What's on TV?
I've just discovered Ann Althouse's blog (thanks to Instapundit). She discusses Con Law cases, which will help me in preparing my class. She has a nice, matter-of-fact way of commenting on various aspects of her life; and she writes better than I do.
One of her themes is television. She has been discussing both the Sopranos and American Idol. I am looking forward to seeing more Sopranos (it comes to Canada on free or broadcast TV after a delay of a year or two), but I refuse to watch any of the Idol stuff, or for that matter any so-called Reality TV.
She has mentioned that she hasn't watched sit coms for many years. I'm close to that point myself, even though I think of myself as someone who can really enjoy a good sit com. People tell me that given my sense of humour, I should like the Simpsons or South Park, but I've never really gotten into them. Seinfeld and Frasier also leave me a bit cold. I recognize the craftsmanship in both writing and acting, and there are certainly some funny scenes, but I'm not likely to curl up for an entire episode.
Seinfeld has been discussed endlessly: family and tradition are either a joke or a burden: "all you've got is your friends." This was apparently given a slight twist by, yes, Friends, another show I would not watch. Let's see: everyone's kind of in Beckett's world of loneliness and meaninglessness, but everyone is young and beautiful; they live in much nicer apartments than they can afford, yet they don't have to do disgusting things for rich old men; and they sleep around without ever getting, you know, jealous or anything. Seinfeld was at least a bit more realistic in that everything is harder: finding an apartment, getting laid, finding someone you can really enjoy, say, watching TV with.
I was a big fan of Cheers, and some will say: wasn't that the same, "all you've got is your friends" kind of thing? Frasier gives yet another funny twist: a father and two sons. On many days they wish to God they could find someone else to socialize with/live with, but they keep coming back, grumbling, to the threesome. (This suddenly reminds me of the harsh, difficult but hilarious novels of Ivy Compton-Burnett. Female authors who are hidden treasures/under-appreciated? Bring them on). Having said that modern people are rootless, Allan Bloom considers the apparent exception of the French, especially those who never leave Paris except for a brief vacances. Bloom says: they're not rooted, they're just stuck.
Before going on I should repeat the wise observation of a friend of mine: what makes comedies funny is that people don't reform or get better. Likewise they either have no genuine concern to help others, or they over-do it for selfish reasons, like the Boy Scout in P.G. Wodehouse who is always doing dangerous, appalling good deeds. (W?)
I liked Becker, at least in earlier days. (Here they go again, giving a misanthrope who really likes one-night (or one hour) stands a steady girlfriend. Everyone has to get steadily nicer on TV). A customer in the diner announces he's suicidal. Each main character summarizes his/her life in a couple of sentences, after which he says "Gee, I'm not such a loser after all." In another episode, the Valium slowly wears off as Becker sits in a plane; claustrophia and rage take over our hero, a family physician. There were a couple of very good Christmas episodes; Christmas itself, every single aspect of it, threw Becker into a rage. There was a high-school graduation speech that was very funny. Rhea Perlman did a guest spot as a therapist who is supposed to help Becker with his anger. As she talks to him, she is won over to his approach: "Yeah! Why the hell should I take so much crap?"
Cheers: I think the "Diane" era was better than the "Rebecca" era. Diane was obviously portrayed as a loser, but she showed tremendous spunk (the old Mary Tyler Moore word), and she would actually persuade the others to hint that they might have a better nature, if not actually display it. (Diane to Norm: "You can't guide your entire life by the views of a bunch of beer-drinking swine." Norm: "It's worked for me so far.")
With Rebecca the writers just seemed to take satisfaction in hurting her because in some ways she was very successful. She has risen higher than Diane, so she must be brought lower? Is there some idea that career plus family might barely if ludicrously work for a man, but it can't work at all for a woman? I don't know. But I think one thing I don't like in Frasier is the treatment of Ros. The spunk is still there. But it is almost unbelievable that they could get away with portraying such a skanky and downtrodden woman, looking for Mr. Right, yet constantly throwing herself at losers.
Let's stay with this theme. The Sue-Ann Niven character on MTM. Does this too show that women can't have it all, or even half of it? Somehow she was one of the strongest characters on the show. There isn't actually all that much frustration in her life. It doesn't seem she really wants to settle down--she may get almost, but not quite, exactly what she wants from men. Of course, no one knows better than her, "The Happy Homemaker," what regimented nonsense the domestic scene can be.
I loved the "old" Newhart--the psychologist in Chicago. My favourite episodes of Cheers probably all involved Frasier and Lilith. Maybe the best of all was the dinner party: starving Sam inhaling food, Diane fussing, and Frasier and Lilith going through weird alternations of love and anger.
Today: I think the Bonnie Hunt show has its moments--mainly when they are doing the "show within a show." It actually feels spontaneous at times. The only shows I will watch right through are the Law and Order franchises. My favourite is "Criminal Intent." There are obviously only so many episodes they can get out of this concept of the detective who is a brilliant showman, perhaps about as crazy as some of the criminals, but I love it. They have already come back to the Australian psycho bitch, and they probably will again. CSI, before I stopped watching it, kept bringing Grissom back to a bordello specializing in S&M. Ah yes, Grissom would say, it's the submissive who's in charge.
Doesn't that belong in a sit com?
|
