Nov. 13th '88
Drugs and circuses
We have elected a new administration, and president-elect Bush will try to point this nation in what he hopes is a positive direction; but I think that certain problems are too intractable for anyone to solve, and I have a bad feeling about what is happening to Western Civilization, and to our country in particular.
Those who have read Aldous Huxley's 1932 satire, "Brave New World," will recall that Huxley envisioned a culturally empty civilization wherein cloned, or mass-produced people were given just enough mental and physical ability and education to do there assigned tasks, were kept happy through conditioning and drugs, and were incessantly reminded that they were the best, the happiest class possible. From the Alphas, who ran the world through the Epsilons, who ran the elevators, all was controlled, society was stable, and everyone was content.
Well, in our new world, the collapse of education has left a void filled by television, and morality, that characteristic of social behavior that lets us live in relative harmony with one another, is replaced by the mindless acquisition of treasure and the numbing euphoria of drugs. The difference between us and Huxley's society of half a millennium from now is that in "Brave New World," the Alphas controlled, whereas in our decade the rich and powerful are worked over by forces even they are powerless to affect.
The collapse of our educational system has caused the ascendency of mindless television, the lazy search for easy solutions, no matter how unworkable, and the loss of our faculties of rational thought. We have a president who claims to have an open mind on the subject of astrology. We are retreating from the real world into astrology, fundamentalist religion, political fanaticism, and professional wrestling. We are Huxley's Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons, and there are no Alphas, because the new education, TV, is directed not by scholars interested in keeping alive the best parts of our heritage, but by technology and marketing, and these are unintelligent forces despite the fiction of economics "invisible hand."
We are now saddled with an underclass (Epsilon) generation that can neither read nor write, not in any substantive way. They live from game show to game show, sit bored in school looking forward to the Pablum of soaps, sensationalistic talk shows (did you see Geraldo mud-wrestle a bikini-clad woman last week?), and sports on the tube.
They live from snort to needle and in our inner cities terrorize each other with drugs as the driving economic force in their lives, because dealing drugs is, they think, the way to wealth. Even those not hooked dream not of creating goods and services to aid their fellow man, but of winning a state lottery.
And because so many kids are themselves mothered by kids, they grow up with no moral sense. If you're robbed on the street, you may as well fight for your property, because they'll kill you anyway.
Because TV is a medium of mass entertainment in our maket-run society, it must appeal to the untrained mind. Hence, moralistic sit-coms and cheap cartoons drive out material that would be beyond the uneducated. And those who program and run the television culture are in turn run by it. They are cynical, after appealing to this lowest denominator, and have no incentive to raise the complexity of the culture.
So car chases replace dialogue, and public affairs are made "Lite" and brief.
The producers of TV drivel are not so much venal as they are responding naturally to external stimuli filtered through their own training. They desire survival as much as do the rest of us. So we eat Jello and milk-toast because the bulk of us are not trained to enjoy more substantial fare, and those who are trapped by their own necessity to make money find they have no choice but to remove the spice and add more sugar.
To use television as a bootstrap to raise the level, the complexity of our culture, to substitute in some way for the deterioration of our schools, is beyond the primitive imagination of the young producers because they too are uneducated.
Is there any hope? Or are we doomed to sleepwalk from crisis to crisis? Nobody will know or care until childhood education is rebuilt, and vested interests will make that a slow, expensive process. Well directed television, with it's memorable, striking images, could help, but in a country where public television is criticized by politicians for being too "elitist," I see no hope for that.
Mac Rush works in the Banner's composing room.
Oddly, this was written decades before the first airing of "Jersey shore."
Also, I realize that "sit-coms" looks really odd, but it's what was written on the newspaper clipping I have.
Monday, August 18, 2014
Watching 'Dear John'
Nov. 6th, 1988
Many years ago, the late Elizabeth Dwyer, editorial page editor and writer for the Bennington Banner, called her political endorsements "the kiss of death," and I'm to find out if her legacy is to be passes on to me in the field of reviewing TV.
I know that the best way to ensure the failure of a sports team is for me to bet on it, and that any show I recommend to friends, like last year's "The Slap Maxwell Story" is going to be frustratingly bounced around the schedule before cancellation, so it is with queasy trepidation that I report that NBC's new half-hour situation comedy, "Dear John," is hilarious.
But unlike "Slap," I think that this one has all the ingredients for success.
"Dear John" is about a man whose wife has run off with his best friend, and who is forced to strike out on his own. The pilot show opens with two neighbors helping him move into a dreary apartment, and as he looks the place over, one says, "The last thing I want to do is to interfere in your life. But I saw this ad in the paper for the 'One-to-One Club'...", and the "situation" for shows to follow is set up.
Ignoring his friend's husband's comment, "Why would he want to hang around with a bunch of other pathetic losers," John goes to the local community center with the idea of joining.
Now John is not a person who does things, he is one to whom things happen. So he finds himself being introduced to other troubled people, but it is not until the meeting gets underway that he sees he's stumbled into an alcoholics' self-help group by mistake, and as he tries to excuse himself, he's surrounded by friendly, concerned members trying to convince him to admit that he is, indeed, an alcoholic.
John escapes across the hall to where he belongs, along with two or three others, and the gag finishes with troubled alcoholics finding they're in the wrong group and leaving the "One to One" room.
This club for divorced, widowed, and separated individuals is where John meets the regulars of the series, and apparently will be the focus of future episodes.
