If you have not yet watched season one of Pluribus, go do it. I’ll try to keep the spoilers to a minimum, focusing on the archetypal patterns we are all facing today. You really should go watch it for yourself and do your own reflection. This is written after the end of season one, so some plot points may change as more episodes are released.
Show synopsis: “In a world overtaken by a mysterious wave of forced happiness, Carol Sturka, one of the immune few, must uncover what’s really going on – and save humanity from its artificial bliss.”
It begins in a remote place. With people really hungry to discover something. They asked what it means when the day comes that they finally discover something. They are excited in their frantic efforts to decode it. They are clueless about the danger that is in store.
Not too long after, suddenly, everybody in the world is now “all one.” All except 12 random people scattered across the world who are somehow immune to “the turning” to join the collective hive mind. Much like our digital hive mind, which has been rapidly growing over the last 30 years, everyone in the collective has access to everyone else’s knowledge. Suddenly, everyone knows literally everything and how to do everything, including medical procedures and flying airplanes.
Most interestingly, the collective is very nice. They give the 12 survivors literally anything and everything they want. All they want in return is for the remaining 12 to consent to join the collective. They honor their sovereignty, but they do want them to join them.
The number 12 symbolizes completeness and cosmic order, often associated with significant concepts such as the 12 months of the year, 12 signs of the zodiac, and 12 disciples. It represents a balance of energies, including the combination of masculine and feminine traits. Perhaps an indication that the 12 foundational archetypes are still present in the world and will be available to correct the situation, despite the catastrophic leveling that occurs.
The main character, Carol, is a reluctant, chaotic, alcoholic hero who wants to save the world and restore it to its former state. At first motivated by her grief and loss, which eventually gave way to loneliness. She begins befriending the collective and settling into the new normal. Eventually, though, she recognizes all that is lost and the moral problems obscured by the collective’s kindness, and she starts to investigate, discover, and analyze everything she can about them, hoping to find a way to set things straight.
Of the other 12, we one meet a few in any detail. Each is practically a one-dimensional archetypal character. Carol initially tries to recruit them to help her restore the world. None of them is willing to help; each of them is content, now that the collective willingly gives them everything they have ever wanted. Getting everything we want causes complacency. Why would we want to give up having what we most want? One guy exemplifies this the most clearly. He is a man-child, enjoying the luxuries of material riches, private jumbo jets, luxury penthouse suites, beautiful women, and parties.
Another woman still has her son (in appearance only, he is part of the collective), and won’t help because she believes her only role is to mother him. She calls Carol angrily whenever something happens that upsets him. When the only goal is not to upset the children, we miss key aspects of development that are necessary for the maturation of both parents and children. It’s even more striking commentary as an image when we recognize that the mother only wants to possess her child and not ever upset him, and that he is not an individual person with his own dreams and purpose that are being cultivated, he is unable to think or feel for himself and only plays a role that the mother and the collective demand of him.
Each of us is a complex person, not an archetype. We hold many roles, many ways of being in the world. Whenever we are reduced to a one-dimensional archetype, we are possessed, unable to access the rest of our humanity. A mother is much more than a mother, a father is much more than a father, and a worker is much more than a worker. We have to recognize when we are being reduced to an archetype, or when we willingly claim one, because it limits our consciousness and potential actions and cuts us off from our wholeness.
Towards the end of the season, one character, Manousos, who initially refuses contact, eventually becomes the only one willing to help save the world when Carol has fallen into her own contentment to combat her loneliness and grief. He refuses all food and contact, sacrificing greatly to clearly define the situation and make a plan to fight the collective takeover. Only after emerging from a paranoid, withdrawn seclusion does he decide to join Carol, recognizing he can’t do it alone.
An extreme masculine archetype, he demonstrates rigidity, sticking to his beliefs and values, which strengthens his conviction and mission, but he is unable to relate to Carol and her care and relatedness to people, and is therefore ineffective. He has to soften and learn to relate to her. He wants to just kill everyone to solve the problem, but Carol, in her feminine Eros, still cares about the people underneath the collective brainwashed hive mind and wants to find a more subtle and skilled way to end the collective takeover and save as many people as possible. His values and convictions help snap Carol out of her slide into joining. Her relationality helps him recognize his extreme aggression. They don’t trust each other, but they need each other.
