Charlie Brooker, Black Mirror, and the Monstrous Burden of Public Intellectuals

I shall put this bluntly: as the global population grows, so does the number of stupid people. The idea that the “public intellectual” is a “thing of the past” is inaccurate. Instead, it is the “mob” these clever few need to influence which is getting out of hand, therefore making their careers evermore more difficult and loaded. Enter Charlie Brooker, a public intellectual whom I deem to be one of the geniuses of our time, a man who criticises me and my generation, and the only man whose criticisms I will listen to without arguing back. Despite the unfavourable odds created by public influencers such as the Kardashians and Paris Hilton, Brooker has continued to influence perceptions of the world - society, politics, the economy and popular culture - since his first series of Black Mirror in December of 2011. There is no doubt that he deserves to hold the title of a “public intellectual”.

Charlie Brooker is an English satirical and critical journalist, screenwriter, presenter and producer. He was born in the 70’s in Reading, a town a couple of hours outside London. From his early years, Brooker was criticised for his ideas, which were deemed controversial and inappropriate.In an interview, he said that he attended the University of Westminster, but never graduated as his dissertation was based on video games - a topic which his professors did not appreciate as “acceptable”. While his work for online publications and newspapers was widely recognised and criticised for its controversiality, he is most well-known for his creation of the series Black Mirror.

Black Mirror is a masterpiece. This artistic television show encompasses Brooker’s outlook on the world, and demonstrates the fears that he has for the future of society. There are nineteen episodes of this series, with the topic matter ranging from political propaganda, to the American death penalty law; from parental censorship, to our need to be validated by social media. Each episode has a dark twist of some kind, a genius way of affecting its viewer by highlighting their own worst fears about society. It forces us to look inside ourselves to find the parts that we hate the most, the parts we pretend are not there, and allow them to be exposed on screen.

If Charlie Brooker is capable of affecting the thoughts and feelings of an entire audience in this way, is there a valid reason for which he should not be placed on a pedestal? Why should he not be named one of the greatest geniuses by present and future generations? In his online article Are Public Intellectuals a Thing of the Past?, Stephen Mack poses four of Brooker’s greatest problems as an intellectual influencer in modern society, and his classification as one: overcoming “myth-makers” (or as I had less elegantly put it, stupid people), his difficult task of influencing “the mob” and making them hear “things worth talking about”, the burden placed on him to criticise “the mob” to be heard, and finally, his role as an artist in society getting in the way of his public intellectual status. Despite these obstacles, Brooker has been able to create and influence society, which is why I believe he is a true public intellectual of the present and the future.

The “myth-makers” that Mack describes appear to be the public intellectual’s enemy, the collective group who stands up against him in a debate, the one who is ready to be defensive and critical of genius. He says: “So the public intellectual needs, it seems to me, to puncture the myth-makers of any era, including his own, whether it's those who promise that utopia is just around the corner if we see the total victory of free markets worldwide, or communism worldwide or positive genetic enhancement worldwide, or mouse-maneuvering democracy worldwide, or any other run-amok enthusiasm.” The word “puncture” is evocative, and to me, amusing. Socialites of today’s society are often called “airheads” due to their lack of substance and intelligence. This is not to say that all socialites are stupid, but merely that that is their stereotype. Now take the word that Mack uses: “puncture”. Can you not imagine a pin on a balloon, a foot to a flimsy soccer ball. To puncture the ideas of the “myth-makers” should not be too difficult, as their arguments are rarely strong enough to fight ideas of an intelligent fifteen-year-old.

Brooker has to surpass the fame and fortune of the most famous people of the 21st century to have an affect. Figures of our society, like the plastic-pumped Kardashian-Jenners, have wide-enough reach in media to affect how we view politics. During the last presidential election, Kim Kardashian did an interview with GQ magazine, and was asked a series of questions about her political views. However, this interview was not kept to a “strictly-business” nature: “The magazine reports that after the reality star reviewed a video for her website in which she played Fuck, Marry, Kill with Presidents Barack Obama, Bill Clinton and Bush, she had a change of heart about choosing to off the Texan. ‘I love George, though,’ she said while deciding whether to cut the video. ‘I just think he’s cute. Like a cute little president…. And the [Bush] kids sent us a baby gift.’” This is just one example of an occasion where a “myth-maker” affects the perception of politics. She, and GQ Magazine, diminish politics to something which is comical, unimportant and trivial. In this particular quotation, she doesn’t explicitly refer to the occuring election - maybe she didn’t know it was happening - but it was the very nature of her interview which insults American politics and the future of a nation which is one of the great powers of the world. The Hillary Clinton-Donald Trump election is one which will make history, possibly not for the reasons it should: not for the candidates’ policies and promises, but instead for the humor which surrounded their characteristics. Someone as influential as a Kardashian should not be placed on a pedestal and be allowed to speak about politics without specific education in the subject. Being high-profile is a monumental responsibility. The Kardashians lead, and people follow - both figuratively, and literally on social media. It is people like the Kardashians, and the people who copy them, whom Charlie Brooker must overcome to be heard above the “myths”. Unfortunately, the abilities of the internet is making this portion of society ever-growing.

