Abstract

The long and enduring legacy of racism, specifically anti-Blackness, in the United States has seeped into virtually every facet of our lives, including entertainment. Racism, misogyny, and white supremacy have also paved the way for colorism and misogynoir. In this paper, I explore the portrayals of two of the leading Black women characters in primetime television, Olivia Pope and Annalise Keating, and how their depictions were influenced by their skin tones, socioeconomic statuses, and the beauty standards they met or did not meet. I found that Olivia Pope’s characterization and reputation was given much more dignity than Annalise Keating’s, and the three aforementioned factors all lend themselves to this disparity. Through this research, my goals are to advocate for the dismissal of Eurocentric standards in how Black women are respected and to shine a light on the inequities that still exist in the media, even media created by fellow Black people. 

Introduction

It is no secret that media representation for Black people is one fraught with racism. We can look to the dehumanizing caricatures in the cartoons of the early-to-mid twentieth century and the maids and nannies of the “Golden Age” films for clear examples. While progress has been made, albeit minor (see: Black characters being given lines and personalities of their own), there is still much left to be desired in leveling the playing field and allowing all Black people to be able to see themselves in the same way white people have since the beginning of time. Black women, specifically, have had a difficult history with representation, as they are either the aforementioned mammy archetypes, or relegated to other background roles such as the sassy coworker or supportive best friend. In the 2010s, however, we witnessed a dramatic shift in power on primetime television, with the introduction of the series Scandal (2012-2018) and How to Get Away with Murder (2014-2020), both created by screenwriter and producer Shonda Rhimes, a Black woman who is also behind hits such as Grey’s Anatomy. The two shows finally put Black women in the driver’s seat of their own vehicles. However, these two portrayals were not without flaws, one of the most notable being the differences between the depictions of the two leads: Olivia Pope and Annalise Keating.

Using two of the leading Black women characters on primetime television in the 2010s, as well as sources that explore issues of colorism, media representation, and racialized gender roles, I will answer the question: “How are the leading Black women on primetime television in the 2010s portrayed?” I hypothesize that these depictions are heavily influenced by skin color, as well as socioeconomic status, and beauty standards, with lighter skinned women being written more favorable portrayals.

Literature Review

Colorism is a direct impact of white supremacy that favors those with lighter skin. Furthermore, colorism is not isolated in skin tone, but also intersects with class status, sexual expression, and much more. In Tayler J. Mathews and Glenn S. Johnson’s “Skin Complexion in the Twenty-First Century: The Impact of Colorism on African American Women,” the authors provide a data-driven examination of colorism and its impact on Black women. According to the authors, for Black women specifically, their life chances are not only impacted by their race, but also where they fall on the shade spectrum. This skin tone favoritism also takes into account hair texture, eye color, and facial features, with those seen as closer to Eurocentrism deemed favorable. The study conducted in this piece, which used a questionnaire with both multiple-choice and short-answer questions administered to young Black women at a Historically Black college/university (HBCU), found that the women with lighter skin often felt more valued in their relationships, twice as many were in romantic relationships than their darker-skinned counterparts, and were seen as more attractive by their peers.¹ Furthermore, the study found that darker skin women seem to bear the brunt of many of the negative, racist associations put onto Black women, including notions of aggression, unintelligence, and undesirability. However, the women with darker skin overwhelmingly indicated that, if given the option to, they would not change their skin tone.

The topic of colorism is also explored in Christof Decker’s “Race Interactions: Film, Melodrama, and the Ambiguities of Colorism,” this time through the lens of media and film. The history of Black women in media (both behind and in front of the camera), specifically in film and primetime television is not only limited, but also marred with colorism and respectability politics. In his piece, Decker writes that there is a definite “skin-color bias” that has existed in media since its inception, with darker skinned Black people being the most harmed.² Although representation for Black people as a whole is limited and often unfavorable, being of darker skin, as Decker describes it, becomes a double-edged sword. While light-skinned Black people may face racism and have that reflected in their media portrayals, they are still the ones most often to be seen, especially in recent entertainment. Dark-skinned Black people, in contrast, not only experience racism, but also do not even make it to the screen as often as their counterparts. In describing the hierarchy, he uses a diamond-shaped diagram that places white people at the top, dark skinned Black people at the bottom, and light skinned Black people in the middle. Colorism complicates the idea that racism is just white versus Black, because it is a consequence of the nuances created by centuries of racism and white supremacy.

