I’ve just finished The Office (US) for the first time (after being pretty much spoiler-free for the past 5+ years, minus general pop culture knowledge). And, although at first I didn’t understand why people loved it, by the end, to quote Bowie’s reaction to the Office, “I watched. I laughed. What do I do now?”
BUT despite all the things the show did perfectly - from Jim and Pam’s True Love story to Michael’s perfect character arc to being a great adaptation and changing the way we think of modern comedy today - there is one major flaw in the entire show, and that is the character arc of Andy Bernard.
I say this as someone who loves the ‘Nard Dog’. Andy is my second favourite character of the whole show - only to Michael Scott - and I thought that Ed Helms did a wonderful job portraying him. So I’m a little frustrated that he didn’t get the ending I thought he deserved. In fact, I believe that Andy and Michael should’ve had similar arcs in the show, and treated in a different fashion, Andy could’ve had just as satisfactory of an ending.
(NOTE: Obviously, this is not spoiler-free and written assuming you already know who all the characters are - read on if that’s alright with you!)
Both Michael and Andy are clearly the ‘losers’ of their respective families. Michael’s own grandmother wouldn’t invest in his paper company, and he had a difficult relationship with his mother/stepfather (evidenced by him crying in his mother’s wedding video where he being replaced by a dog as ring bearer and during Toby’s counselling sessions). Meanwhile, Andy at the age of six was renamed from ‘Walter Jr’ because his parents thought that his younger brother was more worthy of the name. He is also seen as the failure of the family as evidenced during the garden party he throws at Dwight’s farm just to try gaining his father’s approval, when his father refuses to sing a duet with him or grant him the approval he seeks. This is further cemented when Andy remembers the family trips when he sells the family boat, when he mentions that his father refused to let him touch the wheel because he wasn’t ‘enough of a man’.
This desperation for inclusion and approval also extends to friends and co-workers, as most of Michael’s antics frequently are done out of a desire to be part of the group (ie when he invites himself to Jim’s house party and the video of him as a ‘child star’ when he states that his dream is to have a hundred children so he could have a hundred friends that will never leave him) and Andy’s ‘mirroring’ behaviour to move up in the corporate world and be accepted by his co-workers (to the point where he’s the last one standing after being absorbed into the Scranton branch).
They’re even both determined characters who continue to try and beat the odds. For instance, when, after quitting, Michael decides to start his own paper company before being brought back by being bought back by David Wallace and when Andy decides to start his own paper company “Big Red” before going to David Wallace to convince him to buy Dunder Mifflin and be reinstated as manager.
Both of them are also obsessed with emphasizing their educational background, albeit in opposite fashions. Michael’s lack of a business degree (or degree of any kind) is explored in earlier seasons, particularly when he sees that Ryan is majoring in business. His insecurity regarding his lack of formal education is manifested in the way he emphasizes how he earned ‘being boss’ through ‘talent’. Although in a twist, Michael is shown to be a competent manager and great salesman by the end of his arc in season 7 simply because he cares about people. In comparison, Andy’s Cornell background is explored throughout most of the show as the subject which he loves the most (to the point where the ‘fitting’ ending for his character is working admissions AT Cornell). His overqualification for being a salesman is ironically contrasted by him being the worst salesman on the entire team. This is clear to the point where the only reason he was made manager was simply because the first choice pick for the job made him, the second pick, manager after being promoted. Yet his insecurity regarding this overqualification is also manifested in the same way as Michael’s under qualification - emphasizing to others how he ‘earned’ being boss and thus deserves respect.
Both are also prone to acting out in frustration or anger. Andy’s first character flaw is clearly introduced as having problems with anger management, while Michael frequently plays disastrous pranks/makes inappropriate comments about his employees. And, of course, let us not forget their shared hatred of Toby. Another way they parallel each other is in their (unfulfilled) quests for revenge for ‘petty’ slights (usually when others in the office don’t want to go along with a ridiculous scheme of theirs). Not to mention how both characters are rather impulsive (ie when both of them decide to hop on a bus to Mexico after an inspiring speech by young people) and emotional (ie Michael and Andy have no shame crying and throwing tantrums in response to a variety of situations).
