View Single Post
Old 10-26-2012, 02:05 PM   #10
Gráinne
Senior Member

How Do You Identify?:
Neither, nada, out of the box
Preferred Pronoun?:
My name always works
Relationship Status:
Happy whatever happens
 
Gráinne's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Little Rock
Posts: 1,818
Thanks: 2,010
Thanked 7,246 Times in 1,416 Posts
Rep Power: 21474851
Gráinne Has the BEST ReputationGráinne Has the BEST ReputationGráinne Has the BEST ReputationGráinne Has the BEST ReputationGráinne Has the BEST ReputationGráinne Has the BEST ReputationGráinne Has the BEST ReputationGráinne Has the BEST ReputationGráinne Has the BEST ReputationGráinne Has the BEST ReputationGráinne Has the BEST Reputation
Default

What's interesting to me, and I might be all wrong, is that all these idealized women like June, Donna Reed, Harriet Nelson, Lucy (to some extent, though her goal was always a career) and even Ma Ingalls all came about during or just after a period of great social upheaval, especially for women. WWII saw women working in great numbers; the '60's were a time of racial and political upheaval, and the '70's were marked by an unpopular foreign war and Watergate. I know that's incredibly simplistic, but interesting to me.

I don't think the people who wrote those programs necessarily thought they reflected reality in any way, or even some idealized way of living, but they were escapism. Even today, I don't want to watch programs about people struggling with their kids or in crumbling relationships-I've lived that! And much of TV, with few exceptions, until All In The Family and its spinoffs (especially Good Times), did not portray people of color in "real" lives with all its pain and struggles. To be blunt, probably more upper middle class whites owned TV sets back then, and so they were more likely to want to watch programs about people just like them (if idealized).

Even as fictional, unrealistic characters, I don't think all these women were necessarily "bad" for Femmes or detrimental. It's all in balance and applying what qualities appeal and disregarding the rest of the messages. As a mother myself, I'm far from any of them (maybe a few rungs above Peg Bundy), but June, Donna and Caroline Ingalls were patient, fair and yet held high expectations for their "children". That's something I can take from the shows.

I don't think there's anything nefarious in itself in wanting to keep an orderly, tidy home for one's children or partner-as Jo says, that quality doesn't take away from independence or smarts (and she is wicked smart ). Ma was portrayed as independent and willing to work when circumstances demanded it. All these women, even Lucy, showed initiative, thinking, and service.

I think we have to remember that TV reflected what was going on in society during that time, as unenlightened as it seems today. The 1950's were not that far off from Amos n' Andy on radio, or truly offensive Bugs Bunny cartoons. And maybe June herself isn't the role model, but some of the qualities that she and the other mother figures (I might even throw in Kitty on Bonanza) of the time embodied appeal today, when so much seems unsure and more "callous".

I'm not sure if I made any sense, and apologies if I offended in any way.
__________________
The odds of going to the store for a loaf of bread and coming out with only a loaf of bread are three billion to one. ~Erma Bombeck
Gráinne is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Gráinne For This Useful Post: