he should have eaten the other five
March 25, 2016 9:51 PM Subscribe
The article, however, is trash.
posted by kenko at 9:54 PM on March 25, 2016 [41 favorites]
posted by kenko at 9:54 PM on March 25, 2016 [41 favorites]
Calling out anti-intellectualism is great. Ross's defect was not that he was intellectual. And the response from the comments is totally accurate--people liked Ross at the time. I never understood that because he always seemed like a crappy friend to me.
posted by saulgoodman at 10:15 PM on March 25, 2016 [10 favorites]
posted by saulgoodman at 10:15 PM on March 25, 2016 [10 favorites]
The comments are much better than the article, which is indeed trash
posted by zutalors! at 10:18 PM on March 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by zutalors! at 10:18 PM on March 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
Ross is terrible though, just the worst. It's not because he's "intellectual", it's because he's monstrously selfish, forces his insecurities on everyone around him, and condescendingly treats them as obviously inferior to his mighty intellect.
posted by Proofs and Refutations at 10:23 PM on March 25, 2016 [59 favorites]
posted by Proofs and Refutations at 10:23 PM on March 25, 2016 [59 favorites]
If I accept the evidence, isn't the conclusion more that Friends is the death knell of the middlebrow consensus that had made a grand show of eschewing low culture, while importing the blandest and most bombastic elements of high culture, cargo cult style.
posted by wotsac at 10:25 PM on March 25, 2016 [11 favorites]
posted by wotsac at 10:25 PM on March 25, 2016 [11 favorites]
You may see it as a comedy, but I cannot laugh with you. To me, Friends signals a harsh embrace of anti-intellectualism in AmericaGet this man a Metafilter account pronto! Our motto here: "Humor isn't funny if it reminds me of something I'm aggrieved about." :)
posted by Harvey Kilobit at 10:29 PM on March 25, 2016 [58 favorites]
Ross is the Nice Guy no woman should ever date.
posted by Windigo at 10:30 PM on March 25, 2016 [45 favorites]
posted by Windigo at 10:30 PM on March 25, 2016 [45 favorites]
Ross is useful because if someone says he's their favourite character on Friends or that they identify with him, you know to walk away. Just walk away fast.
posted by dorothyisunderwood at 10:31 PM on March 25, 2016 [27 favorites]
posted by dorothyisunderwood at 10:31 PM on March 25, 2016 [27 favorites]
If any TV sitcom could have triggered the downfall of western civilization, it would've been decades earlier, with Gilligan's Island.
Besides, The Big Bang Theory is trying SO HARD at promoting anti-intellectualism and not doing so well.
posted by oneswellfoop at 10:32 PM on March 25, 2016 [11 favorites]
Besides, The Big Bang Theory is trying SO HARD at promoting anti-intellectualism and not doing so well.
posted by oneswellfoop at 10:32 PM on March 25, 2016 [11 favorites]
Slate ran a takedown of Chandler a couple months back.
posted by non canadian guy at 10:33 PM on March 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by non canadian guy at 10:33 PM on March 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
Friends is useful because if someone says they have a favourite character, you know to walk away. Just walk away fast. ;p
posted by dr. moot at 10:43 PM on March 25, 2016 [56 favorites]
posted by dr. moot at 10:43 PM on March 25, 2016 [56 favorites]
Did you know the song that originally accompanied the Friends pilot episode was R.E.M.’s “It’s the End of the World as We Know (And I Feel Fine).”That's not true, right? I found some chatter about
Shiny Happy Peoplehaving been the first choice, but surely not this?
posted by books for weapons at 10:47 PM on March 25, 2016
Friends is useful because if someone says they have a favourite character, you know to walk away.
I have never seen more than a handful of short clips from Friends. This show is useful to me in that if someone wants to talk about the TV show Friends, I know to walk away.
posted by Meatbomb at 10:59 PM on March 25, 2016 [4 favorites]
I have never seen more than a handful of short clips from Friends. This show is useful to me in that if someone wants to talk about the TV show Friends, I know to walk away.
posted by Meatbomb at 10:59 PM on March 25, 2016 [4 favorites]
I'd be more willing to accept the "triggered the downfall" theory if there was any actual evidence that intellectualism had been embraced in its depiction in television sitcoms before the premiere of Friends.
I will, however, accept the premise that sitcom television has underscored anti-intellectualism in US culture for decades. I've been watching reruns of Cheers and Frasier lately, and it's rampant in those shows. It carries forward into the "laugh at them, not with them" humor of Big Bang Theory.
posted by hippybear at 11:00 PM on March 25, 2016 [11 favorites]
I will, however, accept the premise that sitcom television has underscored anti-intellectualism in US culture for decades. I've been watching reruns of Cheers and Frasier lately, and it's rampant in those shows. It carries forward into the "laugh at them, not with them" humor of Big Bang Theory.
posted by hippybear at 11:00 PM on March 25, 2016 [11 favorites]
I see Kim Kardashian’s ass at the top of CNN.com, and I am scared.
I would have found your argument more persuasive, Mr Hopkins, if you had made it without being a jerk. This is also my problem with Ross.
posted by langtonsant at 11:29 PM on March 25, 2016 [15 favorites]
I would have found your argument more persuasive, Mr Hopkins, if you had made it without being a jerk. This is also my problem with Ross.
posted by langtonsant at 11:29 PM on March 25, 2016 [15 favorites]
Friends is useful because if someone says they have a favourite character, you know to walk away.
I have never seen more than a handful of short clips from Friends. This show is useful to me in that if someone wants to talk about the TV show Friends, I know to walk away.
I have seen some television and it has become useful to me because if anyone wants to talk to me about it, I mention FanFare and then, friends, I run.
posted by sylvanshine at 12:28 AM on March 26, 2016 [5 favorites]
I have never seen more than a handful of short clips from Friends. This show is useful to me in that if someone wants to talk about the TV show Friends, I know to walk away.
I have seen some television and it has become useful to me because if anyone wants to talk to me about it, I mention FanFare and then, friends, I run.
posted by sylvanshine at 12:28 AM on March 26, 2016 [5 favorites]
For the better part of the middle-to-late nineties, I didn't have a television capable of receiving anything that wasn't fed to it by my VCR. This means that I wasn't watching either Friends or Seinfeld during their original runs.
This has left me at a marginal social disadvantage, because I don't speak Friends or Seinfeld, but these shows have had such tremendous social impact that they have become cultural touchstones, part of a shared-and-understood lexicon. I'll do something, talk about something, and it will be compared to something from one of these shows. True, many of us who grew up watching syndicated reruns of the Brady Bunch or Gilligan's Island are probably likely to speak in the same parallels, but it's fascinating and a little disquieting when someone speaks to me in Friends references and expects me to understand what they mean.
posted by Graygorey at 12:35 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
This has left me at a marginal social disadvantage, because I don't speak Friends or Seinfeld, but these shows have had such tremendous social impact that they have become cultural touchstones, part of a shared-and-understood lexicon. I'll do something, talk about something, and it will be compared to something from one of these shows. True, many of us who grew up watching syndicated reruns of the Brady Bunch or Gilligan's Island are probably likely to speak in the same parallels, but it's fascinating and a little disquieting when someone speaks to me in Friends references and expects me to understand what they mean.
posted by Graygorey at 12:35 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Nietzsche is terrible though, just the worst. It's not because he's "intellectual", it's because he's monstrously selfish, forces his insecurities on everyone around him, and condescendingly treats them as obviously inferior to his mighty intellect.
posted by Taft at 12:52 AM on March 26, 2016 [30 favorites]
posted by Taft at 12:52 AM on March 26, 2016 [30 favorites]
It's interesting that Ross is coming in for all this belated hatred when the other Friends are also so terrible*. I suppose it's to do with the internet's ongoing comprehensive articulation of masculine failings, many of which he perfectly embodies. But actually, they're all pretty bad*, especially Chandler, Rachel, Joey and Phoebe.
*Except of course my girl Monica.
posted by two or three cars parked under the stars at 12:59 AM on March 26, 2016 [5 favorites]
*Except of course my girl Monica.
posted by two or three cars parked under the stars at 12:59 AM on March 26, 2016 [5 favorites]
For real though, my problem with the article is that it's not taking into account that the people who start sentences with "Did you know..." were in the mix, even in 2004, year of the derp. They were doing cool important things, they invented nebulous podcasts and TVtropes and the Nintendo DS and a billion other high-resolution packets of awesomeness. The same applies today, year of the Trump. Actually hopefully this Sanders bird turns things around.
posted by Taft at 12:59 AM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Taft at 12:59 AM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
Wow, I think I must have misread that article. The whole thing came off to me as mildly sarcastic at best. Huh.
posted by gideonswann at 1:03 AM on March 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by gideonswann at 1:03 AM on March 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
Face-value is where it's at. It's always where it has, in fact, been at.
posted by Taft at 1:05 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Taft at 1:05 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
but it's fascinating and a little disquieting when someone speaks to me in Friends references and expects me to understand what they mean.
