Girls, Girls, Girls
Jan. 11th, 2014 11:00 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
penpusherI've been threatening to write some thoughts about the HBO comedy series "Girls," almost since it debuted. But I definitely didn't want to jump the gun and say too much about it before it had established itself, with show creator, director, star and sometimes producer Lena Dunham and her (now a television standard) "Power of 4" collection of main characters.
The show is about to begin its 3rd season (hence the "Girls, Girls, Girls" title) and since HBO has already approved a season 4 for the show, even before the debut of this year's episodes, we have at least enough to properly gauge what is going on with this program. Though much more importantly, we have enough to decide the underlying stuff of what the program is saying (or attempting to say) about this moment in time for the people it examines.
Sitcoms are always problematic, when they purport to give you a real taste of life. The overarching problem is that no scripted series (and certainly no "reality" series) on TV is real. Clearly they can be based in reality, but, once you start the writing process, it turns into fiction. This isn't a criticism though. It's not that we don't like and enjoy a sitcom premise that we know couldn't happen, from a genie living with an astronaut in Florida, to a bunch of geeks hanging out in Pasadena, getting into misadventures as only geeks can. Ok. Maybe that second one *CAN* happen.
If you listen to Ms. Dunham's interviews and takes on storylines and plot points, it seems that she feels her show is drawing her audience into a world that actually exists with people that are dealing with their difficulties. But more, the implication is that she is this voice of her generation, making a statement about how the lives of the characters she displays are important and problems that are happening, and somehow is shining a light and giving a focus to those elements.
While I applaud her for certain aspects of her program, not the least of which is dealing with body image, when she starts talking about the points that supposedly make this show "more real," it becomes problematic.
Really, as far as I can see, "Girls" isn't any more "real" than "Friends" was in the 1990s and early 2000s. Yes, on HBO, people can say words not permitted on "broadcast" TV, and can get naked on screen, which I guess provides a basis for making this program a bit more gritty than it otherwise would have been. But, just how real are we getting here?
The "Friends" comparison wasn't random. That program was also set in New York, and in both "Friends" and "Girls" we have a city that is not just predominantly white, but overwhelmingly white. This isn't a New York I've ever seen! And I live here!
"Girls" has even less of an excuse for this, since it is set in Brooklyn, and is dealing with elements of life that would bring the characters into contact with a lot more diverse people, through college, through survival jobs, through clubbing and interaction on the subways and streets. Why is there not more representation of "reality" in this program?!
But this is a problem for Television itself, not just "Girls." And, like the problems we face as a society, it's both a lot bigger and a lot smaller than you might expect. The problem is bigger because of the system in place that focuses on the advertising. TV is a money making game. And everything is based on getting sponsors that are willing to advertise on a show. Television caters to the sponsors first, last and always. This typically is the first "go to" argument against diversity on a program for those that are defending the system currently in place.
But, again, that doesn't really fly when it comes to "Girls." Being on HBO, there are no sponsors. Judd Apatow, Dunham and their group can go... pretty much anywhere as far as narrative, casting, concepts.
The problem is smaller because someone like Dunham has a golden opportunity to make these changes just by making these changes! Not every show runner can take chances... certainly not at the big 5 networks. But here, there is a whole world out there available.
Of course, the reason it's not happening is pretty simple: it's the old "write what you know" thing. Lena Dunham, very much a product of her environment, grew up in an insulated upper-middle class home with successful artists. And she really can't write people of color, because she probably doesn't actually know any. And that's where hiring people of color as writers might help flesh that out a little bit.
Conversely, this is why internet services like Netflix and Hulu are starting to have success with programming like "Orange Is the New Black." Though it's great that women of color are getting some exposure via that series, it might be nice to have, as an alternative, a show where the bulk of those characters aren't in prison.
And that gets me back to "Girls." I mean, I could get into the minutiae of the characters, how Hannah has OCD and how that complicates her life in a myriad of ways. How being in New York and being a millenniumer and being treated as if the world were handed to you might make an important statement to the world. And maybe it's an entertaining show that might sometimes touch on something that relates to someone who is viewing it, reflecting back some strand of that person's experience. But for me, "Girls" is just another television show that didn't quite get it right, even though it had a lot of opportunities to do so. And in 2014, that's a little sad.
The show is about to begin its 3rd season (hence the "Girls, Girls, Girls" title) and since HBO has already approved a season 4 for the show, even before the debut of this year's episodes, we have at least enough to properly gauge what is going on with this program. Though much more importantly, we have enough to decide the underlying stuff of what the program is saying (or attempting to say) about this moment in time for the people it examines.
Sitcoms are always problematic, when they purport to give you a real taste of life. The overarching problem is that no scripted series (and certainly no "reality" series) on TV is real. Clearly they can be based in reality, but, once you start the writing process, it turns into fiction. This isn't a criticism though. It's not that we don't like and enjoy a sitcom premise that we know couldn't happen, from a genie living with an astronaut in Florida, to a bunch of geeks hanging out in Pasadena, getting into misadventures as only geeks can. Ok. Maybe that second one *CAN* happen.
