Comments on: On Stan Lee, Leonard Nimoy, and Coitus . . . Or, The Fleeting Pleasures of Televisual Nerdom http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/07/30/on-stan-lee-leonard-nimoy-and-coitus-or-the-fleeting-pleasures-of-televisual-nerdom/ Responses to Media and Culture Fri, 12 Feb 2016 19:35:04 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.7.5 By: Bärbel Göbel http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/07/30/on-stan-lee-leonard-nimoy-and-coitus-or-the-fleeting-pleasures-of-televisual-nerdom/comment-page-1/#comment-23968 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 23:18:48 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5272#comment-23968 While I have heard much similar critique on Glee, I believe that its subtleties, while making it less main stream, often go unnoticed, maybe? My favorite dialogue is still: “Just because you sleep with someone doesn’t mean you’re in a relationship with that person.” “Exactly, otherwise I would be in a relationship with Santa.” The show’s ‘quality’ lies in things left unsaid, and that includes its use of stereotypes (Names are drawn from a hat, one piece of paper reads: The other Asian kid), racism, flashy Highschool Musical look, mention/brief scenes of a girl with trisomy 21 that then sits on the side lines – for quota …

The potential downfall of the show would be to go with the flow of its more common reading. If it stops these asides, it will be all that you have said. For now though, I am interested what else is between the lines…

]]>
By: Heather Hendershot http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/07/30/on-stan-lee-leonard-nimoy-and-coitus-or-the-fleeting-pleasures-of-televisual-nerdom/comment-page-1/#comment-23965 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:42:43 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5272#comment-23965 Thanks for your note, Myles. I have no doubt that there is some tweaking going on, but, yes, the foundation for the laugh track is actually people. It’s interesting how a real studio audience now seems so old school. So much of the one-camera, reality-ish comedy (e.g. Party Down, Curb Your Enthusiasm, and so many others) depends upon long silences, awkward pauses, and moments of drawn out embarrassment and humiliation. This kind of emotionally fraught humor wouldn’t work with an audience making noises!

As for the girlfriend, I suspect that the juvenile question driving all of season 4 may be “when are they going to do it?” So, a la Foucault, the no sex thing will really be about sex completely. But you are absolutely right that, if they can avoid the pitfalls of the Penny/Leonard relationship that you have so aptly explained, things might turn out alright!

]]>
By: Jonathan Gray http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/07/30/on-stan-lee-leonard-nimoy-and-coitus-or-the-fleeting-pleasures-of-televisual-nerdom/comment-page-1/#comment-23964 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:14:11 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5272#comment-23964 Jennifer, if your feelings re: Glee are unpopular, at least you’re not alone. I’ve grown tired of it — the show can still be fun at times, and has some good humor in it, but it’s soooooo proud of being accepting of everyone when really it’s not all that much. I also find it hard when watching not to think that most of those supposed “outcasts” would be the cool kids in high school who thought I was a loser. Whereas, as Heather points out, I long for Freaks and Geeks — Bill, Sam, and Neal, I can recognize as my kin 🙂

]]>
By: Myles McNutt http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/07/30/on-stan-lee-leonard-nimoy-and-coitus-or-the-fleeting-pleasures-of-televisual-nerdom/comment-page-1/#comment-23962 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:09:29 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5272#comment-23962 Just to clarify, the Big Bang Theory laugh track is actually the studio audience – it films live, and according to all reports uses that audience response. Sure, it may be tweaked (as you note), but the show’s producers often note how integral that live response is to their sense of timing.

As for the girlfriend, I’m intrigued enough to put away my concerns – while his queerness is certainly a key part of his character, I think that as long as the relationship remains built around companionship rather than sex (in other words, the precise opposite of Leonard and Penny’s relationship) I think it could work out alright.

]]>
By: Heather Hendershot http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/07/30/on-stan-lee-leonard-nimoy-and-coitus-or-the-fleeting-pleasures-of-televisual-nerdom/comment-page-1/#comment-23953 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 20:16:33 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5272#comment-23953 I’m so glad that you brought up Glee. I’ve seen about as much of it as you have of BBT, so I’m not sure how informed of a response I can make, but I’ll echo your concern about the pretty conventionality that seems to infuse the new pop culture interest in nerds. This is obviously at work in High School Musical, which is (really, I mean it) one of the most disturbing films I have ever seen. The film conveys a fascist insistence on perfection, but perfection that is achieved through natural ability and not trying too hard. Sharpay is evil because she is strong-willed and tries very hard to achieve, while the good singers and athletes just happen to be perfect and succeed through expressing their own perfection to the world. There are no real outcasts in this world, except people like Sharpay who deserve to be outcasts.

