ON COMEDY, DRAMA AND EMOTIONAL INVOLVEMENT: or, VIVISECTION OF A DYING SHOW: Once again a stray thought I had started to grow in my mind, and before I knew it I had all the material I needed to write an essay. This essay is also so complex that I found it hard to settle for one single title for it, and while the titles I've chosen may not seem to have anything in common I hope it will all become clear to you as you read on. And before you ask, the answer is yes. The second title *does* mean that the essay will be quite pessimistic, but I still want everyone who reads this to understand that the *essay* was not a result of the pessimism. The *pessimism* was a result of the conclusions I came to from doing this analysis, or if you want to put it in another way: I started with "Comedy, drama and emotional involvement" and ended up with "A vivisection of a dying show". :-( One of the questions that have been raised lately due to some of the episodes of seasons 3 & 4 is: "Where is the show heading?" The reason for this question is pretty obvious. The overall "tone of voice" in seasons 3 & 4 is quite different from that of seasons 1 & 2. Exactly *what* that change is has been surprisingly difficult to pinpoint, but I will do my best to answer that question so that we in turn can come closer to answering the question "Where is the show heading?" Yet another question that needs to be answered (And perhaps this is why the main question is so hard to answer: It consists of so many smaller questions.) before we can get down to business is: "Where has the show been?" ...so let's head all the way back to season 1 and take a peek. What was the inner purpose of the show from the beginning...? As many genres of television and literature as there are we can still basically say that they all serve one or more of three purposes, these purposes being: 1) Bringing out emotions. (For example: "Tom & Jerry"-style cartoons, soap operas and horror movies) 2) Making people think. (Or in a more primitive version - just making people accept the views presented *without* thinking.) (For example: Debate programs) 3) Presenting a (hopefully) objective report of a set of events. (For example: The TV-news.) Now which of these purposes fit "Daria"? Obviously number 3 is out of the question since it's a cartoon we're talking about and it's hard to think of a medium more poorly suited for that purpose - unless of course we assume that it intends to present an objective view of what goes on inside Mr. Eichler's head... which would be really silly. I would therefore argue that the purpose is a combination of purpose 1 & 2 (in proportions which vary from episode to episode). When it comes to the subject of making people think the show has in my opinion done quite a remarkable job considering it only has about 21 minutes of active air time per episode at its disposal. Episodes like "The Misery Chick", "Too Cute" or why not even "This Year's Model" have done a lot better job in bringing out points about our society than most debate programs I've seen... Also the whole unpopularity/ outcast-aspect is something of a trademark of the show. It's a show about an unpopular girl and the show itself often brings up unpopular issues and points of view. (At least as long as we look at season 1, and that's what we're doing at the moment.) Well, what about emotions then? What kind of emotions is the show striving to produce in the viewer? This is where it gets complicated (mostly because of the fact that emotions are so subjective and hard to analyse) but also because the show is one of the more complex ones at this point. I would like to say that the most basic and simple purpose of the show here of course is to make people laugh - but laugh "with style". (As I already mentioned the writers of the show apparently also want the viewers to *think*.) Well how do you combine these two then? The laughing and the thinking. There are a couple of ways... One might present a serious point but present it in such a way that the presentation itself creates a contrast to the message it delivers thus making it funny. (For example by using a weird or wacky metaphor.) The most typical way however is the satire, and this is also the path that the show primarily follows. The satire however has one characteristic that not all forms of humour have: It has to have a target. The satire is never funny in itself, it is only funny when compared to whatever it makes fun of - and it's funny in such a way that it makes the target look bad. IOW the satire is quite an aggressive form of humour - actually a parasite that thrives of the host causing it harm. This feature makes the satire the ideal medium for criticism, but also causes some moral questions regarding it. This also goes for the satire's cousin, the sarcasm (which of course is *very* prominently featured on "Daria" and has been from day 1.) The main difference between satire and sarcasm is that the satire targets some*thing* whereas the sarcasm targets some*one*. In capable hands the satire/sarcasm is a weapon, and the saying "The pen is mightier than the sword." would probably never have been, had it not been for this kind of humour. People like when you laugh *with* them, but everybody fears being laughed *at*. The moral question involved with the satire/sarcasm (from now on S/S) will therefore always be: "Does whoever/whatever is mocked *deserve* to be mocked?" (Make no mistake here - the S/S is not an objective "stupidity-eliminator". It is only as objective as the person who's using it.) Also the S/S can (like any weapon) be highly offensive to people who embrace and represent whatever the S/S targets. This means that whoever *uses* S/S to make a point must be especially careful not to make any of the mistakes he criticises. If he does, not only will he be a hypocrite but there will be a lot of offended people