quarter_to_five | (no subject)

I see - and sympathize - with all complaining that no one is writing fic for your favourite rare pairing or obscure old fandom, but I will raise you all the sublime frustration that no one is writing serious meta for your critically unregarded comedy loves.

WHY can I not find a good analysis of the political subtext of Brooklyn Nine Nine? WHERE is the critical deconstruction of the narrative tools in How I Met Your Mother? HOW is no one jumping around on a barricade about class issues in Community? Why dost thou betray me and leave out to dry and with no one to talk to, oh fandom?

I'm going to sit here and stare at the wall, y'all.

Well, at the books, because I'm in a library.

Ooh, that one looks interesting.

Apropos, do you know how incredibly boring, obvious and unimaginative most serious books about tv are? All that "Philosophy of Mad Men" (we have no less than 3 books about Mad Men, and the series isn't even done!) or Women on TV: from Lucy to Friends type stuff. I sort through them a lot because that section tends to be a perennial mess, and SO OBVIOUS.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Heh, I guess at least in my case - well, aside from the fact that I'm not very good at meta anyway - I watch comedy shows for really shallow entertainment. I don't want them to be deep *G*. So I... basically don't think about it.

Except that I only now discovered Community and my VOD service in Germany only has the first two seasons up :( It's shown on some regular tv channel as well, but not undubbed.

Honestly, for the most part, I do too, but I still find analyzing it really interesting, and actually more interesting than analyzing really good, serious stuff. I mean that in there proper sense of the word 'meta' - stuff that is about the show as a show, not about analyzing the inner world of it. Mad Men or Breaking Bad or TSCC or something know exactly what they're doing. There's a deliberateness and a precision there that doesn't leave nearly as much room for messing about with the - possibly unconscious - ways those shows communicate and what they communicate.

It's like how a while back I was really into romance novels, for example, the trashier the better - I didn't like them in the slightest, but someone did, and I was desperate to figure out why and how. (Though I do actually like comedy.) Why does the billionaire have to be Italian? Why isn't he French? Why is the Sheikh never from a real country? Why Highlanders, Cowboys and Tycoons, but not, say, Ninjas and Astronauts? What is the symbolism and imagery that those books are drawing on, how are they conveying them, what kind of worldview are they assuming and recreating, how are their readers reacting to them? Etc, etc.

Those questions are fascinating to me in a way "what does the color of Don Draper's tie represent in episode 3" just doesn't. There's a deal of interesting academic writing on romances though, (which got me through that) but I've yet to find anything good on contemporary sitcoms.

In short, I'm just sulking. :-) I feel for you on Community though. It is one of the funniest, cheeriest things ever when it's on it's game, which it mostly is through seasons 2 and 3.

Edited 2014-02-19 19:11 (UTC)

I love reading meta about any show I watch. Or maybe even join in the discussion. I just... Never come up with these questions/topics on my own.

Also, are Troy and Abed meant to be slashy? They sort of feel like the equivalent of Raj and Howard to me... Or is that just me?

There's definitely a healthy Troy/Abed contingent out there. It's never explicit, or a running gag, the way Raj and Howard are (Community is far too dignified and politically self-aware to frame its protagonists in that kind of crude, slightly degrading humor, I think) but it's a thing.

One of the interesting things about them is that i've heard people actually shy away from slashing them, even though they're so eminently slashable - because they've got such a vibrant, healthy, honest, interesting friendship and that's kind of rare to see between two men on tv in itself.