Reckoning with reality through Brooklyn Nine-Nine.
- catarinasantos0918
- Sep 9, 2020
- 22 min read
Of all of my internal monologues and unpublished drafts on Word about shows I watch, like, or think about, there was always one untouchable show I personally refused to over-analyze. That show was Brooklyn Nine-Nine. I was, and in writing this, still am, afraid I’d ruin it for myself forever by thinking about it more critically, because it is pure, feel-good entertainment. In other words, a wholesome and hilarious escape from my quotidian. But, and there will be a lot of “buts” throughout here (# titleofmysextape), I couldn’t help but reflect about the police in light of recent events. Specifically, as the Black Lives Matter movement reignited following George Floyd’s death, I have seen the term “cop propaganda” bubble up more and more across social media, in reference to this and many other cop-shows. As such, I started to wonder what is meant by that term, and whether we can throw that phrase around with Brooklyn Nine-Nine.
Brooklyn Nine-Nine is a comedy cop-show, so discussing what discourses are at play there is inevitable. Sure, it’s a comedy, and many would prefer to escape into it and be numbed by the laughter it provides than to think about what is being addressed, intentionally or not. But, it’s precisely because it’s a cop-show that, at the very least from time to time, we have to tackle certain real-life issues the police come into contact with, upfront. I’ve seen many comments of those who get upset or bored with more “social justice” episodes like “Moo-Moo” and “He Said, She Said”, precisely because they are “political” – but it’s exactly for that reason that they are necessary. Everything is political, I’m sorry to say. And the police are inevitably involved in such tentative subject matters; so to have some episodes like these, that address sexual harassment, feminism and the # MeToo movement in the case of the latter, or racism in the former, is only logical. No matter how fictional the 99th precinct is, the show naturally draws from reality, from the real police, or at least, what we expect of them or not. So, this is me reckoning with reality, as we all should, now and again. Because, ultimately, no matter how fictional, we can see a reflection of ourselves in these universes. We can use the fiction not just to escape, but to dream up of how things could be different in our reality.
Right now, its jarring. It’s upsetting. It’s annoying and hard to acknowledge that even our favorite shows are permeable to our complicated contexts, or that sometimes we have to ground them in the harsh light of reality. But after all, “We need to be really bothered once in a while. How long is it since you were really bothered? About something important, about something real?”, (Ray Bradbury, “Fahrenheit 451”) .
None of this means B99 is ruined forever, as I feared. If anything, using it to process what I perceive, know, see and learn from and about the police enriches my relationship with the 99’s squad. Through them we can bridge the gap between fantasy and reality, understand where the separation lies, and when to converge the two lines. And now is the time to converge. After all, comedy is and always has been the best form of commentary. And B99, I should say, deftly walks that line between humor and candor.
“Moo-Moo”, as I’ve said, is a fantastic episode to bring up in this context, because it is exactly that: a reflection of racism and the police. Our squad’s yogurt-loving, sweet father of three, big eight circles and suspenders, Sergeant Terry Jeffords, is nonsensically arrested by another cop just because he was a big, intimidating black man in a “nice” neighborhood (his own), looking for his daughter’s lost toy. Thankfully he was able to use the cop-card and be let go after the officer confirmed the fact, but was still blamed for not carrying his badge around (he was off-duty Maldack!). How many don’t get to play that card? And what does the immediate excuse of having a badge say about Maldack, and as a result, the police as a whole?
There’s a lot to unpack there, and the remainder of the plot, weaving between Terry’s intent to report the officer at the expense of a potential promotion, and Jake and Amy’s babysitting antics trying to explain racism to Terry’s kids, is simple, but profoundly effective – without forgoing the humor I should add. I urge everyone see it, even without context of the rest of the show; it’s a fine standalone piece to reflect upon.
