Blog #2: "Pretty Specific and a Little Bit Subversive"

“Pretty Specific and a Little Bit Subversive”

“In its debut season, Nip/Tuck was the highest-rated new series on American basic cable, and the highest rated basic cable series of all time for the 18-49 and 25-54 age demographics” (www.wikipedia.com). While I started to re-watch the previous seasons of Nip/Tuck, I began to contemplate what it was about Ryan Murphy’s work that intrigued not only me, but anyone else who has had the privilege of watching his shows. Was it the over-the-top sexuality, ambiguous morals, and disturbing operations that hooked me? Or, was it the satirical nature in which Murphy addresses “America’s obsession with changing their appearance” (www.hollywood.com)? I would like to think of myself as being the later, one who is capable of identifying “signature moves” co-existing in Ryan Murphy’s television series. From Popular to Nip/Tuck, and Nip/Tuck to GLEE, storylines using reoccurring archetypes, subtexts, and themes of superficiality can be easily observed. I will begin by presenting a brief biography of Ryan Murphy and after I will identify the elements that recur enough to be considered “signature moves”.
Born and raised in Indianapolis, IN, Ryan Murphy attended Warren central high school, where he performed in musicals and plays, edited the school’s newspaper, and was an active member in numerous clubs. I include these childhood memoirs to emphasize that Ryan Murphy’s own experiences as a “high school musical theater geek” was an important influence which helped shape stories and overall tone in Popular, Nip/Tuck, and GLEE. Ryan Murphy never dreamed of being a television producer when he started out as a journalist working for The Miami Herald, The Los Angeles Times, New York Daily News, and Entertainment Weekly. In 1999 however, a strange twist in fate lead to Murphy teaming up with producer Gina Matthews to create the teen comedy series Popular. He served as a writer and an executive producer for two seasons before the network decided to cancel the series in 2001. His big break came at the start of his series Nip/Tuck in 2003. Over the years, he has served as a writer, executive producer, and director on the show which he still continues to do so today. Although Murphy is best known for his work on Nip/Tuck, his new show GLEE is proving to be a competitor in the ratings. GLEE is a comedy-drama musical series that first aired on September 9, 2009. Murphy is a writer, executive producer, director, and an executive music producer on the show. It is easy to draw connections between the show Popular and GLEE, to state the obvious of both shows being centered on high schools and cliques. So where does the popular yet controversial masterpiece of Nip/Tuck fall in? Through closer observation, one can see that archetypes, subtexts, and stories/lessons revolving around superficiality co-exist in all three series.
In an interview with TVGuide that took place on May 19, 2009, Murphy says “I’ve never had much luck with it [network shows] just because I think my voice is pretty specific and a little bit subversive. But I also want to do a show that appeals to everybody”. Clearly his worries should be considered misplaced when looking at the success Nip/Tuck has had over the years or even at the jumpstart attention that GLEE has been receiving in its first few weeks of airtime. Murphy goes on in the interview to say that “my own experiences as a high school musical theater geek” assisted in the writing of storylines for his shows. Upon closer examination, I realized that no matter the show, Murphy’s heart went out to “those geeky types who populate the glee club, a group of underdogs” he silently roots for through the use of subtext: an unsaid message or feeling that can be seen in an auteur’s body of work but not necessarily heard or vocalized. Episodes like the one with “Sophia Lopez” at the end of season one of Nip/Tuck have screaming undertones/subtext of Murphy standing up for the underdog. In this episode, Julia is enrolled in a Pilates class with her trans-gendered friend Sophia. The class is full of over-privileged stay-at-home moms who will stop at nothing to get Sophia kicked out of the class just for being trans-gendered. From signing a petition in support of getting Sophia kicked out of the class to blatantly leaving the premise when she is present, Murphy uses an over-the-top comedic and dramatic tone to support the underdog (Sophia/trans-genders) while still emphasizing how superficial people can be.
Along with Nip/Tuck, Murphy’s first television series Popular can be found to have an over-the-top comedic tone to it alongside a subtext alluding to superficiality. According to IMDB’s plot summary for Popular (1999), it is “a biting satirical drama that focused on two high school girls (Carly Pope and Leslie Bibb) – one a bright outsider, the other a popular cheerleader”. He uses stereotypical roles as leading characters so that anyone watching can identify with someone on the show. Once Murphy had the audience relating to someone in some way, he then over-exaggerated and dramatized - in a satirical manner, the way in which the characters interacted with each other. Doing so he sheds light on the superficiality found in people by utilizing and trusting that the audience can read his subtext.
Portraying particular archetypes throughout all his series consistently is one of Murphy’s signature moves as well. There is always a likeable nerd/geek alongside the popular/attractive one. Ryan Murphy created Nip/Tuck centering around the lives of two plastic surgeons Sean McNamara and Christian Troy. Sean is the smart, talented, skilled, reserved, innocent and prude-like character alongside his partner Christian who is the attractive, adventurous, shallow, and popular one. These archetypes are seen again in the show Popular. The show revolves around Sam McPherson (unpopular journalist) and Brooke McQueen (popular cheerleader). Murphy carefully portrays the archetypes on polar opposite ends of the popularity spectrum. Brooke is popular, beautiful, a straight A student, and of course a cheerleader. Sam is the unpopular outsider who is smart, strong-willed, articulate and stubborn. More recently, Murphy has created a show called GLEE. GLEE provides a witty take on school life focusing on the high school’s show choir/glee club. Although it is not as cynical and dark as Popular and Nip/Tuck, “I wanted to do a show that has a bigger heart and is kinder” Murphy told reporters at TVGuide. He still calls upon his signature move of using archetypes as main characters in his show, but this time he makes it a goal of the show to make people feel “optimism about what you can become” and breaks out of the inhibiting mold of stereotypes. He does so by portraying Finn Hudson (the star quarterback) risking his image and reputation for the chance to join the Glee Club. However, this wouldn’t be a signature move without the signature. Rachel Berry (talented member of the Glee Club/nerd) gets bullied by football players frequently along with the flamboyant male who can sing soprano - Kurt Hummel. A classic tale of cheerleaders/popular vs. nerds is ever present in Sue Sylvester’s (over-enthusiastic, extreme, feminist cheerleading coach) relationship to the Glee club – her arch nemesis.
In a world that is overly concerned with looks, outer appearances, reputation, and status, Ryan Murphy’s work as an auteur is extremely refreshing and comical. From the superficial beliefs and countless surgeries used to change appearance in Nip/Tuck, Popular’s over-satirical portrayal of high school cliques, and to GLEE’s unique portrayal favoring the underdogs of the world, Ryan Murphy makes a valiant effort to poke fun at America’s obsession with altering appearances and the increasing level of how superficial people can be. His “signature moves” that utilize stereotypical archetypes, subtext, and superficiality, aide Murphy’s quest in wanting “to do a show that appeals to everybody” in a unique way. “After eight years of living in the dark, strange world of Nip/Tuck, Ryan Murphy is ready for something different” – change.