around to loudly point out that fact. In conclusion one might say that using satire is a high-risk game. The rewards are great, but if not careful, so are the risks. So, if the primary goal is to be funny, the secondary goal is to make a point[*] and S/S is used to accomplish these goals, then *how* exactly is it done? Well, the answer of course is that it's done as every S/S is. It points out an error, focuses on it, exaggerates it a bit so that even the dumbest person ought to see it, and that's it. This, of course is the reason that the characters on "Daria" are such exaggerated stereotypes - it makes for better S/S (and overall comedy). So when Daria is cynical, she's not just a little cynical, she's cynical to the bone. When Quinn is shallow "her shallowness is so thorough that it's almost like depth". When Ms. Barch hates men, she *really* hates them. When Mr. O'Neill is emotionally sensitive he's a total wimp. When Kevin & Brittany are dumb... etc. etc. The cartoon characters on "Daria" are extreme personalities drawn to the extreme. This should not be a surprise. There is an entire art of humour built around the concept of exaggeration, and "over the top"-characters work well for comedy. Or as Scott Adams (author of "Dilbert") put it: "The more I exaggerate a character, the more he's familiar." [*]: I'm placing the priorities is this order because we haven't seen any episodes that have not been (or at least tried to be) funny, but not every episode tries to make a point. Now what happens when you throw in some S/S into that mix...? (Just so that no mistakes are made here: I *know* that S/S is *not* the only form of humour seen on Daria. Some of the humour is just "ordinary" humour for fun's sake.) The answer is that strong opposites meet, and they meet in a hostile manner... Result: Fractions are created - in the case of "Daria" the traditional fractions have been Daria & Jane vs. The rest of the world. (Okay, so I'm exaggerating, but not by much.) Daria's role on the show was very clear in the first two seasons. She was the voice of reason in an insane world, and she also was the person one sided with in the conflicts that took place because just as with any S/S one only had three options: 1) To side *with* the S/S. (Which was the same thing as siding with Daria.) 2) To side *against* the S/S. (Which means that one probably hated the show as a whole.) 3) To be neutral. (Which means that the show didn't accomplish it's goal of making that person laugh. It's usually quite boring to listen to sarcastic quips regarding a topic you don't care the least about, and not caring is the only way to be neutral when S/S is used.) That of course is the way of the S/S - it rewards only those who side with it, and in the light of this I think it's safe to say that the intentions of the writers were that one would side (emotionally) with Daria and Jane. But just in case there are people out there who are still not convinced I will dig even further into this issue by looking at the alternative. And in order to do so I will finally get to the topic of emotional involvement, but unfortunately I will also have to start this discussion with a rather grim example... As you all know the Germans had set up some concentration camps during world war 2 and ever since, both historians and psychologists have pondered the question how something like that could happen. How could an entire nation be convinced into committing systematic genocide? What had happened to people's conscience? I'm not going to go further into this topic. I'll just take one example that will hopefully illustrate how important our emotional involvement is when it comes to interaction with other human beings and how we view the world we live in. One of the heads of a world war 2 concentration camp (I forget his name.) was well known for his cruelties. He could be completely ruthless and had no problems with sending hordes of Jews to the gas chambers - yet when his canary died he cried like a baby... How come? Obviously the guy had feelings, otherwise he wouldn't have mourned the death of his canary, and just as obviously he had no sympathy whatsoever toward the Jews, otherwise he wouldn't have been able to systematically slaughter them. Obviously it comes down to how our conscience works. If we try to place ourselves in the situation of another person it will be much harder for us to do something that will hurt that person, simply because it will hurt ourselves through implication. All the immorality we see in the world can in fact be traced to one big flaw in our consciences - the fact that we're able to turn it off. Still - since we live in the world we live in, and not a perfect one we sometimes *have* to turn off our consciences lest people (who have *their* consciences turned to the "off"-position) take unfair advantage of the situation. (Most cults control their members by manipulating their conscience.) The head of the concentration camp *had* a conscience - it was just that he had bought the Nazi propaganda that labelled the Jews as parasites and compared them to rats, and he adjusted his conscience accordingly giving Jews the same compassion he gave rats... This of course relates very closely to the S/S... The S/S *always* has a target. Does that target deserve to be targeted? Are we allowed to turn off our consciences when it tries to tell us how that target feels? If we *don't* turn it off the humour of the S/S will only seem twisted and perverse, and what was meant to be funny will seem as inappropriate as a funeral party. (Okay, so there are movies that use funerals for comical purposes, but they are always very careful not to bring up a serious point of view. If viewed with the eyes of the mourning widow, the guy falling into the grave, stepping through the top of the casket retrieving his false teeth - which he once out of the