Sunday, December 1, 2013
Every Single Week (due by section meeting Wed.)
According to Anna McCarthy, ABC’s president, Robert A Iger, said of Ellen that it “became a program about a character who was gay every single week, and… that was too much for people.” McCarthy describes this perspective as maintaining the “fantasy of queer identity as something that can be switched on for special occasions” along with a “fear of a quotidian, ongoing lesbian life on television.” Since Ellen’s coming out episode in 1997, a number of queer characters, generally secondary characters, have appeared on both broadcast and cable television. Choose a program with a queer character from the 2000s that you are familiar with and examine whether or not that character’s relationship to their sexuality is truly serialized or only focused on during “special occasions,” whether to play up a particular stance on sexual identity or for eroticizing reasons.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with Iger that Ellen was "gay every single week" in Ellen, however, I do not think that that portrayal is still dominant in television today. Rather, I believe that it is often the case that a queer character's major story lines do revolve around them being "gay every single week" in the first season or two of their role, but after their establishment as a character with a queer background, their story lines often evolve into something larger than their sexual identity.
ReplyDeleteIn Showtime's Shameless, Ian Gallagher's primary stories mainly revolved around his sexuality for the first two seasons, but then moved beyond that eventually. For Ian's character, the first season of Shameless consisted of his personal sexual discovery and his ability to navigate that around his family and school lives. We learn about Ian's job outside of school, and see that he is engaged in a relationship with his boss, another man hiding his sexual identity. The second season of Shameless continues those story lines, with Ian growing older and taking an increased role of responsibility in the Gallagher household. While most of Ian's personal story lines are about his sexuality, he is also heavily integrated into the whole family's stories, and his sexuality does not play a major role in any story lines besides his personal ones (episodes that show him alone in other contexts, outside of the Gallagher home) in season two.
In the third season, we see Ian's character evolve much further. We learn more about his friendships, his academic and job interests (wanting to go into the Army), and still continue to learn about his relationship challenges with his on-again-off-again "boyfriend," if you could call it that.
I think Shameless is a good example of the fact that modern television shows often do portray characters as "gay every single week" for a certain period of time, until it has been well-established that the focal character is queer. After their sexual identity has been engrained as part of their character's personality/history/relationships/etcetera, the television story lines often stray away from that concentration and show the character more holistically. While the character's sexuality is still a topic of many stories, it often is in personal stories rather than the concentration of an entire episode. As time goes on, the character is depicted more and more holistically. In essence, I think that the Ellen show syndrome for portraying queer characters as "gay every single week" is still very much prominent in television today, but television shows often move past that stage more quickly today than they did (or tried to) in the past.
I often find television programs with a gay main character to actually be quite annoying for the same reason that Iger states. Each episode involving that character has to do with their gayness in some manner. Whether it be getting picked on, relationship struggles, or difficulty expressing themselves, I get bored of seeing the same problem being discussed episode after episode. I enjoy programs that don't treat the character just as a gay character, but for what they truly are, a person.
ReplyDeleteThis is why I absolutely love the portrayal of Danny from MTV's Teen Wolf. While Danny is not a very popular character, nor does he turn into any type of creature like most of the other characters on the show, he is consistent. Danny has been on the show from season one and throughout the past three seasons, they have seen his character grow in a beautiful and appropriate way. From the first time the viewers meet Danny there are slight hints that he is gay in the way that he looks at the other members of his lacrosse team and how he would often compliment his team members. However, this is all we really get. There is not explicit episode or even line in the show that states that Danny is gay, we just know it and we accept it.
Throughout the seasons there have been even more hints of Danny's sexuality, but the most explicit occurred in the show's most recent season. Danny became a vital character in the show as he started dating one of the werewolves. What is extremely interesting about this is that the werewolf Danny is dating has a straight twin brother. The show manages to express how someone who is gay is no different from anyone else and instead of ostracizing that character and making a very big deal out of their sexual orientation, he is portrayed just like everyone else. I find Danny to be a very good representation of gay culture on television as the show addresses this issue properly by going at it from an acceptance strategy instead of making a huge deal about it.
