If you watch political series you will find a similar dynamic among couples linked to Power (apart from the participation of Michael Kelly in at least two of them). Of course, human relationships are a reflection of the circumstances around them and perhaps a little more so in Lioness, The Diplomat, House of Cards, or even The Girls on the Bus, to name the most recent. In worlds where marriage can be an arena of power or a refuge of selfless love, these stories show us to what extent intimacy can be influenced by personal ambitions and sacrifices, or, a detailed plan.

These “contemporary” couples illustrate marriage as an alliance of strategies and power, where trust is often overshadowed by the need to conquer or manipulate. By comparing these relationships, we can reflect on the impact of power and idealism on the way we relate – whether through love or ambition. After all, these are couples who share complex and politically charged relationships, with tensions that mix intimacy and power.

Lioness: Do the CIA and lobbyists work ‘together’?

In Lioness, in addition to the somber voice of Nicole Kidman as Kaitlyn Meade, the senior CIA supervisor, we have an underused Martin Donovan as her husband, Errol Meade. Errol is a high-ranking financial investor, who helps her with economic advice and market perspectives for the operations led by the ‘lionesses’.

The reunion of Nicole and Martin, who worked together in Portrait of a Lady, in 1996, has chemistry and credibility that made me regret that they were practically wasted in the first season, but now they are more on the scene.

If 28 years ago, like Isabel Archer and Ralph Touchett, the platonically involved cousins ​​in Henry James‘ classic were young and idealistic, nothing could be further from that in Lioness. Kaitlyn and Errol’s relationship reflects the weight of the dangerous missions and secrets that accompany her life in the CIA in a practical but strange way.

We see that they deal with ethical conflicts and divided loyalties, where the work, often dark and morally ambiguous, directly affects the couple’s trust, but they deal with it calmly. What we see is more of a partnership than a carnal union, with the explanation (finally!) given in the 3rd episode: after prostate cancer, the relationship between the two is no longer physical, but still one of love.

Kaitlyn and Errol are a more coherent and effective mirror of what we see in The Diplomat and healthier than what was presented in House of Cards, 11 years ago. However, it suggests to us that at least in Washington DC, love marriages are fictitious.

Thus, the relationship between Nicole Kidman and Martin Donovan‘s characters in Lioness is marked by the fine line between duty and affection. Kaitlyn is emotionally distant and her marriage to Errol carries the weight of a job that forces her to choose between family loyalties and the demands of the CIA.

The dynamic between them seems to reflect a marriage worn down by the demands of the Secret Service, where it is not easy to share details of one’s life. Trust is weakened not by explicit lies, but by what is not said, by omission. The relationship is marked by a type of love that resists adversity but also suffers from a lack of transparency. This dynamic is inspired by real-life couples who work in highly confidential and risky sectors, where the tension between personal and professional lives can be overwhelming.

The Diplomat: Personal Crises Influence American Foreign Policy

The Diplomat premiered to good reviews in 2023, returned with a better season in 2024 and now we can start thinking about the next phase, in 2025. In it, we see the unstable career diplomat, very young and idealistic Kate Wyler (Keri Russell) married to the prominent diplomat, Hal Wyler (Rufus Sewell), currently retired and helping her behind the scenes.

Kate and Hal as a couple are everything that diplomats are not and their toxic relationship is a clear obstacle to the position they occupy. But The Diplomat explores precisely the tension between political and personal commitments and diplomacy involves them in power games that challenge their individual and marital values. Inspired by dynamics in marriages of diplomats and politicians, the relationship between the two shows how the profession can redefine support and ambition between spouses.

Kate and Hal’s lives are deeply entangled in international politics, with her in one of the most tense positions on the global stage—being groomed for vice president—while he serves as an advisor. What gets in the way of Hal’s having his own ambitions and strategies before anything else, and what keeps Kate from shining is her arrogance. Their relationship is full of friction and rivalry, as each has a particular vision of what is important for his career and his marriage.

They seem more like strategic partners than a traditional romantic couple. This marriage lives in a kind of limbo, with constant adjustments of power between the two. Russell’s character sometimes faces dilemmas about how much she can trust her husband, while Sewell, in turn, sees her wife’s success as an opportunity to exercise her own power. Couples like these exist in diplomacy, where there is a balance between mutual support and hidden competition, especially when both have aspirations or careers in the public sector. They are very close to Claire and Francis Underwood (Robin Wright and Kevin Spacey), from House of Cards. And the upcoming third season will make the comparisons even clearer!

A partnership that worked to a certain extent

When the remake of House of Cards arrived on Netflix in 2013, everything in its narrative made sense and it was a huge success. Until #metoo and Kevin Spacey‘s personal problems changed the course of the story, which ended without the impact of its premiere.

Robin Wright and Kevin Spacey shined as Claire and Francis Underwood, the couple who represent a pure political partnership, where marriage is an extension of their power strategy. They are more allies than lovers, committed to strengthening their positions in government. This couple is strongly inspired by real political partnerships, where spouses form long-term strategic alliances to gain and maintain power.

Embodying a couple completely dedicated to the pursuit of power, leaving traditional love in the background, the relationship between Claire and Frank Underwood is a cold and calculating partnership, where each knows the value of the other within a larger plan. They share secrets and fulfill specific roles within their conjugal “political machine”. Their commitment is more an alliance of interests than a love story, and this makes them inseparable, although without apparent affection.

The inspiration for their dynamic comes from real couples who, in political history, used marriage as an asset in campaigns or power projects. Couples like the Clintons, for example, often evoke a public image of a solid, pragmatic partnership, in which both have a clearly defined role and respect the other’s power and position. In House of Cards, this pragmatism is taken to the extreme, becoming almost an implacable pact of power above all else. And as in fiction, it worked until it didn’t.

And what do the series want to suggest to us?

There is always a problem with Hollywood narratives: they are repetitive and unimaginative. And, somewhat (still) misogynistic. As a reflection of what they believe to be the only alternative for a woman in a position of power, marriages seem more like a constant ring of ideological and selfish fights, toxic relationships based on a dense partnership, without sex (or some, occasionally), but – never – an emotional, healthy and aligned union.

Of course, there needs to be drama, but the lack of creativity makes us find the same characters in different productions and this is tiring. In all of these cases, the relationships move away from traditional romanticism and explore a cold and pragmatic interdependence. In all three, marriage becomes almost an institution in itself, essential to sustain ambitions and endure the isolation that comes with intense political and government careers. Is this really the case? Or rather, even if it is a “realistic” reflection, does ALL fiction need to be like this?

Hollywood seems to believe so, because each series, in its own way, shows the impact of political and high-risk life on marriage, and, in all of them, the characters are willing to compromise personal aspects to serve a greater purpose, and this makes their relationships intensely fascinating and, at the same time, cold and calculated. It is the portrait of what they seem to see as a “professional marriage”.

It seems to me, although it is too early to judge, that Lioness is subtly changing this premise with the intimate conversation between Kaitlyn and Errol wondering if they wasted time when they had a healthy and sexual marriage before agreeing to remain in the current situation, where they are more partners than friends or lovers.

If personal and professional aspirations are deeply and sometimes darkly intertwined, to the point that the marital bond ceases to be an emotional refuge and becomes a strategic alliance, it is easy to expect constant threats to stay on top. Thus, these series not only explore the human side of power relations but also remind us that, in certain circumstances, a truly happy marriage does not produce good drama. These couples, albeit in different ways, represent the resilience and fragility of relationships that sustain, but also consume, those who build them.

Pesquisar

Pesquisar