You go "Girls"

Season Two finale of HBO television show “Girls” received mixed reviews when it premiered on US televisions, (and laptops around the world), last month. Some say “Girls” has ushered a new age of feminist television whereby young women are fairly and reasonably represented, but others have lamented the egotistical, “first world problems” nature of the show. Others still, were more preoccupied with prophesizing how season three would begin. Reading through countless hipster blogs, feminist websites and seemingly endless alternative online publications, what began to interest me was debate regarding the former of the three topics; does “Girls” represent a shift in how young women are represented across entertainment media? Does the popularity and success of “Girls” herald a change in television, whereby the female characters we watch and enjoy are true to form and are women that we, women, can relate to?  

For those of you who have yet to be hooked, “Girls” follows the trials, tribulations and occasional triumphs of four single young women living in New York City. Sound familiar? Many have compared the show to cult television series “Sex and the City,” but really they couldn’t be more different. Described by the New York Times as “raw, nuanced and audacious,” “Girls” features painfully awkward sex scenes, financial woes, drunken debauchery, and testing female friendships. There isn’t a single pair of Manolo Blahniks in sight. But despite their differences, the hype and critique around “Girls” has echoed much of the feminist rhetoric surrounding “Sex and the City” (SATC).  

Both shows, for instance, have been grouped amongst a minority of television programs which pass the Bechdel Test. Originating from a comic strip published by Alison Bechdel in 1985, the test provides a means to measure feminism, or at least the female presence, on-screen. Bechdel dictates that in order for a film or television program to pass the test, two or more female characters have to talk to each other about something other than men.

It may seem like a relatively simple test, but up until the 1998 premiere of SATC, very few television shows, or films, (with a few exceptions) managed to score a pass. Not only does SATC pass the test, it also presents the right ‘ingredients’ for feminist television; the main characters are aggressive, sexually empowered, self-aware, sisterly and possessing power and choice. That’s not to say that there aren’t limits to the show, only that it has brought something new to mainstream television viewing. Similarly “Girls” could be read as indicative of a new wave of ‘varied’ feminism, whereby it’s alright to be feminine, vulnerable, romantic and reliant – because you can also be strong, intelligent, independent and ambitious.

Perhaps the most telling symbol of this progression in contemporary feminism is not the contents of “Girls”, but the creator of the program. It is a show written, produced and directed by its lead actress, twenty six year old Lena Dunham. In a world where women comprise of only 11% of directors, 15% of writers, and 22% of producers and 18% of creators, (according to the quarterly publication “Media Report to Women”), Dunham has overcome a considerable hurdle. Dunham’s female characters represent a similar milestone on our television screens; they are not all size six, beautiful, career successful, nurturing, compassionate nor sexy. But neither are they backstabbing, conniving, sexually promiscus, nor aggressive. Hannah, Marni, Jessa and Shoshanna, the “Girls”, are self-indulgent, selfish, awkward, hyper educated and privileged products of the baby boom and economic bust. Their problems include balancing a life of unpaid internships, unsatisfying sex, chauvinistic male bosses, experimentation with illegal substances, ill-chosen partners, house sharing, STI’s, and overly protective parents. Many of us will have experienced some of the above, and if we haven’t, then we probably know someone who has.  

… At the end of the day it’s still only TV. But at least it’s a brand of television which offers a somewhat more diverse image of young women, and I can’t help but admire Dunham for risking her career, putting herself on the line and ultimately for producing (what I believe to be) a hilariously well written script.

Borrowing from the words of “Girls” lead star Hannah, the show may not be a “the voice of a generation”, nor a catalyst for feminist revolution, but at least it’s “a voice of a generation.”

Siobhan Rooney