(The Sopranos, 1999-2007 HBO)
OP-ED- Born Under a Bad Sign: How We Decode the Language of Masculinity
The climate of toxic masculinity in film and TV, and gendered interpretation of media
Noah Peretz
This year marks 25 years since the premiere of HBO’s “The Sopranos.” Over its eight-year run and the 17 years since its conclusion, it earned a reputation with fans and critics alike as one of the seminal TV series of the 2000s and one of the most iconic series of all time, rated a 9.2 on IMDB and ranked as the best show ever by Rolling Stone. While I agree with the critics’ ringing endorsements, I also believe the show and shows like it must be viewed through a lens that examines their stances on masculinity.
The Sopranos’ continued presence and relevance across popular culture can be attributed to its willingness to portray its central character, James Gandolfini’s Tony Soprano, in a negative light. Season One’s fifth episode, “College” innovated the “antihero” trope by placing a character that lacked conventional morals in the role of the protagonist. It marked the first time a TV protagonist killed another character on screen, as described by Mary McNamara of the LA Times.
In the first four episodes before “College,” Tony was clearly not cast in an entirely benevolent light, as he was still a mob boss who ordered hits and ran a criminal organization, but his struggles with mental health and fear of losing his family got me on his side and made me believe in his potential redemption. When I watched Tony kill the informant he was pursuing in the fifth episode via strangulation, it more than sowed the seeds of doubt in my mind that he could truly change. All the therapy in the world could not entirely redeem a murderer.
In her senior thesis, ‘“The Strong, Silent Type”: Analyzing the Portrayal of the Cost of Masculine Gender Performances in The Sopranos,’ SUNY Cortland researcher Holly Taylor, accompanied by Professor Anna Curtis, wrote “Although Tony Soprano was not the first anti-hero protagonist, and definitely not the last, his character stands out among an array of anti-heroes. In the end, he has no actual redeeming qualities, seen as an ‘immoral, spiritually bankrupt psychopath who, in the final analysis, is only out for himself.’ Despite this, many people connected with his character and feel sympathy for him, likely due to their relationship with Tony Soprano from the beginning of the series.” Tony’s immorality is his defining quality, but his status as the protagonist contrasts his characteristics, as the viewer is essentially in his shoes throughout the narrative.
While the antihero trope movement has made for critically acclaimed TV and film, it has also led the way for a mass misinterpretation of the lessons these antiheroes impart. Some viewers watch characters like Tony Soprano do morally reprehensible things and recognize the cautionary tales told about the corrupting nature of power and toxic masculinity. Other viewers idolize these characters, framing their violent actions as righteous because of their position as the protagonist. While antiheroes are often deliberately written to be empathetic and human, it may be easy to empathize more with the monster than the man.
The Sopranos led the way for shows with antihero protagonists like Breaking Bad and Succession, which include a wide array of monstrous actions perpetrated by their leading men. Breaking Bad follows Bryan Cranston's Walter White as he transforms from a high school chemistry teacher to New Mexico’s leading methamphetamine cook, and Succession looks to be a corporate dramedy on the surface, but Brian Cox’s Logan Roy and his potential heirs are leagues more conniving and corrupt than they seem.
These characters are explicit condemnations and cautions against harmful masculinity, yet some audiences see them as endorsements of it. NYU film professor and film editor Ray Hubley notes that, “we, the audience, look at the screen, and we find ways that we relate to what we're perceiving on the screen, and even when we see bad behavior, we relate to it. There’s kind of a prism that gives us a bias of empathy to that behavior.”
There is a mutually reinforcing relationship between the social climate and the media that society creates and consumes. This has become especially evident in the sphere of gender relations and the way gender is perceived.
American University sociology professor David Reznik’s studies focus on identity politics in mass media. He told me, “People in society learn through TV and film that masculinity is an unnecessarily narrow and tenuous identity, an exclusive so-called club that one is always in danger of having their membership rescinded if they fail to meet any of its restrictive criteria.” The status of masculinity as an in-group that someone must belong to or be excluded from is often the framework for audiences’ interpretation of toxically masculine characters.
The performance of masculinity is a concept that is tied to masculinity’s role as a group to be included in or excluded from. Taylor and Curtis wrote, “hegemonic masculinity traits in society are associated with characteristics such as ‘unemotional, independent, non-nurturing, aggressive and dispassionate’,” which can be construed as negating stereotypical feminine traits. Masculinity is performed as the opposite of femininity, so as to create distance from it.
