Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
It's funny. Laugh. Books Media Television United States Book Reviews

Planet Simpson 176

Posted by timothy from the one-he-actually-liked dept.
Aeonite (Michael Fiegel) writes "The title of Planet Simpson: How a Cartoon Masterpiece Defined a Generation says it all. In its exploration of the first 15 seasons from The Simpsons, the book does much more than relate funny moments, reprint favorite quotes and point out trivia that you might have missed in your first (or fifteenth) watching of any particular episode. To be certain, those things are there, but they're really secondary to the overall 'mission' of the book, which is to relate the rise of the cartoon to the political, social and cultural realities of the 1990s and early 2000s." Read on for the rest of Fiegel's review.
Planet Simpson: How a Cartoon Masterpiece Defined a Generation
author Chris Turner
pages 464
publisher Da Capo Press
rating 7
reviewer Michael Fiegel
ISBN 0306813416
summary An exploration of The Simpsons and its impact on society (and vice versa)

Perhaps in keeping with the counter-cultural, DIY, anti-authoritarian attitude of The Simpsons itself, the book is decidedly unauthorized, the back cover stating for the record that it was "not prepared, licensed, approved or endorsed by any entity involved in creating or producing The Simpsons." In fact, although episodes are referred to by their official production codes (e.g., 9F11, or "Selma's Choice"), Matt Groening and others associated with the show are quoted only second-hand, through reprinted excerpts of old interviews.

Illustrating clearly that this is his personal take on The Simpsons, Turner opens the book with a moment in time: Thursday, January 21, 1993 at around 8:20 p.m. EST in a campus pub called Alfie's at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario. There, in a room crowded with people in various stages of inebriation, the author watches Act 3 of Episode 9F11 ("Selma's Choice") of The Simpsons, and relates how the room explodes into laughter after a series of jokes about Duff Beer and its effects (e.g., beer goggles). I don't even remember this episode, but for the author and his friends it was a moment to be remembered. The point is that The Simpsons is full of such "moments," and these, reflective of society and recited ad infinitum by fans, help us see not only the way the series has shaped our world, but the way our world has shaped the series.

Off On a Rant

The book bills itself as "the first trade book to take a look at The Simpsons as a microcosm of the Western culture that it has both influenced and reflected." But author Chris Turner never goes so far as to establish a cause-effect relationship between The Simpsons and our world. In the author's own words: "...this is, in the end, my version of The Simpsons. The show's canvas is far too broad, and the culture it reflects far too diverse and fragmented, for me or anyone else to be able to offer a completely comprehensive or definitive analysis." Rather, he places the two side-by-side and views each through the mirror of the other, usually without taking his theses too far.

There are a few moments, though, where the narrative approaches the point of hyperbole -- for example, when Turner states that The Simpsons "...was the Beatles and the Stones. It was Elvis and Chuck Berry. It was that big, that unprecedented, and that important" or that "If there is a common cultural currency, it's got Homer Simpson's picture on it." Sometimes this hyperbole gets him into a bit of a pickle, as when he refers to episode 1F13 "Deep Space Homer" as "second to none", and on the same page places it second to 9F15 "Last Exit to Springfield." This has naught to do with inaccuracy, however, and everything to do with the fact that sometimes the author's love for the show sometimes clouds his vision in tints of rose. He is, at times, a sort of Anti-Comic Book Guy, chanting "Best. Episode. Ever." as he recalls his favorite moments. Is The Simpsons truly the glue that holds postmodern society together? Or is it just one brand on the shelf (albeit perhaps the best-selling brand)? Perhaps it depends on how big a fan you are; clearly, the author is a big fan.

In other places, Turner's points are a little harder to swallow, particularly in the chapters which focus on specific characters and what they represent. I can easily buy that Homer Simpson can be compared to the nature of mainstream America, with "its hopes and dreams and insatiable appetite," but I have a harder time grasping how Bart Simpson is evocative of the style and ethos of the punk rock movement's mainstreaming. Sometimes a brat is just a brat. And does Lisa Simpson truly represent the re-emergence of progressive activism in the West, or is she just a younger sister who's smarter and nicer than her brother? Later, the author (correctly) attributes the use of the phrase "I, for one, welcome our new [fill-in-the-blank] overlords" to The Simpsons, but also claims that the use of *tumbleweed blows by* on sites like Metafilter and Slashdot can be traced to The Simpsons. This latter I have a little trouble buying at face value, and I think it's overreaching a tad.

