Squid Game — not just a localized phenomenon

Squid Game, a Korean TV show that launched on Netflix on September 17, 2021, has taken the world by storm. Squid Game revolves around the protagonist, Gi-hun, a gambling addict with a piling amount of debt to loan sharks. In addition, as a result of being divorced, Gi-Hun is portrayed as an incompetent father who will soon lose custody of his daughter if he is deemed financially stable by the government. While waiting for the subway, a man in a suit offers Gi-Hun money if he plays and wins a game of ddakji, and for every loss, Gi-Hun has to get slapped in the face. After getting slapped multiple times, Gi-Hun is eventually victorious and wins a decent sum of cash. The man in the suit tells Gi-Hun that much more can be won if he plays more games. Already at rock bottom, Gi-Hun obtains a cryptic invitation to the games and decides to participate. He, along with 455 other contestants, are all struggling financially in their own ways with debts that are monstrous in proportion. The sum of money to be given to the winner of the game is approximately 40 million USD. Unfortunately for these contestants, unlike the game of ddakji, the punishment for failing is not a simple slap — but death.

Squid Game comes at a time when many young South Koreans face the perils that many of the fictional characters of Squid Game face. After the coronavirus began to take hold of the world, the financial situation in South Korea has only gotten worse. According to a study, “the [coronavirus] crisis has benefited sectors producing goods and employing higher-skilled workers and harmed sectors providing services and employing lower-skilled workers. This risks perpetuating disparities that existed in Korea before the pandemic” (Thorbecke, 1). As a result, many of the most financially unstable citizens have disproportionately been harmed by the pandemic. Much like how the characters participate in Squid Game to try to pay off their mounting debts, those at the bottom of the ladder have started to resort to desperate measures.

Much like how South Korea has found it hard to control the inequality as a result of the coronavirus crisis, much of the world has also been reeling from the pandemic in similar ways. Those in service-oriented industries have had a hard time finding work while more skilled laborers have simply transitioned to working from home. Therefore, Squid Game comes at a time when issues of inequality, trying to pay back one’s debt, and trying to climb out of financial trouble have been more relevant than ever. As such, while other films about capitalism might have addressed similar issues about social class and capitalism, they did not arrive at a time when inequality and debt are issues that are fresh in people’s minds.

After Squid Game’s launch globally, it became an instant sensation. According to Netflix’s third-quarter letter to shareholders, Squid Game was watched by over 142 million households globally in its four first weeks of release and has been the #1 program in 94 countries, including the US (Netflix). In addition, TV rating firm Nielsen reported that Squid Game, in its second week after its debut, garnered over 3.26 billion minutes of watch time in the US, becoming only one of six TV shows to achieve this feat (Nielsen). With the massive popularity of Squid Game, it begs the question — what is the primary factor driving Squid Game’s popularity in the United States in particular? While some may believe that Squid Game became a sensation in the United States because of its high production value and its particular ability to be the subject of memes, I argue that Squid Game has translated to viewers in the United States because the show depicts and critiques the widely held cultural notion of the American Dream.

While Squid Game has been massively popular in America, some mistakenly believe that Squid Game succeeded primarily because of its unique battle royale element. However, Squid Game is only a long line in a precedent of well-produced shows that have battle-royale elements. Shows like The Platform, a Spanish horror film where prisoners are kept in a vertical tower who must fight for survival, share many similar elements to Squid Game’s brawl for cash. Other films like The Hunger Games, Battle Royale, As the Gods Will, and Alice in Borderland all incorporate battle royale elements (The Spinoff). It follows that Squid Game’s battle royale element was not the key to its success because if it were, many of the previous shows and movies mentioned would have topped popularity charts.

Others may argue that Squid Game succeeded because it was a foreign show that was a breath of fresh air to many domestic viewers. While this may be true for a certain amount of US viewers, the argument, which has been proposed by news outlets such as NBC, crucially overestimates the popularity of the show being tied to its country of origin. In fact, Korean shows have actually been found to have less success than domestic shows. According to a study, “ K-drama [exhibits] similar limitations, mainly due to distinctively developed cultural codes and norms between American and Asian societies. This suggests that some areas need to be addressed or overcome for hallyu to expand and deepen its reach in America. For example, K-drama can develop storylines that can appeal to a wider range of audiences” (Longnecker & Lee, 121). What this study found is that these Korean dramas have found it hard to expand their reach in America due to cultural differences, and Squid Game is no exception. Squid Game’s dialogue is Korean, the show is set in South Korea, and the show’s games are based on South Korean children’s games. Therefore, Squid Game is a South Korean show at heart. The key to Squid Game’s success, it seems, is that Squid Game has found the secret sauce that Longnecker and Lee suggested — appeal to a wider range of audiences.