Even so, we’d all like to think «Jake Peralta would never», but is it possible that B99 could manipulate our perceptions of the police? Is it possible that even B99’s squad and lovable characters perpetuate micro-aggressions and justifications for unjust conduct by the police? That they too are guilty of systemic racism, or police brutality? What does this reflect? Is it intentional, or a satirical take by the writers? And even if not, is it necessary to hold the show, to hold art, accountable? These are the questions that ran through my mind. Though it may be easier to deny B99 could have any negative influence whatsoever, because, once more, we want to hold onto our comedic escape, it is impossible to ignore that a cop-show, all cop-shows in fact, add to and shape the narratives we’re discussing today, and have been discussing for forever, about the police. So, while I wholeheartedly believe Jake Peralta is a good man and a good cop, I can’t be so certain to say he would never, when the matter goes beyond each individual’s actions. I’ll ramble on that a bit further down.
So, what is “cop propaganda”? It means exactly what it sounds like; media that celebrates, sways opinions positively, and highlights “good” police and law enforcement practices or individuals, influencing our point of view of them favorably, to deter the negative. It’s all those stories about hero cops who go out of their way for a kid, or a kind officer who rescues a kitten, for instance. Often, we see them circulating at times like these on our social media feeds. But a collection of small stories like these are nevertheless still influential, still powerful enough to deter the discussion away from the root of this complex problem, and instead get us caught in the wormhole that is the “not all cops are bad”/“it’s just a few bad apples” argument.
In the early weeks of June, we saw plenty of examples of cop propaganda spread throughout social media at the same time as criticism of police conduct was rising and peaceful protests were being organized everywhere. Ask yourself why? Why was footage and stories of “good” cops circulating more so at this time? Maybe it’s because we were more attentive of their actions then, and these stories suddenly jump out more and linger in the front of our minds as we hold on to the hope and reminder that maybe the world isn’t so bad. Or maybe, in part, it was a way to balance out the narrative of what needs fixing by finding excuses and sweeping the true problems under? Most likely everyone saw the videos of cops kneeling with protestors across American cities – only later in these same cities, police used excessive force, tear gas, or even ran over the same crowd they stood in solidarity with just minutes before, to disperse them into chaos. This has continued well into this month of September. Not to get too political or ramble on about these specific situations and their nature or outcomes, for I am no expert, but the point I wish to make is that this type of footage stands as cop propaganda because it is used to spread a positive image of the police, even though their actions otherwise are incongruent with the image they aim to set out – especially then. It is especially then that we need to be aware of any type of media revolving the matter.
Cop shows, like B99 and so many others, and like any media, can end up enacting the same kind of influence. To think Jake Peralta «would never» is akin to saying not all cops are “bad”. And its true, not all of them are – but let’s not fall into a fallacious rut; the problem isn’t that they are all are bad, or that because many are good that its’ all fine and any kind of change or reform is unnecessary. The problem is that the system they make up, the formation of this force, the resources and the conduct is deeply flawed and shaped to enact brutality and systemic racism, as seen across multiple institutions. We have to be weary of making this “bad apples” argument; some are bad, some are good, and the police’s ideal intent is, to some extent, good, but the practice! That’s what we’re seeing and protesting, and it’s bad.
Going back to TV, cop-centric shows, mostly unintentionally, have tended to create this image that a) the majority of cops are good, since their job is to put away the “bad guys” (an oversimplification of concepts like power and justice and crime made for narrative purposes), b) they are our last line of defense between terror and order, and are rarely portrayed as the overwhelming cause of it, or c) often the corrupt, “bad” cops are only few and far between, and of those, their removal or suspension surges with convenience – which rarely effectively happens realistically too.
