The Real Reason Why The Line Of Duty Ending Was Actually Brilliant

Spoilers

At around 10.01pm on Sunday night – as soon as the Line of Duty finale of season six wrapped on BBC - social media erupted with anger at the ending. Buckells? Really? ‘Was that it!!?’ many on my timeline wrote. ‘Anticlimax or what!’ said others. On the whole, the country seemed to be hugely disappointed that H, or ‘the fourth man’, wasn’t some evil genius but a ‘blundering fool’ right under AC-12’s noses the entire time.

Yeah OK, maybe the episode lacked the drama we’ve had in previous episodes and parts of that ending were cringe – oof that pub scene, 'mate'. But it was only anti-climactic if we expected a mastermind criminal to be revealed and all to be solved.

Instead, Line of Duty creator Jed Mercurio made a much more profound point about how corruption doesn’t work in that way. They sussed Buckells out, but institutional failings in the police were still largely dismissed. The whole point of Chief Constable Osborne and DSI Patricia Carmichael’s characters (played by Anna Maxwell Martin) was to say ‘This is not institutional. It’s just a few bad apples.’ Sound familiar?

Gaslighting feels like it’s become part of the whole process of government and policing in this country. Remember the Government’s recent race report, where they found no evidence of institutional racism? We’re used to higher powers whitewashing the idea that problems like racism are structural or institutionalised.

Then there was the police inspectorate’s verdict of the Met’s manhandling of mourners at the vigil for Sarah Everard in March. A reportstrongly defended police's use of force and instead denounced politicians who criticised the force - demonstrating how dismissive attitudes can be around behaviour that to many is unacceptable.

In Line of Duty, Ted Hastings’ speech about accountability, transparency and how the search for truth has kept him going can certainly be interpreted politically. Transparency and accountability are two words used a lot recently in relation to the Government’s cronyism and lies.

And as for a bumbling man in charge, widely thought to be incompetent who repeatedly falls upwards, constantly promoted. Let’s just say a number of people on social media have pointed out parallels between Buckells and our Prime Minister.

To some, the idea that Buckells is H felt disappointing, but it’s genius. Why is Buckells repeatedly promoted? Because Mercurio is making a point about how we live in a world where the system allows that to happen. Because there aren’t checks, balances and exposure of the way corruption works. Because we’re not allowed to say a problem is institionalised. It will only be dismissed. Hastings is going to be pensioned off because he’s constantly digging for the truth in a force that wants to deny institutionlised corruption - he’s a threat.

The importance of this ending is that Mercurio seems to be saying you can’t blame corruption on a few bad apples. It goes much deeper than that. It’s not a happy ending, but it’s smarter (and more realistic) than any high-drama action scene. If you can blame corruption on particular individuals, it suggests once you catch them, that’s it. You’ve solved the problem.

Generally on TV we want to see good and evil figures wrapped up and a storyline neatly resolved. We want to see demon-like figures who represent evil put away, the heroes celebrating and all loose ends tied up. But Mercurio won’t settle for those simplistic stereotypes of evil and corruption. Just in the way Michaela Coel didn’t neatly wrap up the end of I May Destroy You, but instead offered multiple potential endings, because the scars left behind after sexual assault are complicated and blurry and Coel’s character’s trauma can’t be contained in a box.

Sometimes there isn’t an easy, satisfying ending, because the awful things in life are far more complex than that. If you deal with it in a simplistic way, you’re not dealing with the nuances. These kind of endings are far more interesting because they leave open a lot of important questions.

This ending challenges the idea of the mastermind criminal and shows corruption as something that’s much more mundane. Like Coel, Mercurio embraced complexity with this finale and it's paid off. It might not have left you cheering at your TV screen as the credits rolled - but it could well have caused a few who sit in high offices to shift uncomfortably on their sofas. And that’s another sign of really great TV.

Read more: All The Best Line Of Duty Season 6 Memes Now It's All Over