I believe that although it might have been true in 1997 with shows such as Ellen, that Anna McCarthy’s statement regarding the public not being comfortable with consistent portrayal of gayness is not accurate to today. I feel that television audiences have become more open to seeing gay characters present themselves in a non-straight manner and so such characters act as so more often than just on ‘special occasions.’
ReplyDeleteMore specifically, in Modern Family, Cam and Mitch are a gay couple whose story addresses gay issues every week. For example, in one episode Cam and Mitch planned themselves a gay wedding, as it just became legalized in California, and even kissed on screen. In another episode, they discuss the option of surrogacy and donating their sperm in order to conceive a baby with their own genes. Furthermore, throughout each episode Cam exhibits his flamboyant hand movements, his tendency to sing and dance, and his patterned, yet matching, outfits. Despite this constant display of gayness, Modern Family has continued to be on the air for 5 seasons and has won multiple Emmys.
In terms of the goal of Modern Family in including a gay couple, the comedy and family genre of the show causes the relationship to be portrayed as purposeful and having an agenda, rather than for erotic reasons. Through depicting the very normal life of Cam and Mitch, the creators of the show make it possible for a straight audience to relate to gay characters. Therefore, I believe that Modern Family is trying to impose acceptance of queerness onto its audience.
It seems to me that in our current culture of trying to “normalize” gay individuals into society, the meaning of being “gay every week” becomes difficult to define. In some shows, such as those first two seasons of Shameless, the very purpose of introducing gay characters is to include a plotline about sexuality and teen discovery. While this may be integrated within the general storyline, it still represents being “gay every week.” Although society can now accept more gay representation in two full seasons, the series still assimilates Ian’s story into common, non-gay topics as Haley mentioned.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, Modern Family, introduces two main characters who happen to be gay, the point being that this couple is just like any other couple. When Cam and Mitch kiss, it becomes a “special occasion” of which McCarthy quotes. Many of the gay plotlines are there as events to introduce gay topics, whereas the remaining episodes are again “normalizing” gay characters. Once a TV show begins to focus on an actual serialized gay relationship, it becomes a television show geared towards gay viewers. Shows like Queer as Folk and The L Word are shows that consistently depict queer identity and what it means to develop relationships, break up, and live as a gay individual. Yet because they don’t contextualize a gay relationship within a heterosexual universe, or normalize a gay relationship in a seemingly relatable manner to heteronormalized lifestyles, these shows fall into niche audiences due to the general “fear of depicting ongoing homosexual life on television.”
I believe that today a large portion of TV viewers still fear a serial depiction of gay characters. While shows such as The L Word might be much more prevalent and popular than in the 90’s, they seem to exist on the margins of TV programing. Also, the shows that air during primetime or in mainstream programming, balance gay culture and characters with heterosexual and conservative values.
ReplyDeleteModern Family is an example of a show that mediates the introjection of gay characters into normalized culture. As Julia stated, the show does present Cam and Mitch as an everyday couple while addressing certain issues on sexual identity. Yet, I believe the significance of the gay couple in the show is also drawn from their relationship to other characters. More specifically, the couple is situated amongst an extended family with more conservative values. Mitch’s father, Jay, seems reluctant to accept his son’s sexuality. While Jay represents an older generation of hard working, self-made Americans, there is also Phil and Claire’s family that is a pretty typical middle class family. I believe that this show has been so well received because of how it negotiates Cam and Mitch as a gay couple amongst a more conservative or normalized culture. It might be that audiences still fear a “quotidian ongoing” homosexuality in television, yet they are more prone to accept it. Furthermore, audience’s reluctance or fear may be soothed by the presence of heterosexual characters as seen in Jay, Cam, and Mitch.
