Hey, conservative dudes!

[miko2d]

ra: I took the bait and Googled "andy griffith leftist" and came up withcommie rat Not very convincing.

 Exactly. I saw that piece a few years ago but it never registered, since I have not watched the show. Recently I had a chance to and that surfaced in my mind..

 It seems convincing to me. What would one expect? A singing of "International" and showing boobs at the sports game? Not really.
 I see several shows occasionally and always think "what are the producers thinking". I am sure than many who create conservative shows now would not have done the "Andy Griffith Show" the way it is done.


AKWeav: miko2d, I'm not sure I've seen anyone on this bbs spout forth more off the wall drivel.

 Not what you are used to hear, right.

I think the Andy Griffith show was about as entertaining as some of the other TV programs of it's period.

 Never said it was not entertaining or bad quality.

Rip, when you post a link try and use ones that us guys here..

 I'll quote the article for you.

 miko

[miko2d]

Sheriff Andy Taylor of Mayberry: Commie Rat
by Brad Edmonds

The old Andy Griffith Show, one of the most-watched, best-loved sitcoms ever, is lauded as a slice of small-town, apple-pie Americana, hearkening back to a simpler, better time when men were men, women were virtuous, and children occasionally were well-behaved. At the same time, one might ask: When a television program from any era is praised by the mainstream media, could there be some underlying leftist message? The answer is yes.

The first and most obvious commie message is Andy’s refusal to carry a gun. Heroically, he captures evildoers every time without a pistol. Notice also that Barney, the one who wants to carry a gun, is a buffoon, and whenever he touches his gun it goes off at random. There is no question what sentiment the producers were expressing. Further, on those rare occasions when there’s a truly violent criminal to pursue, Andy reaches into the rifle rack. And you thought Rosie O’Donnell was the first gun-control hypocrite.

Another modern, leftist, anti-everything-traditional message is the complete absence of a nuclear family on the Griffith show. Barney is single and desperate; Andy is widowed and moderately content; Gomer and Goober were single and whatever; Thelma Lou and Helen were single; Bea was a spinster…I can’t remember whether anybody on the show was married with children. The nuclear family was passé even for Mayberry residents of the early 1960’s. Other anti-family messages: A rare married couple portrayed on the show wasn’t happy unless they were having violent domestic disputes; another couple, with the husband played by Jack Nicholson, abandoned their baby at the beginning of an episode.

There are other implausible tweaks. On some old episodes, you’ll see Andy, Barney, Thelma Lou, and Helen having dinner at the local greasy spoon after 10 P.M. This almost never happened in real towns like Mayberry, and in fact is not very popular today in the south outside cities the size of Atlanta. You’ll also see occasional mention of cocktails before dinner – a decidedly citified custom that would have been extraordinary in a small southern town in the 1960’s.

And there are anti-gender role stereotype messages. Whenever a man from the country walks into town to find a wife, he is a buffoon. Earnest T. Bass and a two-episode character played by Alan Hale represented this anachronism. (Alan Hale played the Skipper on Gilligan’s Island; in Mayberry, he came complete with overalls.) Both considered it the man’s job to pursue the woman and to provide for the family later on. No wonder they were portrayed as buffoons. And for their parts, Andy and Barney endured all sorts of abuse at the hands of Helen and Thelma Lou. On many an occasion, Andy and Barn would (completely innocently) step into a pile of the women’s wrath, and spend most of an episode trying to apologize, explain, and beg their way out of it. Of course, the tables were seldom, perhaps never, turned.

There are other messages. The old man who owned the department store was a miser who hated people and cheated his employees. No one ever made a strong moral statement about Otis, the town drunk who had a wife at home but seemed to spend most nights in jail. Helen, the public schoolteacher, knew what was good for children better than their parents did.

There are plenty of superficial old-fashioned small-town quirks in the shows, such as the town band and the townspeople’s exaggerated ignorance of anything cosmopolitan. Occasionally the point was made that children need to learn discipline. But these features always floated on the surface. The underlying messages were that the nuclear family is uncommon and perhaps unnecessary; gender-role stereotypical living is mostly without merit; guns are bad; capitalists are evil; teachers are better than parents; and according to one ridiculous episode, killing a bird (by accident, no less) is about the greatest crime imaginable.

