Claims Against Unrealistic Comparasons of the Simpsons Universe to ours.

This is a paper which defines why the Simpsons "Universe" has unrealistic comparason's of the Simpson's Universe to ours. It is designed to show, while it at times may seem realistic, it has no parallel's to the real earth except for the stereotypical roles each of the character's play.

Let's take "Clancy Wiggum" as an example, a completely unique character's without any real-life parallel persona's existing, yet he holds the outline for the stereotypical Policeman. He holds a common job which integrates with our society, as Police Chief, yet is never shown working nor catching criminals without being directly led to the suspect, yet has never been cautioned against this, or ever been shown having any verbal communication with his community. This is clearly a non-realistic character, probebly the most so from within the Simpsons' show.

You can take pretty much every character from the Simpsons and you get the same analysis. Even Bartholemew "Bart" Jo-jo Simpson with his lack of authority, Lisa "Lisa" Simpson and her serial over-acheivment and even Margery "Maggie" Simpson with her grudge holding against Gerald (The one-eye-browed Baby) and the EEQMCSQ in the building blocks (Which, if you didn't already know, is short for E=MC Squared).

The "plotlines" of the Simpsons are also twisted, unlikely and sometimes just plain crazy while trying to keep a "down-to-earth" style of show. This was particularly shown at the end of "The Great Money Caper" with it's highly unlikely ending with little, if any, explination.

Now do you think that the Simpsons is what is teaching the adults of the future how to behave, as so many teenagers and children idlise these characters, and may act like them in the future? Well, Fox is betting that they do, and that is why they will, and that's why the Simpsons has past it's 12th series.

On a lighter note. Snuh mania has been rocking the country, and I personally will say "Duh to Snuh", and "Troll-mania" has been sweeping a internet medium called "Usenet", which this story hasn't been appearing within - I am not a troll - I repeat NOT a troll. This story and more after the break.

Thankyou for watching "Eye on Springfield". This is Kenny Brokelstein.

while it

for

outline for

our

criminals

against

community.

within the

same

authority, Lisa

Simpson

EEQMCSQ

E=MC

Bart's under-achievment and Lisa's over-achievement are not at all unrealistic, at least certainly not in the way Wiggum is. There are many under-achievers and over-achievers in this world. Bart and Lisa are designed like this to be opposites of each other, which allows them to play off each other and creates conflict when neccessary. Maggie's grudge against the eye-brow baby is just some comedy thrown in, and only in a very few number of episodes at that.

just

True, but it wasn't always this way.

future

and

that is

Let's set this matter straght: Fox does not still make and show the Simpsons because it wants to teach adult of the future how to behave. Fox makes The Simpsons because they can sell ad space and syndication rights and make money; lots and lots of money. There is no more to it than that.

I'm a bit confused at your title:

Claims Against (meaning claims you're making) Unrealistic Comparisons (you're against the comparisons) of the Simpsons Universe to ours

Is that right?

Drunk and full of pie, Halo- wrote:

But how can the Simpsons' universe not parallel ours, when it is a satire of it? The Simpsons (universe), in its best years, always directly made fun of our world by exaggerating its problems, and its people. "Stereotype" is an exaggeration, and (over)simplification of something. Coincidentally enough, a caricature (cartoon) is defined as an "exaggerated, simplified drawing of something". Isn't the ideal overall concept of the Simpsons, then, a "caricature of America?" The most familiar elements are exaggerated (made fun of), just like they are in an actual cartoon drawing. But, the drawing retains its familiarity. Hence, we think of the statement "we see ourselves in these characters" when thinking about The Simpsons.

We instantly recognize funny characatures of George Bush, Bill Clinton, and Osama Bin Laden in the opinion page comics. The (uh-oh. I'm going to use that word) paradigm of "The Simpsons as a cartoon", thus, takes on a whole new meaning.

Except that he's a cross between a parody of Edward G. Robinson, and a pig.

--which is commentary on the police system. It's critical of certain people who are policemen (in OUR world), and sloppy police work in general. It often shows us the opposite of the way a good policeman would operate.

Which is more commentary. Wiggum's shoddy work is acceptable in The Simpsons' universe, because it mocks ours. There's irony, and commentary; so we have satire.

None of the cartoon is realistic, simply by the fact that most everyone's skin is yellow. Nobody so exaggerated as Wiggum could exist in our world. That's why it's funny. We see the exaggerated mistakes he makes, and think about the watered-down similarities to police in our world.

The perfect episode to contrast our world with The Simpsons' world is 4F19 Homer's Enemy, where Grimes (from our world) can't reconcile Homer's ineptness with reality.

The idea was obviously not to create characters just as real as us; but strong characters, with exaggerated flaws (and humanity), who strongly resemble us. That (again) is a definition of a charicature, or a cartoon. The criticisms of a person's looks (present in a charicature) parallel the criticisms of people's lives (in the show).

An episode has an unrealistic plot, and that's grounds for saying "The Simpsons" and real life can't be compared? This presupposes that all episodes are gold, and that they follow the same concept. Maybe the point you should make is that you feel all episodes are good, and that they all follow the same pattern. That way, the "unrealistic" plots may better support your statement.

Overall, The Simpsons is a criticism of society, not an endorsement of it nor an endulgement in it. If people interpret "The Simpsons" that way, so be it. It's these people that "The Simpsons" mocks. If Homer saw a "Simpsons-like" show, he'd be the kind of guy to behave like the characters.

--says you--

While people may enjoy the characters, there are serious doubts that the show lasted 12 seasons because people want to "be like Bart" or "be like Lisa". It lasted 12 seasons simply because it has been profitable. Very profitable.

me too

"duh"