The article “Olivia Pope and Black Women in Primetime History” by Joshua K. Wright directly places Olivia Pope and Annalise Keating into this conversation. Wright provides a history of the prominence of Black women in primetime television prior to Olivia Pope’s (and, by default, Annalise Keating’s) emergence. Black women in series such as The Beulah Show and The Amos n’ Andy Show were portrayed as caretakers and problem solvers, as well as loud, angry, and overbearing.³ While there were more well-rounded characters—such as Diahann Carroll’s Julia in Julia and Clare Huxtable in The Cosby Show—these characters identities as Black women did influence their storylines. According the author, Scandal marked the emergence of a “post-racial” Black woman in primetime. Olivia Pope’s race rarely comes up in the entirety of the series and, even in the few instances it does, it is not deemed notable enough to revolve an entire storyline around. These choices elicited both praise and criticism for the series creator, Shonda Rhimes, a Black woman herself.

In “Strategically Ambiguous Shonda Rhimes: Respectability Politics of a Black Woman Showrunner,” author Ralina L. Joseph explores the “strategic ambiguity” in Rhimes’s work and how it is influenced by respectability politics. In her hit shows, including her longest running, Grey’s Anatomy, Rhimes is deliberate about portraying a specific “type” of Black woman: professional, successful, and elite. They do not interact with Black people, referred to in Joseph’s essay as “the folk,” who do not share these traits. These shows were created prior to the Black Lives Matter movement, and Shonda Rhimes seems to have operated from a “colorblind” approach; she did not directly acknowledge the unique experiences of her characters that were explicitly due to their race. Joseph describes “strategic ambiguity” as a practice that is ambiguous in the fact that it does not address social identifiers or name any oppressions, while it is strategic in the fact that it “quietly” claims a seat at the table and offers a more passive way to combat racism.⁴ This mode of operation allowed Rhimes to, after the introduction of the Black Lives Matter movement, easily transition into a position of advocacy for the cause, as she had spent years silently building her platform, without facing the repercussions of not adhering to respectability politics.

This article “Still Unmarried: Black Women and Relationship Advice Literature” Emerald L. Christopher-Byrd delves into the existing gender roles within Black communities, and how, specifically, the sustenance of the Black family and Black marriage are most aggressively thrust onto Black women. After emancipation, trends in relationships between Black men and women—including having children before marriage, cohabitating without being married, and even an increase of single adults altogether—were seen as a “reflection” of the behavior of Black women, specifically, and their values and morality were called into question. The, as many scholars of the twentieth century put it, “destruction” of the Black family was due to “unchaste” Black women.⁵ Additionally, women who chose to work were also blamed, as this, W.E.B. DuBois argued, tore marriages apart, and prevented families from being created and/or maintained. Christopher-Byrd also contextualizes this through an exploration of tropes such as the jezebel and the gendered suppression and control of Black women’s agency. Post-emancipation, Black men expected Black women to abide by respectability politics in order to subvert jezebel stereotypes surrounding sexuality and sexual expression. This worked to uphold white supremacist ideals, as the image being vied for was one of white womanhood, or “the lady.” The lady keeps a happy home and a happy husband and is sexually restrained.

Lastly, in Black Feminist Thought, Patricia Hill Collins ventures further into how Eurocentrism molded this critique of Black women who chose not to fall into these rigid roles. The stereotypes of the “mammy,” “matriarch,” and “jezebel” were deliberately established in order to control Black women.⁶ By daring to venture outside of these boxes, Black women not only harm white supremacy, but also misogyny. The latter is often misconstrued as an attack on the Black man. This chain has created an inadvertent link between white supremacy and Black masculinity, where Black women challenging one becomes an indirect challenge on the other.

 

Methods and Data

In the mid-2010s, two series seemed to dominate the primetime sphere. They were popular because of their engaging plots, consistently high stakes, and featured ensembles of fascinating characters. Furthermore, these series made history as they were both headlined by two Black woman protagonists, and came out of the production studio of a prolific Black woman showrunner. These shows were Scandal and How to Get Away with Murder (HTGAWM), starring Kerry Washington and Viola Davis, respectively, as characters Olivia Pope and Annalise Keating. While both of the settings and plots of each are different, with the former focusing on a crisis management form and the U.S. government in Washington, D.C., and the latter focusing on a group of law school students and their criminal defense attorney professor/employer in Philadelphia, there is much overlap in the positioning of both protagonists. However, there is much difference in the ways in which each are perceived and treated by their circles, as well as their written portrayals.

