buyout: a marxist critique of breaking bad

Watercooler Journal Feb. 2014 1

Buyout: A Marxist Critique of Breaking Bad

Jared McNett Truman State University, Class of 2013

Contributor of the Month

Breaking Bad probes the depths to which a cancer-diagnosed father will go to provide for his

family while exploring the price at which every individual can be bought. Though the series is

primarily concerned with that father, Walter White, it also spotlights his impressionable sidekick

Jesse Pinkman, whom Walter’s pursuit gradually corrupts. A marked turn in the tone of the

show occurs between seasons two and three in which Walter, now having reached the

monetary benchmark he set for himself, still lusts after the lucrative meth market. Throughout

the course of season three and into season four, Walter and Jesse’s journey takes them to cold

and soulless places, where cash is abundant and morality is in short supply.

Bursting at the seams with class warfare and torn asunder by the battle between the

bourgeoisie and proletariat, Breaking Bad is ripe for Marxist pickings. When seeing through


Chandler’s perspective of “Marxist Theory,” the show is a fascinating mirror of the seamy side

of the American dream. The world of the show is one where cash is king and where every

man/woman/child can be bought and sold for a price. Breaking Bad then is both a capitalist

nirvana and a Marxist nightmare, determined by the flip of a shiny silver coin.

A Marxist Primer

A critical piece of Marxist Media Theory that Daniel Chandler discusses is the concept that

mass media plays a critical role in the “reproduction of the status quo” (2). Chandler goes on to

note that this stands in stark contrast with “liberal pluralists” who tend to stress the liberating

power of mass media, and how it induces freedom (2). As Gurevitch et. al see it, a capitalist

society is a confining society, a society that favors the upper class at the expense of the middle

and lower class, a society where control is determined by capital and autonomy is “an illusion”

that reinforces the dominate culture. For Gurevitch et. al then, the media’s societal role is to

relay and reinforce the dominant cultural mindset and tamp down alternative viewpoints. This is

true of a film like District 9, where the South African news media derisively refers to the

immigrating aliens as “prawns,” further reinforcing a narrative crafted by the bureaucratic

government and Multinational United, who intend to keep the “prawns” living in the squalor of

an internment camp.

“Breaking Bad then is a capitalist nirvana and a Marxist nightmare, determined by the flip of a shiny silver coin.”

As Chandler notes, a key element of “classical” Marxist Theory is the idea of “economism”

which posits that economy can determine everything in a society from the political to the social

(3). Economism exists metaphorically in Charlie Chaplin’s Modern Times, where workers lacking

any individual identity literally become cogs in the machine of big business. Due to this view of

economism, Hall believes that the mass media of Marxist Theory must cater to the needs of big

business, lest they miss out on vital ad revenue.

The aforementioned “reproduction of status quo” that Chandler dissects is made possible by

the mass media’s promulgating of the “dominant ideology” (those values held by the ruling

class). Citing Curran et al., Chandler finds that this process is aided and abetted by the mass

media’s “concealment of class struggle” which effectively allows for class struggle to be swept


under the rug (Curran et al. 26). To a degree this can already be seen in many U.S. news media

markets, when certain “messier” stories lacking a clear, clean narrative are avoided. Given that

there is often an economy of words and time in news presentations; media members are

constantly looking for the quickest, cleanest sound bite to drive the story. These bites often

obfuscate the full story, and the consumer is left in the dark with no inclination as to the larger

political, economical, or social struggle at work. When this struggle is concealed, the possibility

for dissent and disruption of the “status quo” is effectively neutralized.

Marxist Theory is also quick to point out that the mass media can reproduce the status quo by

mythologizing certain segments of society (Chandler 5). This is true of many law enforcement

dramas (such as Cops) which craft a good guy/bad guy storyline. In these shows, the forces of

good will eventually stomp out the “malevolence” of crime. Examining these shows on a closer

level, a Marxist theorist would likely conclude that these narratives warn viewers that

contrarianism and all anti-societal behaviors will not be tolerated and will be stopped by any

means necessary. In effect, these shows keep consumers on the “straight and narrow path”

that dominant society crafts.

French philosopher Louis Althusser advanced the belief that ideology—not economism—has

the greatest influence on status. According to Althusser, ideology is transformative, capable of

deceiving people that they are self-determining, when in actuality they are pawns in an

ideological “chess game” (8). This game accelerates through interpellation, wherein state

institutions shepherd us into positions where our work will assist those who own and control the

means of production (Smith 208). In effect, Althusserian Marxism suggests then that we do not

“work to live, but rather live to work” (Arze-Bravo et al.).