grave notices don't fit, might not seem so funny... Conscience and emotional involvement is practically the same thing, and the ever burning question is: "Emotional involvement - with whom?" Let's take one more example - and this time let's make it Daria-related so that it becomes clear what I mean. Let's jump into the episode "The Invitation" some time during act 3... (If you have the episode on tape I encourage you to watch it.) INT.: BRITTANY'S HOUSE. THE LIVING ROOM. (A party is going on and the 3 J's have just found Quinn who has been trying to avoid Daria in order not to be embarrassed by her.) Joey: I'm glad we found you. Jeffy: We were looking all over. Jamie: I looked the hardest. Quinn: (Sees Daria on an intercept course. Nervous.) Uh, I gotta go to the bathroom. Joey: You need some help? Jeffy: I'll go with you. Quinn: It's the *bathroom*! Daria: (Catches up with Quinn just outside the bathroom. Speaks loudly (for Daria).) Hiii, sis! Quinn: (Annoyed.) Aren't you a little out of place here? And everywhere else on Earth? (Enters bathroom and locks the door.) (Daria frowns, then sees the 3 J's and smirks. Sandi walks up to the bathroom and rattles the door knob) Daria: (To the 3 J's.) Hi, I'm Quinn's brainy sister. People say we look alike. (Time lapse effect => Line forms outside bathroom.) Jodie: What's she doing in there? Sandi: Maybe she's taking a Jacuzzi. (Brittany looks shocked.) Daria: (Still speaking to the 3 J's.) And the traffic was so tied up that my mom finally hands Quinn the empty soda cup and says, "Here, you gotta go? Then go." (The 3 J's look uncomfortable. Quinn approaches, horrified) Daria: I have this great picture at home of Quinn in her chubby stage. (Quinn drags Daria away.) Quinn: (Digs up some money.) I've got five dollars. Daria: (Fakes misunderstanding the situation.) Boy, you try to look out for your little sister... Quinn: (Digs up more money.) Make it ten. Daria: Well, I have been saving up for a pair of snappy orthopaedic shoes. (grabs money) ---------- Okay... That was funny. Right? Well, it obviously was *intended* to be funny. The entire set-up for the scene was typical for that of a comedy and for example the "It's the *bathroom*!"-joke confirms this. But let's take a look at this from another point of view... ---------- Quinn looked up as she heard some familiar voices. They belonged to her three escorts Joey, Jeffy and... she kept forgetting the name of the third one. They had just located her in her semi-hidingplace behind a ceramic tiger where she had taken refuge in order to be spared from... whatever it was that her sister had in mind. And speaking of the devil... she had barely finished the thought before she saw Daria walk up at the other side of the room. Quinn immediately realised that she had been spotted, and she *quickly* needed an excuse to avoid the incredibly humiliating situation that she would soon be dragged into if nothing was done. -"Uh, I gotta go to the bathroom.", she quickly told her admirers. It was a lousy unimaginative excuse, but this *was* an emergency - just not *that* kind of emergency... She still had the incident when Daria had embarrassed her in front of the whole school fresh in mind, and she hadn't even been able to look Corey straight in the eyes since that had happened. -"You need some help?" -"I'll go with you." Quinn was almost shocked at first. Were these guys *completely* shameless or just *completely* dense? She quickly collected herself, though... -"It's the *bathroom*!", she replied with a voice that would have gone through the thickest of skulls, and then quickly walked off before Daria could catch up with her... Unfortunately this just wasn't her day. -"Hiii, sis!", an all too familiar mocking voice called out behind her. Quinn got very annoyed. Daria *knew* she hated to be called "sis" in public. Daria was a loner and a "brain" and Quinn didn't want to have anything to do with that lifestyle. Why couldn't Daria just leave her alone since she was so good at being alone? Why did she have to go after her? Even if Daria was satisfied with having just one friend Quinn sure wasn't and Daria's interference greatly reduced her chances of ever climbing the social ladder which despite what people said was a very genuine part of reality. She was also pretty sure that the only reason Daria would attend a party like this was to annoy her - Daria simply didn't belong in a place like this. -"Aren't you a little out of place here? And everywhere else on Earth?", she snapped at Daria, openly expressing her frustration with her. Then she locked herself into the bathroom not really knowing what she was going to do next. She silently feared what Daria would do. She knew Daria knew she was different, but she also knew that she didn't like when Quinn pointed it out to her. Would she still be waiting there when Quinn left the bathroom (which obviously had to happen sooner or later) just to pick up where she had left off? The decision was easy - leaving the bathroom would happen *later*, not sooner. The longer she could prolong the crap from hitting the fan, the better - and then there was always the chance that Daria would break the siege. Patience wasn't one of her virtues, she didn't even have the patience to put on make-up. ... After checking her make-up for the fifth time, making good use of the facilities and (unusually) thoroughly washing her hands Quinn finally felt that the coast was probably clear - and besides the voices outside the bathroom were getting increasingly threatening. She carefully opened the door and slid out as if she wanted to accomplish the impossible task of leaving undetected. She tried to ignore the annoyed grumbles and she was actually surprised at how long the line had grown. She quickly scanned the area and to her joy Daria was nowhere... No wait! She felt her heart skip a beat as she saw