I believe that in this regard Cam and Mitch balance the depictions illustrated by McCarthy. The episodes do not focus on them specifically or their sexuality, yet they often bring up issues central to their sexual identity, such as adopting a daughter and raising her together (one episode dealt with her Lily’s idea of her mother) while equally presenting heterosexual characters and conservative values.
After Ellen “came out” in her television show, it is true that Ellen “became a program about a character who was gay every single week.” I really agree with Haley, who said that a queer character’s major story lines revolve around his or her sexuality for the first season or so, but after “their establishment as a character with a queer background,” their story lines eventually focus less on their sexuality and more on sweeping issues.
ReplyDeleteFOX’s hit show Glee is one example of a show in which a character (several, actually) is “gay every single week.” One of these characters is Kurt, who has been around since the show’s beginning six seasons ago. When Kurt is first introduced, his sexuality is not explicitly established. The audience is led to believe that Kurt is gay by revealing his crush on another boy, and some of the other characters also believe him to be gay. But Kurt does not outwardly say the words “I’m gay” until a few episodes in the first season; first to a friend, then to his father. After his establishment as a gay character, Kurt’s story lines focus less on his sexual identity and more on broad issues that any average high school student may face: applying to colleges, dealing with bullies (although it was a result of his sexuality), and making friends. Eventually, Kurt develops a love interest. This story line doesn’t concentrate on the fact that he’s gay and dating another male, however; but just that he’s dating someone in general. The story isn’t about him falling in love with a boy, just him falling in love.
I think a lot of television shows are like this today. After establishing the sexual identity of a character, the story lines drift from their sexuality to their general life and other issues. I think maybe this is because society today overall is more accepting of queer lifestyles. Audiences generally understand more about LGBT lifestyles, and do not need to “learn” about them through fictional television shows. Rather, queers in shows like Glee are regarded more as equals, and are thus given equal story lines.
ReplyDeleteThe program that McCarthy’s theory can relate to for me is Will and Grace. In Will and Grace, Will Truman (Eric McCormack) and Jack McFarland (Sean Hayes) both portrayed gay character and the sitcom enjoyed incredible success during its eight season run and still is successful in syndication. The show was one of the first to air with principally gay characters. One of the biggest issues it raised was “how gay were the characters” Will played a more reserved gay man who modeled many attributes of straight characters, but dated men. On the other hand, Jack was flamboyantly gay and this often played a role in many of his escapades as a struggling actor trying to find work throughout the shows episodes. These characters provide a dichotomy of relationships to sexuality. Will’s gayness only was on exhibition on certain occasions whereas Jack’s sexuality was very serialized in that it played a role in each episode. Will and Grace aired only a year after Ellen’s coming out episode and perceptions about homosexuality in America were changing. Will and Jack’s homosexuality often caused them to act differently in a platonic relationship as opposed to straight characters, they often bickered like a married couple and their differing representations of gays (one straight laced, one flamboyant) were beneficial to television as it helped open viewers eyes to more than one type of gay person. The show helped define but also defeat McCarthy’s theory in that each character took a side of it, but together their representations allowed for special occasion and serialization.
When Ellen first came out as gay, I think networks and writers were confused about how they should handle this piece of the character. On the one hand, it is a portion of the character's identity that will want to be addressed by the writers. On the other hand, however, it comes across as campy when a character's sexuality is touched upon every week or every episode, particularly when this sexuality is the butt of a joke. When the primary driver of the narrative is a character's sexuality and the trials that they go through as a result of that sexuality, that is what can become 'too much' for viewers. This is the primary reason that Ellen failed, because it made her orientation the cornerstone of plot lines for far too long.
ReplyDeleteIn contrast, a recent show, Orange is the New Black, features gay characters, but does not make their sexuality the driving force behind plot lines. The main character, Piper Chapman, who is currently engaged to a man, reveals that she once dated a woman back in her college years. Although there is a short scene in the pilot where his parents are confused about whether or not she is gay or straight, the show makes a point of noting that sexuality is neither permanent nor clearly defined. Furthermore, when Piper gets to prison, she interacts with numerous other women of differing sexualities - some are gay, some are straight, and some are like Piper, women who have relationships with men outside of prison, but are having sex with women in prison.