# SsshNotAnExpert
Needless to say, B99’s influence in this sense is completely unintentional, but there is a clear association made between what cop narratives we are fed, whether it stems from fiction or not, and how we perceive them in our day-to-day. In fact, here’s an interesting link to the history of the police procedurals, about how police have been involved and often times influential towards their own portrayal in fiction, and what, from “Cops” to “Law and Order”, we have come to expect from police conduct. There are many more examples from my personal library that I could draw from, of the wildest iterations even, like “Psych”, or “NCIS”, or “Bones”, “IZombie”, and even “Lucifer”; all of which have in some way played with, and into, this long-written perception of police and crime-fighting divisions as heroes. The fact is that in all these examples, and in the majority of any other example you can think of, cops are the heroic protagonists. By placing them in that spot we are already sympathizing and romanticizing their job, because we see things from their point of view alone – a point of view that stands in the “right side” of any story so to speak.
The thing is, Brooklyn Nine-Nine’s universe is one of optimism and kindness. It’s a comedy, its fiction, and it’s got the Goor/Shur trademark heart. As such, the bad guys are simply, undeniably, your stereotypical bad guys: drug lords, kidnappers, murderers and serial killers, money launderers, you name it. The Disco Strangler, the Oolong Slayer, Jimmy “The Butcher” Figgis. We don’t question their evilness, we just know it’s there, its inherent and simple – catchy and surmised into a comic-like nickname. Perhaps with the exception of the Pontiac Bandit, we don’t truly care about their motivations, actions and fate once put away by the ’99, because that solves it – that evil is removed and forgotten. And we care about Doug Judy not only because he is so charismatic, but because he does leave the low life behind. It’d be too complex for a show like this to have us sympathize with a true baddy. At any point anyway, we know there will be a happy ending, a resolution and some closure for our heroes. The villains are plot devices for the actual puzzle solving and detecting, which is the main aspect that draws us in in the first place. Its far more dramatic and complex to portray the entire chain of the legal process, or the various angles and motivations that led to the motives that led to the crime, so in Brooklyn Nine-Nine, for instance, we stick to the simple day-to-day in the Bullpen, occasionally going out to a scene. Again, a comedy, I know.
I’m not saying we should change that about B99, or that it needs to get more complex. Keep it light and breezy, right? But why do we not question the said “evilness”? When we suspend our disbelief, in a comedy show no less, naturally we expect the black and white simplification of good vs. evil, but, we can’t forget that in reality there are many moral ambiguities. So, we’ll blissfully maintain that the squad is right and trying to do the right thing, because its simpler. I understand why, in times like these, it irks us how messy the reality is. Here, the good guys are, without question, truly good too. With all that we have been hearing, seeing and reading in the news about the police, we’d like to think that Jake Peralta «would never» because to learn otherwise is to get disappointed or heartbroken that he would do the most human thing: make mistakes or downright fail us. I’m not arguing they’re terrible people or that for one mistake we should throw stones at either of them – far from it – but its important to remember that reality is far more complex than type-characters in a feel-good show. And real-life stakes require the weight and responsibility we overlook or shrug off in our comedies to keep that suspension of disbelief.
If we look at Jake as an example, we can see that his arc is one of tremendous growth both as a professional and as a human being, and so I have no trouble defending he is a good person and a “good” cop. We see him arrest his superior’s hooligan penis-tagging son even if it jeopardizes his career, early on in the show. We see him defend, without hesitation and on multiple occasions, his gay, black Dadptain’s honor, even when that means sucker-punching his childhood hero (off duty). Jake is also a guy who, without much hesitation, arrest his former partner for planting drugs on a suspect to make a bust. Would he still have his job in the real world in doing that? Jake also improves his filing and reporting because it’s also an important bureaucratic step in the due process of the legal system that they as cops are inevitably a part of. Jake “I’ve only read 15 books in my life” even started watching documentaries on feminism to better understand his wife’s and every woman’s struggle, which like anything, pertains to a job like his, where he has to handle people and organizations. He almost missed his own son’s birth too, because he couldn’t ignore there were people he needed to help in the city-wide blackout. In this mess of events he even managed to prevent a bank robbery and figure out that was the cause of the blackout, whilst on his frantic way! (And kudos to Amy for leading and organizing the precinct as calls came in, all amidst contractions!)
