Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Man Who Gets The Science Right On 'The Big Bang Theory'

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 75 posts

Re: The Man Who Gets The Science Right On 'The Big Bang Theory'

#11

Post by eco »

stormbrew wrote: post #8
eco wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once heard Big Bang Theory described as "blackface for nerds"* and it made me suddenly realize why I was so uncomfortable watching that show. * I hope no one thinks I'm trying to trivialize blackface which was, of course, far worse than what Big Bang Theory is doing.

I really wish people would stop saying this. Even if you don't mean to trivialize what blackface actually was, that is basically the net effect. It's a terrible analogy on pretty much every level.

They both set up caricatures of an unpopular group for the audience to laugh at. Like I said, blackface is far worse but I don't see how the analogy is "[terrible] on pretty much every level". It's much less hateful and damaging, certainly, but it's there in tone.

I was hoping to not have this debate that invariably comes up about how you can't compare anything to blackface because of how bad blackface was but I don't consider that a valid argument against the comparison.

Re: The Man Who Gets The Science Right On 'The Big Bang Theory'

#12

Post by brazzy »

novum wrote: post #3

As an aside, I was watching BBT just yesterday (on a long plane ride with limited entertainment options) and I was reminded how uncomfortably awkward it makes me feel. In short, the core problem is that the characters are not sympathetic -- you're meant to laugh at them, not with them, to say nothing of the show's terribly backwards gender roles. This essay was quite popular a while back and summarizes all this and m…

> In short, the core problem is that the characters are not sympathetic -- you're meant to laugh at them, not with them, to say nothing of the show's terribly backwards gender roles.

For the record: I disagree 100% with every single statement in there.

Re: The Man Who Gets The Science Right On 'The Big Bang Theory'

#13

Post by stormbrew »

eco wrote: post #11
stormbrew wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish people would stop saying this. Even if you don't mean to trivialize what blackface actually was, that is basically the net effect. It's a terrible analogy on pretty much every level.

They both set up caricatures of an unpopular group for the audience to laugh at. Like I said, blackface is far worse but I don't see how the analogy is "[terrible] on pretty much every level". It's much less hateful and damaging, certainly, but it's there in tone. I was hoping to not have this debate that invariably comes up about how you can't compare anything to blackface because of how bad blackface was but I don'…

Part of what makes blackface so horrible is the power imbalance that underlies it. In the days of minstrelry, black people were deeply and powerfully unequal in civil society. They had no recourse against the indignity done to them by blackface performance, and it was an indignity forced on them by a more powerful social class.

Try replacing nerds with black people in that paragraph and tell me it's at all comparable.

Re: The Man Who Gets The Science Right On 'The Big Bang Theory'

#14

Post by objclxt »

novum wrote: post #3

As an aside, I was watching BBT just yesterday (on a long plane ride with limited entertainment options) and I was reminded how uncomfortably awkward it makes me feel. In short, the core problem is that the characters are not sympathetic -- you're meant to laugh at them, not with them, to say nothing of the show's terribly backwards gender roles. This essay was quite popular a while back and summarizes all this and m…

> Can we at least agree that laugh tracks are awful, even on otherwise-phenomenal shows (Seinfeld)?

No. Multi-camera sitcoms with live audiences are very, very different in writing, tone, and end product to single camera comedies. They both serve different purposes.

Shooting a sitcom in front of a studio audience radically alters the pacing, the way jokes are told, and the setup (you're inherently constrained to fewer sets).

I think there is still a space today for comedies with live audiences (and the ratings seem to back this up). I love Arrested Development. I also love Frasier. AD would obviously never have worked with a live audience, Frasier would have been a far worse show without the laugh track.

Now, I'm not talking about canned laughter. I think I can agree that adding laughter in post is bad. And Big Bang Theory is particularly guilty of 'sweetening' live audience reaction, meaning jokes that shouldn't be that funny often have huge waves of laughter. I don't appreciate that.

Re: The Man Who Gets The Science Right On 'The Big Bang Theory'

#15

Post by warfangle »

stormbrew wrote: post #13
eco wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They both set up caricatures of an unpopular group for the audience to laugh at. Like I said, blackface is far worse but I don't see how the analogy is "[terrible] on pretty much every level". It's much less hateful and damaging, certainly, but it's there in tone. I was hoping to not have this debate that invariably comes up about how you can't compare anything to blackface because of how bad blackface was but I don'…

Part of what makes blackface so horrible is the power imbalance that underlies it. In the days of minstrelry, black people were deeply and powerfully unequal in civil society. They had no recourse against the indignity done to them by blackface performance, and it was an indignity forced on them by a more powerful social class. Try replacing nerds with black people in that paragraph and tell me it's at all comparable…

Put it in context of a high school / middle school lunchroom...