The author also has a habit of unapologetically spiralling off into a tangential rant, a la Dennis Miller. The entire book is written in this style, with point A being related to point B suddenly being compared to point Z, and the author is quite aware of it: one of the subheads in Chapter 2 is titled "A Short, Frank Discussion (Actually More Like a Longish Rambling Examination) of Homer's Extraordinary Id." In most places, this style works for the book; in others, it nearly breaks the narrative as we sputter over a side point for a few pages.

For example, in Chapter 2, "Homer's Odyssey," there's a two-page aside where the author talks about Aunty Goethe's Peachy-Mango Love Pain juice, Space Jam, Edward Munch, PBS Documentaries and several other seemingly unrelated matters. Ultimately his point about American society is clear, but it gets a little thick toward the middle, and hard to see the forest for the trees. At another point in the same chapter, a discussion of Springfield's hysterical masses turns into five-and-a-half pages devoted to the Y2K bug, getting back to The Simpsons just in time for the chapter to end. Relevant? Perhaps, but I found myself at one point wanting more Simpsons and less substance.

Similar tangents appear throughout the book, each encompassing between several paragraphs and several pages, and covering topics such as: Kurt Cobain, Quentin Tarantino, Nike, The Onion, Radiohead, William Gibson, Bowling For Columbine, John Lennon, the WELL, Tuvalu, Cyberjaya, a website named "oo," a Portuguese bus ride, Lemonwheel, The Truman Show, and Wilco's song "Misunderstood." And perhaps, viewed all together like that, those references do make a certain sort of sense as a representation of the past 15 years, but individually they occasionally seem jarring.

Mmmmm, Pizza

The book reads, at times, like a collection of essays rather than a continuous narrative. Turner at one point discusses the show's distinctive animation style, which mixes cartoonishness and realism, as follows: "(Homer) falls like a cartoon, but he lands like a real person." This book feels like that, opening in a much more fannish, cartoonish fashion and ending in a way that's a bit more thick and scholarly. The unevenness isn't ruinous, though. Consider a pizza with a few lumps and bubbles in the dough, and maybe all the pepperoni is off to one side and there's way too many mushrooms in the middle. It's still a tasty pizza, and everyone can probably find a slice they'll enjoy.

Chapter 1, "The Life & Times of The Simpsons, serves as an introduction to both the book and the series. It first retells the series' creation myth -- that it was dreamed up in 1987 by then 33-year old Groening in about 15 minutes, so he wouldn't lose the rights to Life is Hell -- before moving on to other key points, such as its April 19, 1987 debut as a sort of Anti-Cosby Show, and its first full episode on Sunday, Dec. 17, 1989 (The Christmas Special). It discusses how the show built up its creative team of writers and voice actors, the rise (and fall) of Bart-Mania in 1989-1990, and its ascent to its "Golden Age" in the mid 1990s before reaching the current "Long Plateau."

The author attributes this rise (and ensuing gentle decline) to the show's shift from typical cartoonishness into a tendency to "riff" on real-world events, reflecting society and culture in a way that audiences could relate to. "Entertain and subvert," said Groening on several occasions about the show's mission, unabashedly showing us cartoon versions of our real world's "corrupt authorities, clueless leaders and rapacious businessmen" that we could not only laugh at, but understand. "It's funny because it's true," goes the saying.

The next five chapters are, at least in name, focused on specific characters. Chapter 2, "Homer's Odyssey," and Chapter 3, "Bart Simpson, Punk Icon," are the most focused on their particular topics, with the others tending to sprawl a bit more, bringing in related minor characters and more tangents.

For example, Chapter 4, "Citizen Burns," touches not only on how Monty Burns represents corporate America (reflected through a parody of Citizen Kane), but also mentions Pimple-faced Kid, Sarcastic Middle-Aged Man, Lindsay Naegle, Jack Larson, Mayor Quimby and Chief Wiggum. Chapter 5, "Lisa Lionheart," discusses not only Lisa's many faces -- Genius, Little Kid, Activist -- but goes off on several tangents about Activism in general, Culture Jamming and Politics. Chapter 6, "Marge Knows Best," is perhaps the greatest misnomer in the book. While it does present Marge as the moral center of a show that repeatedly and blatantly denies the presence of a moral center, large sections cover the Flanders family (with special attention to Ned's "unbearable piousness"), battles with the Catholic Church and suicide-prevention groups, Abe Simpson and Homer's mom. The material is all related, but I felt Marge got a little shorted. And no mention of Maggie anywhere!

