Sitcom: What It Is, How It Works
Conclusion
by
Richard F. Taflinger, PhD
This
page has been accessed since
29 May 1996.
I began this book because, as a student of
theatre and a child of the television age, I believe that television, the most
ubiquitous form of entertainment in the
The study did have to be limited: television
is an extremely broad area covering news, sports, public affairs, information,
advertising, and, of course, entertainment. I elected to confine my study to commercial
prime-time (8:00 - 11:00 pm) television, and the form of programming called the
situation comedy.
There were two things I wanted to accomplish
with this study: 1) trace the development of the situation comedy from 1950 to
1993; and 2) develop a set of criteria describing the situation comedy in the
various forms it assumes, based in general on more than 40 years of
observation, in specific on the study of hundreds of examples, and the
application of two sets of principles, the neo-Aristotelian principles of
drama, and the six criteria I found for comedy. The two sets of principles are
considered separately because the neo-Aristotelian may be applied to any
television program, while the principles of comedy should apply only in the
case of comedy programs.
The neo-Aristotelian principles I used for my
study were action, character, thought, spectacle, music and diction. The
elements of comedy were: 1)the action appeals to the
intellect rather than the emotions; 2)the action is inherently human; 3)the beings
carrying out the comic action behave in a mechanical manner; 4) there is an
established set of societal norms; 5) the comic actions are incongruous to the
norms; and 6) the action is perceived as harmless by the audience.
The trends in situation comedies since 1950
show a move toward a more liberal attitude about subjects of humor. In other
words, in the element of thought, instead of societal norms such as
a-woman's-place-is-in- the-home, or horses-can't-talk, or the-man-is-
the-master, as in the 1950s and 1960s, the norms used in many situation
comedies today are attitudes about sex, violence, racism, and other subjects
that didn't even exist in early television comedy. The field of permissible
subjects has greatly widened, illustrating that ideas and thinking have
replaced pat situations with pat resolutions.
The situation comedy can be divided into
three types: the actcom, the domcom,
and the dramedy, each type characterized by
differences in their fundamental elements of action, character, and thought.
The actcom, the
original and most numerous type of sitcom, has the following characteristics:
1.
The plots are action-oriented, and based on personal crises of a superficial
nature.
2. The characters
are not complex: few motivations are shown, and the characters are consistent
and predictable in action and thought. The main characters are central to every
plot, and are the masterminds of schemes to solve the problems and leaders of
the action. Supporting characters are not necessary to all plots, are followers
and not leaders, and are often dupes and butts of jokes.
3. Writers use no
specific themes, the plots written for the purpose of provoking laughter, not
to communicate ideas. The characters are superficial in thought, clever rather
than intelligent, and show a lack of foresight or consideration of future
consequences of their actions.
4. The settings are
strictly backgrounds to action, with little sense of personality, either of
their own or of the characters inhabiting them.
The domcom
has the following characteristics:
1.
The plots are character-oriented and based on domestic crises. The first
segment of an episode is much like an actcom, but at
the point of crisis, character and thought supercede
action as the consequences of the action on the character are examined.
2. The characters
are complex, with multiple and conflicting emotions and complex motivations.
The main characters are emotionally stable and loving, and desire to instill
moral values without stifling the personal growth and experience of their
children. Supporting characters include the children, who are usually the
bearers of the problem, and other who are used mainly as comic intensification
and as a sounding board for the main characters.
3. The writer
usually has a theme based on intra- or interpersonal relationships, in
particular those related to children growing up and maturing in a social world.
The characters are usually rational, although their thinking is sometimes
clouded by emotion, with attempts at understanding complex issues. They are
also usually conscious of future consequences of their actions, consequences
that are very important in their future planning.
4. The settings are
again a background to the action, but they are much more personalized and in
keeping with the personalities of the characters who inhabit them. The setting
is almost invariably a home, either a house, or an apartment, comfortable and
middle-class.
A dramedy,
the rarest type of sitcom, has the following characteristics:
1.
The plots are thought-oriented, and examine the effects on characters when they
are confronted with societal ills such as warfare or crime, or problems with
which they are not equipped, either through training or background, to cope.
