Live data from Hacker News

TV’s Dwindling Middle Class

nytimes.com

91–100 of 138 posts

Re: TV’s Dwindling Middle Class

#91

“Cheers,” which ran for 11 seasons on NBC, starting in 1982, was the first great hangout show: neutralizing the depiction of class and removing the pressures of work. Life is hard enough, “Cheers” said; let’s just make TV. Ever since, television started taking it easier on us. Bill Clinton was in the White House, and the economy had improved. On “Seinfeld,” “Living Single,” “Friends,” “Ellen,” “It’s Like, You Know,”…

>Why would you go into any of these shows expecting anything resembling reality. They are all clearly entertainment in the form of light drama and inconsequential, whitewashed sexual tension. To expect anything else is to set yourself up for failure.

Because even light drama and entertainment can reflect society and middle class -- and the article gives many examples of that in the past.

Besides, the "deeper shows" you mention are equally disconnected from what's under discussion. Neither "House of Cards" nor "Breaking Bad" reflect American middle class life -- Heisenberg might be someone who can't afford health care, but the base of the plot and its concerns afterwards is entirely different.

Re: TV’s Dwindling Middle Class

#92
The author blames the modern sitcom's remoteness from working and lower-middle class concerns with their creators' immunity from the recent recession. In place of everyday situations, we have shows set in "soundstages and writers’ rooms," the haunts of the out-of-touch in New York and LA. So you wind up with a show with this sort of genesis:

Our creator was once a prominent writer and performer on a comedy sketch show, which aired live every Saturday night from an NBC studio in New York. It ran for 90 minutes. After their time on the show came to an end, our creator decided to pitch a sitcom based on their experiences there. The lead character is the head writer on a comedy show, similarly produced in New York. They must balance their work in the writers' room and their personal life, though this turns out to be difficult. A pilot is made, and our creator plays the lead.

Modern viewers may recognize this as 30 Rock, but it is in fact The Dick Van Dyke Show. It is based not on SNL but on a direct ancestor, Your Show of Shows. Carl Reiner's performance in the pilot may have dissuaded executives from casting him in the commissioned series (hence Dick Van Dyke), while Tina Fey remained the lead in her own version. But otherwise the parallel rings a sight near perfect.

The author stumbles over himself insisting, however, that while The Dick Van Dyke Show did not give vent to working and lower-middle class concerns, it did at least feature characters who "had careers" and were definitely of a class. As if the same were not true of shows like 30 Rock (which is at times obsessed with class difference), or of Parks and Recreation and The Office. These do not depict realistic workspaces, but why place that demand on a sitcom? And why not place the same demand on, yes, The Honeymooners, Taxi, The Mary Tyler Moore Show, I Love Lucy, The Beverly Hillbillies, Green Acres, The Andy Griffith Show, and on and on. In all cases the demands of the form—and in almost all cases the demands of overly long tenures—stretched the premises and the rare attempts at realism very thin.

I think you can make an argument that the most popular comedies available right now—whether on TV or at the movie theaters—are unflinchingly escapist. (Though, as the article notes in its discussion of an episode each of Horace and Pete and Girls, this has not gone unnoticed or unremarked by all of the shows' writers. Still, these two are not the most popular things around by any stretch.) Similarly, Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers were seen to traipse across exclusive resorts, high-class stages, ballroom floors, and Venice, in elaborate dresses and a "top hat, white tie, and tails"—all during the Great Depression. Sometimes hard circumstances produce a public clamoring for comment; sometimes the public just wants a reprieve.

Re: TV’s Dwindling Middle Class

#93

There are lots of prominent counterexamples. The Office was a pretty direct attempt at making a modern middle class show. Breaking Bad at least started with one man's middle class problems. I think the main artistic factor here is that the sitcom, an awfully convenient medium for telling middle class stories, is dead. A 30 minute comedy where every episode was basically an island could be an oddly touching medium to…

Modern Family, 30 Rock, Parks and Recreation, The Middle, Raising Hope, How I Met Your Mother, and Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt were all fairly recent examples of decent modern sitcoms (and wow that list is bigger than I thought it'd be), and for the most part, generally centered around middle class families/people. Some are a bit more outlandish and over-the-top at times, but that can also be their appeal.

By modern, I also mean they follow a continuing story arc episode-to-episode, so while you could watch any episode in isolation, you get a lot more if you know backstory and the characters. They're also all "single camera" shows (no laugh track) which IMHO is a much better style, and allows them to be more creative, have a continuing story, and frankly, be funnier than the (pause for laughter) lines in a show like Big Bang Theory.

