7F09 "Itchy & Scratchy & Marge" [Review Re-Post]

I have no time to write a new detailled review this weekend, so here�s a re-post of my 7F09 review. It�s maybe interesting for all the people out there who already have the S2 DVD or who will buy it soon. It�s my only other S2 review (beside my new 7F19 review) but I think almost every Season 2 episode would deserve a longer review to discuss the content. Well, maybe someone else will try to write another Season 2 review, I�d like to read some other opinions.

The following review is maybe a little too short and not really able to mention all aspects of 7F09 (which is again a very complex episode and media satire) but I hope it can give some insight and start a little discussion about the serious issues shown in the episode.

BTW, what does the DVD audio commentary say about 7F09?

------------------------------------

7F09 "Itchy & Scratchy & Marge" [Review]

I decided to write a review about one of the IMO best episodes ever, namely about the brilliant and very complex media satire 7F09 "Itchy & Scratchy & Marge" from the best season ever, Season 2.

Already the beginning (when Maggie hits Homer with the mallet) shows a brilliant and very detailled parody of the famous "Psycho" shower scene and is - clearly different from todays senseless Homer torture - also an important element of story. The mallet scene actually starts the flow of story and is necessary for the dynamics of the satire.

The episode has an excellent uncertainty about its real message and moral. There�s no simple and straight Good/Bad message about the issue of violence in the media but the problem is shown in a thought-provoking unclear way and at the end, there�s no solution but just more unclear material for further discussion - all the uncertainty and subtlety of the "message" is a clear improvement to the often too direct "in your face" morality of Season 1.

In Season 1, the morality would probably have been "TV violence is bad" with IMO too little room for own thoughs and opinions, while the more subtle moral of season 2 goes more in the direction "Violence on TV is a problem with many facets. Think about it". A much better style, unfortunately very seldom reached in the later years in this quality.

While Maggie is clearly influenced by cartoon violence, Bart and Lisa seem to accept the I&S scenes with some kind of childlike innocence (or blunt feelings?) and thus, they are unable to understand Marge�s arguments against I&S, but have own arguments pro cartoons, like Lisa�s "But Mom, if you take our cartoons away, we'll grow up without a sense of humor and be robots." (says Bart: "Really? What kind of robots?") Who is right? We can notice the subtle uncertainty already here and it�s quite clear that Marge considers the complex problem in a too simple way (and thus she will fail.)

Marge�s TV appearance on "Smartline" is a classic and brilliant example for satirical dialogue humor, which is created by (deeper) absurd and satirical lines and not by simple visual gags for the masses.

Kent, who (as a member of the media) should have an objective opinion, is already prejudiced and considers Marge�s protest as "stupid question" and Roger Meyers Jr. can convince him with weird lines like the comparison between cartoons and the crusades and the "fact" that there was violence on earth long before cartoons existed. Dr. Monroe�s appearance and his meaningless talk is IMO a hint at the fact that even psychologists have no clear opinion about the influence of TV violence.

We have here the same deeply satirical concept we had for example with the "actor playing Charles Darwin" in 7F01 (who was able to convince the voters with an absurd line about Blinky) - we have a satirically exaggerated reality which creates humor through the social acceptance of absurdity. That - and not cheap visual nonsense - was the true greatness of the show in those days.

The lame and boring violence-free I&S version and the (again) exaggerated reality of "good children" who turn off the TV to the tunes of Beethoven�s Sixth Symphonie (brilliant scene) and who leave the house to "find back their childhood" free from TV violence in a better world - all this is satire and no serious moral. It was never meant to be serious. It�s a kind of Utopia, which can�t work and which will fail. It can�t work because it�s too unreal and based on a simplification of a complex problem. As I said - Marge considered the problem of TV violence in a too simplified way and thus her failure was expectable.

A typical season 1 episode would have probably ended with such a simple moral (that would have been a point of criticism) but season 2 is complex and in itself stable enough to continue the story and to show Marge and the viewer how very weak her arguments and her "crusade" really was. The episode confronts Marge with her own simplification. Is the nudity of Michelangelos David just filth or is it another form of free speech and freedom of art? Is violence on TV filth or just another form of freedom of art? What is art, what is freedom of art, what is freedom of media? What is wrong? What is right? The episode gives no clear answer.

Dr. Monroe asks Marge about the problems in her conviction, but she isn�t able to find a reply and just says "I guess one person can make a difference, but most of the time, they probably shouldn�t." Her own moralistic protest has failed, but it remains as thought-provoking concept over the end.

