David Silverman reminded us all on Facebooktoday that we first saw the Simpson family in a short, “Goodnight, Simpsons” on The Tracey Ullman Show in 1987.

Yes, I saw it. I was 12.

I doubt that anyone thought on that night that the family would ever even get their own show, much less that they would be on the air 23 years later. Who could have guessed that there would have a movie and that they would change the face of television, of primetime, of satire, forever?

I doubt anyone could have guessed that the subject of this short would become one of the foci of my life, that I would teach classes on it and one day write a book on it with my best friend.

Thank you, The Simpsons, for giving me so much happiness over the years, for reminding me that television doesn’t have to be stupid, and for showing that dysfunctional families are revelant to our lives. Thank you for being my longest and most satisfying relationship.

Last night, I was eating kalua pork and my roommate heard the doorbell. When I went to check, I found a small box and saw that the return address was McFarland.

I called my son into the living room–surely the book, The Simpsons in the Classroom (co-authored with Denise Du Vernay), was finally here. I got my knife and some champagne.

It occured to me as I made the first incision that I might in fact be cutting into the cover of my book. Luckily, the packers anticipated this and thus a protective layer was the first thing I saw.

I handed the first copy to my son, and showed him the dedication. He hadn’t known that I dedicated it to him. Of course, being a sixteen-year-old, he had to pretend that it wasn’t the coolest thing ever, and he refused to smile in the photo we tried to take. It’s a good thing he’s wonderful in every other way.

A few minutes later, I finished my dinner and then headed out to a choral concert. Today, a few hours later, I will grade papers and prep my lectures for Monday and then head to a garden party.

Somewhere near my solar plexus, there’s a small flame of excitement, and when I catch sight of my book on the coffee table, or when people mention it on Facebook, it flares up and fills my whole body for a second. I become giddy and amazed.

It’s going to be interesting to see how long this high lasts.

I’m putting together a book launch event–stay tuned for details!

April, Courtney, and I headed to WonderCon yesterday. We parked close to the convention center and then followed the people in costumes to the door. First, we headed to the exhibition hall, where April found some amazing Simpsons toys. Several artists were trying to sell their wares–a few were handing out samples. Then, we came upon the stars.

Which stars? Denise Crosby (Tasha Yar on STTNG), Aaron Douglas (the Chief on BSG), Lou Ferrigno (the Hulk), Richard Hatch (BSG), Richard Herd (the Greatest American Hero), Suzie Plakson (Q’s “wife” on STTNG), Q himself, Brent Spiner (Data), and Lindsey Wagner, the original Bionic Woman. We didn’t actually get to speak to any of these people–they were charging for pictures and photos and thus weren’t open for free geeky conversation. Spike from Buffy was behind a curtain somewhere, charging $40 for an autograph. The Chief from BSG had a sign up that his money was going to a charity, at least.

There was one man we couldn’t resist, however. Adam Baldwin, from Firefly and Chuck, made us gasp in a display of nerdiness we hadn’t experienced in years. We pooled together $10 to get a picture with him. (Just as we were crowding together, he commented on the aroma of weed that passed by us.) The best part was that I got to touch him for free. The second best part was that we kept hearing people say that “Alec Baldwin” was there.

After a quick lunch, we headed back in for panels. We were going to sit in on a panel on Star Trek and Philosophy, but the speaker, a preacher, seemed boring, so we headed off to a celebration of the “anniversary” of the Galaxy Quest television show. We were afraid that a few of the audience members wouldn’t play along with the panel as they discussed their favorite episodes, guest appearances, and the resurgence of the series, but everyone seemed game. In the very entertaining panel, they mocked the conventions of sci-fi tv and showed that we nerds can make fun of ourselves.

Then, as we were heading into a panel on Kick Ass, we were stopped by one of the marketing people of the film. He asked us if we would see the film that night for free and then be interviewed on camera about it afterwards. He said that they needed to reach out to a female audience and that our femaleness (combined with our hotness) made us ideal. He also seemed to think we were young.

Thus, armed with our VIP tickets, we went into a crowded room for a panel discussion with the cast and one of the graphic artists. I’ll be reviewing the film for matchflick soon, so I’ll sign off with this:

April, Adam, Courtney, Karma

Living under a rock? Then you might not know that The Simpsons is celebrating its 20th anniversary tomorrow. (More importantly, you may want to reconsider your living arrangements. And how are you getting the internet under there?)