Shaka, when the walls fell.
posted by mach at 1:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [84 favorites]
Shaka, when the walls fell.
posted by mach at 1:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [84 favorites]
Friends are useful because I have found that they have TV, which I of course properly eschew.
posted by mwhybark at 1:19 AM on March 26, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by mwhybark at 1:19 AM on March 26, 2016 [5 favorites]
Shaka, when the walls fell.
That response works on a couple of levels.
posted by leotrotsky at 1:27 AM on March 26, 2016 [12 favorites]
That response works on a couple of levels.
posted by leotrotsky at 1:27 AM on March 26, 2016 [12 favorites]
Ross was an asshole.
posted by Jubey at 1:52 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Jubey at 1:52 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
The show ended in 2004. The same year that Facebook began, the year that George W. Bush was re-elected to a second term, the year that reality television became a dominant force in pop culture, with American Idol starting an eight-year reign of terror as the No. 1 show in the U.S., the same year that Paris Hilton started her own “lifestyle brand” and released an autobiography.Take that, 2000s. You thought the 80s sucked?
No, you don't, and I understand why now.
posted by i_have_a_computer at 2:03 AM on March 26, 2016 [5 favorites]
Metafilter: This has left me at a marginal social disadvantage
posted by DiscountDeity at 2:28 AM on March 26, 2016 [9 favorites]
posted by DiscountDeity at 2:28 AM on March 26, 2016 [9 favorites]
Ross was an asshole
Surely you mean "Ross, what an asshole."
posted by chavenet at 3:19 AM on March 26, 2016 [9 favorites]
Surely you mean "Ross, what an asshole."
posted by chavenet at 3:19 AM on March 26, 2016 [9 favorites]
I never really got the sense that Ross was an intellectual. He was just a guy who had sort of... occupied a career path in science/academia because it aligned with his interests and you used to be able to have a career in science/academia.
posted by Etrigan at 3:36 AM on March 26, 2016 [33 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 3:36 AM on March 26, 2016 [33 favorites]
I liked it when Ross got his teeth whitened.
posted by colie at 3:40 AM on March 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by colie at 3:40 AM on March 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
I just run away as soon as someone starts talking to me, it saves a ton of time.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 3:45 AM on March 26, 2016 [95 favorites]
posted by Potomac Avenue at 3:45 AM on March 26, 2016 [95 favorites]
The character of Ross was a skewering of certain privileged, elite-intellectual sensibilities. That's the most constructive reading, for anyone who sees the comedy of his frustrations and foibles and identifies with aspects of his portrayal to any degree. On the other hand, those who identify against Ross have the equal responsibility to not allow their own prejudices (what the article argues is anti-intellectualism) color their reading of the character. I think that strikes a balance.
Pivot!
posted by polymodus at 3:51 AM on March 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
Pivot!
posted by polymodus at 3:51 AM on March 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
I was accidentally exposed to 1/2 of one episode of this show once. It was about people who appeared to be adults incessantly tittering over double entendres and hints of sex. It was an embarrassingly obvious outgrowth of a sexually disfunctional society. It was "Three's Company" for the 2000s.
In other words, it sucked. Gilligan's Island, on the other hand, was a Surrealist masterpiece.
Which reminds me of one of my favourite stand-up lines of all time: "What's up with the Professor? He can make a radio out of a coconut but he can't fix a hole in a boat."
posted by crazylegs at 4:51 AM on March 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
In other words, it sucked. Gilligan's Island, on the other hand, was a Surrealist masterpiece.
Which reminds me of one of my favourite stand-up lines of all time: "What's up with the Professor? He can make a radio out of a coconut but he can't fix a hole in a boat."
posted by crazylegs at 4:51 AM on March 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
Friends had tens of millions of fans. Nobody here on Metafilter liked it, of course.
posted by that's how you get ants at 5:35 AM on March 26, 2016 [60 favorites]
posted by that's how you get ants at 5:35 AM on March 26, 2016 [60 favorites]
I thought the article was extremely funny and enjoyed it a lot.
posted by dmo at 5:39 AM on March 26, 2016
posted by dmo at 5:39 AM on March 26, 2016
I'm not a Friends fan and even I know that Ross wasn't derided by the others because he was a mighty bulwark of the life of the mind but because he was a ridiculously pompous blowhard and a shrill, annoying jerk (of course all the others were shrill, annoying jerks too, so it was all a wash).
posted by blucevalo at 5:51 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by blucevalo at 5:51 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Friends had tens of millions of fans. Nobody here on Metafilter liked it, of course.
I liked it. Watched most weeks. A lot of people I knew at the time did too. It was about people our age. I was in that exact demographic the show covered at the time. Thankfully my local peer and friend group was more diverse race and class wise but not by a whole lot.
It's been twenty odd years and I've grown both in knowledge and experience. Now I only like it in nostalgic sense. The warts are much more apparent. If it was new today I wouldn't like it and wouldn't watch it. I've watched a few episodes here and there and find it and the characters more annoying then I did then. Though Ross was always annoying.
I liked and watched a lot of things 20 years ago that now make me go 'what? why?"
Hindsight can be awesome but also can be very 'ugh' inducing.
posted by Jalliah at 6:02 AM on March 26, 2016 [10 favorites]
I liked it. Watched most weeks. A lot of people I knew at the time did too. It was about people our age. I was in that exact demographic the show covered at the time. Thankfully my local peer and friend group was more diverse race and class wise but not by a whole lot.
It's been twenty odd years and I've grown both in knowledge and experience. Now I only like it in nostalgic sense. The warts are much more apparent. If it was new today I wouldn't like it and wouldn't watch it. I've watched a few episodes here and there and find it and the characters more annoying then I did then. Though Ross was always annoying.
I liked and watched a lot of things 20 years ago that now make me go 'what? why?"
Hindsight can be awesome but also can be very 'ugh' inducing.
posted by Jalliah at 6:02 AM on March 26, 2016 [10 favorites]
There's this commercial where that pretty woman with the haircut from Friends awakes from a nightmare where she's looking for the shower on an airplane, then unironically chats with the bartender on a Dubai airline about the dream. That's all I know about Friends, but I think it sums up the zeitgeist.
posted by sammyo at 6:05 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by sammyo at 6:05 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
... isn't the conclusion more that Friends is the death knell of the middlebrow consensus that had made a grand show of eschewing low culture, while importing the blandest and most bombastic elements of high culture, cargo cult style.Exactly. And now the middlebrow consensus steadfastly eschews high culture, while importing and celebrating the most bombastic elements of low culture, cargo cult style. Progress, I guess?
The problem with this guy's thesis is that Ross manifestly isn't an intellectual. I'm reminded of the observation that Newt Gingrich is a stupid person's idea of what a smart person looks like. Ross is a stupid writers' idea of what an intellectual looks like. Of course the outcome is going to be genuinely horrific.
posted by Sonny Jim at 6:13 AM on March 26, 2016 [11 favorites]
The show had cute jokes, but I never could figure out why they lived in such nice places when half of them were barely working.
posted by JanetLand at 6:36 AM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by JanetLand at 6:36 AM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
I used to look down on "Friends." Then I actually watched it (my college housemates loved it) and realized how tightly constructed and perfectly timed the jokes are. Like, I've watched enough comedy now to realize that comedy is hard, and Friends is just a great example of good craftsmanship.
Of course the characters are awful. That's kind of intrinsic to comedy, setting up cringeworthy situations that make people uncomfortable , and then relieving the tension with a punchline that makes it all okay. That release of tension, that laughter, is why comedy makes us feel better about things. The cringeworthy situations come from the flawed characters. Perfect people aren't funny.
But no punchline works for everyone... everyone has different anxieties. Watching comedy that doesn't make you laugh will just leave you feeling uncomfortable and annoyed at the characters. I feel this way about Seinfeld, but I still respect that it works for a lot of people. I think the flaws in the Seinfeld characters just hit too close to home for me. They're what I fear becoming. Whereas I feel safely distant from Ross. I may share many of his flaws, but they are not the flaws I fear most in myself.
Anyway, even if Friends doesn't work for you, you should recognize that it does for a lot of people, that these are some serious professionals doing high quality work.
posted by OnceUponATime at 6:37 AM on March 26, 2016 [67 favorites]
Of course the characters are awful. That's kind of intrinsic to comedy, setting up cringeworthy situations that make people uncomfortable , and then relieving the tension with a punchline that makes it all okay. That release of tension, that laughter, is why comedy makes us feel better about things. The cringeworthy situations come from the flawed characters. Perfect people aren't funny.
But no punchline works for everyone... everyone has different anxieties. Watching comedy that doesn't make you laugh will just leave you feeling uncomfortable and annoyed at the characters. I feel this way about Seinfeld, but I still respect that it works for a lot of people. I think the flaws in the Seinfeld characters just hit too close to home for me. They're what I fear becoming. Whereas I feel safely distant from Ross. I may share many of his flaws, but they are not the flaws I fear most in myself.
Anyway, even if Friends doesn't work for you, you should recognize that it does for a lot of people, that these are some serious professionals doing high quality work.
posted by OnceUponATime at 6:37 AM on March 26, 2016 [67 favorites]
White people in a NY I didn't recognize spending all kinds of money on food and lattes and apartments; money that came from nowhere.