something that bode more trouble than she had ever bargained for: Daria was talking to her escorts and judging by their looks she was making them uncomfortable. Although Quinn wasn't really sure that she wanted to know what Daria was telling them, at the same time she felt that she *had* to know. Her life could be over, and it seemed only natural to be curious to find out whether that was actually the case or not... She would close in on their position without Daria seeing her (which was easy, since Daria was facing in the opposite direction) and listen in on what she said... It was as simple as that. She had to come pretty close in order for her to be able to hear anything over the music, but if the sight had made her heart skip a beat, then what she heard made it all but stop entirely. -"And the traffic was so tied up that my mom finally hands Quinn the empty soda cup and says, 'Here, you gotta go? Then go.'", Daria explained, obviously enjoying it. Quinn gasped in shock. HOW COULD SHE!? That was one of the most awkward memories of her entire childhood and Daria was happily reciting it in front of her admirers! What would they think!? She was still new in this school and hadn't had time to settle in yet. She remembered the time back in Highland, about a year before they had moved away a new boy had joined their class. He had been normal looking guy that Quinn actually might have dated, but after the second day that was pretty much out of the question. On that day the boy had tripped in the cafeteria and spilled his milk into the lap of one of the teachers, and for some reason the teasing had never really stopped. He was probably still called "The milkman", or "Milly" for short. Was it possible that she would be heading for some sort of similar existence because of Daria's stories!? Oh, God! How long had she been going on about this? Quinn never had the time to answer that question. Daria had noticed her presence and smirked mischievously at her, then turned toward the three J's. -"I have this great picture at home of Quinn in her chubby stage." That made Quinn snap out of her trance. This *had* to stop, and it had to stop now. She grabbed Daria by the arm and using mild force dragged her away to someplace less crowded. She knew there was only one thing that would stop Daria at this stage, and she could only hope that it wouldn't be *too* expensive. -"I've got five dollars...", she tried without revealing the full extent nor nature of her emotions. -"Boy, you try to look out for your little sister..." Daria knew *just* what to say to annoy her. Quinn felt like screaming "Looking out my ass!!!" and punching her in the face. The *least* she could do was not to pretend she was doing her a favour. Quinn however had enough sense not to do so. Not only would Daria probably kick her ass if she took a swing at her, but Helen would probably ground her for a month, too. Daria was the elder one, the more responsible, and if Quinn was the *first* to hit... well she could just kiss any social life goodbye for a long time ahead. Instead she dug up the last of the money she had. -"Make it ten.", she said hoping Daria would finally be satisfied. -"Well, I have been saving up for a pair of snappy orthopaedic shoes.", Daria replied with a smirk grabbing the money. Even as she signed the truce she had to get in one last taunt, Quinn thought. Daria knew very well how much she loathed the looks of orthopaedic shoes and the thought of *her* money being spent on something--- She interrupted her thoughts right there. This was exactly what Daria wanted - and it wasn't like she was going to loose those boots of hers anyway, so there was no point in fretting about that. Still considering her weekly $40 allowance those $10 stung a lot. They constituted... uh... Oh, hell! Who cared about those percents anyway? She would just have to find Joey, Jeffy and... was it Jamie? ...to see whether the damage could be undone or not. She had to act casual she told herself. People can sense when something is wrong. She put on her standard smile which she knew almost all boys thought was cute but deep within she was starting to wish she had never come to the party at all... ---------- Hey! *Exactly* the same story, but suddenly it's not so funny anymore. How come? It's simple: The second version describes the events from Quinn's point of view and we're no longer able to close our conscience toward her feelings. The entire scene is no longer funny but instead rather tragic and Daria actually comes out a rather unpleasant person in the latter version. Well, which version is the right one? Which is the one the writer (Anne D. Bernstein) has had in mind? The question can most easily be answered by looking at the context. What is the show as a whole striving toward? What is that particular scene striving toward? What can we learn about the philosophy behind the show by looking at this? Is it a comedy, is it a drama, or is it something in between? Well, I have already answered the question regarding the show as a whole. It would appear to be very clear by now that the primary definition of the show is "Comedy", but what about that particular scene...? When it comes to that question the answer is almost equally simple: It was either a very good comedy, or a very bad drama. And why is that? Again simple... There were plenty of jokes thrown in, and the "Quinn perspective" I took in the drama version of the scene doesn't fit in with the rest of the episode. The jokes were also all "on the same frequency" as the would-have-been drama, and these jokes would only have disturbed the tragic feeling the drama would have expressed. (More on this later.) Writing drama isn't very hard. Writing *good* drama isn't all that easy, but definitely easier than writing good comedy. Well what about "dramedy"? The comical drama or dramatic comedy. That's a chapter all