True Detective Reinvents Itself, Again

How in the world is this show going to end? Our roundtable discusses “After You've Gone,” the seventh installment in HBO's series

This post has been updated. (March 4)

Spencer KornhaberChristopher Orr, and Amy Sullivan discuss the latest episode of True Detective.

Kornhaber: In that last nanosecond, I saw what we all were. Me, this roundtable, this whole big HBO prestige drama, it was never anything but a jerry-rig of presumption and dumb will. We can just let go finally now, to realize that all the hype we know, all the backlash we know, all the Reddit threads, all the screencaps, it was all the same thing. It was all the same dream, a dream that we had inside a locked room called the Internet, a dream about watching a TV show that would somehow turn out to be more than a TV show.

And like a lot of dreams, there's a monster at the end of it.

And the monster is … a guy vaguely remembered from four episodes back, who has shaved his beard and now if you squint you can some scars maybe, whose voice sounds different than it was when he was mowing that abandoned school’s lawn but IMDB says it’s the same actor so I guess True Detective really is just a show about the sinister side of landscape maintenance.

Sorry for the fevered, Cohle-influenced ramble. It’s just that my head’s spinning a bit—not from the various developments in this past hour, but rather from the fact that we’ve finished the penultimate installment and I still have no idea what True Detective is.

As the disc-switch opening image of the episode indicated—and as all the procedural work and bromantic drinking and cat-burglary flashbacks confirmed—“After You’ve Gone” was a change-up for True Detective. Yet this show remains, in the words of our colleague Derek Thompson, a “mystic Rorschach blot.” Is it an a good-looking but heavy-handed rehearsal of clichés? Deep dark occult philosophical treatise? Lone Star viral marketing campaign? All that? None?

Here’s one thought that hadn’t occurred to me before: satire.  We’ve always known True Detective plays with the tropes of the cops-and-killers genre, but in this past hour there were times when I wondered whether the show was straight-up making fun of the characters and maybe even the audience. Creepy music and dark lighting ratchets up tension before it’s revealed that Rust’s storage unit is basically a True Detective comment thread in diorama form. A lovely old lady reminisces warmly until some twig drawings send her into a mad fit of coughing and “Carcosa!” The jolly lawnmower man makes a nefarious-sounding reveal to the camera after detectives cut him off mid-sentence and drive away.

All of these things are presented like revelations, but they feel more like camp. They’re images out of an airport paperback, recycled to tell us things we already know. Rust’s obsessed. Carcosa’s some lunatic swamp ideology involving the Tuttles. And salt-of-the-Earth Louisiana contains dark secrets. It almost feels as though the show is laughing at us for obsessing over it as a murder mystery: The next twist is… not really a twist!

And yet. I’m still obsessing over it as a murder mystery. I still see a shot like this—


—and wonder whether it’s a hint that, per many close readings, Marty’s KIN is closely involved with the killer-cult conspiracy. Is the “sprawl” that Cohle talks about not the Tuttles but rather the Harts?

Or, now that Papania and Gilbough’s interrogation has ended, should we make something of the fact that we’ve moved onto a new, possibly unreliable deposition? Most of this episode’s narrative is relayed by Rust talking to Marty. How much of what he recounts about raiding Billy Lee Tuttle’s house, or interviewing that young crossdresser, or living a simple lonely life all these years, can we trust? It’s convenient that Tuttle would be killed after evidence was taken from his safe. It’s surprising that the sole student Cohle tracks down from Shepherd’s Flock would readily spill the details about his molestation. And it’s striking that our two temperamentally opposed main cops would lead basically identical existences in the past few years. Is Rust spinning tales? Is he manipulating Marty to help him out in the final stage of some long, awful con?

And then I say: Stop it. Stop scrutinizing the backgrounds of each frame; stop guessing where this show is going. The exact contours of the plot’s resolution still aren’t available to us yet. What is available are the lessons of the story thus far.

If the lawnmower man does turn out to be the scarred, spaghetti-monstrous, Yellow King, it’ll be yet another instance of the show positing unspeakable evil as a product of the banal, the unassuming, and the hidden-in-plain-sight. Cohle or Marty’s complicity would do the same. I’m holding out for some mind-blowing turn in the finale, something that complicates the picture beyond telling us once more that the crushing scariness of mortality (“Rejoice! Death is not the end!”) makes normal people harm one another. I can’t quite envision it. Can you, Chris?

Orr:  Not really. But I’m still hoping. And, like you, Spencer, at this point I have very little idea what to expect. Citing that jukebox shot at the opening of the episode as a metaphor for the show was perfect. It reminded me about a great piece on the subject of setting a film to music a while back by David Thomson (currently the critic in residence at my old haunt The New Republic), which made an eloquent case for the superiority of movies with a powerful, unifying score over what he called “jukebox” movies—that is, ones that focused on catchy-but-eclectic soundtracks. If memory serves (the piece doesn’t appear to be online anymore), his primary examples were two Scorsese films, Taxi Driver (scored by Bernard Herrmann) and Goodfellas. His point was that a powerful score helps knit a film together, whereas a soundtrack, no matter how good (and the Goodfellas soundtrack is a great one) tends to fragment it, to make individual scenes pop more on their own than as parts of a whole.

Presented by

How to Cook Spaghetti Squash (and Why)

Cooking for yourself is one of the surest ways to eat well. Bestselling author Mark Bittman teaches James Hamblin the recipe that everyone is Googling.

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.

blog comments powered by Disqus


How to Cook Spaghetti Squash (and Why)

Cooking for yourself is one of the surest ways to eat well.


Before Tinder, a Tree

Looking for your soulmate? Write a letter to the "Bridegroom's Oak" in Germany.


The Health Benefits of Going Outside

People spend too much time indoors. One solution: ecotherapy.


Where High Tech Meets the 1950s

Why did Green Bank, West Virginia, ban wireless signals? For science.


Yes, Quidditch Is Real

How J.K. Rowling's magical sport spread from Hogwarts to college campuses


Would You Live in a Treehouse?

A treehouse can be an ideal office space, vacation rental, and way of reconnecting with your youth.

More in Entertainment

Just In