The following conversation reminded me of something I have
long believed deserves blogatorial attention.
At our recent Seder, my brother-in-law Shelly, an accomplished
musician who plays a killer clarinet rendition of “Diyanu” (a traditional Seder song) mentioned his daughter, a former
practicing attorney, complaining about some clever maneuver on The Good Wife involving Chicago’s Cook
County States Attorney’s Office where she had once been employed, insisting,
“It would never happen that way.”
This observation did not surprise me, athough, as mentioned
above, it reminded me to write about it.
(Far be it from me to allow a non-practicing attorney from Chicago to
deliver the ultimate pronouncement.)
One of my all-time favorite sitcoms was The Dick Van Dyke Show (1961-1966), showcasing three television
comedy writers. Years later, after I
became one, I retrospectively realized that that
also “doesn’t happen that way”.
Rob, Buddy and Sally almost never rewrote until two in the morning, and almost always “broke” for lunch. The only time I recall breaking for lunch was when President Reagan was
shot. Honest Injun. You needed an assassination attempt to avoid Styrofoam
“take-out.”
Today, I am regularly reminded of the egregious contrast
between the way things actually are and their portrayal in the media by a
spouse who is a practicing psychologist.
Dr. M is highly resistant to watching a TV show or attending a movie in
which psychotherapy is the primary concern.
(The Exception: The Sopranos, which she claims has
verisimilitudinal resonance.)
Anyone who has been in therapy – and arguably most people
who haven’t – is aware that one does not get cured of their psychological
afflictions in an hour. (TV) Or in two hours. (a movie.)
Or even twelve to fourteen hours.
(a miniseries.)
It takes longer than that.
Sometimes, considerably longer. Sometimes you have to go back for more therapy, which would never happen
in a movie, unless the original version was a hit at the box office, in which
case, I Think I’m Still Crazy
would be hurried into production.
“A psychologist would never say that” is the familiar
complaint. Plus, there’s the inevitable
oversimplification. An individual’s
history and layered personality are ill suited for brisk, commercial representation. But they continue making such movies,
probably because the writer has been in therapy his or her self and they are
convinced that this time they will “get
it right”.
(Then the producer insists, “We don’t need the middle part
where they’re just talking. Go straight
to where he bursts in tears and they hug.
Insinuating that it is more than a comforting
hug. My God, I’m a genius.”)
There’s a movie we
will not being going to see.
I suspect you do not have to be an attorney, a television comedy
writer or a practicing psychologist to detect the glaring inaccuracies in the
cinematic depictions of your actual livelihood.
I’ll bet it happens with everything.
MUSICIAN: “She’s
not playing the harmonium!”
TRASH COLLECTOR:
“He’s lifting it up wrong.”
SUPERMARKET BAGGER: “They’re putting the eggs on the bottom!”
And I imagine that could be extremely disappointing.
TRASH COLLECTOR: “The first movie they ever made about trash
collecting. And the guy doesn’t lift
with his knees.”
Well… what are you gonna do?
Do we really want to see a lawyer entering the Cook County
States Attorneys Office for some essential legal attention, only to discover they
have closed early to celebrate a long-time employee’s “Retirement Lunch”? (Which in no way advances the storyline?) Are you interested in a depiction of
exhausted futility in which a room full of frustrated comedy writers pitch a
single, “replacement joke” for over an hour?
Do you want a “psychoanalysis movie” that lasts for twenty years and in
the end, the patient is still not certain
they’re cured?
We understand. It’s
“Artistic License.”
Bending the facts to fit the story you are trying to tell.
In a reasonable amount of time.
The alternative?
“I can’t believe it we made it through a twenty-year-long
movie. Oh my God! You’re old!”
I don’t know. Movies
“based on actual events.” Jobs
distortingly different from what they actually are. I should be used to our entertainment never
telling us the truth.
I’ve been watching cable news broadcasts for years.
(Note: The depiction of “blog writing”, including the
obligatory punchline? This is actually
the way it is.)
1 comment:
I am that musician. My objection, though, is really that given the number of excellent musicians there are in the world, some of them can act. So why not hire someone who can actually play the harmonium?
wg
Post a Comment