I'm not a pro, but I bet there's a punchline in there that would kill.
posted by allthinky at 6:47 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm not a pro, but I bet there's a punchline in there that would kill.
posted by allthinky at 6:47 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Friends invented the phrase "friend zone" and Ross was the guy in it, and that is all you need to know about Ross and Friends.
posted by tzikeh at 6:58 AM on March 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
posted by tzikeh at 6:58 AM on March 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
I liked Ross because he had the monkey. I turned the show on religiously in case the monkey appeared for a scene.
Then they sent the monkey away and I stopped watching forever.
posted by Scattercat at 7:11 AM on March 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
Then they sent the monkey away and I stopped watching forever.
posted by Scattercat at 7:11 AM on March 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
The show was packed with gags and was brilliantly performed by all the actors (although Phoebe's character was a bit weak). Even minor characters like Rachel's sister were memorable. What more do people want from a sitcom?
posted by colie at 7:15 AM on March 26, 2016 [10 favorites]
posted by colie at 7:15 AM on March 26, 2016 [10 favorites]
What more do people want from a sitcom?
Forget it, Jake. It's Metafilter.
posted by chimaera at 7:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [40 favorites]
Forget it, Jake. It's Metafilter.
posted by chimaera at 7:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [40 favorites]
I read the above-linked Slate article about Chandler. I can't help but notice that in the Chandler Gay Panic video (embedded in the Slate article) at 2.29 where the broker thinks that Chandler and Joey are a couple, there's a Keith Haring print in the background.
posted by bunderful at 7:21 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by bunderful at 7:21 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Yeah, I mean there's a pretty clear distinction between how Chandler feels about his dad and about gay people, and how the show wants us to feel about them. Chandler's dad is portrayed as being pretty awesome. Chandler himself, not his dad, is the butt of those jokes.
posted by OnceUponATime at 7:36 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by OnceUponATime at 7:36 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
My irony meter isn't fully warmed up yet, but of his conclusions: Big nerdy mansplaining men of science like Ross do not read novels. The author's conflating his sciences and his humanities. The problem with Ross was not that he read novels and had a deep empathy for human life the other friends did not share. Ross was in fact the last person on the show who would ever have read a novel, and that's why he was such a choad. In fact, the only time I remember anyone on the show reading a novel was when Joey so thoroughly terrified himself with The Shining that he kept it in his freezer for his own mental well-being. Joey -- an actor, which is I guess an insufficiently intellectual pursuit for the guy who wrote this article -- is almost surely the most empathetic friend, the most likeable, and perhaps unsurprisingly, the only one to have a (brief, stupid) life beyond the original show.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 7:46 AM on March 26, 2016 [16 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 7:46 AM on March 26, 2016 [16 favorites]
the only time I remember anyone on the show reading a novel was when Joey so thoroughly terrified himself with The Shining that he kept it in his freezer for his own mental well-being.
Joey and Rachel trade their favorite books - he reads Little Women and she reads The Shining. It's Little Women that goes in the freezer, because he is so upset when Beth gets sick. I always liked that scene, and I think it underlines your point beautifully.
posted by bunderful at 7:54 AM on March 26, 2016 [40 favorites]
Joey and Rachel trade their favorite books - he reads Little Women and she reads The Shining. It's Little Women that goes in the freezer, because he is so upset when Beth gets sick. I always liked that scene, and I think it underlines your point beautifully.
posted by bunderful at 7:54 AM on March 26, 2016 [40 favorites]
OnceUponATime, if I could favorite that comment more than once, I would. Exactly what I was gearing up to say.
And let me add, the show holds up. My kids have watched the whole series on Netflix, and enjoyed it. The jokes are still funny.
posted by Frayed Knot at 8:06 AM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
And let me add, the show holds up. My kids have watched the whole series on Netflix, and enjoyed it. The jokes are still funny.
posted by Frayed Knot at 8:06 AM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
Phoebe is an artist who refuses to compromise her voice and seems to tune out the audience when she plays. Chandler helps his friends out financially on many occasions and makes great pains to avoid embarrassing anyone in the process. Joey does a job which ensnares most people into assuming self-aggrandizing airs yet is selfless, friendly, and even industrious at times. Monica makes things beautiful and makes beautiful things. Ross is virtuous in the manner laid out in the article. And Rachael chose a life of independence after a coddled adolescence and actually sticks to that decision.
But you're right, their mannerisms disqualify them wholesale from redemption.
posted by Taft at 8:14 AM on March 26, 2016 [30 favorites]
But you're right, their mannerisms disqualify them wholesale from redemption.
posted by Taft at 8:14 AM on March 26, 2016 [30 favorites]
I skimmed the article, will read it later, but I tend to agree with the author. At my workplace, management is so anti-intellectual that people with advanced degrees are continually put down and treated like second-class citizens, while their favorites (brown-nosers and con artists) are praised and promoted. But I work in government, so YMMV.
posted by jenh526 at 8:16 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by jenh526 at 8:16 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Ross deserved to be made fun of for his intellectual abilities and for being a shitty person, and I say that as a person who is both a geologist and have been fun of for intellectual abilities, because Ross is the WORST GEOLOGIST/PALEONTOLOGIST EVER.
I serve up these examples:
a) Ross is always pale. He does not have a tan. He does not get dirty. What kind of paleo person is these things? Someone who never gets out in the field. In that respect alone, he's terrible. Also, aside from some bone snafu in China, he never goes out in the field on the show. He should spend summers doing paleo stuff. IN THE FIELD. GETTING DIRTY. Ross never got dirty one day in his life. Except for the whole leather pants incident, which was hilarious. Seriously dude, you're a scientist who works with rocks - how did you not understand the physical properties of baby powder?
b) He always wears a freaking suit. Or like, sweater combos or something. You know when geologists wears suits?
--weddings (maybe)
--funerals (maybe)
--depositions (usually)
-- fundraisers for their own grants when rich benefactors are there (probably unless they're trying to give off a certain aura)
THAT'S IT.
c) He's a dino person who also did some kind of paper on sediment flow rates? THOSE ARE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT FIELDS. That's a kind of divergence that happens in undergrad. Not until you're in your 50s and you're a little bored and want to branch out a little would you do that stuff. PICK A FIELD, HORRIBLE RESEARCHER.
d) I'm pretty sure there's no rocks in his apartment. Like boxes of rocks. He doesn't need help moving boxes of rocks when he's always moving. You know why? He doesn't have any. Because he's a TERRIBLE GEOLOGIST.
e) When contemplating moving to London, he brings up his son, but then doesn't say What an awesome opportunity to work on ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs and pterosaurs and the world famous JURASSIC FOSSILS which make England a dream for every paleo person in the world!. .. .but oh yeah my kid. Also he's getting married in London but doesn't ONCE make a side trip to see chalks and the Green Sands and London Clay or even the Oxford Clay?!!!? He never says WOW I just have to make a one day trip to the Isle of Wight to see world famous DINO TRACKS. WHAT A PISSPOT OF A GEOLOGIST.
f) When his girlfriend, who had worked her way up from not knowing what FICA was to a waitress to roles in her dream industry, finally had a job that meant she had a career started working a little late, he got jealous as hell and pretty much demanded she choose between him and her career by accusing her of having feelings for her coworker- what a sexist horrible asshole of a man.
g) Seriously, the suits.
posted by barchan at 8:17 AM on March 26, 2016 [138 favorites]
I serve up these examples:
a) Ross is always pale. He does not have a tan. He does not get dirty. What kind of paleo person is these things? Someone who never gets out in the field. In that respect alone, he's terrible. Also, aside from some bone snafu in China, he never goes out in the field on the show. He should spend summers doing paleo stuff. IN THE FIELD. GETTING DIRTY. Ross never got dirty one day in his life. Except for the whole leather pants incident, which was hilarious. Seriously dude, you're a scientist who works with rocks - how did you not understand the physical properties of baby powder?
b) He always wears a freaking suit. Or like, sweater combos or something. You know when geologists wears suits?
--weddings (maybe)
--funerals (maybe)
--depositions (usually)
-- fundraisers for their own grants when rich benefactors are there (probably unless they're trying to give off a certain aura)
THAT'S IT.
c) He's a dino person who also did some kind of paper on sediment flow rates? THOSE ARE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT FIELDS. That's a kind of divergence that happens in undergrad. Not until you're in your 50s and you're a little bored and want to branch out a little would you do that stuff. PICK A FIELD, HORRIBLE RESEARCHER.
d) I'm pretty sure there's no rocks in his apartment. Like boxes of rocks. He doesn't need help moving boxes of rocks when he's always moving. You know why? He doesn't have any. Because he's a TERRIBLE GEOLOGIST.
e) When contemplating moving to London, he brings up his son, but then doesn't say What an awesome opportunity to work on ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs and pterosaurs and the world famous JURASSIC FOSSILS which make England a dream for every paleo person in the world!. .. .but oh yeah my kid. Also he's getting married in London but doesn't ONCE make a side trip to see chalks and the Green Sands and London Clay or even the Oxford Clay?!!!? He never says WOW I just have to make a one day trip to the Isle of Wight to see world famous DINO TRACKS. WHAT A PISSPOT OF A GEOLOGIST.
f) When his girlfriend, who had worked her way up from not knowing what FICA was to a waitress to roles in her dream industry, finally had a job that meant she had a career started working a little late, he got jealous as hell and pretty much demanded she choose between him and her career by accusing her of having feelings for her coworker- what a sexist horrible asshole of a man.
g) Seriously, the suits.
posted by barchan at 8:17 AM on March 26, 2016 [138 favorites]
I've been holding that inside for years.
posted by barchan at 8:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [75 favorites]
posted by barchan at 8:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [75 favorites]
Nietzsche is terrible though, just the worst. It's not because he's "intellectual", it's because he's monstrously selfish, forces his insecurities on everyone around him, and condescendingly treats them as obviously inferior to his mighty intellect.