The players of this piece are ones who will be easy to live with. Judd Hirsch, a 54-year old Emmy Award winning actor (for his nice work in "Taxi"), brings a sense of "pathetic loser" with redeeming features to his role, the quintessential nice guy who's been beaten on most of his life, yet who has such decent instincts that we cannot help but like him. He's dry, with perhaps a touch of cynicism, just enough to give his character an interesting edge.
The other juicy role is tenaciously grasped by Jane carr, who plays Louise, the lust-obsessed group leader. With the help of her piercing British accent and her brusque, nosey manner, Carr moves thing along through an outrageously strong personality. As she introduces John to the group's purpose, she points out that "No one's here to pry into your private life - have you any sexual problems?"
Remaining major parts include Kirk (Jere Burns), an obnoxious twit whose confidence in himself as a ladies' man is matched by his singular lack of success; Ralph (Harry Groener), a Wally Cos sort whose wife married to gain citizenship and ran off during the wedding reception; and Kate (Isabella Hofmann), who apparently is going to be John's romantic interest.
Kate thus far (two episodes) is a totally undeveloped character, lovely but quiet, and I'll be interested in seeing if she builds a personality of her own, or if still waters run shallow.
Surprisingly, in some respects the second show, which is more typical of what we'll get than the expensive premiere, is technically better than the first. The musical score is lighter, more appropriate to the lightweight nature of the clever script, whereas the pilot's music was a direct ripoff from "Hooperman." and the laugh-track, which "Dear John" does not need anyway, is much less obtrusive the second time around.
"Dear John" so far does not address the human condition, it does not mention (nor have) children, and it only slightly involves us in teh trials of one cast adrift on the social sea.
But it cheers me up and makes me laugh out loud. I like that in a comedy.
You can catch it Thursday nights at 9 p.m. on WNYT, Channel 13.
Mac Rush works in the Banner's composing room.
By far my favorite two lines written in this one "But it cheers me up and makes me laugh out loud. I like that in a comedy."
Many years ago, the late Elizabeth Dwyer, editorial page editor and writer for the Bennington Banner, called her political endorsements "the kiss of death," and I'm to find out if her legacy is to be passes on to me in the field of reviewing TV.
I know that the best way to ensure the failure of a sports team is for me to bet on it, and that any show I recommend to friends, like last year's "The Slap Maxwell Story" is going to be frustratingly bounced around the schedule before cancellation, so it is with queasy trepidation that I report that NBC's new half-hour situation comedy, "Dear John," is hilarious.
But unlike "Slap," I think that this one has all the ingredients for success.
"Dear John" is about a man whose wife has run off with his best friend, and who is forced to strike out on his own. The pilot show opens with two neighbors helping him move into a dreary apartment, and as he looks the place over, one says, "The last thing I want to do is to interfere in your life. But I saw this ad in the paper for the 'One-to-One Club'...", and the "situation" for shows to follow is set up.
Ignoring his friend's husband's comment, "Why would he want to hang around with a bunch of other pathetic losers," John goes to the local community center with the idea of joining.
Now John is not a person who does things, he is one to whom things happen. So he finds himself being introduced to other troubled people, but it is not until the meeting gets underway that he sees he's stumbled into an alcoholics' self-help group by mistake, and as he tries to excuse himself, he's surrounded by friendly, concerned members trying to convince him to admit that he is, indeed, an alcoholic.
John escapes across the hall to where he belongs, along with two or three others, and the gag finishes with troubled alcoholics finding they're in the wrong group and leaving the "One to One" room.
This club for divorced, widowed, and separated individuals is where John meets the regulars of the series, and apparently will be the focus of future episodes.
The players of this piece are ones who will be easy to live with. Judd Hirsch, a 54-year old Emmy Award winning actor (for his nice work in "Taxi"), brings a sense of "pathetic loser" with redeeming features to his role, the quintessential nice guy who's been beaten on most of his life, yet who has such decent instincts that we cannot help but like him. He's dry, with perhaps a touch of cynicism, just enough to give his character an interesting edge.
The other juicy role is tenaciously grasped by Jane carr, who plays Louise, the lust-obsessed group leader. With the help of her piercing British accent and her brusque, nosey manner, Carr moves thing along through an outrageously strong personality. As she introduces John to the group's purpose, she points out that "No one's here to pry into your private life - have you any sexual problems?"
Remaining major parts include Kirk (Jere Burns), an obnoxious twit whose confidence in himself as a ladies' man is matched by his singular lack of success; Ralph (Harry Groener), a Wally Cos sort whose wife married to gain citizenship and ran off during the wedding reception; and Kate (Isabella Hofmann), who apparently is going to be John's romantic interest.
Kate thus far (two episodes) is a totally undeveloped character, lovely but quiet, and I'll be interested in seeing if she builds a personality of her own, or if still waters run shallow.
Surprisingly, in some respects the second show, which is more typical of what we'll get than the expensive premiere, is technically better than the first. The musical score is lighter, more appropriate to the lightweight nature of the clever script, whereas the pilot's music was a direct ripoff from "Hooperman." and the laugh-track, which "Dear John" does not need anyway, is much less obtrusive the second time around.
"Dear John" so far does not address the human condition, it does not mention (nor have) children, and it only slightly involves us in teh trials of one cast adrift on the social sea.
But it cheers me up and makes me laugh out loud. I like that in a comedy.
You can catch it Thursday nights at 9 p.m. on WNYT, Channel 13.
Mac Rush works in the Banner's composing room.
By far my favorite two lines written in this one "But it cheers me up and makes me laugh out loud. I like that in a comedy."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)