An Exploration into the Representation of Teenagers in Contemporary TV in Relation to Crime and Violence; With Close Reference to ‘Misfits’ (2009), ‘The Get Down’ (2016) and ‘Skins’ (2007)
In ‘Changing Times Of American Youth’ F. Thomas Juster, Hiromi Ono and Frank P. Stafford from the Institute of Social Research in the University of Michigan discovered that time spent doing sports and other active past times by people aged 6-17 has declined significantly, allowing for more time doing media related activities such watching TV or going online. With the sudden introduction of computer activities, teenagers and children have started to become much more versed in Media. Some companies have even dedicated their entire production to creating web series such as Netflix.
Due to this sudden increase in media-related youth activity, many TV shows have started expanding their horizons when it comes to the representation of teenagers; however, many of these representations are negative, usually portraying the teenagers as lazy criminals. Sarah Coyne’s study of Relational Aggression suggests “These results support the general aggression model and suggest that viewing relational aggression in the media can have a long-term effect on aggressive behaviour during adolescence.” The paper also mentions that over six decades of research can stand for this point. Another credible source that supports this idea is the Chapter “Content Effects: Violence in the Media’ which states Exposure to aggression and violence in the media increases aggressive cognitions, affect, and behaviour while simultaneously decreasing empathy and prosocial behaviour.” Taking this into consideration, along with the reflexivity social theory in which an audience will react and adapt to a text, causing the text to react and adapt to the audience, we can safely assume teenagers will react to the contemporary increase in violent and criminally seasoned media texts by becoming more violent and criminally inclined…however not all aggressive representations are necessarily negative and this report serves to explore what defines a negative violent representation from a positive one. I have focused primarily on the ‘teen drama’ genre, for it is a genre focused primarily around teenagers and their interactions with one another, so of course it spoils us for choice on what characters to examine.
There are several stereotypes that separate certain types of representations. For example, the stereotype of black teenage males is they’re simply criminals with no hope for the future, or the stereotype of a teenage girl is that all they care about is the reputation and how they’re seen in the eyes of their male counterparts. These stereotypes are somewhat challenged in ‘Misfits’ where the black male of the main cast is the only person in the main cast who appeared to have hope of the future and a goal. While he is a criminal, a huge point in his character development is how much he regrets his mistake of carrying drugs and would change the past if he could to get his athletic career back. The female stereotype is also challenged to a certain extent. The two female characters in the main cast both contrast and follow the stereotype. One is extremely ‘tomboy’ like (another female stereotype which portrays a female as masculine), being violent, ill-spoken and an aloof criminal. She’s also one of the most readily violent characters, contrasting ‘Sex differences in aggression in real-world settings’ which supports the idea that men are much more likely to be have aggressive and harmful intent in their actions than women. However, the other main female cast member is a lot more in tune with the more common stereotype of being very sexually active and doesn’t seem to care about much other than her appearance but this changes after a huge character arc.
‘Misfits’ takes place in a youth’s community centre that hosts a group of criminals punished with community service. All the characters are quite different, despite being so hugely linked in their histories by all being criminals. This makes it appear contemporary media presents all teenagers as criminals, regardless of exact age or race. Comparatively, another thing I noticed, during Season 2, Episode 2, about all the main characters is they all come from seemingly poor and less economically stable upbringings; considering whenever they’re not on community service, they’re usually socializing around an estate or meeting in a run-down bar. ‘Nathan’ is the only character who’s family life we actually see gaining some insight into his absent father figure and how broken his family is. Viridiana R ́ıos’ paper suggests that financial situation is coherent with an individual’s likeliness to be criminally inclined which supports Misfit’s authenticity in it’s characters.
Examining this shot here, including the 5 original main cast members, we see they’re all in prison jumpsuits, immediately conveying the information that they’re all criminals. Used as the thumbnail for the first episode, this is many people's first impression of the cast - they look sprawled out and dazed on the cold, wet concrete. A good metaphor for the entire show’s portrayal of the main cast in which there are two main sides to them; the stupidly irresponsible teenagers and the unlucky kids worthy of empathy.