by itself and I would say that producing good dramedy is among the most difficult tasks there is. Combining drama and deep thought is quite easy. (That's why I wrote "How Deep it Goes" as a drama.) Combining comedy and deep thought is somewhat harder, but still quite possible. The reason for this is that one is combining *one emotion* with *one intellectual insight*, and since these two work on entirely different "frequencies" there is no mix-up... The problem with dramedy is that one has to incorporate (at least) two very different emotions *without* mixing them. If this incorporation is not done properly we get the situation where we (for example) look at the previously mentioned scene from the POV presented in the second take, but are still expected to laugh at it as in the first - which would be quite sadistic and sick. As we have already concluded: Quinn got a lot of crap in that scene (and she keeps getting crap from Daria all the way through seasons 1 & 2, and even in season 4 she occasionally gets some). The question here becomes: "Does Quinn deserve it or not?" Answer yes, and you've got yourself a comedy. Answer no and you've got yourself a sick show intended for sick people... The reason for this is the element of comedy that is always present and we either have the situation where "Daria cuts morons and jerks down to size" (=good comedy). or "Daria is a smart jerk who uses her wits to hurt innocent people." This *could* be good drama *provided* that the comedy wasn't there to interfere with the moral indignation we would feel, were this the case. (It's very hard to feel moral indignation and laugh at the same time.) As things currently are in the show it only makes for *very crappy* drama. Well, if we want to get technical about it there *is* a third option which is that "the show just presents a realistic(?) view of an American suburb". This would allow for the option that "Daria does what she *thinks* is right but she is in fact wrong a lot of the time and thus *does* hurt people, but does so because she isn't as smart as she thinks she is". That would however be very pointless indeed as it would make the whole show incapable of representing anything (since the show would act like the average politician and never take a stand on anything itself but instead satisfy with reporting the character's subjective points of view), and thus the show itself would (per definition) be nothing more than a slightly humorous cartoon soap opera. For this reason we must make the assumption that the idea of "Daria" is (or at least was) that *Daria* is right and all the idiots she cuts down to size get what they deserve. From this reasoning follows that the show represents what Daria represents. It's not for nothing that the abbreviation OH (=Our Heroine) has come to be used on the Daria message boards. Daria has been viewed as a sarcastic heroine - not as a sadistic villain or pseudo-intellectual loser. (And besides I doubt they would name the show after those two last ones...) How *do* you go about it if you want to incorporate both drama and comedy into a story then? Well the answer is that you somehow have to keep them separated. There are several ways to do this and I'll just look briefly at some of them... 1) If you got a story with a plot and a subplot - keep the comedy in the plot and the drama is the subplot (or vice versa). 2) Place the comedy in the beginning of the story, then after something dramatic happens you can safely switch to drama. (Or vice versa after the dramatic situation has been resolved.) 3) Place the drama in a position where the viewer (reader) can keep some emotional distance to it. An excellent example of this would be "The Misery Chick", which through this kind of separation can briefly take a look at such a serious topic as death and still be funny without being tasteless. On a thread on one of the message boards this topic came up a couple of months ago, and it was mentioned that some comedies had tried to kill off a major character and make it funny, but that none had succeeded. The reason is quite obvious: Death is not a very funny subject, and when it hits too close to home trying to make it look fun will seem perverse. IOW those who failed didn't consider the emotional bond between the viewer and the show. TMC, OTOH does an excellent job by (briefly) introducing us to the character Tommy Sherman who acts like a total asshole every second he's on screen. When he dies the viewers are not likely to experience any (negative) emotions, and I was in fact surprised at how seriously Daria & Jane took it. The jokes also aren't made directly at the expense of Tommy Sherman (at least not *after* he dies) but rather at people's reactions to his death and are in that context perfectly acceptable (and quite funny... I still think that Ms. Li's speech packed full of meaningless pseudo-philosophical drivel is one of the funniest parodies ever made on "Daria".) :-) 4) Establish an emotional bond between the viewer and the victim. After that is done you can expose that character to both comical and dramatic situations and the viewer will still be able to follow the emotional track (provided the changes aren't *too* sudden or sharp). Establishing an emotional bond usually means creating a good guy that the viewer can relate to. (Well "good guy" is *technically* optional, but how many people identify themselves with assholes?) A great example of how the emotional bond between a regular "Daria" viewer and Daria herself was used in a somewhat dramatic situation was the episode "Quinn the Brain". Daria had an identity crisis because of Quinn "taking her identity" and the episode is still one of the greatest "Daria" episodes of all time. We can feel pity with Daria for the situation she is in, but when she (on her own initiative) makes a quip we can laugh at it because "apparently she