Re: The Man Who Gets The Science Right On 'The Big Bang Theory'

#16

Post by SeanLuke »

What baffles me is that David Salzberg is a professor works tirelessly to get the science correct on BBT, and yet this gentleman was unable to correct the incredible, mind-bogglingly bad episode "The Tenure Turbulence", where every possible aspect of tenure appears to come from some alternate universe unrelated to Earth. This episode is so far beyond wrong I don't know where to start. David knows how tenure works: indeed he might be the only person working for the show who does (besides maybe Bialik). Why wouldn't they consult him?

Re: The Man Who Gets The Science Right On 'The Big Bang Theory'

#17

Post by SeanLuke »

novum wrote: post #3

As an aside, I was watching BBT just yesterday (on a long plane ride with limited entertainment options) and I was reminded how uncomfortably awkward it makes me feel. In short, the core problem is that the characters are not sympathetic -- you're meant to laugh at them, not with them, to say nothing of the show's terribly backwards gender roles. This essay was quite popular a while back and summarizes all this and m…

> Edit 2: Can we at least agree that laugh tracks are awful, even on otherwise-phenomenal shows (Seinfeld)?

BBT does not use a laugh track.

Re: The Man Who Gets The Science Right On 'The Big Bang Theory'

#18

Post by phaus »

soneca wrote: post #10
novum wrote: post #3

As an aside, I was watching BBT just yesterday (on a long plane ride with limited entertainment options) and I was reminded how uncomfortably awkward it makes me feel. In short, the core problem is that the characters are not sympathetic -- you're meant to laugh at them, not with them, to say nothing of the show's terribly backwards gender roles. This essay was quite popular a while back and summarizes all this and m…

I started to feel this way watching Two and a Half Men, because of the character Allan. After some years of laughs I just felt awkward because there was this, incredibly unlucky, with no particular skill socially or professionally, mistreated by everybody, from his ex-wife to his brother's maid, humiliated by women, with no will-power to fight back. Really, it was just sad. Usually even the weak characters have some…

For me the awkwardness started when I realized that Charlie Sheen was playing himself. A morally deficient, manipulative, self-centered douche-bag who happens to be hell bent on self-destruction, yet he always narrowly avoids it due to his disproportionate amounts of luck.

Re: The Man Who Gets The Science Right On 'The Big Bang Theory'

#19

Post by BrianEatWorld »

SeanLuke wrote: post #17
novum wrote: post #3

As an aside, I was watching BBT just yesterday (on a long plane ride with limited entertainment options) and I was reminded how uncomfortably awkward it makes me feel. In short, the core problem is that the characters are not sympathetic -- you're meant to laugh at them, not with them, to say nothing of the show's terribly backwards gender roles. This essay was quite popular a while back and summarizes all this and m…

> Edit 2: Can we at least agree that laugh tracks are awful, even on otherwise-phenomenal shows (Seinfeld)? BBT does not use a laugh track.

You are right that its not canned laughter, but a laugh track can more generally refer to a separate track for the audience's laughter. This can be edited to compensate for jokes that require repeated takes or have its level's adjusted just like the rest of the sound in the show.

I don't watch the show, so I can't say for sure, but its possible that the way the laugh track is mixed makes it more obvious than other shows, such as 90s sitcoms.

Re: The Man Who Gets The Science Right On 'The Big Bang Theory'

#20

Post by stormbrew »

warfangle wrote: post #15
stormbrew wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of what makes blackface so horrible is the power imbalance that underlies it. In the days of minstrelry, black people were deeply and powerfully unequal in civil society. They had no recourse against the indignity done to them by blackface performance, and it was an indignity forced on them by a more powerful social class. Try replacing nerds with black people in that paragraph and tell me it's at all comparable…

Put it in context of a high school / middle school lunchroom...

Where, in spite of that, your teachers were probably pushing you to perform, and when you got out you probably had no trouble getting into a good school which made it more likely for you to get a good job.

Kids are cruel, but their social order is not the real world. In the real world nerds are not a disadvantaged, let alone oppressed, group.

Post reply on HN