Michael also frequently tries to liven the office up with presentations that indulge his personal sense of fun and love of acting/comedy. Andy similarly copies this style when he’s manager. His love of musical performance inspires him to start traditions like playing ‘Closing Time’ every time it’s five o’clock and sing (a lot of) acapella in the office. Their shared love of entertaining others is clearly mirrored in the episode where they both auditioned for the same musical - although Andy was ultimately chosen to perform in Sweeney Todd, while Michael was passed over. In fact, although Andy was later rejected from show business by the series finale, the clearest difference here is that Andy legitimately has more talent/competency than Michael regarding show business (ie Andy’s musical ability - even when he aduitions for the acapella television show, despite being rejected, it’s stated that he has a good voice by the jduges).
Additionally, Michael and Andy are promoted to manager despite being incompetent (most of the time) at the job. Both men frequently call a superior to get a third opinion or advice (Michael with Jan and David Wallace, and Andy with Jo, Robert, and David), both simultaneously lean on and try to insert themselves as a third wheel to Dwight and Jim’s antics (which almost never works), and try multiple times to gain Darryl’s approval (which sort of works).
Yet despite this incompetence, both show underlying signs of being good managers. For instance, although the majority of the group doesn’t want to participate in Michael/Andy’s retreat ideas (Michael’s at the lake, and Andy’s at Gettysburg), the ultimate goal of both was to bring people together while gaining their employees’ approval. And both goals were ultimately affirmed by the end of the day through the eventual participation and respect of their employees (ie when everyone finally participated in Michael’s ridiculous games like sumo wrestling and when Jim and Darryl tell Andy that they’re wearing pink tour hats because they like him). Another example is when Michael shows insight about having separate birthday parties for all of the employees, and despite all the financial failures of Dunder Mifflin, manages to make his branch the most profitable one of the entire corporation without firing anyone. Meanwhile, Andy stands up to Robert California for his employees to get Columbus Day weekend off, makes sound decisions for his family after his father leaves them for broke, and when he insightfully calls out Darryl regarding his lack of motivation when the latter is resentful about Andy getting the manager position.
Even in personal relationships Michael and Andy have similar (disastrous) luck with women. Michael was in a toxic relationship with Jan for two seasons at the beginning of his character arc, while Andy was in a similarly toxic relationship with Angela for two seasons during his early development. Both men were taken advantage of by their respective partners - Michael was taken advantage of by Jan (to the point of verbal - and potentially physical - abuse), and Andy by Angela as she had a secret affair for the majority of their relationship (including during their engagement). Similarly, both men expressed their desire/excitement for getting married and starting families multiple times before, during, and after their relationships ended.
Yet despite it all, both men still behave respectfully to Holly and Erin - their two longest romantic interests on the show (excluding petty acts of jealousy, ex: when Michael pours coffee over Holly’s Woody doll and when Andy brings Gabe back into the Office to anger Erin). This is evidenced by their behaviour during the corporate picnic when Michael decides not to tell Holly that he still loves her and when Andy still wants to make sure Erin gets home safely after drinking too much at the Christmas party with Robert California. The main point where they differed was that Michael ended up marrying his ‘true love’ in Holly, while Andy never finds his own ‘Holly’.
Which, speaking of, this was a huge source of frustration for me. The amount of time spent on the storyline of Andy and Erin with a rushed ending was similar to the slightly rushed ending of Holly and Michael's story (the number of episodes in their reunion arc is comparatively brief). And a lot of the ways Erin and Andy are teased mirrors the off-timing of Michael and Holly for most of the show’s run (including the few beginning episodes where their relationship has a false start before breaking up). Even the lines both Michael and Andy say about their respective love interests align. Michael says of Holly, “And I think we’re one of those couples who’ll have a long story when people ask how we found each other. I will see her every now and then, and maybe one year she’ll be with somebody and the next year I’ll be with somebody and it’s gonna take a long time...and then it’s perfect.” Similarly, Andy says of Erin, “I am so sorry that we have not loved each other at the same time” before they end up getting together when Erin chases after him. Erin is thus clearly paralleled as a ‘rebound’ from Angela to Andy just like how Holly is a ‘rebound’ from Jan for Michael - and both risk losing their jobs to pursue their romantic interest (as well as take trips to warmer climates - Jamaica and the Bahamas - to consider their relationships and lives in Scranton).
