning. Despite Fleabag’s wrong choices and the pain they caused, she is a sympathetic and empathetic character. Not in spite of it, but perhaps because there is a tendency to hurt in her loveliness.

‘Normal People’ is based entirely on the 2018 book of the same name by Sally Rooney, and audiences will not only read about it, but also watch two people madly in love and impossibly afraid of what it means. figures can be seen orbiting each other. After a completely secret relationship in middle school, Connell and Marianne spend their college years avoiding their long-lasting love, dating other people, and remaining unspoken and clearly misunderstood. Masu. Both Connell and Marianne make similar mistakes as they work through the experiences and aftermath of relationships that never saw the light of day. Their miscommunication and sometimes inconsiderate treatment of the other contrast sharply with the obvious love they have for each other, weaving a tapestry of failure, thoughtlessness, and redemption. The relationship continues, sometimes as a friendship and sometimes as a romance, as Connell and Marianne figure out who they are to each other and who they are to each other.

The seeds of Connell’s disregard for Marianne were sown early on, ignoring her in middle school while keeping their secret relationship strictly behind closed doors. Connell made this choice to maintain her social standing within her class, fearing being publicly involved with the school’s eccentrics, especially in her love life. Fear of rejection and social anxiety are central to his decision-making process. The end point of their relationship before college is when Connell asks another girl out to Debs, leaving Marianne completely alone. His motivations are common, if not universal, and viewers are forced to grapple with their disapproval of Connell’s mistakes and the understanding that they could make the same mistakes if they were in the same position. Masu. The implications of Connell’s actions in middle school reverberate throughout the rest of the limited series, giving Marianne that she was once an embarrassment, and Connell that he chose to hurt the woman he once loved. Always remind me that.

“Fleabag” and “Normal People” deftly blur the lines that separate behavior from moral and immoral, making it more realistic than the sophisticated portraits of idealized lives that so often appear on screen. better represents. In doing so, these shows become art in their own right, as they expose the complexity of human motivations, flaws, and contradictions that pervade every individual. Featuring a main character who hurts people, this show is more about the human condition than a simple piece of television. These similarities are not lost on producers. crossover video A film has been released that depicts Connell and Marianne attending confession with a priest who plays a key role in the second season of “Fleabag.”

Somehow, Waller-Bridge and Rooney have crafted a heartbreaking and relatable story about the inner coexistence of fear-driven mistakes and unyielding love.