The last five chapters take a different spin, focusing not on specific characters and their relation to society, but on societal events and their relation to The Simpsons.

Chapter 7, "The Simpsons in Cyberspace," documents appearances of the Internet on The Simpsons (and vice versa) as the Internet rose from nothingness to ubiquity. It discusses "Freeze Frame Fun" (the quick jokes you can only catch if you tape and play back the show in slow-motion), alt.tv.simpsons and The Simpsons Archive (www.snpp.com), which the author cites as one of his major resources used in the writing of the book. This latter discussion includes mention of how an online critic of the show ultimately led to Comic Book Guy's infamous line in episode 4F12 "The Itchy and Scratchy and Poochie Show": "Worst. Episode. Ever." Life imitating art imitating life, as it were. Though this is interesting reading, it's also one of the more unfocused chapters, starting off talking about The Internet on The Simpsons and closing with a discussion about societal change and global warming. Slashdot readers will also be amused to see an incorrect citation of Moore's Law on page 304. But I digress.

Chapter 8, "The Ugly Springfieldianite," documents how The Simpson family's travels across America and around the world reflect U.S. actions in world affairs, the global reach of The Simpsons, and the way in which stereotypes are presented in the cartoon. Material such as trips to Australia, Canada and Africa are documented and analyzed, and "ethnic" characters such as Bumblebee Man, Apu and Groundskeeper Willie (including his infamous "Bonjourrrr, you cheese-eating surrender monkeys!") are covered in detail.

Chapter 9, "The Simpsons Go Hollywood," covers the various appearances of celebrities on the show and how for the most part such appearances satirize the very stars themselves. It documents in-person appearances by Tony Blair and Tony Bennett, as well as celebrity voice acting by Kathleen Turner as Stacy Lovell (creator of Malibu Stacy) Elizabeth Taylor as Maggie's first word ("Daddy"), and Johnny Cash as a Space Coyote spirit. It also covers, in some detail, repeat appearances by stars such as Jon Lovitz, Albert Brooks, and the late Phil Hartmann (Troy McClure and Lionel Hutz), as well as the notion of celebrity within The Simpsons itself (Krusty, McBain, etc.). As a whole, this is probably the most solid and focused chapter in the book.

On the other hand, Chapter 10, "The Simpsons Through the Looking Glass," is probably one of the weakest. Still interesting reading, it's a bit unfocused, as if that looking glass were a little bit clouded. It discusses the notion of the mediascape as a vast wasteland, irony, parody, self-reference, satire, hysteria and media saturation, with special attention on the shows inside the show (Krusty, Itchy and Scratchy, etc.) and anchorman Kent Brockman. Perhaps it's a bit too broad of a topic to try and cram into one chapter, especially since many of the same points are made in other sections of the book.

Planet Simpson

The book ends with Chapter 11, "Planet Simpson," in which the author attempts to bring together the disparate ideas presented throughout the book. He discusses the notion of "what is" vs. "what should be," the amusing case of Fox nearly suing itself over Episode ABF09, "Mr. Spritz Goes to Washington" (in which The Simpsons ran a fake news crawl on the bottom, satirizing Fox News), and brings his thesis to a head with this statement:

"Planet Simpson is a state of mind, a loose realm of shared consciousness. It is a place populated by folks who watch The Simpsons every week or even twice a day, who maintain Simpsons fan sites, who never lose at The Simpsons trivia board game, who used to watch it every chance they got, even if these days they don't watch it as much as they used to."

As a member of a generation raised on Saturday Morning cartoons, a person who grew up watching The Simpsons and who now regularly visits websites like Fark, Metafilter and Slashdot where Simpsons references run thick, I can't disagree with the author's notion of a globally-shared Simpsonian philosophy. It's clear that the show has affected our culture (or, at the very least, our Internet subculture), and that American culture has had an impact on the show in return.