Tomorrow night my family will gather around the tv, which has spent more time raising the boy than I have, to enjoy the 450th episode of this groundbreaking series, followed by Morgan Spurlock’s documentary.

As some readers know, I talked to one of the producers of the documentary. (And she said she found my name in her first day of research!) Du and I were hoping to get into the documentary. We’re superfans, right? I mean, our book on The Simpsons is coming out in May and is available for preorder: http://www.amazon.com/Simpsons-Classroom-Embiggening-Experience-Springfield/dp/0786444908/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263072262&sr=1-1 (See what I did there; it’s all about subtlety.)

Apparently, Du and I are not crazy enough. Well, we are, but it’s not that apparent upon just talking to us for a few minutes–we’re a simmering and longer-lasting kind of crazy. But we don’t have our whole back tatooed with images from the show. Who does? Watch the documentary and find out.

A few notes on the anniversary: if you’re counting from the first time the Simpsons family was on the air, the 20th anniversary would have been April 19th, 2007 (we first saw the Simpsons on The Tracey Ullman Show). If you’re counting from the first time the show was on the air, the anniversary would have been December 17th, 2009 (the first full-length episode was “Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire“). Sunday night is relatively close to the next possible anniversary date, January 14th, when “Bart the Genius” appeared.

I know, I know, I sound like Comic Book Guy (Jeff Anderson). Well, I sound like him in nerdy-knowledge, but a lot of other bloggers out there sound like him in their constant irritable yammering about how The Simpsons isn’t funny anymore and about how it shouldn’t be on the air. Even my own boyfriend complains about The Simpsons–he got irritated with the show a few years ago when they had too many un-funny guest stars. Admittedly, there have been a few irritating guest stars, mostly of the sports-variety (they don’t card read good). Luckily, the show has gotten better on this particular front.

But I want to address the critics’ repeated concerns. First, if you think the show shouldn’t be on anymore, don’t watch it. Some of us do still enjoy it, so let us have it. However, when you turn from The Simpsons, don’t be surprised when you realize that the vast (vast) majority of what’s on television doesn’t even deserve a discussion about continuing quality, as it never had quality in the first place.

Let’s address the quality issue. Some argue that The Simpsons isn’t funny anymore. I will agree with most critics that Seasons 4-8 were amazing (the Conan years were the best!), but there were some duds then and some winners then. There are dud episodes now, but there are some winners, too.

In fact, I don’t think the show has changed all that much. We’ve changed though. Yes, like Kent Brockman, I’m placing the blame squarely on you, the viewer! Think back to those early years of The Simpsons–it was innovative and scandalous not because of anything inherent, but because we found it so. It was new–we were shocked & pleased. Arguably, The Simpsons and our reaction to it changed television. Now we have South Park and Family Guy and the myriad shows on Adult Swim. Those shows often seem to be the innovative and scandalous things we long for. But note how the older a show becomes, the less scandalous we find it.

A show can only push an envelope in the beginning. Then we get used to the new position of the envelope and something else has to come along to push it into a new place. That doesn’t mean the show changes or gets less funny. In fact, it means the opposite–the show is the same–our expectations have shifted. The Simpsons and South Park often seem quaint today compared to newer shows because we have become immune to their brand of shock. That’s what repeated innoculations do.

I will readily admit that I’ve changed as a viewer. I’m not the same person I was in 1989. I have become desensitized to a lot. But I still believe that The Simpsons is superior to its cartoon progeny. Why? Because it’s still well-written. Because I actually care about the characters and the community it’s built (I actively dislike most of the characters on Family Guy, in comparison, no matter how funny the constant references to the popular culture of my childhood are). I enjoy watching the shows repeatedly–the layers of jokes and references in the show are unparalleled in contemporary cartoons (Arrested Development came close in the non-cartoon world). Thus, I see new things every time I watch. While jokes may be funny on the second viewing of the other shows, I don’t see anything new in the watching.

The Simpsons provides us with a language we speak, a perfectly cromulent language in fact. It gives us something to talk about with people from other cultures–laughter is universal & so is laughing with the show. And please don’t forget, whatever  you think about the show now, that The Simpsons paved the way for the currently edgy shows you love. Wanna take bets on whether your favorite show will reach 450 episodes?

