That Big Bang Theory thing
Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 12:10 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
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.
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.
no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 08:38 am (UTC)Nice piece.
Anon
no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 03:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 06:05 pm (UTC)Guess I should read that essay... :)Anon
no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 01:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 02:34 pm (UTC)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.
no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 02:43 pm (UTC)I'd love to see your Coopernian analysis some day. ;)
no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 03:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 03:36 pm (UTC)Also, I for one would be delighted to read your Dr. Cooper-style point-by-point refutation of the original article.
no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 03:48 pm (UTC)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.
no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 04:34 pm (UTC)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. ;)
no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 04:36 pm (UTC)Like several others have said, I would love to read your Cooper-esque essay. :)
no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 06:30 pm (UTC)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 :>
no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 06:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 06:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 08:35 pm (UTC)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.
no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 06:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 07:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Wed, Jan. 9th, 2013 08:30 pm (UTC)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.
no subject
Date: Thu, Jan. 10th, 2013 08:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: Thu, Jan. 10th, 2013 02:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Sat, Jan. 12th, 2013 06:08 am (UTC)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.