<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Screw Dramedy: How We Distinguish Between Comic and Dramatic Television</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/</link>
	<description>Television Reviews and Analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:36:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Polk</title>
		<link>http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/#comment-22732</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonathan Polk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Oct 2010 04:14:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://memles.wordpress.com/?p=3880#comment-22732</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Surprised that no one has suggested that the later years of M*A*S*H are hard to classify along this comedy/dramedy/drama paradigm.  While earlier seasons portrayed an all out comedy with the occasional dramatic moment, like the time Trapper was going to adopt the Korean kid, the later season subverted this and added comic relief to what were essentially dramatic stories.  The fight over the laugh track, given the conversation today about its inclusion bringing a self-awareness of the form which you almost never see in a drama, further serves to blur this line. 

And I would also submit that while M*A*S*H was far from the first sitcom to tackle serious storylines, it was likely the first whose entire format was subverted into being essentially a drama halfway through, or probably a dramedy depending upon the strict definition of the term.  But as Jason mentions above, what we classify a show as is more important than what it actually is, at least in this context.

Yet the series and its actors (and writing probably) were always nominated in the comedy category at the Emmys.  So were someone going to do a sort of historical comparison using the shows you have cited above, M*A*S*H would seem like a good place to start.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surprised that no one has suggested that the later years of M*A*S*H are hard to classify along this comedy/dramedy/drama paradigm.  While earlier seasons portrayed an all out comedy with the occasional dramatic moment, like the time Trapper was going to adopt the Korean kid, the later season subverted this and added comic relief to what were essentially dramatic stories.  The fight over the laugh track, given the conversation today about its inclusion bringing a self-awareness of the form which you almost never see in a drama, further serves to blur this line. </p>
<p>And I would also submit that while M*A*S*H was far from the first sitcom to tackle serious storylines, it was likely the first whose entire format was subverted into being essentially a drama halfway through, or probably a dramedy depending upon the strict definition of the term.  But as Jason mentions above, what we classify a show as is more important than what it actually is, at least in this context.</p>
<p>Yet the series and its actors (and writing probably) were always nominated in the comedy category at the Emmys.  So were someone going to do a sort of historical comparison using the shows you have cited above, M*A*S*H would seem like a good place to start.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Excellence on Selective Terms: Rewarding Series Television at the Peabody Awards &#171; Cultural Learnings</title>
		<link>http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/#comment-15907</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Excellence on Selective Terms: Rewarding Series Television at the Peabody Awards &#171; Cultural Learnings]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2010 22:54:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://memles.wordpress.com/?p=3880#comment-15907</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] their use of the term dramedy, and forgiving the fact that they used &#8220;tuneful&#8221; as an adjective, the problem here is [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] their use of the term dramedy, and forgiving the fact that they used &#8220;tuneful&#8221; as an adjective, the problem here is [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Myles</title>
		<link>http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/#comment-14804</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Myles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:07:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://memles.wordpress.com/?p=3880#comment-14804</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I laugh a lot at Hung a lot too, but I think its actual narrative is almost entirely dramatic: the overbearing presence of the recession keeps things heavily grounded in reality, and while there is plenty of awkwardness it&#039;s ultimately played for character development more than cheap gags.

In other words, it&#039;s not that I don&#039;t laugh at the shows below the diagonal: rather, that&#039;s just not their &quot;purpose&quot; at the end of the day.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I laugh a lot at Hung a lot too, but I think its actual narrative is almost entirely dramatic: the overbearing presence of the recession keeps things heavily grounded in reality, and while there is plenty of awkwardness it&#8217;s ultimately played for character development more than cheap gags.</p>
<p>In other words, it&#8217;s not that I don&#8217;t laugh at the shows below the diagonal: rather, that&#8217;s just not their &#8220;purpose&#8221; at the end of the day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: qualler</title>
		<link>http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/#comment-14803</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[qualler]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:04:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://memles.wordpress.com/?p=3880#comment-14803</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is a great list, although I would still put &quot;Hung&quot; above the dividing line, and in fact place it just below &quot;Bored to Death&quot; in terms of laughs. I see &quot;Hung&quot; as more of a comedy, but mainly because I think anything Thomas Jane says in his voiceover is funny because of his excellent delivery, and any scene with Jane Adams and him is top-notch in terms of either awkward or laugh-out-loud funny. 

As far as &quot;How to Make It in America&quot; (per your Tweet this morning) I&#039;d also put it below, making it more of a light-hearted drama than a &quot;dramedy&quot;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a great list, although I would still put &#8220;Hung&#8221; above the dividing line, and in fact place it just below &#8220;Bored to Death&#8221; in terms of laughs. I see &#8220;Hung&#8221; as more of a comedy, but mainly because I think anything Thomas Jane says in his voiceover is funny because of his excellent delivery, and any scene with Jane Adams and him is top-notch in terms of either awkward or laugh-out-loud funny. </p>
<p>As far as &#8220;How to Make It in America&#8221; (per your Tweet this morning) I&#8217;d also put it below, making it more of a light-hearted drama than a &#8220;dramedy&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bored to Death &#8211; 1&#215;08 &#8211; Take a Dive &#8212; Serialmente</title>
		<link>http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/#comment-13647</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bored to Death &#8211; 1&#215;08 &#8211; Take a Dive &#8212; Serialmente]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Nov 2009 10:01:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://memles.wordpress.com/?p=3880#comment-13647</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] di definizioni e aspettative che derivano da esse? (Articolo di approfondimento consigliato: Screw Dramedy: How We Distinguish Between Comic and Dramatic Television). O semplicemente sono gli autori che, pur avendo tra le mani attori bravi e volendo affiatati, non [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] di definizioni e aspettative che derivano da esse? (Articolo di approfondimento consigliato: Screw Dramedy: How We Distinguish Between Comic and Dramatic Television). O semplicemente sono gli autori che, pur avendo tra le mani attori bravi e volendo affiatati, non [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Myles</title>
		<link>http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/#comment-13602</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Myles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:03:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://memles.wordpress.com/?p=3880#comment-13602</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[...I can&#039;t believe I didn&#039;t think of that.

However, I do know why I didn&#039;t: its unique structure means that it has five different types of episodes, which means that in some ways it becomes five different shows in one. It creates a collective experience very different from any other show on television, which is why classifying alongside other one-hour dramas (yet alone other half-hour series) seems problematic.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;I can&#8217;t believe I didn&#8217;t think of that.</p>
<p>However, I do know why I didn&#8217;t: its unique structure means that it has five different types of episodes, which means that in some ways it becomes five different shows in one. It creates a collective experience very different from any other show on television, which is why classifying alongside other one-hour dramas (yet alone other half-hour series) seems problematic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gould</title>
		<link>http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/#comment-13601</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[gould]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:59:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://memles.wordpress.com/?p=3880#comment-13601</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What about In Treatment?
It&#039;s a 30 (even less) minute drama.

Also, it seems HBO is developing T, a new 30 minute drama about &quot;the gender transformation of a woman into a man&quot;. (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118010905.html?categoryid=14&amp;cs=1&amp;nid=2565&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Variety&lt;/a&gt;).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What about In Treatment?<br />
It&#8217;s a 30 (even less) minute drama.</p>
<p>Also, it seems HBO is developing T, a new 30 minute drama about &#8220;the gender transformation of a woman into a man&#8221;. (<a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118010905.html?categoryid=14&amp;cs=1&amp;nid=2565" rel="nofollow">Variety</a>).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Myles</title>
		<link>http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/#comment-13585</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Myles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 19:06:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://memles.wordpress.com/?p=3880#comment-13585</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I won&#039;t lie and suggest that my own academic hat wasn&#039;t on a bit here as well, so to add your own hat to the ring is never unwelcome around these parts.

