There are plenty of ill-conceived female characters all over prime-time TV (just pick any show on the CW for starters) but is it fair to dump Glee into that category? While Glee undoubtedly has some of the most egregious, misshapen teen girls around, I don't think it's this fall's worst offender. Sadie over at Jezebel makes some very salient points in her gender-critique of Glee, but she misses the mark when she calls the show "cheap and disingenuous." Yes, stock portrayals of female characters can reinforce harmful stereotypes, but I don't think that's what's happening on Glee.
As an avid fan, I think you can appreciate the show without dismissing it because it doesn't portray women in a positive light. This is a Ryan Murphy show. And no one comes out looking good in a Ryan Murphy show.
Nothing about this show is balanced or nuanced, nor is it supposed to be. It would be a nice artistic leap if Glee were able to move outside those boundaries, but then it wouldn't be the same show. The show is all about being big and bold -- in essence magnifying character traits for comedic, dramatic and musical effect. That includes creating an over-the-top gay student, a super bitchy cheerleader and rigid type-A ice queen.
Like the musicals that it parodies, everything on Glee is meant to be an over-the-top amalgam of characteristics. I'll be the first to cry foul when Dean or Sam on Supernatural calls anyone a "bitch" or "slut." That kind of casual misogyny is just as bad as making every short-skirted cheerleader a dimwitted "mean girl."
But on Glee, it's not just the women who come off looking bad. Will and Finn aren't "saintly" or perfect, as Sadie writes. If anything, they're buffoonishly stupid to varying degrees and equally selfish. Will hasn't yet to notice his wife is faking her pregnancy, and he's so immature he walks out on the club after Rachel insults his choreography. Finn, meanwhile, is so dumb he believes his girlfriend got pregnant after he ejaculated into a hot tub. And he's not above manipulating Rachel into returning to the club by playing on her affections for him.
This is a show that traffics in caricature and exaggerated renderings of reality. Every character in the show, not just the women, takes on a cartoonish quality. It's not just the musical numbers that require a suspension of disbelief, but the characters also.
Like Sadie said, you can't just blow off this show as being "harmless fun." I don't think any TV is harmless, and after seeing the direction Glee is moving in over the past few weeks, there's a lot of good to balance out the perceived bad.
For starters, getting the jocks and cheerleaders to join the glee outcasts breaks down the rigid high school social boundaries. We're also starting to see more depth in Quinn and Rachel as they move toward a friendship. Creator Ryan Murphy may have started out playing with stock types, but he's not beholden to them. And the show is only in it's first season with six episodes under its belt. Give it some time and it may move away from representing one-dimensional stock types to fleshed out human beings. But honestly, it wouldn't bother me if we didn't.
it's a toss up between who has the right to be most offended. Gays? African-Americans? Women? Gym Teachers? Jocks? Basically, there are no well-represented, well-rounded characters on this show. Not just women. I'd object if I felt that women were being handed the short end of the character stick at the expense of everyone else, but I look at Glee as more of an equal opportunity satirist than an equal opportunity offender.
[Watch clips and episodes of Glee and other shows at SlashControl.]
Henry Louis Gates, Jr. on 'Faces of America' and the Beer Summit
Six Reasons Why '24' Has Jumped the You-Know-What
The Super Bowl Commercials: The Best
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-19-2009 @ 11:34AM
rick cokely said...
Did you ever see Popular? It was one of Ryan's shows and it did just like Glee (and sorta like Nip/Tuck) where it started with a stereotype and turned into something entirely different with the characters learning and growing. That's the point of the show and most of Ryan's shows. It's sad that people are really thinking about shows in this way - I'm definitely one of the firsts to say that diversity (especially on TV) is important, but this is just ridiculous. Besides I think gay men have a lot more to be upset about considering the character of Kurt.
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 12:06PM
Anita said...
I will say this. I think Glee is smart and funny. Plus, I enjoyed Popular. However, I don't feel the female characters are one-dimensional considering how fabulous Jane Lynch and the Emma character are. Plus, the wife is starting to have new dimensions outside her former gold digging roots (although that remains).
I like that Glee breaks down school clique barriers a la Popular. However, one thing that always bothered me is that because the writers do such a good job of fleshing out Quinn, Rachel, and Finn including showing their back stories outside the 1 dimension of teacher, loser or jock, including showing their home lives and interior monologues, I expected the show to do the same with the minority characters. However, Mercedes remains the same 1-line African-American cliche, Tina barely speaks, and the other characters remain stereotypes. Although I liked that the creators added diversity to the cast, because the other characters remain unfleshed out and merely supporting players to the caucasian leads, I feel a bit antsy.
I don't think it's sad people see weaknesses in a show. That's what makes it better. It's sad if people continue to accept things mindlessly. I think if you see the weaknesses, you can point them out. If they remain, it's up to you to decide if you want to continue to enjoy the parts that are good. Glee is a good show, but, of course, I, like other people, want to see myself represented in them. But, if that doesn't happen, that doesn't take away from its accomplishments.
