The most uplifting shows for me on television right now feature protagonists who make a living off of other people's sorrow.
I find my eyes moistening with tears when sexual addicts lose custody of a baby they intended to raise, when a man responsible for the deaths of many (and who is chronicly unfaithful to his spouse)has his wife file for divorce against him, and I gasp with terror as a man who picked up a hitchhiker for both the thrill and a possible sexual get-back encounter against his boyfriend ends up getting hijacked and nearly beaten to a pulp.
Either something's wrong with me, or these are the best damn written shows on television.
While the former is arguable, the latter is not. The Sopranos, Nip/Tuck, and Six Feet Under are the most brutally honest shows on television, and have writing that is so powerful that you are able to associate with people who in many cases, seeing them just in glances, you normally would outright despise.
I've talked before at length on how wonderful a show Joan of Arcadia is - it's an honest show that moves me to tears as well. But it's a blatantly sunny CBS show. Characters have rough times, there are moral dilemmas. While having a supernatural twist, the situations the characters deal with are real, and have effects. But, being a relatively moral (and normal) CBS family, it doesn't get too 'gritty'. You may know these kids in school, you may know their parents from work, or PTA meetings. They're the people with general sunny dispositions whose lives are actually more frought with internal strife than appears on the surface.
With the aforementioned cablers, though, the protagonists are people in which following a first impression of them, your mind would make up horror stories of what the rest of their lives are probably like. These are the proverbial Damned To Hell - and they'll likely admit it to you.
But what about the aspects of their lives that you don't see?
"Don't Judge A Book By Its Cover". You hear it all the time, I hear it all the time. Most of us probably try and live it as well as we quote it, and come up failing. We say we're not prejudiced, but we judge. It's instinctual. Even if done for caution (let's stay away from that fellow, he looks scary), it's still judging.
And then there are the people we hear about on television, on the news, on 20/20, or other news magazines. People who have done horrible things, people who have become monsters of a mythic proportion in our minds. These aren't just killers - these are financial scam-artists, sexual predators, and even people who are lax about cleanliness in the Food Services.
We watch programs detailing an Expose' on their Evil Habits, and we villainize them, and are immensely glad and happy that they've been caught, and never give it a second thought about the people who love them, and how they're affected by finding out these things, or, if they knew, how they felt about them doing them.
A friend of my family is a great guy, and an amazing dentist. A few years ago, there was an incident where a child patient started having a fit and thrashed his arm out towards the Dentist and his tools - the dentist reacted out of reflex to move the arm away. This resulted in the child's arm getting bent at an odd angle, and breaking.
It was a problem. It shouldn't have happened. News got out - and then, not unlike the recent Catholic Priest sexual abuse scandals, people came seemingly out of the wordwork saying, 'Hey, my arm got a little bruised back a few years ago. I want money, too.'
Hearings ensued, the verdicts of which were televised in the Jersey/New York area on the news. If we hadn't known this man, known his disposition, known his family, his daughters, been his ACTUAL PATIENTS -- from the news reports alone, we'd think this man was some sort of crazy nutjob out there preying on the young and the weak who needs to get Out Of This Job as soon as possible. We'd applaud that his licence was taken away.
But we didn't applaud. There was much support (we attended the hearings, and even made signs for the Media to see in support of him. Many other fellow patients were there as well with other means of support), both by being physically present, and thorugh telephone communication. We saw the sorrow, the pain that the new financial burden pressed upon them. We saw his daughters burning with anger and hurt at the slanderous things people were saying about their father.
Meanwhile, people tuned in their televisions and cheered.
This is a case of extremes - there was indeed an accident made, but the image set forth through the media was a false one. In the shows I was discussing - particularly The Sopranos and Nip/Tuck - characters truly are immorral. But..there's more to them. In many cases, they want to change, and strive to change, but are in fact ADDICTED to their immoral lives, see their destruction, in cases are DESPERATE to move away from this rapid self-destruction they see themselves in, but still love the thrill and instant-satisfaction of their immoral lifestyles too much to change. There are moments of deep moral anguish where we see these people want to change, and are rooting for them to change, and realize that they are lovable human beings, and yes, through their immorality, you can identify and love them...
...and then they let loose, and go and do something completely reprehensible that all but kills whatever compassion you may have had for them - until you see the toll it takes on them again, and instead of thinking 'Well, litle bastard gets what he deserved', you hurt for him. You know he deserves what he's getting, and this is the Right Thing To Happen - but that doesn't make you empathize with him any less.
and it's kind of scary.
But then there are the lives more similar to that of our dentist friend, where it doesn't even take a terrible accident to make a bad impression - the job itself makes you judgemental.
In Six Feet Under, three of the main characters run a Funeral Home. Throughout the series, many of the characters have judged them as being money-hungry scavengers taking advantage of, and making money off of the grieving. and it's easy to see this point of view --
Until we pull back and see the people for who they are, see their conversations with others, hear their philosophies. They truly believe they're doing an important job to give people the opportunity to have one final sufficient 'Good Bye'. They are trained 'grief counselors'. Some of them get down right depressed and become emotionally attatched to the families who come in, and, thorugh stories told of the deceaced, even form atatchments with the bodies they need to embalm. It's strange. It's bizarre. It's something you don't think about.