“I think the way that masculinity is shown on TV reflects a lot of what you may see in real life, and this opens conversations about the perception of gender that people may not be comfortable with,” Taylor said.
In recent years, trends have emerged in media and its reception surrounding male idolization of villainous and morally dubious characters. This is especially prevalent on social media, where some of these characters are presented as universally relatable, such as American Psycho’s Patrick Bateman in 2022 and 2023. This trend, documented by GQ, was rooted in the misunderstanding of American Psycho’s message as a condemnation of capitalism and the culture it breeds, and instead became a way for posters to espouse violently misogynist beliefs channeled through the character of Bateman.
In his article, ‘Constructed Masculinity: How Much Do Media Representations Dictate Male Identity?’ researcher Euan Robertson wrote, “An issue surrounding decoding is that the intended re‐enactments or representations of masculinity can fail, as it is not clear what is required to decode them, basically there is no guarantee of consistency. Audiences cannot always decode overt attempts at encoded parodic narrative. These depictions and representations are sometimes taken at face value, further reinforcing both existing and emergent stereotypes.” The misunderstanding of a message that a movie aims to convey is an indictment of the ability of some viewers to discern if the portrayal of a bad man aims to teach a lesson about how men should behave and treat others.
Media literacy is a term that has increased in popularity in recent years surrounding the discussion of the way viewers watch and interpret TV shows and movies. Media literacy is an important element of watching any visual media, especially a work that has something to say about society, namely men’s place in it. Without an understanding of authorial or directorial intent, I do not think a viewer can truly glean anything from the show they claim to enjoy.
Professor Reznik added, “When it comes to portrayals of masculinity in TV and film, media literacy includes the capacity to unpack and parse the various elements involved in any content, from explicit elements in the media all the way through to the subtext.” Subtext is a massively important element of narratives that comment on masculinity, as the critique of a character like Tony Soprano’s actions often lies in the subtext of the story.
If “College” sowed the seeds of doubt in my mind about Tony’s capacity for change, the Season Six episode “Kennedy and Heidi” saw those seeds bloom and flourish. Tony suspects Christopher Moltisanti, his nephew who he was grooming to become the next boss of the family, is back on heroin. This is in wake of Tony bullying Christopher for his attempts at sobriety, showing the contradictory nature of the toxic masculinity Tony performs. He perceives Chris as weak when he tries to rid himself of vice because Chris can’t “live a little,” but also perceives him as weak when he is addicted to substances because he is a slave to vice.
Christopher and Tony get into a car crash after Christopher swerves on the highway, and in the wreck, Christopher admits he is high, begging Tony to not call an ambulance because he won’t pass the drug test at the hospital. Tony then sees a branch lodged through the car seat in the back of Christopher’s car and murders his nephew by squeezing his nose until he stops breathing. For the rest of the episode, Tony feigns grief but is actually happy that Christopher is dead, as he saw him as a liability because of his addiction troubles.
To me, this episode was a great example of the subtext of the story providing a condemnation of toxic masculinity, even if the explicit storyline of the episode does not punish Tony for murdering Christopher. Tony seeing the destroyed car seat and being compelled to kill Christopher is indicative of his resentment for failed fathers, and his own failure of a father, ‘Johnny Boy’ Soprano, who ushered him into the business of the mob rather than nurturing him. Tony redirects the deep-seated hatred he has for his father that he cannot consciously acknowledge onto Christopher, completing a cycle of hatred perpetuated by the hierarchical or “hegemonic” toxic masculinity as described by Taylor and Curtis.
In trying to speak with others about masculinity in TV, I have often found that my interpretations fall on deaf ears. The prevalence of glorification of antiheroes goes hand-in-hand with the denial that these characters tell cautionary tales, much like the denial of sensitivity and emotional intelligence that toxic masculinity promotes. “Sometimes because of echo chambers, you’re going to get the message that you want to get and reiterations of what you already believe in, so the media you watch will reinforce what you already believe in,” Media Education Lab representative Yonty Friesem said.
The Sopranos and shows like it seem to prop up their antihero protagonists on the surface, but I see, and urge others to see the opposite. The condemnation of using one’s masculine power over others is an important message to impart, and when viewers can recognize this, I hope they can take the message and apply it to real life.
Critically analyzing media and thinking about my place in a patriarchal society has changed how I think about both the shows I watch and the life I lead. Every viewer stands to benefit from recognizing the pitfalls of unemotional, violent masculinity that characters like Tony Soprano portray and using that knowledge to become more cognizant of the lessons these characters teach.