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 1:40PM
matthew barnes said...
anyone who is taking these characters that seriously is missing the whole point.
the comedy in the show is that every single character (from cheerleader to principal to diva) is a stereotypical representation. the boys, girls, gays, straights, jocks, nerds, cougars and prey ALL demonstrate a ridiculous cohesion to the stereotype they represent. this is not a weakness... this is what makes Glee funny.
sure... the characters will develop beyond their stereotypes in time.. but even then, they'll still be rooted in who they are in the stereotypical universe that is Glee. and i, for one, will be happy for it.
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 1:32PM
craigspr said...
Thank you for sharing
http://www.craigspr.org
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 12:54PM
Malren said...
Anita wrote: "However, Mercedes remains the same 1-line African-American cliche"
1. She's a B character on a new series, so you haven't been shown more of her for a number of reasons that have to do with getting people hooked on the A characters before you start dumping eps full of back story.
2. There was an ep where the entire B storyline focused on her and how she was sort of in love with Kurt.
In fact, I think Kurt is a B character and the only one to be the focus of a A storyline so far. So...Mercedes will get her shot. Most of the other B characters don't even get lines every week.
3. Give. It. Time.
Going back to Hemal's article, I agree about the way Ryan Murphy develops shows. These people have to be somewhat flawed...in some ways bad people...in order to demonstrate the growth and the life lessons Murphy wants to explore. Again...NEW SHOW, people.
As for whether liking this show makes me (or anyone else) a good or a bad feminist? I could not care one whit what some high-horse-riding moron with access to the internet thinks about what I believe. I do what I think is right and fair in the real world. What I watch on TV means *F*-all to how I practice fairness and equality in my day-to-day life.
Lastly, how anyone could watch this show and think the men come off well is beyond my ken. Every male on this show is weak, stupid and mean. They lie, they cheat (physically and/or emotionally), they are bad people and that includes Will and Finn. Even the principal is a simpering douche. No male on this show is "saintly." That's one lazy, stupid attitude to take. Makes me wonder if that woman even watched the show.
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 1:19PM
Anita said...
But, that's my point. All of the minorities are B characters. Principal Figgins is the only figure who I think is pretty fleshed out and makes my heart sing with his iterative tightfistedness -
10-19-2009 @ 1:02PM
Sigma982 said...
How about this. It's a TV show aimed at entertaining the viewer....nothing more. Enjoy it at face value or just don't watch it. Things don't have to be P.C. or to the moral/social/ethical liking of everyone.
Stop looking deep into things. If it were a news program or something that's supposed to be centered around fact, then fine, you have a point. But it's not and shouldn't be analyzed as such.
Otherwise, everything would be diluted due to oversanitization. Lighten up, people.
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 1:18PM
scott said...
amen, sigma!
10-19-2009 @ 2:20PM
director91 said...
Don't say all CW shows because Supernatural doesn't do it.
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 2:32PM
RobynM said...
I haven't had time to catch up with Glee yet, although my daughter and some of her friends are ardent fans.
But to answer your question - no, I don't think so. Part of feminism is accepting that women are just people, and some of them are really awful. If everyone on the show is representative of a stereotype, the fact that some of the female ones are less than positive shouldn't be a big deal.
Also, as has been mentioned, the show's only been on a month or so - a baseline has to be set before getting down to the business of serious character development.
If over the course of the rest of the season, the guys make progress and the girls don't, then the griping can start.
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 2:38PM
Mike said...
They're SUPPOSED to be stereotypical people, aren't they? Isn't the whole show about how these stereotypical people are able to move past how society sees them, thereby showing all of us that we can move past how we see ourselves?
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 3:34PM
C said...
I'm conflicted about Glee. I love the singing and some of the actors, but I hate Will's wife and that whole plot. I pretty much hate any plot that requires one or more of the main actors to be completely stupid. and that's most of the plots in Glee.
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 4:47PM
HD said...
Modern feminism is a joke, it all about "girl power" and feeling okay with your body no matter what your size. It's all attitude and no substance.
Women forget what "real feminists" had to fight against, how much they had to suffer. Women used to be (and in some place still are) property of their fathers or husbands, unable to own property, take out a loan, travel freely or vote.
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 10:21PM
YouFaceTheTick said...
No, loving Glee means your standards are low.
Where are the stereotypes developing? Let's be honest, this isn't Freaks n Geeks or even Season 1 of Friday Night Lights. This is 90210 with singing.
What are we 5-6 episodes in and they've run out of songs, the stories are from a soap opera and the singing is badly dubbed (pre-recorded by the actors). Sigh...the premiere gave my high hopes. Sadly, they were misplaced.
Reply