House of Cards and Philosophy: Underwood's Republic

by J. Edward Hackett, William Irwin

Is Democracy overrated?

Does power corrupt? Or do corrupt people seek power?

Do corporate puppet masters pull politicians’ strings?

Why does Frank talk to the camera?

Can politics deliver on the promise of justice?

House of Cards depicts our worst fears about politics today. Love him or loathe him, Frank Underwood has charted an inimitable course through Washington politics. He and his cohorts depict the darkest dealings within the gleaming halls of our most revered political institutions.

These 24 original essays examine key philosophical issues behind the critically-acclaimed series—questions of truth, justice, equality, opportunity, and privilege. The amoral machinations of Underwood, the ultimate anti-hero, serve as an ideal backdrop for a discussion of the political theories of philosophers as diverse as Plato, Aristotle, Nietzsche, Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Marx. From political and corporate ethics, race relations, and ruthless paragmatism to mass media collusion and sexual politics, these essays tackle a range of issues important not only to the series but to our understanding of society today.

Genres: Philosophy, Politics, Nonfiction, Sociology, Political Science

304 pages, Paperback

First published December 1, 2015

Reviews

[Fantasymundo · Rating 4 out of 5]

“House of cards y la Filosofía” es un libro tremendamente accesible y ameno, igual que su predecesor en la colección. No hace falta saber mucho sobre filosofía para llegar a disfrutarlo, porque uno de sus grandes éxitos es el afán de divulgación y el didactismo que proyectan todos los ensayos. Cada uno de ellos está diseñado para estar integrado y apoyarse en las tramas y en los personajes de “House of Cards”, por lo que resulta muy sencillo seguir las argumentaciones que proponen los autores. No hay Seguir leyendo

[Ilse Colin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fácil de leer, explica teorías filosóficas con ejemplos de la serie. Es un buen libro de principiantes si te interesa seguir leyendo sobre filosofía ya que presenta teorías de diferentes autores y su aplicación.

[Christi]

I like the idea of this book better than the execution. I enjoyed some of the essays, particularly the ones that attempt to answer the show's puzzles via political or philosophical theory: for instance, what about the show makes us root for Frank even though he's a terrible person? However, most of the essays analyze Frank's motives in light of a given theory or philosopher, and they do not adequately address the "so what?" factor: i.e., one essay argues that Frank embodies Machiavellian politics while another argues that he does not, but neither gives a convincing rationale as to why it matters. Yes, it is interesting to look at House of Cards alongside various theories, but I want a purpose for doing so that helps me better understand either the show or the theory at hand. I will admit that I began to heavily skim about halfway through the book as the essays got pretty repetitive: many of them quote the same passages from the same philosophers and use them to discuss the same moments in the show. So perhaps there was discussion of rationale that I missed, or perhaps it was just implied, but in any case, I would've liked to see such claims articulated at the beginning of each essay.

[Ina Cawl · Rating 5 out of 5]

one of the best books i have read this year yet
this 24 essays truly captures behind the curtain philosophical lesson from House of Cards.
i truly recommend this book to the worldwide fans of House of Cards and our Machiavellian Hero Frank Underwood

[Rebecca Fung · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is rather disappointing and spotty in its execution. House of Cards is a show ripe for political and philosophical discussion. There was a lot of potential here. I've watched both the UK series (entirely) and the American series (apart from the final season). Here are 24 essays discussing different aspects of philosophy, and they vary widely in quality and style.

There are attempts in some essays to reflect upon philosophical concepts using the House of Cards episodes as a launching pad, discussing what sort of questions House of Cards raises. For intstance, the discussion by Kogelmann of the ideal society. I would have liked more of this kind of discussion. However, many of the essays dissect the House of Cards using philosophical structures as a template - for instance, discussing whether or not Frank is an "ubermensch". An interesting discussion and it was good that both sides of the argument are presented, but while this does open us up to what an ubermensch is, it does not really take the concept of the ubermensch further than House of Cards and delve into what questions the House of Cards raises for the ubermensch role in society (and since House of Cards is fictional, then is it a really meaningful discussion?). However I did like the structure in this section with the "for" and "against" arguments placed next to each other. The discussion of Machiavelli was also interesting.

Other essays I felt were more descriptive, with nicely cherry-picked evidence, than really well-argued.

I was a bit disappointed on how Plato and Socrates was covered because I believe they deserved much better.

Now that House of Cards has ended, some of the essays suffer a little because they were clearly written before the show had finished. While we can read the book with that in mind and forgive that (it's certainly not the "fault" of the writers or the editors) it does mean a reader may find the analysis a bit lacking. For instance, the analysis of the sexual politics and strength of the Underwood marriage doesn't seem very complete without a good discussion of Tom Yates' role. There is also ongoing mention of how Frank Underwood values power over money and the fact that he declares he will tackle the corporate world while leaving Claire in power in the White House at the end of Season 5 would certainly be worth discussing in his character development.

For that matter, if the book had been written a lot later, a discussion of viewer ethics and Spacey's removal from the show in Season 6 would probably have been appropriate!

I found Berruz's entry on Freddy and racist representations pretty much dissatisfying, possibly though because I found the whole "Freddy and racism" arc in House of Cards jammed in and badly written, possibly to appeal to popular opinion at the time rather than really developing the story in a considered way and laying the foundation for it early and following through.

I hear that there is another book in this series, on Orphan Black. I love Orphan Black but I am now hesitant to read a book of essays on it. It's another book that raises a lot of philosophical questions though, but perhaps better mused on alone.

[Julia · Rating 5 out of 5]

dawno nie czytałam tak dobrej książki, która by tak na mnie wpłynęła. Poszerzyła moje standardy myślenia i postrzegania nie tylko tego serialu ale i całego świata, politycznego i moralnego zwłaszcza. Doskonale uzupełnienie serialu, pobudziła moją ciekawość na dziedziny dotąd mi obojętne i nieznane

[KG · Rating 4 out of 5]

I bought two books from this series (HoC and Orphan Black) from this bookstore I randomly stumbled upon. The titles seemed very interesting and I already love the two TV shows.

The book is extremely easy to read; there's 24 essays written by different authors, and any of them can be skipped.

After reading this book, I think I made the right decision to buy these books. House of Cards is one the darkest TV shows I have ever seen, and this books explores that darkness through the lens of philosophy. It presents character analysis in a very different way that is quite pleasurable to read. Other topics explored include democracy and government, economy, friendship, sexuality, morality, public opinion and more. The most notable essay tries to look at why we root for Frank Underwood even though he is evil.

Recommend this book to anyone interested in or new to political philosophy.

[Ronja (queer-is-the-universe) · Rating 4 out of 5]

We may sometimes feel like we know the true Frank, but Frank is well aware that we are watching him ...

[Tristan Searle · Rating 5 out of 5]

“The rules that the artist breaks are not morals or laws, but standards of creation.” —Matt Myers (Why Frank Underwood Is Frankly Not an Übermensch, p. 79)

[Brandi · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love this series - treating pop culture like academic work is probably one of my favorite things. This book covers only the first three seasons of HoC, and it was interesting to see the authors' (incorrect) speculations about Season 4. Still, they do a lot of great character analysis.

[Christina Isakoglou · Rating 5 out of 5]

The art of deception broken down. Provocatively raised issues about democracy, morality, feminism, being vs seeming, intentions vs beliefs and desires, public opinion, your own opinion while Francis' clever asides let your guard down, illustrating that the first step of seduction is establishing an intimate connection in the hopes of getting the other(s) to adopt views and values that they would ordinarily resist. Because "That's how you devour a whale...One bite at a time".