It really makes one long for the dearly departed Freaks and Geeks. Remember when the boys sit on the curb with popsicles and wonder why the hell girls would like stupid, athletic boys who will never, ever get into a good college? They decide that the librarian type is what they need to find–like Bailey, on WKRP in Cincinatti. When one of them briefly does get a cute girlfriend, she turns out to be terrible, boring, vacuous–and a Republican! There were certainly attractive people on Freaks and Geeks (Franco), but it really was such a brilliant, short-lived moment when TV dealt with outcast nerdom in a real way.

]]>
By: Heather Hendershot http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/07/30/on-stan-lee-leonard-nimoy-and-coitus-or-the-fleeting-pleasures-of-televisual-nerdom/comment-page-1/#comment-23952 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 20:03:44 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5272#comment-23952 Thanks for all this, Miles. Your observations about the laugh track are provocative. You seem to be talking about the laugh track as if it were a real record of audience response–and, indeed, perhaps this is how viewers sometimes perceive it. Hence, a laugh track that in season 3 would seem ridiculous (making a niche/nerd viewer think, “Who would laugh at that feeble joke? What is the mass audience thinking?”) might in the better season 2 make that same viewer feel implicated as part of the audience. In effect, then, the track would function as stand-in for the satisfied nerd/niche viewer’s response.

Of course, even when real studio audiences are present, laugh tracks are mercilessly tweaked by producers. Euphemistically, this is known as “sweetening,” but one might less generously call it utter fabrication of audience response. I am reminded of Andy Kaufman’s horrified response to learning he had been cast on Taxi. A sitcom? But the laughter is a recording of dead people! In any case, I suspect that when we like a show, we interpret the laugh track as more real than when we don’t like a show.

Like you, I am interested to see what will happen in season 4, though I am also nervous. Season 3 ended with Sheldon being matched up with a girlfriend. I like the actress a lot, and it was a great cliffhanger. However, as I briefly mentioned in my initial post, Sheldon is compelling in large part for his queerness, and, on this front, the new girlfriend could take things in more or less interesting directions. Season 2 often infantilized Sheldon (as in his trip to Disney world, his attendance at a mixer with a Green Lantern lantern), and it wasn’t very interesting, as the implication was less that his sexuality was strange than that he was simply pre-sexual. However, season 2 also contains a brilliant moment in episode 6. Earlier in the episode, the boys wonder how Sheldon might reproduce, and they hypothesize that it is likely that one day he will simply eat too much Pad Thai and undergo mitosis. This is precisely what happens in the show’s coda (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00lRB2oP08A) Now THAT is some strange sexuality! One cannot help but worry, then, about how this new girlfriend plot might turn out…

]]>
By: Jennifer Smith http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/07/30/on-stan-lee-leonard-nimoy-and-coitus-or-the-fleeting-pleasures-of-televisual-nerdom/comment-page-1/#comment-23947 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 19:23:25 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5272#comment-23947 Excellent piece. I haven’t watched much of the Big Bang Theory myself (maybe an episode and a half), largely because the portrayal of nerddom seemed more often than not to be coming from a place of, as you said, laughing “at” the nerds rather than with them. I also had a lot of issues with the show’s portrayal of women, especially because — and I’d love for viewers to correct me if I’m wrong — there seems to be no place in the BBT world for women who are geeks. No matter how well the show may reflect geeky passions and references, they certainly aren’t portraying the nerd world I live in, in which women are vital contributors and not just hotties-next-door.

I have to say — and this may be an unpopular opinion — this is almost the exact same problem I have with Glee. As a former high school outcast with a passion for musical theater, I was excited for a show that might capture that experience. But no matter how many Broadway guest stars they throw into the mix, all I can see is a show that seems to revel in focusing on its conventionally pretty, straight, white, able-bodied, at least semi-popular characters and pushing all of the actual outcasts into the background — literally, in he case of the musical numbers. And that’s not even counting the reliance on crude stereotypes and a pervasive characterization of almost all women as shrews. It feels like another show that seems like a niche show come to a mass audience (singing! dorks!) but is actually a mass show pretending to be niche for a sense of edginess.

