Watch one of the three 1980s television episodes linked below and write 400 words on the representations of class within Roseanne, LA Law, or COPS. This post will count as two blog posts.
LA LAW, s.1, ep.1
Roseanne, s.1, ep. 1
COPS, pilot (please watch all of the parts on youtube)
In Roseanne, they focused mainly on what it was like to be a middle class, working family. Similar to the types of family television shows we see today. We see the husband and wife, with their three children.
In this episode, we see both parents working and it looks as if they both work in a blue collar job. Like most stereotypical families, the mother is responsible for what happens in the home, as well as dealing with the affairs of the children. Meanwhile, the husband is in charge of fixing up the home, but is portrayed as doing nothing. He almost seems as if he is another one that the wife has to take care of. Roseanne even stated, "I'll do everything, like I always do."
We also see money being a very important factor in how they live their life. They seem to have enough to live comfortably but leaving work early to go to a conference with the teacher takes cuts in on her pay. However, their home looks nice but lived in and they struggle with the normal maintenance issues. What is interesting, though, is that the husband is skilled to take care of this plumbing issue. They do not need to call a plumber because he has the basic home-care skills.
Roseanne's schedule is highly centered around her kids. She seems to be the one to do everything for them. However, their kids seem like the typical rowdy, talkbackers that are still dependent on their mother. Even in conversation with her husband, Roseanne is able to take respond to her children, in what seems like a humorous way. And in the end, when their daughter injures herself, they prove to be parents capable of taking care of their children. They may be "abnormal" but what does that really mean today? I mean, their "whole family barks."
After all is said and done, beyond the arguing, Roseanne and her husband love each other. They have a humorous relationship and just like other television shows, sex has no longer become a taboo subject and they end the episode with a comical statement, "Let's do it!"
Roseanne is a calm, levelheaded, sarcastic, forthwith, working class domestic core. Her character presents the argument that being the unrecognized familial responsibility of the housewife warrants an arrogance that comes across as masculine, exposing the docile passivity expected in femininity. Roseanne holds no hesitation toward reminding her family that she has been placed at the bottom of their consideration, and by recognizing her as the domestic linchpin, gains power. But this could be said for upper and working class families alike. Roseanne narrates the entropy and chaos of working class life. Adversity such as DIY fix-ups, cheap supplies breaking, hourly wages, and contract employment sum up an absurd world, one so hectic and disenfranchising that laughter is a necessity.
There are several uppity yuppie characters in the pilot - the schoolteacher especially, who is inches away from denying Roseanne for a squash match. Her jargon and neurotic analysis describe the boredom and fidgety thinking of the upper class, and seems quite trivial against the realities of being a working class mom. The conversation draws a stark class division. Roseanne speaks frankly, not pedantically, because she holds the philosophy that the smart choice is to navigate through the insanity of everyday living, not to inject it into oneself. The workplace and the classroom are both ostensibly extensions of the family. Roseanne’s manager, George Clooney (also WOAH) tells Roseanne that the workplace is like a team, but they don’t care about her struggles. Her family is her problem. The teacher argues that the family in the problem, and, if Roseanne is the center of the family, then she is the problem. Roseanne knows that when people are juggling their social weights and need to drop one, that the mom is the first to go. The masculine public sphere is considered more appealing than the feminine private one. John Goodman would rather “make connections” and fraternize in the outside world to help his family than help directly by fixing the sink. Roseanne does considerably more than her husband and they both know it’ s because he can’t do what she does. Men aren’t raised to take on house chores, and take great pride when they do any. The two work as a couple, because they’re both masculine, and what balances better than two people yelling at each other. The program shows that working class life is such a meteorite shower that there is no time being powerless under the burden of femininity. If a household is to survive, it needs two strong pillars. In fact, the weakness in the house I the pilot is the dad’s laziness and arrogance. The show portrays male arrogance as often simply satisfaction with placement on the patriarchal zenith, while female arrogance is in fact deserved. The show displays social agency and power is merit-based, not inherent in gender. Working class living: harder family life plus misogyny to create harder life for women, deserves our infinite thanks.
Let me first say that this is not what I thought COPS was like. I was under the impression that an episode of COPS was really just a series of busts, police stops, and nothing more. Therefore I was quite surprised to discover the real structure of the show, which more often than not deviates from showing actual police action to mediate, develop narrative and provide background on the live’s of the cops they are following. The show is clearly framed around the figure of the “cops” and as such takes on a bigger task than just showing the “nitty-gritty” police work. Rather, the show draws a pretty clear line between the setting of the nitty-gritty police work and the home lives of these cops. This is primarily where class is policed by the structure of the show. Every cop profiled in the show has, in their respective home spaces, the option of removing themselves from the struggles of the impoverished and lower class. In this way, the show very tangibly represents social mobility. The cops deal, on a daily basis, with the crime of the urban, lower/working class setting; the cops work in this setting and arguably see some of its dingiest, most crime-ridden areas. Yet, at the end of the day, they can remove themselves from the reality that their job surrounds them by; these cops are shown curling up with their wives by the fire, or otherwise experiencing domestic spaces in a way that is not only distinctly middle/upper class, but also out of reach for those victims of the cop’s authority. However, at the same time that it illustrates a clear class division between the cops and those they’re arresting, COPS gives rise to problematic logics about the police’s position in society and grants them supreme moral authority, in a way. First of all, the police (except for the initial, Latino-accented policeman) are all white and though the demographic of those being investigated is generally mixed- there is a racialized logic at play that everyone is aware of. Whether it’s the patrolman who tells the “white boys” he keeps stopping that they “don’t belong here” or just the general assumption of guilt and harsher tone taken towards minority criminals, the show seems to tacitly accept stereotypes about racialized criminality. That being said, the overwhelming feeling is a classicized guilt. From the spectatorial position, the cop is situated as the purveyor of law, of truth, and though the show tries to “humanize” them, it also really only shows them succeeding. The spectator is situated to believe that the cop is doing what is right and as a result it ignores the stories of the criminals. Often, when lower class people, struggling for the same position of social mobility as the cops possess, break the law, it was a law designed against them, to favor the socially mobile. No voice is given to the systematic oppression of lower class, often racialized, groups and as a result, the show problematically reinforces the middle/upper class as morally virtuous and correct, and unquestionably vilifies the lower class.