Works Cited
McNamara, Mary. "Review: 'Nip/Tuck' at the begining of its final season on FX." Television review. LA Times. Web. 11 Oct. 2009. .
"Nip/Tuck." Internet Movie Database. Web. 11 Oct. 2009. .
"Ryan Murphy on Glee: People Don't Just Break Out Into Song; "There Are Rules"" Interview by Mickey O'Connor. TV Guide 19 May 2009. Print.
"Ryan Murphy." Wikipedia. Web. 11 Oct. 2009. .
Television Review. Web. 11 Oct. 2009. .
Wagner, Curt. "Ryan Murphy finds 'Glee' in new musical." Ryan Murphy finds 'Glee' in new musical comedy. 19 May 2009. Web. 11 Oct. 2009.

The Critic Within

The Critic Within

According to www.csun.edu, 99% of American households have at least one television set at their disposal. Of that 99%, 66% of American households have three or more televisions in their homes. The average amount of time that the television is on in the household is 6 hours and 47 minutes. That is 6 hours and 47 minutes of being bombarded with multiple messages, various points of views, and entertainment. With so many Americans being exposed to television, each with their own unique point of view and perspective, why should mine be any different? In no way do I find myself to be an elitist nor do I find my point of view to be any better than the next. However, I do find my stance and opinion on things to be eye opening, well rounded, and educational. My hope is to aid readers in considering other perspectives different from their own and ultimately expand their awareness of what they are watching. In this post I will share my goals for doing TV criticism, express my view on television, and share my viewing pleasures and habits in hopes of gaining a relation to you- my readers.

