High Indifference

With more twists and turns than a Bangkok alley, the concluding episode of True Detective Season 2 points out that we are not the masters of our fate… in fact, most things in life are beyond our control.

In this blog I’ll discuss my thoughts on the ways episode 8 explores the concept of destiny and what, if any, effect people can have on it.

In many ways the character of Frank Semyon exemplifies the typical individual success story lauded in today’s Western society: he has amassed a fortune through hard work and singular guile. By using his skills he has justly been rewarded with success.  Unfortunately, True Detective sees a gaping flaw in this logic; it reminds us that hard work often doesn’t pay off. This season rams home the point that there are things which people cannot predict or deal with no matter how hard they try. So far, Frank has been somewhat successfully railing against the machinations of those who seek to bring him low. This last episode even teases viewers with the prospect of his victory by allowing Frank to take his revenge on Osip and McCandless.  However, in the end it is simply not enough. No matter how hard Frank tries he cannot control everything in his life. His plan can’t include the wild card factor of the Mexicans and his nature doesn’t allow him to part with the money he sees as his life’s vindication. For his hubris in attempting to control his fate is rewarded with his own demise.

The attempts of the ’92 dirty cops to control their own fate also question the concept of agency. The season revealed the ways in which Holloway, Burris, Caspere, and Dixon seized the opportunity of the ’92 L.A. riots to make money and gain positions in Vinci. These are unscrupulous men who have achieved success through controlling their environment.  However, the fact that they are so confident in their positions eventually leads to their near-total expiry.  During the sequence in the train station Holloway in particular is shown to be completely self-assured and confident of his ability to control the outcome of a sticky situation. His casual conversation and attempts to bribe Velcoro particularly show this outlook. But Holloway, another eminently connected and powerful man, is also brought low by a factor which is simply beyond his control.  Burris and Holloway are not able account for Lenny and his shadowy revenge and thus Holloway is killed.  Thus the series demonstrates the both the far reaching consequences of the actions of these men and that the control they seek to exert is merely an illusion.

But, if this is the case, why did Burris, Tony Chessani, and Geldof survive and apparently continue in their corruption? The fact that some characters suffer the consequences of their actions and some do not exemplifies the subtlety with which True Detective has approached this concept.  There is no powerful force in this show consistently evening the scales; some characters live, some die, some achieve success and some don’t. The sense which the show leaves you with is therefore that really, there is no controlling your fate. You can work within it, understand it, accept it, or work against it but, at the end of the day you simply do not know what will happen.