In the pilot episode of Roseanne, the topic of class can be recognized throughout the entire episode and makes itself present right away in the very first scene in the house. The kitchen is cluttered, appliances are out of date or not working, and the food that is being cooked for meals mostly comes from a can. This seem like a lifestyle choice, but in most cases it is true that lower class people have to buy canned food since it is cheaper than fresh food. Roseanne even tells her husband to save a coupon in the newspaper for detergent so she can save some money. Some dialogue in this first scene also gives some insight as to what class the family is in. One of the daughters brings up the topic of a food drive that her school “is doing for the poor.” Roseanne then responds to this by making the comment, “Tell them to bring the food over here.” In this instance, the audience knows that Roseanne is being sarcastic and comical as she usual is throughout the rest of the show. However, it is still known from this conversation that they really can not afford to give too much of their canned food to the poor because they need it for themselves.
An area of problem that presents itself throughout the episode is absence of enough time. Since Roseanne has to work at her factory job for eight hours a day this doesn’t leave much time for other daytime activities. When Roseanne’s daughter makes it known that someone needs to meet with her teacher, Roseanne first turns to her husband and asks if he can do it since he does not have a steady job. Since her husband is unavailable, Roseanne ends up having to take off work early and in turn her pay is docked for leaving before her shift is over. From the atmosphere of the factory and the comments that are made between Roseanne and her boss, it is implied that Roseanne does not make much money but that in her case every cent helps her family survive, especially since she is the only source of income.
As if taking off work was not strenuous enough for someone in the working class like Roseanne, but when she got to the school to meet with her daughter’s teacher, the teacher asked if they could reschedule the meeting for a different day. Roseanne made it very clear to the teacher that she had taken off work today and that she needed to have the meeting happen right then. The teacher unwillingly agreed to continue with the meeting but during it remarks about Roseanne’s parenting abilities were brought into question. Since Roseanne works eight hours a day, and then had to come home and take care of the house and three kids, she did not have much time to spend time with each child individually. The teacher acts uppity about the subject and has to “dumb down” the conversation that she is having because she sees herself as being a member of a higher class than Roseanne and her family.
As Roseanne gets home from the meeting she and her husband begin to fight from the frustration of having so many things to fix and take care of yet neither of them having enough time or money to do them. One of their daughters breaks up the fight by cutting her finger and the two parents work together to calm her down and clean her up. The fighting ceases and there is a realization that they work better as a team then against each other and that is how they have to survive in the working class.
The subject of class is weaved throughout the pilot episode of Roseanne. Within the first two minutes of the episode, their socioeconomic status is brought up. Becky is looking through the shelves to find food to donate for her school’s food drive “for poor people,” Roseanne replies back to her daughter saying, “tell them they can drive some of that food over here.” Through this sarcastic, humorous comment, the show is able to establish the financial situation of the family. In addition to that, one of the opening problems presented in the episode is the broken sink. This suggests that the family cannot afford to purchase new appliances. Another example is when Dan is reading the newspaper, Roseanne tells him to save her the coupon, suggesting that saving money is a necessity for the family. Also in this opening scene Roseanne discusses how she needs to take an hour off of work and lose an hours pay in order to do stuff for the kids. This issue is extremely relatable for working class families where both parents have jobs outside of the home. Within the opening scene of the first episode, there is already multiple comments on class and their socioeconomic status.
In the next scene takes place at Roseanne’s job. She works at a hand on job in a factory, which can be interpreted as a lower class occupation. In this scene she begs her boss to let her off of work for an hour to talk to her daughter’s teacher. After a couple minutes of back and forth he says he will give her a half an hour and it is coming out of her paycheck. She replies to his response under her breath, “there goes the Porsche.” Roseanne continuously makes sarcastic remarks about her financial situation.
At the meeting with her daughter’s teacher there is an obvious juxtaposition between the two characters. The teacher comments on the fact that Roseanne is late, which Roseanne defends herself in saying that she had to leave work and lose pay to get there. She also suggests that some of her daughter’s problems has to do with the fact that Roseanne does not spend enough time with her, to which Roseanne replies, “I have three kids and I work so I don't have any time.” Due to the fact that the teacher views herself as above Roseanne, she talks down to her and uses a complicated vocabulary to emphasize the difference.
Throughout the episode it is made clear that Roseanne carries the weight of the family on her shoulders. She is balancing between providing for her family financially and emotionally. The topic of money and jobs is brought up numerous times between Roseanne and Dan. Though through their financial struggles and sarcastic humor, the Connor family appears to be extremely loving and caring which at the end of the day is what truly matters.
Roseanne depicts working class life and the struggles that come with living in the middle to poorly lower-middle class. The family isn't lacking in needs but still has struggles that emphasize they don't have much to spare. This can be seen when Roseanne only allows her daughter to take two cans for her schools food drive, there's a surplus but not much. The family's food is mostly canned and prepackaged. There are comments about maintaining the upkeep of the house as well, probably meaning professional services are saved for emergencies.
A major aspect of blue-collar, working class life tat Roseanne captures was the difficulty of handling the multiple demands on the family, in particular on Roseanne. Roseanne has to juggle working at her job and taking care of her family. Roseanne takes time off work to make sure her children are taken care of; she goes to class meetings for one and exchanges a backpack for another all while taking a pay cut for leaving work half an hour early.
There is condescension from upper class or higher position characters towards Roseanne. her boss, played by George Clooney, forces her to take a pay cut all while cutting down the time she leaves, probably in the name of efficiency. Her daughter's teacher, who'd prefer to play squash than go through the meeting that she arranged. She implies that Roseanne's family has "a problem at home." She is ignorant to the struggles Roseanne goes through as Roseanne says "I have three kids and I work so I have no free time."
Roseanne's husband Dan also has struggles of working in construction. Currently waiting for a contract Dan doesn't do much around the house, much to Roseanne's disappointment. Dan tries to make contacts but struggles to do so. This shows the shift in traditional roles in the home, as of the pilot Roseanne is the primary breadwinner for the family while taking care of most of the family issues. Dan insists on cleaning the sink because it's a man's job but still struggles for commitment.
The general dysfunction of the family though doesn't play in a negative light. The family's middle class struggles possibly bring them closer together. Roseanne and Dan are able to work out their differences in order to take care of their children. At the beginning of the episode Dan asks Roseanne, "Are you ever sorry we got married?", Roseanne responds "Every second of my life." Dan tries to play along but can't deny his love for Roseanne and this echoes in the final scene. The family has struggles but they aren't beyond fixing.
