A few thoughts about a.t.s.

Just a few thoughts I had about a.t.s.

The posts in a.t.s. in the year 2002 can IMO be divided into 7 categories.

Category 1: People quoting from random episodes and people replying with other quotes. Category 2: People telling everyone how awful and meaningless the show has become. Category 3: People telling everyone how cool and superfunny the wacky Homer show is. Category 4: People replying with irony or sarcasm to either category 2 or category 3. Category 5: People asking questions which have been answered a million times before Category 6: Nothing from the above, partly serious topics Category 7: Trolls, idiots and spam

Quoting from various episodes is a fine and sometimes even funny thing - if it�s done moderately, but it�s IMO overdone here. It�s a newsgroup (it used to be one) and not a quote group and reading well-known quotes and old stuff all the time is somehow far away from the original purpose of such a group, isn�t it?

It�s IMO unavoidable in a newsgroup with so much traffic that many posts will fall into one of these categories. People often post just to ask one question, so they don�t know about a FAQ or that the same question has been asked a hundred times before and thus they don�t understand if other people reply with irony or sarcasm or if there are no replies at all.

Many people don�t even read posts like "Why the show is awful now" any longer, there�s too much stuff like that, many people feel frustrated and bored if they have to read the same complaining stuff all the time. However, many older people who watch the show from the very beginning on also feel frustrated, if they read that others ("new fans") praise new episodes for - what seem to be - utterly meaningless reasons, like empty slapstick, disgusting stuff or sex jokes.

Personally, I have often problems to understand the meaning of a lot of posts here and I think I know why. I watch the show since the very beginning. I know all episodes. I have all episodes on tape. TV shows all episodes again and again uncut. I know a lot of people who also know all episodes and who prefer old serious episodes, don�t like new episodes and who have an opinion close to my own (not so radical maybe, but close.)

The problem is IMO, that many people here in a.t.s don�t know older episodes or consider season 8 and 9 as older episodes (IMO big mistake) or have just seen some heavily cut syndication eps. But that�s IMO no good base to discuss the show. How can you tell someone why the show was much better a few years ago if that person hasn�t seen any episodes older than season 10 or 11?

That�s IMO a fault of syndication and of US TV stations which show the very same 20 or 30 new episodes again and again and thus "raise" an entire generation who theoretically would deserve the same subtle and serious and intelligent social commentary the older fans had but who don�t get it from new episodes and thus consider Homer being raped by a panda as superfunny and best thing the show ever did or flat HOMR as the most emotional and deep episode ever.

The Simpsons is a show that started in 1989, that has now almost 300 episodes (I think so, I haven�t counted them) and that went through a lot of style changes and outstanding experimental episodes, so I think people can�t have a correct opinion if they know only the latest 50 or 60 episodes from 2000 to 2002. It�s impossible and that�s IMO one of the reasons why the discussion here in a.t.s. is difficult.

So what to do?

I don�t know. I think a.t.s. would need a little more classic episode reviewing instead of quotes all the time. There are so many people who write comments about new episodes, so why are there almost no reviewers who write comments and criticism about older episodes (by older I mean really older, season 2 or 3 for example)? I really expected some season 1 reviews when the DVD came out, but actually I haven�t seen any, most people just complained that the DVDs didn�t work correctly. The capsules to season 1 are IMO rather incomplete (the capsule to war parable 7G05 didn�t even mention the reference to the famous "World War II is over" photo taken in New York 1945 to which the episode refers in the scene where a boy kisses Lisa) so new infos would certainly be good and useful.

Whatever - reviewing classic episodes would be a good way to tell some people (who can�t see older stuff) what happened in such episodes and why many of us "complaining dudes" still consider the old "unfunny" episodes as much better than the current wacky slapstick show. Just an idea, I think a.t.s. could need some fresh stuff like more reviews, fanscripts, serious discussion etc.

Just a few things I wanted to say. No offense to anyone.

Chris

Done that one.

Haven't done that one.

I don't think I've tried that one yet.

Done it! Many a times.

Nope.

I'm one of the elite members to do that!

I could start.

Bazilla

Somebody wrote in message news:[email]... perhaps while high..."Chris Pfeiler" , I'm looking in your direction...

other

Homer

times

Maybe there should be eight. I'm Bart Simpson. (Category 1)

Stop saying that!

Austin

<Quoting from various episodes is a fine and sometimes even funny thing - if it�s done moderately, but it�s IMO overdone here.>

I'm hoping to establish the new variable of noting the show's improvement.

