Lock and Load! Wit and Social Critique in the Television Series Boston Legal

Diplomarbeit

Zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades

einer Magistra der Philosophie

an der Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz

vorgelegt von Christine BAUER

am Institut für Amerikanistik Begutachter: Ao. Univ.- Prof. Mag. Dr. phil. Klaus Rieser

Graz, 2014 Table of Contents

Table of Contents ...... 2 1. Introduction ...... 3 2. Theoretical Part ...... 4 2.1 TV Style ...... 4 2.2 Genre or How to Label Things ...... 6 2.2.1 TV Genre...... 8 3. Form and Authenticity ...... 10 4. Character Realization ...... 13 4.1 Stereotyping ...... 15 4.2 Dialogue ...... 17 5. Representation and Identity ...... 19 5.1 Satirical Representation ...... 20 6. Television and Ideology ...... 21 6.1 Postmodernism ...... 26 6.1.1 The Modern and the Postmodern: Contrasting Tendencies ...... 27 6.2 Postmodern Television Drama ...... 29 7. Analysis ...... 31 7.1 At First Sight: The Style of Boston Legal ...... 31 7.2 In Touch with Reality: True-to-Life Issues in BL ...... 34 7.3 Getting to Know Each Other: Selected Characters ...... 37 7.3.1 Denny Crane ...... 38 7.3.2 Alan Shore ...... 43 7.3.3 Shirley Schmidt ...... 46 7.4 An Unexpected Example of Stereotyping in BL: Brad Chase ...... 48 7.5 Challenging Identity Categories ...... 51 7.5.1 Soulsister ...... 52 7.5.2 Mighty Dwarf ...... 52 7.6 A Case of Capital Punishment in the Episode “The Court Supreme“ ...... 53 7.6.1 Alan´s argumentation at the United States Supreme Court ...... 55 7.7. Not just a Case of Tax Evasion...... 58 7.8 Ideology and Boston Legal ...... 60

2

7.8.1 Postmodern Ideas in Boston Legal ...... 62 7.9 Dialogue ...... 63 8. Conclusion ...... 64 9. Works Cited ...... 66 9.1 Primary Sources ...... 66 9.2 Secondary Sources ...... 66 9.3 Web Publications ...... 67

1. Introduction

Television can be considered a “medium under transition” (11) as Jason Mittell put it in 2008, as “digital media have grown in importance, the role of television is challenged by…the Internet and video games”. This is why television programs must attract attention. Apart from scheduling 1 there is the tradition of “series running in seasons from fall to spring” (27). Additionaly, television series will always sell as a digital medium, either on dvd or via streaming. As a consequence American TV series are part of mass culture and as such are outpoured over the whole globe. American politics are also of concern to the world as its decisions often have global consequences. The following thesis analyzes the television series Boston Legal created by the American screen writer David E. Kelley. It aired in five seasons between 2004 and 2008 and was produced in association with 20th Century Fox Television for the ABC. The courtroom drama offers explicit social and political commentary combined with witty dialogues. Mittell states that ‘most programs are just designed to entertain and distract an audience, and analyzing their meaning as shaping American culture and forging national identity might appear to overstate television´s importance’(288). TV-series must usually follow certain conventions because they aim at distracting the viewers from reality and thus the issues treated are escapist and distorted. Mittell also refers to what some critics consider the ‘cultural forum model’, suggesting that ‘television programs seek to reach the broadest possible audiences...it must grapple with significant social and cultural issues relevant to many viewers’(284). So the cultural forum model opposes the meaning of ideological critics that ’television

1 The term refers to the networks´practices to offer daytime, late-night and prime time programs. 3 presents a consistent and uncontested vision of the world, reproducing the interests of the ruling class and the corporate television industry”(283). Moreover, Mittell explains that ’the forum of television is a place where the ideals and opinions of the viewers are represented in the culture” (284), with representation, in America´s democratic system, meaning to participate in political life (cf.284). Chapter one and two of this thesis deal with film theory and thus will provide some insight into theories about style and genre, form and authenticity. Character realization including some remarks on stereotyping are exposed in chapter four, whereas theories concerning representation and identity follow in chapter five. The theoretical part of this thesis concludes with chapter six dealing with television and ideology.

2. Theoretical Part

2.1 TV Style Everybody likes to talk about style. Especially viewers of new and trendy TV series do not merely adore the screenplay or the actors, in most series from the beginning of the 2000s onwards it’s more than ever a certain distinctive style that shoots a TV series to fame. Interestingly, during this time period, some changes were occurring. A crop of new TV series exhibited certain key stylistic elements. Style became the buzz-word on every discussion about tonight´s TV program. Forensic scientists, housewives and medical doctors entered our living room, but the hype was less about that they entered but how, or as James Monaco put it, referring to CSI: Crime Scene Investigation:” It´s less about logic than the visual ride: constant flashbacks, real or not; heavy pop soundtracks; lots of color washes – green, red, gold; slomo and quick cuts; lots of flash wipes; constant soundtrack wooshes; switch, switch , switch in the plotline”. (Monaco 2010:556) It is necessary to amend the conventional understanding of what style is by adding elements that can be analyzed. Television scholar Jason Mittell talks about five main stylistic techniques- staging, camerawork, editing, sound, and graphics, but focuses on “staging” as the most important facet of television style:

Staging conveys information about the show´s setting and tone. Sets, props, and costumes are carefully designed to provide visual markers about the characters and how they live…television series typically design sets that might last throughout a multi-year series…the goal is…to create an inhabitable and believable space that…viewers welcome into their home (Mittell 2010:176f) .

4

So for television, style refers to “the variety of formal elements that are used in all genres to communicate meanings and elicit responses from viewers…Stylistic analysis can allow us to appreciate the artistry and creativity offered by a program, highlight how particular meanings are encoded …explain the emotional impact…on viewers” (176). And further: “ Television series face particular challenges concerning staging when compared to film…television series typically design sets that might last throughout a multi-year series” (179) as compared to films that are usually “compressed two- hour-narratives” (179). Be it either a film, or a regularly watched Television series- viewers tend to develop a close or even intimate relationship towards their favorite program in the course of time. This relationship also links with expectations about style, due to Bordwell: “The spectator has a relation to style as well. Although we are seldom conscious of the fact, we tend to have expectations about style…” (2010:313) Moreover, “style can confirm our expectations, or modify them, or cheat, or challenge them” (313). This is especially true for TV-series of the eighties and early nineties. Monaco states that “…in television the writer-producer has become the artistic hero of the day, with real power…(2009:548). Stephen Bochco exercised this newly gained power twice:

Perhaps the most innovative narrative in any medium during the eighties…Hill Street Blues merged hard-hitting, issues-oriented police drama with absurdist comedy, all set in the context of a continuing set of soap opera stories about a large group of characters. It brought Robert Altman´s sense of humor and range to realistic docudrama treatment of relevant political issues. The combination of stylized high comedy with serious intelligence, all set in the context of the most mundane of genres, marked a new level of sophistication in storytelling –one that has yet to be exceeded by practitioners of the feature film (547). In 1985 Bochco developed his typical new style even further with another TV- series when he “applied this imaginative and innovative style to a group of lawyers. L.A.Law covered hundreds of issues with wit and perception during its long run” (547). The series was significant for the period, or as Monaco puts it: “ It may be remembered as the emblematic television show of the eighties, since it dealt almost as often with business issues as with political issues, and it was the business of business that characterized that decade in America (547f)”. L.A.Law was a truly issue- oriented series, and when in 1990 Dick Wolf came in as a producer, this became even clearer: “By eschewing character, Wolf was able to concentrate on ideas and issues, producing one intense and involving story-line after the other. Because the series is about ideas rather than character it has been able to survive numerous cast changes…(550). In that

5 respect L.A.Law differs strongly from Boston Legal, as will be pointed out in the practical part of my thesis, as the latter´s success came true not only but mostly with David E. Kelley´s choice of characters and their degree of popularity which places them even close to iconicity. Nevertheless both TV-series deal with lawyers, are issue- oriented and represent the trend of thought of the time in which they were produced regardless their differing implementation of style. In this context another television series should be mentioned, as it might count as a valuable precursor for the booming CSI –series by Jerry Bruckheimer. Monaco even claims that “What Stephen Bochco was to the eighties and Dick Wolf was to the nineties, Jerry Bruckheimer has been to the oughts. His CSI (2000-) and its spinoffs have defined the TV esthetic of the decade… the CSI style ows a little to the high style of Miami Vice, a lot more to the digital technology that makes such a visual busy-ness so easy” (556). Though from the the noughties and mainly focusing on a meanwhile “prevalent crime-scene gore” (Ibid.), CSI with its highly stylized staging and somber atmosphere resembles Michael Mann´s Miami Vice (1985-89), a series which was widely acknowledged in the eighties. It “set a Film-Noir cop show in the colorful pastels of the new capital of Latino America with a hip soundtrack to match “(550). Millions of fascinated viewers watched former Vietnam veteran Crockett and his Puerto Rican partner Tubbs sneaking around as undercover agents of the Drug and Vice Squad dressed in their highly fashionable linen trousers and Italian leather moccasins, representing the mood of their decade. To sum up, the rise of the television series definitely reached its peak during that period, or as Monaco states: “In the eighties and nineties many filmmakers found more rewarding work, esthetically and intellectually, in television… Television in the eighties, like film in the sixties, was mature enough to develop a self consciousness” (548).

2.2 Genre or How to Label Things When talking about different types of films, one tends to be influenced by stereotypical arguments like “Native Americans appear in films belonging to the genre of the Western:” Bordwell states that “ the popular cinema of most countries rests on genre- filmmaking.” and “ some genres stand out by their subjects or themes.” (Bordwell 2010:328) But is it as easy as that? The vivid discussion of genre specification clearly denies this. Bordwell continues that the theme or the subject matter is not so central to defining a genre…some genres are defined by the distinctive

6 emotional effect they aim for: amusement in comedies, tension in suspense films (Ibid.). Most viewers would recognize a Western or police drama, though the specific film or television series might display elements of more than one genre. Nevertheless a specific film or TV series clearly follows certain conventions, certain “plot elements may be conventional” (Bordwell 330) so that the movie corresponds to what Ryall refers to as “a detailed set of assumptions- an intertextual consciousness- derived from a regular viewing of related films and an awareness of the various secondary discourses.” (Ryall 1998:337). A Western often has a revenge plotline as specific plot element, (Bordwell 330) in a legal drama it is justice that molds the storyline. A common feature of soap opera is adultery. But is it as simple as that? Stuart Hall argues that “it is not possible to fix the meaning of particular generic signifiers. Neither is it possible to define genres through a fixed set of attributes unique to themselves” (2012:357). So there are overlaps, guns for example occur in a Western as well as in a gangster film (Ibid). Moreover, Hall states: “What defines the genre is not the specific convention itself but its placing in a particular relationship with other elements – a relationship which generates different meanings and narrative possibilities according to the genre: for example, the gun wielded against the wilderness in the western, or against society in the gangster film” (357); This goes along with what Bordwell claims:

Other genre conventions are more thematic, involving general meanings that are summoned again and again: the Hong Kong martial- arts film commonly celebrates loyalty and obedience to one´s teacher, The screwball comedy traditionally sets up a thematic opposition between a stiff, unyielding social milieu and characters´ urges for freedom and innocent zaniness. (330) Ryall explains such repeatedly and commonly used features in various films as a “continuum”, created by one film that follows the other over a certain period of time, using the same images and similar plot structure. Ryall states: “Genres can be studied both in terms of an internal history of forms, themes, and iconography, and in terms of their relationship to broader cultural and social shifts” (329). Moreover Stuart Hall claims that

multiple pressures towards innovation and renewal mean that popular genres not only engage with social change but become key sites for the emerging articulation of and contest over change. So the discourse and imagery of new social movements – for example, the women´s, gay, or black liberation movements – which circulate into public consciousness through campaign groups, parliamentary and social policy debates, new and popular journalism, and other media representations, provide popular genres with

7

material for new story lines and the pleasures of dramatic enactment (362).

Labelling a film or a television series is never as easy as it might seem, and the discussions about film genre are a very broad issue, thus in categorizing and analyzing it appears to be helpful to keep in mind what Ryall calls the fluidity of genres (1998:339). Instead of merely trying to label a certain genre, “it is necessary to probe the consequences of positioning the film in relation to the various genres to which it has a family resemblance, and to think about genre in relation to the process of film comprehension…” (336). Though some genres stand out by their subjects and themes what Ryall proposes here is an audience-oriented approach rather than a generic labelling of films, he claims further that: “…all films have woven into their texture at some level (narrative, style, iconography) signals that indicate the appropriate ways in which they might be understood and appreciated.” (337). Hall states that “ Genre is a system or framework of conventions, expectations and possibilities (Hall:358). To sum up the limits to the precision with which the concept of genre can be applied along with Bordwell we might take War of the Worlds as an example, as it combines horror, science fiction and family melodrama. Is Psycho a slasher movie or a mystery thriller? (329) And further:

For the vast publicity system that exists around filmmaking, genres are a simple way to characterize a film. In fact, reviewers are often central in gathering and crystallizing notions about genres…some reviewers tend to dismiss genre films as shallow and trivial, assuming them to be simply formulaic…undoubtly, many films in all genres are cheaply and unimaginatively made. Yet some of the greatest film also fall into genres…On the whole, genre is a category best used to describe and analyze films, not to evaluate them. For viewers, genre often provides a way of finding a film they want to see … audiences expect the genre film to offer something familiar, but they also demand fresh variations on it” (329f). Bordwell concludes: “The filmmaker may devise something mildly or radically different, but it will still be based on tradition. The interplay of convention and innovation, familiarity and novelty, is central to the genre film”(331).

2.2.1 TV Genre There are limitations to the usefulness of genre theory, as it turns out to be pointless to argue that there is something like generic purity in relation to television programmes, as television genres and programmes are hybrids. So for example it is typical for soap operas to focus on characters´private lives and to have a continuing storyline. Yet a distinction is not as easy anylonger, as many series use self-contained

8 episodes with autonomous plotlines as well (cf.Creeber 2011:8). But why is there mutation? Creeber explains that “much television programming is produced...in relatively close proximity to its screening date. This is obvious in the case of news or current affairs, but also affects comedy and drama series as well. Television producers change aspects of their programmes in response to audience feedback: characters can be killed off or foregrounded” (8). So the relationship between viewer and programme is more direct here than compared to the medium of film. A term that needs to be explained as it often occurs in the discussion of television programs, is “format”: Creeber points out that “ unlike genre, format is widely used within the industry and among consumers as a way of describing the kind of programme they are watching” (9). So the term “format” is an industrial term, or a “production category with relatively rigid boundaries that are difficult to transgress without coming up with a new format” (ibid.). Genre is referred to as “the product of a text- and audience-based negotiation activated by the viewers expectations...genre is the larger, more inclusive category” (9). In order to dig a little deeper into the matter of genre and television I would like to state what Glen Creeber says , who quotes from Mittell (2004) referring to television genre: “ Rather than regarding genres as properties of television programmes to be analysed, defined or interpreted, genres can be viewed as cultural categories that circulate around and through television programming (2011:12). Creeber suggests from this approach that “genres are not lodged in the texts or programmes categorised by particular genres: instead, genres are forged by the cultural processes of categorisation itself” (12). Again referring to Mittell, Creeber mentions

three particular discursive practices that are commonly used to constitute television genres: definition (for instance, “this show is a sports programme because it features athletic competition”), interpretation (“sports programming celebrates national identity”) and evaluation (“sports are more legitimate than reality TV”). Through these discursive practices the category of a sports programme is made culturally coherent and accumulates meanings and associations that link it to particular social norms and values, aspects of the genre that would not be discernable just by analysing the programmes themselves (12). Creeber suggests to consider if a television series either criticises or supports the dominating social norms (12), “whether they are seen as tied to real-life cases or functioning as escapist fantasies”(12). Concerning the debate around escapism I would like to continue with what Mittell states:

9

Television is often considered an escapist medium, and thus its meanings may have little to do with the real world...but this approach neglects the fact that many fantasy programs do offer meanings concerning serious issues, whether it´s the gender politics of Bewitched or the attitudes toward government in The X-Files. Clearly we cannot dismiss television´s meanings as simply escapism, as there is always some resonance with real issues even in the most escapist show (2010:269f). The other position would be that television mirrors reality. Mittell declines this view as “to simplistic” (270). He prefers the metaphor of a funhouse mirror, as images are either “altered or distorted” (ibid.), this is to say that “some elements are enlarged and highlighted, while others shrink or disappear altogether...in this way, television does not reflect as much as refract the world, altering its appearance through its particular techniques and forms of conveying meaning”(270).

