3

Before I Gaze At You Again


 

[vodpod id=Groupvideo.4393694&w=560&h=340&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

The TV post that rightly got the most attention yesterday was Linda Holmes’s “How a Thorough De-Gazing Saved CBS’s ‘The Big Bang Theory.'” Trying to figure out how the show can be so enjoyable now when she hated the pilot so much (and still does), she traces it to the concept of the “male gaze,” the idea that many female characters in fiction aren’t really people, just devices to produce certain reactions in men.

The pilot is terrible. The pilot is really, really terrible. And while there are many reasons for that — Leonard and Sheldon are too similar, their odd-couple dynamic isn’t firing yet, Sheldon’s quirks aren’t cranked up to heaven yet, and the writing feels very “pilot-y,” for lack of a more precise descriptor — the biggest problem is Penny, the only woman in the core cast, played by Kaley Cuoco. Penny lives across the hall from physicists Leonard and Sheldon, and while she’s now Leonard’s girlfriend and well-integrated with the guys and their friends, when the show started, Penny was not a person; she was a prop.

Nothing was ever seen from Penny’s point of view; she almost never had a joke that wasn’t at her own expense. Here’s all her dialogue from the first scene she ever did:

“Oh, hi.” “Hi.” “Oh, that’s nice.” “Oh, okay, well, guess I’m your new neighbor, Penny.” “Hi.” “Hi.” “Oh, thank you, maybe we can have coffee sometime.” “Great.” “Bye.” And here’s the dialogue from her second scene: “Hi.” “Hi.” “Oh, you’re inviting me over to eat?” “Oh, that’s so nice. I’d love to.” “So what do you guys do for fun around here?”

The term “male gaze” has gotten a bad rap, perhaps deserved, because it sounds like one of those terms that college media professors invent as a substitute for paying attention to the story. But you can say the same thing with less loaded language, and it’s actually true. Most of the female characters on Two and a Half Men have been bimbos and emasculators, and on the flip side, Holmes points to Sex and the City as a show where the men don’t actually have any identity of their own. Even on a show where everyone’s a stereotype, it can be frustrating to see a character who’s nothing more than Generic Woman or Generic Guy.

But I think the progress of Penny — her development into a character who’s notable for more than her development — may have more to do with an important principle of series TV, and particularly sitcoms: if the show can come up with one really good, strong character, it can elevate other characters. This is the Sheldon principle. Once he became a specific character with individual likes, dislikes, problems and comic tics (which he wasn’t in the pilot; he was the generic Other Nerd), other characters could play off that, and gain individuality through the individual ways they reacted to him. Penny has gone further with that than the others, because her relationship with Sheldon is the most specific and unique; the other three guys each have a similar type of attitude to the show’s breakout character, so they haven’t been individualized as much. But shows like these are about relationships, and those relationships are easier to construct when at least one character is not just a blank slate.

I’ve used Family Ties as a classic example of this. Every character started out pretty generic. Michael J. Fox’s rise to stardom not only helped his character, it helped most of the other characters, as their specific, different relationships with Alex began to define them as people. (The worst character was the mother, whose relationship with Alex was the least clearly defined.)


 
Filed under:

Before I Gaze At You Again

  1. How sad that you degrade Elyse Keaton to merely "the mother" from Family Ties, when the show was originally, as I recall, a star vehicle for her in the first place. Although that would be reflective of her personality and placement on the show as time went by, as everything eventually became a by-product of how Alex would react in any given situation, which I think was most on display in the "A is for Alex" episode. As a side note, I'm surprised that they never gave Steven's beard billing in the later seasons. It was a thespian in its own right.

  2. I made it 12 minutes into the pilot before I turned it off. Since then I just assumed the entire running of the show was just as bad.

    Does it at least have a laugh track every 8 seconds so I know when to laugh?

  3. Interesting article for those of us who feel obliged to analyze comedy . . .

    Going all Laura Mulvey for a second, the show started out with the Hollywood stock nerd as sub-male semi-other, for whom the "male gaze" didn't convey ownership or power, but represented frustrated desire. Much of the humour derived from the male characters' inability to relate to the subject of their gaze.

    Like a lot of TV shows, BBT started out as an idea that could be pitched to the money people in under thirty seconds ("Three nerds live next to hot bimbo. Comedy results.") and only progressed to something else after it started making money.

    Okay, moment passed. And yes, there are a lot of inebriated puns made on "male gaze" at academic parties.

Sign in to comment.