And it's moving as hell.
Nip/Tuck is about two prominent plastic surgeons who begin each interview with 'Tell Me What You Don't Like About yourself' - these are doctors who have severe self-image problems themselves.
The shows...aren't pretty. Many people would find their displays of graphic language, violence, and nudity an immediate turn-off, not seeing how anything this 'vile' could have any sort of redeeming value.
It amazes me, too, how something so unpretty can in fact be truly beautiful, and educational about how fascinating and complex human beings really are.
Posted by Jutsa Notha Name (Member # 4485) on :
quote:I find my eyes moistening with tears when sexual addicts lose custody of a baby they intended to raise
Are you describing nymphomaniacs, or just normal people who have sex?
Posted by Taalcon (Member # 839) on :
An individual who was enrolled in a sexual addiction support group, and picked up a woman from that support group and got her pregnant - or so he thought. And she kept all along making Doctor Troy think he was responsible, and he finally decided to grow up and take responsibility --- and the child came out black. It wasn't his.
But then he decided to love the child anyway - it wasn't his, but he had told himself he'd change, and had decided to love the child. This wasn't going to change. But the child wasn't safe from the mother - at all. And Christian Troy wanted to sue for custody, to adopt. As a revenge tactic, the Mother decided she'd have another baby that WASN'T his, and proceeded to have almost twice as many sexual partners in one month than there were days in that month in order to get herself pregnant - this failed, but gave Christian even more dirt against her for the trial...
Until she pulls out the Biological Father as a wild card to flaunt in Christian's face. This man, however, becomes convinced that the child isn't safe with the mother, and wants Christian to take care of it...
Until he has a revelation and decides he needs to come clean to his wife about the affair, and decides to sue for complete custody of the baby itself, without any visitation rights.
The judgement made is that while Christian does appear to have a true unconditional love for the baby, he has no leagal rights, and the mother is othe only one for whom the judge truly feared for the child's life if he were to go with them.
So custody is given to the Biological father, and Christian is never allowed to see his 'son' until he turns 18.
[ July 21, 2004, 11:08 AM: Message edited by: Taalcon ]
Posted by Jutsa Notha Name (Member # 4485) on :
Wow! What a crazy situation! Of course, what better place to pick up chicks? Posted by Taalcon (Member # 839) on :
IT's frustrating when you hear about Family Values groups protesting and trying to boycot these shows, because of the Reprehensible Values the Show Preaches.
these people have obviously never seen these shows, which are, in many cases, morality tales. Just not as black & white and clear cut as many would like all their entertainment to be.
The show might not be for them, but lordy, why try to take it away from people who can handle it?
Posted by Jutsa Notha Name (Member # 4485) on :
Kinda like the tale of one of those wicked neighbors from Samaria with a twist in it.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Hmm...I have a theory.
This arise from my recent choices of literature. When I was a teenager, all I read were classics. I recently tried to read Anna Karenina, and I couldn't make it through. I couldn't handle it. Talking with a friend, I came to the conclusion that I simply didn't want to read about unhappy families - I know perfectly well what an unhappy family is like. When I was a teenager, I didn't at all.
My theory - take it for what it's worth - is that part of the fascination with these lives stems from your own being absolutely nothing like it.
I read that in connection with Harry Potter, too - kids LOVE to read aabout a plucky kid who overcame being shut in the cupboard under the stairs for most of his life. It's adventure. I drink up the details of the Dementors and Voldemort as Nemesis because there is NOTHING in my life like that. But for kids who really are treated like Harry was - for whom being shut in the cupboard under the stairs is a possibility instead of an exciting daydream - the book isn't nearly as much fun.
Posted by Taalcon (Member # 839) on :
You know, at first I rolled my eyes at that comment (Justa's), but the more I think of it, in some ways it's really accurate. The story of the guy everyone should despise on principal actually being the most valiant person when it really matters. But yes, seeing some of these as a VERY extended and embellished 'Good Samaritan' story almost...kinda makes sense.
-
quote:But for kids who really are treated like Harry was - for whom being shut in the cupboard under the stairs is a possibility instead of an exciting daydream - the book isn't nearly as much fun.
Interesting - I would think it would make the story an even more attractive work of escapism. Interesting thought.
[ July 21, 2004, 11:25 AM: Message edited by: Taalcon ]
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Well, this makes me think about the kind of books I like best, stuff like Faulkner, Dostoyevsky, Thornton Wilder, or James Baldwin where the people sometimes make disasterous choices, and terrible things happen to them, and their lives are anything but cookie cutter nice, yet I think I disagree with the thought that they're only interesting to those who do NOT have lives like that. To me, when the issues you deal with in your actual real life are serious and sad, when you have faced desperate troubles, both from bad choices made by you and those around you, and from difficult circumstances which are outside anyone's control, then stories of people with happy peaceful "normal" lives are often too lightweight for you to enjoy as your main course of heart-mind-spirit food. It can be pleasingly diverting to watch an episode of the Brady Bunch, for example, or read a book like Jane Austen (whom I am not putting down at all -- she has wonderful observations about human foibles, in such an affectionate way), but it just doesn't seem important enough to form the meat of your reading. Whereas someone like Dostoyevsky or James Baldwin is.