3. Form and Authenticity

When analyzing a film or a television series in terms of film theory it is necessary to talk about form. According to Bordwell (2010:67) “film form is a system- that is, a unified set of related, interdependent elements…many of the principles of artistic form are matters of convention.” He continues:

The forms of different films can vary enormously. We can distinguish, however, five general principles that we notice in experiencing a film´s formal system: function, similarity and repetition, difference and variation, development, and unity/disunity. One of the functions of the use of formal devices like for example shot composition or mise- en-scene can be to create an impression of realism, though “realism, as a standard of value, however, raises several problems. Notions of realism vary across cultures, over time, and even among individuals (Bordwell 119). King describes authenticity in film as entailing “claims to the status of actuality, of something ´really happening´ rather than being fabricated, in the pro-filmic reality, the material that unfolds in front of the camera” (108). The creation of an impression being real is often achieved by the use of real landscapes and real people. Especially true for television series is that they often refer to issues of current political or sociological interest in society, reflecting the trend of thought of a certain period. Geoff King, though mainly focusing on Independent Cinema furnishes a universal explanation which also might be considered useful in the studies of television series and how the producer achieves to create the impression of authenticity by claiming that

A distinction can be made between the creation of an impression of authenticity in various aspects of the pro-filmic reality and in the use of particular formal devices through which the matter in front of the camera is conveyed to the viewer. In many cases

10

the two overlap, sometimes necessarily. Shooting in real locations or following improvised dimensions of performance might necessitate the use of unsteady hand-held camerawork, awkyard zooms or imprecise framing (113). So the inventive use of formal devices can, but need not be the case in order to support the impression of authenticity. A film may follow certain genre conventions and continuity editing or narrative structure may be quite conventional and therefore the whole film might not differ a lot from the mainstream Hollywood movie, this is also true for films belonging to the independent sector, though Newman argues that a higher complexity of storytelling in the past two decades of American film has sprung from the independent cinema movement (Newman:90). The style of a film is “largely motivated by content” (King:147). The duration of shots, if longer than the average shots throughout the movie, can create an impression of what might be the real experience of the protagonist, like being lost somewhere. Extended shots keep the viewer “both in close physical proximity to characters- as if following their progress, documentary style- and at a distance, deprived of the brand of emotional intimacy…” (147). Further through shots on really existing locations a strong feel of authenticity can be achieved. Moreover King argues that a higher degree of authenticity is not only a question of shooting on real locations (108), but he also argues for acting as “another dimension in which claims to the status of authenticity before the camera can be made, at the level of performance itself, even when this occurs within an entirely fictional frame” meaning that a further dimension of reality, besides real surroundings or authenticity-oriented mise-en-scene, is that of the unfolding performance of actors and the emotional reality of character to which it aspires (110). Newman takes up the theme when saying that “…critics and filmmakers alike often note that while Hollywood movies tend to emphasize plot above all else, indie films are generally more character-driven. This links up to most television series, as they are often character-driven as well. The success or cult status of a television series, as already mentioned in the chapter about style, largely depends on being somewhat outstanding by meeting or consciously not meeting the viewers´ expectations. Stacey Abbott, when talking about what defines the cult-status of a television program, claims that “these niche, often marginal, shows have repeatedly served to redefine and challenge TV conventions by pushing the boundaries of what is acceptable stylistically, narratively, and thematically... (2010:3) So what does it need for a cult series- a bold character and a unique plot- not necessarily, though special attention in this respect

11 should also be paid to character development. Yet Newman argues that “character complexity is independent of plot complexity…” (Newman: 90). In the course of my thesis I will later deal with character realization in more detail, and therefore meanwhile go on with Bordwell´s definition on plot:” The term plot is used to describe everything visibly and audibly present in the film before us.” (2010:80) When talking about plot one should take in account some remarks on the narrative: Bordwell considers a narrative to be a chain of events linked by cause and effect and occurring in time and space (2010:79). Narrative form is not only limited to fictional films, but it can also appear that authenticity-driven films like documentaries employ narrative form. So narrative form can appear in all basic types of film. (78) Bordwell states that “the fact that a narrative relies on causality, time, and space, doesn´t mean that other formal principles can´t govern the film.” He explains further that the set of all the events in a narrative, both the ones explicitly presented and those the viewer infers, constitutes the story. The total world of the story action is called the film´s diegesis. So landscapes, towns, cars, animals, and people are all diegetic because “they are assumed to exist in the world that the film depicts” (80). Formal devices like editing and sound can work non-diegetically. What does this mean? Bordwell explains that the plot- the totality of the film- can bring in non-diegetic material, meaning material inserted from outside the story for the effect of creating a ‘real world’ “(81). He continues:

In sum, story and plot overlap in one respect and diverge in others, the plot explicitly presents certain story events, so these are common to both domains. The story goes beyond the plot in suggesting some diegetic events that we never witness. The plot goes beyond the story world by presenting non-diegetic images and sounds that may affect our understanding of the action (ibid.). The representation of a so –called real world represented on the TV screen yet needs a closer look: Glen Creeber quotes from a study about serial drama and its pleasures (2011:64):

A number of viewers judged Dallas to be realistic. However, it was clear that this sense of reality did not emerge from the show´s diegetic world, its settings, character and plot elements; these aspects of the show were incommensurable with the reality of viewers´ everyday lives. Rather, viewers derived a sense of realism from the show´s apparently true-to-life depiction of psychological situations...what is indicated as “real” indicates above all else a certain structure of feeling which is aroused by the programme (ibid.). To sum up, a television series, in this case Dallas, attracts audience by what is called “emotional realism” (64) whereas “the external manifestation of the fictional

12 world...contributes to pleasure not because of its reality effect...but because of its stylisation (ibid.)”. The question of employing a certain degree of authenticity or realism within a television series, is closely linked to its success as writer Stacey Abbott states:

The system of television ratings traditionally rewarded shows that were watched, caring little about shows that were loved. Love was nice, but didn´t put delicious ad dollars on the table. Now, however, there´s some evidence that things have changed...you want an involved audience...you want a show that feels real, that challenges its audience to watch carefully, pay attention, listen hard, take the lessons, love the world. You want that engaged, challenged audience. You want a cult (Abbott 53).

4. Character Realization

Creating a specific world with clear, authentic references to the “real world” of the audience or its expectations towards what is considered “real” on side of the viewer provides the basis of authentic character realization. Linda Seger, one of American top writers of film and television, in her book Creating Unforgettable Character refers to “context” (1990:1) as the most important component in inventing plausible characters. Characters as such are “a product of their environment…the contexts that most influence character include the culture and ethnic backgrounds such as social, religious and educational background, historical period, location, and occupation (5f)”. Context again needs research, either by close observation or systematic interviews with real lawyers, doctors or police officers. Many writers set their scripts in “real” places, often because they know the area out of personal experience: “Two of Ian Flemings James Bond novels, Dr. No and Live and Let Die, and several of his short stories were set in Jamaica, where he maintained an estate, Golden Eye. He visited Tokyo before writing You Only Live Twice, and wrote From Russia with Love after riding the Orient express”(10). Seger considers a profound research essential in developing authentic characters as “ it paves the way for the imagination to give the character life (21) “ and once more referring to the importance of location she claims further that: “Location affects many different aspects of a character. The frenetic rhythm of Philadelphia in Witness is different from the slowe-paced life on the Amish farm. The rhythm of the West in Electric Horseman is different from the rhythms of New York in Working Girl. And each will have an effect on the character”(10). The rise of the television drama during the eighties brought forth not only new visual styles and a new depth in content and the issues that were treated, but also the

13 characters gained depth. Whereas in Law and Order character development played a minor role compared to the content, there were other series in which the focus clearly was a different one. The Cosby Show (1984-92) presented the African- American family in a new light. During the seventies and eighties “black sitcoms had been common …ever since Norman Lear´s spinoff The Jeffersons, but the emphasis had always been on race “(Monaco:550). In The Bill Cosby Show Bill Cosby as the witty and successful doctor and head of a middle-class Brooklyn family emphasized the humanity of his character and his family—not their race. As a result, The Cosby Show stands as a landmark in the history of American race politics (550).” Monaco even grants him a place “ in the pantheon of American cultural icons”(550). Bordwell states that “ iconography consists of recurring symbolic images that carry meaning…objects and settings often furnish iconography…even stars can become iconographic: John Wayne for the Western, Arnold Schwarzenegger for the action picture, Jim Carrey for comedy” (Bordwell:330). In the practical part of my thesis I will take a closer look at some of the actors starring in Boston Legal, and whether their iconic status can be confirmed. Each television series comprises several actors, and “each character fulfills particular functions in a narrative” (Mittell:214). Instead of one main protagonist in a single movie “ongoing series typically present an ensemble of central characters, each of whom may serve as protagonist for a particular episode (214). Though there are a number of well- known characters having emerged from TV series, “even in a series with a strong central protagonist, as ...in House M.D., or Frasier, the protagonist is typically part of a team of central characters who comprise an engaging ensemble (214). Yet characters from this ensemble of actors encircling a main protagonist “may serve as protagonist for a particular episode”(ibid.). As every narrative at same point might need a villain, it is the so called antagonist who acts as opponent to the protagonist: “Television series might feature antagonists in single episodes, as in the criminal or police drama, but ongoing narratives rarely have such clear villains. Soap operas famously feature villains who later become heroes (as well as the reverse), and prime time serials often embrace such ambiguous characters whose alliances and motives are always shifting, such as Arvin Sloane on Alias…or Ben Linus on Lost. On comedies, antagonists are typically humanized and allowed to coexist with the ensemble, as with…Dwight Schrute on The Office. Even Taxi´s Louie DePalma, who might be the least sympathetic regular character ever to appear on a network sitcom, was portrayed with sufficient charm and heart to make him part of the ensemble” (215).

14

After having invested in several seasons, many viewers have build up a strong relationship towards their favorite television series, due to the fact that “viewers can grow to know television characters with much more depth than possible in a single film…the characters´ relationships become more defined and central to the ongoing series narrative “(ibid.).

4.1 Stereotyping When talking about representation the next step would be to draw upon the notion of stereotypes, which Mittell defines as “narrow, oversimplified, and inaccurate definitions of cultural identity” and continues:” While select elements of a stereotype might be true about some members of a cultural group, the stereotype reduces all aspects of the group to a small set of characteristics and erases any diversity within the group itself” (309). In order to understand the process of stereotyping we must consider who gets stereotyped. In this respect writer Linda Seger gives some useful insights. She claims that ethnic minorities, religious groups, people with sexual orientations different from the viewers´s mass, people with physical disabilities, older people, younger people, and people from the opposite sex are often stereotyped (Seger 1990:196). “People with disabilities are often portrayed as the “handicapped horror”...or they are portrayed as the pitiful victim, or else as the ‘Supercrip’, a term sometimes used by people with disabilities to connote the Superman or Superwoman who performs tremendous feats and is able to overcome the disability through miraculous means”(197). She continues that “Blacks are often portrayed as comical, or the butt of the joke, or as perpetrators of crime”, Women as well as minorities are often victims, “in many films, particularly, they tend to be expendable. Either they are the first ones to die or they´re the ones who need rescuing by the white male”. Seger continues that “Asian women will often be portrayed as the erotic-exotic” and she ends up with the white male. As “most groups, from secretary to blondes to basketball players to WASPs to Vietnam vets to lawyers, have at one time or another been portrayed in a stereotypical manner. Very few groups have been immune from our natural desire to simplify complex human character” (197f). Mittell states that “media images help reinforce stereotypes in viewers´ minds, furthering negative assumptions about subordinate groups for outsiders and belittling people´s identity” (Mittell:309). This corresponds with what Seger claims, saying that “usually a stereotype is negative. It shows a cultural

15 bias toward the characteristics of one´s own culture, painting characters outside that culture in limiting, sometimes dehumanizing ways”(196). Mittell applies the observation that critics as well as viewers “examine programs looking to identify stereotypes and label images as harmful” and he makes clear that “identifying and criticizing stereotypes is an important aspect of studying media representations” (309). Stuart Hall states that there has to be a difference between typing and stereotyping (Hall:257), an approach similar to Linda Seger, who differentiates between stereotype and character type:

A character Type is not the same as a stereotype. The doddering father or the braggadocio soldier are character types, not stereotypes, because the portrayal is balanced with other images of fathers and soldiers. Audiences do not form the conclusion that “all fathers are doddering “or all soldiers are braggadocio” as a result of this image. The character type doesn´t suggest that everyone in a certain group (such as fathers) has the same characteristics (doddering). The stereotype does(Seger:198). This means that “without the use of types, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to make sense of the world”. Hall states further:”We understand the world by referring individual objects, people or events in our heads to the general classificatory schemes into which – according to our culture – they fit...we are always “making sense “ of things in terms of some wider categories” (Hall:257) and he explains: “Thus, for example, we come to “know” something about a person by thinking of the roles which he or she performs: is he/she a parent, a child, a worker, a lover, a boss, or an old age pensioner? We assign him/her to the membership of different groups, according to class, gender, age group, nationality, “race”, linguistic group, sexual preference and so on. We order him/her in terms of personality type – is he/she a happy, serious, depressed, scatter-brained, over-active kind of person?”(ibid.). This is to say that “ in broad terms , then, a type is any simple, vivid, memorable, easily grasped and widely recognized characterization in which a few traits are foregrounded and change or “development” is kept to a minimum”. Hall claims that “stereotyping reduces, essentializes, naturalizes and fixes ‘difference’ ”, and furthermore “stereotyping deploys a strategy of splitting. It divides the normal and the acceptable from the abnormal and unacceptable. It then excludes or expels everything which does not fit”(Hall:258). Mittell claims that “approaches to stereotypes and image analysis assume that images can be viewed as essentially positive or negative, representing a group effectively or inflicting harm”(Mittell:309). He quotes The

16

Sopranos as an example for the problems that can occur in the process of examining stereotypes:

The Sopranos has been critiqued and boycotted by some groups for perpetuating Italian stereotypes, portraying Italian Americans as violent, uneducated mobsters obsessed with food and hypocritical in their Catholicism. While certainly the show offers many characters who fit that type, Sopranos also features Italian American doctors, FBI agents, priests, and students at elite colleges—and even one character who heads an organization protesting media stereotypes of Italian Americans!(309). Mittell sums up that “while some people focus on the show´s stereotypes, other viewers consider its counter-stereotypes and the complications of ethnic identities portrayed in the program” (310). He concludes that image analyses tend to work on the surface of representation, removing the representation from the context and thus evaluates images without considering “their role within narratives, genres, industrial strategies, and historical moment” (ibid.). Representations reflect and construct reality, they shape norms through repetition and validation (313). As Mittell puts it: “All analyses of representation recognize that television´s portrayal of identity categories shapes American culture, molding the commonsense norms of defining groups and shaping what we assume about ourself and others” (314).

