The creators of a sitcom are able to use many different situations and still follow the hegemonic belief of a society, “There were monster families (Munsters), vampire families (The Addams Family), witch families (Bewitched), alien families (Third Rock from the Sun)” (Creeber 2001. p.66) and yet their popularity is steady not due to the outrageous situations but due to the understanding that they all have similar, if not the same ideologies to follow. Freud said that “The two fixed points in what determines the nature of jokes – their purpose of continuing pleasurable play and their effort to protect it from the criticism of reason – immediately explain why an individual joke, though it may seem senseless from one point of view, must appear sensible, or at least allowable, from another.” (Freud 1976. p.181) What Freud points out here is that although the situation in some of these is outrageous, as long as the beliefs that they hold are tangible (existing and accepted) then acceptance can be given by an audience.
The popularity of the sitcom has been said to be because of its “ideological flexibility” (Creeber 2001. p.70) and because it is “the perfect format for illustrating current ideological conflicts while entertaining an audience…even including political reversals to accommodate changing social and political norms.” (.ibid) It is clear that sitcoms thrive of the views of their target audience and use them as the basis of what the characters say and do. Haven said that “shows must exhibit international appeal ‘before anything moves forward’ (Schapiro 1991 p.29) in domestic production.” (Allen and Hill 2004. p.442) The way in which it will gain international appeal will be to play on the beliefs that are held by all of the possible audience, which consists of stereotypes and beliefs that will be held by all.
There are endless combinations of possible situations for sitcoms to be in but there are two main themes that sitcoms have which are the workplace and the family. Of course there are others such as ‘gay’ and ‘queer’ sitcoms and unruly women but these can be categorized in one of the two main aforementioned themes. In workplace sitcoms, as in soap opera, the majority of events are possible in everyday life but not with the same intensity. Some even push the realms of surrealist by either the setting or a particular character that could be considered unusual or eccentric. Workplace sitcoms seem to be based largely around sexual chemistry rather than about the actual occupation. This is because in ‘real life’ sexual partners are often chosen from the workplace; therefore the sitcom yet again follows ‘real life’ norms to attract the audience.
When it comes to a sitcom taking realistic, everyday situations and exaggerating them, the ‘unruly women’ sitcom is best known to do this. “The term [unruly women] describes an icon of a grotesque female whose excesses break social boundaries”. (Creeber 2001 p. 68) These social boundaries being the beliefs that are held by the society in which the sitcom will be shown. Examples of the sitcoms where these unruly women are from are Rosanne and Absolutely Fabulous. The excesses that these women represent are fat for Rosanne and excessive make-up and strange clothes for the Absolutely Fabulous women. These characters are created to be this way in order to go against the social acceptance and therefore bring attention to them.
Sometimes sitcoms can fall into a number of categories and these are usually considered to be called hybrids. These are when conflicts can arise between work and home and the sitcom shows scenes at both. ‘Friends’ is an example of this showing the characters not only in the home/family situation but allows the audience to glimpse into the workplace of each of the characters. The reason ‘Friends’ falls into the family category even though neglecting to be a genetic family is that the term ‘family’ in the sitcom sense is used loosely. It refers to a group of people who live in close proximity and engage emotionally with each other, as often happens in everyday life with neighbors.
A type of sitcom that is becoming more and more popular is the ‘gay’ and ‘queer’ sitcom. In most cases, this type of sitcom works in a slightly different way than that of the family sitcom for example. The family sitcom usually starts with a highly-flavored ideological principle that slowly exhausts itself, whereas the gay sitcom usually starts quite ambiguous until the characters’ ‘camp’ humor dominates. ‘Ellen’ is such a sitcom and stereotypes have been used in it to present lesbians as some of the audience may be unable to understand the ‘camp’ humor. Some humor about lesbian lifestyles is used in Ellen that might not be followed by heterosexual viewers so stereotypes are used for such an audience. When these stereotypes are gone against then problems can arise. ‘Frasier’ is such a sitcom where this has happened since the two lead heterosexual characters are presented differently from the accepted norms of society. “Many well-meaning heterosexual viewers find it offensive that Frasier and his brother Niles are considered ‘queer’ because of their feminine tastes and preferences for opera, fine wine, designer clothing and the like. They consider this to be stereotyping and ask: why cant a man be heterosexual and effeminate?” (Creeber 2001 p.71) The characters of Frasier and Niles are not the stereotypical single male and because of this, people have assumed that they were homosexual. This goes to show the extent that stereotypes are used in society today. As soon as something is different from the norm then issues arise. On top of this, Frasier and Niles are what can be considered to be the ‘New Man’ which is a straight male who can show an effeminate side. It is a relatively recent development in theories of masculinity and shows that ‘Frasier’ is following contemporary beliefs in ‘real life’, that a straight man can still be effeminate and masculine.