What got Nietzsche in trouble was denouncing anti-semitism when it was culturally fashionable and being such a heartless bastard he attacked a man in the streets for flogging his horse too brutally.
Basically he was an uppity intellectual, and despite all his talk about strength coming from suffering and what not, he hated to see people suffering. Or the neurosyphillis he was rumored to have caught from prostitutes made him do it (though that was probably just another character smear promulgated by the social elites he alienated by not playing ball on the anti-semitism).
Nietzsche didn't harass people with his own hang ups and insecurities. He did himself in by caring too much about other people and beings, which people above a certain station in society absolutely can't tolerate or relate to.
posted by saulgoodman at 8:21 AM on March 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
What got Nietzsche in trouble was denouncing anti-semitism when it was culturally fashionable and being such a heartless bastard he attacked a man in the streets for flogging his horse too brutally.
Basically he was an uppity intellectual, and despite all his talk about strength coming from suffering and what not, he hated to see people suffering. Or the neurosyphillis he was rumored to have caught from prostitutes made him do it (though that was probably just another character smear promulgated by the social elites he alienated by not playing ball on the anti-semitism).
Nietzsche didn't harass people with his own hang ups and insecurities. He did himself in by caring too much about other people and beings, which people above a certain station in society absolutely can't tolerate or relate to.
posted by saulgoodman at 8:21 AM on March 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
My irony meter isn't fully warmed up yet, but of his conclusions: Big nerdy mansplaining men of science like Ross do not read novelsMaybe my irony meter is off too, or maybe I'm remembering the show wrong, but what's the source of this odd stereotype?
posted by Llama-Lime at 8:29 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Ross is the gleaming coprolite on the not-yet petrified mound of Friends. Still the same basic substance, just hardened.
posted by blue_beetle at 8:37 AM on March 26, 2016
posted by blue_beetle at 8:37 AM on March 26, 2016
Friends had tens of millions of fans. Nobody here on Metafilter liked it, of course.
That's only because it wasn't a show called Comrades, the zany antics of a house-full of extremely diverse people—and several who maybe don't identify as "people"—in an age of Fully Automated Luxury Communism.
posted by octobersurprise at 8:47 AM on March 26, 2016 [11 favorites]
That's only because it wasn't a show called Comrades, the zany antics of a house-full of extremely diverse people—and several who maybe don't identify as "people"—in an age of Fully Automated Luxury Communism.
posted by octobersurprise at 8:47 AM on March 26, 2016 [11 favorites]
I've been sitting here wracking my brain trying to think of any sitcom that had a favorably depicted intellectual, and I have to say, the only one that I can think of, to be completely honest, is Home Improvement. It had not only Wilson, who was widely read and dispensed knowledge to Tim that caused his caveman brain to reflect on life and strive to grow, but it also had Al, who had much more common sense about the subject matter of Tool Time (and much of the rest of life) than Tim did, and very often the joke was Al pointing out how Tim was being an idiot.
Other than that (I admit, rather shocking to realize) sitcom, I cannot think of a single other one that depicted any actual respect for intellectualism, and can think of dozens that actively disparaged it.
posted by hippybear at 8:52 AM on March 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
Other than that (I admit, rather shocking to realize) sitcom, I cannot think of a single other one that depicted any actual respect for intellectualism, and can think of dozens that actively disparaged it.
posted by hippybear at 8:52 AM on March 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
Philip the black dude in Rising Damp was an intellectual.
posted by colie at 8:57 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by colie at 8:57 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
The only thing that I remember about that epoch of tv was that "Friends", although not an unpleasurable show, made "Mad About You" seem like Ibsen.
posted by Chitownfats at 9:00 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Chitownfats at 9:00 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
I've been sitting here wracking my brain trying to think of any sitcom that had a favorably depicted intellectual,
Possibly Frasier Crane when he was still on Cheers. He was the butt of jokes, certainly, but pretty much everyone on that show had to take a turn, and he was just as often the voice that solved that week's problem.
posted by JanetLand at 9:06 AM on March 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
Possibly Frasier Crane when he was still on Cheers. He was the butt of jokes, certainly, but pretty much everyone on that show had to take a turn, and he was just as often the voice that solved that week's problem.
posted by JanetLand at 9:06 AM on March 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
hippybear: I'm not entirely sure how we're defining "intellectual" here, but how about Frasier? I haven't watched much of it, but my impression is that most of the main cast are supposed to be intellectuals, and that they're generally favorably depicted.
Let's see, who else... M*A*S*H is full of characters with medical degrees and strong political opinions, but it's true that they're not particularly portrayed as intellectual, except maybe for Winchester, although that seems like more of a class thing.
Mr. Feeny is sort've the Wilson of Boy Meets World, and Topanga's a mini-Intellectual. Um, Doogie Howser? The parents in Fresh Prince? Ben and Leslie from Parks & Rec?
posted by galaxy rise at 9:07 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Let's see, who else... M*A*S*H is full of characters with medical degrees and strong political opinions, but it's true that they're not particularly portrayed as intellectual, except maybe for Winchester, although that seems like more of a class thing.
Mr. Feeny is sort've the Wilson of Boy Meets World, and Topanga's a mini-Intellectual. Um, Doogie Howser? The parents in Fresh Prince? Ben and Leslie from Parks & Rec?
posted by galaxy rise at 9:07 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
that they're generally favorably depicted.
Nah, Frasier and his brother are portrayed as bog-standard fops, mincing, indecisive, and clueless about ordinary people and life.
posted by saulgoodman at 9:17 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Nah, Frasier and his brother are portrayed as bog-standard fops, mincing, indecisive, and clueless about ordinary people and life.
posted by saulgoodman at 9:17 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Doogie Howser might work. He was pretty sympathetically and humanly characterized.
posted by saulgoodman at 9:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by saulgoodman at 9:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
I'm not entirely sure how we're defining "intellectual" here, but how about Frasier? I haven't watched much of it, but my impression is that most of the main cast are supposed to be intellectuals, and that they're generally favorably depicted.
Well, Frasier of the titular sitcom is a psychiatrist with a radio show who has a psychiatrist brother and the two of them engage in the most infantile, emotionally-unaware behavior week after week, with much of the jokes of the show being how these two men who have such distinguished backgrounds and cultural taste can be so childish so often.
This might also be a class thing, not an intellectual thing, with Daphne and Frasier's father representing working class and Roz and others at the radio station representing lower-middle class, so the jokes might be more directed toward aspirations of upward social mobility and the ability to take on the trappings of the upper class (as Frasier and Niles did rising above their policeman father's status with their medical degrees), but being unable to actually attain true integration within the class toward which they strive.
But really, most of the jokes in Frasier have Frasier and Niles, as intellectuals, being the butt of the jokes. Despite the show's expansive use of $5 vocabulary words and its trappings of sophistication, the central message was always "these learned snobs are ridiculous; let's laugh at them".
posted by hippybear at 9:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
Well, Frasier of the titular sitcom is a psychiatrist with a radio show who has a psychiatrist brother and the two of them engage in the most infantile, emotionally-unaware behavior week after week, with much of the jokes of the show being how these two men who have such distinguished backgrounds and cultural taste can be so childish so often.
This might also be a class thing, not an intellectual thing, with Daphne and Frasier's father representing working class and Roz and others at the radio station representing lower-middle class, so the jokes might be more directed toward aspirations of upward social mobility and the ability to take on the trappings of the upper class (as Frasier and Niles did rising above their policeman father's status with their medical degrees), but being unable to actually attain true integration within the class toward which they strive.
But really, most of the jokes in Frasier have Frasier and Niles, as intellectuals, being the butt of the jokes. Despite the show's expansive use of $5 vocabulary words and its trappings of sophistication, the central message was always "these learned snobs are ridiculous; let's laugh at them".
posted by hippybear at 9:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
Poe's law in full effect here - I can't tell if this is a parody of Silicon Valley exceptionalism, or just Silicon Valley exceptionalism.
I've been sitting here wracking my brain trying to think of any sitcom that had a favorably depicted intellectual,
Frasier is the obvious one, and of course Niles. They are presented as figures of fun, and their concerns are often treated as ridiculous, but they also take genuine, uncontrived pleasure in the arts (and are more eclectic than they let on - qv Frasier, thinking he is alone in the house, banging out "Great Balls of Fire" on the piano).