4.2 Dialogue Richardson defines high production values, weighty themes, and strong characterization/acting as classifications of what he calls quality drama (cf. Richardson 2010: 22), paying special attention to dialogue, as drama displays wordplay for its own sake and witty use of language can be a character point (23). Richardson further differs between basic easy listening and advanced easy listening. Basic easy listening “involves hearing characters as people and their talk as everyday talk. Advanced easy listening hears dramatic qualities in that talk, but can´t or won´t say much about how those qualities got there”(23). Richardson states that clever dialogue is not an arbitrary sign of a TV series fulfilling the above mentioned classifications of quality drama (cf. 22), but ”it is a functional device in the communication between dramatist and audience, because its cleverness encourages appreciation and engagement” (22). This encouragement leads to a higher degree of involvement and thus brings forth the cult status of a series. Complicated characters challenge the audience, or as Abbott puts it: “When an audience has to bring contradictions into focus as they try to understand the totality of a complex character, they cannot help but get involved. Characters that defy

17 easy analysis invite investment for the same reason that we are drawn to complex people in real life” (Abbott 2010: 49f). One of the main points that Stacey Abbott states concerning dialogue is that “ realistic dialogue helps a show feel real” (48). She mentions the television series The Sopranos as an example for the use of “specific vocabularies and ways of speaking that aren´t transparent to the viewer and which often go unexplained” (49). Richardson in his research on Television dramatic dialogue quotes from Nelson, who analyzed The Sopranos:

The dialogue itself is as sharp and streetwise as the camera style, arguably introducing a greater level of realism than hitherto […] it is low key and oblique, with the characters unable to articulate that understanding of themselves and their predicament which marks more regular, formulaic drama which feels the need to be explanatory .[…]A particular feature […] is The Sopranos´ demotic use of expletives in New Jersey speech patterns which the constraints of broadcast television have previously kept from the small screen […] the dialogue is on occasion overtly witty and by no means politically correct, with Tony Soprano afforded some of the sharpest lines. When Richie Aprile takes up again with Janice Soprano, having served time in jail, he tells a skeptical Tony that he and Janice ‘got history together’ to which Tony quips, ‘Yeah, Israel and fuckin´ Palestine.’ (Nelson 2007:32). Due to Richardson Nelson´s evaluation of this dialogue is based on the three main criteria “realism, including the use of expletives; obliqueness in character revelation; and wit” (23). Concerning the Israel and Palestine joke I would like to mention what Abbott states concerning under-explaining, namely that it “forces the audiences to pay close attention” (Abbott:46). This under-explaining rewards the attentive viewer for watching and listening carefully, the reward is an overall understanding of what is going on (46). But what does happen when things are reversed and over-explaining takes place? Abbot explains as follows:

The effect of over-explaining is exactly as one would predict. I worked for a while on a show called True Calling about a morgue worker who was pulled back one day in time to help prevent a death. The show never attained cult status, despite having ingredients that suggested it might. I´m convinced in hindsight that part of the problem was clarity. We made a great effort on that show to be extremely clear, using flashbacks and additional dialogue to remove ambiguity. I might be wrong, but I now think that we took away an opportunity for the audience to feel proud of getting the show by making it impossible not to get (46). To sum up, cult TV is authentic and demands active viewership contrasted with mainstream, which offers easy and passive pleasure , and “can be defined as cult against something that it is not. Exactly what fulfils this role can shift and change over time, with the underlying structure of meaning staying pretty much the same” (68).

18

5. Representation and Identity

Whenever a social group is represented in a television program, an identification process takes place, due to the viewers´expecations defined through cultural norms that are either challenged or confirmed. Mittell talks of ‘identity categories’ (cf. Mittell:306) and defines the study of identity as the study of difference, examining “how media present identity categories differing from the social dominant position of a white, male, heterosexual adult” (ibid.). “Additionally” Mittell states that “we can examine the representation of this dominant identity, looking at how television offers particular meanings surrounding whiteness, masculinity, and heterosexuality” (306). Due to Mittell, there are three types of identity categories: “race and ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation “ (ibid.). The study of identity in television programs can follow different methods and approaches, Mittell defines ‘creator identity’ (306) as one facet of representation, naming The Cosby Show and Ellen as examples. In both shows the producers influenced the shape of their show, Bill Cosby wanting to present a positive African-American image and Ellen DeGeneres actively supporting lesbians through her coming- out in the show ( 307f). So “the identity of creators can help shape representation but “they can never be seen as simply the defining factor in determining the meanings of a television text” (308). Mittell refers to image analysis as an early approach to studying representation. Nick Lacey states that an understanding of the world around us is something that is learned and that “the particular society we are born into has a great affect on us. People born into different societies have a different understanding of the world because they will learn about it in different ways” (Lacey 1998:8). As for the process of identifying things, Lacey follows the definitions between denotation and connotation. Describing a particular colour as red is called denotation, the process of adding further features to it like passion, danger or love happens on the level of connotation. (8) Mittell states that “an image analysis assumes that the representation of identity offered on television screens can be assessed and judged around two basic questions: are images accurate, and are images positive?“ (Mittell: 308). He continues that image analysis “looks at the surface presentation of characters and meanings, categorizing them based on accuracy and social value” ( 308):

Thus the images of female bodies commonly presented on television might be viewed as inaccurate by their overemphasis on thinness and unrealistic (or even unhealthy) beauty

19

norms. African –American representation could be condemned for overrepresenting Blacks as criminals and thus creating an unrealistic and potentially damaging portrait of the world (308). So representation due to Mittell means “taking facets of the real world and presenting them on-screen, but altering their meanings through the act of televising them” (270). With respect to defining norms in a culture, in our case American culture, we need to focus on subjects which define norms that go beyond a mere portrayal, more or less accurate. Representational analysis gains importance here as it “focuses on visions of American national character” (271). Jason Mittell claims that “nearly all meanings shown on American television might be considered as representing the national character, contributing to a shared sense of America and what makes the country distinct” (ibid.).

5.1 Satirical Representation As television cannot simply impose its intentions and ideologies on the viewer,” one of the chief ways television programs engage directly with social issues is through the use of satire and parody”(290). Such programs treat weighty issues in a controversial way, they entertain and at the same time they ”pose particular problems for critics trying to analyze how they fit within their cultural contexts”(ibid.). Mittell gives definitions for both terms, yet pointing out that “satire” and “parody” are not interchangeable, notwithstanding the fact that “each term suggests different facets of a similar phenomenon “(290). He defines “satire” as “the broader term, indicating a critical commentary on a topic using pointed and often ironic humor” whereas “parody refers to satirical works that directly mimic the form of another text, often changing or exaggerating the content to make fun of the original genre, style, or story”(ibid.). In order to strengthen the difference in his definition, Mittell applies an example from The Simpsons, as an episode “offers a satirical commentary on the debates surrounding media violence when Marge campaigns to clean up the airwaves, but it uses parody to mock actual cartoons using the show-within-a-show Itchy & Scratchy” (290). The tradition of social satire in America has sprung from the late 1960s, when comedic variety programs with a relatively direct use of satire emerged. Political jokes occurred quite frequently, but apolitical humor and dancing still dominated the scene. Especially American warfare in Vietnam provoked writers of satirical comments and thus was picked out as a central theme, as the following example from the hit show Laugh-In nicely demonstrates: “We went into Vietnam as advisors. Last week we

20 dropped 400,000 tons of advice.” (291). As mentioned above, antiwar sentiment and critique of military ideology was apparent in television series like M*A*S*H, and shows like Laugh-In further foreshadowed television´s “turn toward political commentary”(292), a turn that was achieved through the use of satire and comedy. During the 80s televisions engagement in social issues became more direct, character- driven comedy shows like The Cosby Show contrasted drama series like Hill Street Blues, with satire having lost some of its importance (294). Nevertheless Fox Network and with it a new show entered the scene: the family sitcom Married…with children was a “parody of sitcoms whose working title was Not the Cosbys. Married pushed boundaries of sexual humor while mocking the notion of the nuclear family as a bastion of American culture, an attitude that resulted in a viewer- led sponsor boycott and protests to Fox” (ibid.). In this respect it is important to mention that Fox Network gained publicity for broadcasting programs with a satirical appeal, hence “pushing the limits of network standards…Fox used these satirical programs, as well as its longest-running hit The Simpsons, to craft a brand identity of network unafraid to challenge conventions through satire and social commentary.”(294).So satire can be used as a vehicle for social commentaries and critique and thus influence the audiences´ way of looking at the world. But it is not as simple as that: Mittell claims that satire and irony undergo the risk of being misunderstood. Especially when a program satirizes stereotypes there is room for interpretation. For instance a show promoting beerdrinking and pornography, and mocking women´s intelligence can be understood either as a satirical comment on sexist men or a celebration of male fantasies of beautiful and submissive women (297). “Satire”, as Mittell states, “more than most forms of programming, offers widely divergent interpretations and viewer perspectives” (ibid.).

6. Television and Ideology

Cultural critics “consider ideology as the powerful dominant values that pervade American society...according to an ideological critique, ideological meanings are to be found in television programs of any era. It is useful to consider how televised ideologies of today shape how we look at our world” (Mittell:272). Mittell constitutes “dominant meanings as part of a shared common sense” (ibid.) and names consumer capitalism as

21

“a primary component of American ideology that is conveyed in nearly every television program”(272):

Business news celebrate sales figures as economic success; sitcoms show characters who achieve happiness by acquiring new consumer goods; home improvement programs define “improvement” via consumption...rarely are alternatives to this consumerist economic system presented on television, except as vilified and unexplained threats of communism tied to “enemy” countries as with the representations of the former Soviet Union or Cuba frequently found in espionage dramas of the 1960s...this is not to fault American television for not offering anti-capitalist programming(although some critics argue that television should), but rather to point out the pervasiveness of the ideology of consumer capitalism on television, even in programs that seem to be escapist or even critical(273). Mittell talks of a “cycle of ideology” which “reproduces itself through media circulation and consumption” (ibid), though he does not deny that “if television producers want their program to find a place on the television schedule, they must create a show that meets the approval of a network or a cable channel, which in turn must be able to sell advertising during the program”(274). Television journalism is another important vehicle in spreading certain ideologies, as “ideological theory suggests that by making a position appear to be commonsense and natural, it becomes a cultural norm (275). But how does it work? Mittell explains it as follows: “People hear an opinion, and if they feel it is consistent with how they view the world, they accept it as a norm”(ibid.). He gives an interesting example of how politicians cleverly take advantage of this phenomenon:

Republicans gained public support for their tax cut policies in the early 2000s by repeatedly referring to the “estate tax” as the “death tax” on television and in other media appearances, a strategy that helped shift one commonsense notion (that people inheriting multimillion-dollar estates should pay taxes on them) into another (that people should not have to pay taxes upon their death) (276). But what about the viewers´choice in watching this or the other television program ? On TV there is no “consistent ideological message across the hundreds of hours of programming available each day, but rather it offers a range of contradicting and varying meanings” (276). Mittell does not believe in brainwashing viewers by ideology. He introduces the concept of “hailing” which he explains as follows: “like calling for a taxi on a street, television programs call out to viewers by getting our attention and letting us know we are being addressed” (277). This means that “when you watch a program that gets your attention and offers you what you want to see, you have been hailed for ideological messages to be conveyed effectively, programs must

22 engage viewers, hailing them to accept the show as speaking to them personally”(ibid.). He states further that “Hailing tries to make viewers feel that the worldview offered by a particular program fits with their own personal outlook “(277), and referring to television programs that don´t deal too obviously with more political matters: “most programs are less overt in their political viewpoints, and thus must hail viewers by making them feel comfortable with the show´s perspective and encouraging viewers to identify with characters or performers”(277f). A proper example for this identification process is made by Stacey Abbott who states the following about her experiences as a writer for the Gilmore Girls:

Writers were frequently approached by fans who loved the show and talked about how similar their own mother-daughter relationship was to the Lorelei-Rory relationship. The important thing is that they thought they were the only ones; they didn´t realize that other women were saying the same thing. The relationship was presented as having such specific properties, such unique rhythms, that each viewer prided herself on her ability to ‘get’ it. They felt like members of an exclusive club. That´s cult TV (Abbott: 50). In Mittell´s words this means that “when you give yourself over to the pleasures of a program through identification, you accept the ideologies promoted by the show and endorse its vision of the world as your own” (Mittell: 278). Due to Jason Mittell every show offers opportunities for identification and thus ideological engagement, be it medical drama, family sitcoms, televised contests, soap operas, where the viewer is offered a place in the community and, cop shows, “where the viewer is asked to identify with the legal system itself” (ibid.). The ideology present in the series is quite strong, and the series partly satirizes weighty, political issues, thus subverting television programs that “evoke a feeling of patriotism in viewers, addressing audiences explicitly as Americans. America´s Most Wanted, American Dreams, Good Morning America.” The flags and eagles are omnipresent on the small screen,

News and public affairs programming assumes that all viewers identify as American and thus accept government positions as the result of a democracy…The United States is a tremendously diverse country, and Americans have a much broader range of personal and political beliefs than is presented on television; however, most programming presents a patriotic belief in a common American identity as shared by all audience members (280). Mittell mentions an incident right after 9/11 that nicely shows what happens when American ideology and the way it is presented on television is undermined: ”Politically Incorrect host Bill Maher criticized people calling the attacks “cowardly”, suggesting that the American military launching cruise missiles from afar was more “cowardly” than the airplane attacks…as the terrorists killed themselves in

23 the attacks. White house press secretary Ari Fleischer responded to a reporter´s question about Maher´s comments by asserting that given the proximity to the attacks, Americans “need to watch what they say”, a remarkable comment from a government founded on freedom of speech”(280). But that was not all, as “while Maher´s show remained on ABC for six months before being cancelled, sponsor and affiliate withdrawals were clear indications of the penalties television programs and personalities could expect for straying from dominant notions of patriotism and ideology”(ibid.). The occurrence clearly demonstrates the interdependence between television producers, advertising industry, and politics. Mittell claims ‘hegemony’ as the term to describe “how a dominant set of ideals is accepted by the populace at large. Rather than being coerced into following propaganda, under hegemony, people actively accept ideologies as part of their everyday lives.”(281) As we have learned above, ideologies mold a person´s worldview, thus are accepted. This acceptance creates “consent for the ruling class´s positions and belief systems. Hegemony refers to the process of leading by consent of the ruled, actively accepting ideologies as part of common sense. Television and other media help to create consent by promoting dominant viewpoints” (ibid.). In this respect television is part of and thus supports “the underlying economic and political systems” (281). Mittell refers to the political drama The West Wing as “a good example of hegemony” (ibid.):

The show has been both hailed and criticized as a “liberal fantasy”, appealing to viewers who felt that President Clinton had been too moderate and offering an idealized sanctuary for loyal Democrats during the Bush administration. President Bartlet regularly leads America into armed conflict when motivated by goals of peace keeping and global justice, and the show tempers his intellectual side with a commanding presence and religious background…Bartlet also serves as the supreme father figure on the show, both for his staff, who nearly all lack family ties, and for the fictionalized country as a whole. Ultimately the program celebrates overtly patriotic visuals and music, while romanticizing a patriarchal commander…For the liberal viewers who embraced the show´s intellectual subtleties and moral quandaries, these ideologies come with the package. The show hails liberals while asking viewers to consent to underlying ideologies (282). As a continuative step in analyzing television programs Mittell suggests granting television the status of a cultural forum., arguing that “most television shows present a more mixed set of meanings than pure ideological propaganda”(283). He states that “in fictional narratives, the status quo is always shattered by some conflict or disruption, as dramatic action moves from equilibrium to complication and back to restored

24 equilibrium. Typically the disruption, not the equilibrium , is the focus of the narrative”(ibid). He strengthens this point by arguing that “a typical narrative shows characters in conflict and crisis…doctors, lawyers, and businesspeople must always encounter problems…these moments challenging the dominant ideologies featured in most programs” (283f). Some of the programs “might offer alternative positions and ways of looking at the world beyond hegemonic common sense. “Mittell explains the idea of the cultural forum with differing visions coexisting within a program and the subsequent diverse ideas that are presented. The relative choice of viewpoints is necessary to reach a broad audience and offer them opportunity to be hailed and take up the chance for identification (284). Therefore a program “must grapple with significant social and cultural issues relevant to many viewers, and must offer diverse meanings relevant across the American viewing public” (ibid). Mittell goes even further as treating television programs as “cultural rituals, as viewers return to repeated formulas and plots to work through social anxieties via the process of debate and conflict offered by fictional narratives” (ibid.). Not every TV series fits the purpose of offering a cultural forum, yet some do better than others. In The West Wing social issues and serious matters of national interest are treated regularly, “with dramatic action stemming from the characters´attempts to balance competing interests and beliefs around topics such as the death penalty, drug enforcement, and healthcare policy. Other programs, like “Ally McBeal and The Wire, regularly build plots around social issues, integrating political debate into dramatic action” (284f). Nevertheless Mittell states that” there always limits and boundaries to television´s cultural forum—certain positions are left unspoken or instantly dismissed in the narrative”(285). A well known example of “both the possibilities and the limitations of an explicit cultural forum is the long-running war sitcom M*A*S*H “(ibid.). The program contains a clear anti-war message, and a critique of military ideology: “ most episodes express a mix of both ideological and opposing viewpoints, along with limits to what can be debated in its cultural forum”(285). The characters Trapper John McIntire and B.J.Hunnicutt, “regularly express disdain for the army, its policies, and the rationale for the war their country is fighting” (285f). An important role in the storyline is taken by visiting characters, “who often object to the doctors´ chaotic insubordination and lack of respect” (286). Yet such programs are rather the exception to the rule, and Mittell states that “programs such as M*A*S*H “are explicit

25 in their political debates, foregrounding social issues within the scenario, plot, and dialogue, but the majority of fictional programming is seemingly escapist and apolitical”(ibid.). Notwithstanding the fact that “television programming continues to offer both ideological and resistant meanings to be debated and dissected by critics and viewers alike…most shows aim for a niche appeal for a specific type of audience”(288). Television programs, either escapist or critical, mold the viewers´ perception of the world, this happens because television “exposes viewers to facets of the word exceeding their real-life experiences” (ibid.). Mittell states further that “just because the producers of a program are not trying explicitly to send messages about American culture” (289), the programs in question “are irrelevant or should be ignored as “just entertainment”…a good number of television shows are created with an agenda beyond just capturing attention. Most creators have a perspective on the world they wish to share in addition to amusing and engaging viewers” (ibid.). Mittell gives some examples to underline the varied intentions of producers and writers:

Touched by an Angel was created to celebrate particular religious and moral perspectives, while Will and Grace aimed to push the boundaries of gay acceptability in different directions. From The Cosby Show to Roseanne, The Waltons to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, many of the most successful programs in television history have come from producers trying to impact viewers with a particular vision of the world and perspective on American culture…studying television´s specific strategies of representation can strengthen our appreciation of such television landmarks, and better our understanding of the medium´s social impact (ibid.).

