Netflix dropped the third season of 3%, their post apocalyptic thriller right when I needed a diversion from my latest depressive episode. While I was let down by the second season, this latest one delivered rich, multilayered characterisations and asked questions on revolutions and how to survive them.
Take Michele, who I must confess, is not my favourite. She chose to create an enclave on the innland as a solution to the exclusionary haven that is the offshore. In so doing, she thought she could fight against the status quo only to see her solution become another tool in the arsenal of exclusion.
Joana, my favourite, is fully militant and focused on reducing the offshore to the same conditions as the innland through military action. As gifted as she is, however, she is limited by her dogged stubbornness on only one course of action and haunted by her traumas.
I was unsure about Elisa in the beginning but in the end, she became a fave when she chose to stay innland so that she could be what she was, a healer. She, to me, defines the ones who just want to save the world and are therefore hurt by the cruelty of what could be a personal paradise. Her characterisation and motivations showcase strength even in her indecision and this, is a solace in a world that pushes for decisiveness over a patient examination of alternatives with varying consequences.
So long as there exists a paradise for the privileged, there must be blood underneath. That is the defining meaning of the 3%. This system strips the humanity from both the oppressor and the oppressed. While the question remains as to what happens to the world if the offshore is no more, it is evident that there is no winning by upholding the status quo either by establishing conclaves in the innland or peaceful transition. It is perfectly summed up by Michele: ” That is the flaw of the process. That we have to choose and we are human”.
myrandomramblings808 