The pilot of “Roseanne” showcases a family that is a fair representation of the American middle class of the 1980s. The family lives in a nice home and always has food on the table. Both Roseanne and Dan work blue-collar jobs to provide for their three kids, they live in a standard middle class American home. Roseanne is clearly in charge of the household; she cooks, cleans, and watches over the children (and her husband). She is always nagging Dan to fix the sink, rather than hiring someone to come fix it (something an upper class family would do). The Conner family is clearly not rolling in money, but they have enough to get by and support three kids. They have enough space and appliances to live, but do not have the luxury of paying to replace out-of-date material items.
It was very interesting to me to see how negative Roseanne was towards her children. She still loves and cares about them, but a majority of the jokes in the show were negatively directed towards her children. I imagine the show was written this way to relate to the audience who were probably similar to the Conners, middle class American parents. Even though I am not a “middle class American parent” I enjoyed Roseanne’s sarcastic humor, but a bit excessive and almost annoying.
While watching this show, I couldn’t help but to relate it to the screening we watched of “Good Times.” In “Good Times” the Evans family is living in poverty in the Chicago projects. Even though they don’t have much and have to count pennies to pay their rent, they still put each other as their top priority. They work together to put a roof over their heads, and it seems to bring them closer together. In “Roseanne” the Conner family is not in as much of a financial struggle and the family members are a lot more negative towards each other. One of Roseanne’s daughters complains about having a blue backpack, when the daughter in “Good Times” would probably be happy just to have a new backpack. The children tease each other and Roseanne is always complaining about something. At the end of the day both families love each other, but the issues that the Evans have to face makes them seem more appreciative for what they have.
Roseanne is explicit in its class discourse without, at least in this first episode, caving to the temptation of being hyperbolic. I saw this hyperbolic impulse in the situation of the episode we watched of Good Times: an eviction notice threatens to leave the Evans without a home and the family tries desperately to come up with schemes to gather the funds to pay off their debt. Obviously this is a situation that happens to real people, but because the eviction situation is so suspenseful and because it seems to function as the key term in a narrative the situation transcends, in my mind, its real world correlate and becomes first and foremost a piece of a formula that I am supposed to decode. What concerns me most about this machination is the sense of resolution that it makes possible. If I take the show to be ABOUT poverty and I take its scenarios and characters to be represent a condition that exists in the world, I believe the conclusion that scenario comes to be equally to that original condition. What I find troubling then is that that episode we watched of Good Times engages the viewer into feeling concern for the condition of a “certain people” through a suspenseful narrative and then releases the audience from the anxiety once the plot is resolved. By structuring the plot as a result of the family’s condition, the plot’s resolution constitutes in my mind the dissolution of those conditions. Another kind of engagement seems to be solicited by Roseanne. Rather than drive me down a narrative, Roseanne presents snippets of a life whose characteristics I am forced to examine in the absence of an overarching plot. Through an impulse to view shows somewhat narcissisticly, my response when presented with characteristics that are foreign to me – and Roseanne and her world are quite unlike my own – I am prompted to compare them to myself and my own world. And the show lends itself well to this kind of a reading: every scene in the pilot seems to be an exposition of the environments that Roseanne passes through. The opening scene introduces the conditions of her home, the following two scenes introduce the conditions of her work, and the scene after that introduces a setting (her daughter’s elementary school) that exists outside the previous two. The scenes are related narratively by a plot: Roseanne finds out at breakfast she has to visit with her daughter’s History teacher which necessitates her requesting an hour off of work. But this plot doesn’t seem to be the thing that deploys these scenes in an effort to complete itself. Moments that are related to the above mentioned plot take up relatively little screen time in comparison to the unrelated quips and gripes that proliferate each scene. It’s as if the scenes are containers for the jokes that take place in them; the scenes could be arranged in any order, the central plot can be pulled out, and what is remarkable about them will remain intact.
The relationship between environments becomes much more of a focus, each scene that explores the various environment invites a comparison between them. The state of Roseanne’s home is explained by the type of work she does and her work and home gives her a set of interests that stand in contrast to those of the school teacher and the privileged institution she represents. To fully appreciate the differences in environment requires observing the elements that exist within them: the state of the appliances, the economy of the attire, and the attitudes implied by discourses that transpire all illustrate what these places are like and how they function. Also brought into focus is the way Roseanne navigates each these environments, her attitudes finding explanations within their counterparts: her begrudging attitude at home reflects the time constraint work imposes on her, the cynical tone of her sexist discourse at work reflects the frustrations she has at home, and her sardonic inflection with the liberal interventionist school teacher reflect the priorities demanded of a woman in Roseanne’s position. If Roseanne is “a show about poverty” it addresses poverty by survey rather than allegory and I think, unlike an allegory which is designed to come to a moral head, this kind of survey approach has the potential to prolong engagement with the heterogeneous motifs because each motif relates to poverty and requires a combination of individuated attention and cross-comparison. This is in contrast to our episode of Good Times in which the motifs represent poverty but are related according to the demands of a narrative baseline.
The pilot episode of Roseanne depicts the life of a working class family very realistically, with the episode often commenting on the tightness of money and the stress of being a working parent without seeming exaggerated or fake. Within the first few minutes, the eldest daughter attempts to take cans for a food drive and Roseanne quips “have the them drive some of that food over here,” and then allows her daughter to take two cans only. This small joke buried within the chaos of the breakfast scene sets the tone for the rest of the episode--many jokes are made at the expense of the family’s money troubles, but at no point in the episode does anyone in the family seem hopeless. There are many other quick throw away lines about the family’s lack of money and leisure time due to their working class status throughout the episode. At one point, Roseanne jokes “there goes the porsche” when her boss (IS THAT GEORGE CLOONEY???) says he would dock a half hour of her pay. Multiple other comments in that same vein continue as the plot moves forward. The portrayal of Roseanne and Dan as working parents is also an important aspect of Roseanne’s depiction of the working class. Dan works construction and clearly has difficulty finding work, which contributes to the household's stress and money issues. Roseanne’s job as an employee on the line at a factory is not shown for too long on screen, but seems monotonous and probably energy-sapping. She then must go home to her three children and take care of them. This aspect of being a working parent is extremely true to life, and also part the central fight between Dan and Roseanne when Roseanne complains she works for eight hours and then comes home and has to work for eight more for her children and husband. I think this single aspect of the working class is the best portrayed and the most true to life in Roseanne. Three children are a full time job, and working on top of that in order to support a family is exhausting. The short scene featuring the history teacher was funny and used to offer a contrast between Roseanne and someone clearly of a higher class. Roseanne, although she comes off as somewhat rough next to the put together teacher, clearly wins the audience’s sympathy in the scene. The teacher’s lack of respect for others’ time (after Roseanne had to leave work and lose pay to be there), and insistence that she needed to go play squash made her into a ridiculous caricature against Roseanne’s more realistic portrayal of a working class parent.