The end of the episode is actually pessimistic. The streets are empty again, the toys and remains of a satirically "peaceful childhood" lay in the cold wind of reality (a symbolical scene) and TV violence is sucessfully back, while the children "accept" it either with innocence or with blunt feelings. Maggie�s shot on a picture of Homer is the last element that gives a hint at a negative message, everything else is left to the viewer�s own opinion (those were the days.) The final emotional scene between Marge and Homer weakens the deeply dark side of the ending a little and shows the integrity of the family as a stable element in an absurd world (<= important, but lost today.)

Only 4 seconds were cut in syndication. That�s a very rare thing in season 2 where some episodes were heavily cut for over 70 or even 80 seconds (including often important scenes.) The upcoming S2 DVD will solve that problem.

I�d say 7F09 is a brilliant and complex media satire and it deserves nothing but a grade A+. Season 2 rules. Comments are as usual welcome (to the review as well as to my bad English ;-))

------------------------------------

So far the re-post.

There�s another thing I�d like to say and the review is a good example. I think it�s necessary to make a clear difference between the "surface story" of an episode (the funny plot) and between the deeper concepts and aspects of satire and subversion in classic episodes. In most classic episodes, there are always at least two layers of story (often more) => the obvious elements and the hidden parts and the latter are IMO the much more interesting, especially if you like a serious discussion about episodes.

Season 2 and 3 have many examples for that, even Season 1 has some (read my 7G12 review.) It�s of course partly a matter of personal interpretation and own thoughts about episodes and stories. A lot of satirical implications and "layers" were intentionally added by the writers (often more than many people think) while others are a more personal interpretation and own ideas of the viewer. But where�s the actual difference? It was IMO always a unique strength of classic episodes to stir own thoughts and to be more than just the sum of its parts.

Chris

Great post Chris, just thought I'd add a few of my own comments to your excellent review.........

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

there

episode

else

Hopefully when Season Two is available worldwide, there will be greater discussion on the topic. I'll try and post a review of my own during the next few days.

namely

Agreed - but I think Seasons 3 and 4 give S2 a good run for its money.

and is

important

is

The 'mallet scene' is absolutely brilliant. The scene-for-scene parody of Psycho's shower scene wins laughs on three levels: (a) A well-done parody is always amusing - it is humour through recognition; (b) Homer being attacked by his own two-year-old baby subverts the standards of the horror genre (the absurdity is later highlighted by Homer's phone-call to the SNPP - "I told you, my baby beat me up... Oh it is not the worst excuse you ever heard!"); (c) The Psycho music recurs throughout the episode, signifying Maggie's intent.

Such a scene (as a starting-off point for the story as a whole) uses the infamous Three Act Structure to ideal effect. Rather than beginning the episode with a completely unrelated event [- "I bet you never saw that coming!" -], the episode's theme is apparent from the start.

violence in

at

The genius of the episode, IMO, is that the writers are able to address a complicated issue with *oversimplified* arguments. The show doesn't present a 'real' balanced argument, but rather a hypothetical and unbalanced one:

Typical anti-television argument: Children imitate behaviour which they see on TV. 7F09: Maggie *directly and immediately* imitates I&S. (The I&S executives also seem to be similarly impressionable - they suggest that Marge can be stopped by "dropping an anvil on her" or "stuffing her full of TNT and throw a match down her throat)

Typical anti-television argument: The world would be a better place for children without TV. 7F09: When the kids stop watching television, Springfield becomes a child's Utopia - or, rather, a stereotypical view of an idealised childhood.

The argument made by 7F09 is that the world *would* be a better place without television - but the argument is so ludicrous that it is self-defeating.

to

against

take our

(says

subtle

complex

Notice also that Bart and Lisa simply defy Marge and watch I&S illegally - similar to the American public during Prohibition. Another great point made is about the sovereignty of Law. Marge bans Lisa and Bart from watching I&S, but is allowed to watch it herself (Homer: "How come you can watch cartoons but the kids can't?", Marge: "Because.", Homer: "Because why?", "Because I said so."). Marge, in this instance, believes herself to be 'above the law'. Marge also forces Lisa and Bart to protest against I&S - even though they disagree with the protest. She tries to influence her children in exactly the same way she believes that Roger Myers does.