As galaxy rise mentions, half the cast in Parks and Rec delight in learning and knowing things. Ted Mosby in How I Met Your Mother is presented as pretentious, and when he finally gets to indulge his pretentions - by declaiming Dante to an audience of intellectuals at an upscale party - he realises that what he really wants to be doing is watching Robots versus Wrestlers with his real friends - i.e. that his enjoyment of intellectualism is balanced with the joy he takes in enjoying what his friends enjoy.
The little-seen but phenomenally influential Herman's Head has a main character who works in the fact-checking department of an analog of Conde Nast, and his peers are a writer, another fact checker and his boss, who is presented as essentially knowing everything.
Of course, intellectuals in sitcoms are often made to look foolish, because sitcoms use the foibles of their characters to create comedy in a broadly stable environment. So, Phoebe is ditzy and believes she can see the dead, Joey is credulous, Chandler is neurotic, Monica is fastidious, Rachel is spoiled. Complaining that smart characters in sitcoms are made the butt of jokes because of their smartness is sort of complaining that sitcoms are sitcoms.
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:20 AM on March 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
I've been sitting here wracking my brain trying to think of any sitcom that had a favorably depicted intellectual,
Frasier is the obvious one, and of course Niles. They are presented as figures of fun, and their concerns are often treated as ridiculous, but they also take genuine, uncontrived pleasure in the arts (and are more eclectic than they let on - qv Frasier, thinking he is alone in the house, banging out "Great Balls of Fire" on the piano).
As galaxy rise mentions, half the cast in Parks and Rec delight in learning and knowing things. Ted Mosby in How I Met Your Mother is presented as pretentious, and when he finally gets to indulge his pretentions - by declaiming Dante to an audience of intellectuals at an upscale party - he realises that what he really wants to be doing is watching Robots versus Wrestlers with his real friends - i.e. that his enjoyment of intellectualism is balanced with the joy he takes in enjoying what his friends enjoy.
The little-seen but phenomenally influential Herman's Head has a main character who works in the fact-checking department of an analog of Conde Nast, and his peers are a writer, another fact checker and his boss, who is presented as essentially knowing everything.
Of course, intellectuals in sitcoms are often made to look foolish, because sitcoms use the foibles of their characters to create comedy in a broadly stable environment. So, Phoebe is ditzy and believes she can see the dead, Joey is credulous, Chandler is neurotic, Monica is fastidious, Rachel is spoiled. Complaining that smart characters in sitcoms are made the butt of jokes because of their smartness is sort of complaining that sitcoms are sitcoms.
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:20 AM on March 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
During my tenure as a teacher, I gained the reputation of being a slayer of bullies and defender of nerds. I promise you: bullies can be mean, but they knew Mr. Hopkins was much worse.Dude, unless you literally slayed bullies...
posted by Halloween Jack at 9:22 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
It's not their intellects that get Frasier and Niles into scrapes though, it's their vanity. In the Music Hall/sitcom tradition there's not many things that get you ripped to bits more than vanity.
posted by colie at 9:23 AM on March 26, 2016 [10 favorites]
posted by colie at 9:23 AM on March 26, 2016 [10 favorites]
(Interestingly, by the way, if not wholly surprisingly, if you want to see a genre where "intellectualism", for whatever value of intellectualism one means, is celebrated, then really one need look no further than the young-adults androids-and-deltoids output of the CW.
Drawing on the character archetype of the Willow, every series has at least one character - Chloe Sullivan in Smallville, Felicity Smoak in Arrow, Cisco in The Flash - who are generally technically literate, but also possessed of a range of cultural touchpoints, and who are portrayed as vital parts of the crimefighting team and often key players in the narrative.)
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:27 AM on March 26, 2016 [11 favorites]
Drawing on the character archetype of the Willow, every series has at least one character - Chloe Sullivan in Smallville, Felicity Smoak in Arrow, Cisco in The Flash - who are generally technically literate, but also possessed of a range of cultural touchpoints, and who are portrayed as vital parts of the crimefighting team and often key players in the narrative.)
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:27 AM on March 26, 2016 [11 favorites]
This thread has taken me on a slight derail to the 60s, when a sitcom set about a guy trying to sit in on college classes at a fictional California college made a huge impact on me.
posted by maggiemaggie at 9:30 AM on March 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by maggiemaggie at 9:30 AM on March 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
I was accidentally exposed to 1/2 of one episode of this show once. It was about people who appeared to be adults incessantly tittering over double entendres and hints of sex. It was an embarrassingly obvious outgrowth of a sexually disfunctional society. It was "Three's Company" for the 2000s.
I managed to catch a bit of it in 30-second increments, in the living rooms of sharehouses with non-culturally-oriented housemates. It struck me as bombastically corny. The characters didn't so much talk as throw zingers at each other, mugging for the camera for the second that the laugh track played. They seemed like loud, brash attention-seeking show-offs, and played into the stereotype of America being populated by instances of Erich Fromm's Marketing Character, compulsive salesmen whose product is their own public image.
posted by acb at 9:45 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I managed to catch a bit of it in 30-second increments, in the living rooms of sharehouses with non-culturally-oriented housemates. It struck me as bombastically corny. The characters didn't so much talk as throw zingers at each other, mugging for the camera for the second that the laugh track played. They seemed like loud, brash attention-seeking show-offs, and played into the stereotype of America being populated by instances of Erich Fromm's Marketing Character, compulsive salesmen whose product is their own public image.
posted by acb at 9:45 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Of course, intellectuals in sitcoms are often made to look foolish, because sitcoms use the foibles of their characters to create comedy in a broadly stable environment.
Yeah, this. Sitcoms are basically the modern version of the ancient New Comedy, unchanged over 2000 years. The comedic effects rely on stock characters whose purpose is to disturb the status quo before restoring it. (Comedy, unlike satire or the grotesque, takes the restoration of a status quo as a good and happy thing.)
if you want to see a genre where "intellectualism", for whatever value of intellectualism one means, is celebrated, then really one need look no further than the young-adults androids-and-deltoids output of the CW.
That's an interesting point. It demonstrates, I think, how much more like bildungsromans these shows are than comedies. And also how these characters function like the "companion to heroes": wise, reliable, always available to the protagonist(s).
posted by octobersurprise at 10:04 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Yeah, this. Sitcoms are basically the modern version of the ancient New Comedy, unchanged over 2000 years. The comedic effects rely on stock characters whose purpose is to disturb the status quo before restoring it. (Comedy, unlike satire or the grotesque, takes the restoration of a status quo as a good and happy thing.)
if you want to see a genre where "intellectualism", for whatever value of intellectualism one means, is celebrated, then really one need look no further than the young-adults androids-and-deltoids output of the CW.
That's an interesting point. It demonstrates, I think, how much more like bildungsromans these shows are than comedies. And also how these characters function like the "companion to heroes": wise, reliable, always available to the protagonist(s).
posted by octobersurprise at 10:04 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Lisa Simpson is an intellectual and Bart respects her.
posted by colie at 10:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [28 favorites]
posted by colie at 10:18 AM on March 26, 2016 [28 favorites]
I remember a friend telling me that while Internet crusing someone sent him a dick pic with a box set of Friends for size comparison and he said "it was the length of the box but, do you wanna fuck someone that owns a BOX SET of Friends?"
Anyway the true horror was rewatching an episode a while back and realizing every joke at Chanlders expense is how being terrified you might be seen as slightly less than 100% nedatherhtal masculine straight. He's chuckles the comedy eunuch.
posted by The Whelk at 10:33 AM on March 26, 2016 [12 favorites]
Anyway the true horror was rewatching an episode a while back and realizing every joke at Chanlders expense is how being terrified you might be seen as slightly less than 100% nedatherhtal masculine straight. He's chuckles the comedy eunuch.
posted by The Whelk at 10:33 AM on March 26, 2016 [12 favorites]
Let's see, who else... M*A*S*H is full of characters with medical degrees and strong political opinions, but it's true that they're not particularly portrayed as intellectual, except maybe for Winchester, although that seems like more of a class thing.
I guess I am not sure how you are defining intellectual. Hawkeye and BJ are clearly well-read, making slanting cultural reference jokes all the time, but they are not pompous, like Charles. I would say they are like most of the intellectuals I actually know rather than the stereotype.
posted by dame at 10:53 AM on March 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
I guess I am not sure how you are defining intellectual. Hawkeye and BJ are clearly well-read, making slanting cultural reference jokes all the time, but they are not pompous, like Charles. I would say they are like most of the intellectuals I actually know rather than the stereotype.
posted by dame at 10:53 AM on March 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
For intellectual sitcom characters, several of the cast of News Radio would count I think.
Lisa was played as nerdy (she could do large calculations in her head, enjoyed CSPAN, had high SAT scores, etc), and usually for laughs. Dave was more geeky than nerdy. Clearly smart, but not necessary intellectual. He didn't come from an elite background--he was frequently mocked for his humble beginnings in Wisconsin. Bill was usually played as reactionary and anti-intellectual, but was well-spoken and would do things like quote Keats (though incorrectly, and for bombastic effect). Joe was in no sense an intellectual but was implied to be something of an autodidact technical genius. Matthew, Jimmy James, and Beth were all played as common idiots, though each had their moments--Matthew breezed through dental school (basically as a throwaway gag), Jimmy James was a brilliant businessman, and Beth was a savant with the Jumble. Catherine was barely a character. She mostly existed to trade sarcastic jabs with Bill.