The 1980s saw the rise sitcoms centering around lower-middle class and middle class families in working class environments, such as Roseanne, Cheers, Cops. Roseanne focused on the realities of living as a lower middle class family, with a factory job, unreliable work, three children and a house that needs constant work. Their family life is not glamorized at all, and tensions about financies and about relationships are focused on, rather than ignored.
In Season One, Episode 1 of Roseanne, the episode focuses on the family as a whole and issues that continue to be present throughout the series, such as strapping finances, a tense but loving relationship, unsupervised (but loved) children, and the general tone that Roseanne brings to the scene. The series focuses on a loving but “classless” family (Dan doesn’t mind warm beer) and their struggles to make a good life through a factory job and unreliable pay. Her language, grammar, and general talking-that-kind-of-sounds-like-yelling reminds viewers that she is supposed to be working class, practical, uneducated and not classy, but lovable nonetheless. With this tone, Roseanne appealed to all audiences because of her humor and wit and her relatability.
There are many signs of how Roseanne’s family is set apart by class in this pilot episode. To begin, Roseanne’s family, a husband and three kids, is hectic, baudy/loud, and rude, which are very different dynamics from the family dynamics we get from sitcoms such as Maude or Good Times. There is a casualness that is more present in this lower middle class depiction of the family that is absent in more formal shows (this may simply be the differences in decade in which the shows were made). However, we see in the scene where Roseanne visits with her youngest daughter’s history teacher in a slightly run-down public school classroom that the teacher looks down on Roseanne, blaming her home for her daughter’s behavior. Additionally, the oldest daughter’s backpack breaks a day after buying it, indicating its cheapness, and she is forced to bring her books in a garbage bag.
This pilot episode also touches on the intersection of gender roles and class in Roseanne’s world. Roseanne is the mother, and “lady of the house,” expected to cook, clean, and care for the kids, while also holding a full-time job at a local plastics factory. Dan, her husband, has unreliable work and doesn’t seem to carry his weight in the home. Roseanne jokes about it, but also makes it clear that this is not how it should be, asking him to take on more responsibility or do more for the kids. Her role is centered around their children despite her busy schedule, and she willingly takes on the task of making dinner, buying beer, and meeting with their teachers. Roseanne and Dan’s relationship is tense, but it is a loving partnership, which is made clear through Roseanne’s question, “Who would you have married if you didn’t marry me?” to which is says, “No one.”
Roseanne was a sitcom that was launched in the late 1980s. The show depicts the everyday life of the working class people, especially the working class women who had to solve the problems dealing with their factory work and house chores. The main female character, Roseanne, subverts the stereotypes of being a mother or a wife on the screen, since she was neither soft while taking care of her children like the traditional mothers do, nor was she feminine and physically attractive to men. She was loud, active, and had a strong personality, opposed to the portrayals of the female characters on the screen. However, Roseanne played an important and complex role of a working mother in the working class society where she had to look after her husband and children as well as working in the factory to support her family financially. The show focuses on the everyday situations encountered by the Conners. Since Roseanne’s husband Dan was not able to find a job, she had to take on the responsibility of supporting the family, making herself a working mother. The role of Roseanne was quite similar with that of Martha in the television sitcom, Mama. Like Roseanne, Martha also lacked the financial support from her family and had to complete the trivial housework, take care of her rebellious children and helpless husband. Roseanne portrayed an ordinary working class family in the American society while Mama centered on the life of an immigrant family. However, Roseanne was depicted as a more complex character than Martha due to her multirole of being a mother and a female worker. Even though Roseanne was not a traditionally considerate mother or an attractive female character, she appealed to the audience because she was powerful, independent, and sacrificed herself to support her family. The representation of Roseanne in this show presented a nice image of working class women during the period.
Season 1 episode 1 of Roseanne depicts a middle class family who has money issues despite having a strong family structure and beautiful house. The episode features Roseanne who has been married to her husband for 15 years. They are both working full time jobs but are constantly arguing about their contributions to the households. Roseanne ridicules her husband for not doing enough around the house. Roseanne works full time, cooks for the family, shows up to parent-teacher meetings, and makes coffee every morning. These internal family problems cause Roseanne to constantly have to take time off of work (lose money) and her children to have behavioral problems at school and in the household. Despite all of these problems Roseanne remains happily married to her husband and is able to have coffee for breakfast everyday. An instance that was particularly humorous during the episode is the meeting between Roseanne and her daughter’s teacher. The teacher remarks that Roseanne’s daughter’s barking (which she does out of boredom) is considered abnormal in the classroom setting to which Roseanne responds that her whole family barks. This shows that Roseanne heavily supports the choices that her family makes and is able to selflessly set aside her time in order to meet her family’s needs (even on short notice!). This stable family remains intact after all of the dynamic problems that surround the household. It is usually the support characters (such as the teacher and Roseanne’s advisor) that usually has to accommodate for Roseanne’s personal issues. This show runs parallel to the family structure in the Simpsons. Both Homer from the Simpsons and Roseanne’s husband are depicted as lazy and alcohol-loving despite meaning well. Both Marge from the Simpsons and Roseanne are depicted as level-headed and are often the moral voice for the family. Each family has three kids that often cause problems and represent a typical middle class family household. Roseanne has really showed the evolution of the family since the post-war era of the 1950s. Although Roseanne is still represented as the person who takes care of the household she works a stable job full time. Roseanne has a very commanding voice in family decisions and often jokingly points at getting rid of her kids/husband. She played a big part in reforming the way her husband presents himself, noting that men do not just become the way her husband is. Men have to be made by a woman.