Turner's book does a good job of looking at both sides of that coin and presenting his points in a way that is generally interesting and fun to read. Though there are times in the book where I found myself scratching my head, or wondering how he could have missed a favorite quote (Where, oh where, are the dogs who shoot bees from their mouths?), overall this is a solid piece of writing. Anyone who's enjoyed the show will find this enthralling reading, whether you're looking for a bit of Simpsons history, a deeper analysis of the show's impact in the present, or an idea of where the show might go in the future. The book is at times weaker, at others strong; at times unclear, at others startlingly focused; at times funny, and at other times quite serious. But then, that describes The Simpsons as well.

You can purchase Planet Simpson: How a Cartoon Masterpiece Defined a Generation from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews. To see your own review here, carefully read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Planet Simpson More

Planet Simpson

Comments Filter:
  • It's right here [networkmirror.com]

  • Nancy Cartwright, voice of Bart (Score:5, Informative)

    by Arctic Dragon ( 647151 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @04:55PM (#12180410)
    Nancy Cartwright's book [amazon.com] is also a must-read for any Simpsons fan.

  • ObMangledQuote: (Score:4, Funny)

    by Hentai ( 165906 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @04:55PM (#12180414) Homepage Journal
    Stop the Planet of the Simpsons, I want to get off!

  • One question... (Score:4, Funny)

    by game kid ( 805301 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @04:55PM (#12180415) Homepage

    "The title of Planet Simpson: How a Cartoon Masterpiece Defined a Generation says it all."

    So we shouldn't read the rest of the long review then?

  • Defined a generation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MyLongNickName ( 822545 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @04:57PM (#12180430) Journal
    If the Simpsons define this generation, then I say we drop the bomb now.... Wildly entertaining show, often making insightful observations, but I think the title of the book goes too far.

    But of course, you don't sell books with a title of "How 'The Simpsons' was a really fun show to watch"

    • Re:Defined a generation (Score:4, Insightful)

      by SocietyoftheFist ( 316444 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @05:01PM (#12180491)
      How being the operative word... I have the first five seaons on DVD and oh man... the writing back then was so much better. The stories had so much more depth to them. I remember cooling off on it in the late 90s when they started to retread and the writing started going downhill.

      • Re:Defined a generation (Score:3, Interesting)

        by telbij ( 465356 )
        The 4th and 5th seasons seem to be a high point (I'll have to check on the 6th), but personally I think it's only the narrative quality that really went downhill hard. Things just got too outlandish. I don't think the jokes suffered all that much though. The current negative opinions of the Simpsons have more to do with nostalgia than true suckage. Yes the characters are all typecast, yes things have been rehashed, but on the whole the Simpsons is still in my top 3 shows.

      • Re:Defined a generation (Score:5, Insightful)

        by stratjakt ( 596332 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @05:20PM (#12180718) Journal
        The first season was a big of a dog, they didn't hit their groove until about season 3, when Conan O'Brian was their head writer.

        They could always bounce back. I've found the last couple of seasons somewhat hit-and-miss. I thought last weeks episode was pretty good (Homer with his diamond studded "Snitch Life" necklace - "What's the matter, you never seen bling bling before?")

        I wish Fox had have given Futurama the same chance, that show had a lot more potential, it seems easier to keep the Futurama world "fresh" than that of the Simpsons. It seems the pulled the plug too early, when the characters and themes were just starting to take shape.

        Just my opinion though.
        • I happen to have Season Three in front of me and look at this list of Episodes

          Stark Raving Dad - Homer's commited for wearing a pink shirt, big white guy that thinks he's the little black guy...

          Ms Lisa Goes to Washington - Lisa wins an essay contest and goes to nationals and finds out Sen Bob Arnolds little secret...

          When Flanders failed - Flanders opens a left handed shop and Homes wishbone wish for failure comes true

          Bart the Murderer - Bart is implicated for the murder of Principal Skinner buy his mobs

        • Re:Defined a generation (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Dachannien ( 617929 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @07:33PM (#12182189)
          I wish Fox had have given Futurama the same chance, that show had a lot more potential, it seems easier to keep the Futurama world "fresh" than that of the Simpsons. It seems the pulled the plug too early, when the characters and themes were just starting to take shape.

          No kidding. There was actually plot development in Futurama. Nothing ever really happens on The Simpsons, and at least a couple seasons ago, the formula was "Insert Homer doing something random, pointless, and mildly amusing here". Sadly, Fox execs were looking for the same-old formulaic crap in Futurama, and couldn't get a handle on it when Groening and Cohen didn't deliver what they wanted.

