That Big Bang Theory thing

[scarlettina]

So I spent some time this afternoon and evening thinking about the essay about The Big Bang Theory (TBBT)--a show I've watched more-or-less since the beginning--that's making the rounds on social media. The essay posits that this show about four super-brainy geeks is actually a show that makes fun of nerds, not a show that loves them. The essay posits that it's the ultimate manifestation of mainstream disdain for nerdy enthusiasm and social awkwardness, and that it further ghettoizes geek culture. It posits that the show's point-of-view character is Penny, the "normal" girl, and that the audience is supposed to laugh with her at the nerds, rather than laughing with the nerds at themselves. I spent a lot of time researching and starting to write a long exegesis analyzing all of this and then, tonight, realizing that I just didn't feel like writing the encyclopedic refutation I originally had in mind (three paragraphs in, I realized that if I continued, the resulting analysis would be worthy of--dare I say it--Dr. Sheldon Cooper*), I decided to approach it a little more simply.

I disagree with the essay at a pretty fundamental level. I don't think that Penny is the viewpoint character; it is clearly and obviously Leonard, the best-socialized of the four main male characters. He is Penny and the audience's facilitator into the geekier universe of Raj, Howard, and Sheldon, but he's also Raj, Howard, and Sheldon's facilitator into Penny's more mundane world. He's a person of both worlds and is befuddled by navigating them both. That's where a lot of the comedy in this show comes from.** When the audience laughs at a geek reference, it's partly out of recognition of something beloved and familiar; it's partly because we each in our own way identify with having a deep enthusiasm (whether it's which issue of a comics some character last appeared in or which baseball game was the last in which some player played for some particular team); and it's partly because each character is doing something so signally in character that it provides entertainment, delight, or surprise.

I'm not saying that every joke on TBBT is good-natured. Some things are funny because they're mean; that's the nature of comedy, and there's not a single sitcom on television that isn't cruel towards its characters, whether the jokes are about weight, about how long someone has been single, about baldness, and so on. (My God, the jokes about obesity on Roseanne were legion, and yet the Connors' obesity was one of the things that made them most identifiable to the audience. I don't think many fat people objected to the jokes--or if they did, they didn't watch, and missed a key pop-cultural moment in television.) But most sitcoms, including TBBT, are also loving toward their characters. There is a balance. (Howard's character has been treated with real love in the development of his relationship with Bernadette; he's clearly grown and changed.) It should also be noted that the mean jokes aren't just as the expense of the geekitude. There are mean jokes about Leonard's height, Howard's mother, Penny's relative lack of education and her attempts at acting, at Bernadette's astonishing vocal resemblance to Howard's mother. The show is an equal-opportunity insult machine. But also? It does--like the best sitcoms--get at some fundamental truths about being human and being an American in this time and place. Comedy comes from--and leads to--that as well.

In the end, here's the thing: if we can't find a way to laugh at ourselves (in the guise of Sheldon, Leonard, Raj, and Howard), then we're kind of missing the point--which is that everyone is socially awkward in one way or another. Everyone is super-geeky about one thing or another. Everyone has had moments of social humiliation along with personal triumph, moments of desperation in dating, cluelessness in friendship, and painful yet transformative growth. I think the original essay writer betrays a sensitivity about his own geekitude in his refutation of TBBT, and that's OK. But I think that there are valuable lessons to be learned from the show by viewing it through a broader lens than he's viewing it through. And I think that geeks who turn off TBBT, while certainly within their rights to do so, are missing something key about the entire TBBT phenomenon: it wouldn't be happening if we geeks weren't a cultural force to be reckoned with in the first place--and that's something that, as geeks, we have always wanted and that we--no question--have achieved.


* For example, the author posits that TBBT is the first show to feature geeks front and center. I started to research the truth of this assumption, since I disagreed with his disqualification of other shows that I thought plainly punctured it. The Lone Gunmen came first. And Chuck premiered the same year TBBT did. 'Nuff said.
** I should note, upon reflection, that Penny is Bernadette and Amy's facilitator to the guys' world and, often, the guys' facilitator to the women.

Comments

[shelly-rae.livejournal.com]

I haven't watched much of TBBT (no tv here) but from what I've seen I agree. Leonard is definitely the viewpoint character. Penny and the dumb blonde, dumber boyfriends, and the binge drinking is also a stereotype and the trouble she gets into, well, sheesh.