Maybe you thought the old Andy Griffith shows were wholesome and nourishing. Remind yourself that they came from Hollywood, and watch the next rerun a little more critically (if you must watch at all).

August 8, 2001

 It sounds quite true to what I saw in a few episodes. The show is great of course, in all other respects. It's a typical Holywood production from times when it was already afflicted by liberals but not yet lost its standards of quality.

 miko

[AKIron]

He has some reasonable points regarding the show. However, anyone that models their lifestyle on a sitcom has more problems than what the show may lead them to believe.

The Simpsons is about as anti male as you can get. Still, it's funny, and if you can't laugh at yourself then you just can't enjoy laughing at all.

[miko2d]

AKIron: He has some reasonable points regarding the show. However, anyone that models their lifestyle on a sitcom has more problems than what the show may lead them to believe.

 Absolutely right. But some things happen without our notice that change our views or at least perceptions.
 In Soviet Union we - the children - were not told directly to watch our parents and go report to police if they do or say something suspicious.
 We were just shown the great hero Pavlik Morosov who was murdered by his grandfather for revealing his father's deeds to authorities.

 The capitalists were not as much protrayed bad as stupid and after a while we had a stereotype than just made it hard to take them seriously. And what you do not take seriously, you do not consider. They made us not to think about stuff at all rather than understand why it was good or bad.

 In some cultures it was a shame for a man not to be married and not have children - such were not considered complete. Pride in one's children was one of the main features in aman's life.

 A child who's been raised on seeing nice likable characters totally outside those conventions - and associating with them - will never understand such values or convictions.
 A (counter-)question "Why should I bother to have and raise kids - there are so many other things to live for?" At some time it was unthinkable from a normal person in a judeo-christian or muslim- or derived culture. Now it's common.

 The person I know recently had a conversation with his friend in New York diner about the local police - specifically the police violating regulations for no good reason - like double-parking or blocking fire-hydrants.

 A woman at the next table overheard them and joined in in to defend the police. At some point he said that the police are just their employees. She was appaled and said "How degrading, that you consider them your employees!"
 A modern educated woman is shocked and outraged by the very idea that the  government employees work for the people!

 Did anyone ever explicitely tell her that it is not so? Never. But the constant and subtle protrayal of the government as our bosses rather than our employees made its work.
 How far from that to a facist state readily accepted by such people? May be still far but not as far as it used to be....


 Simpson is my favorite. Makes me feel good about not being like that likable looser. It's an show for adults. I would be very carefull showing it to my child and would offer a lot of explanations.

 I have enough work explaining that a wolf chasing the rabbit in a cartoon is not evil but just hungry. Or that Bambie is what we make soup of.

 miko

[Eagler]

me thinks ur thinking alittle to deep for the show - things were not that complicated then

[AKWeav]

mikod2, you might have posted that first, and asked what we thought of it. It would have been slightly less inflamitory don'cha think. But then you always seem to enjoy the radical approch. Course had you done so, I would have most likely ignored the whole thing.

A similar analysis can be made of any show, book, or movie. It's only if anyone actually buys into it, that it takes on any merit. (oh wait, I get it now... everything in this life has a liberal/conservitive/communist/socialist/ agenda)

The Andy Grifith show was like any other show of it's era. An attempt to profit (monetarily) from a new medium. Nothing dark or sinister about that.

Now, some of those radio shows of the 40s and 50s. You wanna talk about propaganda!:D

Sorry Rip, can't update anything. System says no to all attempts. Guess I'll look at it when I get home.

[AKIron]

No argument from me that Hollywood hasn't/isn't trying to alter or shape American lifestyles. The question should be why and into what.

[1K0N]

Ernest T was a liberal if I ever saw one....

[miko2d]

AKWeav: mikod2, you might have posted that first, and asked what we thought of it. It would have been slightly less inflamitory don'cha think.

 Guilty of that. But I had my reasons. I am as much disinlined to believe the libertarian writers as any others unless I establish their credibility with me.
 So I wanted to get a few "untainted" opinions first - in order to learn. It doesn't usually work but I keep trying.


A similar analysis can be made of any show, book, or movie.