isn't taking it *that* seriously herself if she still can joke about it." IOW - when the one who is in the worst position is making the jokes it's not tasteless, because we laugh *with* that person *despite* his/her misery. Would somebody else make the jokes it would be perverse since we would be laughing *at* the victim[*] and his/her misery. One thing one must be aware of when using this method is however that the comedy is useful only so far. As the gravity (drama) of the situation increases (=the character gets into a tighter and tighter spot) the humour will consequently grow darker and darker until it completely fades away. (QTB was just an example BTW. IMHO most of the best "Daria" episodes have been done using this method, including the masterpiece "Arts 'N Crass".) [*]: By "victim" I mean a person who is suffering *undeservedly* for something. A person who suffers for his/her own stupidity, ignorance, shallowness etc. does not count. Before we proceed to the other seasons from here it might be a good idea to make a brief summary of what conclusions we have come to so far regarding the beginning of the series... 1) When writing a TV-show, a book or pretty much anything else one must observe the emotional patterns carefully, especially if one wants to combine comedy and drama. If one does not do this there is a risk of the humour becoming tasteless instead of funny. 2) The show is primarily a comedy, and the humour of the show is of such nature that it forces the viewer to either side with someone or be entirely left outside the emotional pattern of the show. 3) The emotional bond on "Daria" is established between the viewer and the good guys which on this show are Daria and Jane (IOW - we side with them). Assuming otherwise would lead to Daria and Jane being villains, and the show as a whole being tasteless. Alternately it would lead to the show just being *pointless*. Okay, then... We have all these examples of how the show is constructed and how the emotional patterns have been done. What about mistakes then? Do we have any such? Unfortunately the answer is yes... When I first saw "Through a Lens Darkly" (in January 2000) I immediately knew I hated it... but I didn't know why. This bothered me a lot since I thought only morons have strong opinions without being able to give cause for them. (In retrospect I must however admit that I'm staring to give intuition more credit, since it told me in a fraction of a second what it took my intellect a very long time to figure out.) In my essay "Cynic's complaint" I hinted that it had to do with Daria selling out on her principles, but somehow I knew that wasn't the whole truth. Now that I've found it, I almost wish that I hadn't because what I've found is also the diagnosis of why the episodes have been getting worse and worse... and I'm sorry to say the disease is fatal. :-( Before we go on to analyse TALD, let's first take a look on another episode that came close to blowing it, but didn't and therefore came out with flying colours namely "See Jane Run". What happened there? Well Daria's and Jane's friendship was put on trial when Jane started reaping dubious benefits from her participation on the track team. At first Daria was okay with it, but when things started to grow bigger she tried to pull the breaks and in doing so ticks off Jane. (Mmm, the sweet smell of drama.) What happened then? Well, basically Jane began to see things the way Daria did, quit the team and made up with Daria. What was the problem here? Well, as I already stated the emotional pattern on the show is based on the viewer siding with Daria *and* Jane - but here they are suddenly not on the same side! The pattern is disturbed and the drama is because of this getting so deep that comedy already requires extreme caution. Basically the viewer is now forced to side with Daria and Daria only. (And she *was* right. There *was* a difference between getting out of gym and getting a buy on a test, but she was also smart enough to realise that even skipping gym was a mistake on her side when looking at the situation with scrutiny.) The episode survives because the situation is repaired so quickly and it afterwards leaves one with the same feeling as after seeing a tightrope walker *almost* fall. The suspension lasts for little more than a second, but it actually made the performance more exciting - and most importantly it all *ended* well. What about TALD then? Well here the situation is even more complex. Here it's not Daria vs. Jane, it's Daria vs. Daria! Which Daria will come out on top? The one that wants to wear contacts because she cares what other people think of her looks, or the one we know from the first two seasons? Here we have drama! It's not just a question about a teenage girl who tries to decide whether to wear contacts - it's a question of what the show as a whole represents! Daria's question can shed some light on what I mean... -"Suppose you were well known for not caring what other people think of you, and then suddenly you did something that showed maybe you do care a little about what other people think of you. Would that invalidate everything you'd done and said up till then and make you a hypocrite?" In that form the question isn't really of very much value because the phrasing of the first sentence disguises the fact that it's a moral dilemma (something that the rest of the episode reveals) but let me instead answer the question: -"Suppose you embraced a certain moral code, and then suddenly decided to ditch it. Would that invalidate everything you'd done and said up till then and make you a hypocrite?" The answer is: It depends. Depends on what? It depends on whether you have a good reason for ditching (or replacing) that moral principle or not. By good reason I naturally mean good *moral* reason. The fact that you're a little short on cash is *not* a good