Definitely not the first geek show. I think Buffy qualifies as does that show with the cute cosplay girl who does forensic science. Is that csi? Anyway.

Nice piece.
Anon

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

Part of the author of the other essay's position is that Buffy doesn't count because Xander is the only geek and the show is targeted specifically toward geeks, not at the mainstream viewer. I disagree completely with that assertion. Part of the reason I headed off writing my original version of this essay was that it became an exegesis of what constitutes American TV and how shows are chosen to be developed and picked up by studios and networks. Short version? If a studio and sponsors don't perceive a show to be mainstream enough to generate a profitable audience, the show won't go forward, so even a show targeted toward geeks, whether it's Buffy or CSI or Star Trek, must generate income sufficient to satisfy a studio and sponsors before it airs. That means that they believe a show will generate a critical mass of audience, and no show on American TV survives without same--a critical mass of audience means a mainstream audience.

[shelly-rae.livejournal.com]

Well yes. Xander and Willow are the first geeks in the group, then Oz who is a cool Geek and they are joined by Giles. They deal with a number of made scientist Geeks, (robot Buffy) and finally the self-proclaimed nemeses Geek trio. I never even thought of Star Trek but yes. How about Lost in Space? Does The Professor from Gilligans Island count?
Guess I should read that essay... :)

Anon

[bedii.livejournal.com]

I'm annoyed and I haven't seen the show or read the article. A good case could be made for Mr. Peepers being an adult geek who was the lead of a TV series in 1955, and if you're willing to allow love interests I suspect you could use Our Miss Brooks to extend that back to Radio, although every time he shows up I want to scream at Miss Brooks "You can do better!"

[joycemocha.livejournal.com]

Lovely essay and I agree with your take. The other essay made me growly and uncomfortable because the husband and son (one IDed with autism, the other one self-diagnosed) both love the show to death...and it comes close enough to both of their temperaments that if it were laughing at the geeks, they wouldn't go for it.

When you're including The Lone Gunmen, though, don't forget Scully and Mulder themselves. In a lot of ways The X Files was also a show about geeks, with Scully and Mulder top amongst them. And Northern Exposure had faint whiffs of that rarely recognized but still very real category of the rural geek clan.

[garyomaha.livejournal.com]

Bingo. You nailed it (IMHO) and quite well-written, too. Thanks for writing this -- I had misinterpreted your FB post to mean that you agreed with the original writer.

I'd love to see your Coopernian analysis some day. ;)

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

Agree with him? Nope, not for a minute! As for the Coopernian analysis, um . . . maybe. If I'm ever unemployed again and have nothing better to do with my time. :-)

[willowgreen.livejournal.com]

Thank you for this. As I said in my comment to your earlier post, I don't think the show could reproduce nerd culture as accurately as it does without a lot of love. Once there was a scene set in Leonard's lab, and my spouse spotted an instrument there that he developed -- which he confirmed was the type of instrument that would be in that kind of lab. He was SO excited. :-)

Also, I for one would be delighted to read your Dr. Cooper-style point-by-point refutation of the original article.

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

As I said in my comment to your earlier post, I don't think the show could reproduce nerd culture as accurately as it does without a lot of love.

Yep. Couldn't agree more. You can't write this stuff if you don't know it thoroughly yourself. See above re: laughing at oneself.

[textualdeviance.livejournal.com]

Afraid I must disagree. The characters were drawn as broad stereotypes, not actual well-rounded human beings. They might be a bit more now, but they certainly weren't in early episodes.

These aren't real, recognizable people. They are a hipster's idea of what geeks are, written in grudging consultation with actual geeks to get details right. I had the same problem with Chuck. They threw in constant references to the usual-suspect pop-culture touchstones, and thought that was good enough. It wasn't. It's painful and insulting, and just this side of taped glasses and pocket protectors. Comedy based in stereotypes isn't funny, and it's even less so when it's stereotypes of a marginalized group. Look at it this way: there aren't enough of us to account for the shows ratings. It's drawing in audiences who think we're inherently funny because we're different, and get off on that.