Newsradio mocked and loved all of its characters, so I wouldn't describe it as explicitly pro- or anti-intellectual. I would say it played towards a more educated audience, though. It was an unusual combination of very clever and very silly.
posted by dephlogisticated at 10:54 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Lisa was played as nerdy (she could do large calculations in her head, enjoyed CSPAN, had high SAT scores, etc), and usually for laughs. Dave was more geeky than nerdy. Clearly smart, but not necessary intellectual. He didn't come from an elite background--he was frequently mocked for his humble beginnings in Wisconsin. Bill was usually played as reactionary and anti-intellectual, but was well-spoken and would do things like quote Keats (though incorrectly, and for bombastic effect). Joe was in no sense an intellectual but was implied to be something of an autodidact technical genius. Matthew, Jimmy James, and Beth were all played as common idiots, though each had their moments--Matthew breezed through dental school (basically as a throwaway gag), Jimmy James was a brilliant businessman, and Beth was a savant with the Jumble. Catherine was barely a character. She mostly existed to trade sarcastic jabs with Bill.
Newsradio mocked and loved all of its characters, so I wouldn't describe it as explicitly pro- or anti-intellectual. I would say it played towards a more educated audience, though. It was an unusual combination of very clever and very silly.
posted by dephlogisticated at 10:54 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I guess I am not sure how you are defining intellectual.
I don't think anyone's defining intellectual particularly clearly. The examples and characteristics being cited suggest it's some combination of intelligence, cultural knowledge, education, and class background. I'd add "tendency to abstraction" as an admittedly abstract signifier.
Sports Night is another sitcom with well-portrayed intellectuals, although that's no surprise given that it's Sorkin. I've read a bit about the rise of complicated and challenging storytelling in television around the turn of the millennium, and Sorkin's a part of that with his hyper-articulate characters. As running order squabble fest points out, there are plenty of intellectuals in drama, and in fact intelligence is almost fetishized in a number of popular shows. I wonder if sitcoms have been influenced by the same trends and if not, why not?
posted by galaxy rise at 11:16 AM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
I don't think anyone's defining intellectual particularly clearly. The examples and characteristics being cited suggest it's some combination of intelligence, cultural knowledge, education, and class background. I'd add "tendency to abstraction" as an admittedly abstract signifier.
Sports Night is another sitcom with well-portrayed intellectuals, although that's no surprise given that it's Sorkin. I've read a bit about the rise of complicated and challenging storytelling in television around the turn of the millennium, and Sorkin's a part of that with his hyper-articulate characters. As running order squabble fest points out, there are plenty of intellectuals in drama, and in fact intelligence is almost fetishized in a number of popular shows. I wonder if sitcoms have been influenced by the same trends and if not, why not?
posted by galaxy rise at 11:16 AM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
Part of being an intellectual is recognizing the variety of people who like to think and learn, and recognizing that you're not going start out empathizing with all of them just because of that commonality, maybe…
posted by polymodus at 11:20 AM on March 26, 2016
posted by polymodus at 11:20 AM on March 26, 2016
I wonder if sitcoms have been influenced by the same trends and if not, why not?
Humor's often about unresolved tension. Psychologists generally think we laugh at things that make us feel a little nervous/releases some kind of tension. If there are a lot of sitcoms poking fun at intellectuals, that might be a symptom, rather than a cause, of the anti-intellectual sentiment in society: people resent intellectuals and want to get the tiny little cathartic release of watching them be symbolically humiliated in sitcoms. But the point above about what people mean by "intellectual" being a big jumbled mess of things seems right, too.
posted by saulgoodman at 11:34 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Humor's often about unresolved tension. Psychologists generally think we laugh at things that make us feel a little nervous/releases some kind of tension. If there are a lot of sitcoms poking fun at intellectuals, that might be a symptom, rather than a cause, of the anti-intellectual sentiment in society: people resent intellectuals and want to get the tiny little cathartic release of watching them be symbolically humiliated in sitcoms. But the point above about what people mean by "intellectual" being a big jumbled mess of things seems right, too.
posted by saulgoodman at 11:34 AM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Ok, I never saw Friends, but I sympathize with what the linked screed was saying (though I don't think it meant that Friends was LITERALLY the cause of the downfall of civilization).
Maybe the defense of intellectualism there is entwined with a defense of the privileged, those who can afford an education, who were expected to be educated, some fields over others... But there WAS a rise in anti-intellectualism around that time and it continues.
I remember getting strangely upset at some commercial from a few years before Friends, I think featuring Candice Bergen maybe (Murphy Brown actress). She walks into an elevator, occupied by two men, one a yuppie who locks eyes with her romantically, and another a working-class guy who for the duration of the elevator ride, talks about his role in the building of the elevator, its construction and history, etc. We're meant to identify with the wordless yuppies in their bonding over how BORING this guy is.
My view of anti-intellectualism: there are two possible opposites for the word "boring". One is "exciting" and the other is "interesting", and intellectuals choose "interesting". Intellectuals prefer the long-form argument. They bring up qualifying facts that argue against the main point. They bring up and toss out hypotheses. They go through twists and turns before they get to the "point", if there is one, of their inquiries. Obviously the sit-com medium itself is not great for promoting that approach but great for sending it down with a zing. And it's true too that the linked blog post didn't offer qualifying counter-arguments!
posted by Schmucko at 11:39 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Maybe the defense of intellectualism there is entwined with a defense of the privileged, those who can afford an education, who were expected to be educated, some fields over others... But there WAS a rise in anti-intellectualism around that time and it continues.
I remember getting strangely upset at some commercial from a few years before Friends, I think featuring Candice Bergen maybe (Murphy Brown actress). She walks into an elevator, occupied by two men, one a yuppie who locks eyes with her romantically, and another a working-class guy who for the duration of the elevator ride, talks about his role in the building of the elevator, its construction and history, etc. We're meant to identify with the wordless yuppies in their bonding over how BORING this guy is.
My view of anti-intellectualism: there are two possible opposites for the word "boring". One is "exciting" and the other is "interesting", and intellectuals choose "interesting". Intellectuals prefer the long-form argument. They bring up qualifying facts that argue against the main point. They bring up and toss out hypotheses. They go through twists and turns before they get to the "point", if there is one, of their inquiries. Obviously the sit-com medium itself is not great for promoting that approach but great for sending it down with a zing. And it's true too that the linked blog post didn't offer qualifying counter-arguments!
posted by Schmucko at 11:39 AM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I feel kind of bad for Ross. After all, he was killed in the Great Harvest.
posted by benzenedream at 12:02 PM on March 26, 2016 [16 favorites]
posted by benzenedream at 12:02 PM on March 26, 2016 [16 favorites]
Ross was controlling and childish and insecure and annoying AF. Rachel should have had Joey's baby.
It's weird that the author doesn't get exactly why Ross is not liked. He's annoying.
posted by discopolo at 12:04 PM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
It's weird that the author doesn't get exactly why Ross is not liked. He's annoying.
posted by discopolo at 12:04 PM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Well, Mr. Spock. But the 60s still admired intellectuals.
posted by acrasis at 12:16 PM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by acrasis at 12:16 PM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
I'm ok with intellectuals being ridiculous and mocked -- that's what comedy does. Lodge novels are 100% intellectual, and every intellectual in them is a ludicrous caricature. I suppose it's how you mock them that matters, but as far as I can tell it's pretty much just a spectrum from coarse ("ha ha he used a big word") to detailed ("ha ha he thinks planck-scale puns are funny" [which perhaps just came to mind because I was just installing very-slightly-too-small bookshelves]). Intellectuals are constantly mocking each other for having the wrong kind of nerdiness or nerdy humor, and while I can't stand Big Bang Theory myself, I know a lot of academics who enjoy it because, while mocking intellectuals, it is doing it in a way they themselves would mock each other. A lot of that is even anti-intellectual mocking, where either you're an intellectual in the wrong way, or you're too intellectual even for academia (eg, don't know how to have a beer and talk sports when you need to). So on the one hand, I suppose I'm defending the shows for being no worse than actual intellectuals; on the other hand, our supposed intellectuals aren't so hot in their internal humor either.
And while I'm playing the dyspeptic intellectual, while I agree with all the other points, this one:
c) He's a dino person who also did some kind of paper on sediment flow rates? THOSE ARE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT FIELDS. That's a kind of divergence that happens in undergrad. Not until you're in your 50s and you're a little bored and want to branch out a little would you do that stuff. PICK A FIELD, HORRIBLE RESEARCHER.
has been frequently made in the "Ross is a bad academic" lists. But it really shows just how bad academia has become, that it's utterly unrealistic to have a (very slightly!) interdisciplinary research record before making full professor. If that's intellectualism, we may be better off without it.
posted by chortly at 12:31 PM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
And while I'm playing the dyspeptic intellectual, while I agree with all the other points, this one:
c) He's a dino person who also did some kind of paper on sediment flow rates? THOSE ARE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT FIELDS. That's a kind of divergence that happens in undergrad. Not until you're in your 50s and you're a little bored and want to branch out a little would you do that stuff. PICK A FIELD, HORRIBLE RESEARCHER.
has been frequently made in the "Ross is a bad academic" lists. But it really shows just how bad academia has become, that it's utterly unrealistic to have a (very slightly!) interdisciplinary research record before making full professor. If that's intellectualism, we may be better off without it.
posted by chortly at 12:31 PM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I feel this way about Seinfeld, but I still respect that it works for a lot of people. I think the flaws in the Seinfeld characters just hit too close to home for me. They're what I fear becoming.
