Friday, March 30, 2018

Roseanne reboot: the white working-class exposure that Americans need

In case you've been living under a rock and haven't caught one of the million promos, I have a very important announcement: Roseanne is back on network TV.

I'll admit that I never watched Roseanne when it originally aired from 1988 to 1997. However, the show was wildly popular in its time, and was lauded for its realistic portrayal of a white, working-class family. The show's creator, Matt Williams, and its star, Roseanne Barr, both grew up working class. The intent of the sitcom, was to "represent the people [they] grew up with - without condescending - and basically celebrate [a] working-class family with a husband and wife who loved each other."  The titular character, Roseanne Connor, started the series as a factory worker and cycled through a number of working-class jobs when the show was on the air. Her husband, Dan, was an on-again off-again contractor who also tried his hand at numerous working-class jobs as the seasons progressed. The couple was raising a family with a tight budget in a working-class exurb of Chicago, they voted for Reagan, and they were overweight (anathema in Hollywood, even today). While the Roseanne portrayed a more conservative family, it still tackled a number of issues that were edgy for its time: feminism, abortion, homosexuality, racial prejudice, alcoholism, drug abuse, and sexual dysfunction were all addressed on the show. 

The revival of Roseanne comes at an opportune time. While there have been a number of TV shows featuring working-class families in the past, few such shows are on TV today (even in the so-called golden age of television). This is especially surprising giving the renewed focus on the white working class in the aftermath of the 2016 election. Due to lots of promotion by ABC, and perhaps due to great timing, the premiere of the new season had blockbuster ratings, drawing 18.2 million viewers. The show has already been renewed for an additional season after just 2 episodes. 

The response hasn't been all positive. Roseanne (the real person) has always been somewhat of a controversial figure, but she drew renewed derision from liberal media and commentators after publicly announcing her support for Donald Trump. Her Trumpian leanings have even carried over to her TV persona: in the first episode of the new season, it's revealed that Roseanne Connor is a Trump supporter. While liberals aren't fond of these developments, at least one person was tickled by the news. President Trump himself personally congratulated Roseanne on the premiere's success. 

Roseanne isn't the only show to make a triumphant return to TV in the age of Trump. Will & Grace, a show about two gay men and their "fag hags" living in NYC also returned to TV this year. Will & Grace was a show I definitely watched growing up, and I've also watched every episode of the new season. It's proudly and profoundly anti-Trump. The only Trump supporters on the show are Karen, the wildly rich and ridiculously absurd socialite, and a random Nazi who buys a swastika cake to bring to a party for Trump. The show is comfort food for liberals (I'll admit, I continue to love its campiness and gay in-jokes). The main characters are liberal elites and every episode is basically an echo chamber for liberal ideas. No one who watches Will & Grace is outside of their comfort zone. 

So why did I decide to watch the Roseanne reboot? Well, perhaps because of what I am currently learning in White Working Class & the Law, I wanted to see how white working-class Trump voters would be portrayed on TV today when not being treated as the butt of tragicomic jokes. I was pleasantly surprised.

The two episodes I watched were absolutely fantastic. Roseanne (the character) is indeed a Trump voter, but she is far from one-dimensional. In fact, she's complex... as I imagine the majority of Trump voters are. The first episode opens with Roseanne and Dan bemoaning the increased price of their many prescriptions, a struggle faced by working families everywhere. Their kids have returned home, and they are struggling with low incomes and joblessness. Along with the kids come grandkids, who are quite a surprise. One granddaughter is black, and a grandson is exploring the gender spectrum (wearing girls clothing to school). Dan and Roseanne are concerned, not that the grandson could be gay or transgender, but that he will be bullied at school. 

As far as politics are concerned, Roseanne is feuding with her sister Jackie, a stereotypical Hillary Clinton supporter who makes her debut on screen wearing a pink pussy hat and a "nasty-woman" t-shirt. This is a family dynamic I expect is playing out in families across America.  While they don't agree on much, the show hints at possible common ground. One storyline focuses on daughter Becky's decision to serve as a surrogate to make some extra money... both Roseanne (who is less-than-thrilled) and Jackie agree that the decision is Becky's to make because it's "her body, her choice."

While the show has a decidedly political bent, it maintains its humor without bitterness. It portrays Trump voters, not as bigots or idiots, but as regular folks who voted for someone they thought would "shake things up." Even though I personally abhor Trump, I found myself laughing ... and genuinely liking the Connor family. Perhaps shows like Roseanne are just what is needed today to help bridge the gap between liberal and conservative Americans - to see each other a regular people, rather than strangers or ideological opponents. 