On 10 Apr 2002, Chris Pfeiler wrote:

<SNIP>

You forgot an eighth category, Chris - People complaining about the posts in ATS.

The regulars of ATS make it what it is, not personal opinions on how it should be. As for the "original purpose" .. Would you care to enlighten me what you think the "original purpose" of ATS was? I'm not trying to be mean, I really want to know!

"Many older people"? What do you base that assumption on? I have always considered the earlier episodes classics and most of the newer episodes a definite decline in ... character. But I've never felt frustrated about how other fans of the show feel. Why should I? I have just accepted the fact that "the Simpsons" is a different show now, and that the show probably never will produce such true masterpieces as "Old Money", "Bart Sells His Soul", "Homer vs. Lisa and the 8th Commandment" or "Homer's Odyssey" again.

It didn't have to go that way, I know. But it did. And if people like the newer episodes and have never watched an older episodes, that's too bad, but it doesn't bother me. I have no need to tell people how much they're missing.

Yah. I'm one of those people :-) But I have never (well, until this post) engaged in any debate on old vs. new episodes, simply because it's no different than discussing whether or not things were better in the '50s.

Why do you fell the need to do that? I don't understand why you want to "help" people realise that the older shows were better in every aspect (other than some personal satisfaction?)? There are a lot of IMO's in your post. :-) Don't get me wrong, obviously the point of this post is to air your opinions, the problem is - as always - that opinions are based on your preferences. What is "a good base to discuss the show"? What should we even discuss about the show? The best Homer quotes? If "Lisa the Vegetarian" really ridicules vegetarians or not (this particular discussion I myself have partaken in at one point) ? Who is to judge what is interesting to discuss? If you feel that you have noone in ATS to discuss the aspects of "the Simpsons" with, that you want to discuss, then that just might be because - as you correctly point out - younger fans aren't as learned (i.e. would they catch a Coleridge reference?) and haven't watched the older episodes. However, it might also depend on the fact that they HAVE watched the older episodes, and choose to discuss other aspects of the show. Either way, it would seem very unlikely that there would be a sudden interest to completely change what is discussed here. You are doing more than your share by posting thoughtful and insightful posts. Even though I rarely post 'serious' posts to ATS, that doesn't mean I'm not up to discussing new aspects of the show (f.e. older episodes) if the discussion thread intrigues me. This happens rarely on ATS, and I don't mind, I just interpret that as a genuine uninterest to keep these discussions; I don't really mind, since ATS works on many levels, for a wide range of people.

Browsing through Google's archives, I find (in the past) not much to support the view that ATS has become more trivial than before. Already back in 1991, most of the posts are idle quotes/chalkboard gag questions/"which one is Itchy?". ATS has possibly never mainly been about intellectual discussions about the show. I'm not sure I would want it that way, either.

It makes discussions about discrete social commentary difficult, yes. And it also makes discussing how much better the older episodes are, yes. But I suspect that's not what everyone in ATS wants to discuss, for good or worse. :-) There are other aspects of the show that can (and are) being discussed. Although I would also like more discussions about older episodes, I've grown to accept that's not the way here. ATS still provides many insightful comments.. from time to time. :-) Perhaps we should form an alt.tv.simpsons.oldschoolers?

I might consider taking that up. :-)

Thanks for the nice post, Chris! It was - as always - thought-provoking.

/ Kristian
+-------------------------------------------------------+
|Kristian Ronge |[email]|[email]|
|d99, datateknik, KTH (Kungliga Tekniska H�gskolan)     |
|d99, Computer Science, Royal Institute of Technology   |
+-------------------------------------------------------+
-"Just eat the damn orange!"

Kristian Ronge wrote in message news:...

That's not really true. If you go back to 1997 or 1998 or 1999, we'd get really long discussion threads and insightful, critical, lengthy reviews practically every week. If you posted something serious or thoughtful, you'd almost certainly get a lot of feedback, justified arguments either agreeing or disagreeing with you. It's just that over time, a lot of the passionate old-school fans who created all the excitement gave up on the show, stopped watching, and stopped posting here. The newsgroup was still worth reading, but sometime in midsummer last year, the group became more cliquish and less willing to partake in intellectual discussion and mostly just quoted episodes. By the end of the summer, I decided to leave the newsgroup. I think most of the serious discussion has moved on to web-based message boards like simpsonforum.com or maggied.com.

