I hereby decree that, on this Thursday, 1 January 2004, lay claim to the establishment of Van's law of intellectual television. The law states:
"As the intellectual comedy in a television show (animated or live action) increases, the survivability of the show on network television decreases. However, the survivability in reruns on a secondary network greatly increases."
This notion of "intellectual comedy" is something I have been putting thought into for some time. Let us first look at the term intellectual comedy. I choose this term because there are, essentially, two types of comedies on the air.
The first type (Type A) of comedy is where the television show doesn't hide the joke. It may come in the form of slapstick, the delivery of someone's lines or a situation in the background the viewer may see. Good examples of shows likes this are Cheers, Frasier, Friends, Everybody loves Raymond, and Seinfeld. All shows that are, and have been, considered successful. (Example of slapstick: A character hitting himself or walking into a wall, or a joke where the viewers can see the punch line before it is delivered by the actor)
The second type (Type B) is a blend of the traditional slapstick, much like that a viewer may see in a Type A show, and the delivery of jokes that make the viewer think. This is better known, in the real world, as a joke that takes a person some time to get. Great examples of shows like this are Futurama, Hidden Hills, Family Guy*, and Sports Night.
Now individuals will look at the second set of shows and say that they "failed", in comparison to the Type A comedies, because their writing was crude, the shows did not have a theme that progressed as the series progressed or the content was uninteresting. All of the above mentioned points of failure directly relate to the law of intellectual television. All the shows mentioned above have a great, truly great, blend of accepted slapstick comedy and subtle, intellectual, comedy. Sometimes, the delivery is so good that the intellectual comedy is being delivered to the viewer as the slapstick comedy it taking place. The themes are subtle, such as a reoccurring phrase or situation throughout the series. Viewers do not pick up on the themes because they do not watch the show regularly enough to see it reoccur.
Article comments
1 - Ken
Brilliant insight. I'd nominate "Scrubs", "Arrested Development", and "The Simpsons" as all worthy Intellectual Comedies currently airing on network TV. I think the combination of slapstick and deeper humor for the introspective is very effective. Perhaps the writers include the slapstick so that the show will have enough staying power with the general public to get a foothold among the Intellectual Comedy fans.
A thought: does the lack of a laugh track make it more likely that an Intellectual Comedy will fail? Look at "Police Squad", "Sports Night", or (currently-airing) "Arrested Development". Were these failures on network TV, because the general public didn't know when to laugh?
As a side note, I'd propose that the invention of TiVo makes it possible that more Intellectual Comedies will survive, because people can watch shows that air at odd times. I have no clue, for example, when "Arrested Development" airs. It simply appears on my "Now Playing on TiVo" screen, and I watch it when I durn well please. Then I talk it up to everyone I meet, spreading the word.
Since the TiVo company can collect and report audience metrics (assuming I don't opt-out of sharing my data), network producers can get a true idea of how many people are watching these smart shows.
I'm gonna share Van's Law with my friends. It will likely produce some great discussions about other shows that fit the "Intellectual Comedy" genre.
2 - Phillip
This is a great article. Including the law of intellectual property. I wonder ... perhaps on some level south park should be consider to be Type B as well. I've found that its messages are very subtle, even when they presented overtly.
3 - Van Santos
Ken - I agree with you on Scrubs. That actually almost didn't come back this year, but I'm sure glad it did.
I also wonder about Tivo. As the technology gets better maybe this will allow people greater ease in watching. I'll admit it, I hated recording with VHS. :-)
As for the laugh track... Sports Night should not have had that. I always thought that took away from the show.
Phillip - I agree with you on South Park, the same could be said with the Simpsons.
The difference between these two successful shows, as I see it, is they didn't start out as intellectual. As the show gained in public, the teams behind them refined their writing styles.
4 - Hal Pawluk
I'd buy your premise if you had left out Futurama and Family Guy.
(I've never heard of Hidden Hills so have to give you a pass on that one :-)
5 - Kiki
Frasier. It was canceled far before its time.
6 - jacob
there is no argument for family guy being intellectual, at all. seinfeld is more intellectual than it.