So what did Squid Game do to appeal to a wider audience in the United States? I believe the actual reason why Squid Game became a viral sensation that translated so well to US audiences despite being a South Korean show is that it was a show not just about capitalism but more specifically about the American Dream.

So why would a show about the American Dream make it so popular in the US? The American Dream “is a belief widely held by many Americans. It is the mainstream of American cultural values” (Wang, 32). Clearly, if a show is able to offer commentary on such a widely held cultural belief, it will be popular because it offers a perspective about a commonly held belief that people have strong opinions about. First, let’s define what the American Dream is in the modern sense. Wang states that the American Dream “…is often understood as: As long as you work hard and don’t give up, then you will realize your personal value and have success…In the common sense, the American dream is the ideal of a democratic, equal and free country” (Wang, 32). Basically, the modern notion of the American Dream states that everybody should have an equal opportunity to achieve success. More precisely, “equality means…people having a fair chance to pursue opportunities regardless of where they started” (The Archbridge Institute, 9). While the American Dream has always been a popular notion that has been ingrained within Americans for many decades, there is growing public distrust that the American Dream is still alive following the coronavirus pandemic.

Let’s specify how the American Dream fails many in our society today. According to the Brookings Institute, the American Dream “…is showing signs of wear, with both public perceptions and concrete data suggesting that the nation is a less mobile society than once believed. This is not good: the inherent promise of America is undermined if economic status is, or is seen as, merely a game of chance, with some having the good fortune to live in the best of times and some the bad luck to live in the worst of times. That is not the America heralded in lore and experienced in reality by millions of our predecessors” (Sawhill & Morton, 7). With the American Dream, a widely ingrained belief within people living within the US, in peril, it is natural for a show that addresses such issues to draw the attention of many people.

The first criticism of the American Dream that Squid Game presents is the concept that success is not truly equal because there will always be people who bend the rules, and without punishment, there can be no equal opportunity for success. Many of the characters that are a part of the main cast in Squid Game represent critiques of the realizability of the American Dream. First, we have Deok-Su, who represents a criminal in the show and uses force and threats in order to get what he wants. Deok-Su goes back to his roots as a gang member outside of the games and assembles a gang of ruthless and cunning people to try to win the squid game through force. During mealtime after the first game, the participants are given only one hard-boiled egg and a bottle of water for dinner. As such, Deok-Su and his gang go in the line again to get extras. When this is noticed by the other contestants who call Deok-Su out for his behavior, he ends up killing the other contestant. Deok-Su later marvels at how easy it was to remove the competition. Yet, while this was all going on, the Front Man and the pink suits did nothing to stop this, and it is hinted that giving the participants little food was done on purpose to incite fighting amongst the participants. Another example is during the second game, where participants have to trace out a shape using a needle from a Dalgona candy. In this game, Deok-Su and his accomplice Mi-nyeo use a lighter and effectively cheat because the game becomes much easier once you can melt the candy using the lighter. Yet, Mi-nyeo and Deok-Su basically cheat in front of the pink suits while they do absolutely nothing. From these events, we can deduce that in the games, those who put others down or cheat to get ahead are not only not punished but enticed to do so.

The American Dream posits that success should be equal to all, yet the notion of people who will harm others or cheat for their benefit attacks this idea of equality. In our society, there are many people who are willing to put others down in order to achieve their own success. Recently, there was a squid game cryptocurrency created on a decentralized ecosystem known as the Binance Smart Chain. After promising to host a real-life squid game tournament where participants can win money. The catch is that they first must buy the cryptocurrency to be able to participate, with the cost of entry at 40 million USD during the token’s peak value. However, despite multiple warning signs, people continued to pile into the token until the creators finally “pulled the rug” before days before the game’s supposed launch, which basically means that the developers stole and took all the pooled funds in the token for themselves, leaving those who bought with a basically 100 percent loss. Because the Binance Smart Chain is anonymous and doesn’t require anybody to identify themselves, these developers have run off with approximately 3 million dollars of other’s funds, with little that law enforcement can do. The irony is that Squid Game, the show that tries to remind us that we should not tolerate these acts, became the vehicle for unscrupulous actors to launch a token do the exact thing that the show denounces. However, the result of these criminals’ actions, both in the show and in real life, is that regular people had to lose in order for those who bend the rules to win. Therefore, those who are the unlucky ones who are taken advantage of have a lesser chance to achieve success. While some might argue that these criminals are punished, I tend to disagree.

