The Ruth Rendell Mysteries (1987) | How Woke Is It?

Our VerdictNot Woke

The Ruth Rendell Mysteries1987

In a free society the right to critique art is essential and protected speech. These reviews reflect personal opinions and not statements of fact.

What We Think

The Ruth Rendell Mysteries stands as a nearly untouched relic of pre-woke television, where good storytelling and traditional values take precedence. A breath of fresh (non-woke) air compared to today’s ideological landscape.

Score Breakdown

Compromised:Narrative Integrity

Not Woke

What is this?

The Ruth Rendell Mysteries puts storytelling first, focusing on complex, flawed characters rather than identity or modern ideological quotas. There is little sign of forced representation or any character elevated for diversity points. The show’s classic whodunit approach is refreshingly straightforward and concerned with plot over politics.

Compromised:Cultural Foundations

Not Woke

What is this?

This series largely reflects traditional British values, portraying family, morality, and social order in a nuanced manner. Masculinity is not undermined, and cultural or religious themes are presented respectfully, consistent with the period and setting. No deliberate revisionism is apparent.

Compromised:Ideological Monoculture

Not Woke

What is this?

While the moral lines are clear, traditional perspectives are central, and alternative worldviews are handled with nuance rather than caricature. There is little sign of agenda-driven villainization, and debate around issues arises organically through character conflict.

User Reviews

No user reviews received yet.

Please leave a review and let the world know what you think.
Your review will be kept completely anonymous.

Your Review

Comments

Users Also Viewed

Movie poster for Twelfth Night, or What You Will

Disclaimer: In a free society the right to critique art is essential and protected as a form of free speech and freedom of expression. The reviews and commentary on this site represent personal opinions and interpretations. They are not statements of fact and should not be taken as factual claims about any individual, company, or creative work.