The Jolly Bengali

The Jolly Bengali wrote in message

The clique-ness was around in a smaller way five years ago at the time before I started posting here. The quoting from episoes was being done then, but far far less than now - the exception rather than the norm.

Aside from dissatisfaction with the show one of the main things which really put off a lot of the regulars was the incessant SNUH posts on 2000. Many of the old familiar names vanished at that point rather than wade through hundreds of 500-line posts with the word Snuh on every line.

Nowdays I keep the group open just for the Sunday comments on new episodes from the incisive people I recall from the old days. The rest of the week there's not a lot worth reading bar one-line quotes and sniping so I tend to skip reading.

David

On 10 Apr 2002, The Jolly Bengali wrote:

I've frequented ATS since late 1999, and I must say it's been pretty much the same since I got here. Back then there was the en_mog threads, discussions about Barney's drinking and as always people discussing the deterioration of "the Simpsons". I am not questioning the fact that the old-school fans who've now left ATS for good made a valuable contribution and that there was many a intellectual discussion. I know well that there was probably more "serious" discussions taking place here (Ondre, we miss you!), although "serious" is hard to define. I'm just saying that, browsing through the archived threads of ATS, I've never gotten the impression that it was MAINLY about intellectual discussions. The number of "intellectual" fans who've left is astounding, I know, and the impact they made perhaps can never be compensated for. It's just that back then, I get the impression that there was something of a 40-60 split between "serious"-"non serious" discussions/threads. Now it's more like 20-80, at the most.

I'm not sure. If many intellectual fans left ATS and stopped watching the show, I seriously doubt they would be discussing it anywhere else. Then again, many of those partaking in the discussions on the forums you mention might never have heard of ATS. I haven't frequented those message boards, so I guess you're the expert. :-)

/ Kristian
+-------------------------------------------------------+
|Kristian Ronge |[email]|[email]|
|d99, datateknik, KTH (Kungliga Tekniska H�gskolan)     |
|d99, Computer Science, Royal Institute of Technology   |
+-------------------------------------------------------+
-"Just eat the damn orange!"

Kristian Ronge wrote in message news:...

I agree. There's also less traffic on this newsgroup than there used to be.

Actually, you're right. Most of the people on the web-based message boards really don't discuss episodes on an intellectual, analytical level. The fans there are more mainstream and not nearly as hard-core as some of the old-schoolers whoe used to frequent (and still do) this newsgroup. But the traffic on those message boards is a lot greater than on alt.tv.simpsons, and there's a whole lot of opinions and reviews and polls and fanfiction. I still check out alt.tv.simpsons posts because occassionally, something really analytical and thourhg-provoking is posted (usually by chadderack and pfeiler).

-The Jolly Bengali

where is this more serious discussion at???

"The Jolly Bengali" wrote in message news:[email]...

news:...

Kristian Ronge wrote:

[good points of criticism to my post]

Yep, that�s me ;-)

That�s all I wanted. I guess my post was as usual a little exaggerated and misunderstandable (blame it on my bad English). I never meant to tell anybody what to think and how to post, that�s why I used a lot of IMOs and started lines with "Personally...". It�s just my humble opinion, but I don�t think I�m entirely wrong. Just a theory:

[Warning - possible exaggeration]

Post some random quote everybody likes and you�ll get a lot of replies. Post a thread like "What Simpson character would you like to see without pants" and you�ll get a lot of replies. Post a more detailled and serious episode review or analysis and maybe 2 or 3 people will reply, at least one person will tell you to get a life ;-).

My post was certainly biased, pro old episodes and contra new episodes (wouldn�t be me otherwise), but I still consider myself as open-minded and I watch new episodes and try to see good things in them, but it�s difficult for me. I like a couple of episodes from season 13 (DABF04 for example) but then there�s a lot of IMO rather poor stuff - stuff that seems to me sitcomish and meaningless. I watched a couple of good Futurama episodes recently and can�t help but think that F3K episodes like "Luck of the Fryish" or "Godfellas" are way above the unimaginative and flat DABF style of too many recent OFF.

I just think there should be more diversity of topics in ATS and also more tolerance. Quotes are fine, well-known questions are fine, even the daily/weekly "Why the show sucks now" and "Why I love it when a dog sniffs Homer�s butt" post is fine to me (there�s freedom of speech and art, episode 7F09 contains a good message about that) but some more detailled reviewing of classic episodes or some analysis of subtle stuff or whatever would be a very good idea to bring a little diversity, to bring kind of balance and some longer and meaningful threads.