I’ll especially add that Jake becomes more aware of his power and authority after being wrongfully imprisoned himself at the turn of seasons 4-5, and truly reels from that reality he lived through, vowing to be more careful in building cases to arrest the right person. There are countless other examples of his growth, perfected leadership, and innate “goodness”. The same can be said about any other core member of the squad.
But – and this is that necessary, annoying, “but” – his main flaw is an example of the romanticized idea we viewers have of cops. He’s got the hero complex and wants more than anything to be like John McClane from Die Hard; the renegade cop who saves the day all on his own. It’s a fantasy, one he kind of outgrew as he learned to better cooperate, share the lead and achieve teamwork. We see that in “Show Me Going”. But nevertheless, it’s a modelling expectation that led him to the force, one that perhaps drives many to the force, and that reinforces the idea that without them there is no good at all. They keep us safe and keep the order against anarchy, isn’t it? Well, I believe there is a necessity for a sense of order, capable of ensuring it and from whom we can rely on for protection. But, when we grow up with stories like these, and are constantly shown that cops are unequivocally doing good, flawless in their moral alignments, even when breaking some rules because in the end its to save the day or for “the greater good”, and especially because they risk their lives for others, its easy to assume that in real life this power isn’t abused, and that they all do follow-through with this vow. But it’s in times like these that we have to ask ourselves, do they? Have they all? Are they doing so, right now? Just because I’ve never experienced it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.
With this, I feel the need to bring up some of the observations within B99 that I’ve made that resonate with the many issues at hand. For starters, there’s the sense of family in the squad. There are countless endearing stories about found family or work families, and B99 is no exception. However, what in real life seems to happen is an unrelenting loyalty to a badge, as one is to a sports team, creating a sense of family. As a rebuttal to the BLM movement, some come forth saying “blue lives matter too”. Now, sure, cops’ lives do matter as well, and as they vow to risk their lives to protect everyone, they are to be valued. The problem, what we see happen, is that this promise has been broken. It is clear not all lives are being equally cared for or protected by this fine blue line. So, when black lives are far more likely to be suspected, arrested or made victims of brutality, we have to acknowledge that there is a racial problem and a systematic problem. And police defending their own kind and their own skin blindly is contradictory with the notion they defend to “serve and protect”, is it not? In other words, harsh as it may be, their vow and their “job” means they are offering to put others’ life ahead of their own no matter what. So, the “blue lives matter” idea is secondary to the plight that belongs to black lives in the current state of affairs. This neat little comic sums up that argument. A policeman’s ability to stand their ground and shoot whenever they perceive their lives are endangered is being exploited and is keeping misinformed, unprepared cops in the force, and causing the brutality we see so often.
Now, the B99 squad doesn’t seem to me to reason like this, even though they see each other as family. It’s only a little preoccupying to think that in the real world, the loyalty to the badge has led to this gang-like mentality – where there is to be no snitching within the force, and its ride or die for each other, not for the citizens and communities they circle and convince they protect. Gladly, the familial bonds the ’99 forged make them not only work together exceptionally well, but also care deeply, as we all should. It isn’t used as an excuse to hush their individual flaws or outright mistakes. Like a good set of family and friends should do, they hold each other up so as to grow, pointing out and smoothing over each other’s’ rough edges too, rather than sweeping their mistakes under a rug so as to mask the problems. The premise of the show was that Jake’s new boss, Captain Holt, was a buzz-kill “by-the-book” automaton trying to discipline this lovable class-clown, but instead of limiting the conflict to just that, making Holt the boring antagonist, the magic of the show is in how both of them lift each other up, in the most surprising ways. All the while, making the entire squad truly considerate of the community they serve and are a part of, learning to do things responsibly. In fact, the ’99 has pretty much been “at war with the NYPD” the whole time because they call out the corruption, micro-aggressions and problems inherent to the system or in specific officers. Jake reported a colleague as mentioned, Holt has tried to rise further and denounce the NYPD’s “John Kellys”, and Terry went ahead with reporting the officer who arrested him in “Moo-Moo”.
