Pluribus: “The most miserable person on Earth must save the world from happiness.”Smash or Pass?

Pluribus is a new series on Apple TV (I’ve watched it on Amazon Prime) with the premiss: “The most miserable person on Earth must save the world from happiness.” It explores the question of Free Will versus perpetual joy. At first, I would have kicked it (passed.) Because I thought it disjointed, with a confusing opening. In other words–no hook. The set up is terrible. The story, setting, music–all bad. Characters? However, I kept watching because of a fellow WordPress person’s review was intriguing.

In conversation over my birthday-dinner out with family (they hadn’t watched it); we talked of the phenomenon of unbeknownst prescience. Because, I think, that’s what occurred regarding the creator’s (Vince Gilligan) themes. Which, to me, signals a show, despite its flaws, worth watching.

Let’s get into it.

Pluribus

means, in Latin, many; and is commonly referred to in the phrase E Pluribus Unum. Or, “out of many one.” In this case, Gilligan uses that concept to set up a scenario in which all of the peopled-world become of the same mind. (A hive mind.) However, a few individuals, world-wide, have an immunity to the “virus”. The protagonist, the most miserable person on Earth, Carol Sturka, is one. And, she is very, very angry about the situation, which causes the death of a lot of people. Therein lies the conflict, which all good stories must have. However, that’s not the only one.

The  conflicts are many

and why I find this show so fascinating. I don’t know if Gilligan had any idea the possibilities of discussion this show creates when he conceived it ten year ago. Because AGI (artificial general intelligence) and LLM (large language models) and super algorithms hadn’t yet emerged.

Personality

or one’s personal reality is what make us individuals, or different from one another. The creative writer (novelist), which Carol is, and artist in general, is driven by their unhappiness and loneliness. Which often manifests in anger. Albeit that anger is a secondary emotion. At the root of anger is hurt, often from rejection, or lack of love and belongingness*. Of course, the artist isn’t aware, or conscious, of this.* With the exception, perhaps of David Foster Wallace. Who wrote a brilliant essay about just this subject. (Addiction and loss of self b/c of media consumption.) And subsequently killed himself. Will Carol?

In Pluribus, this is shown brilliantly in episode 4. Carol is furious, because she discovers she is a fraud. Because much of what she thought was true about herself she discovers is not. The conflict, as yet unresolved, is that maybe one’s individuality (personality) is the cause of all suffering and misery. As well as attraction. That is a great question! In fact, a shrink question.

Love and Romance

is another presented conflict. What causes a person to fall in love with an individual? Here it is specifically referring to Lesbian Love. Carol loves her publicist and life partner, Helen;

who is killed by the love virus. The writer (best selling Romance, or, “mindless crap.”) seeks revenge. However, in the process uncovers that she is sexually attracted to her handler/chaperone. Additionally, that Helen really wasn’t that impressed with Carol’s writing. What sparked the attraction?

Homosexuality

is yet another unresolved conflict. What causes it? Could it be a reaction formation to childhood rejection?

Role Reversal

could be a conflict for many watchers. In this case the protagonist is a lesbian, in place of the typical male hero type. Such as Jesse Stone in Robert Parker’s novels. Which happens to be my favorite–a hard drinking, troubled, lonely tough guy that saves the day.

Helping

those who don’t want, or ask, for help. That’s an old, old question and riddle which is addressed in the show. too.

In Conclusion

I am fascinated to see how these conflicts (and others) are resolved. However, I don’t think Vince Gilligan knew what he was doing when he began this work. Nor, for that matter, did Apple TV know what it was getting into. Could it all be just a happy accident?

In many elements of story telling – it’s “meh” at best. In my opinion. Does my opinion matter? Am I like Carol – a miserable person trying to save the world from happiness?

Would the Earth be better without us in it? As Taylor Sheridan suggests in 1883.

Could we invent a love drug to fix us?

What do you think? I give Pluribus a hard smash. I love it!

• See Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs.
• See the theory and writings of Sigmund Freud.