I�m not just complaining about the show, I also do something. I don�t post very often (am I even a regular here?) but when I post it�s always very detailled and - I hope - interesting for a lot of people. I have posted a lot of stuff and I�m working on the second half of my season 4 reviews now. Why? Not because I have nothing else to do or because I have no life, but for fun and also to improve my English. Maybe someone else wants to write reviews, I�d like to comment them.

Enough for now. I guess nobody�s really interested in what I say ;-).

Chris

On 11 Apr 2002, Chris Pfeiler wrote:

Aww.. you're flattering me.

You've hit the head on the nail there. That's how ATS is today. I'm not saying it's bad, because if you like quotes (and, believe me, I do!) then it can be a lot of fun. The reason why only 2 or 3 replies are made to a post of the third type you describe, is not because there are only 2 or 3 people here who are "intellectual fans". I would like to take part in more serious topics from time to time, but I don't have much time to browse ATS (gee, you'd think otherwise, wouldn't you? ;-) so even if I sometimes feel like discussing very serious topics about the show I find myself lacking the motivation to reply to serious posts or to start a serious thread myself. I have nobody to blame for that but myself. And I also feel partly responsible for the way ATS is today (I don't mean to over-exagerrate my part in shaping ATS these last years, I'm just saying that if I post 60-70 posts a month on average and 50 of those are semi/non-serious then that will of course affect the threads on ATS. Dean's Snuh-cascades did the same, but to much more effect). I couldn't take a guess in how many people here are kinda like me; who like quotes and silly stuff but sometimes misses intellectual discussions, and who doesn't do enough to actively see to it that such threads become a little more frequent here. I'm not saying that it's bad NOT to want more intellectual discussions, because, hey, ATS is supposed to be fun. But there can always be some "seriousness" too. And there is, but ATS is reflected in the personality of the posters here, and if most people like to discuss new episodes, and which guest stars rule, and type 2 posts (see above), and post random quotes, then that's how this newsgroup is going to be, for better or worse.

Some of my favourite eps are from season 9,10 and 11, but I agree with you that the show is a bit more uneven. I'd say Season 12 is a 50-50 split "good"-"not-so-good".

I concur. But I'm not at liberty to speak, since I'm not doing much to improve diversity (although I consider myself a bit more tolerant now than I was when I got here in '99). I promise to try and shape up.

I consider you a regular. Hey, you post something on a regular basis - about once a month! And yeah, it is always interesting to read your posts, not because of any controversial ideas (you're not THAT controversial... ;-) but because they reflect very personal feelings about thing concerning "the Simpsons". I've never comitted myself to think about the father-daughter relationship in any Simpsons episode, but you dissect the older episodes and show people at least an interpretation of things I never even thought about. I like that.

I'm rambling, and I have to get back to work, so I'll end here.

/ Kristian
+-------------------------------------------------------+
|Kristian Ronge |[email]|[email]|
|d99, datateknik, KTH (Kungliga Tekniska H�gskolan)     |
|d99, Computer Science, Royal Institute of Technology   |
+-------------------------------------------------------+
-"Just eat the damn orange!"

Kristian Ronge wrote:

And that�s exactly the reason why I post such "deeper" reviews and stuff. You said in your previous post "I don't understand why you want to "help" people realise that the older shows were better in every aspect (other than some personal satisfaction?)?" and now you found the answer, at least from my point of view.

I post such reviews and analysis to interpret episodes and ideas in a way you usually don�t find here in ATS and always hope that people will consider episodes in a somehow new light and see deeper concepts after reading my texts. And - yes - there *is* indeed some personal satisfaction, if I read that people discover new things in episodes after reading my texts. I remember that Abman wrote that the likes "Bart Sells His Soul" even more after he read my review and - hey - I really like that. I know - I should get a life ;-).

You can do the usual ATS stuff (my good old categories ;-)) or you can see the show in a very very different way and consider many story elements as examples of social science or philosophy (BTW, there�s a good book called "Simpsons & Philosophy" for the more interested fan) or psychology or literature or art or the meaning of symbolism etc etc etc. A lot of crazy stuff, I know. But I also know many people who consider the show in a way which is quite similar to my own and thus I get a lot of confirmation for my ideas.

The problem is, that it is much more difficult to see new seasons as somehow good or even accept them as true Simpson episodes if you miss a lot of important things, like real social commentary or subversion (real one, not the cheap obvious in-your-face-satire ) or the famous character depth and so on.