Despite this conscientious air, though, there are still some smaller details I can’t help but nitpick at from the ‘99’s conduct. It too is not exempt from romanticizing or inadvertently depicting behaviors or conditions that happen realistically. Though narratively funny or necessary, sometimes we still have to pause and ask: is this something we’d be laughing at if it were really happening? Because it really is happening.
The first idea that comes to mind is excessive force and aggression. Physical comedy plays a lot with this, so its no surprise B99 indulges in it. Again, we adore this show because it plays with the ridiculousness in what ought to be professional. Nevertheless, it is concerning how dismissive we are of Rosa’s aggressive tendencies, not to mention Pimento’s and eventually everyone else’s from time to time. Its played for laughs and introduces Rosa as a badass, a to be feared (yet competent and responsible) cop, even when we learn she is actually quite sweet and sensitive inside. The concept of violence being so tentative by someone in this line of work, though, or even the sense that outright violence can be justified in some moments but not others, can be preoccupying when transferred into the sobering reality we live in. The question of power truly is about these asymmetrical forces, and we can comprehend why the police need to sometimes enact a sense of physical authority. Yet, how come its easy is to justify it over and over again when there are other means to deescalate? Rosa’s always super eager to user one of her many hidden knives if need be – though gladly is always shot down by the others. Its only worrisome to think of how easily we let these wants pass. Because it is for humor and everyone’s reaction is always in sentiment with my worry – that there’s no need for such aggression – I’ll let this point hover here. Plus, so far it seems she only takes it out on computers. All I wish to point out is how such traits could reveal deeper issues to address and keep an eye on, instead of write-off as funny.
Rosa is not the only one guilty of these tendencies to glorify physical strength or force. At one point or another they have all roughed up someone, and it seems within reason in context. But, its just a little problematic how it’s a slippery slope to finding a justification in excessive force in police, real or fictional, because of their authority, or because the bad guy “had it coming” or deserved it, or is resisting. Does every crime justify such measures? Other than Captain Holt beating the crap out of a perp he was already arresting because that guy kidnapped his “fluffy boy” Cheddar, I can’t think of many more times where B99 glorifies or portrays such unlawful brutality. Though I’d like to think we’d all do anything for Cheddar the dog, to have the Captain lose his temper in that situation is not appropriate, and if it were real life, that perp could and should report it for excessive force. Yes, he’s still a criminal, but even then, its unjustified, it’s a question of rights and power, and I think this is where many people get mistaken when faced with real examples. The arrest and subsequent lawful punishments are already, supposedly, enacting justice, so the police can’t be so excused to punish and beat up perps themselves, no matter how emotionally understandable. Committing a crime doesn’t justify murder, and it certainly isn’t the police’s place to decide that – they are just a cog in the whole legal system, grinding with a big chunk of equally flawed gears. In the end its fiction and physical comedy, so I can already hear some rebuttal about how I may be taking these situations a bit too seriously, but it’s a thought we shouldn’t overlook when acknowledging reality – because if we are so quick to accept it from the characters we love, I wonder how quickly we’d accept it on our evening news?
