Let’s Stop Romanticising Predatory Behaviour — Why “It’s Okay to Not Be Okay” was Bad — K-drama Analysis
It’s Okay to Not Be Okay (literal title: Psycho but It’s Okay) came to our screens in June 2020 to tell the tale of two people; Ko Moon-young and Moon Gang-Tae and their relationships with each other and the people around them.
At first glance, there was something intriguing about this show. It portrayed itself to explore the issues of mental health, disabilities, and those who have faced difficult situations in their life; hence the title of this show. Followed with the show's ‘fairy-tale’ narration approach and cinematography, this show has some interesting (to be polite) ways of representing trauma and relationships.
I’ll be discussing this in two sections; 1) narrative, 2) representations.
Narrative
Structure
As explained above, the show originally takes a “fairy-tale” narrative approach and in the first three episodes of the show, we can see how the ‘fairy-tale’ element heavily influenced the overall aesthetic of the show, and we are presented with these elaborate editing sequences. The reasoning for this is to be parallel with Moon-young’s profession as a children’s book writer. She writes fairy-tales, while also living within her own, with the show's narration being about the world she is living in.
However, the element of the storytelling lacked so much consistency. The “fairy-tale” aesthetic completely disappears in a large chunk of the show, it did not feel intentional or like it was trying to fit in with the unpredictability of its characters.
It just felt as though the editor got bored or forgot it was simply an important narrative structure of the show, as it randomly makes another appearance near the end of the show. It was quite unexpected. With editing decisions like these, you either do it or you don’t. Don’t do dribs and drabs of it when you feel like it, as the overall presentation of the show looks sloppy and unorganised.
At times it felt as though the show was trying to aestheticize mental health issues, I couldn’t count on my finger the number of times the characters cried in this show. To the point it was melodramatic, and I felt no connection to the characters because all they did was cry. These characters faced real issues, Gang-tae was the sole provider for his autistic brother Sang-tae, Moon-young has deep-rooted family issues with her parents; however, I felt so detached from these characters.
There are only so many times crying can be used to evoke emotion in the plot without it becoming overbearing. Instead of showing me these characters just crying — show me how they get through this trauma. Moon-young and Gang-tae just seemed to cry and be happy, and then the cycle continues without explanation.
‘Fake’ Family Dynamics
The show was constantly trying to push a ‘family dynamic’ with Gang-tae, Sang-tae and Moon-yeong, and how they help each other to find their own way and let go of their past. However, I rarely saw moments that they actually help each other overcome anything. With over 16 hours of storytelling, I can’t think of many examples where the characters help each other overcome any obstacles.
- Sang-tae battling his fear of butterflies.
- Gang-tae learning to let go of his responsibility towards his brother.
and Moon-yeong… She basically stays the same.
Not a single plotline was enticing. For example, coming up to the end of the show. It is revealed that Moon-yeong’s mother is the head nurse at the OK hospital, the audience is left on a cliffhanger. Her mother drugs Sang-tae, attempts to capture Moon-yeong, and then — she’s arrested, and that plotline was over. I found that there were many anti-climactic moments in the show to the point where the viewer may think to themselves, “so what was the point?”.
I am going to finalise the narrative here by saying, Moon-yeong and Gang-tae had no chemistry, at all. I was rarely a witness to be a moment where I felt as though these two made a good couple. If anything it felt like they secretly hated each other.
Yes, these characters are very flawed, that is the point. However, I was unsure whether or not that is why they are together or if they are genuinely good for each other.
But this is what I’ll be discussing in the next section.
Bad Character Representation and Toxic Behaviour
The Problem with Moon-yeong
Moon-yeong reminds me of a classic femme fatale, she has a strong demeanor, an extravagant style, and most importantly her decisions and actions are most likely done for the benefit of herself.
All these attributes are associated with the classic femme fatale and while aesthetically this may seem like a somewhat “empowering” way to look at women, as these women take back their autonomy, they openly talk about sex while looking amazing. However, a femme fatale can be classes as a loose sense of powerful femininity (Katherine Farrimond-The Contemporary Femme Fatale: Gender, Genre and American Cinema)
“a seductive woman who lures men into dangerous or compromising situations
a woman who attracts men by an aura of charm and mystery (merriam-webster)”
A femme fatale is framed as an overtly sexual woman, who manipulates “innocent” men with their sexuality to get what they want. This is damaging as it portrays women who are comfortable with their sexuality as villains, who the male character must break free from and go back into the arms of a more “pure” innocent woman.
The character concept fits Moon-yeong, not in every sense as she still gets the guy but definitely in more ways than one.
The show constantly romanticises Moon-yeong’s toxic and predatory behaviour towards Gang-tae and Sang-tae, with the use of eerie and attractive cinematography, or it is being played off as a joke. For example, she convinces Sang-tae to sign a contract of his autonomy to her, knowing he has learning difficulties, where he couldn’t stay anywhere else but her house. She did this knowing Gang-tae would also have to move in as Sang-tae relies on Gang-tae being a full-time care giver.
She also sexually harrassed Gang-tae many times, in his workplace, she shouted in front of patients and colleagues asking why he would not have sex with her, she gets too close to him when they talk, she is impulsive and puts herself in danger in the hopes of Gang-tae following her.
Yet somehow, she helped Gang-tae gain his independence and be happy in the end…right?
There is no problem discussing toxic and predatory behaviour in a show, the problem is to romanticise the relationship that is toxic. I do not think the writers were trying to prove a point and highlight the toxicity that can exist in relationships. We were really being pushed the message that these two characters belonged with each other for the better, and not the worst.
It is also a bit frustrating that the only women in the show who were successful in their careers were the most toxic ones, again, I have no problem in portraying toxic characters regardless of gender. Not every woman needs to be a “girl boss”- it’s just when comparing them with the more “conventional” women in the show, the loving mother (Soon-duk), and the caring nurse (Joo-ri). It’s a bit cliche that the successful writer who is a “sexually liberated” woman is the predatory one, as this is the trope we’ve seen in film and television for years. For example, the “bunny boiler” from Fatal Attraction was a strong-headed business-woman, who needed the man, therefore must destroy everything around him.
This links back to the classic femme fatale, femme fatales needed to be toxic to men, and lure them with their sexuality. They are ultimately demonised characters and yes, Moon-yeong gets the guy.
However, it’s extremely disappointing to see the same tropes over and over again because a woman is successful, or sexual.
Either way, predatory behavior is terrible and anyone who displays it must face consequences. Moon-yung never experiences consequences for her predatory actions nor learns anything. It’s a shame because I wanted to like this show, but the toxic messages disguised in a pretty aesthetic were not working for me.