I didn’t think so.

Happy Anniversary, The Simpsons!

Love, Karma

Just this morning, Denise and I received a list of editorial questions regarding our Simpsons book.

Although it’s never fun to deal with these questions, today is the absolute perfect day to be reminded that we are Simpsonologists. Today is the 20th anniversary of The Simpsons.

To be clear, the Simpsons as a family was first seen in 1987, but it was this day 20 years ago that The Simpsons appeared as a show with “Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire.”

Since I had watched The Tracey Ullman Show religiously, I was excited about The Simpsons incarnation and mom and I set up the VCR. Luckily, my mom wasn’t one of those who only saw Bart’s bad behavior (it was in this episode that Bart first said “I’m Bart Simpson, who the hell are you?”). Instead, my mother saw the show as funny and familiar and ultimately celebratory of the nuclear family and of the Christmas spirit.

My mother did not become the fan I did, but she nurtured my interests. (She also allowed me to read The Handmaid’s Tale in high school, after some members of my family said she shouldn’t–this eventually lead to me becoming the President of the Margaret Atwood Society. Surely there are lessons here about parents and permissiveness.) I’ve passed on my fandom to my son, who is 4 years shy of this 20 year anniversary. I also hope that I’ve nurtured things that will flower for him in unexpected ways.

So–happy birthday, The Simpsons! And many more!

Apparently, the cats look forward to me opening the door.  They’ve all learned to jump the back fence, although not all of them have learned to jump back in (which would be great, since the cat door opens to the back).  Methinks the cats like to trap themselves out front so I have to play the doorman again.

I’m looking forward to the following:

1. having a break from teaching.  As much as I love teaching (and I really, really do), it’s a difficult job to do non-stop, so I need to recharge a bit.

2. being on track with the book.  Denise and I are going gangbusters & now that I have a teaching break, the writing will go faster.

3. perhaps holing up in a cave/condo/cabin somewhere with a laptop to write said book.

4. Margaret Atwood’s new novel, The Year of the Flood, which comes out September 22nd.

5. The Simpsons, Season 12 on DVD, dropping on the 18th.  The boy, who is 16 today, is going to buy it for me for my birthday.

Some blogger believes I “forgot” things; not mentioning things in a non-comprehensive list is not to have forgotten them.  His title is also weird–I distinctly mention that there have been lawsuits, so his claim that they’ve not had them in 20 years is off.  The article is here:  http://reporter.blogs.com/thresq/2009/05/the-simpsons-20-years-of-lawsuitfree-funny.html

My touching tribute to Dom DeLuise (via my matchflick column) is here:  http://www.matchflick.com/column/1946

Was watching last night’s Daily Show whilst doing yoga this morning.  Newt Gingrich claimed that socialized medicine (aka universal healthcare) would be bad because bureaucrats would be making your healthcare decisions.  He said the responsibility for your healthcare (and he seemed to imply fiscal as well) should be on you (and your consultations with your doctor).

My doctor and I do make decisions.  But they all have to be approved by bureaucrats at the insurance company.  Those bureaucrats were forced to take me, but if I were a freelance writer, I wouldn’t be able to get health insurance at all.  Let’s not forget that other bureaucrats make my health care decisions at the law level–whether I can have medical marijuana, whether a doctor can use the word “abortion,” etc.

So there are three problems with Mr. Gingrich’s fear of bureaucrats.

1.  He’s fine with a lot of laws about what my doctor can say or do.  That’s government intervention in health care.

2.  Bureaucrats completely run my health care.  And the really bad thing is that they do so for profit, which means that they are not in any way motivated to make decisions based on what’s good for me or what’s medically better.  They are motivated to deny coverage because that’s what happens in a profit-based system.

3.  For all those without healthcare, they would love to have a bureaucrat deciding whether they can have their cancer treatment.  Right now, there is no “decision” available to them.  At least a bureaucrat might say yes.

Am sick of this “bureaucrat” scare tactic.  WTF do they think we have now, if not bureaucrats?  Who’s living in a place where all the decisions are made by you and your doctor?

Oh, wait, those people in countries with universal healthcare tend to have that freedom.

is here:
http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/25661

Yea! (Even if they did edit it down.) Yea!

is here:
http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/25661

Yea! (Even if they did edit it down.) Yea!