When looking at gender in sitcoms, it can become clear to what extent they follow the beliefs of the contemporary society. The way in which sitcoms represent women has followed the position of women in society. “…feminism was initially bent on illuminating the egregious inequalities caused by worldwide gender systems in constructing women as the subservient category to man in the gender binary”. (Allen and Hill 2004 p.378) Up until the impact of feminism in the 1970’s, it is obvious that the majority of sitcoms had leading male characters such as ‘Dad’s Army’ and ‘Porridge’. Women at the time were more likely to be part of an ensemble cast (where the lead character is a group rather than one person) however, recently women have been in more leading roles in sitcoms reflecting women’s stance in society.
Due to the work of feminists, the media in general has changed the way that women are presented and therefore sitcoms too. However, even though the positions that are given to the men and women in sitcoms may have changed, stereotypes are still followed. A male secretary for example, in a sitcom is likely to have feminine traits. ‘Less Than Perfect’ for example features a secretary called ‘Kip’ who shows effeminate traits such as constantly checking his appearance and an interest in fashion. Furthermore, the boss in a workplace sitcom, even if it is a woman, is likely to have masculine traits and characteristics. These stereotypes are held on to because that is what the viewers want to see as it is what they know and understand.
It seems clear that sitcoms “package existing norms and beliefs” (Selby & Cowdery 1995) in order to gain an audience as it are these beliefs that the audience want to see reiterated. The sitcom does not always follow these beliefs rather than use them to emphasise the difference between the commonly held ideal and the character that the sitcom has created. Nevertheless, the beliefs held by society at the time are used in sitcoms. Whether these beliefs are presented through characters or gone against by the idea of exaggeration through other characters, it is still the known stereotypes that are being used in order to create the sociologically ideal character, or the obscure counterpart. The extent to which sitcoms “package existing norms and beliefs” (Selby & Cowdery 1995) is high because even when it is not creating characters using the stereotypes, it is making a character using the stereotypes as a basis to go against the beliefs that society holds.
References
Allen, R and Hill, A (2004) The Television Studies Reader. London. Routledge.
Creeber, G. (2001) The Television Genre Book. London. British Film Institute.
Crisell, A. (2006) A Study Of Television: Thinking Inside the Box. Hampshire. Palgrave Macmillan
Freud, S. (Dec 1976) Complete Psychological Works of Freud. New York. WW Norton and Co Ltd
Schapiro, M. (1991) ‘Lust-Greed-Sex-Power: Translatable Anywhere’, The New York Times. 2 June. Section 2
Bibliography
Allen, R and Hill, A (2004) The Television Studies Reader. London. Routledge.
Ang, l. (1995) Living Room Wars: Rethinking Media Audiences for a Postmodern World. London. Routledge.
Creeber, G. (2001) The Television Genre Book. London. British Film Institute.
Crisell, A. (2006) A Study Of Television: Thinking Inside the Box. Hampshire. Palgrave Macmillan
Gaunlett, D and Hill, A (1999) TV Living. London. Routledge
Geraghty, C. & Lusted, D. (1998) The Television Studies Book. United Kingdom. Arnold.
Hood, S. (1980) On Television. Sydney. Pluto Press.
Livingstone, S. (1998) Making Sense of Television. London. Routledge.
Petrie, D and Willis, J. (1995) Television and the Household. London. British Film Institute
Silverstone, R. (1994) Television and Everyday Life. London. Routledge.