However, I do think a legitimate case could be made for why Andy and Erin shouldn't end up together (unlike for Michael and Holly). In fact, I assumed in season 8 that Andy and Erin wouldn't end up together (ie Michael's advice to Erin in season 7, the fact that Andy has a serious girlfriend who is clearly a good match for him, and his final line to Erin about missed opportunities for love). There’s also evidence that Pete is a much better 'Jim' to Erin's 'Pam' (ie the obvious thematic parallels between the first and final seasons, the fact that Erin's orphan background would've been too challenging to overcome to feel accepted in comparison to Andy's privileged upbringing, the way both Andy and Erin hurt each other and encourage the other to act immaturely whereas Pete calms Erin down and is a steadying influence for her). Andy’s selfish and immature behaviour in season 9 clearly makes him a terrible match to Erin, who outgrows him in understanding her own self-worth (ie when she refuses to pretend to be happy when Andy suggests it to make their relationship work). You could even go in a different direction and say that Andy and Erin getting together then breaking up is ultimately a good move because their arc demonstrates how even if your timing is right and you love each other, you're not always meant to end up together (a clear contrast to Jim and Pam, Dwight and Angela, and Michael and Holly).
But my problem is that the show sends mixed signals to the audience about the validity of this break-up decision. Despite all the above evidence, throughout the last four seasons, I think that Helms and Kemper (the actors for Andy and Erin) have amazing chemistry - their goofy, lovable romance is totally believable as another great salesman/receptionist romance.
Even though they date other people and hurt each other in the process, both Andy and Erin seem legitimately interested in wanting the other person to be happy (ie Andy telling Erin to move on when he dates Jessica and vice versa for Erin when she’s with Gabe). They also take the time to know each other (ie when Erin knows Andy’s family crest on his engagement ring). Not to mention visually the numerous ‘small’ moments the camera catches between Erin and Andy looking at each other with longing is similar to the many moments it captures of Pam and Jim over the course of the series.
However, I think some of the best moments for why they work are in the final episodes of season 8. For instance, when Erin encourages Andy to grow and stand-up for his feelings for her (ie when he goes to Florida to get her back and when he breaks up with Jessica by declaring his love for Erin). And when Erin comforts Andy regarding his masculinity when he’s unable to sexually perform and when he loses control of his anger and punches the wall a second time (by rubbing his arm in the parking lot). Two critical moments for Andy where, after Erin’s encouragement, he realizes his self-worth and is able to legitimately calm down and feel in control of his life again (which ultimately spurs him into action by recruiting David Wallace back to Dunder Mifflin and getting his old job back - a move that demonstrates a type of determination similar to Miachel).
Thus, I think it would’ve made more sense to continue Andy’s growth with seeing him end up with Erin similar to Michael ending up with Holly. If nothing else, due to the sheer amount of parallels and episodes invested teasing the audience in long suffering ‘will-they-won’t-they’ storyline.
In conclusion, I see both Michael and Andy as fun-loving, caring, determined people who enjoy to perform, seek the approval of others, want to be included, can be petty, childish, and vengeful, act out when upset and frustrated, desire to have a stabilizing influence of marriage and family, and ultimately prove to be solid, competent characters underneath their incompetent managerial veneer. However, the major difference between the two in the end of their arcs. While Michael’s is satisfactorily resolved, Andy’s is not.
Michael is an extremely compassionate and caring character, but it is buried underneath a lot of social faux pas and childish behaviour. Shortly after finally ending things with Jan, Michael initiates a relationship with Toby’s replacement, Holly. Holly tempers Michael’s flaws by accepting him (ie she loves his jokes and is just as dorky as he is), but also challenging him to mature (ie when Michael doesn’t treat Toby poorly on his last day as he wants to impress Holly). Obviously, the entire cast of characters also helps with this growth (ie Pam and Michael and Erin and Michael’s relationships as a mentor/mentee dynamic), but Holly is Michael’s ‘happily-ever-after’ that is fitting for his character after the growth of the entire series. His greatest desire to have a family and be accepted - to love and be loved well by others - is finally fulfilled by the end of his arc.
