an obvious point about Judge Judy

Here is a conversation piece, "Justice Served: A Conversation Between RuPaul and Judge Judy."

I did my first interview for 60 Minutes 26 years ago, and Morley Safer said to me, “What direction do you think it’s all going in, and will it get any better?” And I said to him, “It’s going to get worse. A lot worse.” It’s like what you said before—you watch my program because there’s linear thinking. But there is an element of dumbing down that has been embraced by others, which suggests to me that these rules of civilization are being dulled.

This so-called conversation has a few interesting parts, but this statement stood out to me. The whole civility discussion. When she was a real judge working in New York City's child welfare system, Judith Sheindlin was accused of being insensitive. Real Judge Judy was trying to scold and scare lazy social workers, addict parents, and wayward kids into doing what she thought was right. But it was only going to get worse, so she took her chance to cash in.

The people in Judge Judy's TV courtroom have histories and circumstances that figure into why they are fuck-ups getting sued for $2000 in back rent and $750 for caving in their landlord's car windshield with a brick. Real Judge Judy and the law cannot factor in any of that. The fact that the plaintiffs and defendants are mostly all fuck-ups is part of the formula to the show's appeal.

About "I Love Lucy"

I have never been able to watch more than four minutes of "I Love Lucy" and I think this is why: the show never tells a story; instead, Lucy puts on a show. This inevitably leads to her acting out, hamming it up, taking the production over the top. There is no arch, no moral, no lesson learning; there is no character development, no growth in the show, its production or its talents. There is nobody to sympathize with or relate to. All you see is a comedienne trying to meet expectations or out-do herself comically with exaggerated crying and bumbling, facing the camera all the while.

All this is to state the obvious: that how you feel about the show hinges on taste, one's expectation and preference. If Lucy isn't funny, she's just pulling gags.

Notes:

• Television was still young.
• This means nothing.

Something on "The Late Shift: Letterman, Leno, & the Network Battle for the Night" by Bill Carter

In the early 1990's, late night television is owned by NBC's staple "The Tonight Show" starring Johnny Carson. But as the much-revered host neared his 30th year, the program's static offerings and rapidly aging audience sent murmurs of discontent through NBC's corporate offices. Carson, for whatever reasons, offered no resistance and abruptly announced his retirement just ahead of his anniversary season. Meanwhile, Jay Leno, with his unmatched work ethic and consistent performance, rose from leader of the new generation of stand-up comedians to frequent guest host of "The Tonight Show". And David Letterman, with wits and an innate and cultivated gift for entertaining, earned his way to hosting a late show that aired after Carson. In The Late Shift, Bill Carter details--and I mean details--the personalities and the drama, decision-making, and the consequences surrounding "The Tonight Show" hosting change of 1992.

Carter seems to respect Leno, but it's Letterman he admires as a talent. Leno comes off as a nice but also very repressed, complicated guy who excels at stand-up and had a pit bull for a manager. Letterman sounds like an under-appreciated star who's also stubborn, fickle, and plagued by self-doubt.

I mostly enjoyed The Late Shift, though the first half is better than the last. This story includes a lot of characters and the audit of who said and thought what can be exhausting.

Adult contemporary

Recently the New York Magazine article "Indie Grown-Ups: Are Wilco and Feist our adult contemporary music?" turned a critical eye on a few prominent indie rock artists, describing, for example, Feist's recent album as merely "gusty singsong melodies about finding clarity by the oceanside delivered over cozy acoustic arrangement". The author's larger point was this:

These acts, intentionally or not, have won; they’ve taken a lower-sales, lower-budget version of the type of trip Sting once took, from a post-punk upstart to an adult staple.

Later he indicts labels for having aided and abetted this trend, grooming innocuous sounds from the likes of Feist, Wilco, Radiohead, and Bon Iver to create a new generation's equivalent of adult contemporary.

Although written in response to a different New York Magazine article, The AV Club piece "What makes music boring?" reinterprets this critique by distilling and elaborating on the "cozy" quality described above, this time using the language of boredom:

In a sense, all music is boring. The same, however, can’t be said about “boring” music. “Boring” is its own genre. It is a code word that instantly conjures artists with clearly definable attributes. “Boring” music is slow to mid-tempo, mellow, melodic, pretty in a melancholy way, catchy, poppy, and rooted in traditional forms. It is popular (or popular-ish). It is tasteful, well-played, and meticulously produced. (Or it might sound like it was recorded in somebody’s bedroom under the influence of weed and Sega Genesis.) It is “easy to like”—or more specifically, “easy for white people to like” (“white people” being a sub-group of white people singled out by other white people). It is critically acclaimed (perhaps the most critically acclaimed music there is), and yet music critics relish taking “boring” musical artists down a peg more than any other kind of artist.

This critique to me seems easy to argue, which is to say I don't disagree. But it just isn't particularly insightful. Both articles essentially make this analogy:

• Adult Contemporary is to pop music genres as Feist is to indie music.

This analogy extends easily:

• Adult Contemporary is to pop music genres as Poison is to glam metal/hard rock.

It can even extend to other discussions:

• Adult Contemporary is to pop music genres as scones are to sweets.

And the articles aren't more controversial because they take on indie music--indie music has no exclusive claim to coolness. My comment on glam metal and scones means more. It took more imagination.