There’s another point in this line of thought, which is the resources and military grade equipment at their disposal. The argument to “defund the police” comes to mind when I think about how Jake and Charles checked out a ton of (literally) heavy weaponry, for what they thought would be their last ride, so easily. They certainly did not need all of it, and of such caliber. It’s because of this that the argument to defund the police has grown – because to reallocate these investments into the communities, into the education and the welfare would make the very need for such equipment closer to obsolete. This example of our “Night Boys” is, once again, a result of the fantastical, hero-complex ideas Jake’s got in his mind, needing to go big; big enough to match the awesomeness he so craves and wants his job to be – Die-Hard level awesome. And how easily Boyle goes along with that. For that reason, Jake also ziplines through a window in doing a simple arrest just so he can say a cool-cool-cool line, and he requests a chopper from Wuntch at the first chance he can get, for example. Again, for the stylez. Great moments in the show, but also a clear reflection of how much investment is put into truly military and at times frivolous resources that average, real officers don’t necessarily need or are expected to use, possibly even appropriately trained to handle. Maybe I’m biased because of my distaste for guns, but its hard to imagine how to deescalate any situation with guns raised at any slight movement... I say y’all ought to breakdance like Holt, that was far more effective.
I’ll also point out Jake and Amy’s season 1 competition over who could get more arrests. I did like it narratively, and how that pretty much propelled their amazing romantic relationship (#Peraltiago). Plus, they seemingly stuck to the book in making justifiable arrests. But, the concept of betting each other over most arrests is problematic. Especially because this actually happens in police forces! The chase over any reason for arrest in order to keep busy, to show progress! What a silly idea; does the number of arrests equate to how safe a community is? There seems to be a pressure to make arrests in order to seem productive or valuable in the force, and that is just worrying. Because what’s happened is people are chased over any possible infraction so an officer can look good in the ranks and reports, to make it seem that work is actually being done, and it’s the most disadvantaged who get exploited the most this way. And the results have not been great – an understatement. So, while it’s a detail and a cool moment between Peralta and Santiago, who did not seem to try and make arrests out of thin air and widening inequalities where they are already prevalent, it’s not something to be encouraged or accepted in our reality, because it’s remarkably easy to take advantage of authority this way.
Lastly, that I can think of, I’m concerned that Jake has made a similar mistake twice: both in “48 hours” and the critically acclaimed “The Box”, Peralta arrested/kept someone in custody with no evidence, to the limit of what is legally acceptable. And in both cases, both perps were portrayed as black men – a detail I’m sure was unintentional, but perhaps telling of some unconscious bias, whether in Jake or the writers, or even in me as a viewer overthinking one of her favorite comedies (take the implicit bias test). Then again, it might just be a coincidence. In the first example, Jake went after this former criminal he knew, because he suspected that guy might’ve been involved in his new case, and arrested him after this perp called him “Joke Peralta” – all without gathering any solid evidence beforehand. No matter how comically petty, this is not right or lawful, Pineapples. No one took this arrest well, and as a result he spent the next 48 hours doing the work he should’ve done before the arrest. I’d love to say he learned his lesson, but he gets into a very similar situation in “The Box”. There, Jake needed a confession to solve the case, and the perp did go in for interrogation voluntarily – but was then held for far too long despite lack of evidence. It was actually a strategic choice of his to “break him” into confessing or slipping up, as that would be the only way to solve the case. But sure, Jake happened to be right about his gut-feeling both times, and sure, both times everyone on the squad and Holt rained down on him for the mistake. Though, we can’t help but acknowledge that a limit has been breached in doing this. It does leave a sour taste behind when we think about how in reality this can be quite cruel, especially if Jake ended up being wrong and had held someone innocent for hours because his pride got in the way. This, I’ll add, just episodes after he had returned from his own wrongful imprisonment.
I bring these up because its very telling how often the Defense Attorneys are portrayed as the antagonists (hey, remember Sophia Perez, her boss, and how both Jake and Terry thought these professionals were the worst?), when in other stories they are an important and necessary set of “saviors” within the legal process, proving innocence. We can’t forget that it’s a question of “innocent until proven guilty”, and that there is a necessity to check and balance the police work, as with anything. The legal process ought to be respected, even if it too is flawed and has gaps. Together with “good” police work though, the more likely that justice be served.