Where Orange is the New Black truly succeeds, however, is its identical depiction of homosexual and heterosexual relationships. Piper's conflicts with her fiance are treated the same way as her conflicts with her ex-girlfriend, Alex, who's in prison with her. Love triangles between women in prison are treated the same way that heterosexual love triangles would be - varying emotions, jealousy, etc. And uncomfortable advances towards Piper from a female inmate and a male prison employee are treated as equally awkward and difficult situations. Ultimately, Orange is the New Black focuses on creating an overarching look at how human beings relate to one another, without giving differing treatment to levels of relationships or orientation. In contrast, Ellen made a point to focus on homosexual relationships over heterosexual after the main character's coming out episode.
Oscar Martinez, Dunder Mifflin’s accountant, in NBC’s The Office was a character that I believe to be “truly serialized,” as opposed to being only highlighted during “special occasions.” Oscar originally wasn’t openly gay in the series; it was only after Michael Scott, his incompetent manager, accidently outed him that the rest of the characters and audience knew of his sexuality (besides the few hints that lead up to the outing). Out of all of the characters in The Office, he is arguably the most levelheaded and responsible one, as the rest of his coworkers are mostly incompetent, inefficient, or a combination of the two. His character isn’t used to “play up” a certain stance on sexual identity or to eroticize them; he’s just a mild-mannered office worker who just happens to be gay. In fact, the gay jokes in the series usually highlight the ignorance of the character who brings them up. For example, in the episode “Gay Witch Hunt,” the constant gay jokes made on Oscar’s behalf made Michael Scott look ignorant and buffoonish instead of Oscar. Overall, the series portrays Oscar in a positive light while not using his homosexuality as a vehicle for cheap laughs or reactions.
ReplyDeleteThe statement regarding "Ellen" as a TV program that was "gay every single week" and McCarthy's statement about homosexual representation being used as a "special occasion" is true for many TV shows in the last 10 years or so. I remember watching TV shows like "Degrassi: The Next Generation" and experiencing their comfort with various taboo subjects, especially homosexuality. Often, however, the reveal of a character coming out or going through a "phase" was used so frequently that the show became predictable in its narratives. True for many TV shows, revealing a gay or lesbian character and focusing multiple story lines on their homosexual lifestyle was frequently utilized as a means to play up the shock value of a show and help to boost ratings--it was almost as if having a gay or lesbian character on a show was an accessory that could be brought out and focused on every now and then to catch viewers' attention. Despite this being a common formula, there are a handful of TV shows that serialize their characters' sexuality and blend the subject matter into the plot smoothly without feeling the need to make it the subject of attention at all times.
ReplyDeleteOne show that does this quite well is ABC's "Scandal" with the character of Cyrus Beene, the White House Chief of Staff who is also gay. Cyrus has such a vindictive and ruthless personality, which is completely opposite from the stereotypically flamboyant gay character that is sometimes referenced on other TV shows. The fact that Cyrus is gay and married was introduced to the plot in such a nonchalant way that it made it clear that his sexuality was not going to be a central point to the plot. The show is so strong and attention-grabbing in so many aspects of the narrative that constantly playing up the gay character storyline is completely unnecessary. There were a few moments during the series where the struggles of Cyrus and his husband were highlighted (e.g. when they were deciding to adopt a baby), but it was presented more in a way of a couple deciding whether or not they actually want kids as opposed to the standpoint of society judging them for being gay dads. This was done in such a way that it wouldn't take away from the more important, driving forces of the show surrounding the President and Olivia Pope's love affair and Olivia's job as a "fixer" of sorts. Shows like "Scandal" are very successful at portraying differing sexualities as a means of personal sexual identity and not as a way to shock the audience with a now played out homosexual storyline. They present these characters in a more sophisticated manner and seem quite fearless about maintaining ongoing depictions of homosexuality in a more casual way.