6.1 Postmodernism Due to Ziauddin Sardar,

Postmodernism is the spirit of the 21st century. It is a product of our realization that many rationally constructed edifices of the 19th and 20th centuries have turned out to be irrational illusions …postmodernism has now become a global cultural force underpinned by free market and bourgeois liberalism. Today, postmodernism is everywhere: it has penetrated all spheres of human activity and taken deep roots in daily life. There is postmodern philosophy, history, anthropology, fiction and even religion. The postmodern world is being built by the movie, the television programme, advertisements, design, fashion, pop music shopping complexes…(2002:5). On order to get a valuable overview of the main features of postmodernism and to grasp some of the deviations from modernism I would like to introduce the following table taken from the website of Georgetown University, called the Pomo Page:

26

6.1.1 The Modern and the Postmodern: Contrasting Tendencies

Modernism/Modernity Postmodern/Postmodernity

Master Narratives and metanarratives of Suspicion and rejection of Master history, culture and national identity as Narratives for history and culture; local accepted before WWII (American- narratives, ironic deconstruction of European myths of progress). Myths of master narratives: counter-myths of cultural and ethnic origin accepted as origin. received. "Progress" seen as a failed Master Progress accepted as driving force Narrative. behind history.

Faith in "Grand Theory" (totalizing Rejection of totalizing theories; pursuit explanations in history, science and of localizing and contingent theories. culture) to represent all knowledge and explain everything.

Faith in, and myths of, social and Social and cultural pluralism, disunity, cultural unity, hierarchies of social-class unclear bases for social/national/ ethnic and ethnic/national values, seemingly unity. clear bases for unity.

Master narrative of progress through Skepticism of idea of progress, anti- science and technology. technology reactions, neo-Luddism; new age religions.

Sense of unified, centered Sense of fragmentation and decentered self; "individualism," unified identity. self; multiple, conflicting identities.

Idea of "the family" as central unit of Alternative family units, alternatives to social order: model of the middle-class, middle-class marriage model, multiple nuclear family. Heterosexual norms. identities for couplings and childraising. Polysexuality, exposure of repressed homosexual and homosocial realities in cultures.

Hierarchy, order, centralized control. Subverted order, loss of centralized control, fragmentation.

Faith and personal investment in big Trust and investment in micropolitics, politics (Nation-State, party). identity politics, local politics, institutional power struggles.

Root/Depth tropes. Rhizome/surface tropes. Faith in "Depth" (meaning, value, Attention to play of surfaces, images,

27 content, the signified) over "Surface" signifiers without concern for "Depth". (appearances, the superficial, the Relational and horizontal differences, signifier). differentiations.

Crisis in representation and status of the Culture adapting to simulation, visual image after photography and mass media becoming undifferentiated media. equivalent forms, simulation and real- time media substituting for the real.

Faith in the "real" beyond media, Hyper-reality, image saturation, language, symbols, and representations; simulacra seem more powerful than the authenticity of "originals." "real"; images and texts with no prior "original". "As seen on TV" and "as seen on MTV" are more powerful than unmediated experience.

Dichotomy of high and low culture Disruption of the dominance of high (official vs. popular culture). culture by popular culture. Imposed consensus that high or official Mixing of popular and high cultures, culture is normative and authoritative, new valuation of pop culture, hybrid the ground of value and discrimination. cultural forms cancel "high"/"low" categories.

Mass culture, mass consumption, mass Demassified culture; niche products and marketing. marketing, smaller group identities.

Art as unique object and finished work Art as process, performance, authenticated by artist and validated by production, intertextuality. agreed upon standards. Art as recycling of culture authenticated by audience and validated in subcultures sharing identity with the artist.

Knowledge mastery, attempts to Navigation through information embrace a totality. Quest for overload, information management; interdisciplinary harmony. fragmented, partial knowledge; just-in- Paradigms: The Library and The time knowledge. Encyclopedia. Paradigms: The Web.

Broadcast media, centralized one-to- Digital, interactive, client-server, many communications. Paradigms: distributed, user-motivated, broadcast networks and TV. individualized, many-to-many media. Paradigms: Internet file sharing, the Web and Web 2.0.

Centering/centeredness, centralized Dispersal, dissemination, networked,

28

knowledge and authority. distributed knowledge.

Determinacy, dependence, hierarchy. Indeterminacy, contingency, polycentric power sources.

Seriousness of intention and purpose, Play, irony, challenge to official middle-class earnestness. seriousness, subversion of earnestness.

Sense of clear generic boundaries and Hybridity, promiscuous genres, wholeness (art, music, and literature). recombinant culture, intertextuality, pastiche.

Design and architecture of New York Design and architecture of LA and Las and Berlin. Vegas

Clear dichotomy between organic and Cyborgian mixing of organic and inorganic, human and machine. inorganic, human and machine and electronic.

Phallic ordering of sexual difference, Androgyny, queer sexual identities, unified sexualities, exclusion/bracketing polymorphous sexuality, mass of pornography. marketing of pornography, porn style mixing with mainstream images.

The book as sufficient bearer of the Hypermedia as transcendence of the word. physical limits of print media. The library as complete and total system The Web as infinitely expandable, for printed knowledge. centerless, inter-connected information system.

(Georgetown University, Po-mo)

6.2 Postmodern Television Drama “Postmodernism is founded on the belief that signs are arbitrary and that their conventional meaning can always be abandoned and substituted. Genres are, therefore, no longer stable and can be continually reinterpreted” (Creeber:55) . As a result, there are so-called genre hybrids, with idiosyncratic characters which challenge the viewer who wants to find meaning. Compared to films that without pretense, focus on story and character James Monaco grants postmodern films that they “have characters and stories that may be just as interesting—but they see them through an extra layer of metafiction: they call attention to the way they are told, their narrative technique” (Monaco 2009:425). In Creeber Robin Nelson (1997) analyses David E.Kelley´s dramedy Ally

29

McBeal and defines it as a genre hybrid incorporating elements of sitcom, soap opera, courtroom drama and MTV. Although “the narrative structure in Ally McBeal is relatively conventional…ongoing stories of the interrelationships between the partners in the Fishman &Cage law firm are intercut with episode-contained lawsuit cases undertaken by one or more of the partners”(Creeber:56), Nelson states that “typically, however, the courtroom dramas address a topical social issue from an unusual angle, subverting (on many occasions inverting) dominant social values”(ibid.). The main character Ally is what Nelson calls “double-coded”, as she represents the professional career woman and on the other hand she is vulnerable and waits “for Mr. Right to come along”, hence the two images suggest a productive tension (56).

By exaggerating glamorous character types familiar in American television, and by parodying familiar televisual tropes, Ally McBeal draws attention to its compositional principles and exploits the double-coded postmodern irony of simultaneous affirmation and subversion …it also offers a provocation seriously to consider contemporary social issues by transgressing normative codes to disturb traditional sureties and invite quizzical – if not outright oppositional – readings (56). As example for this transgression in the series, one episode “advocates the legitimacy of a ménage a trois, a new model perhaps for the American family” (ibid), whereas the weighty issue of sexual exploitation gets subverted when Fish “vigorously defends the case of a female litigant charging harassment against her boss because he had seduced all the women in the office except her”(56). The theme of subversion remains prominent in Boston Legal,. Another compositional device besides exaggeration, parody, subversion of social norms and values, multilayering, and hybridization of genre is the use of music, with the regular appearance of Vonda Shepherd, moreover, the music “is used in interesting ways. At times it marks a dramatic moment, not so much by underscoring but by musical mood and lyric offering a counterpoint. On other occasions, music is used directly to comment on the action” (ibid.). Furthermore

Ally, and some of the other main characters such as Cage, have their own private theme song. On advice from her psychoanalyst, Ally thinks Gladys Knight and the Pips when she needs a boost of confidence, and they duly appear digitized on screen as if both in and out of her head. Thus the use of music expressionistically to articulate character´s interior thoughts and feelings has a new take (56). Another feature typical for postmodern drama is stated in Creeber in an essay by Adrian Page who states that: ”to be truly postmodern, television drama must suggest

30 multiple ironic readings, which undermine the stability of all our contemporary certainties” and, concerning characterization Page quotes from Collins (Collins:1992:331) :” In particular, postmodern drama often involves a central character´s quest for truth”(Creeber:58).

7. Analysis

7.1 At First Sight: The Style of Boston Legal In this chapter I will analyze in how far Boston Legal is self-contained in style, and what the formal elements are which make it outstanding as a television series. Further I will try to point out how the use of these elements add up to or link the main characteristics of the series on the content level, namely wit and social criticism. The first formal element on the level of style clearly is the theme song. It is performed by Rhythm and Blues singer and songwriter Billy Valentine. R&B is a genre of popular African-American and stands for urbane, rocking and jazz-based music with a heavy, insistent beat (cf.Wikipedia, Rhythm and Blues) These attitudes are particularly suitable to describe the theme song of Boston Legal, and link up to the subject matter of the series which is situated in the urban area of Boston, one of the oldest cities of the United States, and a center not only for business and manufacturing, but also for culture and education. Moreover, I consider it an important fact that Boston is not only among the cities with the highest costs of living in the United States, but was also the scene of several key events of the American Revolution such as the Boston Massacre, the Boston Tea Party, the Battle of Bunker Hill and the Siege of Boston (Wikipedia, Boston) The TV series clearly places itself in the urban context of Boston as a town of tradition and historical importance, as it frequently offers shots of the specific architectural surroundings, always adding Rhythm and Blues music to series of rhythmically-cut zoom shots. These shots are exactly cut to the beat of the music and hence successfully achieve the effect of echoing the pulse and pace of an urban atmosphere. Apart from this special way of rhythmically combining zooming in and cuts, I would not- technically speaking- consider Boston Legal a highly stylized series typical for the oughts. There is no slomo, we do not have constant flashbacks as in CSI. Although there are sound wooshes it is R&B music which dominates the atmosphere hence coining the specific style of BL. There are switches in the plotline but they have a by far less aggressive effect than in CSI. In the above

31 described cuts Boston functions as a visual marker of the series, as well as the office scenes which are shot on location at the building in 500 Boylston Street. As far as staging is concerned, the audience´s expectations are confirmed rather than undermined, with the effect that the viewer soon gets used to the pace and visual style of the series. The viewer´s expectations are cheated elsewhere. As I mentioned in the theoretical part of this thesis, L.A.Law can be considered a forerunner in legal drama series, and therefore has coined the audience´s expectations towards a television series of this genre. But does Boston Legal measure up to these expectations? On the content level there are similarities, both are legal dramas which combine heavy issues with wit, but whereas in L.A.Law the character are less important than the issues, Boston Legal combines both enigmatic characters and issue-oriented story telling. In this respect the viewer needs more time to feel at home within the staging, as the characters can be easily grasped only on a very superficial level, but in truth are multilayered and complex. The setting, however, is quite typical for a legal drama, though in the course of the series there are also episodes which have been shot outside the office, and even outside of New England. Another visual marker which can be found in nearly every episode is the balcony scene. The two main characters, Denny Crane and Alan Shore, clock off their days at the balcony of the office, where they discuss the remains of the day in a rather philosophical way. During this balcony scenes the setting remains always the same, white lounge chairs, cigars and whisky, with Denny and Alan not only discussing private and political matters but displaying their affection for each other, and celebrating their bromance2. As there are other characters as well, the series offers a continuing set of stories not only involving the two main characters and thus adding a kind of soap opera feeling, as private matters and relationships clearly are an issue in Boston Legal. There is something like the Crane, Poole and Schmidt family, and the relatedness between audience and characters is enhanced very cleverly from episode to episode, as the characters are revealed more and more and gain depth throughout the course of the episodes. For the audience, this development from the impression of having to deal with mere types towards multilayered characterization offers great opportunity for the viewers to drop anchor, thus adding up to sophisticated story-telling and differing a lot from a soap opera or a sitcom or stylized C.S.I, where the characters

2 Meaning brotherly romance, indicating to the close relationship between Alan and Denny (cf.Wikipedia, bromance).

32 rarely to never offer interesting insights, well in the tradition of series like L.A.Law. So character development and – depth mark the specific style of Boston Legal. Nevertheless the series most of the time focuses on the two actors James Spader and William Shatner playing Alan and Denny. As far as genre is concerned, Boston Legal disposes in the legal drama series, yet displaying elements of more than that one specific genre such as comedy and thus becoming what is called a dramedy. The intertextual consciousness of the audience well recognizes the series as a legal series, due to staging and setting, yet the secondary discourses the series inhabits go beyond this recognition. As pointed out in the theoretical part of my thesis it is not possible to define genres through a fixed set of attributes, as there are often overlaps, and especially Boston Legal intentionally offers such overlaps, as the episodes are often self-contained in content and setting, and genre definitions are blurred and satirized when for instance New Orleans or Texas are chosen as locations and elements of the Western or documentary style of the shots challenge the expectations of the viewer. This playful approach towards genre-specific elements is carried forward throughout the series, and also reflected in the characters. Firearms repeatedly are a subject matter for Denny Crane, aficionado and truly devoted member of the NRA, the National Rifle Organization. One of Denny´s verbal expressions which he uses quite often is “Lock and Load!”. It is short for “locking the magazine into the gun and loading the ammunition into the gun´s chamber,”used to show toughness, ambition or fear and other strong characteristics. Originally spoken by John Wayne in ‘Sands of Iwo Jima’ as ‘load and lock’.)” (Urbandictionary, lock and load) So the reference to elements of the Western in Boston Legal is made clear through the character of Denny Crane, who satirizes the American Western Hero when he passionately wields his gun against the wilderness of the urban setting of Boston, often following a revenge plotline and at all times impressed by the value system of what he considers truly American. What can be found in BL is the thematic opposition of elements of comedy and elements of drama, its plotlines make use of icons and through the imagery and serious discourse of social issues like black or gay liberation the storyline gains depth and tension. As there are three discursive practices which define a television series, definition, interpretation and evaluation, I will try to adopt these categories to Boston Legal: definition: this show is a courtroom series because it deals with lawyers;

33 interpretation: the series criticizes the American society and political system ; evaluation: the series is sarcastic and hence entertaining BL criticizes the dominant social norms, its encoded meanings cannot be dismissed as escapism, as it deals with real issues to an extent that clearly lies above the average of television series, or legal drama, or comedy in general. Nevertheless the characters are not mirrored as the real issues like discrimination, abortion or death penalty are but rather appear altered as they are highly sarcastic and iconic

7.2 In Touch with Reality: True-to-Life Issues in BL What makes BL an outstanding example of television entertainment is not only its being a hybrid, as it combines drama and comedy with the effect of increased tension and depth in the storyline and acting, it is mostly the content that differs from what the audience expects in an average television series. The issues treated are closely linked to what is on the agenda of American political consciousness and public perception in the oughts, like Health Care, tax cuts, or the failings of the FEMA, Guantanamo, the war against terrorism, Patriot Act, immigration, death penalty, arms-control treaties, assault weapons law and the influence of the NRA. The discussion of gun-control has lately lit up as a quotation from the speech of the NRA CEO at the convention of the National Rifle Association in chapter 7.3.1 will demonstrate. Further issues covered in the five seasons of BL are American warfare in Iraq and armament supply in foreign countries. Moreover, the episodes deal with social issues as are discrimination, abortion, mobbing, education, or lawsuits against tobacco enterprises and the pharmaceutical industries and organ donor associations. Besides, typical lawsuits like murder and violent felony or adultery complete the range of subject- matters in Boston Legal. Part of the concept of Boston Legal, which contributes to the series´ appeal of authenticity is the appearance of real- life guest stars. In the episode Loose Lips the Babtist Minister Al Sharpton plays himself and speaks up for a man who has lost his job as a Santa Claus because his boss has learned that he likes to crossdress from time to time. In a fervently held speech he defends the accused man:

Al Sharpton: [bursts into the courtroom] Sorry I'm late, Judge, I'll make this quick...