There are dozens more geek characters in modern TV whose creators don't rely on a TV-reporter's zoo-animal view of con crowds to draw them. Alec Hardison, Claudia Donovan, Penelope Garcia, Abby Sciuto, the entire cast of Eureka, etc. all have recognizable geek and nerd elements, but that's only half their personalities. They're not defined by their geekiness as are the guys on BBT and Chuck. The shows don't frame them in a way that comes down to "Ha ha! Lookit the Aspie Star Wars obsessive!"

Also, as for earlier geek characters: WKRP's Les Nessman surely qualifies, and I could probably come up with many more were I not barely awake at the moment. ;)

[fullcontactmuse.livejournal.com]

I've always seen Penny as the audience surrogate, not Leonard. She's the one who stops asks the important question of "why", which Leonard does far less. To be fair, Leonard is probably the most accessible of the four male leads to your mainstream viewer and is the Abbott to whole Sheldon's and Howard's Costello.

Like several others have said, I would love to read your Cooper-esque essay. :)

[twilight2000.livejournal.com]

And as for why someone might think Penny is the POV character, Netflix says this:
Sheldon (Jim Parsons) and Leonard (Johnny Galecki) know quantum physics and the Klingon language. They don't, however, have a clue about women. That's too bad, because attractive, newly single Penny (Kaley Cuoco) just moved into the building, and she could use some companionship. If these two nerds are ever going to score with the ladies, Penny will need to give them a crash course in life in this sitcom from the creator of "Two and a Half Men."
Others have similar descriptions - and lots of writers depend on the blurb to frame the show.

NOTE: I've not seen the show - so have no personal opinion :>

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

I think it's safe to say that the show has veered from that rather simple description. Leonard and Penny are an item, Sheldon has a girlfriend, and Howard is married. I can't figure out what Raj's sexual orientation is; I'm not entirely sure he knows. But the show has gone so much further than that.

[twilight2000.livejournal.com]

good to know - and I'm not *just* being obnoxious - I've been trying to find a way to stream it online so I can see what the noise is all about on this show - so your post caught me :>

[daveon.livejournal.com]

I think the problem is that over the last 7 years the characters have evolved and changed. But that's hardly a surprise, because actually most people do. Penny and Leonard have both changed more than the others, although you could argue they've played up Sheldon more over that time.

Howard has been forced to grow up.

Raj is still uncertain, but as you say, he's probably uncertain himself.

I couldn't help but feel as I was reading the essay that the core of the problem they were having was that actually a lot of it was cutting too close to the bone.

[kistha.livejournal.com]

I haven't watched it, but his essay made me understand why two of my friends love that show - for the exact same reasons he doesn't like it.

[frabjouslinz.livejournal.com]

I agree - it's no more insulting to geeks than any comedy show ever written is to its main characters. Sometimes the jokes fail, but that's true in all comedy shows. And some jokes work for some people, and not for others. I don't think that so very many self-proclaimed geeks would love it, if it were just a mean in-joke against us. Some self-described geeks won't like it, but that's just odds. I think the person who wrote the original essay is entitled to his opinion, but not mine. It doesn't make him right, it just makes him like everyone else who hates something that lots of people love: grumpy and sure he's right and everyone else is wrong.

[daveon.livejournal.com]

I concur with you. Leonard is the lynchpin of the essemble. He *wants* to be normal, but at his core struggles with it.

I actually think the most poignant moment was after Penny and Leonard broke up the first time and she introduced her latest dumb as bricks boyfriend who said something stunningly daft, prompting her to look pained and say, "I used to be happy with just the looks."

As somebody who relates quite strongly to Leonard and has a life outside of fandom where my attendance of Conventions raises a few eyebrows, I can't agree with the thesis of the other essay.

[steve98052.livejournal.com]

Your essay, plus some other references to the show that indicate that it makes a point of getting the geek details right, tempt me to figure out what channel the show is on, whether our new television can receive it, and whether it's on at a time when we're not busy with something else.

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

It's on on Thursday nights (in other words, tonight) at 8 PM on KIRO (channel 7). You can also watch episodes online.

[steve98052.livejournal.com]

More significant problems are whether we actually have time on Thursdays for the show, and to what degree the show is accessible to someone who hasn't watched from the start.

Thanks for the pointers though.