          To be honest, I think the title of the book should be reworked:

          "Planet Simpson: How a Cartoon Masterpiece Defined a Generation and Killed Another Cartoon Masterpiece by the Same Creator Before Its Time"

        • Futurama was great until they introduced those two little kids. They upset my little futurama world oo much. Man I hate those kids.
          • Yeah, but they didn't use them much. I just watched the entire series over the last couple weeks, something I do every few months and it's so painful how much better this show is than "The Simpsons" (which I still enjoy, but it has been hit and miss for the last 6 years or so).

            "Futurama" had real character development, deeper stories, and some great philosophy along with the breakneck speed, great sight gags, ass jokes and sharp satire that it shares with its predecessor.

    • You say that, but consider the current cartoons that could define the next generation that are airing today. Family Guy, hilarious as it is, is often very edgey and borderline acceptable. Infact it's interesting to me what is acceptable one day and not teh next. Family guy for example was canned, now it's back. 2 years ago you could not watch Ultimate Fighting (you the hardcore cage fighting) on television because it was banned. Then it was allowed on pay per view. And now this weekend, for the first
      • I've often wondered why the Family Guy rubs the public the wrong way. What's so borderline acceptable about it?
        • Well, that little quip about FDR's legs really offended me...it's too soon!
        • Some people have a serious moral objection to personification. Dogs speaking? Blasphemy!

        • Re:Defined a generation (Score:3, Insightful)

          by UWC ( 664779 )
          Agreed. I've seen nothing edgy about it. Nothing that challenges any preconceptions or offends the sensibilities of anyone who's likely to watch it in the first place. What's edgy?

          "What's this? Some people think Jewish people are naturally adept at finance, but that's not necessarily true? Time to update my worldview!"

          "My goodness, there are stereotypes that some idiots apply to a particular ethnic group? And members of said group might be offended if an idiot attempts, however ignorantly, to perpetuate

          • I would consider things somewhat 'edgy' that I wouldn't want to watch with a relative. I have no problem watching The Simpsons or Futurama at home with the 'rents around, but I turn off Family Guy and South Park. There were just one too many embarrassed feelings after faked orgasms or 'women really like sexual abuse' jokes.
        • For starters, it's a phenomenally bad series.
      • I thought it would be SpongeBob or maybe Fairly Odd Parents (Wanda's hot).
      • The ads make it look as fake as wrasslin, though, from what I've seen.. with the fake blood smattered all over the images.. bleah.

        I don't know about it being "banned".. very little is "banned" from pay to play services.
        They just don't consider it sane to broadcast some things.
    • On of my clearest memories as a child is making jokes on the front yard lawn at my Grandparents BBQ with my cousins, aunts and uncles, and we talked at least for an hour about nothing but Simpsons quotes.

      It has been more than a show, and even though it's maybe "Jumped the Shark" this season, that doesn't make it a less significant force in the 1990s.

  • Sounds like the the title should be (Score:3, Funny)

    by X43B ( 577258 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @04:57PM (#12180445) Journal
    Best.SimpsonsBook.Ever.

  • Where might I find these? (Score:5, Funny)

    by SavoWood ( 650474 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @04:58PM (#12180451) Homepage
    As a member of a generation raised on Saturday Morning cartoons, a person who grew up watching The Simpsons and who now regularly visits websites like Fark, Metafilter and Slashdot where Simpsons references run thick...

    I for one would like to welcome our new cartoon overlords so they might tell me where I could find one of these Simpsons references on Slashdot.

  • finally, a story (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Savatte ( 111615 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @04:59PM (#12180469) Homepage Journal
    where simpsons quotes can be funny, informative, insightful, and interesting.

    Personally, I like the line "and so as the rat's milk is returned to the sewer, the circle of life is complete." Which if you think about it, is really a metaphor for the overall trajectory of the series and ourselves. The show began weakly (though not in ratings), grew strongly and quickly, plateaued, and is now in decline, until it dies, merely hinting at it once was.

    • Might be slumping, but what a legacy. Can't think of a single show where the writing stayed so good for such a long stretch.

