POP-CULTURE COLUMN: The Inequality of the TV Renaissance
POP-CULTURE COLUMN: The Inequality of the TV Renaissance By Dan Brown I don’t know why fortune smiles on some old TV shows, and lets the rest go free. Why have a new generation of viewers warmed to the likes of Friends, Gilmore Girls, and The West Wing via streaming, while such shows as That ’70s Show, Northern Exposure, and Seinfeld enjoy no such renaissance? I don’t know the answers. That’s why this column is more of an observation than an argument. I work with young people in both my day jobs, and I can’t tell you how shocked I was when one of them asked me something along the lines of, “Have you heard of a sitcom called Friends? I’ve watched all 10 seasons and it’s my new favourite show!” Other productions they enjoy watching include The Office, New Girl, and even Breaking Bad. Keep in mind, the folks I work with were children when some of these shows originally aired on network TV. The phenomenon of kids watching old productions isn’t new, of course. When I was a tyke growing up in the 1970s, I couldn’t avoid reruns of duds such as Gilligan’s Island, which had stopped airing before I was born in 1968. In a universe of limited channels, it was just what was on. The difference is young people today are seeking out Friends and its ilk on their own, they aren’t being force-fed the same old slop over and over, like my generation was. Thanks to streaming services such as Netflix, today’s viewing audience has a virtually unlimited library of content from previous decades at their fingertips. According to different studies, as much as 60 per cent of their viewing time is spent watching comedies and dramas from the past (that is, when they’re not on TikTok). But why do they gravitate toward certain offerings, but not others?Have they heard or read that Friends, for example, was really popular in its day? Were their parents or older siblings fans of Gilmore Girls? Streaming companies have an endless hunger for content, so it could be a case of the younger generation watches whatever is available, and whatever is being promoted. That might explain why no twentysomething has come to me and said, “I love The Drew Carey Show! It’s so great.” After all, there are 233 episodes of that thing! Even a huge hit such as Seinfeld gets no love now. Viewer's couldn't care less about House, as well, even though it once had a diehard following. It’s enough to make me believe the old saw about television is actually true. In the Before Times, the theory that explained why a telecast was popular went like this: Viewers made a show popular because they enjoyed spending time with its characters at the same time every week, thus those characters were regular visitors in the collective living room. Perhaps in our crazy post-postmodern world, hanging out at Cheers with Sam, Diane and the rest of the gang is the ultimate comfort food. Do you have any theories that would explain why certain shows transcend their era, yet others have no success at doing so? I would love to read them in the comments! Dan Brown has covered pop culture for more than 33 years as a journalist and also moderates L.A. Mood’s monthly Graphic-Novel Group book club.
