The Uncomfortable Classics of Norman Lear

Norman Lear and his white floppy hat have been back in the news of late. 

First for being among the recipients of this year’s Kennedy Center Honors; and then for announcing his intention to skip the awards ceremony, as some sort of Donald Trump protest. 

I could write this blog about that but I won’t. What I will observe is that this accolade really has nothing to do with Mr. Trump. Honorees are selected by previous winners and the Kennedy Center trustees. It’s one of the highest honors this nation bestows upon its artists, and should have nothing to do with politics. Harry Belafonte accepted his medal from Ronald Reagan, and Charlton Heston accepted one from Bill Clinton. And everyone behaved themselves. 

But, again, that’s not the topic for today. Instead, I’d like to explore Norman Lear’s paradigm-shifting contributions to television. The reflexive position among TV historians is to praise them as brave and brilliant and progressive. And much of that is true. But I don’t own any of the shows he created on DVD, and have rarely watched them since their first runs, so joining that chorus of adoration would be disingenuous. 

I acknowledge that All In the Family, Maude, One Day At a Time, The Jeffersons and Good Times are classic TV, either as a result of their quality or enduring appeal. Classic TV shows from the 1970s often serve as comfort TV as well. But this is one of those times when, at least for me, they do not.  

It’s not because they were groundbreaking – a trait that implies shaking up the status quo. That Girl and The Mary Tyler Moore Show and I Spy and other comfort TV staples also share that distinction. The difference to me is that with the Lear shows, the controversial or incendiary elements were always at the forefront. It became what they were about, instead of being just one ingredient in the situation comedy stew. 

As a result, they shared another common denominator that disqualifies them from comfort TV status – anger. 

Quick – what’s the first thing that comes to mind when you think of All In the Family? It’s probably Archie and Mike in a heated argument over politics, or Archie calling his wife a dingbat. On The Jeffersons, a deluxe apartment in the sky did little to assuage George’s seething resentment over past indignities. And Julie on One Day At a Time was always yelling about something. 

Sure there were laughs along the way as well. But when I think of Comfort TV I don’t think about shows that consist largely of people screaming at each other. I get enough of that on Facebook. 

Norman Lear proved that television comedy could incorporate contemporary issues into stories. And since television reflects culture more than shapes it, it’s probable that if Lear hadn’t done it someone else would have, and perhaps not as well. 

But the fact that sitcoms can be provocative doesn’t mean they have to be, or even that they should be. Where I get perturbed is when cultural critics suggest that Lear’s shows were better, or more important, because they engaged such topics. 

I am not trying to demean Norman Lear’s legacy. His shows deservedly achieved both popular and critical success. All In the Family alone earned more than 20 Emmys. 

But there is a tendency in art, including television, to pat itself on the back more when it’s ‘edgy,’ as evidenced by the current Emmy dominance of cable and streaming shows over more traditional network fare. 

It’s fine to prefer television that confronts current event issues, but 20 or 40 years later a joke about school busing or Richard Nixon doesn’t pack the same punch. And it’s just as difficult to write a good sitcom episode about more benign topics, and make it funny and appealing. In fact I’d argue it’s more challenging, because you can’t lift material from the newspaper. 

And if you believe doing so makes Maude more substantial, and a series like Father Knows Best more antiquated, watch an episode of both and get back to me.