Netflix's Insatiable & a Girardian Schopenhauer.

The word 'insatiable' arises in the philosophy of Schopenhauer- for whom Spinozan conatus- the principle of inertia by which every being seeks to continue to be itself rather than evolve to fit some higher purpose- is the blind, proto-Darwinian, Will whose choices are always ironic.

The article on Schopenhauer in the internet encyclopaedia of Philosophy gives this summary-

Because the will has no goal or purpose, the will’s satisfaction is impossible. The will objectifies itself in a hierarchy of gradations from inorganic to organic life, and every grade of objectification of the will, from gravity to animal motion, is marked by insatiable striving. In addition, every force of nature and every organic form of nature participates in a struggle to seize matter from other forces or organisms. Thus existence is marked by conflict, struggle and dissatisfaction.
The attainment of a goal or desire, Schopenhauer continues, results in satisfaction, whereas the frustration of such attainment results in suffering. Since existence is marked by want or deficiency, and since satisfaction of this want is unsustainable, existence is characterized by suffering. This conclusion holds for all of nature, including inanimate natures, insofar as they are at essence will. However, suffering is more conspicuous in the life of human beings because of their intellectual capacities. Rather than serving as a relief from suffering, the intellect of human beings brings home their suffering with greater clarity and consciousness. Even with the use of reason, human beings can in no way alter the degree of misery we experience; indeed, reason only magnifies the degree to which we suffer. Thus all the ordinary pursuits of mankind are not only fruitless but also illusory insofar as they are oriented toward satisfying an insatiable, blind will. 

Since the essence of existence is insatiable striving, and insatiable striving is suffering, Schopenhauer concludes that nonexistence is preferable to existence. However, suicide is not the answer. One cannot resolve the problem of existence through suicide, for since all existence is suffering, death does not end one’s suffering but only terminates the form that one’s suffering takes. The proper response to recognizing that all existence is suffering is to turn away from or renounce one’s own desiring. In this respect, Schopenhauer’s thought finds confirmation in the Eastern texts he read and admired: the goal of human life is to turn away from desire. Salvation can only be found in resignation.

Netflix's 'Insatiable', however, which too has a conatus- it wants to come back as a second series pretty much the same as the first series- doesn't make Buddhist, but rather Girardian, mimetic rivalry based, Christian choices. Thus it gets baptised while high on Molly. It seeks to resolve a Satrean 'No Exit' type problem by evoking the notion of a 'trouple'- this time featuring two gay men and the social climber wife of one of them- which however is an unstable bond- the husband, having to choose between his rival and his wife, is about to commit suicide when the son of a Pastor is sacrificed to the Plot so he and the pageant Queen he is coaching can have a life more abundant- though once again fraught with insatiable conatus whose narrative is one of recuperating Will through the sort of metanoia we associate with Drew Barrymore films.

Insatiable's cascading satire or skandal highlight's the stumbling block to Faith in Chrematistic, winner take all, as opposed to Open Market, Capitalism, and also to such irenic Christianity as must, to cast out its demons, itself enter into the swine. The foundational axiom to its ironic economia is -'Choice is the the act which destroys what it affirms'- for example, if you are tempted to embrace being a bad person- thus permitting yourself to murder a rival- you can still choose to be a good person though loudly affirming this choice will accompany bludgeoning your ex to death.

The critics complain of the 'scenes a faire' nature of the stereotypes featured. Fatty Patty is always about to eat her own body weight in cake or fudge weiners or whatever; the gay dudes are super gay all the time; the ex-trailer trash Suburban Socialite is always on the point of turning into a 'Momentrepreneur' marketing a tasseled tampon funded by Big Tobacco and the Ku Klux Klan; the Pastor is constantly casting out demons whom, however, his Rock & Roll loving son hopes to ingratiate himself with and somehow monetize... Insatiable has an insatiable appetite for every trashy meme on TV and is all the better for it- at least for those of us whose long satiation with network TV has made us the victim of the Schopenhauerian Fata Morgana of Choice as incarnated in 'on demand' services like Netflix and Amazon Prime.

Will this series succeed and win accolades in the same manner as 'the Good Place'? Currently, we think of Red State, working class Whites as the Divinely appointed pharmakos, or scapegoat, whose ritualised humiliation and slaughter is the salutary public spectacle which can serve as an inoculation against self-laceration or internecine violence in the face of The Donald's apotheosis or impeachment.

This is a deeply silly- a shameful- thought. There is nothing wrong with either working class White people or ignirrint fat black peeps like myself. We think Schopenhauer can go suck Girard's balls- or the other way round- we simply don't care. Christianity has nothing to do with scapegoats or 'mimetic rivalry' and holier-than-thou bullshit. It's about enjoying being together while still being able to get to work, with a clear head, the next day.

Similarly, Buddhism isn't about 'resignation', its about cool stuff like Shao Lin Kung Fu and Basho's haiku and Steven Seagall...before he got fat. Except he didn't really. It's a fat suit dude! Steve is like totally buff. As am I. Fuck is wrong with you sheeple? Why can't you see the truth?