On House of Cards a.k.a. House of Cunts

Lucas Versantvoort / October 5, 2014

House of Cards is one of those series where you’re wondering why you’re even watching it in the first place. It’s like Game of Thrones in that regard… You’re mainly watching Francis and Claire behave like assholes ruthless pragmatists and do everything in their power to…well, get even more power. Now, obviously there is a certain appeal in watching someone with a one-track mind achieve what he wants, but House of Cards has the look and feel of something more and the problem is…it doesn’t deliver on that front (though season 3 might change that).

No idea what the blood is supposed to symbolize...nope...

            The series tries to be a cynical look into politics in the White House and it does give us a good idea of what things are probably like. The problem is that it has a genuine air of seriousness on the one hand, but a ridiculous setup on the other and the series fails to find some comfortable middle ground. There's a lack of balance between the moments where we're supposed to care for Francis and Claire and the moments where they behave like assholes. Remember, this is a series that in one episode has Francis kill Zoe and requests our sympathy in the very next episode, when he's confronted with the prospect of having to pin a medal on the general who raped Claire many years ago. (The fact that this works is not the point...) Yes, the mechanisms of politics feel realistic, but you’ve got a main character who in the very first scene strangles a dog out of mercy and later stages someone’s suicide and throws a twenty something female journalist in front of a train and then cynically talks about it to our faces…and yet the series expects us to take it completely seriously. All these over-the-top moments imply that this series is actually a game of watching a ruthless man crush all opposition on his way to the top first and political critique second. You’d think the series would be more in on the joke, but no, this series exudes a sense of being something more, something approaching…‘art’, perhaps? Given its serious style, the least they could do is explore Francis and Claire in more detail, because we still don’t really know them despite the occasional glimpse beneath the surface. A few scenes show Claire is aware of the damage she and Francis are causing and a few others suggest things about Francis’s latent homosexuality and his nostalgia for what his time at The Sentinel represented (in the library episode), etc. But it’s all too thin for this series to really be considered a character study. Instead, we mostly get this continuous bombardment with Political Corruption and a 101 from Francis on how to beat the system and the people in it.

I will say that I find Francis and Claire’s relationship refreshing…in a slightly disturbing way. Rather than let Claire be the typical wife suffering under the man’s corruption, she is Francis’s equal in ruthlessness. In a way, they symbolize some of the ideals of a relationship: open communication, sharing, etc. There’s a beauty to the scenes where they’re sharing a cigarette in their usual spot, in front of an open window bathed in night light. Also intriguing is the role sex plays in their marriage, or rather the lack thereof. Sex isn’t an end, but merely a means to an end. Needless to say, Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright play all of this wonderfully. They’re not only comfortable around each other, they exude a shared history.

Now, it might be that House of Cards is aiming to be something of a slow burn on the character development front. The only way the series could even be considered becoming part of the upper echelon of television dramas is by complicating Francis and Claire, because it’s certainly not going to do that on claims of ‘being a real insight into Washingtonian politics’. There’s been a few occasions were we catch a glimpse of something human beneath the icy wall they call a skin, but the series never follows through on it. Simply introducing a rape background story and have that seemingly explain Claire’s entire character is not enough (despite its execution). They have to be humanized in some way, otherwise – in pure marketing terms – the series will remain in stasis. We’ll just be treated to variations on ‘seemingly insurmountable odds oppose Francis and Claire; they stress out over the possibility that they might not succeed this time; Francis finds a solution due to a combination of intellect, luck and the stupidity of those around him; rinse, repeat’. Speaking of insurmountable odds, the people opposing Francis aren’t exactly worthy opponents. It’s of course because their human nature makes them easy pickings for someone like Francis, but seeing him come out on top time and time again robs the series of suspense. There’s never really been the feeling it could go wrong for Francis on his way to the top, not until he gets there first at least. Ultimately, what I’m waiting for is for their entire ‘house of cards’ to collapse in on itself and learn more about them in the process. Maybe Francis and Claire will even turn on each other. After all, Francis made no qualms about marching on alone if he had to. If the series takes its Shakespearian roots seriously, then the first two seasons represent Richard III’s rise and then afterwards, at the peak of his power, must come the fall.

Stray observations:

-I didn’t like the way some of his Francis’s opponents were defeated. Remy has been endlessly built up to participate in Francis’s downfall only to chicken out and follow his dick/heart when opportunity presents itself. Same goes for the President who at a certain point tells Francis he will lay him on his back if he ever sees him again, but one ‘heartfelt’ letter later and suddenly it’s time to hand over the reins to Francis. And there are countless others who just submit in the blink of an eye to Francis’s ‘southern charm’… Of course their human nature is supposed to be what Francis exploits, but this series just needs a ‘supervillain’ who thinks and acts like Francis.

-I think Francis’s monologues are occasionally underwritten and uninsightful and only serve to prove that the series takes itself too seriously. Am I supposed to consider this series a riveting drama with compelling characters and genuine insight into human nature and politics when I’m served lines like “let the butchery begin”, “everything is about sex. Except sex. Sex is about power” and “For those of us climbing to the top of the food chain, there can be no mercy. There is but one rule: hunt or be hunted”?