Pluribus Is About Everything

by

Be warned: this review reveals details from the first two episodes of Pluribus. The show is full of surprises, but even if you learn some of them beforehand, it’s still a fascinating and worthwhile watch.

Pluribus blends elements of zombie, alien invasion, and post-apocalyptic stories, but ultimately feels fresh and original. The story begins after a virus from space kills hundreds of millions, and those who survive are linked by ‘the Joining’ – a telepathic connection that erases their individual selves, creating a single, collective consciousness. Only thirteen people remain as individuals, and in the second episode, the tough and realistic Carol Sturka seeks them out, hoping they can work together to save humanity. She tries to inspire them with a speech about fixing the world, but Diabaté, one of the other survivors, simply asks, “Why?”

The situation is dire. In just days, everything that has always defined what it means to be human has vanished, and if Carol and her allies fail, humanity will be extinguished. While it’s obvious that the apocalypse is terrible, Diabaté’s question highlights what makes Pluribus different from typical zombie stories and other ambitious science fiction shows: its main character struggles to believe that this new, post-apocalyptic world might actually be… acceptable.

Diabaté questions why anyone would reject the world created after the Joining, as it seems to be the peaceful future humanity has always dreamed of. After the Joining, all conflict ceases, and everyone is united in a shared, peaceful purpose. In the second episode, Carol learns from Zosia, a member of the hive mind, that the Joined prefer a vegetarian lifestyle and are incapable of intentionally harming any living creature. They thrive on happiness, and even Carol’s outburst of anger causes a temporary disruption to the entire global hive mind. They are dedicated to conservation, having released all animals from zoos, and they actively try to help Carol by offering her comfort and care. Remarkably, their first act as the new global leaders is to clean up the aftermath of their takeover – repairing damage, collecting the deceased, and tending to the injured. Given this seemingly perfect, equal, and peaceful world, why is Carol so desperate to undo it, especially considering how unhappy her life was before the Joining?

Diabaté’s question about the hive-mind opens up many ways to understand the story. It’s not that people have lost their individual thoughts – there isn’t one person controlling everyone. Instead, the collective body is made up of the experiences of all those who are connected. This raises the question: is losing individual identity truly a bad thing? And if it is, what exactly is lost? Is individuality worth the pain and conflict it often creates?

Like many stories about zombies, Carol’s biggest fear isn’t death, but losing herself – her personality, her choices, everything that makes her her. She worries about becoming something she can’t control. There’s a similarity to vampire stories too. Vampires, in books like Dracula and Interview With the Vampire, and even Twilight, are often depicted as lonely outsiders, cut off from normal life. Their endless life comes at the cost of happiness. This resonates with Carol, who struggled with unhappiness even before the world fell apart, and she doubts anyone else can truly find joy now. She sees the other survivors—like Diabaté, who distracts himself with pleasure, and Lakshmi, who avoids grieving her son—as simply delaying the inevitable, not actually finding lasting happiness.

One popular way to understand the show Pluribus is as a story about artificial intelligence and the danger of creating an AI that simply tells people what they already want to hear. This AI would be built by combining all existing creative work into one agreeable, but ultimately unoriginal, voice. From this perspective, Pluribus explores the loss of meaning in creativity and a future where ideas are endlessly repeated to a society that no longer appreciates anything new. The show asks: what’s the value of AI-generated art if it’s only consumed by other AI? And can something truly be called “intelligent” if it doesn’t generate original ideas, but just remixes everything that’s come before?

The concept of Pluribus can also represent grief or depression, particularly the feeling that others experience happiness easily while Carol cannot. The collective’s joy feels unjust – they can dismiss the harm they’ve caused and move on, but Carol is unable to ignore it. She desperately wants the collective to recognize her pain, and when she expresses her anger, it overwhelms them, briefly causing the entire world to fall apart. This raises a profound question beyond a simple metaphor: is happiness, in itself, a good thing?

The first episode of Pluribus stumbles a bit when exploring its themes. Before the central event, Carol wrote a hugely popular fantasy series that, while bringing joy to many, she actually disliked. Despite being a popular story itself, Pluribus portrays the fans of Carol’s books through her judgmental eyes. Their enjoyment feels shallow to her, as she views her work as simple and unfulfilling. These devoted readers foreshadow the Joining, appearing as a faceless crowd that Carol resents for finding pleasure in what she considers a silly series.

The initial approach is disappointing because it unfairly simplifies the complex and thought-provoking ideas within Pluribus. It portrays happiness as a shallow distraction. Carol, as the storyteller, isn’t reliable; she views everything through the lens of her own unhappiness. She dismisses those who enjoy her books as foolish, since she herself isn’t satisfied with them and offers simplistic answers to fans. However, within Pluribus, Carol encounters people like Diabaté and Zosia who challenge her beliefs, directly asking, “Why? Are you sure?” These individuals, from diverse backgrounds, question Carol’s strong focus on individualism and gently point out the limitations of her American perspective. They ask important questions, like whether individual freedom is more important than collective peace. Carol, however, refuses to truly consider these questions, because questioning her beliefs would fundamentally change her understanding of herself.

From the very beginning of Pluribus, I was struck by how the show didn’t pick a side. It really resonated with me that it understood Carol’s fight against this overwhelming pressure to just be like everyone else. But it didn’t just blindly support her; it also made me think about things from different angles, questioning what truly makes us free, happy, and how we can build a good community. Honestly, whether you see the show as being about dealing with loss, the dangers of AI, or even the way America focuses on the individual, it all comes down to this core idea: we’re all trapped inside our own heads, and yet, somehow, we’re surrounded by others who feel just as alone. It’s a surprisingly hopeful thought, really.

Read More

2025-11-14 19:57