 Not "can be", "must be". I am observing my young son grow. He started walking when he was 10 1/2 months old. I discovered that despite being able to walk and choose the goal to arrive to, for a while he did not have any control over what he was walking into or over. He would set a direction and walk over objects and fall a lot.

 So the skill of discering what one is walking through is clearly aquired with training. I believe so is the skill of discering what one is reading/watching through - being critical of everything.
 Some people I know - especially religious people - are very good at seing dangerous influences in common (for our times) occurences. Of course what's bad for them is often good for me.

It's only if anyone actually buys into it, that it takes on any merit. (oh wait, I get it now... everything in this life has a liberal/conservitive/communist/socialist/ agenda)

 Maybe not as sinister as a direct intent to subvert the culture. Maybe just a person with a liberal set of values doing things naturally and expressing his perceptions. But the effect is the same.


The Andy Grifith show was like any other show of it's era. An attempt to profit (monetarily) from a new medium. Nothing dark or sinister about that.

 There is MTV and there is "The 11th Heaven" or "Saved by an Angel" or something and few others with clearly chrisian agenda. There are animal shows that may turn an impressionable child vegetarian. All make money but also influence our minds.
 I believe it is the parent's job to do that, so I am probably going to rip off the antenna from my TV and store up some good DVDs that reflect my values.


AKIron: ...that Hollywood hasn't/isn't trying to alter or shape American lifestyles. The question should be why and into what.
 Whether they are trying to or it is just an unintentional side-effect, the commercial mass culture can only shift the perceptions in one direction - lowest denominator and mediocrity.
 For an uplifting influence one should seek not mass but elitist culture - but that would not be PC...

 miko

[ra]

For an uplifting influence one should seek not mass but elitist culture - but that would not be PC...

Like Gore Vidal or Noam Chomsky?

[midnight Target]

Obviously that cut and paste article was by someone who NEVER or almost NEVER watched the show. Andy carries a gun when he feels it is needed. Sometimes in the conduct of his duties and sometimes for fun. There was even a show where he takes his new girlfriend crow shooting.

[ra]

I agree with MT about something!



My impression is that the guy who wrote this wants to discredit anyone who says TV shows can have a hidden politcal agenda by making a completely ludicrous example of Andy Griffith.

ra

[miko2d]

Andy carries a gun when he feels it is needed. Sometimes in the conduct of his duties and sometimes for fun. There was even a show where he takes his new girlfriend crow shooting.

 Good point. They must have had several writers for that show and some of them were less liberal than others. In those times  one could even find a lot of conservatives in academia! Hollywood must have had some as well.


ra: Like Gore Vidal or Noam Chomsky?

 I was thinking more along the lines of classical music vs. rap.

 But if you need literary examples of elitist culture, that would be reading greeks and romans in original languages as well as classical western philosophers and authors and poets.


ra: My impression is that the guy who wrote this wants to discredit anyone who says TV shows can have a hidden politcal agenda by making a completely ludicrous example of Andy Griffith.


 He does not claim that the show has a hidden politcal agenda. He says that the show has subtle political influence.

 You do appreciate the difference between the meanings of the words "intent" and "effect", right? It's the same with "agenda" and "influence".

 miko

[AKWeav]

My impression is that the guy who wrote this wants to discredit anyone who says TV shows can have a hidden politcal agenda by making a completely ludicrous example of Andy Griffith.

Aw come on, it wasn't written that poorly. I would like to hear his thoughts on "Green Acres". A show with obvious anarchristic leanings.

[ra]

He does not claim that the show has a hidden politcal agenda. He says that the show has subtle political influence.

Read your own cut n paste:  "The first and most obvious commie message is Andy’s refusal to carry a gun."

If his point had been to say that this or any other show has subtle influences, then he would have been saying nothing at all.  Unless he could prove Andy Griffith had an effect on society, subtle or otherwise, then he is just engaging broad speculation.

But if you need literary examples of elitist culture, that would be reading greeks and romans in original languages as well as classical western philosophers and authors and poets.

There's nothing elitist about those, but using the logic of this author, all of those sources of classical western elitism could be said to have spawned communism and fascism, amongst other isms.

Here's some Latin:  Post hoc ergo promter hoc.

ra