2. The characters
are generally complex, with multiple and conflicting emotions, complex and
mixed motivations, and a sense of self-reliant dependence on each other. In a
human dramedy, the characters are concerned with the
problems of others, and are generally humanistic and moderate on their view of
life, society, and rules. In an advocate dramedy, the
characters are concerned with themselves rather than others, and in general are
selfish and self-centered, their own thoughts, beliefs and actions, to their
minds, superior to all others and the only ones worthy of consideration.
3. The writers
always employ a theme, try to communicate an idea,
although it is not always a humorous one, that explores a point of view about
some subject, usually one related to the effects of stressful situations on
human beings. The characters in a human dramedy are
constantly thinking, although their thoughts are occasionally clouded by
prejudice or preconception. Eventually they achieve understanding, even if they
do not embrace a new point of view. They are intelligent, witty, imaginative,
and clever. The characters in an advocate dramedy
appear to react by conditioned response rather than by thoughtful analysis of a
situation. They are argumentative, but are dogmatic rather than reasonable.
4. The settings are
backgrounds specialized to the format of the program, and often personalized
according to the personalities of the inhabitants. The settings serve to
establish the ambiance in which the characters cope with the problems with
which they are presented.
#
The plots in all three types of situation
comedy provide four of the six basic criteria for comedy: societal norms,
incongruity, appeal to intellect rather than emotion, and the perception by the
audience that the occurrences are essentially harmless.
Actcoms show physical actions that are incongruous with
reality as perceived by society. Domcoms illustrate
the effects on characters of behavior incongruous with the established norms of
behavior. The dramedy holds societal norms up for
examination by illustrating them in extreme cases. In the case of the dramedy, some occurrences cannot be perceived as harmless,
and consequently are not humorous.
The characters in all three types of
situation comedy provide the final two criteria for humor: they are inherently
human, and, for the most part, they react in a mechanical manner to stimuli.
In recent years, some shows are blurring the
line between one type of situation comedy and another. As mentioned earlier,
some actcoms, such as CHEERS, mature into pseudo-domcoms, although most episodes are still actcom in nature. Some shows go even further. For example,
NIGHT COURT is usually an actcom. However, on
occasion there are episodes that explore character, with the characters taking
on relationships that turn it to a pseudo-domcom
rather than an actcom. There are even episodes that
are dramedic, as the characters explore a societal
problem and its effect on people.
However, for a show to cross over from one
form to another, it must possess at all times those features inherent to each
form. NIGHT COURT can, at times, be any of the forms because it has the
characters, relationships and settings, as well as the writing and producing
quality that allow it that latitude. Such qualities are rare and difficult to develop
in the pressure cooker atmosphere of commercial television.
#
Television has been called many things, most
of them unflattering: chewing gum for the eyes, the vast wasteland, junk food
for the mind, the boob tube, the vidiot set. However,
no matter what is said about it, it cannot be denied that television is the
most pervasive single element in American society, dominating time,
conversation, attitudes, thought, and the entertainment industry. As such, it
is well deserving of an examination that will heighten viewers' awareness of
what they are watching. As I discussed the sitcom, I'm certain, dear reader, that many images and memories sprang into your mind.
As I wrote this book, I talked about it with many people. Each had their most
and least favorite shows, and enjoyed discussing them at length. They
particularly enjoyed finding out why they felt the way they did about the
shows.
Although this book only covers a single facet
of television, it is, I hope, a beginning in understanding what goes into the
making of television programming, and will provide a basis for future
evaluation.
Return to Sitcom
Contents Page
Return to Taflinger's
Home Page
You can reach me by e-mail
at: richt@turbonet.com
This page was created by
Richard F. Taflinger. Thus, all errors, bad links,
and even worse style are entirely his fault.
Copyright © 1996
Richard F. Taflinger.
This and all other pages created by and containing the original work of Richard
F. Taflinger are copyrighted, and are thus subject to
fair use policies, and may not be copied, in whole or in part, without express
written permission of the author richt@turbonet.com.
Disclaimers
The information provided on this and other pages by
me, Richard F. Taflinger (richt@turbonet.com), is under my own
personal responsibility and not that of
In addition,
I, Richard F. Taflinger, accept no responsibility for
WSU or ERMCC material or policies. Statements issued on behalf of