As I've grown older, I've realized I'm one block of cheese and tracksuit-made-of-velvet away from becoming George.
posted by littlesq at 12:45 PM on March 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
As I've grown older, I've realized I'm one block of cheese and tracksuit-made-of-velvet away from becoming George.
posted by littlesq at 12:45 PM on March 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
Brooklyn 99 has some incredibly lovable and respected intellectuals.
posted by meese at 12:47 PM on March 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by meese at 12:47 PM on March 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
Friends was corny and the characters were all awful and likable in their own ways. Same with Seinfeld. And most other comedies. That’s how it works. Hang on, I’m about to explain comedy.
posted by bongo_x at 1:07 PM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by bongo_x at 1:07 PM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
But even if it’s not totally serious, the idea that Friends triggered rather than reflected anything is sort of silly. This is the same era where TV was full of beer commercials where the main characters pulled stunts that showed that they weren’t really marginal pathetic alcoholics, they were just lovable losers just like you and me, but it’s all going to be OK because they have beer. Here, have a beer.
posted by bongo_x at 1:13 PM on March 26, 2016
posted by bongo_x at 1:13 PM on March 26, 2016
>trying to think of any sitcom that had a favorably depicted intellectual,
Michael Evans from Good Times (maybe not an intellectual but he had intellectual interests). Arthur Dietrich from Barney Miller.
posted by philfromhavelock at 1:27 PM on March 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
Michael Evans from Good Times (maybe not an intellectual but he had intellectual interests). Arthur Dietrich from Barney Miller.
posted by philfromhavelock at 1:27 PM on March 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
Someone sent him a dick pic with a box set of Friends for size comparison
…
Chandler [is terrified he might be seen] as slightly less than 100% Neanderthal masculine straight.
I hope it's OK to conflate the two parts of that story in my headcanon, and assume that Matthew Perry's going round trying to pick people up with the line "this big, and it lasts for 10 seasons". Because that's what I just did.
posted by ambrosen at 1:37 PM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
…
Chandler [is terrified he might be seen] as slightly less than 100% Neanderthal masculine straight.
I hope it's OK to conflate the two parts of that story in my headcanon, and assume that Matthew Perry's going round trying to pick people up with the line "this big, and it lasts for 10 seasons". Because that's what I just did.
posted by ambrosen at 1:37 PM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
All of the "friends" are extremely damaged people.
-Ross and Monica, having been raised by overbearing, narcissistic boomer parents suffer from a lack of personal autonomy and the associated anger and frustration. In Ross' case, this anger is projected outwards through his intermittent explosive disorder, towards the world in general, and assertive, successful women specifically. Monica turns her anger inwards, contributing to her OCD and disordered eating. Only later, when she takes a job as a chef, is she able to release these impulses in a way that is not enacted on her own body. The gendered nature of the Geller siblings' responses to the same childhood environment should come as no shock to anyone.
-Rachel's story involves her relationship with her emotionally abusive father, which leads her to devalue her own desires and emotional needs. This, combined with a relatively materially privileged upbringing has led her to equate goods with emotional satisfaction, contributing to her compulsive shopping behaviors. Only near the end of the series is she able to assert her own autonomy, through success in her career, and through her ability to define her own boundaries in her relationship with Ross, and as a single parent.
-Joey is actually one of the more functional members of the group. Having been raised by his mother and sisters, he is actually pretty respectful of women. Nevertheless, participation in a larger masculinist culture leads him to devalue the opinions and emotions of any woman who is not as assertive as the women in his family. Consequently, he engages in serial relationships that, while sexually rewarding, are likely not emotionally satisfying. He also appears to have some sort of intellectual disability which is really not being addressed by anyone.
-Chandler resents his father's sexuality and profession (as a successful drag performer), and is unable to separate himself from the stigma that attached to this very visible expression of this father's identity in the '70s and '80s. He blames his father for his parent's divorce, and views any discussion of or reference to his father as an attack on his own identity. Rather than confront his feelings towards his father, he retreats into cynicism and self-deprecating humor as defense mechanisms, while engaging in almost obsessive policing of gender norms.
-Phoebe's (frankly terrifying) past as a homeless teenager has led her to pathologically reject almost any negative thought or emotion, to the point where she has invented an entirely separate persona into which she can project the "bad" thoughts or feelings, and use to engage in her self-destructive impulses (yes, Phoebe and Ursula are the same person. THE SAME PERSON).
-Gunther has come to realize the economic trap that all but the most privileged members of Generation X had already fallen into. He knows that, notwithstanding his desires or the complexities of his inner life, he will only ever be a barista. For him, nihilism is the only rational response (they no longer show the episode where he shoots himself in front of the Central Perk).
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 1:45 PM on March 26, 2016 [62 favorites]
-Ross and Monica, having been raised by overbearing, narcissistic boomer parents suffer from a lack of personal autonomy and the associated anger and frustration. In Ross' case, this anger is projected outwards through his intermittent explosive disorder, towards the world in general, and assertive, successful women specifically. Monica turns her anger inwards, contributing to her OCD and disordered eating. Only later, when she takes a job as a chef, is she able to release these impulses in a way that is not enacted on her own body. The gendered nature of the Geller siblings' responses to the same childhood environment should come as no shock to anyone.
-Rachel's story involves her relationship with her emotionally abusive father, which leads her to devalue her own desires and emotional needs. This, combined with a relatively materially privileged upbringing has led her to equate goods with emotional satisfaction, contributing to her compulsive shopping behaviors. Only near the end of the series is she able to assert her own autonomy, through success in her career, and through her ability to define her own boundaries in her relationship with Ross, and as a single parent.
-Joey is actually one of the more functional members of the group. Having been raised by his mother and sisters, he is actually pretty respectful of women. Nevertheless, participation in a larger masculinist culture leads him to devalue the opinions and emotions of any woman who is not as assertive as the women in his family. Consequently, he engages in serial relationships that, while sexually rewarding, are likely not emotionally satisfying. He also appears to have some sort of intellectual disability which is really not being addressed by anyone.
-Chandler resents his father's sexuality and profession (as a successful drag performer), and is unable to separate himself from the stigma that attached to this very visible expression of this father's identity in the '70s and '80s. He blames his father for his parent's divorce, and views any discussion of or reference to his father as an attack on his own identity. Rather than confront his feelings towards his father, he retreats into cynicism and self-deprecating humor as defense mechanisms, while engaging in almost obsessive policing of gender norms.
-Phoebe's (frankly terrifying) past as a homeless teenager has led her to pathologically reject almost any negative thought or emotion, to the point where she has invented an entirely separate persona into which she can project the "bad" thoughts or feelings, and use to engage in her self-destructive impulses (yes, Phoebe and Ursula are the same person. THE SAME PERSON).
-Gunther has come to realize the economic trap that all but the most privileged members of Generation X had already fallen into. He knows that, notwithstanding his desires or the complexities of his inner life, he will only ever be a barista. For him, nihilism is the only rational response (they no longer show the episode where he shoots himself in front of the Central Perk).
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 1:45 PM on March 26, 2016 [62 favorites]
Friends have never been one of those shows I think much about, it's a good thing to just have playing from Nick at Nite at midnight when I don't feel like sleeping yet. None of the characters really offend me because they're all equally unrelatable to me, but when I was younger I did care about them and all that drama. At the end of the day, it's just a TV show.
posted by numaner at 1:46 PM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by numaner at 1:46 PM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Friends had tens of millions of fans. Nobody here on Metafilter liked it, of course.
That's only because it wasn't a show called Comrades, the zany antics of a house-full of extremely diverse people—and several who maybe don't identify as "people"—in an age of Fully Automated Luxury Communism.
Dude, that's just Star Trek: The Next Generation.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 1:55 PM on March 26, 2016 [44 favorites]
That's only because it wasn't a show called Comrades, the zany antics of a house-full of extremely diverse people—and several who maybe don't identify as "people"—in an age of Fully Automated Luxury Communism.
Dude, that's just Star Trek: The Next Generation.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 1:55 PM on March 26, 2016 [44 favorites]
I felt that the 90's were generally a fairly uninteresting decade for TV sitcoms, with the exceptions of classic-era Simpsons and Larry Sanders. Friends was silly and annoying, and Seinfeld was clever but seemed over-rated to me.
I never could figure out why they lived in such nice places when half of them were barely working.
According to the internets, they sublet from an aunt who had a rent-control deal for many years.
Lisa Simpson is an intellectual and Bart respects her.
The best essay in 'The Simpsons and Philosophy' (2001) is Little Lisa & American Anti-Intellectualism.