Me too :-). Maybe someone feels inspired to write some serious stuff to bring a little more diversity to the group.

Chris

why don't you post one of your old reviews- what's the harm?

"Chris Pfeiler" wrote in message news:[email]...

anybody

I�m

Post a

and

review

tell

I

for

then

and

can�t

are

episode

of

very

longer

very

detailled

stuff

because

to

jim wrote:

There�s no harm, but I already posted all of my reviews and other texts here and you can find them on my website as well.

Chris

On Wed, 10 Apr 2002 23:22:16 +0200, Kristian Ronge wrote:

I knew someone was going to say that if I wasn't... :)

We could look up the charter. We could also hug and kiss some poisonous snakes.

Yup, all that's needed is posts like Chris' to stimulate conversation like this, and you re-balance the nature of the postings here.

Nah, that's what subject lines are about. :)

TTYL

a lot of useless stuff is in her I agree. My posts are worthless. But. I read the reviews and like the essays. Post some thing about the show. Write an essay about the show. Not about this newsgroup.

A good way to start is.....

What I love about the simpsons is........

or

My favorite Simpsons episode is ........ because..... the scene where ... and when somebody said......

or

Willie or Principal Skinner or Homer is my favorite because........

jim - who want's lottery tickets?

what do you think??? everybody

You've clearly put a lot of thought into this, and I applaud you for that. However, if one of your categories is "other" or "none of the above", then it negates much of your point.

A poorly-constructed analogy would be... There isn't much choice in buying a new car anymore. All you have is... Category 1. Ford Category 2. GM Category 3. Chrysler Category 4. Everything else.

Yours truly, Some bozo

[email] (Chris Pfeiler) wrote in message news:...

Then there's me...

And most of us wish there wasn't...

I do get bored with this.

Just like you, admit it.

Maybe they keep an open mind to the new episodes, unlike other people.

Maybe they want to just give their opinions.

Well, it's better than looking through a FAQ for a question that is not there.

How about "On-Topic Miscellanious" for a real name.

Two words, Ignore them

People just want to have fun, show off their Simpsons-loving spirit, is that not okay with you?

Let me ask you this, do you have a life outside this newsgroup? If yes, could you give me an honest opinion as to why you have kept track of all this?

Now I'm fully convinced that you care way too much about what goes on here.

Now this paragraph is just like the bias of liberal-news media, you claim to be neutral, but then admit how much you don't like the new episodes as if it's true.

How do you know they did? People just like the Simpsons, it's as simple as that.

I've seen older episodes on my Fox station, why do you complain?

I think you are making it difficult by bringing up all these big ideas of everything going on here. In fact, I figured out that you are someone who reads all these opinions and take a blind alleagence to those that agree with yours and can't admit it so you post this overcooked analyzation of the newsgroup and divide everyone into a catagory as if you are not among them just to cover up for the fact that you don't respect other people's opinions.

Either live with people's differences or leave.

Well, tell them if it bothers you.

Just because you would give a hopefully unbiased review of the classic episodes doesn't mean that only they should understand what you like, but that you respect the opinions as to why they like the newer stuff.

That was not a few, that was a lot, and though you didn't directly offend anyone you should at least have a better understanding of people's opinions from now on.

Also, about those things you recommend for the newsgroup, do some of those instead of complaining about why other people aren't.

On 10 Apr 2002, Jack Of Spades wrote:

I'd say Chris has. The response however has not always been overwhelming. It is up to everyone who is interested in perhaps steering some of the discussions here into the more intellectual types to make an active effort to do so. Now, I'm not blaming anyone or pointing any fingers anywhere, since I know not everyone is thrilled about pshycological undertones in season 3 episodes :-), as Chris is. Some people like quotes more than anything, some people like to notice and discuss references, etc. That's cool.

/ Kristian
+-------------------------------------------------------+
|Kristian Ronge |[email]|[email]|
|d99, datateknik, KTH (Kungliga Tekniska H�gskolan)     |
|d99, Computer Science, Royal Institute of Technology   |
+-------------------------------------------------------+
-"Just eat the damn orange!"

You, uh, never actually checked the FAQ, have you?

http://www.snpp.com/guides/lisa.html

I hadn't and it rocks out of my way jerkass I'm goin to look at the faq

times

Chris Pfeiler wrote:

Don't forget Category 8: people posting boring opinions! You're boring, stop boring everybody! Sincerely, Little Girl