In Roseanne, they focused mainly on what it was like to be a middle class, working family. Similar to the types of family television shows we see today. We see the husband and wife, with their three children.
ReplyDeleteIn this episode, we see both parents working and it looks as if they both work in a blue collar job. Like most stereotypical families, the mother is responsible for what happens in the home, as well as dealing with the affairs of the children. Meanwhile, the husband is in charge of fixing up the home, but is portrayed as doing nothing. He almost seems as if he is another one that the wife has to take care of. Roseanne even stated, "I'll do everything, like I always do."
We also see money being a very important factor in how they live their life. They seem to have enough to live comfortably but leaving work early to go to a conference with the teacher takes cuts in on her pay. However, their home looks nice but lived in and they struggle with the normal maintenance issues. What is interesting, though, is that the husband is skilled to take care of this plumbing issue. They do not need to call a plumber because he has the basic home-care skills.
Roseanne's schedule is highly centered around her kids. She seems to be the one to do everything for them. However, their kids seem like the typical rowdy, talkbackers that are still dependent on their mother. Even in conversation with her husband, Roseanne is able to take respond to her children, in what seems like a humorous way. And in the end, when their daughter injures herself, they prove to be parents capable of taking care of their children. They may be "abnormal" but what does that really mean today? I mean, their "whole family barks."
After all is said and done, beyond the arguing, Roseanne and her husband love each other. They have a humorous relationship and just like other television shows, sex has no longer become a taboo subject and they end the episode with a comical statement, "Let's do it!"
Roseanne is a calm, levelheaded, sarcastic, forthwith, working class domestic core. Her character presents the argument that being the unrecognized familial responsibility of the housewife warrants an arrogance that comes across as masculine, exposing the docile passivity expected in femininity. Roseanne holds no hesitation toward reminding her family that she has been placed at the bottom of their consideration, and by recognizing her as the domestic linchpin, gains power. But this could be said for upper and working class families alike. Roseanne narrates the entropy and chaos of working class life. Adversity such as DIY fix-ups, cheap supplies breaking, hourly wages, and contract employment sum up an absurd world, one so hectic and disenfranchising that laughter is a necessity.
ReplyDeleteThere are several uppity yuppie characters in the pilot - the schoolteacher especially, who is inches away from denying Roseanne for a squash match. Her jargon and neurotic analysis describe the boredom and fidgety thinking of the upper class, and seems quite trivial against the realities of being a working class mom. The conversation draws a stark class division. Roseanne speaks frankly, not pedantically, because she holds the philosophy that the smart choice is to navigate through the insanity of everyday living, not to inject it into oneself. The workplace and the classroom are both ostensibly extensions of the family. Roseanne’s manager, George Clooney (also WOAH) tells Roseanne that the workplace is like a team, but they don’t care about her struggles. Her family is her problem. The teacher argues that the family in the problem, and, if Roseanne is the center of the family, then she is the problem. Roseanne knows that when people are juggling their social weights and need to drop one, that the mom is the first to go. The masculine public sphere is considered more appealing than the feminine private one. John Goodman would rather “make connections” and fraternize in the outside world to help his family than help directly by fixing the sink. Roseanne does considerably more than her husband and they both know it’ s because he can’t do what she does. Men aren’t raised to take on house chores, and take great pride when they do any. The two work as a couple, because they’re both masculine, and what balances better than two people yelling at each other. The program shows that working class life is such a meteorite shower that there is no time being powerless under the burden of femininity. If a household is to survive, it needs two strong pillars. In fact, the weakness in the house I the pilot is the dad’s laziness and arrogance. The show portrays male arrogance as often simply satisfaction with placement on the patriarchal zenith, while female arrogance is in fact deserved. The show displays social agency and power is merit-based, not inherent in gender. Working class living: harder family life plus misogyny to create harder life for women, deserves our infinite thanks.
Let me first say that this is not what I thought COPS was like. I was under the impression that an episode of COPS was really just a series of busts, police stops, and nothing more. Therefore I was quite surprised to discover the real structure of the show, which more often than not deviates from showing actual police action to mediate, develop narrative and provide background on the live’s of the cops they are following.
ReplyDeleteThe show is clearly framed around the figure of the “cops” and as such takes on a bigger task than just showing the “nitty-gritty” police work. Rather, the show draws a pretty clear line between the setting of the nitty-gritty police work and the home lives of these cops. This is primarily where class is policed by the structure of the show. Every cop profiled in the show has, in their respective home spaces, the option of removing themselves from the struggles of the impoverished and lower class. In this way, the show very tangibly represents social mobility. The cops deal, on a daily basis, with the crime of the urban, lower/working class setting; the cops work in this setting and arguably see some of its dingiest, most crime-ridden areas. Yet, at the end of the day, they can remove themselves from the reality that their job surrounds them by; these cops are shown curling up with their wives by the fire, or otherwise experiencing domestic spaces in a way that is not only distinctly middle/upper class, but also out of reach for those victims of the cop’s authority.
However, at the same time that it illustrates a clear class division between the cops and those they’re arresting, COPS gives rise to problematic logics about the police’s position in society and grants them supreme moral authority, in a way. First of all, the police (except for the initial, Latino-accented policeman) are all white and though the demographic of those being investigated is generally mixed- there is a racialized logic at play that everyone is aware of. Whether it’s the patrolman who tells the “white boys” he keeps stopping that they “don’t belong here” or just the general assumption of guilt and harsher tone taken towards minority criminals, the show seems to tacitly accept stereotypes about racialized criminality. That being said, the overwhelming feeling is a classicized guilt. From the spectatorial position, the cop is situated as the purveyor of law, of truth, and though the show tries to “humanize” them, it also really only shows them succeeding. The spectator is situated to believe that the cop is doing what is right and as a result it ignores the stories of the criminals. Often, when lower class people, struggling for the same position of social mobility as the cops possess, break the law, it was a law designed against them, to favor the socially mobile. No voice is given to the systematic oppression of lower class, often racialized, groups and as a result, the show problematically reinforces the middle/upper class as morally virtuous and correct, and unquestionably vilifies the lower class.
