The bold and brazen return of USA Network’s Mr. Robot serves as a telling indication that American television is prepared to leave its Golden Age in favor of an Era of Postmodern Television. If the opening episode of season_2.0 (eps2.0_unm4sk-pt1.tc) is any indication of what Sam Esmail and his crew have in store for us, we are in for some groundbreaking television — television that is not only gripping on a pure entertainment basis, but openly challenges preconceived notions of the medium itself.

In any discussion of postmodernism, it is usually pertinent to mention literary theorist Fredric Jameson. In his seminal work Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, he muses on the following:

[I] want to suggest that our faulty representations of some immense communicational and computer network are themselves but a distorted figuration of something even deeper, namely, the whole world system of a present-day multinational capitalism. The technology of contemporary society is therefore mesmerizing and fascinating not so much in its own right but because it seems to offer some privileged representational shorthand for grasping a network of power and control even more difficult for our minds and imaginations to grasp: the whole new decentered global network of [late capitalism] itself.

In his work, Jameson preoccupies himself with networks of power that function in society, but go largely unnoticed — systems that as a whole that are entirely familiar, but are unable to be fully grasped by human comprehension. He goes on to suggest that the individual’s inability to understand these systems leads to an unending process of skepticism, paranoia, and conspiratorial thinking. Mr. Robot’s protagonist, Elliot, is able to understand these systems. He not only understands them, but even exerts direct control over these processes — or so we are led to believe. However, even in his remarkable agency in combatting these systems, he is still unable to escape from paranoia.

Elliot in Bed (USA Network)

Mr. Robot deals explicitly with the incomprehensible networks Jameson identified back in 1991 in the present day of 2016, and deals with it through the medium of television, which in itself is a technological innovation. Television is a populist medium where the spectator typically does not have a comprehensive understanding of the mechanics behind the image. Pick a person off the street and ask them how cable TV works, how streaming works, what the internet is, how a LCD/LED screen works. The odds they could answer any of these questions is slim to none. Therefore, the dialogue Mr. Robot opens about the systems Jameson identified as problematic takes place in a medium that is imbued with technological ambiguity and unfamiliarity. In a sense, television is the ideal medium for this discussion to take place — one in which the thematics of the work are reflected in the form itself.

The contents of the show itself take this increasingly incestuous interplay a step further through collapsing narrative transitivity. Rather than opt for a linear storyline or clear narrative structure, showrunner Sam Esmail and his team instead embrace the postmodern spirit and weave multiple theoretical universes within the singular show of Mr. Robot. Each narrative universe exists in parallel with one another, adding and subtracting information as they unravel.

An fsociety mask, worn by Tyrell (USA Network)

First, there is the show Mr. Robot itself. The final 44–54 minute product that is churned out through a pain-staking post-production process. Film theorists love to use the terms fabula and syuzhet (lifted from Russian formalism) to describe the formal elements of the moving image. Fabula refers to the raw material of the story (what is seen/heard), and syuzhet refers to the order in which materials appears. Together they compose the television program we watch. So, the fabula and syuzhet represent one narrative universe. For references sake, let us refer to this universe as the base universe.

However, things get increasingly interesting as we dive into the fabula, the raw material, of the show. For example, there exists an additional narrative universe defined by Elliot’s direct address to the spectator. Following his therapy session with Krista, Elliot begins his narration:

“Hello again. Yes, I’m talking to you this time. I’m sure you wanted to hear what I told Krista back there, but I’m not ready to trust you yet — not after what you did. You kept things from me, and I don’t know if I can tell you secrets like before...”

Whether or not his narration is purposely directed at the spectator or an unidentified third party is unclear, but also not-so-important. Even back in the series opener Elliot describes the feeling of being watched. The effective implication is that he is talking to someone, and we are a someone who is listening. He feels watched, and we are watching.

Elliot walking home (USA Network)

On the topic of Krista, this opening sequence also reveals there is a narrative universe that consists of Elliot’s telling of events to Krista. Previously in season_1.0, Elliot withholds information from her, making this universe uninteresting, void of pertinent details. However, this time around it is clear to the spectator that there is valuable information in this reality, information that for now is being withheld. Even though we are not given the opportunity to listen to this narrative dialogue, we know it exists. We know Elliot is saying something, we are just not allowed to hear it.

Mr. Robot holds a gun to Elliot’s head (USA Network)

Then there is Elliot’s dialogue with the character Mr. Robot, a machination of Elliot’s mind. In the sequence that follows those above, Mr. Robot shoots Elliot in the forehead and the details are graphic and appear real. However, Elliot rebounds after a beat and resumes his daily routine. The universe that exists between these two is very much real in Elliot’s mind, and clearly influences how he acts in his actual reality, the one we are shown in the base universe.

Season_2.0 has also introduced a new narrative universe through Elliot’s interactions with his journal. extreme close-ups of Elliot scribbling into his journal give us a narration that is distinct from any others we have previously seen. Unlike his narrations in season_1.0, the journal is not directed at us or any other implicit audience, but rather is a record of events Elliot composes for Elliot. From what is shown, it is clear that the journal universe acknowledges that Mr. Robot is a figment of his imagination. The journal serves as an indication of Elliot’s own awareness of what is real and what is fake.

Obama addresses the fsociety hack (USA Network)

Finally, there is the narrative universe of the diegetic televisions within the base universe. Elliot’s mother watches Obama press conferences addressing the fsociety hacks, complete with found footage. In the close of season_1.0, the truth of these fictional reports are murky. Many news reports were shown in the closing sequences, but at the same time Elliot also strolled an unfeasibly empty Times Square. Additionally, there are the talking-head, MSNBC-esque pundits that are projected in the smart home of Susan Jacobs, E-Corp’s general counsel. The use of television within the base universe establishes a standard of what the general public in the base universe understands about fsociety and evokes a formal play with television-within-television. The diegetic televisions are useful as a barometer in which to frame certain events.

However, what is seen through these screens could simply be what Elliot wants to see. A good amount of the show is seen through his lens so it’s a fair possibility, but it is this brand of thinking that the show purposefully promotes. The continual collapse of narrative transitivity mars the truth with fiction. Therefore, by presenting the show in this manner, Esmail has created an artifact, the show itself, that is just as undecipherable as the institutions it seeks to portray. He has created a complex network of possible realities and contingent truths to the point at which the spectator cannot clearly discern the real narrative of events with absolute certainty. As a result, the show engenders anxiety and paranoia within the spectator him or herself, mimicking Elliot’s own paranoia about the world around him and the completely reasonable fear we, as a collective entity, should feel regarding complex institutions like our government systems, private enterprise and late capitalism.

Therefore, as the holistic composite of Mr. Robot is entirely digestible as a television program, the individual scenes and images, the fabula and syuzhet, begin to crumble under any level of scrutiny. When one goes digging for truth in the minutiae of the show, it results in a seemingly endless Pynchionian pursuit. Fans of the show understand this, break out the red yarn, and put on their tin foil hats searching for the right answers.

Elliot watches a basketball game (USA Network)

However, this level of spectator participation and engagement is entirely optional. As Elliot describes his daily routine, his perfect loop, to Krista:

Repeating the same tasks every day without thinking about them, isn’t that what everybody does? Keep things on repeat, to go along with their NCIS.

There is some satisfaction to a numbing pleasure of episodic television. Shows like NCIS are predictable; they’re easy to digest and binge. They’re familiar and homely and most importantly they do not require too much thinking. They are designed to be a numbing, morphine-like pleasure and Mr. Robot presents an open challenge to an archaic model of television. It is a difficult, dense show — and unapologetic about it.

An excerpt from Elliot’s journal (USA Network)

Following a flashback to Elliot’s youth where he is in the ER, an image of a Elliot’s heart rate is displayed on a monitor. The doctor says, “as you can see through the images, everything appears to be normal.” In this small expression lies the perfect microcosm of what Mr. Robot is. Everything in the show appears to be normal, but is it really so? Is the spectator up to the task to find out? Can the spectator exert control over the situation? And the answer to that question is important, because not only will it influence their relationship with with Mr. Robot and the success of the series, but the audience’s response to Mr. Robot will also influence future networks, executives, showrunners, writers, and the industry of television. If the audience has high levels of engagement with the show, we may see more postmodern television in the future.

The spectator, then, is put in a position similar to that of Elliot. Faced with tackling an insurmountable network of power, Elliot serves as our televisual proxy. And there is some optimism in being Elliot: as Elliot devoutly writes in his journal, “I am in control.”