'The West Wing:' Verdict!

Now I’ve watched the whole of ‘The West Wing’ I'm going through for a second time more slowly, which is the way I tend to read books that excite me. Somewhere along the way I changed my opinion about having a quarrel with its niceness. I couldn’t have watched it if the main characters had been as bitchy, cynical and self-serving as their real-life counterparts may well be, so having them as basically good people trying to do the right thing is OK by me. 

I’ve grown very fond of the characters and, whilst I hope I’m not naïve enough to think this is how it is in American politics, at least I have a clearer idea of the process. The series has addressed, sometimes only superficially but probably with acuity, the domestic issues that arise perennially and that has been interesting. Gay rights. English as the official language (goodness - didn't realise that was a problem, but now I know it is and why.) State sponsored prayer (why they couldn’t have the same ‘do it if you like’ attitude of the UK I don’t know.) The Creationists where getting hotted up during the seven years of the series, so that comes up; mandatory minimum sentencing for drug offences which required enforcing because there was at the time a distinction made between powdered cocaine (used mainly by whites as a ‘recreational drug’) and crack cocaine more likely to be used by the black population who were the ones to get the long sentences whereas the daughters of senators destroying their nasal passages got fines and a slap on the wrist. It was therefore seen to be a racist issue.

And so forth. All this, plus the enormous complexity of foreign policy, the necessity to step in between warring (nuclear) factions, and generally try to understand what ‘keep the peace’ actually means when you are as influential  as the (self-styled) ‘Leaders of Western Democracy,’ are, in my untutored opinion, well dealt with.  There are some well-placed barbs from other nations who retaliate when asked to improved their record of human rights, with the obvious question: ‘What right have you to take the moral high ground when you destroyed the indigenous population of this country?’

In summary, accurate portrayal of reality or not, it gives a flavour of the potential chaos of a democratic government, the possible misuse of its power, and the potential chaos and misuse of unfettered personal power in a country without a democracy. The series has character development, humour and wit, intense drama, pathos, tension... it’s  a ‘Hero’s Journey’ sort of tale so it works for me.