Core Post II -JAE-

Lipsitz highlights that historical dialogues of early TV programming revolve around negotiating nostalgic pasts with images of brighter futures through consumerism. He uses the works of Stuart Hall, Jurgen Habermas, and others to tease out how neither TV productions, audience members, nor consumer goods are independently shaping cultural landscapes at large. Coincidentally, the 1980s and 1990s U.S. returns to these same ethnic family TV archetypes with shows like The Cosby Show, Growing Pains, Family Matters, All-American Girl, and Everybody Loves Raymond. Furthermore, in the 2000s the consumerist aspects of ethnic shows such as Ugly Betty or That’s So Raven, and intersectional culture shows such as Glee held onto the morality themes of previous TV generations while coding the consumerism in less conspicuous ways. Additionally, Lipsitz's reading of historical dialogues resonate with Heather Love (2009) and Boonie Ruberg (2018) who both suggest, of queer persons, that "dwelling in the dark places," or tackling the ugliness of the past is needed to resist normative expectactions of time and space.   

However, Lynn Spigel's essay suggests that women's sexualities and bodies are acted upon by TV ads, programming, and even the site of the physical TV unit within a home in historically salient ways. Yet, I wonder if these observations are just continuations of the ways in which women have been conceived as property and tools to satiate the desires of men. Women have been socialized to compete for the attention of men, even at the cost of healthy relationships with other women. While Modleski’s writings make me wonder if daytime TV programming designs contribute to the socialization of women as domestic caregivers and service providers. In other words, can we argue that daytime programming becomes a tool of a larger oppressive agenda? This stance brings us back into conversation with the writings of Adorno and Horkheimer, Foucault, Hall, and even McLuhan who all caution the pervasiveness of power, hegemony, and media as sites of hegemonic power. In this light Spigel and Modleski supplement Lipsitz paper, which approaches race as a static monolith, through their humanistic and historical perspectives of gender.  

Yet Patricia Mellencamp provides the most interesting reading to me this week. She works to address ways in which people negotiate and mediate the impact of misfortune, injury, and oppressive forces through comedy. Comedy as both a mediator to anger/sadness and a restrictive force disallowing catharsis. I appreciate that comedy is not conceived as a panacea for all misfortunes. Mellencamp’s thoughts make me think of comics like Ali Wong (especially in her book Dear Girls) or Amanda Seales who have written on and performed sets about how their comic personas or materials are sometimes derived from hardships. Additionally they explore how these productions serve as opportunities to navigate the complexities of life's experiences. In sum, this essay looks at how some survive and move beyond the events being discussed in the other readings of this week.