Alan: And subtle!

Judge Harry Hingham: [to Sharpton] Who the hell are you?

Al Sharpton: [continues without pause] ...The image of Santa Claus has been crafted for hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of years. We're supposed to be in a different day.

34

Give the world a black Santa Claus, let the people have an African-American come down the chimney bearing joy and good will!

Alan: [whispers] Gay, not black.

Al Sharpton: The prejudice against gay people must stop. We all say we're for gay rights. We all say we accept homosexuality. But give a gay man a hug, sit in his lap?

Judge Harry Hingham: Who is this man?

Al Sharpton: [continuing] Let the bells of tolerance ring out this Christmas. Let people open their minds as they open their presents underneath the tree. We need your mind, judge, today. Let the gay man be my brother, be your brother, be the school teacher, be the construction worker. Give the world a gay Santa Claus, God Almighty, God Almighty, God Almighty! Leave out the cookies and milk this Christmas Eve for a holly, jolly homosexual, God Almighty!

Alan: And cut!

[courtroom explodes in applause] (from the episode Loose Lips) For Austrian ears such a speech might seem idiosyncratic, for many Americans it is not, as charismatic and fervently eloquent preachers are part of American culture and TV programs. Moreover, Reverend Al Sharpton in person is part of their reality, he is a well known civil rights activist and television- and radio talk show host. In 2004 he even candidated for the U.S. presidential election for the democrats. He is considered a “man who is willing to tell it like it is.”(cf. Wikipedia, Al Sharpton) Further impression of authenticity in Boston Legal is achieved not only by using shots of real people, but also by not depicting studio landscapes, and place the actors in real surroundings instead, thus to film on location with the effect of adding a kind of documentary feel to the episodes. When the hurricane Katrina wreaked havoc in August 2005, one episode featured several diegetic shots which showed the destroyed houses of New Orleans, together with the non-diegetic soundtrack of typical Louisiana jazz, with the effect of the non-diegetic sound enhancing the impression of representing something ‘real’. Further soundtrack of the episode includes kazoo and trombone. So what we have here is authenticity-oriented- mise-en-scene, and together with the emotional reality of characters Boston Legal challenges the viewers´ expectations once more as it pushes the boundaries of TV conventions, or TV series conventions rather by pushing the boundaries of what is acceptable stylistically, narratively, and thematically. Narratively, the episode Angel of Death deals with a female doctor who is charged for murder. She remained at hospital after the hurricane to take care of the terminally ill, bedridden patients by giving them high doses of morphine in order to help them die peacefully, as no water, food or and electricity are available and their dying

35 soon seems inevitable. The episode deals on the one hand with the ethical dilemma of medically assisted suicide, on a higher level it is the failure of the FEMA that is frankly criticized, as it was in the media:

The criticism of the government response to Hurricane Katrina consisted primarily of condemnations of mismanagement and lack of preparation in the relief effort in response to Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. Specifically, there was a delayed response to the flooding of New Orleans, Louisiana. Within days of Katrina's August 29, 2005 landfall, public debate arose about the local, state and federal governments' role in the preparations for and response to the storm. Criticism was prompted largely by televised images of visibly shaken and frustrated political leaders, and of residents who remained in New Orleans without water, food or shelter, and the deaths of several citizens by thirst, exhaustion, and violence days after the storm itself had passed. The treatment of people who had evacuated to registered facilities such as the Superdome was also criticized. Criticism from politicians, activists, pundits and journalists of all stripes has been directed at the local, state and federal governments. New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin was also criticized for failing to implement his evacuation plan and for ordering residents to a shelter of last resort without any provisions for food, water, security, or sanitary conditions.[…] Organizations such as the Red Cross attempted to form coalitions, but the various actors could not agree on a specific solution, and this failure to cooperate led to instability and misunderstanding between governmental and non-governmental actors. (Wikipedia, Hurricane Katrina). One might ask now in how far such an experience represented on TV is ‘real’ for the audience. In the theoretical part of this thesis Creeber refers to Dallas and that the audience judged the show as “realistic”. Now, due to the diegetic world of Dallas, which does not resemble the world of most of the audience, the viewers felt an emotional realism in the acting. To recognize feelings like love, hate, crookedness, greed, etc. adds to their expectations, as it gives them the feeling of witnessing something real going on, just like one might witness greedy, horrible people in one´s own family. So the diegetic world of this episode of BL is represented through shots of real victims of the hurricane and real destruction, the realistic impression enhanced by the sound of real New Orleans jazz. One possible effect could be that the viewer thinks he is watching a documentary. Most viewers, however, would not, due to their media experiences. But I would argue that the viewers´ perception is even more challenged when he or she learns that it´s a television series, of course this is especially true with viewers who have not watched BL before. Whereas in Dallas the pleasure for the viewers derived, as mentioned in the theoretical part of this thesis, from the stylisation of its diegesis, in Boston Legal the viewers derive pleasure from watching something real like shots of a catastrophe that shook the American nation and people worldwide, all this embedded in no, not a documentary, but a television series.

36

Moreover, it happens that the audience feels involved, they are challenged on the emotional level by the fact that what they see has really happened before. So the impact of reality in BL is much stronger, and the storylines are so closely linked to issues taken from the actual world that the viewers feel very much involved, not only on the level of true-to-life emotions that are depicted by the actors, but also and even more by true-to life events and issues. I would argue that this transgression of what is represented as real on the small screen is typical for TV series in the oughts, the viewer is quite bluntly confronted with issues and details which have not been shown in such a way before. This is not only true for Boston Legal, in CSI it is dissection, or sex and drug abuse in other series like Californication, or it is the charismatic Mister Nice Guy and serial killer in Dexter or the single mom growing and selling cannabis in Weeds. It seems that what a successful TV series must do is to constantly exceed the limits of acceptance of its audience. Actually this is exactly what happens in order to create a cult among the viewers. Nevertheless I would contradict Stacey Abbott, who claims that the creation of cult TV happens more or less for its own sake. This might have been true at the very beginning, as it is essential for a new trend to differentiate or deviate from the norm, even at the risk of failing because of offending sensibilities. Yet meanwhile the idea of creating an engaged and challenged audience does no longer oppose to establishing cult TV as a profitable source of revenue for the advertising industry, not despite but because differing from the norm, as this deviation is exactly what an ad needs if not in the encoded meaning than at least on the surface level. I would argue that BL deviates from the norm in the issues treated and in the frank and realistic way these issues are dealt with which brings on the next chapter, characterization.

7.3 Getting to Know Each Other: Selected Characters I would like to suggest that Boston Legal is rich in outstanding actors. Not only is authenticity achieved on the level of staging or content, it is also on the level of performance where the whole series gains further credibility. Main characters are Denny Crane (Wiliam Shatner) and Alan Shore (James Spader), who are lawyers or owners at Crane, Poole and Schmidt. They both represent the immanent feature of wit in the series, as they are sarcastic and their dialogues are very ironic, with Denny being the less subtle type. Alan repeatedly tries to save the world by taking on seemingly hopeless

37 cases. He fights an often lonely fight for his ideals and dares to show his enthusiasm to the audience in the courtroom.

7.3.1 Denny Crane He has over fifty years of experience as a lawyer, and his ability to litigate logically constantly decreases in the course of the five seasons of Boston Legal. As becomes clear in the later episodes, he suffers from an early stage of Alzheimer´s disease, doubtlessly a severe defect for a lawyer, to which he keeps referring as “mad cow”. He is more than proud that he has never lost a case, and he shows his self-esteem by shouting his name to underline the importance of what he said or simply to emphasize his presence and his status as a living legend. He represents the conservative, as he is partial for firearms and disapproves of communism as an example from the episode “A Whiff and a Prayer” shows, serving as a feasible example for his very special kind of logic:

Congressman Raymond Jacobs: May I ask, Denny, how do you feel about gun control?

Denny: For Communists.

Congressman Jacobs: What about banning assault weapons in the private sector?

Denny: As soon as you say it's OK to ban assault weapons, my friend, even in the private sector, you make it easier to take guns away from hunting, then personal protection. Soon the military and the police are without firearms (Wikiquote:Boston Legal). So absurd Denny´s argumentation might seem, the actual situation in America concerning gun control even outmatches him, as the quotation from a CBS Newscast shows:

National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre linked the April 15 Boston bombings with the ongoing struggle over gun laws in America on Saturday, asking the audience at the annual NRA convention in Houston, "How many Bostonians wish they had a gun two weeks ago? Imagine living in a large metropolitan area where lawful firearms ownership is heavily regulated and discouraged, imagine waking up to a phone call from the police, warning that a terrorist event is occurring outside and ordering you to stay inside your home. I'm talking, of course, about Boston, where residents were imprisoned behind the locked doors of their homes, a terrorist with bombs and guns just outside, frightened citizens, sheltered in place, with no means to defend themselves or their families from whatever may come crashing through the door. How many Bostonians wished they had a gun two weeks ago? How many other Americans now ponder that life-or-death question?" LaPierre, perhaps the most aggressive public face of an organization that has determinedly fought efforts by President Obama and Congress to strengthen gun laws in America, reiterated his belief that "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Boston proves it, when brave law enforcement officers did their jobs so courageously, good guys with guns stopped terrorists with guns." LaPierre said the administration and "Washington elites" are interested only in "demonizing law-abiding

38

gun owners," accusing them of exploiting tragedy "by choice, for political gain.”” (Cbsnews, Boston Gun Control) For Denny Crane George W. Bush is the right man in the right place, the world is full of terrorists lurking in caves and behind the dunes in order to erase the grand American nation. He is ready to fire when he feels his civic duty is in demand to defend fundamental American values. Yet Denny Crane´s traits of character do not remain superficial. Especially in the discussions with his best friend Alan in the balcony scenes at the end of nearly each episode Denny is witty and sensible, though often not at first sight, and the attributes of his character advance further as the series advances. In the end he is not even averse to voting for Obama in the forthcoming presidential elections:

Denny: I might vote for him, you know.

Alan: [surprised] Obama?

Denny: Anybody in America can grow up to be President, that's what I say. Except for Hillary! She wins, I puke.

Alan: Barack Obama.

Denny: Handsome, great photo op. I don't know what he stands for... He'd be a perfect

President! Speaks perfect "white" as well as "black". Never heard me say that.

Alan: What about McCain.

Denny: He speaks "Bush" now. Can't win.

Alan: Obama's against the war now, you know.

Denny: So'm I. [Alan looks questioningly] Don't worry. I'm ready for a new war. Time to blow up Iran. And we gotta get Amina.... douche-bag. And that nut job in North Korea. They both gotta go. And not because they're not white!

You can't please everybody. Better to just...

Alan: Blow them up.

Denny: Exactly. And not because they're not white.

Alan: No.

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal Guisendolls)

A little earlier in the same episode Denny drops a clanger during a job interview with a highly skilled young black lawyer, again proving his deeply rooted prejudices. The young attorney wishes to sue him for discriminating him. Denny has praised him

39 for being “articulate” and is called to account for being politically incorrect, yet he really does not seem to see his mistake:

Denny: The man's a keeper.Smart, good-looking, articulate. I like him.

Paul: There you go.

Kevin: May I ask, when you say "articulate", I would imagine almost everyone who comes out of law school is "articulate".

Denny: Yeah, but uh, well, you know what I mean.

Kevin: I don't, actually.

Denny: Well, I-I mean it like Joe Biden meant it. The way they mean it when they say uh Condi Rice is so articulate. That way.

Kevin: But I still don't know what you mean.

Denny: You don't sound black.

Later his old friend Shirley tries to settle things for Denny:

Shirley: Denny, there's no such thing as "sounding black".

Denny: What do you mean?

Shirley: Certainly you don't think all black people sound alike.

Denny: Well, of course not. Anchors on the news don't sound black at all, and the black weathermen sound whiter than me.

Shirley: It's politically incorrect to say somebody sounds black.

Denny: All right, then "African-American".

Shirley: No.

Denny: "Jesse Jackson-ish"?

Shirley: No!

Denny: Well then, how? What do you say? If a person sounds black, what's the right way to say it?

Shirley: [uncomfortably] ... "Urban".

Denny: White people don't live in cities?

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal Guisendolls)

40

It was a clever decision to choose William Shatner for the role of Denny Crane, as he himself has already gained cult status for his acting in the Starship Enterprise series. The audience accepts and loves him despite of his misbehavior and he wins favor though (or because) he is so American it hurts. David E. Kelley cleverly plays the game as there are allusions in the series to Shatner´s past as captain of the famous starship. He does so with the effect of enhancing Shatner´s recognition value. Here comes a quote from the episode Finding Nimmo, when Denny and Alan take a trip to the Luxury Wilderness Resort at Nimmo Bay and get in the way of some environmental activists, and the way they treat Yankees like Denny and him:

Alan: They call them cling-ons.

(‘An unnoticed and fragmentary amount of fecal matter consigned to either the fabric of one's undergarments or the pubic hairs in and around the vicinity of the anus that were not collected by toilet paper during the aftermath of a bowel movement.’ (Urbandictionary, cling-ons).

Denny: Did you says Klingons?

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal Denny Crane)

(from the episode Finding Nimmo)

Another example from the episode Finding Nimmo well describes Denny´s attitude of typical conservative American, when he starts conversation with one of the activists:

Denny: You're one of those environmental lawyers?

Peter Barrett: Is there something wrong with that?

Denny: They're evildoers. Yesterday it's a tree, today it's a salmon, tomorrow it's, "Let's not dig up Alaska for oil because it's too pretty." Let me tell you something - I came out here to enjoy nature. Don't talk to me about the environment.

Alan: All reality, none of it scripted.

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal Denny Crane)

41

The scene also shows nicely how the momentum often molds the dialogues in BL, and how the actors take on the script spontaneously. Several times there are breaches of the fourth wall, and the actors playfully refer to their actual role as actor in a TV series. In the episode Loose Lips Denny gives further evidence of his conservative though very American attitudes when talking to a plaintiff, who has lost his job as Santa Claus:

Gil Furnald: I just like wearing women's clothes sometimes. It's not a sexual turn-on; it just feels right sometimes.

Denny: So, basically, you're a sicko.

Gil Furnald: I'm not sick.

Denny: Lighten up, man. So what, you got caught in a skirt? That what you're saying?

Gil Furnald: My employer found out, and, yes, I got fired. They asked me a lot of questions, like whether I'm gay.

Denny: Well, are you? Not that there's anything wrong with that.