In comparison, Andy is also a solid, caring character, but he is unrewarded by the finale. After an enormous amount of growth (I mean, this is the same character who Michael Scott said was going to drive him crazy in season 3) throughout seasons 4-8 (culminating in him being made manager, competently keeping the top ten clients of Dunder Mifflin, and starting a relationship with Erin, who as previously stated, helps Andy become a more mature version of himself), his great character in season 9 is more erratic and ultimately reduced to being childish, selfish, and fame-seeking (as Erin breaks up with him and Andy quits Dunder Mifflin to become famous through acting) with a fitting, but unfulfilling ending of working in admissions at Cornell.
Andy and Michael both quit Dunder Mifflin to pursue their dreams with no 'plan' for what to do next (Michael doesn't even remember where he's moving to with Holly, while Andy has no savings to fall back on while he pursues stardom). Michael decides to pursue his personal dream to have a family, while Andy decides to pursue his professional dream of acting/singing/dancing/generally performing. But Michael's decision brings him true happiness and is seen as closure for his character, whereas Andy's dream is brutally crushed through public humiliation online (although it is slightly redeemed by the queue to see the documentary panel eagerly waiting to see him). It is only an after-thought that a realistic (and better fit) dream of deciding to work in admissions at Cornell is mentioned (and even then the only time it is alluded to that this would be fitting for his character's 'new dream' is when it is briefly toyed with in the aftermath of his rivalry with Broccoli Rob).
Also, as season 9 progresses it simultaneously progresses the fact that Andy is a terrible manager - even to the extent that his three month trip to the Bahamas is seen as financially beneficial to the office. This is frustratingly opposed to the great work done in season 8 to show that Andy is worthy of the trust Michael places in him during his departure in season 7 when he gives him the top 10 clients of Dunder Mifflin. This also contradicts the idea that Michael's goodbye foreshadows a lot of the final character and story beats (ie telling Erin that she shouldn't pick Andy nor Gabe, as neither is right for her). I believe that Andy leaving Dunder Mifflin and Dwight being made manager by the finale is the right move for both characters, but I wish that they either allowed Andy's character to succeed in being a performer (even if it was ‘mid-tiered’ success) or else invest more in an arc where he actively pursues a job at Cornell (ie if he ended up visiting campus again to get back at Broccoli Rob and ended up loving the campus again - maybe even meeting a romantic interest).
Not to mention that his character’s goodbye is rather truncated to an episode filled with shallow jokes rather than a sweeter, sentimental ending like Michael’s last episode (which is a shame since Andy was also the regional manager trying to keep everyone together for a time). It’s almost redeemed by Helms’ amazing performance of ‘I Will Remember You’ at the end of the episode, but it’s undercut by the fact that most of the story shows Andy as selfishly trying to ‘burn bridges’ at Dunder Mifflin and all of his co-workers not believing in his dream to ‘make it in Hollywood’. It’s frustrating that his term as manager is treated ultimately as a failure, while Michael’s is treated like a success, when in actuality both of them demonstrate a fair amount of insensitive incompetence throughout their tenures mixed with great moments of competency.
I admit that Andy was not a likable character at first - he really didn’t start becoming my favourite character until season 4, as he became more than ‘angry brown-noser’ and ‘confusing rebound from Dwight’ into a fully-fledged character who is deeply flawed, but still lovable with a hidden depth of feeling and talent -- just like Michael and all of the other Office characters. I think, in short, the key to understanding Andy is, in many ways, the same as understanding Michael -- both of them simply want to love and be loved well by others. The difference is that Michael is redeemed as being revealed to be sincere, compassionate, and kind. Michael’s journey of becoming a well liked, respected manager ends in him ‘getting the girl’ with a proper amount of closure which seems right as he really is the ‘heart’ of the show. However, Andy’s journey frustratingly ends with him at the beginning - as a shallow, petty, and incompetent angry (and lonely) salesman. At best, he ends as being the Roy to Erin’s Pam - both act selfishly and thoughtlessly, while serving a larger thematic premise to Erin/Pam’s character growth. And I think that this reductive portrayal does a great disservice to the hard work put in to make Andy’s journey parallel Michael’s throughout the series.
In short, roo-doo-doot-da-doo Nard Dog! You’ll always be my favourite Cornell graduate and hold a special place in my heart -- even if most of the Internet disagrees and I have to pretend season 9 doesn’t exist (just for you). And you totally deserved a Michael Scott ending.
No comments:
Post a Comment