"Santa Claws" <santa.claws@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:5tm0nvkmpnees7qurmo8qhioh66q3l2i9p@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Nothing against the writers, of course, but a lot in their
demographic(s)
> >may have just grown up thinking that underage drinking is "no big
deal".
> >And, getting to the root of the problem (peer pressure? stress?
> >curiosity?) may be a little bit more tolling on the emotions (or,
perish
the
> >thought, "preachy") than they or the audience feel comfortable with.
>
> I don't like preachy so much, this show has never been preachy, but I
> think they could get away tolling on the emotions of the audience way
> more than they might think.
>
> I went underage drinking, probably for all the reasons listed. When I
> have kids and have to deal with this, for me this issue will be one of
> the toughest, 'cause I don't know how to tackle it without getting
> dragged down by sounding preachy AND hypocritical.
I might say that telling your kids not to do something you did as a kid
wouldn't necessarily be hypocritical. After all, none of us went our
whole
childhood and never did anything wrong. Yet if that were the gauge by
which
we taught our children (or didn't), the next generation would grow up to
be
total banshees because we couldn't raise them to behave better on
hypocrisy
grounds.
I guess drinking has gotten to be one of those really sticky issues in
this
context. Parents' messages seem ineffective because kids don't see how
getting drunk/using drugs/whatever hurts them. The whole "everybody does
it
all the time and nobody died" or "I did it once and it didn't hurt me so
it
must be safe" perceptions are hard to bust, especially with kids' sense of
immediacy - not seeing things over the long term. They don't see how
doing
that makes them more lax, lazy, selfish, and desiring more of it - even
while it is happening. Usually the handwriting doesn't appear on the wall
till it is too late.
> I guess the writers are very likely facing that same problem in the
> script. I am seriously curious how they deal with it. But if they drop
> the ball and just avoid it, that would suck.
Remember in the world of television there are 2 ways of dealing with
things:
the way that the network/sponsors/focus groups/test audiences think
everyone
will want to see it played out, and the way everyone actually wants to see
it played out. There will probably be concerns about offending people on
either side of the issue, looking credible and "cool" at the same time,
not
sending clear message for the above mentioned "preachiness" or "bland
approval" fears - most shows that would take this issue head on with all
that would end up saying a whole lot of nothing, just echoing the status
quo
about the issue that exists in real life. MITM has largely been immune to
all these constraints, yet once a show gets burdened with holding its
ratings even it could get bogged down.
> >You're on to something. If we are to assume that Lois's treatment of
the
> >boys is a mere extension of the way Ida treated her as a kid, then that
> >gives us more insight into Lois as a person - are the kids that way
because
> >of the way the parents treat them, or are the parents so evil because
the
> >kids willfully are? We heard Lois say that her parents liked her
sister
> >Susan best. Well, is that because they just didn't like Lois, or was
Lois
> >honestly the worse child?
>
> They said the show was going to deal with underage ***. They like
> their twists. What if the twist in this case is that actually they
> ****tray Lois as the one who had underage ***, went underage
> drinking...
That was in the Thanksgiving episode, and I don't think "Teenage Lois" is
slated for that one.
> Lois doesn't see herself as having been a badly behaved child, but for
> the most part, her kids don't see themselves that way either much.
That's because the kids have actually been raised to be self centered.
They
haven't been raised to think of others or the consequences of their
actions
because no one thinks of theirs or actually takes the time to teach them,
so
all they have with them is the need to outdo the system. What's ironic
is,
Lois thinks she is taking the easy way out of parenting - that it would
have
been much more difficult in the short and long term to actually talk to
them, gauge their feelings and teach them right from wrong than just yell.
Lois doesn't see herself as anything but a saint and martyr. For reasons
mostly still unknown, she has absolutely no desire, will, or capability to
conceive of anyone's feelings about her or the way she comes off to
others.
So if this is a symptom of Ida's treatment of her, it may be one
explanation.
> As to whether Lois created the monsters that are the kids, or their
> behavior that created the monster in her... I have to be fair and say
> both.
Maybe that's the circular question Linwood has in mind to keep us asking.
Such was even said in the DVD commentaries regarding Francis ("Mom says
it's
Francis, Francis says it's Mom".)
> Despite her blaming Francis, I figure she started it. But the whole
> 'Forwards, Backwards' episode dealt with the concept of escalation
> brilliantly. Reese and Malcolm putting each other in hospital for
> what?... Malcolm stealing the last blueberry; "What's the worst that
> could happen?".
I would agree, especially with the first sentence. After all, a child
isn't
born bad or good, environmental factors do shape who a child can be -
especially in the first few years of development.
> Lois is at war with the kids, and neither side is about to see that it
> probably started pretty small.
We've already explored Francis, and we know that Reese apparently bit her
uterus when she went into labor with him. This may signal some kind of
birth defect or other condition with Lois. We may end up finding out that
such things may have happened with all the kids that caused them to be
born
slightly skewed from normal - things that can't really be blamed on any
one
person.
Come to think of it, the "Flashback" episode sort of gave a few clues to
this - remember when they had the microwave right up against Lois's
stomach
when she was pregnant with Dewey?