One potent point made by Mick Underwood is that the working class does not necessarily

conform under pressure of the mass media or hegemonic domination, but accepts proletarian

status because they desire to keep working. As Underwood illustrates, we need to “play by the

rules” in order to stay in the game and chase a win that may never come (4).

A Breaking Bad Primer

Vince Gilligan’s Breaking Bad stands as one of the most stinging critiques of the American

economic system to appear on American television in several years. It is not merely a deviation

from the cultural norms, but a flat-out rejection of the “system.” In scenic Albuquerque, New

Mexico, the American dream internalized from the country’s inception has become a


nightmare. When we open up on a dazed and confused Walter White in the series pilot, he’s

seen brandishing a gun and profusely apologizing (into a handheld camera) to his family for the

shame his short meth-making career has wrought. This is a Walter White ashamed of his

actions, one who can’t seem to believe he has stumbled so far from the straight and narrow.

Pre meth-making Walter White was an honest man, clocking into his civil service job of

teaching chemistry at a public high school. He was a faithful husband and a loving father to a

son afflicted with cerebral palsy living in a humdrum suburb where nothing exciting ever

seemed to happen.

For all his commitment to the American dream, Walter is afforded nothing in return. A man that

was once a part of a Nobel Prize-winning research team has been reduced to teaching the bare

bones of chemistry, lecturing ad nauseum about atoms and the differences between an acid

and a base. Instead of reaping the rewards for his intellect and rugged individualism, Walter

was pushed out of a now billion-dollar company by his colleagues. As the show starts, he splits

his time between teaching chemistry and washing cars at A1A Car Wash under the watchful eye

of an oppressive boss. Even with his dutiful commitment to these dull jobs, Walter still

struggles to make ends meet, barely making house payments. His years toiling as a member of

the proletariat have yielded long nights and diminishing returns.


The capitalist shackles begin to slip off when Walter is diagnosed with lung cancer and given

only a few months to live. Piling onto his mounting problems is his wife Skyler’s revelation that

she is pregnant with their second child. In the same pilot episode, Walter is literally brought to

his knees at the car wash when he finds himself scrubbing away at a current student’s sports car

(that student laughs on in amusement). The pivotal moment for Walter comes when his DEA

brother-in-law Hank Schrader offers him a ride along as fiftieth birthday gift. During the course

of this ride along, Walt witnesses a former student, Jesse Pinkman, narrowly escaping arrest

and leaving behind his shambolic meth-lab. After his brother-in-law tells him how much the

haul was worth, the internal light-bulb clicks for Walter; he realizes how futile his life has been.

After pitching a partnership to Jesse, Walter begins cooking a potent strain of crystal meth

while Jesse tries to sell it.

This initial series of events marks a jarring departure from American cultural norms and quickly

establishes Walter as the ultimate anti-hero. With his decision to break free from the nine-to-

five proletarian grind, Walter escapes Gurevitch’s confining capitalist society and becomes an

autonomous individual. With partner-in-crime Jesse in tow, Walt engages in his own worker’s

revolution, establishing a “cooperative ownership” where everything is split fifty/fifty.


At this point in the story arc, Walter can be seen as working for the greater good, aiming to

provide for his family long after he has faded away. In this fashion, Walter fulfills the Marxist

principle of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,” with his own

family comprising the neediest. Walter has escaped the shackles of the bourgeoisie and no

longer works for monetary reward, but for the satisfaction of providing for his family.

Living to Work: Gustavo Fring’s Property

Fast-forwarding to season three, we find Walter and Jesse in possession of a small fortune, but

with a trail of blood left in their “revolutionary” path. When Walter and Jesse agree to work

with a powerful drug kingpin by the name of Gustavo Fring, the capitalist system once inverted

begins to reassert itself. While Gus deals in an illegal trade scrutinized by traditional American

society, he still values profit and the bottom dollar above all else. In an ironic turn, the man who

operates with the most illegality on the entire show is the one who would be most at home in

the normative American economic system.

By casting Gus as not only a drug kingpin but a successful business entrepreneur, Gilligan

manages to craft a stinging critique of American corporate culture. In the corporate race that


Gus runs, contrivances like workers’ rights and the law are of little concern, mere roadblocks set

up to stymie an ever-flowing revenue stream. In a stark moment of employee abuse early in

season four, Gus slashes the throat of his henchman Victor in front of Walter and Jesse to send

a message about company loyalty. By towering over the pair as they plead for their lives, Gus

effectively reasserts the hegemonic will, albeit by force, of the bourgeoisie on the wayward

proletariat workers. As he leaves them behind in the laboratory to clean up after his mess, Gus

coldly demands Walter and Jesse get back to work. Even with a “cog” now permanently out of

order, the wheels of the capitalist machine must keep turning lest a work day be missed or a

dollar go unearned.

