Posted on 01/12/2011 9:07:20 AM PST by Borges
PC would prevent something like it from getting on the air today.
Norman Lear transferred the British show "Till Death Do Us Part" very accurately - same characters with different names. The former had started airing in the U.K. in 1965.
Nixon can be heard discussing the show on one of the Watergate tapes.
T-shirts, buttons, and bumper stickers showing O'Connor's image and promoting "Archie Bunker for President" appeared at the time of the 1972 presidential election. Archie Bunker received votes as a write-in candidate.
Lucille Ball, who had very old fashioned ideas about entertainment, was embarrased that it was on CBS - “her” network.
That's not the way I remember it. I recall reading an article while the show was still on the air, and it said that Norman Lear was shocked to find out that people liked (and identified with) Archie. Archie was supposed to be a buffoon, and to represent the "typical bigot."
They knew exactly what they were doing. To pull off satire like that you have to pay attention to tone.
What? The Governor and JJ has been cancelled?
Archie was interesting. Although he seemed conservative in many ways, he was a strong union member/blue collar worker, as I recall. Of course all attempts to make him look like a buffoon backfired and made people love him even more.
Didn’t like the show nearly as much once he transitioned into owning the bar, and especially when Edith “died”.
Archie Bunker, as played by the very liberal actor Carrol OâConnor was the butt of every joke and perpetrator of every evil deed on the show was in fact a lower middle class blue collar union worker. The only member of a household of four who worked. He alone supported a stay at home wife, a married daughter, an unemployed son-in-law who was in college studying to be government employee and later a grandson. And Archie was the bad guy?!
A buffoon can also also lovable. And the character grew in stature and complexity as the show went on. And remember that Lear had virtually nothing to do with writing the show.
All In the Family, much like MASH, was very funny for the first two or three seasons, but after that became real preachy and serious in places.
Why would a radical lefitst like Norman Lear want to satirize and ridicule his own political philosophy?
Lear didn’t create the show he purchased the rights to a British show. For the show to have worked dramatically Archie HAD to be essentially likeable. If he was a hateful character it would have been abrasive and unfunny.
I couldn’t care less about Lear. As I’ve said he did not write anything after the pilot. It was written by seasoned comedy writers. Did you watch the show? The liberal characters were satirized as well.
That point was actually articulated on the show to refute the son in law’s condescending attitude towards Archie.
She had her hands full then didn’t she...about the same time Patty Duke was plucking her little boy Desi Jr.
man...she was publicly livid about that remember?
Duke had that Valley of the Dolls thing of life imitating art going on too
(u are old enough I think?)
Lucy was a force of her own....I loved her I ain’t gonna lie
I remember some of the dialogue. It was definitely intended to make Bunker look foolish, with thought processes not worth taking seriously.
That people related with him belies a basic liberal ignorance by the writers of the nature of the average american, which we still see coming from them in spades.
Patty Lane was doing Ricky Jr? I’m glad I didn’t know about this sooner.
Wasn’t Edith HOT?!!
archie, a “conservative white male” was made to look like a fool week after week
That was one of the worst shows ever produced.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.