      "Here's to alcohol, the cause of, and solution to, all life's problems." -Homer Simpson

    • Re:finally, a story (Score:4, Insightful)

      by centipetalforce ( 793178 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @05:20PM (#12180715)
      Agreed. I'm sure some young fanboy mods may mod us down for saying this but the fact is the show just isnt funny anymore, but that's the truth: it isnt. The good writers are gone. What's worse, it's been like this for enough years now, and with many local fox stations not even showing classic episodes anymore, I could see many young viewers as seeing the show as overrated. A shame, really, because it used to be so brilliantly funny. I would rather see my favorite show die than see it in go on like this.
      • I would rather see my favorite show die than see it in go on like this.

        somebody quick! call up tom delay and get congress to stop them from pulling the plug on the show!

    • Re:finally, a story (Score:4, Interesting)

      by schtum ( 166052 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @08:45PM (#12182839)
      Here's an appropriate quote. When the Cosby Show ended, the Simpsons (which ran in the same time slot) paid a little tribute at the end of the show. I haven't seen this since it originally aired so, rather than trust my memory, I googled "simpsons cosby finale" and found this:

      Bart: Hey, Dad, how come they're taking The Cosby Show off the air?
      Homer: Because Mr. Cosby wanted to stop before the quality suffered.
      Bart: Quality, schmality! If I had a TV show, I'd run that sucker into the ground!
      Homer: [patting Bart on the back] Amen, boy. Amen.

      That was in 1992. I can never criticize the Simpsons for sticking around too long, because that's exactly what they said they'd do. Still, who would have imagined they'd make it past 15 years?!
  • 'nuff said.
  • Though there are times in the book where I found myself scratching my head, or wondering how he could have missed a favorite quote (Where, oh where, are the dogs who shoot bees from their mouths?)

    I get the impression there are quite a few quotes in there. I don't know. I don't really want to buy a book that has a lot of Simpsons quotes, unless they relate to the topic at hand. I'd be glad he didn't include my favourite quote -- if I wanted that, I could watch the episode. I don't really like people r

    • Quotes (Score:1)

      by Otto ( 17870 )
      I don't really like people retelling Simpsons/Family Guy/Chapelle Show quotes ad nauseum.

      Chappelle Show quotes do indeed grow old quickly, but with something like the Simpsons, where the list of quotes is so large that you can literally hold entire conversations using nothing but memorable quotes, it's not quite as bad as all that. There's pretty much a Simpsons quote for every occasion, which reduces the "grow old" factor as none of them get overused.

      Assuming your quoter is a true fan, of course, and ca

  • He gave it a 7 (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Shouldn't that be 7 Thumbs Up. (His lowest rating)

  • obscure humor (Score:3, Funny)

    by ch-chuck ( 9622 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @05:12PM (#12180615) Homepage
    they certainly got some gags in - one that outwitted the censors was a sign that read "Sneeds Feed and Seed (formerly Chucks)".

    I can remember browsing the humor books in the mall bookstores in 1987 and finding the "* is Hell" series and thinking it was pretty wild.

  • You mean it's not just a cartoon version of "The Osborne's"?...

  • A problem (Score:3, Interesting)

    by thesupermikey ( 220055 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @05:14PM (#12180645) Homepage Journal
    I found one of the biggest problems i had while reading to book was how the writer refered to episdoes by thier production number. This made it hard to tell what season it was from. Often times when talking about an empisode for more than a parigraph or two it became hard to keep track of what he was talking about
    • "..talking about an empisode for more than a parigraph or two it became hard to keep track of what he was talking about"

      Don't worry, you're even harder to understand.

  • Satire Sans Agenda (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Wateshay ( 122749 ) <bill DOT nagel AT gmail DOT com> on Friday April 08, 2005 @05:15PM (#12180662) Homepage Journal
    I've always thought one of the best things about The Simpsons' satire has been its decided lack of an agenda. So often, satire seems aimed at making you agree to one particular viewpoint or another (or at least aimed at only being funny to those who already believe said viewpoint). Simpsons has never done that. They effectively satirize the weaknesses of all manner of views and beliefs. They're an impartial commentator. Nothing is sacred. For any cutting satirical jab made at a part of the American cultural landscape, I can point to another made at the opposing viewpoint. They aren't conservative or liberal, religious or atheist, great tasting or less filling. That in and of itself is a great achievement.

  • The Truth! (Score:2, Funny)

    by Robotron23 ( 832528 )
    I heard that The Simpsons has only declined in quality in recent years as a satire on bad television and lack of ideas from TV writers as a whole...
    • -Woah ho ho!! A talking dog!? What were you guys smoking when you thought of that?

      -We were eating rotissere chicken.

      or

      -Something like Poochie, but more pro-active.

      -Poochie OK with everyone?

      -yep, yep

      There's a Simpsons quote for EVERY situation.

    • Re:The Truth! (Score:3, Interesting)

      by UWC ( 664779 )
      That's pretty funny, actually. Nice work :)

      It also reminded me that there have been recent trends in episodes of subtle and not-so-subtle jabs at the most common Internet criticisms of the show. The best one seems to be that many have latched on to claiming that recent seasons have featured what detractors refer to as "Jerkass Homer," with less family focus and the like. A couple of episodes recently have explicity used the phrase "Jerkass Homer" or a very close variation.

      Also, the last couple of season

  • Wish they'd end it already (Score:3, Insightful)

    by vadim_t ( 324782 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @05:20PM (#12180710) Homepage
    Reminds me why I like anime. Lots of it (not all though) is a really long story. Take Fullmetal Alchemist for instance, great series, and ends in 51 episodes, unlike some others that drag and drag until they become a bleak shadow of what they were before.

    The long stories with no continuity, even when they are good tend to turn to crap sooner or later. In anime that'd be Ranma, Inuyasha, Dragon Ball Z (eew). The Simpsons seem to be dying a slower death, but I already don't bother watching it and read slashdot instead.
    • It's apples and oranges. The Simpsons is just a comedy, there needn't be no continuity, there is no plot carried over from episode to episode. So long as there are things to lampoon, the show can stay fresh.

      It's really all about the quality of the writing staff. Not just any bozo with a powerbook can write good comedy. People seem to think the best episodes were all in seasons 3-5, then it got worse. It's not that the show ran too long, it's that Conan O'Brian left.
      • Well, Ranma was mostly like that too, many episodes were quite independent, and some were even moved around a bit without problems. The problem was that you could at some point start guessing very well how would things go.

        I'd say the problem is just that it's hard to come up with new stuff in the same setting when there lots of things that were done already. At this point, I find most episodes rather unsurprising. Bart behaves as Bart and Homer as Homer, and seeing Homer strangle Bart for the 128th time ju

  • The Simpsons is an invaluable guide... (Score:5, Funny)

    by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) ( 613870 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @05:21PM (#12180725) Journal
    ...to American culture for immigrants. For example one of the first tasks you have to carry out is getting a driver license. This explained it all:
    [On working at the DMV.]

    Patty: Somedays we don't let the line move at all.
    Selma: Yeah, we call those WEEKdays.

  • Good Review. (Score:4, Funny)

    by gatekeep ( 122108 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @05:24PM (#12180754)
    This sounds like a perfectly cromulant book.
  • More of a textbook than a light summary. Full of details, very well researched, insightful, perhaps, tho at some times over the top with adulation and, I'm sure, the author reads more into the epis than were intended. That being said, it's a perfect book for any dedicated Simpsonite. Had me laughing in recalling the funniest moments and moments I'd missed. Sure, the series may be getting old, but they've done so much. I'd like to see SouthPark (much as I like it) come up with biting originality after 3

  • Overrated (Score:4, Interesting)

    by spyrochaete ( 707033 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @05:38PM (#12180899) Homepage Journal
    I'm a huge Simpsons fan who will challenge any other Simpsons nerd in a quote showdown any day of the week. However, I found this book to be a real snore. It picks the show apart like vultures on a carcass until nothing but the bones remain, gleaming in the sun. This book is too detailed for all but fanatics, and 99% too obvious for the die-hards. I never thought anything could make Simpsons boring, but this book is it. It reads like a pompous Masters thesis and is drier than the Sahara.
    • I totally agree. It is a pretentious op-ed piece and nothing more. I was hoping it would be good and it started out okay but it got repetitive and boring within the first few chapters.
  • The Simpsons is a great show, but please cut back on the merchandising! It seems 10% of the shelves in any toy section of a store are Simpsons-branded games and toys. It tends to dilute any remaining value of the show.

  • Simpsons did it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mcmonkey ( 96054 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @06:04PM (#12181216) Homepage
    The book bills itself as "the first trade book to take a look at The Simpsons as a microcosm of the Western culture that it has both influenced and reflected."