]]>
By: Myles McNutt http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/07/30/on-stan-lee-leonard-nimoy-and-coitus-or-the-fleeting-pleasures-of-televisual-nerdom/comment-page-1/#comment-23877 Tue, 03 Aug 2010 06:09:21 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5272#comment-23877 I’m finally reading this great piece, but I’m far too late considering my own experience with the show. I wrote it off after the pilot, in which I felt personally insulted by the notion that watching Battlestar Galactica commentaries was somehow associated with these broad caricatures of nerdom. However, I attended the PaleyFest panel for the show last year, and I saw how much people seemed to have embraced the show and its treatment of geek culture, and I thought the episode screened was pretty funny, so I started watching. And then I started writing reviews, and then those reviews started getting picked up by a Sheldon/Penny shipper community, and then I was far too fascinated by their interaction with my reviews, and the series’ inconsistency, to stop writing them.

I’ve got a whole lot of observations to make from that experience which would be too much here, but I will extend an argument I made about the pilot while catching up with the series (which can be found here). What struck me on returning to the pilot is that the (live) laugh track is part of the problem: because we’re being instructed on what is funny, there is no way to capture the nuance of whether we’re laughing at the characters or with them. The laugh track is the result of a mass audience, and so it can easily come into conflict with niche viewers and their readings of particular scenes. It’s why I found the “geek” moments in the premiere so problematic, and why it turned me off the show for too long.

However, over time this would change: the studio audiences would be fans of the show, and they would either have a knowledge of the geek culture being discussed (thus getting the jokes) or would have watched enough of the show to understand how the characters revere geek culture. And so the studio audience’s laughter better reflects the unique convergence of mass and niche culture, which helps the series balance out its approach to nerdom.

Perhaps what happened in Season Three was that the writers took this balance for granted, forgetting that their audience was still from two different worlds and that storylines like Leonard and Penny’s relationship would still need to carefully negotiate those different perspectives. It seemed as if Penny became less knowledgeable about comic book culture in order to emphasize their lack of connection, while Leonard seemed at times to ignore his geeky routes entirely and at other times act as if nothing had changed. In the end, their odd chemistry became a story point which resulted in their breakup, but the series could have achieved that breakup without fussing with an all-important balance.

As I say, I could go on forever, but there’s a quick observation – thanks for sharing these thoughts Heather, as they’ve got me excited for another year of anaylzing the series in all of its flawed glory.

]]>
By: Anon http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/07/30/on-stan-lee-leonard-nimoy-and-coitus-or-the-fleeting-pleasures-of-televisual-nerdom/comment-page-1/#comment-23788 Sun, 01 Aug 2010 19:06:17 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5272#comment-23788 I direct you to the plot arc in “Two Guys and a Girl” in which the ebullient Irene was introduced, in a purely comic-relief context, as the geeky cat-lady-next door with an obsessive crush on one of the titular Guys, and eventually wound up captivating the *other* of the Two Guys (i.e., the extremely attractive and funny Berg, played by a young Ryan Reynolds) with her infectious cheer, confident sexuality, and ability to understand him the way no other woman ever had.

It was an unexpected and amazing storyline for a sitcom that up to that point had pretty much subscribed to the “I look hot and will insult you a lot and that will indicate that we have sexual tension” school of writing/casting romantic interests for its male leads.

(I just searched YouTube for visuals and sure enough, there are Irene/Berg vids! Oh my goodness–I had forgotten just how big Jillian Bach’s grin was as Irene, and how vulnerable Ryan Reynolds allowed Berg to be with her. They were so adorable together. )

]]>
By: Heather Hendershot http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/07/30/on-stan-lee-leonard-nimoy-and-coitus-or-the-fleeting-pleasures-of-televisual-nerdom/comment-page-1/#comment-23571 Sat, 31 Jul 2010 00:45:34 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5272#comment-23571 Interesting. Yes, I see a parallel in terms of simultaneous niche/mass (laughing with/at) appeal and queer text/subtext. Sheldon’s naivete about sex is pretty extreme. On the one hand, this often comes across simply as infantilization. On the other hand, Sheldon is just too busy thinking for sex, and this makes him a kind of egghead version of workaholic Liz Lemon.

]]>