Back in middle school, I used to be obsessed with the teen Canadian television show Degrassi: The Next Generation. Since the television show basically touched every possible teenage and pre-teen issue possible in some way, shape or form, one of the characters, Marco, was gay and had battled with telling his parents about his sexuality. For the beginning episodes, he did not even know that he was gay and neither did the audience. However, once he identified his sexuality, he still acted the same character as he always had been. I’m not exactly sure if it was just because I had watched the show religiously, or if this was true for everyone, but until the later episodes you cannot even tell that he is gay until it is stated in the dialogue. It seems to begin to appear in the later episodes by the way he not necessarily dresses himself, but accessorizes his self and how he is always well groomed with a nice hairstyle. His actions remain the same and he continues to be the same person, and not “feminized” to fit the stereotype. His best friend was a girl, Marco evens tates in some episodes how he is not like a girl’s gay best friend who always shops with them and fulfils all of the stereotypes; his girl best friend was very Goth so she did not like those things.
ReplyDeleteAlthough these things did go on, it is a little bit difficult to tell later in the season if Marco naturally changed his ways because of changing teenage hormones or if he started to fulfill the stereotypes. In the later season episodes, especially when after he gets a house with his friend paige, he begins to act more lie a stereotypical gay man. For example, he starts to care more about fashion, and becomes “the whiny girl” in his relationships. He also seems like a more fragile person in the later episodes as well.
It is interesting to see how the writing can change a character to fit mores stereotypes possibly for ratings. Towards the ending season, Marco moved from being my favorite character to just being flat-out annoying. I feel that his character started to change around the same time where the show started to become more popular, and not in the good way. I guess I do understand why the writers changed the character to make him more stereotypical-giving the people what the y want to see”- but I also do not necessarily agree. Not all males that are gay are fragile, whiny, and stylish though media always seems to feel the need to portray this stereotype. The episodes without him being more whiny were much more interesting than his later episodes where he occasionally acts like an angsty teenage girl.
Queerness on television is definitely controversial, mostly because of the ways queerness is typically presented in TV shows. There are characters who, like Ellen, spend every week dealing with problems specifically related to their sexuality, or there are characters who are stated to be queer but then never face any sort of conflict about it. There are problems with both these types of representation—some people are of the opinion that overemphasizing queerness takes away from other aspects of the character and makes them nothing more than a prop through which sexuality can be discussed. Others think that downplaying queerness too much isn’t fair representation of a queer lifestyle—similarly to how African American audiences responded to the show Julia, which was criticized for being “too white” and didn’t represent African American culture and lifestyles.
ReplyDeleteOf course, those are two ends of a spectrum, and there can be characters who fall in between. One such character is Captain Ray Holt on the new Fox show Brooklyn Nine-Nine. Holt’s homosexuality is established early on in the show. However, it is not a plot device, nor is it pushed to the back burner. We learn that Holt struggled in the past to become a commanding officer because of homophobia and prejudice in the police force, but that prejudice is not something he is actively battling now. He also has a husband, a relationship which is simply a fact of the show and has not yet been a source of drama. In fact, Holt’s career and relationship are more stable than those of any of the other employees in the precinct. This paves a path for other plot points, such as Holt’s struggles in the past with racism (he is African American), or even things as simple as his relationships with the detectives. Holt may not face problems specific to homosexuality in every episode, but his sexuality is not ignored-- and since the show is still in its first season, there is a very good chance that more will be done with queer representation in future episodes.
Queer characters do generally to take the backseat to heterosexual characters. In “Grey’s Anatomy” for example there are really only two notable queer characters: Joe the bartender (who’s been phased out in most recent seasons) and Callie Torres Seattle Grace’ orthopedic surgeon. To my recollection the audience doesn’t know Joe is gay until he and his partner bring their adopted child to the hospital. In that case queerness does seem to be brought out for a “special occasion” episode as the doctors reexamine their personal lives in light of the hardship that Joe and his partner are going through.
