Kramer the Conservative

Jun 9, 19974 posts by 3 postersalt.tv.seinfeld
🧠 Theory🙂 Liked it🔥 Controversial
4 posts

As a Doctor of Psychology and an avid student of the human condition I would be interested in any comments on my current thesis. As you all seem very knowledgeable about this programme and obviously have drawn your own conclusions I welcome any input you may have. I�m not to sharp on the whole e-mail gubbins but I would assume you all know what to do and how to do it.

The thesis is only a minor work yet is rather bulky, therefore I�ve split it into three obvious sections with part two and three coming soon.

Kramer the Conservative, Jerry the Rebel and George the Homosexual (not that there�s anything wrong with that). By Dr Maxwell. Garrett PhD.

Part One: Cosmo Kramer and his attitude toward an organised society.

Seinfeld while for ever sticking to it�s tag of �show about nothing� is obviously more than that. What it is about is a close study of the human condition and the effects of an organised society on that condition. For the sake of �the pitch� the makers of Seinfeld have had to reduce each character to an easily recognisable stereotype. This maintains it�s relevance beyond the initial development stage of the programme as the producers and networks are constantly pitching to audiences new and old alike. Therefore the audience watches Seinfeld with a set of prepared expectations and prejudices concerning the central characters. However with close analysis of the story-lines and dialogue between the characters it is clear to see some stark contradictions .

The first of these contradiction concerns Kramer. While on the surface he appears to have adopted an position outside of society, he has no job, no particular ambition, no conscience and certainly no tact. His actions and attitudes are very much controlled by what an organised society deems suitable. These influences control him to such an extent that one could almost call him a conservative. This by no means implies that he is a member, or advocate, of conservative parties such as the Tories or Republicans as he together with the rest the characters appears to be apolitical. An example of Kramer�s conservatism can been seen in episode 108, The Understudy.

When George intentionally or not injures Bette Midler in a softball accident Kramer adopts an interesting attitude toward the resulting circumstances. Firstly is his insistence to care for Midler, he has already made clear his feeling for her describing her as �the wind beneath his wings� and therefore when he finds her in a vulnerable position he adopts the role of protector. It is important to emphasis the difference between the role of protector, traditionally male, and the of carer, traditionally female.

For example when Midler wants some lunch Kramer simply orders it from a store, he is the organiser, and by doing this empowers himself by placing Midler in a submissive role. His aggressive manner when ordering the sandwich strengths this argument as not only is he placing himself in a dominate role over the shop worker but he does so in front of Midler. Such behaviour is evident in the wild as stags will lock horns more as a show of strength in front of the female than as an actual violent attack. Metaphorically Kramer is locking horns with another male who has something more to offer than him, in the form of a sandwich. When Midler asks for a black and white cookie, Kramer sees this as another threat to his position. To prevent this happening he doesn�t even ask the store if they have one but instead vows to obtain one personally.

Kramer may simply be acting in good faith in his assisting Midler, that is until you consider his actions in episode 55, The Visa. In another show of Kramer�s male dominance the baseball legend Mickey Mantle is punched in the face for crowding the plate. Mantle was one of Kramer�s boyhood heroes and quite possibly went a long way substitute as a farther figure. This means that Kramer is racked with guilt, having in essence just destroyed his own father, and decides to resolve the situation back in New York. Yet unlike the situation with Midler he simply attempts to apologise. After all Mantle is a strong male figure and therefore Kramer is unable take the role of protector.

It is not simply in his insistence to maintain his dominant role as the patriarch that we see Kramer�s conservative ideals. When confronting George, Jerry and Jerry�s girlfriend, Midler�s understudy, about their part in the accident, Kramer explains how in �his Broadway� people act differently. The main idea behind his argument is that the quest for success at any cost is a very negative ideal, which contradicts the contemporary opinion that has enveloped society during the last two decades.

The names he uses to emphasis his point are interesting signifiers of the age, and attitude, he prefers to adopt. Kramer�s clothing, attitude and ideals all hark back to the 1950�s yet it is not the rock and roll rebel image that Kramer sees as his inspiration but the small town optimism, the �you�ve never had it so good� doctrine of a conservative government placating the populous with empty rhetoric and promises. Take for example Kramer�s idea for the photographs in his building�s lobby (ep101The Kiss Hello). Within the hostile �modern� city of New York Kramer is attempting to recreate this small town community. While in theory this is an entirely positive idea it quickly becomes clear that the world has moved beyond these conventions.