Squid Game suggests that in our society, people like Deok-Su, who we despise, cut corners yet are frequently tolerated and go unpunished. For example, in many competitive environments like the workplace, those who get the promotion are the ones who take advantage of others and try to get ahead through any means possible. Our fiercely individualistic society where personal performance is important has allowed those who are lucky or willing to take advantage of others to rise up while providing little for those who are unlucky or unwilling to bend the rules. While Squid Game does point out that there are people like Deok-Su in our society, the show also places some of the blame on those who are in the upper echelons of society.

Another critique of the American Dream the show highlights is during the fifth game, where contestants have to get across a bridge, except the bridge is made out of two sets of parallel glass panes. Players must choose between two glass panes over the sixteen pairs of panes to get across and move on to the next game. One of the panes will shatter after being stepped on and cause the contestant to fall to their death, while the other is safe to step on. This game is also the first time viewers are introduced to the wealthy onlookers who treat these deadly games as entertainment. In relation to the American Dream, these people may be seen as people who are so wealthy they don’t need to worry about the American Dream. We also see that the rich onlookers almost treat these contestants as inconsequential, and changes our perception of the true villains of this show from the likes of Deok-Su to the true villains — the onlookers. We feel disgusted that the rich onlookers look at these humans as mere vehicles to bet on for fun. Even worse, when the onlookers see that a glassmaker is able to tell the difference between the two types of glass panes, they prevent him before he can cross by turning down the lights. The onlookers warp the rules and prevent those who are trying to rise up from succeeding. To draw a parallel to real life, the recent moves by financial institutions should be cause for concern. For example, Alden Capital, a hedge fund, has become one of the largest owners of local news publications in the country. While some might think there is nothing wrong with that, Alden Capital has actually been gutting newsrooms by laying off staff and cutting costs. Their ultimate goal? Profit. While local news may not be so relevant to the founders of Alden Capital, there are many who rely on local news in order to become more educated about what is going on around them, not to mention that many people who previously were employed by the newsrooms before Alden took them over. Those who used to be employed by the newsrooms are therefore unluckily the victim of the actions of those who are above the rat race. As such, while these unemployed news reporters may be at a disadvantage, our society does little to help those who have been a victim of such crimes. For all the damage Alden has done, it has basically been unscathed. Similarly, many hedge funds and other “onlookers” have done similar acts to Alden albeit in different industries, through different industries, and with different goals in mind. In aggregate, the actions of these onlookers erode the notion that the American Dream still lives. While those in power may have different goals by changing the rules and treating people like pawns, the message is the same: they fundamentally attack the notion that everybody’s chances to succeed are fair yet are not held accountable in any regard.

Some may argue that Squid Game actually does uphold the notion that the games are meant to be fair by highlighting how the game’s creators punish the doctor that cheated in the games. However, the story is not as simple as it sounds, as the squid game’s Front Man only purports fairness in certain situations. Take the situation where Deok-Su and Mi-nyeo cheat in the dalgona game. The pink suits and Front Man could care less. So why, when the doctor and the pink employees get caught, why are they publicly executed? The reason again is a criticism of the American Dream. When the doctor and his accomplices were harvesting organs, they were benefitting from the game in a way that the onlookers and Front Man had not intended. Thus, they had found a loophole where they could skip the rat race altogether and in a way rise up in a way that was not intended. In addition, the ability for those to leave the island when transporting the organs to the mainland may signify that these are people who are possibly able to get the word to the outside world and attempt to put an end to the games. Evidently, the detective was almost able to leak the whole scheme to the world by masquerading as one of the doctor’s accomplices and goes to show how threatened the onlookers and Front Man felt when the plot was uncovered. As such, killing the purported cheaters in the name of fairness was only a cover to eliminate the threat to the status quo that the ones in power have so carefully maintained. As such, when Deok-Su cheated by using a lighter, it posed no threat to the status quo and those in power’s control. Therefore, what seems on the surface like the support of fairness in the American Dream is a critique of how powerful actors may want to stay in power by doing all they can to maintain the status quo where the American Dream isn’t fully realizable.