ReplyDeleteThe show’s most notable queer character is Callie Torres. When Callie became part of the show she was heterosexual and even married a prominent male doctor character. That relationship didn’t last because he wasn’t attentive to her. Callie seriously begins to question her sexuality when a surgeon visits the hospital. That relationship ends quickly. Later on Callie meets her future wife, Arizona. This is when the queer relationship feels more organic and less like a token LGBT relationship. Callie and Arizona’s relationship is explored in the same fashion as the other doctors’ relationships. The trials, misunderstandings, regrets, triumphs, the juggling of their demanding jobs and personal lives that each couple has, Callie and Arizona also have. The other characters are completely accepting of Callie and Arizona and treat as they would anyone. I would argue that theirs is one of the rare quotidian lesbian relationships on television.
While today, I could easily name several of my favorite queer couples on television, looking back even just ten years ago, the situation was completely different. On the show The OC, sexuality was often very much at the forefront of story lines. Marrissa would hook up with Luke, Luke would hook up with Julie, Julie would hook up with Caleb, the cycle of sex never ended! While there were a few relationships that lasted through the series (Seth+Summer 4evr) the only queer relationships shown were made to look like extreme spectacles. The one prominent homosexual relationship, between Marrissa and Alex, was an extremely special occasion. In an attempt to make her mom upset, Marrissa starts making out with a girl, and then moves in with her. The relationship was extremely eroticized; Seth sees that they have been seeing each other and starts acting like a young boy seeing his first dirty magazine. Seth tells Ryan of the relationship (which happens to be taking place between their two ex-girlfriends), and Ryan is intrigued by it as well. Their relationship is made out to be a total joke, just presented to keep viewers intrigued and used as an engaging story line for a few weeks. While this was a highly sexualized show, it's a little unnerving that with all of the characters they brought in and out, the only legitimately homosexual character shown was Luke's dad for one episode, and it was devastating news for Luke. I'd definitely say that The OC used their singular lesbian relationship something that was turned on for a special occasion to bring in more viewers looking to fuel their fantasies.
ReplyDeleteOn the show The Wire, Actor Michael K. Willams plays a gay male named Omar living in a boarded up homes with his lover Kima played by actor Sonja Sohn. Michael’s relationship to his character is always serialized with the show, as he is never ostracized out right for his homosexuality, although (fuzzy) I don’t believe anyone knew of his homosexuality in the field of work he dwelled. As a high-ranking thief in the neighborhoods of Baltimore he was feared highly by the entire main cast that knew of him. There were scenes of him being “gay” but they were more so to add a softer side to the beast of “Omar”. I remember seeing the episode of Omar siting a table when a male walked out of the bed room and kissed him, I was thrown off as it wasn’t clear to me that he was homosexual by the way the producers chose to portray his character…i.e stereotypically applying “homosexual” traits to him as a gay male, as the scene of him kissing another man felt natural and not emphasized to point where it would be focused on too much. Yet, to play devils advocate to myself, at the time I could not be paying attention overall. As the scene did end on him kissing his lover so that could be a way to emphasize his homosexuality by leaving a cliffhanger. There is also the fact that although the audience knows of him being homosexual he is not broadcasted to the characters within the show that he has a gay lover to my knowledge. The other gay cast member “Snoop” is seen to be openly homosexual although she portrays herself as a man so it’s easy for one to think of it compared to Omar, as he is no different than the other males in the show. I think the particular stance the producers of the wire were trying to get at was that homosexuality is a way of life and blends so well that we are unable to truly tell if a person is gay or no 100% of the time and the bottom line being it doesn’t matter as it won’t change who the person is. Omar and Snoop are both hardcore killing criminals, one is clearly open to her sexual preferences and the other is not, but it is shown that Omar is homosexual, does not openly share the information but in the realm of his character he does not share much at all. It’s hard to say if they are only focusing during “special occasions” or sticking to what the character would truly do if this were real.
ReplyDelete