The aforementioned “employee abuse” further ratchets up in season four when Gus places

security cameras in the lab and assigns Tyrus to replace Victor in watching over Walter and

Jesse. With these implementations, Gus embodies “Big Brother,” never letting Walter and

Jesse out of his sight. This encroachment leads Walter to wail about invasion of privacy, which

falls on deaf ears. Tyrus and his boss Mike intercept every attempt Walter makes to reach out

to Gus, fully isolating the working class from their employers.

“By casting Gus as not only a drug kingpin but a successful business entrepreneur, Gilligan manages to craft a stinging

critique of American corporate culture.”

When Gus made the decision to spare Walter and Jesse’s lives, he wasn’t acting out of

compassion, but out of consideration for his bottom line. Walter and Jesse are Gus’ shining

stars, the most lucrative employees in an empire. They are, in a sense, his property, existing

solely to serve him and his interests. Furthermore, Walter and Jesse’s struggle elucidates

Althusser’s concept of ideology being transformative. Walter and Jesse buy into being “self-

determining” when nothing could be further from the truth. Their every move is closely

watched and scrutinized; they make “pennies” while their boss makes millions. They are slaves

to a seemingly endless proletariat grind. In this way, Walter and Jesse’s predicament tragically

embodies the Althusserian conception of “living to work,” and no life exists outside of the lab.

Though Walter now toils away in the lab as the proletariat, he slowly becomes the bourgeoisie

he once loathed outside. Whereas Walter was once working towards the Marxist ideal of “to


each according to his needs,” he now stockpiles money as if he’s saving up for an economic

apocalypse. He celebrates all this success and wealth with his now estranged wife, heedlessly

spending money on the same champagne that Winston Churchill once drank. As season four

takes shape, this shift becomes more pronounced with Walter slowly fitting the role of

Albuquerque’s newest aristocrat. He’s made more than enough money, and yet he wants more.

All bets are off by the time we hit season five, when Walter trades his workmanlike Pontiac

Aztek for a posh Bentley. Blinded by the dollar signs, Walter now feeds into the capitalist

system, wantonly spending money on cars, bullets, and booze. But despite the death of the

once oppressive Gus at the end of season four, Walter and Jesse are still prisoners of the

proletariat mindset, permanently tethered to the working grind of the lab.

While the fumes of bourgeoisie “glitz and glamour” intoxicate Walter, the new lifestyle

torments Jesse. With his half of the money, Jesse holes up in his own home, buys towering

music speakers, and invites society’s skid row over to keep his misery company. All the fortune

in the world can’t keep the demons at bay for Jesse, who is now the tragic hero of the

revolution.

From a historical perspective, Jesse is the diffident Leon Trotsky to Walter’s brash Joseph


Stalin. As Trotsky once wrote in The Revolution Betrayed, questioning “where it was going,”

Jesse can’t help but turn to the past and wonder where his and Walt’s own personal revolution

went wrong. As season four fades into season five, the divide between Walter and Jesse

becomes a chasm. Akin to Stalin’s own expulsion of Trotsky from the revolutionary ranks,

Walter sends Jesse to the sidelines and seizes control of the operation for himself. With this

final power grab, Walter becomes the nightmarish bourgeoisie. The season five posters for

Breaking Bad play this newly found power to a hilt, sitting Walter down in front of untold sums

of money and meth, as the words “ALL HAIL THE KING” hang just overhead. The former serf

has become a sovereign, all from the benefits of a corrupted capitalist system.

A Marxism of Convenience

It’s worth noting that despite the Marxist rhetoric coursing through the veins of the show,

Breaking Bad is far cry from anything Karl Marx himself would extol. The almighty dollar still

rules over all, and no means of seizing it is considered too extreme. In fact, throughout the

duration of the show, Walter has a hand in killing over a dozen individuals who would dare

stand in his way. In the span of a year, Walter eliminates former co-worker Gale Boetticher and

endangers the life of six-year old Brock Cantillo, the son of Jesse’s girlfriend. He abandons his

cerebral palsy afflicted child Walt, Jr., “leaves” his wife Skyler (who is haunted by the prospect

of her husband being a ruthless drug lord), and becomes a proxy parent for his infant daughter

Holly. Moreover, Walter readily rejects an equal partnership with Jesse in season five for a

chance to go-it-alone and make more money than he or Skyler could ever hope to count.


“Jesse is the diffident Leon Trotsky to Walter’s brash Joseph Stalin.”

