Right, but, just to be clear: sometimes Phil was dealing with that, but sometimes he was just there to be the bumbling sitcom dad who bungles a household task — or who comes to terms with how one of his kids is on the brink of getting expelled from school while the other is now comically past the point where he can help with the homework, or whatever. And, yeah, sometimes Manny’s plot would involve his family situation; but sometimes he was just there to be the kind of little kid who‘d deliver a Martin Prince line about wanting to dabble in amateur theatricals during his university years — or he’d have to deal with a bully, or try to pull off a funny prank, or whatever.
There still seems to be an audience for the regular go-to material of family sitcoms; even if folks are doing a show that does Very Different Look stuff, I figure they could still hire a guy who’d gladly write for The Simpsons and tell him, uh, yeah, that’s fine; we’ve got maybe six minutes to fill in this upcoming episode, just write pretty much what you would‘ve written there.
I think the fundamental flaw here is that the Grimey episode is NOT a commentary on the politics and economics of Homer’s job and how he supports his family. It’s not a comment on blue-collar work or white collar management. It’s not about the culture of work in America.
It’s lampooning the critics of the show. Grimes is the shithead blogger shouting from the rooftops that The Simpsons is not realistic. And all the bad things that happen to him is the writer’s wish fulfillment for people that take this shit too seriously.
It also was the episode where Homer the unapologetic asshole (and loved by all for it) was created and pretty much the ruin of the Simpsons. Before that he had moments when he’d realise he might be wrong, or not meant things to go that far, after this? Homer revving a motorbike in Church with the townpeople lauging. And Marge shrugging.
It’s almost like they’ve seen the bloggers complaining and went “look, you’ve not seen anything yet in the worst episode ever stakes”.
The show lampooned “shithead bloggers” on other occasions. Homer’s Enemy had nothing to do with that. Homer’s Enemy lampoons the idea that Homer is some sort of Everyman and relatable. It posits that instead of Homer being just one element of a universe, that the Simpsons Universe effectively revolves around Homer. So when someone questions that arrangement, rather than his voice being heard, he’s effectively punished for it. Closest corollary would be the Roadrunner being able to run into a picture or painting and the Coyote not, but that has a hoist by his own petard element, which isn’t present with Frank Grimes.
Homer is not really an asshole in Homer’s Enemy, though he is dumber than usual. Homer had already had many asshole episodes under his belt by that time.
The reversal of Homer’s Enemy is The Day The Violence Died, where Bart and Lisa are beaten out as heroes by Lester and Eliza.
It’s also pointing out that if you sum up the total of Homer’s experiences to that point in the show, and if you knew someone like him who had gotten to do all of those things, it would drive you completely insane. They’re lampshading the ridiculousness of the series. Grimes is right, Springfield is a ridiculous place, and the show and writers know it, and that’s just the bargain we make with the show.
Modnote: It is one of the bright line rules of the SDMB to not change contents of quotes. Not even for obvious jokes or corrections. Please do not do this again.
As per the senior mods. We checked first.
I thought the article was a pretty interesting read, even if the “changing politics” part might not be relevant (I wouldn’t know; I never picked up any political stances on the show deeper than “Republicans are useless” and “mayors get reelected too much”). Mainly I wonder just who the show is for now. The jerk-who-gets-away-with-everything-as-hero was a creation of Generation X. We’re (not me personally, mind you) the ones who idolized Beavis and Butthead, Eric Cartman, Ren and Stmpy, and that brat on Baby Blues, and also gave stuff like The Killing Joke waaaaaaaayyy too much import. It’s not a formula that’s going to resonate with anyone else, at least not to any significant degree. All the original fans have seen every angle a dozen times by now, possibly literally. At what point does lazy, stupid, inconsiderate Homer just become old hat?
(Homer’s Enemy was nothing but a colossal middle finger from the writers to their critics, but I’d gotten used to it by that point, so it didn’t really affect me.)
The Simpsons is still enormously popular internationally, because it represents a familiar and uncontroversial animated sitcom with characters who have been around longer than some of the people watching it have been alive.
I agree to an extent the show’s decline is partly due to the decline in broadcast TV - like for an entire generation (at least in this part of the world), the Simpsons was on at 6.30pm every weeknight, right after the news, and was required watching because we’d all be talking about it at school the next day. There was a routine; you’d have dinner, then it would be time for The Simpsons.
Then for some reason the show got shifted to a different timeslot or moved to one of the less popular digital channels when Digital TV broadcasting began, and then it was on Foxtel (Pay TV which hardly anyone has) so it sort of fell off the radar - I don’t think I watched an episode between about 2005 and 2019, when Disney+ launched.
I have to say I still enjoy the show and I like that I can watch it with the kids. It’s not terrible and I think a lot of people are just sad it’s not the height of pop culture the way it was for the first 10 years or so of its run.
This is sometimes brought up by people who consider themselves to be “edgy” or “sophisticated.” I’m sure that the acronym was sometimes used that way. But in actuality, the F stands for “fouled,” which makes considerably more sense.
Just want to point out that Roseanne was contemporary with The Simpsons during its first run as well, and was touted as being more “true to life” than other sitcoms. So that’s nothing new or special either.
I always saw The Simpsons in large part as a satire of the old 1950s-1970s single-family sitcoms- Ozzie and Harriet, Leave it to Beaver, All in the Family, and so on. So you kind of HAVE to have the whole working dad, SAHM, two kids and a dog family situation if you’re going to try and skewer that kind of show. It didn’t reflect life in 1989, but that was by design, not accident.
Now whether it makes sense in 2021 to keep that premise, I don’t know.
Yes, but it was (still is?) routinely used when “explaining” the acronym to people around whom you don’t want, for whatever reason, to use the F-word. Example: That’s precisely how my WWII-vet father “explained” the word SNAFU to me back in the day.
Minor sidetrack: they had a contest a few years back and it was decided that Springfield, Oregon, was the real-life Springfield which most resembled that in the show. It’s not a suburb, but a small city located quite near a slightly larger city (Eugene, which I guess is Shelbyville in this analogy) and about a hundred miles from the nearest really big city (Portland).
Anyway, now Springfield has this really cool Simpsons mural downtown and you should check it out if you’re ever there.
Considering Matt Groening is from Portland, that makes complete sense.
Looking at some articles online, apparently Springfield, OR is a former mill town, and historically had a “wrong side of the tracks” reputation compared to wealthier Eugene.
I’m trying to think of how many sitcoms featured a stay at home mom in 1989 and I’m coming up short. Peg Bundy on Married with Children didn’t have a job but the mothers from Growing Pains,Family Ties,The Cosby Show,Mr. Belvedere, and even Charles in Charge were all working.
I still think The Simpsons has declined because it’s been on the air for more than thirty years. I stopped watching regularly before 2000 and only started watching it again through streaming services while I paint my models. I don’t think it’s a bad show but it’s lived a long, long time. Do people who started watching around 2010 look back at episodes from 1992 and wince?
If you go all the way back to 1992, yes. My kids (pre-teens), for instance, don’t relate all that well to the early episodes, due to a ton of reasons. And even critics have noted that the show improved markedly in the recent decade or so, after some really abysmal seasons.
I still watch the show with my kids and it’s not nearly as bad as most people here would make it. Of course the mid-90’s seasons are much better, but hey, they were the best thing on TV then.
Outdated politics? What, corrupt mayors? Making fun of Republican talk radio? It is hardly a major factor in the show, though I watch it very sporadically these days…