reason to ditch the principle of not stealing. If you HAVE a reason then you will yourself, *with* that very reason have declared everything you've said and done (on that issue) invalid. You are however not a hypocrite since you're still acting according to the best of your moral understanding. You've simply admitted that you were wrong, but now you know better. If you DON'T have a reason, or if your reason is not a good one, i.e. is an *excuse* and not a reason (The latter is much more common since all people have a desire to make their actions *look* moral. Even Hitler had a "reason" for eliminating Jews.), then you will with your actions (and/or your excuse) have invalidated everything you've said *and* you're a hypocrite. Also, the more you've previously defended your principle (i.e. the more important the principle is to you) the bigger a hypocrite you will be. (And remember: Sarcasm isn't really a very discrete way of defending a principle.) Well what about Daria's reasons? What finally convinced Daria to get contacts was some words from her aunt Amy. She said: -"I mean, having contacts is no more vain than primping in the mirror." (Yes, she said more than that, but that was the core of her message.) Well, is this true then? I think not. Vanity can be easily measured in how much time, money, comfort and other resources a person is willing to sacrifice on their appearance or image. Contact lenses are expensive to acquire, time-consuming and uncomfortable to put in and they can cause complications for the wearer. This is *way* more vain than taking a look in the mirror. (And neither the conversation Daria had with Amy, nor anything we know about Daria from the first two seasons give us *any* reasons to believe that Daria would spend a lot of time and energy "primping" in the mirror.) OTOH - Even if we assume that contacts are no more vain than primping in the mirror we're screwed, because following that same logic it would mean that: "Action X is no more vain than getting contacts. Action Y is no more vain than action X, and acting like Quinn is no more vain than action Y." And if that is the case then Daria has no moral advantage over Quinn - and I already explained the consequences of assuming that Quinn doesn't deserve the sarcasm she gets... Well, what has all of this got to do with comedy, drama and emotional involvement? Everything! The whole emotional connection between the viewer and the show is based on the fact that Daria is the "good guy". Therefore when she sells out on a moral principle (even if it's a minor one) that connection is *severely* damaged. The entire episode is a huge tragedy. The hero(ine) has fallen! The shallow and the popular values are taking their toll! Yet at the same time the episode is crammed full of jokes. Jokes that under normal circumstances would have been funny but during the tragedy that currently prevails seem perverse and tasteless. The *final* outpost of sanity is crumbling, and we're supposed to laugh? What's up with that!? *This* is what makes the episode so repulsive. It is neither good comedy *nor* good drama. On the message boards I have seen some fierce criticism of people who have been reluctant to acknowledge certain episodes they loath, as canon when writing fan fiction. Yet ironically it would appear the Mr. Eichler himself is no better at acknowledging the emotional tradition of two full seasons and instead creates a canon that is highly emotionally self-contradictory. The change of the show hasn't just been the "character development". The show itself has undergone such a change that the entire underlying emotional pattern has changed (or at least is changing) in such a manner that it is in fact impossible to embrace both patterns at once. The irony of this is that while Daria "opens up" (which was clearly the intention of the episode) the viewer himself is forced to take emotional distance to the show. This of course works *against* the show more than anything else, because as any psychologist can tell you: There is no such thing as suppressing *negative* emotions. You can suppress *emotions*, period. Or, IOW you will no longer be able to *enjoy* the show after you've taken distance to it, because enjoyment requires emotional involvement. Sure, a lot of people haven't reacted to this change, but forgive me (and I do *not* mean to sound arrogant) when I say that logic suggests that the reason these people haven't seen the *fall* of the show is that they never saw its *true* heights to begin with. Sure, the show still has virtues, but when compared with the golden days of season 1 & 2 (and even some of season 3) these virtues come out as hollow watered-down half measures. The reasons for this should also be pretty obvious by now. In order to make room for the drama necessary to "make Daria come out of her shell" they have had to introduce uncertainties regarding her philosophy. (You see, if she's right, there wouldn't be any reason for her to change.) OTOH, if she's *wrong* then *all* of seasons 1 & 2 crash and burn with it, (as we've already seen). In the light of this, how come that everybody points at episodes like "Partner's Complaint" and yell, "Look, look, there it is, and it's not going to go anywhere.", instead of looking at more than *two and a half seasons* and say the same thing? Now before I get chased out of the country by an angry mob who wants to tar and feather me, and hang me at dawn and before people start yelling "But it's *realistic* isn't it!?" let me state that realism on this level is irrelevant. We are currently discussing what values the *show as a whole* represents, and as I stated in the beginning - realism is not a *primary* function on the show, since the show is a cartoon and is not intended to give an objective view of a set of actual events. The sad truth is that the show is slowly digging its own grave