Olivia Pope and Annalise Keating are both deeply flawed individuals who are often burdened with the responsibility of cleaning up others’ messes, whether it’s the influential people who come into Olivia Pope & Associates or Keating’s many criminally accused clients. Scandal and HTGAWM are compelling case studies to answer the question, “How are the leading Black women on primetime television in the 2010s portrayed?”, especially considering skin color alongside socioeconomic class and beauty standards, as Olivia is a light-skin woman and Annalise is a dark-skin woman, and the two were raised under different circumstances. I will conduct a content analysis of three episodes of each show (as well as the series as a whole), including the pilots, both crossover episodes, the seventh episode of the fourth season of Scandal, and ninth episode of the third season of HTGAWM.

Findings

Both characters are introduced to the series with a great deal of lore around their personas. They are both spoken about by other characters before actually appearing on screen for the first time. For Olivia Pope, this mythology is one marked by awe. She is described as “amazing,” and those who meet her for the first time are stunned and honored to be in her presence. Even the most stoic characters are visibly moved by the mere mention of her name. Her colleagues, who have known and worked with her for years, are still impressed by her presence. For Annalise Keating, this legacy is one that triggers fear. She is described as a “ball buster,” and even plays into this reputation with an opening line of, “I don’t know what terrible things you’ve all done up to this point in your lives but clearly your karma’s out of balance to get assigned to my class.” Although both characters’ approaches are harsh, prioritizing efficiency over empathy, Pope is somehow able to be viewed as a dream, while Keating is referred to as a nightmare.

These characterizations follow both women throughout their respective series. Both characters make decisions that impact their respective circles. These decisions are, at times, extremely selfish. There is a very stark contrast, however, in the grace they are given. In Scandal, Olivia’s employees, who affectionately refer to themselves as “gladiators in suits,” are almost blindly loyal to her (up until the final season). They coin the term “over a cliff” to convey their undying faith and willingness to follow her wherever she leads. She is deified, and even saying the name “Olivia Pope” in this universe is bound to solicit awe. In contrast, in HTGAWM, Annalise is deeply resented by her legion of students, called the “Keating five” (later four). Although the show’s main conflict is catalyzed by the students’ murder of Annalise’s husband, she is often met with disdain for “ruining their lives” as she attempts to continue to cover up for their crimes. This derision does not stop them, however, from continuing to look to her for help when they dig themselves into deeper holes (no pun intended).

Pope and Keating both have unhealthy relationships with alcohol. However, this is only made a major plot for Annalise in HTGAWM, with Olivia’s wine dependency depicted as a quirk. Olivia Pope is known for loving wine, specifically red wine. In the vast majority of scenes that take place in her home, she is seen ruminating over the current episode’s conflict with a glass of wine and, sometimes, a bowl of popcorn. In fact, in season 5, episode 5, when another crisis manager opens Olivia’s fridge to find a single bottle of seltzer and a yogurt, he asks where her food is to which her colleague, Huck, quips, “You mean her wine and popcorn?” Although other characters are well aware of Olivia’s unhealthy habits, this is as far as any acknowledgement goes. There is never even a suggestion that this is a genuine problem.

Throughout HTGAWM, Annalise Keating struggles with alcoholism. These struggles, much like the other portrayals of her pain in the series, are raw and visceral. We watch her hit rock bottom multiple times, and her physical appearance will reflect her internal torture. She has to be taken care of by others, especially by her associate and partner in crime, Bonnie. This also harms her career, as she loses her teaching job and almost loses her license to practice law at all due to alcoholism. In season 3, episode 9 of HTGAWM, Annalise relapses once she learns she is under investigation by the District Attorney’s office. She is shown stumbling around in her drunken state without regard to her image. This points to a larger trend in the differences in how the two women are shown in pain, as later in the same episode Annalise finds out that one of her students has died. When she realizes what happens, she is inconsolably upset and hysterically crying with tears and snot running down her face. In instances in which Olivia is in great pain, she will usually sit stoically or, at most, bare her teeth in disgust. However, she is never seen as uncontrollably upset, even in the most dire situations, and always maintains a level of composure.

In the two-part crossover episode, happening in the seventh and fifth seasons of Scandal and HTGAWM, respectively, Pope and Keating meet for the first time and even engage in verbal sparring. In the argument, Keating directly addresses the differing skin tones of the two, with the suggestion that people, including Pope, cast judgment on her due to her dark skin and curvy figure, and that she is not afforded the same opportunities due to her appearance. Furthermore, Keating brings up the differences in class status between the two, referring to Pope as “siddity” and “bougie” and looking down on Keating for not being born “with a silver spoon in her mouth.” While Annalise opens the door to an important and valid point about colorism, the writers choose to allow Olivia the upper-hand, as she rebuts that people dislike Annalise not because of her skin or shape, but because she is a “bully.” To make matters worse, Olivia closes the argument with classist jabs about Annalise supposedly taking her “broke ass” on the Megabus, a discount travel service, and offering to pay for their hair services with her “no-limit platinum card,” leaving Annalise speechless.