The theory that modern day media presents teenage criminals as immoral is challenged in Netflix's ‘The Get Down’ which stars 5 main characters (much like Misfits). Set in ‘The Bronx’ AKA 1970’s Brooklyn, one of the most criminal settings in history, the immediate difference I noticed between Misfits and The Get Down is that financial status is very rarely mentioned in Misfits and doesn’t play much of a role. A couple of the characters are homeless, but it never stems into an important plot point. On the other hand, The Get Down is very centralized around the main cast’s living conditions and their attempts to escape the ghetto. The Get Down is also a lot more justifiable in its characters actions. A lot of the criminal activity in The Get Down is arguably for survival, whereas a lot of the main characters of Misfits do petty crimes without a second thought but aren’t estranged to being forced into situations that require violence such as killing in self-defence. The Get Down isn’t quite as extreme and many of the main characters are very hesitant to break the law, except for Shaolin Fantastic who does fit the stereotype of a teenage black male. A specific instance of this is in the 2nd Episode of the first series when Shaolin’s house is set ablaze during an insurance scam. He is then forced to turn back to ‘Fat Annie’ a malicious crime boss, after he had just left her criminal employment, much to her disdain. He had another, less criminal approach, but it certainly has understandable motive behind it. We see his counterpart in Ezekiel, who is extremely against violence and Shaolin’s crimes and he’s in just as bad a situation as Shaolin. So, we see two juxtaposing representations of a teenage black male. We can also see this in the camera angles and audio codes during their argument on how to deal with the fire. Shaolin is shrouded in shadow and begins to back into the darkness as he becomes increasingly hostile. The camera’s also looking up at him and playing ominous music as he pushes Ezekiel. It signifies a dangerous turning point in Shaolin and represents him as more of the standard teenage criminal.
This is an ensemble of the main characters. Each individual character is positioned perfectly in relation to their personalities, like Dizzee being the only one standing, portraying his constant feeling of alienation. Or Shaolin being in the shadows, portraying his criminal nature. He’s also subtly pulling Ezekiel into the shadows with him, representing their relationship and Ezekiel’s conflicting paths between the dark streets and the brightly lit, lawful alternative.
So far, all the shows I’ve mentioned portray teenage criminals as victims of circumstance to a certain extent. I continued my research further and discovered ‘Skins’, a show where the main cast changes every 2 seasons. The narrative follows the structure of having an episode dedicated to each character of that seasons’ main cast and a final episode that wraps up everyone’s cooperative stories. This teenage drama is vastly different to the other two shows I’ve mentioned as it’s a very weak argument to say they’re victims of circumstance. Most of the characters are quite privileged when it comes to living conditions and the few that aren’t, seem to be the most righteous characters. It’s also less extreme in its offences, committing mostly petty crimes such as drug use, underage drinking, theft, etc.
In comparison to the past two images, which were very sombre in tone, we have the original cast of Skins. It’s extremely bright and colourful, representing the glamorous and casual outlook they have on their own crime-filled lives. They’re all extremely close as well, which can be construed as a metaphor for the narrative and how interwoven they all are in each other’s lives, as well as the type of relationships they all share, which can range from friends to lovers to some kind of hybrid.
A good metaphor for the difference between Skins and The Get Down and Misfits is comparing the characters that are arguably the protagonists of their series. Tony from Skins has every advantage he could want. He’s good at everything, extremely talented, handsome, lives in a nice area where ‘nothing happens’, yet, in the first season, he constantly breaks the law and manipulates his friends. The exact opposite is Ezekiel from The Get Down. Born with next to no advantages, minimal education, poor upbringing, surrounded by crime with only his lingual talents to aid him and he’s one of the most reluctant to commit crime in the show. And finally, on the middle ground, is Nathan from Misfits who was arrested for stealing candy at a bowling alley. His family life is terrible, with no father figure, a deceased brother and a mother who cuts him off. But he didn’t exactly grow up poor and he shows little remorse for killing several people. In conclusion, many of the representations of teenagers in relation to violence and crime are quite negative but there’s hope in the victims of circumstance.