by betraying its own philosophy. Some people might argue that the show is merely "moving on", but as I've already explained you can't change philosophy as you change a pair of dirty socks without invalidating everything you've said so far and/or becoming a hypocrite. (As for the hypocrite part I can't tell where they stand, since I can't read the minds of the writers. I can only say that we have so far been given *no* *good* reasons *whatsoever* for this paradigm shift.) And as for the invalidation part... If we want to use the tightrope-walker analogy from SJR: "AAAAGH! No safety net!!! MEDIIIIC!!!" I wish I could say that TALD was an isolated incident, but it isn't. "Jane's Addition" and "Partner's Complaint" follow the same pattern of mixing drama and comedy in ways that are inappropriate when considering the show's past. I won't bother to analyse it much further, I'll just be satisfied with taking one example from JA and encourage those who want more details on PC to read my essay "Cynic's Complaint"... I saw the scene where Daria blows off Tom in the pizzeria as a "teaser" on MTV before I saw the episode itself and I almost laughed my ass off. It was incredibly funny... until I saw the scene in its proper context. Where I at first had thought that Daria was just blowing off some random jerk, it turned out she was acting like a bitch toward her best friend's boyfriend - which wasn't the *least* bit funny and made Daria seem to un-mature about 15 years in equally many seconds. Again... emotional distance required. And to be perfectly honest, this is the first time I understand what the saying "Some people could go to Heaven with half of the trouble with which they get themselves to Hell." means. I have never seen anyone work so hard on destroying something good before. :-( You see, not only does the drama part occasionally clash with the humour, but it has already reached the point where it can't be taken much further without some radical changes to the entire show. Let me explain what I mean with yet another example... It has been speculated a lot around the possibility that Daria and Quinn would be getting closer. In order for this to happen it would either require that Daria reduces her moral demands on vanity to next to nothing (DANGER! YELLOW ALERT!), or that Quinn would become a *lot* less shallow (or possibly a compromise of these two elements). The "drawing closer" would simply not be believable if this didn't happen. If you want to see an *incredibly* unbelievable example of this - watch "Speedtrapped". Toward the end of the episode Daria tells Quinn that "It was nice what she had said about them making a good team.", and this has usually been seen as a sign of Daria and Quinn getting closer. Good team...? Good grief! If my sister did to me what Quinn did to Daria I would probably beat her into seven shades of blue and not congratulate her on her ability to do teamwork. After all, all Quinn did was be a RPITA, pick up a strange man, waste Daria's money on clothes thus forcing Daria to help her undo the damage. There is a difference between character development and stupidity... The former has to be logical whereas the latter does not. Well, what would happen to the show if Daria and Quinn both became more "moderated" characters with personalities closer to the centre of a Gauss' curve of a typical suburban population? Well, obviously a lot of comical opportunities would be lost, because as I mentioned early on in the essay much of the comedy of "Daria" relies on the exaggeration of the characters. (What else could one have fun with in a dull suburb where nothing ever happens?) Here the scriptwriters would be faced with two options: 1) Change the "comedy climate" toward the "It's just fun for fun's sake" humour that we see in all the thirteen-on-the-dozen-comedies with their intellectually stimulating pre-recorded laughter. 2) Break up the continuity of the show. (For example: Ep. #408 - Daria is cynical, and we have some S/S-based humour, Ep. #409 - She is not, and we have some heart-warming drama instead, Ep. #410 - She's cynical... etc.) We have already seen signs of both of these, and people have acknowledged it. (Ex. 1 - Episode #404 "Murder She Snored" is an excellent example of a straight comedy episode with no deeper contents whatsoever.) (Ex. 2 - Episode #301 "Through a Lens Darkly": JANE: But why no glasses? DARIA: Um... Sheer vanity? Episode #302 "The Old and the Beautiful": DARIA: They [=The Fashion Club] may be shallow but that doesn't mean they should be executed. JANE: Yes, it does. DARIA: Very well, I'm sold.) This is however not the disease, it's merely the symptoms. The sickness is abandoning the initial philosophy - an act that never goes unpunished. Another consequence of the new development is that the comedy will be too thin and free of sarcasm to be able to deliver any real message. If the writers still want a series that makes people think, the thoughts will have to be introduced via drama. This as I already mentioned is not a problem in itself, the question is just: Will *any* of the comedy survive that at all? Whatever happens I think it's safe to say that what we are currently seeing of the show are the final death throes. #301 "Through a Lens Darkly" - STRRRRRIKE ONE!!! #401 "Partner's Complaint" - STRRRRRIKE TWO!!! #??? "_____________________" - "Can you say 'sell-out'? I knew you could." -Lynn Cullen That was it. If you want to send me e-mail I can be reached at: daniel.suni@kolumbus.fi I expect that you will probably hate me for writing this, but that's okay. I didn't write this to win a popularity contest. If you on the other hand thought it to be interesting and you also want to read my other essay "Cynic's Complaint", it can be found at: http://www.kolumbus.fi/daniel.suni/daria/cynic's_complaint.txt This essay was written by Daniel Suni (c) May 2000