In the pilot episode of Roseanne, the topic of class can be recognized throughout the entire episode and makes itself present right away in the very first scene in the house. The kitchen is cluttered, appliances are out of date or not working, and the food that is being cooked for meals mostly comes from a can. This seem like a lifestyle choice, but in most cases it is true that lower class people have to buy canned food since it is cheaper than fresh food. Roseanne even tells her husband to save a coupon in the newspaper for detergent so she can save some money. Some dialogue in this first scene also gives some insight as to what class the family is in. One of the daughters brings up the topic of a food drive that her school “is doing for the poor.” Roseanne then responds to this by making the comment, “Tell them to bring the food over here.” In this instance, the audience knows that Roseanne is being sarcastic and comical as she usual is throughout the rest of the show. However, it is still known from this conversation that they really can not afford to give too much of their canned food to the poor because they need it for themselves.
ReplyDeleteAn area of problem that presents itself throughout the episode is absence of enough time. Since Roseanne has to work at her factory job for eight hours a day this doesn’t leave much time for other daytime activities. When Roseanne’s daughter makes it known that someone needs to meet with her teacher, Roseanne first turns to her husband and asks if he can do it since he does not have a steady job. Since her husband is unavailable, Roseanne ends up having to take off work early and in turn her pay is docked for leaving before her shift is over. From the atmosphere of the factory and the comments that are made between Roseanne and her boss, it is implied that Roseanne does not make much money but that in her case every cent helps her family survive, especially since she is the only source of income.
As if taking off work was not strenuous enough for someone in the working class like Roseanne, but when she got to the school to meet with her daughter’s teacher, the teacher asked if they could reschedule the meeting for a different day. Roseanne made it very clear to the teacher that she had taken off work today and that she needed to have the meeting happen right then. The teacher unwillingly agreed to continue with the meeting but during it remarks about Roseanne’s parenting abilities were brought into question. Since Roseanne works eight hours a day, and then had to come home and take care of the house and three kids, she did not have much time to spend time with each child individually. The teacher acts uppity about the subject and has to “dumb down” the conversation that she is having because she sees herself as being a member of a higher class than Roseanne and her family.
As Roseanne gets home from the meeting she and her husband begin to fight from the frustration of having so many things to fix and take care of yet neither of them having enough time or money to do them. One of their daughters breaks up the fight by cutting her finger and the two parents work together to calm her down and clean her up. The fighting ceases and there is a realization that they work better as a team then against each other and that is how they have to survive in the working class.
The subject of class is weaved throughout the pilot episode of Roseanne. Within the first two minutes of the episode, their socioeconomic status is brought up. Becky is looking through the shelves to find food to donate for her school’s food drive “for poor people,” Roseanne replies back to her daughter saying, “tell them they can drive some of that food over here.” Through this sarcastic, humorous comment, the show is able to establish the financial situation of the family. In addition to that, one of the opening problems presented in the episode is the broken sink. This suggests that the family cannot afford to purchase new appliances. Another example is when Dan is reading the newspaper, Roseanne tells him to save her the coupon, suggesting that saving money is a necessity for the family. Also in this opening scene Roseanne discusses how she needs to take an hour off of work and lose an hours pay in order to do stuff for the kids. This issue is extremely relatable for working class families where both parents have jobs outside of the home. Within the opening scene of the first episode, there is already multiple comments on class and their socioeconomic status.
ReplyDeleteIn the next scene takes place at Roseanne’s job. She works at a hand on job in a factory, which can be interpreted as a lower class occupation. In this scene she begs her boss to let her off of work for an hour to talk to her daughter’s teacher. After a couple minutes of back and forth he says he will give her a half an hour and it is coming out of her paycheck. She replies to his response under her breath, “there goes the Porsche.” Roseanne continuously makes sarcastic remarks about her financial situation.
At the meeting with her daughter’s teacher there is an obvious juxtaposition between the two characters. The teacher comments on the fact that Roseanne is late, which Roseanne defends herself in saying that she had to leave work and lose pay to get there. She also suggests that some of her daughter’s problems has to do with the fact that Roseanne does not spend enough time with her, to which Roseanne replies, “I have three kids and I work so I don't have any time.” Due to the fact that the teacher views herself as above Roseanne, she talks down to her and uses a complicated vocabulary to emphasize the difference.
Throughout the episode it is made clear that Roseanne carries the weight of the family on her shoulders. She is balancing between providing for her family financially and emotionally. The topic of money and jobs is brought up numerous times between Roseanne and Dan. Though through their financial struggles and sarcastic humor, the Connor family appears to be extremely loving and caring which at the end of the day is what truly matters.
Roseanne depicts working class life and the struggles that come with living in the middle to poorly lower-middle class. The family isn't lacking in needs but still has struggles that emphasize they don't have much to spare. This can be seen when Roseanne only allows her daughter to take two cans for her schools food drive, there's a surplus but not much. The family's food is mostly canned and prepackaged. There are comments about maintaining the upkeep of the house as well, probably meaning professional services are saved for emergencies.
ReplyDeleteA major aspect of blue-collar, working class life tat Roseanne captures was the difficulty of handling the multiple demands on the family, in particular on Roseanne. Roseanne has to juggle working at her job and taking care of her family. Roseanne takes time off work to make sure her children are taken care of; she goes to class meetings for one and exchanges a backpack for another all while taking a pay cut for leaving work half an hour early.
There is condescension from upper class or higher position characters towards Roseanne. her boss, played by George Clooney, forces her to take a pay cut all while cutting down the time she leaves, probably in the name of efficiency. Her daughter's teacher, who'd prefer to play squash than go through the meeting that she arranged. She implies that Roseanne's family has "a problem at home." She is ignorant to the struggles Roseanne goes through as Roseanne says "I have three kids and I work so I have no free time."
Roseanne's husband Dan also has struggles of working in construction. Currently waiting for a contract Dan doesn't do much around the house, much to Roseanne's disappointment. Dan tries to make contacts but struggles to do so. This shows the shift in traditional roles in the home, as of the pilot Roseanne is the primary breadwinner for the family while taking care of most of the family issues. Dan insists on cleaning the sink because it's a man's job but still struggles for commitment.
The general dysfunction of the family though doesn't play in a negative light. The family's middle class struggles possibly bring them closer together. Roseanne and Dan are able to work out their differences in order to take care of their children. At the beginning of the episode Dan asks Roseanne, "Are you ever sorry we got married?", Roseanne responds "Every second of my life." Dan tries to play along but can't deny his love for Roseanne and this echoes in the final scene. The family has struggles but they aren't beyond fixing.