Walter’s own brother-in-law Hank is a boisterous DEA agent, and as their lives become further

intertwined, Hank unknowingly becomes Walter’s rival. When considering Hank’s role on the

show, it would be easy to neatly file him away as the “foil”—the source of tension to play off of

Walter’s criminal posturing. But something greater is at play underneath Hank’s brash exterior.

If Walter’s unceasing quest for cash isn’t enough to make the hard-lined Marxist nervous, Vince

Gilligan’s inclusion of Hank will likely drive them insane. Breaking Bad idealizes Hank more than

any other individual in the show, at times painting him as the show’s sole moral compass. Hank

is the anti-contrarian poster child, putting all ne’er-do-wells on notice that anti-societal behavior

and crime do not pay. Amidst this “amorality,” the long-arm of the law still exists, struggling to

reinforce cultural norms and protect the bourgeoisie from the “fiendish” proletariat.

While AMC certainly does go against the mass media grain by offering Breaking Bad on its

slate, it can’t help but be stuck in the past. The inclusion of the Hank character is a callback to

countless cops from television’s past and strengthens Chandler’s notion of mass media

reinforcing the status quo through mythologizing. From the Marxist frame of reference, it’s

almost impossible not to picture Gilligan kowtowing to cultural demands to include a lawful

character on the show to appease mainstream mentality.

“The inclusion of the Hank character is a callback to countless cops from television’s past and strengthens

Chandler’s notion of mass media reinforcing the status quo through mythologizing.”

Another cause for concern from the Marxist viewpoint is the way in which Walter and Jesse are

slowly subsumed by the bourgeoisie system. Try as they might, they can’t seem to escape the

throes of the machine. Similarly even in their constant attempts to buck the system, Walter and

Jesse only manage to add fuel to the fire. They wantonly spend money on all the finer things in

life, leaving little if any for the starving proletariat masses. And in perhaps the defining moment


of the “all for me” mentality, Walter simply tells Skyler, “I did it for me.” In this sense, Walter

and Jesse are no better than the capitalist overlords that once controlled them. The two then

are not Marxists by heart, but rather Marxists by convenience, utilizing the revolutionary tools

of the sickle and hammer when it suits them, and casting them aside at a moment’s notice for

hegemonic comforts common in a capitalist society to a fortunate few.

A Fan’s Conclusion

I’ve been captivated by Breaking Bad from the get-go, rooting for Walter (through the first two

seasons) and Jesse to succeed at every turn. My urge to root for such unsavory characters likely

stems from an inherent desire to make it on my own without any semblance of a system

holding me back. In reality, the only reason I eventually found myself rooting for Walt to meet

an untimely end is because he spurned the very Marxist philosophies that once kept him afloat

in a raging sea of bourgeoisie oppression.

While it is true that Walter and Jesse are in no way pure Marxists, their bucking of the system

serves as a source of odd fascination for the audience at large, and their story through five

seasons hems closer to a Marxist narrative than anything currently on television.


works cited Arze-Bravo, Murray, Robertson, & Tunzelman. “Althusserian Ideology”: Introduction &

Biography of Althusser. Retrieved November 25, 2012 from: http://froberto.dnsalias.org/shared/Althusserian_Ideology/theory_althusser.html

“Breaking Bad.” Retrieved December 3, 2012 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breaking_Bad Chandler, D. (1994). “Marxist Media Theory.” University of Wales Press. Retrieved November 8,

2012. Gurevitch, M., Bennett, T., Curran, J., & Woollacott, J. (1982). Culture, Society, and the Media.

London: Methuen. Smith, Philip. Cultural Theory: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Inc., 2001. Trotsky,

L. The revolution betrayed: What is the Soviet Union and where is it going? NY: Dover Publications.

Underwood, M. (2003). Criticisms of the Marxist approach. Retrieved November 10 from:

https://tsu-cms.truman.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-416217-dt-content-rid- 2318490_1/courses/2012607497/CRITICISMS%20OF%20THE%20MARXIST%20APP ROACH.pdf

image credits, in order: ©AMC/Lionsgate, via http://breakingbad.wikia.com ©AMC/Lionsgate, via http://sanderbravo.tumblr.com ©AMC/Lionsgate, via http://breakingbad.wikia.com ©AMC/Lionsgate, via http://breakingbad.wikia.com ©AMC/Lionsgate, via http://www.screened.com ©AMC/Lionsgate, via http://spacefan.blogspot.com ©AMC/Lionsgate, via http://hardinthecity.com

buyout: a marxist critique of breaking bad

Documents

marxist nightmare

mass media of marxist

marxist primer

marxist pickings

capitalist society

bad probes

confining society

lower class