When the word “criticism” comes to mind, most of us have a negative connotation applied towards the word. A goal of mine is to not only rid myself of thinking of criticism as a negative thing, but to also show you criticism can be extremely beneficial. In the words of O’Donnell (2007), “television criticism is about the evaluation of content, its context, organization, story and characterization, style, genre, and audience desire”. Furthermore, O’Donnell (2007) says that a goal as a television critic is to understand the various elements of a television program, analyze through critical methodology, interpret meanings, make a judgment, and most importantly communicate your thoughts with an audience. Similarly, Corner (1999) believes that criticism is more concerned with the multiplicity of meaning, expanding the meaning, and the construction of meaning. Both O’Donnell (2007) and Corner (1999) point out a crucial goal for criticism in that we must recognize the multiplicity in meaning in all that we watch. This means that as we watch certain programs and read certain texts, we must recognize that there are multiple interpretations that can be taken away other than just our own.

My personal view on television is very much in accordance with that of O’Donnell (2007) and Butler (2002). I agree with O’Donnell (2007) in that “television criticism is subjective in that it subjects a program to interpretation through the critic’s perceptual filters. Television criticism can also be persuasive in that it can alter the perceptions of recipients” (p. 19). For example, a few months ago, the movie “The Hangover” came out in theaters all over America. There was much hype that surrounded this movie long before it was released in theaters. I went online and read movie critics’ reviews to help me decide whether or not it would be worth paying for. I realized the critiques were subjective in that every critique was different from the next since the interpretations through the critic’s perceptual filters were different. I also realized that the critics were persuasive as well. Reading about how fantastically funny the movie was persuaded me to want to go to the movie.

Along with O’Donnell (2007), Butler (2002) points out that there is a certain hierarchical arrangement in that “the television text does not present all meanings equally, positively, or strongly” (p. 10). Although cliché, my example of this is a feminist one; today we live in a world where both men and women were born equal. I use the word equal loosely -for how men and women are portrayed on television is anything but. Although this portrayal has improved from when I was a child, the shows I remember actively watching as child were ones that embraced the idea of male dominance. Shows like Superman and Power Rangers constantly portrayed the image of the superior male doing the saving with the inferior female needing the saving. Even when Catwoman was introduced in the Batman series, what appeared to be a strong female character was in fact just another victim falling short to the strength and appearance of Batman. Looking forward, I realize my criticisms are subjective in that my own experiences and views will differ how I see certain things. This is why I always keep an open mind and am greatly intrigued by other opinions and views on the subject matter.

Despite the hierarchical arrangement found in television, Sillars and Gronbeck (2001) make an excellent point in that “analyzing even what appears to be the simplest of works requires textualization to suggest what’s “really” being said” (p.10). There are always important messages found in television shows that work towards bettering society. Growing up, watching shows like Barney, Sesame Street, and The Wonder Years, taught me that there are consequences to stealing, lying, cheating, etc… Seeing the true meaning behind subliminal messages and negative undertones are vitally important sometimes in seeing the importance and positive aspects of television. Corner (1999) points out that television research and criticism was rooted from people’s fears that television was a negative aspect to society and it was plaguing the minds of adolescents. I grew up around television, watching television, and am now taking an active critical stance studying television. I believe those to come after me as well are going to be even more accustomed with television. In that sense, instead of viewing television as a negative form of entertainment, I prefer to take Sillars and Gronbeck’s stance by looking into what’s really being said and O’Donnell’s perspective that we can use criticism as a tool to deepen and enrich our understandings of human nature and society as a whole.

I understand that my critiques are subjective since I am different from you. That is why I am interested to hear what you think about my opinions and stance on certain issues; do you agree, disagree, why? Not only am I interested in hearing that, but I too am interested in learning what shows you grew up with that you look back on now and have a completely different opinion about it. What shows interest you now? Any guilty pleasures? As for me, I am a sucker for FRIENDS, the Office, and of course my guilty pleasure is the Road Rules Real World challenges. All feedback is welcome

References

Brunsdon, C. (1993). Identity in feminist television criticism. Media, Culture and Society, 15: 309-320.

Butler, J. (2002). Television: Critical Methods and Applications (2nd ed). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Corner, J. (1999). Critical Ideas in Television Studies. New York: Oxford University Press.

O’Donnell, V. (2007). Television Criticism. New York: Sage.

Sillars, M. O. and Gronbeck, B. E. (2001). Communication Criticism: Rhetoric, Social Codes, Cultural Studies. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

---