Nietzsche is terrible though, just the worst. It's not because he's "intellectual", it's because he's monstrously selfish, forces his insecurities on everyone around him, and condescendingly treats them as obviously inferior to his mighty intellect.
That's kinda applicable if you look at some aspects, but Nietzsche was a complex person whose writings were quite varied. saulgoodman makes a spirited case for Nietzsche's sympathetic side, and it's true that he was compassionate and empathetic at times, but he could also be extreme and overbearing.
posted by ovvl at 4:38 PM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I never could figure out why they lived in such nice places when half of them were barely working.
According to the internets, they sublet from an aunt who had a rent-control deal for many years.
Lisa Simpson is an intellectual and Bart respects her.
The best essay in 'The Simpsons and Philosophy' (2001) is Little Lisa & American Anti-Intellectualism.
Nietzsche is terrible though, just the worst. It's not because he's "intellectual", it's because he's monstrously selfish, forces his insecurities on everyone around him, and condescendingly treats them as obviously inferior to his mighty intellect.
That's kinda applicable if you look at some aspects, but Nietzsche was a complex person whose writings were quite varied. saulgoodman makes a spirited case for Nietzsche's sympathetic side, and it's true that he was compassionate and empathetic at times, but he could also be extreme and overbearing.
posted by ovvl at 4:38 PM on March 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Dude, that's just Star Trek: The Next Generation.
Q.E.D. If Friends were Star Trek metafilter would dig it.
posted by octobersurprise at 5:10 PM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Q.E.D. If Friends were Star Trek metafilter would dig it.
posted by octobersurprise at 5:10 PM on March 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
If Friends were Star Trek metafilter would dig it.
You look good in red, they say red is "in" this season..
posted by ovvl at 5:49 PM on March 26, 2016
You look good in red, they say red is "in" this season..
posted by ovvl at 5:49 PM on March 26, 2016
but he could also be extreme and overbearing.
Oh definitely, and he was prone to grandiose declarations and grand gestures even in his moments of compassion ("I am just having all anti-semites shot."). But his being a boor didn't get him in trouble; they only increased his acclaim. It was the violent outbursts of compassion that finally got him pegged as a nutter, blacklisted, and institutionalized.
Ross wasn't even grandiose. He was just always deeply ambivalent about his romantic feelings and that somehow always became his friends' problem.
posted by saulgoodman at 6:05 PM on March 26, 2016
Oh definitely, and he was prone to grandiose declarations and grand gestures even in his moments of compassion ("I am just having all anti-semites shot."). But his being a boor didn't get him in trouble; they only increased his acclaim. It was the violent outbursts of compassion that finally got him pegged as a nutter, blacklisted, and institutionalized.
Ross wasn't even grandiose. He was just always deeply ambivalent about his romantic feelings and that somehow always became his friends' problem.
posted by saulgoodman at 6:05 PM on March 26, 2016
It was the violent outbursts of compassion that finally got him pegged as a nutter, blacklisted, and institutionalized.
Institutionalized for various reasons, mostly just catatonia at the end of his career. But it's complex.
posted by ovvl at 7:07 PM on March 26, 2016
Institutionalized for various reasons, mostly just catatonia at the end of his career. But it's complex.
posted by ovvl at 7:07 PM on March 26, 2016
All of the "friends" are extremely damaged people.
Am I the only one who read this whole comment in Werner Herzog's voice?
posted by carrienation at 7:14 PM on March 26, 2016 [8 favorites]
Am I the only one who read this whole comment in Werner Herzog's voice?
posted by carrienation at 7:14 PM on March 26, 2016 [8 favorites]
Pivot!
posted by spilon at 10:05 PM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by spilon at 10:05 PM on March 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
I've been sitting here wracking my brain trying to think of any sitcom that had a favorably depicted intellectual, and I have to say, the only one that I can think of, to be completely honest, is Home Improvement.
Daria.
posted by MexicanYenta at 12:03 AM on March 27, 2016 [8 favorites]
Daria.
posted by MexicanYenta at 12:03 AM on March 27, 2016 [8 favorites]
My theory is that Civilization may have triggered the downfall of friends.
posted by nathancaswell at 3:57 AM on March 27, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by nathancaswell at 3:57 AM on March 27, 2016 [7 favorites]
I don't think this article really deserves this much discussion... the "Friends" hook is basically "Ross was smart and yet a jerk so the show is anti-intellectual and by the way I'm a teacher and I think our society is anti-intellectual. Also, people like Friends so they will read my article."
There were actually other paleontologists and academics on the show who were normal people... specifically, I'm thinking of Ross's girlfriend Charlie, played by Aisha Tyler, who was a fellow paleontologist but was cool and funny.
posted by chickenmagazine at 9:26 AM on March 27, 2016 [3 favorites]
There were actually other paleontologists and academics on the show who were normal people... specifically, I'm thinking of Ross's girlfriend Charlie, played by Aisha Tyler, who was a fellow paleontologist but was cool and funny.
posted by chickenmagazine at 9:26 AM on March 27, 2016 [3 favorites]
Obligatory: A semi-alphabetical listing of Black actors with speaking roles on Friends
posted by Freelance Demiurge at 4:25 PM on March 27, 2016 [11 favorites]
posted by Freelance Demiurge at 4:25 PM on March 27, 2016 [11 favorites]
A few stray thoughts about Friends:
- It's a show that lived very much pre-9/11 America and even though it continued beyond that event it did not adapt or evolve
- Ross is a neurotic, insecure asshole but goddamn David Schwimmer clearly had some fun playing him
- My wife and I love the show but it strikes me like Kerouac: unless you encountered it at the right time/age it's probably not your thing
- CHANDLER: Joey, you've had a lot of sex, right? JOEY: Today? Some...not a lot
- I still feel bad for Hank Azaria's character--and just off the cuff, Phoebe choosing Paul Rudd over him may be a better harbinger of societal doom than the portrayal of Ross...
posted by tehjoel at 6:00 AM on March 28, 2016 [6 favorites]
- It's a show that lived very much pre-9/11 America and even though it continued beyond that event it did not adapt or evolve
- Ross is a neurotic, insecure asshole but goddamn David Schwimmer clearly had some fun playing him
- My wife and I love the show but it strikes me like Kerouac: unless you encountered it at the right time/age it's probably not your thing
- CHANDLER: Joey, you've had a lot of sex, right? JOEY: Today? Some...not a lot
- I still feel bad for Hank Azaria's character--and just off the cuff, Phoebe choosing Paul Rudd over him may be a better harbinger of societal doom than the portrayal of Ross...
posted by tehjoel at 6:00 AM on March 28, 2016 [6 favorites]
dephlogisticated: "Dave was more geeky than nerdy. Clearly smart, but not necessary intellectual. He didn't come from an elite background--he was frequently mocked for his humble beginnings in Wisconsin. "
It was established that Dave was in fact from Canada.
posted by Chrysostom at 7:02 AM on March 28, 2016
It was established that Dave was in fact from Canada.
posted by Chrysostom at 7:02 AM on March 28, 2016
-- I still feel bad for Hank Azaria's character--
Moe ? Apu ? Chief Wiggums ? Dr. Frink ? What was she thinking ?
...Or Frank Grimes ?
Oh, yeah... right...
posted by y2karl at 8:23 AM on March 28, 2016
Moe ? Apu ? Chief Wiggums ? Dr. Frink ? What was she thinking ?
...Or Frank Grimes ?
Oh, yeah... right...
posted by y2karl at 8:23 AM on March 28, 2016
Yeah, but the real question is did The Yellow Kid comic strip cause the Spanish-American war?
posted by mhum at 9:10 AM on March 28, 2016
posted by mhum at 9:10 AM on March 28, 2016
I still think of Hank Azaria as "the guy from Herman's Head."
Yeardley Smith, too!
posted by Chrysostom at 9:11 AM on March 28, 2016 [5 favorites]
Yeardley Smith, too!
posted by Chrysostom at 9:11 AM on March 28, 2016 [5 favorites]
Is ‘Friends’ Still the Most Popular Show on TV? "Why so many 20-somethings want to stream a 20-year-old sitcom about a bunch of 20-somethings sitting around in a coffee shop"
posted by Frayed Knot at 10:11 AM on March 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Frayed Knot at 10:11 AM on March 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
I liked Ross because he had the monkey. I turned the show on religiously in case the monkey appeared for a scene.
Well, of course.
posted by Gelatin at 9:55 AM on March 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
Well, of course.
posted by Gelatin at 9:55 AM on March 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
I still feel bad for Hank Azaria's character--and just off the cuff, Phoebe choosing Paul Rudd over him may be a better harbinger of societal doom than the portrayal of Ross...
As much as I kind of dislike Friends, I thought that was bullshit and it still makes me angry(?).
posted by littlesq at 9:52 PM on April 5, 2016
As much as I kind of dislike Friends, I thought that was bullshit and it still makes me angry(?).
posted by littlesq at 9:52 PM on April 5, 2016
« Older This Week In UFOs | Way to give the people what they want, Connery Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by kenko at 9:53 PM on March 25, 2016 [9 favorites]