I mention this for two reasons: one, I like The Simpsons. I don’t jive with it 100% of the time, but it knows how to get me thinking while also laughing. And two, not everything about it works in hindsight. In particular, Homer’s gag of angrily strangling Bart really doesn’t sit well as an adult. I get that Bart’s obnoxious, hence Homer’s rage is “cathartic”, but he’s a kid. It, therefore, doesn’t look good to see “America’s #1 TV dad” resorting to violence.
I’m sure this isn’t a new or profound complaint; after all, the show acknowledged this in an episode where a therapist commissions Kareem Abdul-Jabbar to strangle Homer. It even led to the official announcement that Homer would no longer strangle Bart, citing that “times have changed”. This is dandy, but it brings up concerns. Two in particular, if we’re being honest. And here’s where my “street credentials” falter:
Firstly, The Simpsons isn’t a new show. It’s been in syndication for 34 years, 36 if you include The Tracey Ullman Show. It’s been around long enough that any complaints possible could be made. This includes Homer strangling Bart, something always preceded with “Why you little-”. Even by 2007, when the movie debuted, this was going on, except now in HD!
Homer being an aggressive and violent father has been seared into the public consciousness, enough that it’s become a meme. But while “funny”, is it clever? I know parenting methods have changed, but even in the 80’s this was child abuse. And since child abuse is a form of violence, it doesn’t send the best message.
I want to be clear right now: yes, The Simpsons isn’t reality. It’s a sitcom, so it’s going to exaggerate scenarios for laughs. Homer strangling Bart isn’t something the show’s advocating in real life, either. Me being critical of it, therefore, doesn’t mean I’m “missing the joke”. Because I understand that Homer being a piss-poor role model’s intentional.
That said, intent and actuality aren’t the same. Like the whole “the curtains were blue” debate, art has levels by which it can be analyzed, and some are unintentional. It’s the “Death of the Author”, in that there are subconscious meanings behind how art gets discussed. If Apu being a racist depiction of Desi-Americans can be addressed as a topic of discussion, even if it didn’t start out as racist initially, so too can Homer strangling Bart out of anger.
I want to be clear right now: yes, The Simpsons isn’t reality. It’s a sitcom, so it’s going to exaggerate scenarios for laughs. Homer strangling Bart isn’t something the show’s advocating in real life, either. Me being critical of it, therefore, doesn’t mean I’m “missing the joke”. Because I understand that Homer being a piss-poor role model’s intentional.
That said, intent and actuality aren’t the same. Like the whole “the curtains were blue” debate, art has levels by which it can be analyzed, and some are unintentional. It’s the “Death of the Author”, in that there are subconscious meanings behind how art gets discussed. If Apu being a racist depiction of Desi-Americans can be addressed as a topic of discussion, even if it didn’t start out as racist initially, so too can Homer strangling Bart out of anger.
Okay, this has been a problem for decades, and I’m glad the show’s writers are finally acknowledging it. So then…why does Bart proceed to strangle Homer in a more-recent episode? I know this is a role-reversal, as well as potentially-subversive, but it doesn’t automatically excuse it. After all, removing child abuse doesn’t negate the equally-disturbing parental abuse! That might not be as big an issue, because of power imbalances, but it’s not okay either!
This leads to the other problem: the strangulation issue isn’t fully-resolved. I applaud Homer no longer doing the strangling, because that’s always made me uncomfortable, but Bart doing it isn’t any better. Even Bart yelling “Why you giant-” before doing it doesn’t remedy the problem of using needless violence to get your point across. Because isn’t that why we have words? To communicate our feelings?
Perhaps I’m overthinking this. Okay, I’m totally overthinking this! But outside of being a buzzkill, this is trading one evil for another, less-understood evil. If The Simpsons wanted to be subversive these days, it could start with its most violent gag. I’m not sure what to suggest, but I’m not a screenwriter. Also, I’m not being paid.
This leads to the other problem: the strangulation issue isn’t fully-resolved. I applaud Homer no longer doing the strangling, because that’s always made me uncomfortable, but Bart doing it isn’t any better. Even Bart yelling “Why you giant-” before doing it doesn’t remedy the problem of using needless violence to get your point across. Because isn’t that why we have words? To communicate our feelings?
Perhaps I’m overthinking this. Okay, I’m totally overthinking this! But outside of being a buzzkill, this is trading one evil for another, less-understood evil. If The Simpsons wanted to be subversive these days, it could start with its most violent gag. I’m not sure what to suggest, but I’m not a screenwriter. Also, I’m not being paid.
By finding a workaround, the writers can set a new standard. The Simpsons, after all, has long been accused of “being stale” for years, such that it too is a meme. And part of that’s a lack of risk, as well as a refusal to leave dated aspects in the past. It’s not like the show’s unaware that strangulation’s bad, or they wouldn’t have addressed it with the therapy session!
Besides, removing the gag and replacing it with something constructive might free up room to discuss other issues. Like how the couch gags are too long now. Or how Julie Kavner and Harry Shearer no longer sound good as Marge and Mr. Burns. Or even how, despite the improved animation, the newer episodes routinely chase trends, as opposed to starting them. Homer strangling his son is the cherry on top, even if the show promised to stop doing it.
Finally, I’d like to address something perplexing: when it was announced that Homer would stop strangling Bart, some people became enraged, claiming it “ruined the show”. Yet, like with Hari Kondabolu and Apu, I must object. When did a gag that’s overstayed its welcome become the death-knell of something you don’t like anymore? And why does axing it bother you if you weren’t interested anyway? I’d call the bluff, but is it worth it? Not really.
Besides, removing the gag and replacing it with something constructive might free up room to discuss other issues. Like how the couch gags are too long now. Or how Julie Kavner and Harry Shearer no longer sound good as Marge and Mr. Burns. Or even how, despite the improved animation, the newer episodes routinely chase trends, as opposed to starting them. Homer strangling his son is the cherry on top, even if the show promised to stop doing it.
Finally, I’d like to address something perplexing: when it was announced that Homer would stop strangling Bart, some people became enraged, claiming it “ruined the show”. Yet, like with Hari Kondabolu and Apu, I must object. When did a gag that’s overstayed its welcome become the death-knell of something you don’t like anymore? And why does axing it bother you if you weren’t interested anyway? I’d call the bluff, but is it worth it? Not really.
No comments:
Post a Comment