If you listen to Ms. Dunham's interviews and takes on storylines and plot points, it seems that she feels her show is drawing her audience into a world that actually exists with people that are dealing with their difficulties. But more, the implication is that she is this voice of her generation, making a statement about how the lives of the characters she displays are important and problems that are happening, and somehow is shining a light and giving a focus to those elements.
While I applaud her for certain aspects of her program, not the least of which is dealing with body image, when she starts talking about the points that supposedly make this show "more real," it becomes problematic.
Really, as far as I can see, "Girls" isn't any more "real" than "Friends" was in the 1990s and early 2000s. Yes, on HBO, people can say words not permitted on "broadcast" TV, and can get naked on screen, which I guess provides a basis for making this program a bit more gritty than it otherwise would have been. But, just how real are we getting here?
The "Friends" comparison wasn't random. That program was also set in New York, and in both "Friends" and "Girls" we have a city that is not just predominantly white, but overwhelmingly white. This isn't a New York I've ever seen! And I live here!
"Girls" has even less of an excuse for this, since it is set in Brooklyn, and is dealing with elements of life that would bring the characters into contact with a lot more diverse people, through college, through survival jobs, through clubbing and interaction on the subways and streets. Why is there not more representation of "reality" in this program?!
But this is a problem for Television itself, not just "Girls." And, like the problems we face as a society, it's both a lot bigger and a lot smaller than you might expect. The problem is bigger because of the system in place that focuses on the advertising. TV is a money making game. And everything is based on getting sponsors that are willing to advertise on a show. Television caters to the sponsors first, last and always. This typically is the first "go to" argument against diversity on a program for those that are defending the system currently in place.
But, again, that doesn't really fly when it comes to "Girls." Being on HBO, there are no sponsors. Judd Apatow, Dunham and their group can go... pretty much anywhere as far as narrative, casting, concepts.
The problem is smaller because someone like Dunham has a golden opportunity to make these changes just by making these changes! Not every show runner can take chances... certainly not at the big 5 networks. But here, there is a whole world out there available.
Of course, the reason it's not happening is pretty simple: it's the old "write what you know" thing. Lena Dunham, very much a product of her environment, grew up in an insulated upper-middle class home with successful artists. And she really can't write people of color, because she probably doesn't actually know any. And that's where hiring people of color as writers might help flesh that out a little bit.
Conversely, this is why internet services like Netflix and Hulu are starting to have success with programming like "Orange Is the New Black." Though it's great that women of color are getting some exposure via that series, it might be nice to have, as an alternative, a show where the bulk of those characters aren't in prison.
And that gets me back to "Girls." I mean, I could get into the minutiae of the characters, how Hannah has OCD and how that complicates her life in a myriad of ways. How being in New York and being a millenniumer and being treated as if the world were handed to you might make an important statement to the world. And maybe it's an entertaining show that might sometimes touch on something that relates to someone who is viewing it, reflecting back some strand of that person's experience. But for me, "Girls" is just another television show that didn't quite get it right, even though it had a lot of opportunities to do so. And in 2014, that's a little sad.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2014-01-14 03:13 am (UTC)It wasn't until I was reading reviews on ONTD where all the comments were all, "She needs to check her white privilege," that it even occurred to me there were no people of color on the show and that she was acting selfish.
I don't remember why I didn't watch season two. I think we got rid of HBO. But I did see that episodes where she spends the day with Patrick Wilson.
So she's not the voice of her generation. But she's a voice. Of a generation.
I mean, that line, "When I look at you, a Coldplay song plays in my heart," it spoke to me. I relate to stuff like that.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-14 04:04 am (UTC)The trouble when discussing the element of "color" when it comes to characters in books, movies, television programs, is that, the "default" ethnicity of a character, especially a main character/protagonist, is white. That means that unless otherwise stated, it is assumed that the character is a white person.
This makes for some serious problems when it comes to a whole host of elements. One recent example is "The Hunger Games."
The novel series described Katniss Everdeen as having olive skin. She was clearly being described as an ethnic girl. Hollywood steps in and Jennifer Lawrence gets the role.
But more than that, when it came to auditioning, they wouldn't even allow any minority actresses to try out. It's a difficult circumstance to find good minority actors, but that's a little bit tougher if they aren't allowed to be found!
I don't mean to dump on you or on anyone who likes this show. And nobody who can read this is responsible for how Hollywood works, so this isn't directed at any reader. But sometimes, like you discovered, it's just a little something that you wouldn't be conscious of since that has no effect on how you see and function in the world, but it has a very big impact on those of us who have more melanin.
The longer these sorts of issues persist, the sillier those responsible for them will look to the historians studying this part of history.