The show’s name, “Pluribus,” is part of the phrase, “e pluribus unum,” a Latin motto of the United States found on the Great Seal of the United States and all printed currency, which means ‘out of many, one’. The show is an excellent example dangers of the current misinterpretation of the phrase. The phrase was not intended to mean out of many – same. The founders of the US used the phrase to describe the joining of the 13 independent, distinct, individual colonies into a stronger alliance. As I have written about in previous articles on Individuation and groups, groups of people are stronger and richer when diverse individuals enter into healthy relationships and alliances. Much like a band, orchestra, or American football team, where everyone has different skills and different roles, something beautiful is created that would not be possible if everyone were the same. Yet, that is exactly how our culture has been moving – into sameness rather than relating through differences. Pluribus beautifully illustrates the sinister moral problems masked by sameness and kindness, exploiting people’s need to belong and avoid loneliness.
The show is beautifully written to illustrate how collective thought, behavior, and assumptions, as well as our own personal emotions, needs, wants, and desires, can guide us into extremely unhealthy positions and trap us there. It’s one of the many ways in which modern therapy has misguided us into prioritizing our personal feelings and needs. Some people and therapists even go so far as to believe that our personal feelings, needs, and beliefs are truths that others must abide by. The show also illustrates what happens when we take things at face value. What others say and show may look and sound good, but we always have to balance that with our own understanding of our own motivations, feelings, values, and morality. Our work is not to mindlessly join any collective thought based on how it sounds, appears, or feels, but rather to develop our own understanding, our own compass, and our own position while maintaining healthy relationality with others. It is not easy. The collective’s desire to consume and absorb others is strong and aligns perfectly with our wounds around belonging, isolation, and loneliness.
Again, here is the show synopsis: “In a world overtaken by a mysterious wave of forced happiness, Carol Sturka, one of the immune few, must uncover what’s really going on – and save humanity from its artificial bliss.”
Where have you experienced forced happiness or artificial bliss? Maybe you have even been told to be grateful, to count your blessings, to look on the bright side, and not to be such a downer by well-meaning friends, family, coaches, or therapists. And when and how do we cling to what little bits of happiness and bliss we experience, like every character in the show except Manousos? Don’t misunderstand me, it is important to be grateful and happy for things that warrant those feelings. And we can’t neglect our duty to “uncover what’s really going on.” At least in ourselves and our own lives. Not to just get excited by a new discovery as they do at the beginning of the show, but to take the time to discover what it really is and what the consequences may be. Manousos does take the time to discover what is really going on, but he too neglects an important part of the equation. This is a lesson too for what happens when we cling so rigidly to our ideals that we lose the ability to be relatable and cooperate with others, a much-needed skill to tackle problems in the world beyond our own personal lives.
We’ll see where Vince Gilligan takes the show in the future. But from my vantage point at this moment, Pluribus is a fantastic story of individuation and the development of individual character in relation to the collective. In individuation, all the characters are transformed by their unique souls’ needs. Carol is an engaged public figure, successful but not fulfilled in her career, just going through the motions. She wrestles with her own grief and clings to the past, temporarily falling for the seduction of getting what she wants, and eventually coming back to navigate what is best for both her and the world based on what she can offer. Manousos has to move out of his isolated, withdrawn position and learn to relate to someone who is completely different in culture and gender to form a healthy partnership that will fulfill both of them in their mission and individuation. Individuation – development into a whole, healthy presence in the world is different for everyone.
As with any great story, we can ask, who are we most like in the story, and where in the story are we? Are we like Carol? Manousos? Any random person in the collective? Identified with the mother archetype, man-child playboy archetype? Or any other one-dimensional archetypes illustrated, such as public figures, doctors, nurses, consumers, managers, loyal friends, or nameless, featureless extras? With careful reflection and an earnest desire to see ourselves, Pluribus offers a rich mirror for us in our current times.
Chuck Hancock, M.Ed., LPC, LMHC, is a licensed psychotherapist and Analytic Psychology Training Candidate practicing in Colorado and New York, guiding individuals, couples, and groups into greater wholeness. Inner Life Adventures.