A recent episode of Law and Order SVU poses the question: “Is disagreement really disobedience?”
BY: JACOB POLITTE
Online Editor
Any deep-dive into The Montage archives will prove to our more recent readers that I’m a huge “Law and Order: SVU” fan (copaganda notwithstanding). I even wrote recaps of SVU episodes for two seasons before the pandemic happened.
I don’t write weekly reviews anymore, but I still do watch the show when it airs every Thursday night. The recent finale cliffhanger scene in the episode “Showdown” provoked quite a reaction out of me.
In the scene, Captain Olivia Benson has an intense (for this show) discussion with her direct superior, Chief Kathryn Tynan. Tynan, embarrassed by the unit’s failure to help secure a conviction, sulks into the squadroom which leads directly to a confrontation where she confronts Benson for improperly doing her job and “not understanding her role as a captain.”
On the show so far this season, Tynan has been portrayed as a quasi-villain of sorts. Almost every scene she’s in has an air of discomfort. She, more than any other chief in the history of the show, has truly ruffled Benson’s feathers in ways both big and small, and has made it clear that she sees Benson in a different role than the one she’s held for the last 12 years, and in a different place than she’s worked for the last 27 years.
Benson, however, sees things differently, almost to a fault. She doesn’t want to change her environment. She’s happy where she is and happy doing things her own way. Benson does not believe she’s doing her job improperly, and openly tells Tynan such with her entire being. She plays the “I’ve been here for a long time” card, citing her experience to defend her style of leadership and her priorities.
It pains me to say it, but while I agree with Benson’s attitude, Tynan is objectively ethically correct in her assessment (though since this is SVU, it’s not a spoiler to say Benson’s going to come out on top in the conflict currently between the two). For far too long, Captain Olivia Benson has acted like the detective she was at the start of the show long after the promotions that ascended her up the corporate ladder should have rendered that impossible.
Part of this nonsensical behavior is simply due to television logistics; Mariska Hargitay is the highest paid actress on the show and thus she should be featured the most out of anyone. There’s nothing interesting about her sitting behind a desk delegating if you’re going to pay her ungodly amounts of money.
But let’s stop thinking practically for a second and pivot to the real topic here. This fictional dilemma also broached an interesting question for me personally: when is the right time to push back against a boss who doesn’t understand your work ethic? Especially when that method has a proven track record of success?
It’ll probably hurt any future job opportunities I pursue to say this, but I’ve had moments similar to this fictionalized one where I have had the same mentality as Benson. And in this day and age, that’s not a hard thing to feel. As a viewer, it was a bit triggering to hear Tynan’s dismissive tone and hear her attempt to flex her authority seemingly to spite her opposition. It’s my personal opinion that some people in management positions are examples of the “peter principle” and have no real place being in the positions that they’re in.
To be quite honest, it’s probably a common opinion amongst many in the workforces across the spectrum that, more often than not, a micromanaging boss is more of a nuisance than an asset, regardless of if that boss is skilled or not. Tynan is an example of a competent micromanager, but she too really has no idea the depth of the pool that she waded into.
Benson was out of line. But Benson, at the same time, was also justified completely in standing up for herself. I’m sure it’s different as a cop. But even there, a chief or authority figure can act out of line too. They’re not automatically in the right because of their rank, and they’re not immune from consequences because of it. Or at least they’re not supposed to be.
In the real world, though, at what point is it appropriate to vocalize that? And for what reasons? In the first half of SVU’s season 27, Benson seemed to be biting her tongue for a good long while, and even as she went off on her boss, it was clear she was taking responsibility for her team. Is a harsh verbal retort and/or defense justified if it’s for the right reasons?
Before, I would have said no. But now? Having been in Benson’s shoes? I’m not so sure. Those in power can act out of line too, and I’m not sure that their job title should shield them from criticism or even a reprimand from those of a lower rank. Perhaps there should always be a compromise of sorts, a balance between what works and what needs to happen, because again, those things are often not mutually exclusive.