The pilot of “Roseanne” showcases a family that is a fair representation of the American middle class of the 1980s. The family lives in a nice home and always has food on the table. Both Roseanne and Dan work blue-collar jobs to provide for their three kids, they live in a standard middle class American home. Roseanne is clearly in charge of the household; she cooks, cleans, and watches over the children (and her husband). She is always nagging Dan to fix the sink, rather than hiring someone to come fix it (something an upper class family would do). The Conner family is clearly not rolling in money, but they have enough to get by and support three kids. They have enough space and appliances to live, but do not have the luxury of paying to replace out-of-date material items.
ReplyDeleteIt was very interesting to me to see how negative Roseanne was towards her children. She still loves and cares about them, but a majority of the jokes in the show were negatively directed towards her children. I imagine the show was written this way to relate to the audience who were probably similar to the Conners, middle class American parents. Even though I am not a “middle class American parent” I enjoyed Roseanne’s sarcastic humor, but a bit excessive and almost annoying.
While watching this show, I couldn’t help but to relate it to the screening we watched of “Good Times.” In “Good Times” the Evans family is living in poverty in the Chicago projects. Even though they don’t have much and have to count pennies to pay their rent, they still put each other as their top priority. They work together to put a roof over their heads, and it seems to bring them closer together. In “Roseanne” the Conner family is not in as much of a financial struggle and the family members are a lot more negative towards each other. One of Roseanne’s daughters complains about having a blue backpack, when the daughter in “Good Times” would probably be happy just to have a new backpack. The children tease each other and Roseanne is always complaining about something. At the end of the day both families love each other, but the issues that the Evans have to face makes them seem more appreciative for what they have.
Roseanne is explicit in its class discourse without, at least in this first episode, caving to the temptation of being hyperbolic. I saw this hyperbolic impulse in the situation of the episode we watched of Good Times: an eviction notice threatens to leave the Evans without a home and the family tries desperately to come up with schemes to gather the funds to pay off their debt. Obviously this is a situation that happens to real people, but because the eviction situation is so suspenseful and because it seems to function as the key term in a narrative the situation transcends, in my mind, its real world correlate and becomes first and foremost a piece of a formula that I am supposed to decode. What concerns me most about this machination is the sense of resolution that it makes possible. If I take the show to be ABOUT poverty and I take its scenarios and characters to be represent a condition that exists in the world, I believe the conclusion that scenario comes to be equally to that original condition. What I find troubling then is that that episode we watched of Good Times engages the viewer into feeling concern for the condition of a “certain people” through a suspenseful narrative and then releases the audience from the anxiety once the plot is resolved. By structuring the plot as a result of the family’s condition, the plot’s resolution constitutes in my mind the dissolution of those conditions.
ReplyDeleteAnother kind of engagement seems to be solicited by Roseanne. Rather than drive me down a narrative, Roseanne presents snippets of a life whose characteristics I am forced to examine in the absence of an overarching plot. Through an impulse to view shows somewhat narcissisticly, my response when presented with characteristics that are foreign to me – and Roseanne and her world are quite unlike my own – I am prompted to compare them to myself and my own world. And the show lends itself well to this kind of a reading: every scene in the pilot seems to be an exposition of the environments that Roseanne passes through. The opening scene introduces the conditions of her home, the following two scenes introduce the conditions of her work, and the scene after that introduces a setting (her daughter’s elementary school) that exists outside the previous two. The scenes are related narratively by a plot: Roseanne finds out at breakfast she has to visit with her daughter’s History teacher which necessitates her requesting an hour off of work. But this plot doesn’t seem to be the thing that deploys these scenes in an effort to complete itself. Moments that are related to the above mentioned plot take up relatively little screen time in comparison to the unrelated quips and gripes that proliferate each scene. It’s as if the scenes are containers for the jokes that take place in them; the scenes could be arranged in any order, the central plot can be pulled out, and what is remarkable about them will remain intact.
The relationship between environments becomes much more of a focus, each scene that explores the various environment invites a comparison between them. The state of Roseanne’s home is explained by the type of work she does and her work and home gives her a set of interests that stand in contrast to those of the school teacher and the privileged institution she represents. To fully appreciate the differences in environment requires observing the elements that exist within them: the state of the appliances, the economy of the attire, and the attitudes implied by discourses that transpire all illustrate what these places are like and how they function.
ReplyDeleteAlso brought into focus is the way Roseanne navigates each these environments, her attitudes finding explanations within their counterparts: her begrudging attitude at home reflects the time constraint work imposes on her, the cynical tone of her sexist discourse at work reflects the frustrations she has at home, and her sardonic inflection with the liberal interventionist school teacher reflect the priorities demanded of a woman in Roseanne’s position.
If Roseanne is “a show about poverty” it addresses poverty by survey rather than allegory and I think, unlike an allegory which is designed to come to a moral head, this kind of survey approach has the potential to prolong engagement with the heterogeneous motifs because each motif relates to poverty and requires a combination of individuated attention and cross-comparison. This is in contrast to our episode of Good Times in which the motifs represent poverty but are related according to the demands of a narrative baseline.
The pilot episode of Roseanne depicts the life of a working class family very realistically, with the episode often commenting on the tightness of money and the stress of being a working parent without seeming exaggerated or fake. Within the first few minutes, the eldest daughter attempts to take cans for a food drive and Roseanne quips “have the them drive some of that food over here,” and then allows her daughter to take two cans only. This small joke buried within the chaos of the breakfast scene sets the tone for the rest of the episode--many jokes are made at the expense of the family’s money troubles, but at no point in the episode does anyone in the family seem hopeless.
ReplyDeleteThere are many other quick throw away lines about the family’s lack of money and leisure time due to their working class status throughout the episode. At one point, Roseanne jokes “there goes the porsche” when her boss (IS THAT GEORGE CLOONEY???) says he would dock a half hour of her pay. Multiple other comments in that same vein continue as the plot moves forward.
The portrayal of Roseanne and Dan as working parents is also an important aspect of Roseanne’s depiction of the working class. Dan works construction and clearly has difficulty finding work, which contributes to the household's stress and money issues. Roseanne’s job as an employee on the line at a factory is not shown for too long on screen, but seems monotonous and probably energy-sapping. She then must go home to her three children and take care of them. This aspect of being a working parent is extremely true to life, and also part the central fight between Dan and Roseanne when Roseanne complains she works for eight hours and then comes home and has to work for eight more for her children and husband. I think this single aspect of the working class is the best portrayed and the most true to life in Roseanne. Three children are a full time job, and working on top of that in order to support a family is exhausting.