Still, some might argue that at the end of the show, Gi-Hun is eventually victorious, having outlived the 455 other participants. Throughout the course of the show, Gi-Hun is a person who is inclusive of immigrants, the old man, and women, who were deemed as less advantageous by the likes of Deok-Su. As such, Gi-Hun is a person that is portrayed as good and virtuous. Unlike Deok-Su or Sang-Woo, Gi-Hun doesn’t take advantage of others or use force to the same degree. Some might argue that Gi-Hun winning the show affirms the notion that the American Dream is still possible, even for those who do not want to take advantage of others and put them down to succeed, and I will agree that this is a fair point.

However, while Gi-Hun is a good person, his victory does little to affirm the notion that the American Dream is still alive. While Gi-Hun did come out victorious in the end, he could only win after everybody else lost. In the wake of Gi-Hun’s victory, Squid Game acknowledges that the race to the top, no matter how nice one is, is going to result in winners and losers. This idea is encapsulated in the notion that some of the games in squid game forces competitors to battle against each other such as the game of tug of war. Another example is that in the marbles game, Gi-Hun takes advantage of Il-nam (who at the time was feigning dementia) and deceives Il-nam to win. Il-nam, who Gi-Hun had been treating so well, had to be taken advantage of in the marble game because only one of the pair could move forward. In addition, in the glass pane game, Gi-Hun and everybody else would have been eliminated if Sang-woo, who was willing to do anything to win, did not push the glassmaker to his death to figure out which of the final glass panes was real. What Squid Game is trying to show is that competition is going to be in our society whether we like it or not, and even if you try your very best to minimize harm, there will be a trail of losers in your wake.

In the larger scope of things, Squid Game offers commentary on what possible solutions there are to restore the American Dream to its former glory. Gi-Hun was only able to win because he had befriended Il-nam and was able to win the tug of war game because of Il-nam’s advice. In sum, Squid Game suggests many interpretations of how the American Dream can be restored. The show tries to portray that Deok-Su and those who take advantage of others have always existed, and the complacency towards cheaters by the pink suits shows us that eliminating them is going to be a losing battle. Instead, the show tries to advocate for the support of those who are unlucky or disadvantaged. For example, Il-nam’s unparalleled knowledge of the game allowed the team that on pure strength was considered disadvantaged to be able to eke out a victory. We can relate this to how we can set up our society to help those who may be disadvantaged to level the playing field so that everybody has an equal chance to succeed. However, another darker interpretation that the pure notion of the squid games, which is a metaphor for our individualistic society where we are pitted against each other. No matter whether we think the winner of the squid game is moral or immoral, the result is that there will always be losers. Squid Game is possibly suggesting that the whole notion of our individualistic society is flawed. While the show in general offers little concrete guidance on how to fix the issue of the broken American Dream, it at least draws attention to the problems that the American Dream faces today.

Still, for a show about how it is hard to ascend in society to become so popular speaks about how there is a growing realization that there are many shared values between nations that are geographically far apart. For example, South Koreans empathized more with those who had been eliminated because they knew people in real life who had tried to get rich but ultimately failed. On the other hand, Americans are more likely to focus on how Gi-Hun won and how the circumstances that brought about his victory critique the realizability of the American Dream. Even though South Koreans and Americans focused on different aspects of the show, it still was a film that spoke to the toughness of trying to claw one’s way up the socioeconomic ladder. While globalization is a process, we are beginning to see that even though there is a large geographical distance between South Korea and the United States, we share a remarkable amount of cultural values and struggles. Even if we focus on slightly different aspects of Squid Game, people from both cultures can appreciate and understand the common struggles of the characters presented in the show. We should celebrate that Squid Game’s interpretation changes slightly as it crosses borders because it allows for two cultures to learn more about the specific issues that each country is facing. If everybody had the same interpretation, there would be little to gain by talking to people from another country about a show. But, because there are different interpretations of the show, the resulting intellectual discourse can help each country to solve their problems by bringing in new perspectives. While some might argue that the nuances of the show could be lost in translation between US and Korean audiences, I think that the loss of mistranslation is a problem that we will have to contend with unless our world is totally globalized. In the meantime, while Squid Game’s meaning may change through the crossing of borders, the resulting flow of ideas and perspectives facilitated through the should be heralded as a positive change that benefits us all.