Other examples of his traditionalist outlook include his insistence that the rules of convention are maintained concerning thanking someone for a gift (ep107The Face Painter). His feeling of moral outrage at Newman�s disregard for parking law (ep099The Scofflaw) and in the same episode his aggressive nature toward the concept of littering. This is neatly counterpointed with his obvious respect for established figures of authority such as the policeman and the judge. He in fact begins to emulate these obvious role models as he sees himself as a policing element in what he calls �his town�. This question of authoritarian respect is raised again in episode 94 (The Mom and Pop Store) when not only does he attempt to assist a traditional Mom and Pop store, again the need for parental influences, but he also shows his obvious dislike of the Yuppie society that George and Elaine represent. The final realisation that his authoritarian role models have let him down, by stealing Jerry�s training shoes and moving to New Jersey, invokes a violent reaction in him but at the same time causes his psychological turmoil to manifest it�s physically.

You may notice that many of Kramer�s actions occur as a direct result of Jerry�s influence on his life. This may be due to the premise of the show or it could be that Jerry represents everything Kramer rallies against. While Kramer is the conservative maintaining the status quo of society Jerry is the rebel mixing things up.

such >an extent that one could almost call him a conservative.

I dunno if *conservative* would be my choice of terms. I keep seeing Jerry not as the rebel but as the Winner -- Someone who has come to terms with society much more successfully than the struggling losers of the show, George and Elaine.

But while Jerry generally lives up to the bargain he's made with society, *Kosmo* is that man Thoreau (or was it Emerson?) described as marching to the beat of a different drummer. At times he's almost a shaman, operating entirely on instinct. And maybe that's where the *conservatism* comes in -- and from whence his conflicts with contemporary society arise. His sense of propriety is Ancient and comes from within as if received, not requiring the Talmudic dithering the other three regularly engage in at the coffee shop.

So while Kramer is guided -- however imperfectly -- by the Cosmos, George and Elaine are clearly the descendants of Adam, cast out of the Garden, doomed to their Sisyphian struggles. Infantile George is ruled by his appetites and emotions, the result being rage and frustration. Intellectual Elaine is cut off from her instincts and is constantly dogged by feelings of paranoia and, yes, frustration.

While George and Elaine represent alienation and imbalance, Kramer and Jerry represent union and balance. Kramer has aligned himself with the Spiritual world while Jerry has basically come to terms with the material...

...Which is why Jerry is the hub of the show. Most of us relate to the material more comfortably than to the spiritual. Far from being a rebel of the Molotov-cocktail-throwing variety, Jerry has struck an armistice with society. He can live on the edge (he's a comedian who's never had a regular job; his humor is based heavily on mild social criticism); yet still finds acceptance by the very society he satirizes and won't fully embrace (a society that provides him with lots of girlfriends, gig offers, and at least an adequate lifestyle).

Anyway, that's another spin. It was largely improvised, so feel free to shoot some holes in it.

Alvin Nichter wrote:

This is how I see Kramer as well. He is not only child-like, but in many ways he is dog-like. His face lights up when something smells good. He is exhuberant and shamelessly extroverted. He lacks social subtlety. His reasoning is primative, but he gets by in life relying on his keen senses and on intuition. Even his lifestyle is dog-like: he doesn't work, begs food from others, and spends his days seeking creature comforts. In Freudian terms, he is sheer id.

Morton M. Goldmacher Barrister and Solicitor

It's nice to see some ideas coming from what really wasn't that an in-depth peice. I'm intrested in the concept of Kramer searching for a Father figure and also the idea that he is a child. After all his relationship with Newman is very child-like. After watching the episode with Genderson (sic) and the golf argument I realised that Kramer, while living this free existance, needs the structure that games such as Risk and golf provide. He is an extremly complex charecter whose behaviour and attitudes often contradict each other. I belive that he is in turmoil, with too many externalites coming into conflict with his basicly unstable personality.

I'm sorry about the spelling and the fact that I haven't made much sense, it's late, I've just woken up screaming from a rather distrubing nightmare and I wanted to respond to all your interesting points. I'm glad my poasting wasn't bombarded with the pointless "Get a life, it's just TV" remarks as while Seinfeld is a wonderfully funny TV show it is also a show about inderviduals existing within an organised society. Too often televison seems to opertate within in a vacum without aknowledging the world it pretends to portray. Seinfeld is a show about nothing because it's a show about life and more often than not our lives are about nothing we are JUST LIVING.

Hopefully I've ladi some demons to rest while typing this and can fall to sleep with out strange voices wisphering in my ear (you think Kramers got problems)

Regards mark.