Language and accent confusion are not the only things that puzzle our international audience. Other clichés or conventions appear to them — and to us if we care to take a closer look — as contradictory and absurd.
I have heard dozens of complaints of foreigners who cannot understand why sitcoms repeat unrealistic behavior patterns, to project phony moral principles. They seem more astonished, especially when they well know how imaginative our TV can be.
Some foreigners consider coincidental conventions as something prearranged or imposed by network censors. They claim, that was the reason why Ralph Crandon was never allowed a break in his TV life, no matter how insignificant. He just couldn’t get out of his miserable, poor environment or change his job. Ralph couldn’t even move out of his crumbling apartment. He wasn’t allowed, the poor fellow, to win a worthwhile prize without complications. Ralph Crandon was forced to be nothing but a born loser in the Honeymooners series.
I have tried to point out some exceptions. For instance, I Love Lucy broke away from convention when the Ricardo family moved out New York and into a much better home in Connecticut. The family prospered. “Ah,” they say, “there must be some truth in what we say; after the Ricardos moved to a better place, the show died off.” Superstition?
It must have been a miracle what occurred in Taxi when one prospering character, Jim, the seedy guy, turned millionaire, and did not lose his money after two or three episodes.
Non-American viewers also point out other rules. Prize winning or gambling? You’ve got to be kidding! That is moral no-no. Puritan morality? Maybe. That must have been why poor Lucy couldn’t get one penny out of her winning streak in Montecarlo, during the series of episodes that had set Europe for background.
Then I realize that the only interesting justification I’ve seen on TV for losing at gambling was the one given in the Montecarlo episode of the series Bosom Buddies. In this episode the main characters get some money from an insurance company and lose it in Montecarlo. Still, some American watchers couldn’t help feeling a bit confused. None of my foreign friends liked this episode.
Was this again the same type of TV morality that lead to that sad (but excellent) Honeymooners episode? The one in which Ralph Crandon loses his well-deserved chance to big money on a TV show because he couldn’t identify Swanee River, played by Norman.
The most remarkable example of a double-standard morality was Captain Kirk of Star Trek. He took pride in despising any creature more evolved than him. Well analyzed, Kirk was an arrogant character. He was a trigger-happy twerp who showed no pity destroying any invention before anyone capable could determine whether it was beneficial to humanity. And all those actions built him a popular image.
If you have any question about Kirk’s attitude, just remember Planet M113. Salt supplies were depleted on Planet M113. There was only one native life form left on the planet. It was able to turn itself into whatever shape it wanted. In order to survive, this creature needed salt. The only way it knew to get it was sucking it out of the bodies of Kirk’s crew. It did it out of desperation for survival.
Did Kirk understand the needs of the creature? No. He was out to get it and to kill it. Curiously, in an unexpected end, Mr. Spock compelled McCoy to shoot to kill, exterminating a species. Spock was a supposed strict follower of the principle of respect and non-interference, the questionable prime directive of the Star Fleet. Not in this case he was.
In another episode, Kirk’s friend Gary Mitchell acquired supernatural powers (always depicted as despicable, including in the new series, The New Generation). Kirk found no other solution but eliminating him. Unemotional Spock seeded the hate and advised Kirk to kill Gary. (By the way, Data is a beautiful, unemotional character; Spock was not. He often showed feelings and even rudeness as in Star Trek, the Movies.)
Dr. Robert Corby invented a way to make man immortal. He had found a way to transplant he human brain to an almost perfect artificial body. Thus, man’s mind could live a long lasting life — no sickness, no need for food and with limitless energy. Corby tried to force Kirk, yes. But a victorious captain, Kirk thought it wise to destroy the androids.
No wonder people abroad think we hate scientists and intellectuals. This constant putting down of genius, scientists, intellectuals, etc., with words — not translatable — like egg-heads, etc., is almost not only insulting abroad, but it should be insulting here, too. Our society should value our minds.