I am a human, and nothing human is alien to me. (I paraphrased that from something Aristotle said, I think. ) Reading good books about people in all sorts of situations doing things we might never do or suffering through circumstances we might never be exposed to is how we learn about life, I think. It gives us a framework for thinking about humanity and the human condition that transcends our own narrow sphere of experience.
When I read about aristocratic 19th c. Russians gambling away their family fortunes in German resort towns, and giving up things that once mattered to them more than life, without a backward glance, in pursuit of that next lucky spin of the roulette wheel, it says something universal to me about addiction, about choices for good or ill that I and those around me have made in our lives. It's applicable, even if writ larger and more extreme. And how, if we had not stories of people facing terrible odds, would we find the courage to face our own?
There's so much that needs doing to make the world a place where everyone has a chance for peace and joy. Stories of horrible situations, choices, and human responses thoughout history and across cultures show us the fundamental kinship of all humans, they give us courage not to shy away from sad or unfamiliar circumstances, and they show us the unerring laws upon which the joys and sorrows of human life are predicated. Good stories don't hide from the ugly parts of life. I don't watch tv, but it sounds like the shows you mention tell good stories.
[ July 21, 2004, 12:02 PM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Saying that made it sound as though I take good books like some sort of moral medicine, to teach pat answers about life. That's not at all what I mean.
I guess it's precisely because life is so much more difficult and complex, both in joys and sorrows, than anyone can really fathom, that reading stories of real people with honest failings facing perplexing choices and gut-wrenching experiences is so important to us. The heart, mind, and spirit hunger for these things, and good books feed that hunger. Not because there is a way to know all the answers, but because we have to think about it, to decide what we think, to turn it all over in our hearts and somehow by doing that we learn what it means to be alive, or discover what meaning we choose to imbue into our own lives.
[ July 21, 2004, 12:11 PM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by Taalcon (Member # 839) on :
Katharina:
Do you think someone who has faith in God, who has had everything they've had seemingly taken away for no reason, and who also suffers from terrible illness could find the Book of Job comforting?
--
That's an extreme example of course. But...I actually tend to find things more powerful that DO make me squirm because they resemble things in my life freakily close. Television shows or films in which people say and do cringe-worthy things that I have said or done, or have been in similar circumstances. Sometimes the results are the same as what happened in Our Own Life, and it works as a reaffirmation of sorts. Sometimes the characters handle things differently, and it makes you think about why you made the choices you did.
But I can see how some things may be 'too close to home' for people - in some cases, the fact that characters do what we did and are not treated well for those decisions can make one feel defensive, as if the show was judging them, ignorantly, and after the fact.
[ July 21, 2004, 12:19 PM: Message edited by: Taalcon ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
But the Book of Job is centered around Job staying close to the Lord, isn't it?
I think there's a difference between a sad story that has the hero pull through, and a sad story where the hero gives up hope and becomes what his worst angels urge him to be. It's like the difference between Jane Austen and Edith Wharton.
Having said that, I LOVE Edith Wharton. Jane Austen is witty and piercing, but Edith Wharton feels much more true. She doesn't tack on the happy ending. On the other hand, there's not a chance that I could go through something like her protagonists did - I don't live in that world, and I'd never, ever marry someone I didn't love for societal reasons. Their sorrows have nothing to do with me, and that may be part of why I like it.
[ July 21, 2004, 12:18 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Taalcon (Member # 839) on :
Harry Potter books have happy endings with the kid pulling thorugh adversity, learning gumption, and learning to overcome his living-under-the-cuboardness.
I don't think the end results are always what make a story comfortable, or uncomfortable. It's the scene-by-scene, moment-to-moment parts. It's all in the details.
there have been films and books with 'happy endings' that have left me far more disturbed than those with 'unhappy endings'.
[ July 21, 2004, 12:25 PM: Message edited by: Taalcon ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*thinks* That's true - maybe it was just those parts of the story, the parts of the Dursleys, that the article reported that genuinely abused kids objected to. This would be a much more effective story if I could find the original article.
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
kat, I'm going to have to mull over what you said about Wharton and Austen. Those happen to be my wife's two favorite authors. In fact, right now we are reading Pride and Prejudice together in the evenings. It's my first Austen experience, except for movies, and it's her umpteenth time of reading this one book. She has also had me sit through the film version of Wharton's Age of Innocence more than once.
(I enjoy Wharton myself. The House of Mirth was great, and I also enjoyed The Custom of the Country.)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
) Reading good books about people in all sorts of situations doing things we might never do or suffering through circumstances we might never be exposed to is how we learn about life, I think. It gives us a framework for thinking about humanity and the human condition that transcends our own narrow sphere of experience. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)