    Kinda sounds like The Simpsons And Society: An Analysis Of Our Favorite Family And Its Influence In Contemporary Society [amazon.com]

    The book reads, at times, like a collection of essays rather than a continuous narrative.

    Just like The Simpsons and Philosophy: The D'oh! of Homer [amazon.com]

    Seriously, I [heart] the Simpsons, but I'd like to [club] pseudo-intellectual wanna-bes who think they can pose as avant-guard by doing a serious analysis of something as frivolous as a cartoon. Guess what? It's been done! They aren't breaking new ground; they don't challenge our ideas about culture.

    Baseball players on steroids isn't news. (Seriously, did you think Mark Mcguire's neck looked like a roast beef naturally?) Avril Lavigne isn't punk. And leeching off of Matt Groening's genius and writing a book on the Simpsons isn't interesting or insightful.

    • And leeching off of Matt Groening's genius and writing a book on the Simpsons isn't interesting or insightful.

      You seem unhappy; maybe you should read The Gospel According to The Simpsons: The Spiritual Life of the World's Most Animated Family [amazon.com] to find peace.






      (just joking)

      • That actually got me laughing out loud. I'd mod you up, but I already posted to this thread =)

        And just a P.S., I'm not against serious examination of elements of popular culture. I'm against using pop culture as a short cut past doing good work.

        I've read a couple of these books, and they just were not well written. And from reading the reviews on Amazon, I have no desire to read futher in this area.

        Maybe in the English dept. of the local community college analyzing the Simpsons over rehashing the late

  • Tumbleweeds and other sight gags (Score:3, Informative)

    by hubie ( 108345 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @06:10PM (#12181270)
    I don't know how old the author is, but for those of us who grew up in the 70's and 80's on Warner Brothers (and other) reruns, sight gags such as the tumbleweed blowing by to highlight the lack of life, or crickets chirping to highlight the lack of applause, is pretty common and many decades old. In fact, it is "old school," if this old fart may borrow from the 90's vernacular.

    • This is a test, only a test.

      Say something! Explain yourself! Your tongue's flappin' but no noise is coming outta your big mouth!

      If you grew up with Foghorn, you're probably laughing now and searching the net for the sound files of his classics. Someone, somewhere must have done a sociological study on this character. He's brilliant!

  • South Park? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Sheepdot ( 211478 ) on Friday April 08, 2005 @07:01PM (#12181846) Journal
    What? South Park doesn't define a generation?

    What about the "South Park Republican"?

    As the show's co-creator, 32-year-old Matt Stone, sums it up: 'I hate conservatives, but I really f--ing hate liberals.'"

    As a voting libertarian, I looked at the entire Terry Schiavo incident exactly as the SP creators did, seeing hypocrisy in the way conservatives viewed "playing God". I think if anything, South Park alone might contribute to destruction of the Republican Party as one of only morals, and might even get it back into shape as representing the small-government advocates it once did.

    Or one can hope, anyway.
  • So is it just me, or did the review seem to follow some of the same nuances it pointed out in the book. Seemed the writer picked up some of the authors habits. In essence the review, could be applied (in some respects) to the review itself. Creepy.
  • I'll make the argument that the Simpson's is (was) the last great television show. Technologies as mass communcation mediums peak and then just sit there. The 'record business', no matter what quality arguments you want to get into, peaked as a sociological force during the 60s. People still make compilations of music (disks, iTunes playlists, mastermixes, hell, there's a place in NJ that'll do a flexidisk) but nobody really cares that much anymore. Probably as it should be. Same could be said for the novel

  • Our overlords (Score:2, Interesting)

    by yodha ( 636988 )
    I hope that that all slashdotters do realize that their hackneyed welcome our new overlords originated from The Simpsons.
    From Slashdot subculture [wikipedia.org]:

    Welcoming Our New Overlords
    The sycophant type of troll is based on a quote from the newscaster character Kent Brockman of The Simpsons. In one episode of the show (episode number 96, Deep Space Homer), Brockman watches a video broadcast from a space capsule, within which a number of ants have accidentally been released. The ants appear huge because they flo

Slashdot Top Deals

Ya'll hear about the geometer who went to the beach to catch some rays and became a tangent ?

Close