All of this to say that when faced with all the problems in reality revolving the police and BLM, and police brutality, and systemic racism in multiple institutions, its hard to not be sobered up even when watching a comedy about cops. That’s how, when we actively choose to ignore these topics that bleed into our entertainment, we can fall for propagandistic influences and narratives, in this case, about police. We can’t be afraid to reflect about these issues, because again, it won’t ruin the show. It gives you a better insight into our characters, if anything, and could even allow us to laugh (so as to not cry) consciously at the situations they are placed in and that we may recognize. I say we use that humor to pick up on the ironies, perceptions and accidental satire when so much of the real experience is thrust to the forefront of our minds in times like these. The harsh truth may leak into our escape, but its precisely for that reason, and exactly in those moments, that we should be paying closer attention. I’ll continue to commend B99 despite these notes I’ve overthought and found so much difficulty in expressing in all its complexities. As I am trying to be more willfully aware of the real world, I can’t help but use my escape to process it, and so they both mesh into this reality check. Surely, there’s more factors and ideas to discuss within all of this, but hopefully I gathered my questions and wonderments in a cohesive way, without fully becoming a party-pooper. I tried nothing more than to treat this topic with the respect and responsibility that it deserves.
Its also important to note that B99’s audience is young and very diverse as well. As such, there is an added weight and responsibility for this show to be conscious of just how the 99th precinct will continue to look and act like in the future seasons, taking into consideration the recent wave of protests, and makeup of their audience. There is an added responsibility over how they choose to portray and represent the police given so many of the fans are of the most diverse generation yet, and more likely than ever to be the most vocal about BLM. They are perhaps the most jaded by how differently the adored B99 universe is from reality.
As writing for season 8 of Brooklyn Nine-Nine is underway, and in fact, being completely re-routed in light of these ever-present discussions in our public sphere, I know that they’ll be trying to remain as grounded as they have been about the world we live in, especially now as it changes – and that’s all we can ask for. I’d find it particularly interesting for them to explore in a flashback Jake’s and Rosa’s early days in the police academy, not only for the origin of their friendship, but also because of the training aspect that shapes their career. What root problems are there in that, and what seeds could it unknowingly plant in forming future officers? In real life, that too needs some true improvement, (about the training hours, for example), so it’d be fitting to explore that now, more than ever. Plus, it’d be a situation ripe for humor as well as commentary – lord, just imagine a “Police Academy” spoof by the ’99.
*I won’t even comment on the Quebec remake of Brooklyn Nine-Nine, though. I don’t understand the need for remakes, but that’s a discussion for another time. I share similar thoughts to Melissa Fumero, who plays Amy, and believe she expressed her disappointment well.
In the end, the squad are good people because they continuously try to become better, and that’s the least we can ask for from the real police in return. When Holt was demoted to the PR office, Amy and him devised a pretty simple example of “cop propaganda”, and though the fictional citizens didn’t know the Amy in that poster as we viewers do, their vandalism and complaints about the force she was representing were valid, real, and still relevant today. So, as Holt quickly caught on, he asked how they, the police, could do better. Follow his lead, real-life police; show us you want, can and will do better, and listen to us when we tell you how.
Now, on this day, September 9, can I get a Nine-Nine!
These are my reflections, and as such, they are subjective. I, like many, am constantly learning, so all comments are welcome, because this is a necessary discussion, and a complex issue.
I tried to not take every article at face value. There are so many more resources to get a hold of on what is happening, and how to help or be better. These are what I began with for the purposes of this post.
[CS1]https://www.vox.com/culture/2020/6/3/21275700/police-show-procedurals-hollywood-history-dragnet-keystone-cops-brooklyn-nine-nine-wire-blue-bloods [CS2]https://chainsawsuit.com/comic/2016/07/07/all-houses-matter-the-extended-cut/ [CS3]https://medium.com/@OfcrACab/confessions-of-a-former-bastard-cop-bb14d17bc759 [CS4]https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html [CS5]https://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/28/us/jobs-training-police-trnd/index.html
Comments