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal Loose Lips) The irony in this scene lies in Denny contradicting himself, as he first calls the crossdressing man a ‘sicko’, but later he tries to put his statement into perspective, remembering well that he is American to the bone, and as such must display broad- mindedness. Denny and Alan are very much a product of their environment. Boston is known for having many law firms, and it is a town with many wealthy businessmen and successful attorneys. The repeated shots of the Bostonian skyline and the typical red brick architecture underline that tradition is important in this place. I would argue that the shots of the town of Boston function as iconographic devices, they help establish the impression of a world of white collar working class that demands tradition and principles. When I think of the street shots in Sex and the City, it is fashion boutiques, extravagant restaurants and fancy coffeehouses or seductive bakeries that dominate the scene. I am sure that all this does exist in Boston as well, but it would not match the content of the series, as Boston Legal does not deal with consumerism and consumption. Denny Crane can be considered a type, as explained in the theoretical part about stereotyping. Not only that his views represent the typical American conservative, he is also manly, flirtatious to bold, homophobic with a strong belief in man-to-man

42 friendship including manly pleasures like fishing, hunting, riding, bon vivant and lover of firearms. From the episode Deep end of the Poole:

Denny: Are we setting a bad example? I shoot people.

Alan: I bribe them.

Denny: We drink.

Alan: We smoke.

Denny: I'm unfaithful.

Alan: Not to me.

Denny: Never to you.

Alan: We're not setting examples. We're just being true to who we are.

Denny: Who are we?

Alan: Denny Crane.

Denny: Alan Shore.

Alan: Leaders of men.

Denny: With bull's eyes on our asses.

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal Deep end)

7.3.2 Alan Shore Denny Crane can be considered the striking surface for the excellent lawyer Alan Shore, who represents the disillusioned left-wing American, with an ethical conscience ready to fight for the underdogs though often with unorthodox and unethical means. What counts for him is the ethical outcome (cf. Wikipedia, list of Boston Legal characters). He differs from Denny not only in his political views, he is also about thirty years younger and in the prime of life as attorney, and despite of his marked preference for women in which he resembles Denny a lot he is the more reflective and sensitive of both men, as the following example from the episode Stick It nicely demonstrates:

Alan: You know what I miss most about our country, Denny? Not the loss of our civil rights so much as our compassion, our soul, our humanity.

Denny Crane: Uh-uh-uh-uh-uh-uh. Soul, that's a religious thing. State... church... it's unconstitutional for the United States to have a soul.

43

Alan: Apparently. We seem to be becoming a mean people. Learned Hand once said, "Liberty lies in our hearts, and once it dies there, no constitution can save it."

Denny Crane: Just once, I wish you'd quote a Republican.

Alan Shore: "I want a kinder and gentler nation."

Alan stands for the social criticism that marks Boston Legal as an outstanding series. And he counters Denny´s narrow-minded American world views with mordant sarcasm:

Denny: Canada, Japan, England. Any number of those pinko3 countries, I'd be in jail for shooting somebody.

Alan: God bless America.

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal Race Ipsa)

And further:

Alan: To more travels, Denny.

Denny: To the mountains…

Alan: Prairies…

Denny: Whores…

Alan: America the beautiful.

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal Los Angeles) In the course of the series Alan turns out to be the main protagonist, the storylines are structured around him. As I have pointed out in the theoretical part of the thesis, each character fulfills a particular function in a series. Alan stands for the witty and sarcastic moral core and social criticism, whereas his best friend Denny represents comedy and a lighter kind of humor, often of the unintended kind. Further Alan “ is disappointed and disillusioned with how the country has changed in recent years, and routinely confronts these issues in open court”( Wikipedia, List of Boston Legal characters), but also in the balcony scenes weighty discussions concerning American politics take place, this time including disputatious Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin:

Denny: You know what your problem is?

Alan: Yeah, a collapsing economy, two wars....

Denny: No, Democrats don't know how to win, Republicans do.

3 Term that originiated in the Red Scares of the 1950s. If someone were accused of being a communist sympathizer, they were referred to as a "pinko". This originiated when Nixon was running against Ex Officio Senator Douglas for the positionm of California. He accused her of wearing pink underwear, implying that she sympathized with communist parties. (cf. Urbandictionary, pinko)

44

Alan: Maybe instead of so smugly celebrating that Republicans know how to win, might you be at the least bit disgusted at the tactics that they resort to?

Denny: Oh, please.

Alan: The despicable pandering like supporting gas tax holidays or cozying up to the Evangelicals or the most egregious example of political pandering in memory: John McCain's choice in running mate.

Denny: Well... she's run... something.

Alan: What? A town called Wasilla? Which she left in debt?

Denny: She had executive experience including foreign policy.

Alan: Foreign policy? Because she can see Russia on a clear day? Can she even spell "Russia?"

Denny: She's just as qualified.

Alan: Denny, she couldn't name newspaper she read or Supreme Court decision

Denny: Gossip journalism.

Alan: Gossip journalism? Naming a Supreme court case?

Denny: This isn't about Palin, it's about McCain.

Alan: What if, what if he dies?

Denny: Who?

Alan: McCain! Of the last 19 Administrations, almost half, half had situations where the Vice President had to assume Presidential responsibilities; in fact- complete control.

Denny: Reagan had Alzheimer's, his a approval ratings were up-.

Alan: Denny, John McCain is 72! He would be the oldest person ever to assume office. He's ripe for a heart attack, not to mention, he's had Melanoma four times. There's a very real possibility he could die. And then what? We'd be left with Sarah Palin? Is there really anyone anywhere that's okay with that?!

Denny: Yes! They're called Americans! The Joe six-pack -

Alan: Joe six-pack needs someone to fix the economy not have a beer with!

Denny: I don't hear anything other from Obama.

Alan: You don't hear anything at all from John McCain. His own camp says "don't talk about it." Instead, we'll just go negative.

Denny: Oh, Obama's gone negative too.

Alan: Bulldog Palin said that Obama pounced around with terrorists.

Alan Shore is a person who speaks up, not only when he fights at court or in discussing with his friend Denny Crane. He does not mince matters when in contact

45 with costumers of the law firm, as the following dialogue taken from the episode The Nutcrackers will show. The episode is about a WASP family, whose young twin girls feel discriminated for being white and religious. To demonstrate their proper education, their parents ask them to sing a song to Alan. But the performance does not have the desired effect on Alan, as the experienced viewer might easily tell:

White Supremacist Twins: [singing] Michael rowed the boat ashore...Hallelujah! Michael rowed the boat ashore...

Alan: You do know that Michael was a homosexual Jew from Mexico, right?

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal The Nutcrackers)

The issue of racism is prevalent in Boston Legal, stressing the series´ focus on the lack of tolerance and the hostile climate in the America of the oughts. “Supremacism is the belief that a particular race, species, ethnic group, religion, gender, sexual orientation, class, belief system or culture is superior to others and entitles those who identify with it to dominate, control or rule those who do not…Some academics and writers have alleged Christian supremacism as a motivation for the Crusades to the ‘Holy Land’, as well as for crusades against Muslims and pagans throughout Europe. The Atlantic slave trade has been attributed in part to it as well. The Ku Klux Klan has been described as a Christian, as well as a white, supremacist group. There are many white supremacist groups in the United States today.”(Wikipedia, supremacism)

7.3.3 Shirley Schmidt I would like to talk about the third main character in Boston Legal, Shirley Schmidt, co-founder and senior partner of the law firm Crane, Poole and Schmidt. She is represented as the classy though slightly masculinized type of woman. I say slightly because she is an extremely intelligent and clever person who knows how to tend her flock, but she is not a virago-type of woman. Moreover, she does not correspond to the role of the sexy career woman. She is emancipated and tough, but far from being a stereotype, and she once had a relationship with Denny, “a past she now views with sardonic detachment, often making jokes about it” (Wikipedi, :List of Boston Legal characters Shirley Schmidt)

Denny: Lock and load. Where is everybody?

Paul: This is an administrative meeting, Denny.

46

Denny: Oh! Then what the hell am I doing here?

Shirley: Remember the good ole days when you liked to know what was going on? When you could go from your office to the elevator without a roadmap?

Denny: Didn't need a roadmap to find my way around your body, did I, Shirley?

Shirley: I wouldn't know. I was usually asleep.

Denny: I once had her...and Streisand...at the same time. Remember that?

Shirley: Hahhh, I do Denny. Ha ha. And not to burst your bubble, but that was a male impersonator. Perhaps the penis might have been your clue.

From her employees she commands respect, though in her own special way:

Nora: Mrs. Schmidt?

Shirley: My mother is Mrs. Schmidt; you may call me Schmidt.

Alan Shore is very fond of her and although she is much older he makes advances to her:

Alan: Shirley? [sighs] What about senior partners? There would be nothing wrong with me...lusting, say, after you? Would there?

Shirley: Go subscribe to National Geographic. Make a list of the places you'll never get to visit. Add to that list, Schmidt.

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal From whence we came) Shirley knows that Alan is the most brilliant lawyer in the firm, and probably in town, and when the going gets tough she knows she can count on him, though she also knows how to make use of him:

[Discussing a case concerning cannibals]

Shirley: Because this case is disgusting, it's distasteful, it's repugnant...

Alan: Everything I stand for.

Shirley: I'll drive.

Alan: Shirley, is this about getting in a room with me?

Shirley: [sarcastically] Yes, Alan, I went out and recruited a cannibal just to get close to you.”

(cf. Wikiquote, Boston Legal Fine young cannibal)

47

7.4 An Unexpected Example of Stereotyping in BL: Brad Chase Stereotyping does not occur too often in the series, and when a character represents a stereotype, it is done intentionally, a fact that oncemore underlines the witty and critical attitude of Boston Legal. One of the stereotyped characters is Brad Chase, a former U.S. Marine soldier who somehow represents the type of the beautiful, blonde, dutiful pretty boy. Alan sees through him very easily:

Brad: I outrank you.

Alan: And I'm such a slut for authority. I have trouble talking that fast. I don't believe in being straight up, but I'm a big fan of your Aqua Velva commercials.

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal Head cases) Aqua Velva refers to a famous American after shave, I consider it useful to take a look at one of the typical ads in order to get an impression of what type of man Brad represents in the series. (Artofmanliness, Aquavelva)

48

Brad not only resembles the man in the picture above, moreover, he also epitomizes the masculinity represented in the ad, as it is somehow classic and casual, though constrained as well due the phallic position of the bottle and the woman´s bashfully lecherous looks. The ad apparently reduces and simplifies male humans, presents them as strong and potent lovers with the appeal of the lonesome ranger. The ad does not offer anything for those who demand more from a man than that... and Alan Shore for sure demands more. From the episode Can´t we all get a lung:

Marlene: Buzz Lightyear. Isn't that the nickname for the Ken-doll with benefits? (Wikiquote, Boston Legal Can´t we all get a lung). Brad Chase wears a Buzz Lightyear costume at a fancy dress party, and he is repeatedly referred to it. His choice of costume is no surprise to anyone who knows him, no less than a superhero would fit him as an alter ego. “Buzz is a space ranger from the Intergalactic Alliance and is stationed in the Gamma Quadrant of Sector 4. He is the captain of the Alliance's Team. Lightyear is known for his bravery and courage. Buzz believes that following rules is the way people should live their life”

(Wikipedia, Buzz Lightyear).

In the episode It Girls and Beyond Alan, who (“wherever he works, he treats his coworkers with levity and refuses to take himself too seriously” (Wikipedia, List of Boston Legal characters) shows Brad up and constantly likes to provoke and tease him, especially when Alan has learned that his freshest case really challenges Brad: to frankly talk about the existence of homosexual women threatens his conservative manly mens´ worldview. Alan´s teasing concerns Brad´s homophobia, and refers also to his

49 past as a Marine soldier, as homosexuality, though the fact being a taboo in society, is frequently acted out among members of military services. Alan´s motives for teasing Brad include his hypocritical behavior, as he, Brad, could never admit that he, as a manly man, feels attracted by the thought of lesbian love:

Lori: What's your case about, Brad?

Alan: What is it about?

Brad: It involves interference with contractual relations.

Alan: You mean...lesbians?

Paul: Where are you?

Brad: Today, they're calling Tracy to testify that her ex-lover was-

Alan: Lesbian ex-lover.

Brad: -to testify that Tracy was scamming her for money. Tracy was in fact not an actual bone-fide...

Alan: Lesbian?

Brad: You like saying it?

Alan: I do.

Brad: Say it again.

Alan: Lesbian.

Brad: Keep going.

Alan: LESBIAN! LESBIAN! Lez-bee-un. All together now!

All: Lesbian!

Alan: I also like to watch. How many people like to-

Paul: All right, that's enough, this is a staff meeting. I'll ask you all to conduct yourselves appropriately and professionally.

Catherine: Cookies everyone! Nourishment is most important in the morning.

Paul: Who is this woman?

Catherine: Take two, Tara, you're a rail.

(Later in the episode)

Alan: Hey Brad! All together now!

All: Lesbian!

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal It girls and beyond)

50

The fact that the other lawyers, who are present at the meeting support Alan´s taunting demonstrates that Brad cannot equal Alan´s status in the firm, neither on the social nor on the professional level. He will never outrank him. In my opinion Brad´s role represents a stereotype, as his characterization is oversimplified and narrow and reduced to a small set of characteristics. He clearly is the antagonist in the series, opposing Alan Shore. What is outstanding is not that stereotyping takes place, as we have learned that all TV series do it. What is different in Boston Legal is the choice of the character that is cliché-ridden. This time it is not ethnic minorities, religious groups, people with sexual orientations different from the viewers´s mass, people with physical disabilities, this time it is a character who would serve well as a main protagonist in any other television series. Brad becomes the laughingstock in Boston Legal, not because he is funny or witty, but because he is not. This making fun of the white, heterosexual, male who does not deviate from the cultural norm satirizes common identity categories represented in TV series. Furthermore and interestingly enough, it is usually people from the opposite sex who are stereotypes. As in BL, however, the dominant roles are male, it would be more common that a female character is stereotyped. Now as it is the manly man Brad Chase, who represents the stereotype I would argue that the current mechanisms of gender stereotyping are reversed and thus satirized in this case, too. It would correspond to TV series patterns if Brad was female. Through Alan´s repeated teasing he somehow gets emasculated for the viewer, as he does not react like the stereotypical manly man is supposed to react. He simply cannot outrank Alan.

7.5 Challenging Identity Categories In the theoretical part of this thesis Mittell mentions that for assessing the representation of identity in TV productions one has to consider whether the represented images are accurate and positive. I will take a look at two special characters and their image in Boston Legal. The choice of topics and characters in Boston Legal challenges the audience repeatedly, as cultural norms are questioned, often with the help of satire. The characters I would like to introduce are characters whose representation in the series challenges the cultural norms of the viewer´s expectations. They define identity which differs from the norm, as it is not white, male heterosexual, or, not only.

51

7.5.1 Soulsister I would like to introduce the character of Clarence Bell: He is African- American and sued his employer for gender-discrimination (cf. Wikipedia, Boston Legal List of Characters Clarence Bell) but from client he turns to an assistant in the law firm of Crane, Poole and Schmidt. He is represented as shy, overweight and self- effacing person, though with an amiable and cooperative character. He is not what one considers a tough and manly guy. He moves clumsily and his big eyes, bashful looks and his baby face express the image of a person who lacks self-esteem and permanently feels insecure. Clarence Bell´s characterization gains further depth when the audience is confronted with his second personality Clarice. Clarence switches personalities by transforming into a female, who is everything that Clarence is not. Clarice is proud, loud and cheeky, she is of a gaudy attractiveness as she likes to wear glittering dresses and performs in a club as a soul singer. When she is exposed to crookedness and discrimination, she can get really angry and then she will fiercely make her point. Being Clarice, Clarence can do all the things he would never dare to do as a man. The representation of Clarence/Clarice challenges the identity categories of race, ethnicity and gender. He is widely accepted in the law firm, everybody likes him and his transformation into Clarice is seen with amusement, especially by Alan, (who has a weakness for fancy dresses himself). Yet Clarence is respected in the firm as a valuable assistant. Later in the series the audience learns that he has successfully studied law, but never told anyone. In consequence he is promoted an attorney of litigation, and henceforth appears at court with a new self-consciousness.

7.5.2 Mighty Dwarf Another character, who challenges cultural norms, is Bethany Horowitz. She is a person of short stature, or a “dwarf” as she is called in the series, and also works at Crane, Poole and Schmidt. She has a relationship with Denny, and she represents a comical element in the series. She does not take herself too serious, she makes a lot of ironic jokes about her stature, and she is extremely witty and self-conscious. She is a lot younger than Denny, at least 45 years, but he is completely addicted to her, at least for a couple of episodes. Bethany challenges the identity categories, as she represents very special kind of woman. The image Bethany stands for adds another layer of humor to Boston Legal. Of all women it is Bethany Denny falls for and we have learned that he is politically incorrect and conservative, a charming chauvinist and a great lover of life.

52

To have a liaison with a disabled person is not what one would expect. The audience is challenged once more. Now does Bethany represent the stereotype of the disabled person? Does the viewer feel he must pity her? Or is she a kind of “supercrip”, “handicapped horror” (Seger 197)? No. I would argue that her dominant behavior is rather typical for the image of tough women in TV shows, hence Bethany is more a type than a stereotype. This is also because her image is not negative or harmful, given the fact pointed out by Seger in the theoretical part of this thesis that “the character type doesn´t suggest that everyone in a certain group has the same characteristics”(198). Nevertheless the character of Bethany is rather limited in its representation as the audience does not learn more about her. Yet what makes her contribute to the comedy element in Boston Legal is that her demanding behavior cleverly contrasts her extraordinary outer appearance and challenges the viewers who feel the inherent craving for pity when confronted with a disabled person, thus her representation contradicts the “commonsense norms of defining groups and shaping what we assume about ourself and others” (Mittell: 314). Notwithstanding the fact that Bethany is a ‘dwarf’, what really adds an element of comedy to the series is not Bethany´s stature, but rather how the two lovers treat each other. Denny is anxious to please Bethany, whereas she is the dominant one. Furthermore her character challenges the identity category of sexual orientation, as it comes clear that the sexual relationship between Denny and Bethany seems to flourish, and, not only, but also because of her small stature. The audience is challenged here because it is quite a taboo to talk about the body functions of disabled persons, unless you are a M.D., and it is even a greater taboo to grant them the right to have a sexual life and -desires. The relationship to a person of short stature exceeds the real-life experience of most viewers. I would argue that the relationship of Bethany Horowitz, the Jew, and Denny Crane, the Christian conservative, very cleverly plays with the underlying elements of wit and social criticism in Boston Legal.

7.6 A Case of Capital Punishment in the Episode “The Court Supreme“ In the episode The Court Supreme I found an interesting case of representation of African –American identity. The episode is about Alan being called to the United States Supreme Court in order to speak up for a black man and get a reversal. The client, named Lenny has been sentenced to death in Louisiana for raping an eight-year-

53 old girl. Alan´s first refuses the case. But the case involving death penalty and its argument taking place at the Court Supreme, he changes his mind, also when he learns that the man has an IQ of 70 and the execution of the mentally disabled is regarded as unconstitutional. The problem with the man, who claims to have not raped the girl, is that he was never officially pronounced disabled (cf. Boston Legal, Script 4.7). At their first encounter, the viewer has certain expectations concerning the outer appearance and behavior of the man. In most TV series African-American criminals are represented as brutes, aggressive, loud, and ready to threaten, bribe or lie to their attorneys. Or they are laughing stocks, with heavy gold chains and rude way to talk. Or they combine the mentioned characteristics plus adding one or the other, like dullness and ignorance. At first sight the case of this young man contributes to the overrepresentation of Blacks as criminals. At the first meeting with Alan and Denny he asks: “What about, you know, that I´m slow, does that count?” (Boston Legal, Script 4.7) and the viewer might think, ok, this is part of the shrewed self-display of a black criminal, as often seen on-screen. Denny, once more representing the element of mordant irony in Boston Legal, answers: “It does, they´ll put you in charge of FEMA”(ibid.). In a more relaxed situation the irony of Denny´s joke, which refers to the failing of emergency relief for the victims of hurricane Katrina by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in New Orleans would have caused a burst of laughter. Yet the situation is inappropriate and the joke falls flat. All eyes are on the young man, who tells in simple, calm and convincing words that he expects them to tell that he has not done it. It is due to his representation in the context of this grave situation that we as viewers reconsider our assessment. All the people in the room believe that he is innocent. He is treated with respect and empathy. As a consequence, the audience is hailed. The black criminal, accused for rape of a child and as such in the mind of the average viewer a facet of the real world which but often boils down to a stereotype and as such one-dimensional and simplified in its representation, has changed, by means of representation on-screen, including acting, atmosphere, camera work, and dialogue, his image and its encoded, stereotyped meaning is altered through the act of televising him. Suddenly there is an innocent man, who represents what is American. A man sentenced to death contributes to the sense of what is American. It contributes to the things most viewers disapprove of but accept as being American. Now is the image of Lenny accurate? I would say yes because it does not correspond to a stereotype, though he is mentally disabled he is not represented as a freak. In their first meeting Alan talks slowly, regarding Lenny´s

54 weakness, but he remains respectful and sincere. Denny´s joke does not fit, as he himself realizes quickly. Yet Denny´s sheepish looks and his uneasy body movements express honest concern. The image of the proud conservative American Denny Crane, master of self-display, suddenly cracks, and his pink silken tie indicates that he is a soft- hearted philanthropist who hides himself behind his harsh sayings and seemingly insular attitudes. The episode The Court Supreme offers again a great deal of accuracy, as the real names of the real members of the Supreme Court are mentioned with the effect of representing and challenging the image of ‘real-life’ America. As far as image analysis is concerned, the connotation of the subject-matter capital punishment is that killing people in the name of the law is American. The inherent denotation of Lenny´s case is clear: this is against the constitution, this is wrong. Lenny is a victim of American jurisdiction, and his innocence is not the primary cause of Alan´s involvement. Alan represents the national character of America, he fights for the proper exegesis of American constitution, although he represents a victim. I would argue that all this represents an accurate and positive image of America. The crux of the matter is Alan´s fight at the Court Supreme, it turns the negative image of America in this episode into a positive one. The weight of this issue noticeably adds tension to the already first-class acting in the series Boston Legal. The episode The Court Supreme aired in April 2008 (cf. Wikipedia, list of Boston Legal episodes Court supreme) and represented an at that time actual, real case:

The only two people in the United States who were sentenced to die (after reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976) for committing a rape that did not result in death were convicted in Louisiana courts: Patrick O. Kennedy and Richard L. Davis. Kennedy's case has led to a challenge before the Supreme Court, which was heard in April 2008. The court ruled in their favor, overturning their death sentences but upholding their convictions (Wikipedia, Capital punishment in Louisiana). Alan´s fight is not a simple one, as his brilliant argumentation at the Supreme Court demonstrates: Moreover, Alan defines and attacks what he considers to be American, including further social criticism.

7.6.1 Alan´s Argumentation at the United States Supreme Court Alan Shore: *He goes to the lectern.*

May it please the court, Mr Chief Justice, currently there are 3,300 on death row in this country. My client is one of only two who didn't commit murder.

Justice Antonin Scalia: Are you here to give us a box score?

55

Alan Shore: I'd like to provide a context, Your Honor. In Louisiana 180 men have been prosecuted for child rape since this law went into effect in 1985. Leonard Serra is the only one facing death.

Justice Antonin Scalia: Look, Counsel, Louisiana law permits death for child rape.

Alan Shore: And I would respectfully submit that law is unconstitutional.

Justice Antonin Scalia: Based on what?

Alan Shore: Based on this court's find in Coker that the death penalty...

Justice Antonin Scalia: Spoke to the rape of an adult, not a child. Maybe you need to read it again. And even if I were to concede your point, which I don't, there's a national consensus now in favor of authorizing the death penalty for non-homicide rape.

Alan Shore: Why? Because Louisiana passed a barbaric law, joining the ranks of Saudi Arabia, Uganda,China...

Justice Antonin Scalia: And other States in this country!

Alan Shore: Five! Five States. That's hardly a consensus. And none of those other States authorize death for first-time offenders as Louisiana does. And it should also be noted in your reliance on a national consensus you look to transcend legislation. Laws passed by politicians mostly around election time when they're desperate toappear tough on crime. The people who care the most about the welfare of children, doctors and social workers, the people who actually treat abused kids, have filed amicus briefs asking you to strike down this law. Because they know the death penalty in fact does not protect kids at all, but rather it makes it less likely that children, even if they have been abused, will report the crime, especially if a family member is involved. No kid wants tobe responsible for a relative being executed! And children often get it wrong! They are uniquely prone to suggestibility and coercion, not that the police would ever be guilty of that, of course. But we already have an epidemic of wrongful convictions in this country. As many as 15,000 a year! Too many of them ending up on death row. And child rape prosecutions are especially unreliable. And now we wanna add the death penalty to make these mistakes irrevocable? Whatever one's feelings are on capital punishment, and I realize with this court one seems to be for it, you simply cannot ignore the fact that we often screw it up! We convict the innocent. We botch executions. Which is why many States have declared a moratorium on capital punishment. That's your true national consensus! And yet, here comes Louisiana seeking to expand the death penalty to non-homicide cases. And this is my favorite part, to kill the mentally disabled! Are we serious?

Chief Justice Beyer:

This defendant was never officially pronounced disabled.

Alan Shore: But he is just the same, Your Honor. He has an IQ of 70. They're gonna kill him because there was no official pronouncement?

Chief Justice Alito: The way this goes, Counsel, is we work off a record which you are not free to amend.

Alan Shore: But, by record you simply mean the conviction. Reading of the entire record shows that he denies his guilt, and always has, he has no prior arrests,that the victim

56 never even made the accusation until a full twenty months after the alleged crime, there was no

DNA...Chief Justice Alito: Factual innocence is not something you get to argue.

Alan Shore: Well, how silly is that? You're deciding whether ornot to kill someone and his possible innocence is irrelevant?

Chief Justice Roberts: Mr. Shore! I don't like your demeanor, your tone, and I would remind you of where you are.

Alan Shore: I know exactly where I am, Mr. Chief Justice. I'm in the Supreme Court of the United States, and letme tell you, you folks aren't as hot as all get out. Let's consider your respective Senate confirmations. You all testified under oath that you never actually considered how you would rule on abortion. You must be kidding me! Never gave it a thought? No perjury there? Justice Scalia? You went duck hunting with Vice President Cheney while he was a named defendant in a case before this court. Congratulations on not getting shot, by the way, but you didn't exactly avoid the appearance of impropriety there? Justice Alito? You were caught hearing a case involving a company you'd invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in. Ha! No conflict of interest there? You also don't recuse yourself in terrorism cases even though your best friend is Michael Chernov, head of Homeland Security? Seems to me the Supreme Court of the United States should be made of sterner stuff. Am I right? Justice Thomas? At least put down the magazine! Chief Justice Thomas:Hey! *Denny gasps. Alan turns to smile delightedly. Denny makes a fist in triumph.*

Chief Justice Roberts: I really don't think you mean to come after us, Counsel.

Alan Shore: Oh, but I do! In your short term as Chief Justice this court with your narrow majority has turned back the clock on civil rights, school segregation, equal protection, free speech, abortion, campaign finance. You've been overtly and shamelessly pro- business, making it impossible for some plaintiffs to so much as suecorporations, especially big oil and big tobacco! Somebody's gotta go after you! Exxon Mobil made over fortybillion dollars in 2007.Forty billion! And yet nineteen years after the Valdez oil spill plaintiffs are still waiting to be fully compensated. Justice Scalia? You wanna overturn the verdict altogether because it's not the company's fault that the ship's captain got drunk? But he was a drunk! And they knew it! Perhaps not the best choice to pilot fifty million gallons of crude oil through an environmentally sensitive area!

Justice Antonin Scalia: You are getting so far off point.

Alan Shore: My point is, who are you people? You've transformed this court from being a governmental branch devoted to civil rights and liberties into a protector of discrimination! A guardian of government! A slave to monied interest and big business, and today, hallelujah! You seek to kill a mentally disabled man! I'm curious, as a group, how many executions have you all actually witnessed? I'm sorry that's... that's unfair. *He collects himself.*

I've seen five. And it is the most inhumane, cruel and unusual hypocrisy of a system that promises to be just.

Justice Antonin Scalia:I'll ask you to leave your personal politics out of this. Alan Shore:

And I'd ask you to do exactly the same! The Supreme Court was intended to be free and

57

unadulterated by politics. It is now dominated by it. You're hand-picked by Presidents with ideological agendas, and of the two dozen five-four decisions of your 2006-2007 term, nineteen broke straight across ideological lines. That's politics! And while you claim to be against judicial activism you rewrote--check that—invented new law to decide a presidential election for God's sake! If that's how it's going to be then at least have the decencyto put your names on ballots like the rest of the politicians so that we the people get a voice!

Chief Justice Roberts: Mr. Shore! You have said quite enough. Now you might consider using what little timeyou have remaining to represent your client insteadof your own left wind agenda.

Alan Shore: Contrite.Yes. I absolutely cannot stand up here and ask anybody to excuse the rape of a child. If it were my child I'd want to shoot the son of a bitch in front of the courthouse. But the more evolved response would be to take into account all the circumstances, and to deliberate and decide whether Leonard Serra truly represents the worst of the worst of humanity for whom we reserve the death penalty. I've been advised by my advisors not to talk about Leonard, but I am going to talk about him because Leonard Serra is not in any way the worst. Leonard is not a son of a bitch. Emotionally, intellectually, he is a child! Is this really a person to make an example of? Of all the men Louisiana has prosecuted for child rape since the passage of this law only Leonard has been sentenced to death. Does it strike you as fair that the one guy singled out is the one with an IQ of seventy? Really? He takes a moment to compose himself. Leonard Serra is black. In Louisiana historically it's been blacks that have been executed for rape in non- homicide cases. In the last hundred years Louisiana has executed twenty-nine men for rape. All were black. On the face of this building it reads, "Equal justice under law." I would beg you to honor that. Finally, I'd like to say, despite my tone, I have always been and still am in enormous awe of this institution. Elected officials represent the will of the American people, but the Supreme Court has always reflected our soul and our conscience. My conscience and I hope yours simply cannot reconcile executing a mentally disabled man, whether he was officially pronounced as such or not. We have to be better than that! Even if Louisiana isn't. You know, on the back of this building is that magnificent sculpture, part of which symbolizes the concept of justice tempered by mercy. If mercy truly lives within these walls, within your hearts as Justices, as people, you cannot cause this man to be injected with chemicals for the purpose of killing him for a crime it's very possible he did not commit. He asked me to tell you that. That he did not commit it. He felt it was important that you know that. A moment. He also asked me to tell you he doesn't want to die. (Boston Legal, Script4.7) Alan´s argument is very critical, and in some passages his tone is utterly ironic. It corresponds to what in the theoretical part of this thesis is defined as satire in representation. It represents a critical commentary plus pointed and ironical comments.

7.7. Not just a Case of Tax Evasion Another one of Alan Shore´s closing arguments in which he critically comments on the political situation in America is from the episode Stick it. Alan Shore´s secretary evades her taxes on principle and to challenge the government. When she gets arrested, Alan appears for her at court, and delivers one of his most famous closing arguments:

58

“When the weapons of mass destruction thing turned out to be not true, I expected the American people to rise up. Ha! They didn´t. Then, when the Abu Ghraib torture thing surfaced and it was revealed that our government participated in rendition, a practice where we kidnap people and turn them over to regimes who specialize in torture, I was sure then the American people would be heard from. We stood mute. Then came the news that we jailed thousands of so-called terrorists suspects, locked them up without the right to a trial or even the right to confront their accusers. Certainly, we would never stand for that. We did. And now it´s been discovered the executive branch has been conducting massive, illegal, domestic surveillance on its own citizens. You and me. And I at least consoled myself that finally, finally the American people will have had enough. Evidentially, we haven´t. In fact, if the people of this country have spoken, the message is we´re ok with it all. Torture, warrantless search and seizure, illegal wiretappings, prison without a fair trial- or any trial, war on false pretenses. We, as a citizenry, are apparently not offended. There are no demonstrations on college campuses. In fact, there´s no clear indication that the young people seem to notice. Well, Melissa Hughes noticed. Now, you might think, instead of withholding her taxes, she could have protested the old-fashioned way. Made a placard and demonstrated at a Presidential or Vice-Presidential appearance, but we´ve lost the right to do that as well. The Secret Service can now declare free speech zones to contain, to control and, in effect, criminalize protest. Stop for a second and try to fathom that. At a Presidential rally, parade or appearance, if you have on a supportive t-shirt, you can be there. If you are wearing or carrying something in protest, you can be removed. This, in the United States of America. This in the United States of America. Is Melissa Hughes the only one embarrassed?