The short scene featuring the history teacher was funny and used to offer a contrast between Roseanne and someone clearly of a higher class. Roseanne, although she comes off as somewhat rough next to the put together teacher, clearly wins the audience’s sympathy in the scene. The teacher’s lack of respect for others’ time (after Roseanne had to leave work and lose pay to be there), and insistence that she needed to go play squash made her into a ridiculous caricature against Roseanne’s more realistic portrayal of a working class parent.
The 1980s saw the rise sitcoms centering around lower-middle class and middle class families in working class environments, such as Roseanne, Cheers, Cops. Roseanne focused on the realities of living as a lower middle class family, with a factory job, unreliable work, three children and a house that needs constant work. Their family life is not glamorized at all, and tensions about financies and about relationships are focused on, rather than ignored.
ReplyDeleteIn Season One, Episode 1 of Roseanne, the episode focuses on the family as a whole and issues that continue to be present throughout the series, such as strapping finances, a tense but loving relationship, unsupervised (but loved) children, and the general tone that Roseanne brings to the scene. The series focuses on a loving but “classless” family (Dan doesn’t mind warm beer) and their struggles to make a good life through a factory job and unreliable pay. Her language, grammar, and general talking-that-kind-of-sounds-like-yelling reminds viewers that she is supposed to be working class, practical, uneducated and not classy, but lovable nonetheless. With this tone, Roseanne appealed to all audiences because of her humor and wit and her relatability.
There are many signs of how Roseanne’s family is set apart by class in this pilot episode. To begin, Roseanne’s family, a husband and three kids, is hectic, baudy/loud, and rude, which are very different dynamics from the family dynamics we get from sitcoms such as Maude or Good Times. There is a casualness that is more present in this lower middle class depiction of the family that is absent in more formal shows (this may simply be the differences in decade in which the shows were made). However, we see in the scene where Roseanne visits with her youngest daughter’s history teacher in a slightly run-down public school classroom that the teacher looks down on Roseanne, blaming her home for her daughter’s behavior. Additionally, the oldest daughter’s backpack breaks a day after buying it, indicating its cheapness, and she is forced to bring her books in a garbage bag.
This pilot episode also touches on the intersection of gender roles and class in Roseanne’s world. Roseanne is the mother, and “lady of the house,” expected to cook, clean, and care for the kids, while also holding a full-time job at a local plastics factory. Dan, her husband, has unreliable work and doesn’t seem to carry his weight in the home. Roseanne jokes about it, but also makes it clear that this is not how it should be, asking him to take on more responsibility or do more for the kids. Her role is centered around their children despite her busy schedule, and she willingly takes on the task of making dinner, buying beer, and meeting with their teachers. Roseanne and Dan’s relationship is tense, but it is a loving partnership, which is made clear through Roseanne’s question, “Who would you have married if you didn’t marry me?” to which is says, “No one.”
Roseanne was a sitcom that was launched in the late 1980s. The show depicts the everyday life of the working class people, especially the working class women who had to solve the problems dealing with their factory work and house chores. The main female character, Roseanne, subverts the stereotypes of being a mother or a wife on the screen, since she was neither soft while taking care of her children like the traditional mothers do, nor was she feminine and physically attractive to men. She was loud, active, and had a strong personality, opposed to the portrayals of the female characters on the screen. However, Roseanne played an important and complex role of a working mother in the working class society where she had to look after her husband and children as well as working in the factory to support her family financially. The show focuses on the everyday situations encountered by the Conners. Since Roseanne’s husband Dan was not able to find a job, she had to take on the responsibility of supporting the family, making herself a working mother. The role of Roseanne was quite similar with that of Martha in the television sitcom, Mama. Like Roseanne, Martha also lacked the financial support from her family and had to complete the trivial housework, take care of her rebellious children and helpless husband. Roseanne portrayed an ordinary working class family in the American society while Mama centered on the life of an immigrant family. However, Roseanne was depicted as a more complex character than Martha due to her multirole of being a mother and a female worker. Even though Roseanne was not a traditionally considerate mother or an attractive female character, she appealed to the audience because she was powerful, independent, and sacrificed herself to support her family. The representation of Roseanne in this show presented a nice image of working class women during the period.
ReplyDeleteSeason 1 episode 1 of Roseanne depicts a middle class family who has money issues despite having a strong family structure and beautiful house. The episode features Roseanne who has been married to her husband for 15 years. They are both working full time jobs but are constantly arguing about their contributions to the households. Roseanne ridicules her husband for not doing enough around the house. Roseanne works full time, cooks for the family, shows up to parent-teacher meetings, and makes coffee every morning. These internal family problems cause Roseanne to constantly have to take time off of work (lose money) and her children to have behavioral problems at school and in the household. Despite all of these problems Roseanne remains happily married to her husband and is able to have coffee for breakfast everyday. An instance that was particularly humorous during the episode is the meeting between Roseanne and her daughter’s teacher. The teacher remarks that Roseanne’s daughter’s barking (which she does out of boredom) is considered abnormal in the classroom setting to which Roseanne responds that her whole family barks. This shows that Roseanne heavily supports the choices that her family makes and is able to selflessly set aside her time in order to meet her family’s needs (even on short notice!). This stable family remains intact after all of the dynamic problems that surround the household. It is usually the support characters (such as the teacher and Roseanne’s advisor) that usually has to accommodate for Roseanne’s personal issues. This show runs parallel to the family structure in the Simpsons. Both Homer from the Simpsons and Roseanne’s husband are depicted as lazy and alcohol-loving despite meaning well. Both Marge from the Simpsons and Roseanne are depicted as level-headed and are often the moral voice for the family. Each family has three kids that often cause problems and represent a typical middle class family household. Roseanne has really showed the evolution of the family since the post-war era of the 1950s. Although Roseanne is still represented as the person who takes care of the household she works a stable job full time. Roseanne has a very commanding voice in family decisions and often jokingly points at getting rid of her kids/husband. She played a big part in reforming the way her husband presents himself, noting that men do not just become the way her husband is. Men have to be made by a woman.
ReplyDelete