Duly noted!
And the irony of that is that All in the Family was in many ways a watered-down and cleaned-up version of the British sitcom
Till Death Us Do Part (1966-1974) upon which it was based. In a bigot deathmatch, Alf Garnett (as played by Warren Mitchell, who is apparently still acting) would eat Archie Bunker’s lunch – and then come up with some foul epithet to describe it.
You think Edith Bunker had it tough? Try being Else Garnett for a day. She gave her share back, though.
Ok, I’ll clarify it a little - especially since anything can get on cable TV nowadays.
All in the Family would definitely not be a prime time series on broadcast TV. There are too many special interest group whose purpose is to “protect” us from such “obscene” entertainment. Oh, and not to mention the children. Think of the children!
i think that for the main, the tv series were representative of the period. that calls for some explanation, i feel.
the ‘normal’ people in society fit pretty much into the patterns portrayed. by normal, i don’t mean everyman in the usa felt a common bond with any of the protagonists. i mean that using a bell curve of the population and excluding the outside edges of it (the poor, the rich), the shows would share similarities with the majority of the people in the nation.
the father had a normal job, not struggling to pay the rent; the mother stayed at home and was married to the father; the divorce situation was rarely at issue…iirc, the wholesale divorce market didn’t start till the mid to late 60s, i.e., one had to go to court and prove some pretty good grounds for a divorce rather than the noncompatability aspect. divorced people were something of a rarity (unless one was in a megalopolis)…or, at least, their situations were not brought up in polite society.
i know that it is fashionable to make fun of the utopian aspects of the older sitcoms; i used to do it myself, until i realized that, just like the commercials, the sitcoms were not directed at me-they were directed at middle america.