Discussion

While Scandal and How to Get Away with Murder are two different series, the general themes are similar enough (and given that they were created and produced by the same people) to open up a larger conversation about why two characters, who often have overlapping intentions and motivations, are treated and portrayed so differently from each other. Olivia Pope was treated with much more grace and dignity than Annalise Keating. This disparity can be attributed to the fact that, although also Black, Pope embodies more “acceptable” standards, including skin tone and class privilege.

Olivia’s attractiveness is a recurring topic in Scandal, with an infamous monologue comparing her to Helen of Troy (“The face that launched a thousand ships”). It is strongly implied that her beauty holds as much power as her wit, as she is able to influence the President of the United States through their love affair. Annalise, although having numerous partners throughout the show, was rarely loved “out loud.” She and her former husband had a contentious relationship that started as adultery and ended in his murder, which was indirectly caused by his reoccurring infidelities. Her two main love interests in the series, Nate Lahey and Eve Rothlo, have complicated relationships with her, as Nate and Annalise have an affair as his wife is dying of cancer, and Eve and Annalise have to hide their relationship as Annalise is a closeted bisexual woman. This finding correlates with the study conducted by Mathews and Johnson, as the lighter skinned woman in this example is valued more in her relationships than the darker skinned woman.

Olivia grew up wealthy, and her family’s class privilege and this social mobility allowed for Olivia’s father to send her to various boarding schools for the majority of her childhood. This distance, coupled with two parents who prioritized their own ambitions for power above all else, lent itself to a detached family structure. Annalise, on the other hand, grew up with little money and lived with a large family. However, once she leaves home, changes her name, and finds success as a criminal defense attorney, her family ties are strained. These depictions suggest that Black women cannot be both powerful/wealthy and have healthy family structures. As expressed in Christopher-Byrd’s piece, Black women who are successful and wealthy are seen as making a deliberate choice between professional success and a family, and they cannot have it both ways.

Both Pope’s and Keating’s portrayals can be seen as playing into the mammy and jezebel stereotypes explained by Christopher-Byrd and Collins. Both women are the saviors of their respective universes, and are expected to show up at the drop of a dime to clean up messes, no matter how big or small, that they did not create. They can also be deemed hypersexual or sexually irresponsible, as they both engage in adulterous affairs and have multiple partners at once in certain points in each series.

Conclusion

It is inarguable that Scandal and How to Get Away with Murder were two series that made history and continue to break barriers. Shonda Rhimes, as a show-runner and producer, is also doing this on an individual level, and has revolutionized the entertainment industry. However, it is possible and, in my opinion, very necessary to acknowledge the value of both shows while also remaining critical of any harm they may be perpetuating. Media representation is not enough; having Black characters on screen, even if in leading roles, is not the only steps needed to be taken in order to combat centuries of racism in film and television. While it is not Shonda Rhimes’s, nor any other Black person’s, job to rectify societal ills, when these are the few mainstream depictions available to us, we must be aware of any potential harm being done to members of the groups being portrayed. Black women of ALL skin tones deserve to have thoughtful and balanced portrayals.

1. Taylor J Mathews and Glenn S. Johnson, “Skin Complexion in the Twenty-First Century: The Impact of Colorism on African American Women,” Race, Gender & Class, vol. 22, no. 1-2 (2015): 248–274.
2. Christof Decker, “Race Interactions: Film, Melodrama, and the Ambiguities of Colorism,” Melodrama After the Tears: New Perspectives on the Politics of Victimhood, edited by Scott Loren and Jörg Metelmann, (Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, 2016), 107–126.
3. Joshua K. Wright, “Scandalous: Olivia Pope and Black Women in Primetime History,” Black Women and Popular Culture: The Conversation Continues (Lexington Books, 2014).
4. Ralina Joseph,. “Strategically Ambiguous Shonda Rhimes: Respectability Politics of a Black Woman Showrunner.” Souls, vol. 18, no. 2-4 (2016): 302-320.
5. Emerald Christopher-Byrd, “Still Unmarried: Black Women and Relationship Advice Literature,” Women, Gender, and Families of Color, vol. 7, no. 2 (2019): 182–201.
6. Patricia Hill Collins, “Mammies, Matriarchs, and Other Controlling Images,” Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment (Routledge, 2000), 76-106.