Re: TV’s Dwindling Middle Class

#94
post #15
post #2

I remember growing up as a lower-middle class midwestern kid, Roseanne was a show I loved, because I identified with it so much. Dan and Roseanne were my parents, and my friends were just like Darlene and Becky. Another similar show from that era is "Grace Under Fire". As a 35-yo upper-middle class guy still in the midwest, I look at what's on TV (both broadcast and Netflix/Amazon/etc.) and see none of that represent…

Isn't it simple ? most working class jobs are boring. But law, police, medicine, a tv show(rock 30), or just changing jobs and random situation puts you in a lot of variety and that makes comedy easier. And the expectations of comedy today are far bigger than the 80's. So something had to give.

>most working class jobs are boring.

Seinfeld proved mundane everyday life can be funny and entertaining for audiences.

The other thing is you can have someone living with the challenges and lifestyle of the working class without showing their actual work.

Re: TV’s Dwindling Middle Class

#95
The article basically ignored reality television for some reason. Many, many shows include real-life middle-class people: Survivor, Naked and Afraid, Chopped, Ice Road Truckers, American Idol, Extreme Home Makeover, Amazing Race, Jersey Shore, Alaska: The Last Frontier, etc.

The article mentions Dirty Jobs and Undercover Boss, but it's not clear to me the bountiful reality shows don't undermine the entire thesis of the article.

Re: TV’s Dwindling Middle Class

#96
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny you should mention demographics and House of Cards - it was literally created because Netflix's data suggested that many subscribers enjoyed the Social Network (Fincher), Kevin Spacey movies and the British version of House of Cards. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/25/business/media/for-house-o... It's not demographics in the traditional sense, but make no mistake - Netflix and the like do not create unique piec…

USA Network has had a refreshing run of great series - Monk, Psych, White Collar, Suits, Mr Robot, Burn Notice - that don't quite fit the "older, more conservative folk" mold described. And this is what they've done without much budget, credibility, or star power. I'm pleasantly surprised and sincerely impressed.

I wouldn't call Monk, Psych, White Collar, Suits, and Burn Notice "great series". Formulaic detective/action/buddy TV at best.

Mr Robot is a little better, but itself is no "Wire" (or any other really great show).

Re: TV’s Dwindling Middle Class

#97
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USA Network has had a refreshing run of great series - Monk, Psych, White Collar, Suits, Mr Robot, Burn Notice - that don't quite fit the "older, more conservative folk" mold described. And this is what they've done without much budget, credibility, or star power. I'm pleasantly surprised and sincerely impressed.

I've referred to the USA lineup as popcorn TV. They are kind of fun shows with a little bit of comedy and a little bit of drama and suspense that don't force you to think too hard after a long day. Sometimes I am in the mood for something deep and dripping with intrigue (House of Cards) and sometimes I just want to lay in bed and watch something where it doesn't matter if I miss some small part of plot that becomes s…

Would you describe Mr Robot as "kind of fun shows with a little bit of comedy and a little bit of drama and suspense that don't force you to think too hard after a long day"?

Re: TV’s Dwindling Middle Class

#98
post #15
post #2

I remember growing up as a lower-middle class midwestern kid, Roseanne was a show I loved, because I identified with it so much. Dan and Roseanne were my parents, and my friends were just like Darlene and Becky. Another similar show from that era is "Grace Under Fire". As a 35-yo upper-middle class guy still in the midwest, I look at what's on TV (both broadcast and Netflix/Amazon/etc.) and see none of that represent…

Isn't it simple ? most working class jobs are boring. But law, police, medicine, a tv show(rock 30), or just changing jobs and random situation puts you in a lot of variety and that makes comedy easier. And the expectations of comedy today are far bigger than the 80's. So something had to give.

>Isn't it simple ? most working class jobs are boring.

That wasn't a problem in the past. Besides, nothing more boring than being a regular cop, lawyer, doctor etc.

It's the treatment that makes it look exciting, not the patrolling around for 8 hours and eating doughnuts reality of being a cop.

And you wouldn't believe how tedious being a doctor is, either in a private practice or at a hospital.

Nothing like ER or House at all -- it's the social interactions and plot scripts that make it all interesting, not the actual real life jobs.

Re: TV’s Dwindling Middle Class

#99
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that wouldn't seem to explain the many years of success Roseanne had. Also, as to the comedy, viewed in its time-period, it was a very funny show.

Do you consider it(Roseanne) a classic ? would you rewatch it today, like i watched blackadder(just an old example) ? or like i rewatched 30 rock ?

Yes! It's a fantastic show. In fact I had rewatched several episodes of Rosanne a few months ago and plan to rewatch more.

Re: TV’s Dwindling Middle Class

#100
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a difference between British and American English. In the UK, "middle class" basically means rich. In the US, it means that maybe you own a house.

Are you from the UK, would you call David Beckham (say) Upper Class? He's as wealthy as they come but pretty clearly working class IMO.

That's because the British think of class as some BS blue-blooded royal thing.

Beckham is by no means "working class" -- though he might have been born as such.

He is just not royalty and hadn't grown up from families owing castles and being members in the house of lords.

Post reply on HN