for

satirical

Roger

long

is

the

voters

reality

not

The writers make a great point about the media. Brockman refuses to condemn I&S and simply dismisses Marge as 'stupid' - Krusty and Roger Myers are his colleagues and he is biased towards them, despite his supposedly objective position. Smartline is also a fantastic satire of panel discussion shows ("Excuse me, he was addressing me", "Well, I guess were not going to solve this tonight..."). Another question raised is whether entertainment should be *above* morality. Brockman, Monroe and Homer all dismiss the moral dilemma of I&S by simply stating their enjoyment for the show: Brockman: "Hilarious" Monroe: "One of my guilty little pleasures is to snuggle up with a big bucket of buttered popcorn, dim the lights, turn on Itchy and Scratchy and laugh myself silly" Homer: "Heh heh. Some of these stories are pretty good" and "Hahaha. Take that you dumb squirrel!" A final point, possibly in reference to anti-fur protesters etc. is that they often go to far. Roger Myers receives a letter (from a supposedly 'pacifist' protester) claiming that he/she would happily kill Myers - the means make a nonsense of the end.

their

and no

which

based

As I said above, the "Ideal Springfield" is a brilliant bit of surrealism - the writers are making the point that this "golden age" *would not* happen. Brilliant.

moral

viewer how

confronts

just

on

freedom

episode

Any sensible argument, taken to its logical conclusion, eventually becomes nonsensical. Marge contradicts her own argument - she believes that maintenance of a restrictive moral code is more important than freedom of expression, but her approval of David is incompatible with this.

again,

wind

the

Maggie�s

negative

the

deeply

a

Bart and Lisa enjoy I&S just as Marge and Homer enjoy David - yet both entertainments are supposedly immoral. Yet Marge fails to learn the lesson she should of originally - that I&S should *not* be censored, but that Maggie simply should have been allowed to watch it. The final shot reinforces the point - Marge leaving Maggie to watch I&S is a (fairly rare) example of bad parenting from Marge.

There are one or two interesting points raised on the Commentary.

7F09 received a lot of praise at the time; Al Jean was pleased that they could "have their cake and eat it too" by including plenty of violent cartoons and making a serious point about them; 7F09 is one of the all-time favourites amongst the writing staff; Matt Groening claims that he has put together a montage of I&S cartoons and that audiences are "stunned" after seeing it. This is why he will never sanction an I&S spin-off; The episode was inspired by someone who protested about Married.....With Children - the publicity generated is generally agreed to have helped boost Fox; It was also inspired by Matt Groening's annoyance as a child at the censorship of Warner Bros. cartoons; Marge's suggestion that Itchy and Scratchy "share the pie" was based on similar suggestions from Broadcast Standards; The 'new' I&S was based on a similar period during Tom and Jerry, when they were forced to 'be friends'; Matt Groening describes the 'Perfect Springfield' sequence was the first time they "made a satirical point by saying the exact opposite of what [they] meant"; Bart's remark about building a soapbox racer was the genesis of Saturdays of Thunder; Al Jean points out that in S2 the scenes ran much much longer than today - perhaps that's where you're making your mistake, guys!; The 'museum ending' of the show was provided by James Brooks

Ciao Peter

Somebody claiming to be "Peter Smyth" wrote in news:agsfmj$cos$[email]:

I disagree with this. Marge is simply concerned with violence on TV and what it will do to children. She's not concerned with art that happens to show genitalia, because she's apparently not worried that that would influence children to do bad things. After all, she did paint Mr. Burns in the buff! :-)

It's not Marge who thinks full frontal nudity is a bad influence; it's the rest of the SNUH.

"Ted S." wrote in message news:[email]...

Hi Ted, I understand your point, but you seem to have misinterpreted what I said (or, rather, what I attempted to say). What I was trying to convey was that Marge was unclear as to the implications of her own 'crusade'. As you say, she was only concerned with the impact of cartoon violence on impressionable children - regardless of its entertainment value. SNUH (I understand that Marge has no problem with full frontal nudity) take the same standpoint on David: They are concerned with the impact of his "evil" body parts - regardless of its artistic value. In response to SNUH, Marge takes the same standpoint as Homer/Brockman/Monroe did with I&S - they were unconcerned with the moral dilemma posed by I&S because they found it funny (there are some examples of this in my previous post). Similarly, Marge is unconcerned with the supposed moral dilemma posed by David because she believed it to be "a masterpiece". That's what I meant when I said that Marge contradicts herself and that her views on David are logically incompatable. Obviously, Marge sees it in simpler terms than this (as Chris pointed out in his excellent review). Anyway, I hope I've made myself a bit clearer this time.

Ciao Peter