One of the questions I have to be curious about is what keeps 30-minute dramas from existing: is it just the vicious cycle of network disinterest leading to writer wariness leading to a lack of scripts leading to network ignorance, or are there actually some 30-minute drama scripts out there that, when given network notes and taken to series, are altered in order to at least vaguely enter into the comic realm?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I won&#8217;t lie and suggest that my own academic hat wasn&#8217;t on a bit here as well, so to add your own hat to the ring is never unwelcome around these parts.</p>
<p>One of the questions I have to be curious about is what keeps 30-minute dramas from existing: is it just the vicious cycle of network disinterest leading to writer wariness leading to a lack of scripts leading to network ignorance, or are there actually some 30-minute drama scripts out there that, when given network notes and taken to series, are altered in order to at least vaguely enter into the comic realm?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Mittell</title>
		<link>http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/#comment-13584</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason Mittell]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:35:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://memles.wordpress.com/?p=3880#comment-13584</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t want to break out the academic hat here, but since I wrote a book on this topic, I can&#039;t help myself! I think you&#039;ve touched on the key element of how genre functions on TV: what we call things is more important than what things are in some &quot;intrinsic&quot; sense. The marketing, scheduling, channel branding, critical discourse, and viewer commentary all work to define a show&#039;s genre in ways that seem to confound an internal sense of narrative or tone. 

For me, the troubling example was Ally McBeal, a show that wanted to be both comedy &amp; drama but instead of creating an interesting balance between the two, it swung wildly between serious and comedic tones. But for the Emmys, it was a comedy; for Fox, it was treated more like a drama. (Northern Exposure is an earlier example that was similarly confounding to many, but I found it more organically unified.)

The other element that is crucial on TV is the show&#039;s length - it&#039;s hard to think of any show since the 1950s/60s (Dragnet, Twilight Zone) that&#039;s clearly a 30 minute drama, while over the last decade we&#039;ve seen more 60 minute shows that skew comedic (and get classified as such by awards). But it&#039;s pretty ridiculous that a show like Ally or Desperate Housewives is compared to a 30-minute comedy like 30 Rock which is all about jokes &amp; pace over plot &amp; character - completely different modes of storytelling and structure.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t want to break out the academic hat here, but since I wrote a book on this topic, I can&#8217;t help myself! I think you&#8217;ve touched on the key element of how genre functions on TV: what we call things is more important than what things are in some &#8220;intrinsic&#8221; sense. The marketing, scheduling, channel branding, critical discourse, and viewer commentary all work to define a show&#8217;s genre in ways that seem to confound an internal sense of narrative or tone. </p>
<p>For me, the troubling example was Ally McBeal, a show that wanted to be both comedy &amp; drama but instead of creating an interesting balance between the two, it swung wildly between serious and comedic tones. But for the Emmys, it was a comedy; for Fox, it was treated more like a drama. (Northern Exposure is an earlier example that was similarly confounding to many, but I found it more organically unified.)</p>
<p>The other element that is crucial on TV is the show&#8217;s length &#8211; it&#8217;s hard to think of any show since the 1950s/60s (Dragnet, Twilight Zone) that&#8217;s clearly a 30 minute drama, while over the last decade we&#8217;ve seen more 60 minute shows that skew comedic (and get classified as such by awards). But it&#8217;s pretty ridiculous that a show like Ally or Desperate Housewives is compared to a 30-minute comedy like 30 Rock which is all about jokes &amp; pace over plot &amp; character &#8211; completely different modes of storytelling and structure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Myles</title>
		<link>http://cultural-learnings.com/2009/11/06/screw-dramedy-how-we-distinguish-between-comic-and-dramatic-television/#comment-13579</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Myles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 00:13:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://memles.wordpress.com/?p=3880#comment-13579</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;d argue Chuck&#039;s a comedy that, when it enters into its serialized stories, introduces dramatic elements. While there is an emotional core to the comedy, if you were to pick a prototypical episode of Chuck it would be funny and silly before it was dramatic. As such, comedy (albeit one very capable of impressing dramatically when it sees fit).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d argue Chuck&#8217;s a comedy that, when it enters into its serialized stories, introduces dramatic elements. While there is an emotional core to the comedy, if you were to pick a prototypical episode of Chuck it would be funny and silly before it was dramatic. As such, comedy (albeit one very capable of impressing dramatically when it sees fit).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

