Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (6117)	5/6/2003 12:43:21 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 7720

"If those shows had just depicted the ideal people were supposed to follow, they wouldn't have been funny." Your focus is a bit narrow. The word, "just" is innapropriate for what was happening. The shows were intended to entertain. They presenting the norm model and depicted a weekly dramma usually with humor. The fathers neo listed were usually the "straight men" for whatever the humor element was. Poor beav' couldn't hit a baseball well? What does everybody in the family do to deal with this deviency from the norm? Very different than the trend toward sitcom humor of the 60s and 70s ...and now (sheesh, that forum is way past its prime). They are all intended to present information, with a message in reference to some model or other. The fifties shows on Neos list were much more inclined to make fun of the deviency from the norm where as 60s and beyond were more likely to make fun of the normative model.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (6117)	5/6/2003 12:53:45 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 7720

"I can't think of a single adult I knew who considered those as ideals or role models or the ideal." People (especially men) are not likely to walk around saying, "oooh, Steven Douglas is my idol." So, one has to be observant. People watch the shows observe and learn and reflect to some extent or another what has been modeled for them. That happened in the 50s. When the modeling no longer applies the observers diss the model as in the 60s, and now. In the eighties I was teaching a class to high schoolers (mostly boys). They denied that the media had any impact on their outlook in life. I noticed that many of them wanted to be Top Gun fighter pilots when they grew up. Cigarette adds had just been banned from tv and suddenly the number of them who started chewing tobacco skyrocketed. Adds for smokeless tobacco were all over the place. Paul Hogan was on tv a lot representing Australian tourism. Several of them were Aussie enthusiasts. All of the boys, down to the last one argued without flinching, even for a moment, that these behaviours had always been part of their personality, and that the tv had nothing to do with that. kinda reminds me of you...

To: The Philosopher who wrote (6117)	5/6/2003 1:04:05 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 7720

"And those shows were NOT comedies. Yes, Westerns WERE intended as the 20th century equivalent of medieval morality plays." They were intended to entertain, just the same. There is no such thing as Bonanza land. It was a serious show (usually) about struggling to survive in an honorable way. The shows neocon mentioned had a similar goal. The families wanted to resolve the weekly crisis embued with some humor, and almost always had a happy and honorable ending. Donna Reed, June Cleaver etc were just as much role modeling as the men on neocon's list btw. They have recieved the same kind of dissing since. But we all admired them at the time.