> >What she should have realized, though, is that is that she was giving
him
> >her go-ahead to do it if/since he wasn't already. Sometimes it's just
> >easier for parents to assume their kids will do the bad thing at every
> >turn - keeps them from having to have faith.
>
> I think Lois gave her speech on parenting back in season 1. It really
> was the 'assume the worst' attitude.
Which I guess is sort of a parody on the (lack of) parenting skills being
implemented today.
> "They are able to think - maybe - three minutes into the future and
> it's our job to make sure that future comes cra****ng down on them
> within the time limit, otherwise they never learn a thing."
That comes from taking a very short term view to make it easier as stated
above. Good parenting, OTOH, comes from doing the more patience requiring
job of waiting beyond that three minutes or teaching the kids to think
beyond it. Of course Lois probably sees the word "patience" as a foreign
word so there you go.
> But then I think of the advice Malcolm got from Francis on girls.
> "Whatever mom tells you, don't do it, and don't do the opposite
> either."
IOW, think independently.
> Lois has to figure if she told him not to do it, she is
> setting the stage for him to defy her. In this case I think her tactic
> was kind of like the Spangler *** education lessons at Marlin. She
> didn't tell him not to, but she spent three hours telling him every
> extreme detail, to the point she made him throw up. The kid is
> traumatized and will think of mom every time he thinks of ***... at
> least I think that was her plan.
I believe it was, and it is a quote that parents of adult
development-arrested children have lived and died by.
That's another thing I believe MITM is sort of shooting for long term.
They're showing us how NOT to raise children. If the show lasts long
enough
to where the boys (Malcolm and Reese, anyway) are full fledged (biological
adults), we will see how that parenting didn't teach them to function as
adults, but rather how it manages to accomplish little more than
prolonging
adolescence and stifling true maturity. IOW, the kids will be all
twentysomethings still living at home.
Possible dialogue from Season 15:
Malcolm comes in from work.
Lois: "WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN???????"
Malcolm: "Sorry I'm late Mom. I had to put in overtime at the office.
The
company got contracted by the Pentagon to develop top secret anti-virus
software for informational terrorism and money laundering tracking..."
Lois: "Why didn't you call?
Malcolm: Mom, it's top secret. Homeland Security restricts outgoing
calls
from the site."
Lois: "Big deal, you're grounded."
Malcolm: "But Mom...it was my job...We're just a few lines of code away
from ridding the world of..""
Lois: "So? You were supposed to watch your baby siblings Chris, Drew,
and
Bailey today. I had to fight Jamie to learn how to change their diapers,"
Malcolm: "Why couldn't Reese do it.......or Dewey?"
Lois: "Don't you know anything about anyone besides yourself, bright boy?
Dewey has to read a book of classic literature for his college English
term
paper. He's only halfway through Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.
And
Reese finally got a job. The carnival is in town and they added a few
hours
to his ****ft in the dunking booth because he drew so many throwers. You
know how lucky he was to get that job? Only one he's really qualified for
and the first one he's got since that fast food thing. This is big,
Mister.
You're grounded for a year!!!!"
Malcolm: But Mom, Cynthia and I are supposed to be married in 6 months!"
Lois: "I don't care Mister. Grounded means grounded - no Simpsons' 25th
Anniversary Special coming soon to Fox, no Playstation 10, and no
marriage!!!"
Malcolm: "But you arranged the marriage!!!"
Lois: "Don't think I don't know that Mister. And don't think you're not
going to pay me back every cent with interest for the rehearsal dinner
deposit or honeymoon reservations in Boise, Idaho either!!!"
> >Or...after the hangover wears, Craig decides to toy with him a little -
> >saying, doing, and showing him all kinds of stupid things making
Malcolm
> >think he is still wasted. That alone turns him off drinking forever.
> >
> Craig finally displays his psychotic side. Somehow, I don't ever want
> to go there... :-)
I don't think anyone would...or should. :-)
> Craig is a nice guy, I don't know he has enough cruelty in him to pull
> that off, at least and teach Malcolm a lesson. Now Reese on the other
> hand... or Dewey. They have the necessary sadism to humiliate him in
> ways that would make him never dare drink again.
But Craig also has been proven to have a petulant side that could signal
some kind of pent up feelings. After all, the Wilkersons are probably the
closest that Craig will ever get to feeling like part of a family. So I
could see where some undiscovered sense of moral obligation and
paternalism
and a feeling of being put off by the kid he bonded over hooking up an
entertainment center with doing something naughty manifesting in a rather
unpleasant yet fitting way.
Dewey would probably want to the most, being the good guy that he is - And
the most resourceful at scaring it up too.
> Oddly enough that kind of happened to my best bud. Cured him of
> drinking. Cured both of us of giving in to 'peer pressure'.
He had a misfit and socially needy neighbor show his hidden dark side? ;)
> Yeah, I think I would favor that approach to teaching Malcolm (or I
> guess it could equally be Reese the one they ****tray underage
> drinking) a lesson.
Given that Reese is so hated and self isolated, he actually has one
advantage in that department - he may not be as tempted or exposed to peer
pressure.
|