3 comments:

  1. The reboot of Roseanne has the potential to help many families bridge internal political divides, as it brings politically charged topics to the attention of viewers in a safe and private environment (the family home). However it seems to me that many individuals are not ready to listen to the voice of Trump supporters yet. The 2016 campaign was very politically divisive and the wounds from that experience have not healed yet. In addition partisanship is once again increasing as we approach the 2018 midterm elections. I sincerely hope Roseann can help bridge the gap between liberal and conservative Americans but I remain somewhat skeptical considering the coming storm.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Whether it’s from a sitcom like Roseanne, or something else, I think it’s important that costal liberals are exposed to the more conservative white working class. I believe the same could be said for white working class voters and a show like Will and Grace that showcases a world that is likely unfamiliar to them.

    Television can be an effective medium to divide cross-cultural divides because it depicts its subjects facing daily norms that bridge political ideology. Almost everyone has an annoying family member, most Americans wish they had more money and we all care deeply for our families. Although a costal family might approach a child’s gender fluidity differently than the Connor grandparents, they can relate to the fear of bullying. Most relatable, what old person doesn’t have a panoply of prescription medications?

    I think it’s a positive that we have a show focusing on a conservative family in primetime. We can all laugh at Alec Baldwin’s portrayal of Trump on SNL, then turn around and laugh at Jackie’s “nasty-woman” t-shirt. There is no reason people cannot laugh at something they also support.

    I recently started watching a new show on Showtime called Our Cartoon President. Created by Stephen Colbert, the animated sitcom takes shots at President Trump, the members of his administration and his family. Despite being a conservative, I find the show to be very amusing.

    There are certainly many Trump voters who would be appalled by Our Cartoon President. There are also many Trump voters who would be appalled by the embrace of homosexuality on Will and Grace. The same presumption of admonition applies to many coastal liberals watching the Connors fret over their gender fluid grandson and their daughter who is looking into becoming a surrogate.

    However, that is not the kind of conservative I want to be. I do not want to run away from opposing viewpoints. Rather, I feel like I can only have my own beliefs validated if I am exposed to the countervailing position.

    In my opinion nothing is more foolish than uniformly subscribing to the orthodoxy of a political party or candidate. It exposes a complete lack of any actual ideology and reveals a sheep mentality. When voters substitute their own values for those of a candidate or party they are relinquishing the people’s power to the oligarchy of our political infrastructure. Instead of the people driving policy, we allow party machinations to control policy when we substitute our own values for those of political entities.

    I for one could never support tariffs after being opposed to them my entire life just because my party’s president has decided he wants to flex his muscles. They stand in sharp contrast to Reagan/Goldwater conservatism. Moreover, they are total anathema to the more libertarian brand of conservatism I subscribe to. I cannot support small government when it suits me than turn around and pull a 360 because some politician says so.

    There are a host of other issues that I disagree with Trump on. These disagreements range from minor to vehement. I challenge voters of all stripes, conservative and liberal, to identify areas where they disagree with the orthodoxy of their party and/or major figures within them. If you cannot find major sources of disagreement, ask yourself if some of the beliefs you hold are due to your political party or your own values.

    I will leave you with Cardi B’s epic rant on taxes. Cardi B is a real free thinker, unafraid to talk about her past as a stripper and unafraid to question liberal orthodoxy like the benefits of high taxes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFE6adKcy2E.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I remember watching episodes of "Roseanne" back when I was learning English. I was young then, and it didn't register that the show depicted a working class family. Given the reboot did well in pro-Trump cities, I've been watching recent episodes in an effort to understand how working class Trumpists see themselves, or at least the type of humor they're willing to tolerate on screen.

    I admit, I found the premiere episode hilarious and politically aware. The writers comically touched on several issues that were important to voters in the last election: affordable medications, job security, gender, and political divisiveness, among others. I can see, however, how some could find the humor brash and crass. But given the show appealed to many, we should be open to understanding why "Roseanne's" humor resonates with its viewers. Personally, Roseanne's character reminds me of a couple of my aunts, who often make off-the-cuff, irreverent remarks that are outright funny, even if they're politically incorrect. That's why I think it's important to approach the show without an open mind, in order to appreciate some of the touchy points it tries to get across (e.g., one need not understand queerness or gender fluidity in order to let one's grandson wear female garments).

    But the show is not without its problems. As the commentators in the podcast "Still Processing" noted in their "We Watch Whiteness" episode, it will be interesting to see if future episodes fold Roseanne's black granddaughter into the show in a meaningful way that doesn't ring of "we're not racist because we have a black character." [https://www.nytimes.com/podcasts/still-processing] In the most recent episode, for example, Roseanne is concerned that her new Muslin neighbors intend to build a bomb with their excess fertilizer. And just when Roseanne intimates that she has embraced her Muslim neighbors, she scares a cashier by telling her the neighbors have "enough fertilizer to turn this place into a smoking hole in the ground." [Season 1, episode 7] One has to wonder if her character is saying: I can be tolerant, but on my own terms.

    As the show unfolds, I hope it turns out to be more than a checklist of issues its writers feel compelled to address. But, for now, I'll continue laughing at the irreverent humor, and hoping the show's racial minority characters are fully developed.

    ReplyDelete