A little background is in order, though.
I was born and raised in the '50s and '60s, respectively, and by the mid- '70s, I was off to university. The point being, I was raised without a boob tube in the house. I finally got around to getting one for my family about ten years into our marriage (early '90s). I dropped cable after a little while, but hung on to the box. So as you can tell, I have had very little exposure to television, even as an adult, the odd hotel stay notwithstanding.
I guess it's a coincidence, but the DVDs that generally come out of the '50s and '60s, with the early '70s thrown in. It seems I can relate to that era, even though I was never exposed to television while I was being raised then.
The afore-mentioned box allows me choose what I watch, which is the basis for today's column. And all my DVDs come from the public library. It's actually quite a broad and safe selection. And it's free: But that doesn't mean I'm cheap, just frugal.
Back to the Dark Ages, my kidhood (not a word, Maurice) for a moment: I really believe that the absence of a television in my formative years has been instrumental in framing my rational and creative mental processes--a stark contrast to many children who have been dumbed-down by sitting in front of a screen during their early years.
No offence or bragging; just a passing observation.
However, there are studies to prove that statement, but I want the next two columns to be light and winsome, not heavy and ponderous. If you're interested, you can google it.
But having one's thinking, outlook, and applied intelligence diminished by a small or large screen is an unfortunate way to be raised, isn't it? Occasionally, maybe; regularly, not so good.
Where was I? Right, watching goofy sitcoms in my old age, or more precisely, explaining the value and pleasure of doing such. And why do I find watching Dick, Morey, Rose, and Mary (their real names), followed by Mary, Ed, Gavin, and Ted, then by Lucy and her gang, so enjoyable? And I can't forget Jackie and Art with their television wives, either.
Glad you asked. Let me count the ways:
1. clean humour They provide safe time and place to wind the day down, without being insulted and assaulted with crude, toilet humour. I don't need the innuendos nor the blatant, in-your-face garbage that is passed off as humour.
I have found that in "I Love Lucy" (most of the '50s), "The Honeymooners" (one season in the '50s), "The Dick van Dyke Show" (early '60s), and "The Mary Tyler Moore Show" (most of the '70s), the quips were short, obvious, well-timed, and clean...for the most part.
I'd be remiss to leave the two memorable series with Bob Newhart, one as a psychologist and the second one as an innkeeper. There are others (eg., "Get Smart"), but I'll stop right there.
It's noteworthy that as these shows moved further and further into the '70s (including "Hogan's Heroes"), the jokes got cruder and cruder, and more sex-related ones popped up. By the time the '80s rolled around, it was an unfortunate display of both lame and dirty jokes.
2. clever script Believe it or not, I really enjoy the dialogue for these shows. I just appreciate great gags and witty repartee anytime. There have been many very clever and refreshing exchanges that I enjoy and finme them amazingly crafted.
3. family affair The various sitcoms are very family-friendly. That means that it's safe for my kids to sit with me and watch them, without any fear on my part that something shady or suggestive, or more blatant than that, could show up unannounced.
Of course, my kids wouldn't be caught dead doing that with me for a host of reasons.
I've got a couple more reasons next week. In the meantime, why don't you dash down to your local library...for a laugh?
No comments:
Post a Comment