All insults about socialites aside, it must be mentioned that their political role models are not what they used to be. The job of politicians is to lead a nation. However, if the President of the United States is willing to send the occasional offensive and petty tweet that a teenager would be embarrassed to write, how can we have any hope for the myth-makers?

In November of 2017, a year into his presidency, Trump tweeted, addressing his nation about the US-Russia relationship:

I would like to first highlight the glaring spelling mistake in the second sentence in which Trump misuses the word “There”. His representation of the United States is embarrassing and poses a threat to public intellectuals who need to shout louder to be heard over his noise. Furthermore, he addresses his nation as “haters and fools”. This is disrespectful, and in poor taste. However, all hope is not yet lost. With public intellectuals ready to pounce, a nation can still be educated on the truths of social, economic and political issues.

Brooker is able to influence “the mob” by making them “hear things worth talking about”. How, you may ask, does he drown out the cries from the masses about the latest gossip on the pregnancy of who-cares? Charlie Brooker influences an audience by creating art from our worst nightmares. In 2004, The Guardian proudly posted the viewer stats of Black Mirror from a recent episode: “Channel 4 drama Black Mirror returned with nearly 1.6 million viewers for the first of a new three-part run...The opening episode, Be Right Back, had a 9% share of the audience...It was down from the 1.9 million viewers who tuned into the opening episode of the first series in 2011, but was up 14% on Channel 4's slot average over the past three months.” This statistic indicates that Brooker’s influence on culture has been monumental. By increasing Channel 4’s viewer average by 14%, Brooker showed that his ideas, his writing, his art, was something that people were talking about. This was in 2013, and today, across the world, I have attended Black Mirror viewing parties to celebrate the new season.

Brooker’s topics can be viewed as somewhat controversial. As aforementioned, he writes about the things that others are afraid to tackle, or rather, displays them in a creative enough way to appeal to an audience who are used to explosions, animations, high definition, and surround sound television. He is able to present themes of death, politics, law, economy and social media, without making us feel as if we are sitting in a college class. This is how he appeals to the masses. He combines entertainment and intellect to make us enjoy learning about the world we live in. Take the first episode of Series 3 as an example. Nosedive is set in a virtual reality. In this world, people use visual implants and phones to rate their social and professional interactions with one another on a one-to-five star scale. Their average score is displayed below their profile picture and name for the world to see. The story follows Lacey, who is on her way to self-improvement after being invited to an old friend’s wedding. The audience watches as the rating system destroys Lacey, as pathetic as she had already seemed at the start. This episode marks the dangers of social media, and the emotional nightmare which it causes in its affected individuals. Sophie Gilbert, journalist for The Atlantic puts it very well: “As with so many Black Mirror episodes, the horror lies in imagining all too clearly how such a situation might feel.”

Charlie Brooker’s ideas largely criticise the society we are a part of. He reminds us through brutal presentation of his characters, that we all play a role in the negative aspects of our communities. With all its criticism, it is interesting that his work is so widely enjoyed, but it is obvious that he has found his expressive home with millennials or in Mack’s words, “The infantile common-folk”. When questioned, the older generation are not fans of Brooker’s work. They say it is creepy, depressing, and overdone. However, my generation is the generation which most benefits from watching it. Why is this? According to The Washington Times, it is because we are self-indulgent and “should quit being so self-centered”. We enjoy being sad, we enjoy feeling sorry for ourselves. Our parents’ generation is blamed for the problems we encounter today: unemployment, failing economies, the creation and popularity of social media, chaotic politics and so on. Millennials blame their parents for the negative parts of society which they embrace on a daily basis. In this way, Brooker has a captive audience. He overcomes the hostility felt towards his criticism by working his way into a group who have fatalistic views about society already and uses his art in order to show them what the future holds if attitude does not change. Using Nosedive as an example again, Lacey becomes the shell of a person we pride ourselves in not being. However, taking a closer look at her actions, we are able to see similarities: we have cried at a social media post, we have judged people based on their looks, we have been fake in order to make good first impressions. These activities may be overdramatized, but Brooker brings the nightmares to life by characterising them so perfectly.

Charlie Brooker’s final obstacle to hurdle is his “Public Intellectual” status. He is, a writer, producer, artist, and director, which according to Posner, does not qualify him for the title: “Posner's main claim is that the arts and humanities should be kicked out of public intellectualdom.” This is a very pointed statement to approach. History is filled with artists who had a great impact on the academics of today. Leonardo Da Vinci sketched up the earliest ideas for an aeroplane, Michelangelo used mathematician to influence architecture, not to mention hundreds of political cartoonists who have an influence on our everyday perception of politics. Brooker has created something which is both artistic, and academic, both entertaining, and psychologically challenging. Furthermore, his position as an artist facilitates his ability to be completely honest with his audience, critical, and beautifully politically incorrect. His work may make people uncomfortable, but only because it uncovers truth which they were not ready for.

Charlie Brooker has encountered obstacles of myth makers, mob mentality, millennials and their mothers, and finally the defense of his title as a public intellectual - a title which is totally deserved. Public intellectuals are not a thing of our past. However, each generation has their heroic academics, the men and women who go down in history for their political, economic, social, artistic and scientific efforts and discoveries. Charlie Brooker is present, and will be the past and future of society’s go-to writers, as a revealer and predictor of our worst nightmares.