I dont think things are as bleak as this guy thinks it is but other than a few of the special Halloween episodes i haven’t watched the Simpsons since the early 2000s
I haven’t watched the show in many many years but that article seems spot on.
The article’s not exactly wrong, but it’s been an in-joke for decades that the family’s lifestyle doesn’t match Homer’s job, and it’s a mystery why. I’m not sure there’s any era where they could have lived like that on a single blue-collar job.
The article’s not exactly right either. Google tells me that “Nuclear Power Reactor Operators will normally receive an average wage of Seventy Seven Thousand Eight Hundred dollars yearly.” Homer is not a new worker, either. Even in the show he’s been there for years. Experienced workers make well over $100,000.
That’s easily enough for them to live well on in their modest suburban house.
If the writer wants to make a point about millennials they need to find a different fictional cartoon show to base it on.
No. The Simpsons decline is because of bad writing. All the good writers left around the 12th season. The Simpsons have been mediocre for a long time, they didn’t start declining last year. Another factor is that even the best joke gets old after you’ve heard it 350 times.
Homer is a cartoon character. He’s always been ridiculous. There’s no way someone so stupid and incompetent would have been hired in the first place, let alone promoted to safety inspector. Hell, even Frank Grimes–or Grimey, as he liked to be called–pointed this out in season 8.
“You’ve been in space!?”
“Of course. Haven’t you?”
I loved the episode featuring Frank Grimes (Homer’s Enemy, S8E23). I really identified with his indignation at Homer’s successful life despite being an idiot.
There’s a pretty significant error in the essay. The author keeps going on about how the Simpsons couldn’t possibly have afforded to buy a house, but they didn’t need to - Grandpa gave it to them, and he won it on a crooked '50s game show. 
I dunno, the article seems to be saying that the proper sitcom family for our age would be the Conners, not the Simpsons?
That is a fine point to make… but kind of obvious because the TV show The Conners is on the air, surviving even losing the putative franchise player. We have a working class family sitcom for our time.
Yep. The fact they are still around after all these decades is a monument to the power of market inertia.
And I agree, Homer and all the characters have always been caricatures, even from the start. (I’m sorry but the article alludes to the mores and expectations of the late 80s GHWB era like they were talking about the 60s, and that puzzles me. Already by then the family structure/employment situation of Homer and Marge was using an old TV trope.)
The difference good writers would make is keeping the caricature fresh, rather than letting it turn into a self-caricature.
Yeah there were a bunch of terrible articles recently about the Simpsons claiming that “The dream of a blue collar worker like Homer owning his own house and supporting a family of five single handedly is unfeasible today” completely ignores the whole first season where it’s established that Homer once actually promoted to Safety Inspector canonically starts making about $60,000 a year minimum even back then. It’s only in the later seasons where the joke is Homer makes a minimum wage.
He ratted out on the whole bunch and got off Scot free.
The Simpsonverse Is a comment on how screwed up everything is.
Actually, Grampa Abe sold his house and gave the sales money to Homer so he could buy his family a house. Homer was so grateful that he had Abe come and live with them…for three weeks, after which he shipped Abe off to the Springfield Retirement Castle.
It’s a mistake to expect realism from an animated show. The point is to be funny, not realistic.
Homer makes enough money to pay for everything because it’s funny.
Spencer is wrong in asserting that the Simpsons’ economic situation is impossible. Maybe it’s unlikely - but there are certainly some families in their thirties who own a house. Spencer is probably projecting his own economic situation and that of his social circle on to the entire country.
Yeah, but Springfield isn’t suburbia.
Reading the actual article, you guys seem to be missing the point. They’re not saying that Homer as he exists now, with his job at the nuclear power plant, wouldn’t be able to live like he does. They’re saying that a millennial Homer (which is who he would be today) without even a college degree or any training, wouldn’t get a job like that.
I’ve seen the social upheaval they’re talking about. My household was pretty much the way the Simpsons household was portrayed. except my mom had to work, too. But still, it was enough for them to be high school graduates, doing blue collar jobs. They could and did own their own house.
Now, though, I’m the same age as Homer. My life isn’t like that at all. I don’t have kids or a wife. I don’t live on my own in any way. And, lest you think that’s just because of my personal issues, my sister doesn’t either. She’s moved in with two roommates, and still rents a house. Still no kids, and they all generally say they don’t want them.
It makes sense to me that maybe it’s harder for modern audiences to identify with the Simpsons. We already saw something similar happen when Homer changed from lovable doofus with a heart who learned a lesson to hateful asshole with impunity, whose only saving grace is that he’s too stupid to live. Or when the characters stopped having any real continuity of character.
I think the article is wrong to discount the other theories for why the show’s quality declined. But I can see how what it mentions plays a part. It is a show that is the product of its time.
I mean, he SHOULDN’T get a job like that. There’s an episode where the NRC finds out Homer doesn’t even have a college degree and Burns has to bribe them to make it go away. As Lenny and Carl point out later on, while they have their Masters Degrees for their similar position Homer just happened to show up on the right day to get hired.
Really, I think the shows biggest draw is with parents who want to use this show to bond with their kids. As in: “Hey kids, this is what you mom and I used to watch when we were your age.”
It’s becoming a family tradition rather than something that’s actually funny to watch.
Lol, 'ol Grimey was sure to come up.
He was born in 1962 and died in 1997.
At first, I hated that episode. Until I realized its secret.
Simpsons episodes made fun of everyone. And finally, they made fun of me. That is, people who cared about continuity. And logic.
Then I got the joke.
Thanks, Grimey.
As long as we’re sharing anecdotes, I and my social group are all around Homer’s age and the Simpson household isn’t too unrecognizable. Most are in a pretty typical nuclear arrangement, and all have stable income. Really the only unusual bit is that the majority of the households have women as the breadwinners.
It might be fun to do the same in the Simpsons, at least for a while; relegate Homer to some low-paid grunt position and give Marge the real job.