*Alan sits down abruptly in the witness chair next to the judge*

Judge Sanders: Mr. Shore, that´s a chair for witnesses only. Really long speeches make me so tired sometimes. Please get out of the chair.

Alan: Actually, I am sick and tired.

Judge: Get out of the chair!

Alan: And what I´m most sick and tired of is how every time somebody disagrees with how the government is running things, he or she is labeled un-American.

U.S. Attorney Shapiro: Evidentially, it´s speech time!

Alan: And speech in this country is free, you hack! Free for me, free for you, free for Melissa Hughes to stand up to her government and say “Stick it” !

U.S.Attorney Shapiro: Objection!

Alan: I object to government abusing its power to squash the constitutional freedom of its citizenry! And, God Forbid, anybody challenge it. They´re smeared as being a heretic. Melissa Hughes is an American. Melissa Hughes is an American!

Judge: Mr. Shore, unless you have anything new and fresh to say, please sot down. You´ve breached the decorum of my courtroom with all this hooting!

Alan: Last night, I went to bed with a book. Not as much fun as 29 years old, but the book contained a speech by Adlai Stevenson. The year was 1952. He said:”The tragedy of our day is the climate of fear in which we live and fear breed repression. Too often, sinister threats to the Bill of Rights, to freedom of the mind are concealed under the patriotic cloak of anti-Communism”. Today, it´s the cloak of terrorism. Stevenson also remarked: “It´s far easier to fight for principles than to live up to them”. I know we are all afraid, but the Bill of Rights- we have to live up to that. We simply must. That´s all that

59

Melissa Hughes was trying to say. She was speaking for you. I would ask you now to go back to that room and speak for her” (Boston Legal, Stick it). Adlai Stevenson also really existed. He was governor of Illinois. Truman proposed that Stevenson should seek the Democratic nomination for president in 1952. At the convention he held a stirring and witty speech, impressing many intellectuals with his stylish and thoughtful demeanor. But he lost against Eisenhower, who attracted the masses by the clever use of television. Later he resumed law practice, and his eloquent oratory and intellectual air may very well have served as a model for the character of Alan Shore (cf Wikipedia, Adlai Stevenson).

7.8 Ideology and Boston Legal In his arguments Alan Shore repeatedly criticizes dominant values that stand for American society. As mentioned in the theoretical part of this thesis Mittell talks of “televised ideologies”, and that they “shape how we look at our world” (272). What happens in Boston Legal is that ideology is represented through the different characters and their worldviews. Each of them stands for certain meanings, so that every viewer will find meanings that suit what he or she considers to be the “shared common sense”. Consumer -capitalism as one facet of American ideology is conveyed in Boston Legal only marginally. Certainly the lawyers earn a lot more than the average American, and expensive suits and furniture dominate the staging. Yet I would not consider consumer- capitalism important in the series, it furnishes a kind of background at the most, as one fights for the underdogs more efficiently if one belongs to a higher class. Nevertheless I do not think that it was difficult to sell advertising during the program, as Denny and Alan represent, if not consumer-capitalism, values that correlate with the needs of the advertising industry. Wit and a bit of rebellion always sell. I would argue that Boston Legal has an overall, ideological message that is consistent over the episodes. The audience is very cleverly hailed, as the two main characters Denny and Alan at first sight appeal to different types of viewers. You do not have to be un-American like Alan appears to be (but he really is not, he rather represents disappointment with the country´s development, but believes strongly in the American basic liberties) to find pleasure in viewing the show. Denny will attract the more traditional, elder viewers. He embodies the American precept of “America is the World, so the world had better be more like America”. William Shatner, who plays Denny Crane, is so authentic because his former role as Captain Kirk fitted into this context of American ideology of heroes.

60

“E pluribus Unum” – the founding notion of America- is exactly what matches Denny´s self-righteous behavior in the series. Once the viewers have been hailed, they will “feel that the worldview offered…fits with their own personal outlook” (277) as quoted from Mittell in the theoretical part of this thesis. Moreover, Boston Legal offers both: political viewpoints and characters to identify with, whereas the relationship between Denny and Alan demands a little more insight, there will only be a few viewers who would want to immediately identify with this special man-to-man friendship. It takes some time to understand that the two do not merely represent an odd couple of the Laurel and Hardy type. I think the subtlety in representing human relationships makes the series very attractive, as it does not want to hail at all costs. Further one could argue that the series alienates the viewers by the choice of topics and by the characterization, and that it is exactly because of this alienating that the audience is hailed. Boston Legal subverses the superficial feeling of patriotism which would make them viewers feel, “we are Americans, this show is about American politics and what our government does is the best for us Americans”. What Boston Legal does instead is to question the “flag-and-eagle patriotism” as I would call it, and represent a broad range of issues and characters which scratch on the surface of commonplace American TV series esthetics and discomfort the American Ego. The audience is not served up a uniform American identity on a plate. I think it is mostly due to the inherent criticism and complexity of the series that Boston Legal became cult, not only in America. It stands up against what Mittell, in the theoretical part of this thesis, calls “hegemony, as the process of leading by consent of the ruled, actively accepting ideologies as part of common sense” (281). In contrast to the political drama The West Wing the characters represented are not patriarchal, there is no religious background, no romanticizing of peace keeping and global justice (cf. Mittell:282). What we have is a mixed set of meanings (cf. Mittell:283), yet the meanings all have in common that they quest and criticize the actual condition of the United States of America. Alan Shore´s permanent conflict is to find balance between disappointment and the strength of arguing for a change of conditions. Due to his eloquence he offers an opportunity of identification for most viewers, as the criticism concerning the U.S corresponds to a trend of thought in the oughts. The series Boston Legal as a whole offers a ritual of criticizing and debating current issues, and hence corresponds to Mittell´s idea of the TV series as a “cultural forum” (285). Denny Crane represents the more ideological viewpoint, whereas Alan

61

Shore stands for the opposing viewpoints (cf. Mittell:285). He can be considered left- wing, a liberal democrate. The difference between Denny, the conservative and Alan, whom Denny thinks to be out of touch with the values, mirrors political reality in the United States. Denny´s relationship with Bethany, who is Jewish, contributes further to the representation of differing world views in BL. To sum up, Boston Legal can be considered a more critical than escapist program, and what makes it attractive for a specific audience is the keen-witted and often bold and sarcastic humor of its dialogues, a kind of humor which stands for, as I would argue for what Mittell calls “a niche appeal” (288) and it underlines that the series is not a mere comedy and clearly has “an agenda behind”(ibid.). I would argue that the success of the series owes a lot to the atmosphere of alienation or even identity crisis concerning the fragmentation of American core values which is typical for the noughties.

7.8.1 Postmodern Ideas in Boston Legal Boston Legal can be considered a postmodern TV series. The major part of its inherent criticism refers to the development America took after the attacks on 9/11, and taking a sharp look at the former superpower, hence invalidates the myth of the invulnerable United States as a sacrosanct example for the rest of the world. The series rather creates the image of a nation that has to face its mistakes and is not only prone, but in need of criticism on order to change for the better. The series stands for a deviation from social and cultural norms through representing a society which questions national and ethnic values like religion and the political system. The characters in BL are multi-layered and fragmented, the relationship of Denny Crane and Alan Shore represents an alternative family-unit and paints a new picture of homosocial reality. The idea of the traditional, nuclear family is satirized as something that does not work, as all of the characters are divorced or unhappy in their marriage and relationships are probable to break up when marriage seems to be the next step. The connected idea of a hierarchy between man and woman in marriage is also satirized, as the gender roles are completely reversed when Denny and Alan marry in the last episode, hence representing an alternative to middle-class marriage models. The social order in BL is often questioning hierarchy, as can be seen best when it comes to power struggles which end up at court. The question of high and low culture is not of importance in judging Boston

62

Legal as a quality drama. The series represents a hybrid, and its concept and content is not intended to fit into the rules of mass-marketing. Intertextuality plays an important role in BL, as there are frequent references to actual events and current issues, overloading the audience with fragmented and partial just-in-time knowledge. Forum discussions and blogs concerning the issues and characters that appear in the series occur frequently. Reality and the world of the series as an artificial world seem to merge. Breaches of the 4th wall occur, with the effect of placing the viewers closer at the actor´s side, and hence enhancing the dimension of identifying with the characters. The phallic ordering of sexual identities is substituted by queer sexuality. Porn-style jokes are a seemingly natural part of the humor in Boston Legal.(cf.Georgetown:Pomo) To sum up, the series reinterprets the genre of the legal drama by adding irony and sarcasm as elements typical for the comedy series. Hence the series is a hybrid which could be called “dramedy”. The narrative technique is rather conventional, just like in Ally McBeal, yet the series offers ironic readings of weighty issues. Furthermore typical for the postmodern drama is Alan Shore´s role as the sceptic main character who seeks truth and fights for his ideals, he subverses official seriousness and earnestness at court with the use of sarcasm (cf. ibid.).

7.9 Dialogue The strength of Boston Legal as a TV series lies clearly in the dialogue, and as one necessary element of high quality dialogue there is strong characterization, as mentioned in the theoretical part of this paper. The series demands advanced easy listening, as the witty use of language is a main point in the pleasure of watching BL. I hope I can make this clear through the numerous quotes inserted in my thesis. Dialogue here typically functions as a communicative device between audience and actors, it challenges the viewer who can feel involved to a higher degree than in a series which offers mere easy listening and thus appeals less to the engaged viewer. Denny´s character for example is inconsistent and thus attractive, on the one hand he is the politically incorrect and close-minded conservative, on the other hand he attracts the audience with his clownish charme. In conversations he often misses the point, due to his Alzheimer or as he sarcastically calls it “mad cow” but there are also situations when he hits the bull´s eye by chance, further adding a strong element of comedy to the series. Alan is the kind of person who demands a second, or even a third look. His

63 character is multi-layered and complex as it defies easy analysis, with the effect of creating an en engaged viewer who wants to learn more about him. The strong bonding between Alan and Denny is also extremely interesting and attractive for the audience, as it is complex, too. Why the two characters should be so closely linked on the level of relationship cannot be explained easily. Their world views differ a lot, they are antagonists in a way. Nevertheless they have a lot in common, there are similarities which are quite subtle, but sufficiently convincing as Alan and Denny very much attract each other. In very last episode of the series they even marry to seal their bond of friendship and to give Alan the opportunity to take care of Denny´s affairs in the future as his dementia very probably will progress further, leaving him a case for nursing care some day.

Denny: What are you looking for? Serious relationship?

Alan: Don't be silly... I'm already involved with you.

Denny: You're damn right!

(Wikiquote, Boston Legal The verdict) The above dialogue might count as an example of easy listening dialogue, but it is not, as it demands an engaged audience to decode the meaning and to grasp the dimension of this very special friendship. In that respect I consider the Alan´s and Denny´s relationship as a character itself and just like an autonomous and separate person it needs to be deciphered by the viewers, as it is by far too complex that it could work as a sporting element of comedy alone. Their friendship links the comedy/drama elements in Boston Legal, as it links Alan who, though being scintillatingly witty, represents the element of social criticism, and Denny, whose character as a whole satirizes the American conservative and hence stands for the comical element within the series.

8. Conclusion

The fact that television series are widely consumed but hardly questioned does not mean that there are absolutely no limits in realizing such a series. There are both possibilities and limitations. If a series succeeds it does so out of several reasons. This thesis has tried to take a closer look at such reasons. No matter how a TV series might excel, it must stick to a set of conventions in order to meet the expectations of the

64 audience, in doing so this might also mean to subvert the viewers´ expectations later. Nevertheless, for at least a couple of seasons the viewer has to be hailed in order to watch the series on a regular basis, as compared to film, which usually happens once, television series are aired regularly, often in seasons. This means for the producers and writers of television series that there is a multiple chance to win a new fan and abiding consumer of the DVD to come. This is why it is indispensable for a television series to catch the viewer´s eyes and ears right from the beginning: the soundtrack in BL consists of Rhythm and Blues music only, a kind of music the majority of the viewers likes to listen to. Character realization also profits from the regularity in airing as characters in television series are modifiable, and thereby can develop throughout the course of the seasons. As a consequence, one characteristic of film, namely the appearance of profound and convincing characters can be applied to TV series by implication. One important reason is character realization. In Boston Legal the characters of Denny Crane and Alan Shore are cleverly opposed. On the superficial level the two lawyers quite conventionally function as the funny couple thus the viewers are easily entertained by the seemingly exaggerated character types. In the course of the series the meanwhile successfully hailed viewers learn that the characters gain in depth and are multi-layered and complex. Especially Alan turns out to be a carefully developed persona. The thesis found out that stereotyping is done intentionally with the character of Brad Chase, a former U.S. Marine soldier. Further this thesis has pointed out the playful approach towards genre-specific elements in BL, when Denny Crane as the declared lover of firearms satirizes not only the American Western Hero but also the American value system. Boston Legal is a hybrid, and as such it combines elements of drama and comedy, a fact that is typical for postmodern television series. Further elements of postmodernism in the series are queer sexual identities or dysfunctional family structures, the series deviates from social and cultural norms. The issues treated are unconventional for a television series, in that they are not far-fetched or escapist, but on the agenda of what moves America in the noughties. So the choice of issues treated together with the appearance of real-life guests, contributes to the series´ appeal of authenticity as this thesis has demonstrated. Further some elements of Boston Legal rather tend to appear in film then in a television series, like diegetic shots combined with non-diegetic sound. The series pushes the boundaries of TV-series conventions, there are even breaches of the fourth wall, when the actors refer to their roles as actors

65 in the series. The thesis found out that BL is more critical than escapist and that the dialogues in the series fulfill Richardson´s three criteria of realism, obliqueness and wit, and there is also under-explaining which, together with other criteria treated in this thesis definitely places Boston Legal within the field of cult TV.

9. Works Cited

9.1 Primary Sources Boston Legal: Season 1-5. David E. Kelley Productions. Fox, 2010. DVD.

9.2 Secondary Sources Abbott, Stacey. The Cult TV Book. Ed. I.B.Tauris&Co Ltd. 1st ed. I.B.Tauris, 2010. Print.

Bordwell, David; Thompson, Kristin (2004): Film Art. An Introduction. 7. ed., internat. ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Creeber, Glen. The Television Genre Book. Ed. British Film Institute. 2nd ed. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. Print.

Hall, Stuart. Representation. Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. Ed. The Open University. 12th ed. London: Sage Publications Ltd., 2012. Print.

King, Geoff (2002). American Independent Cinema. New York; Indiana University Press, 2005. 105-164.

Lacey, Nick (1998): “Introduction to Image Analysis.” In: Image and Representation: Key Concepts in Media Studies. Houndsmills: Macmillan.

Mittell, Jason. Television and American Culture. Ed. Oxford University Press. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.

Monaco, James. How to Read a Film.Movies,Media and Beyond. Ed. Oxford University Press. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.

Nelson, Robin. (2000):’”Flexi-Narrative” Form and a “New Affective Order”’ (case study Ally McBeal) In: Eckart Voights-Virchow (ed.) Mediated Drama/Dramatized Media.Frankfurt:Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.

66

Nelson, Robin. State of play: Contemporary “high-end” TV drama. Manchester:Manchester University Press, 2007. Print.

Richardson, Kay. Television Dramatic Dialogue.A Sociolinguistic Study. Ed. Oxford University Press. 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.

Ryall, T. (1998). “Genre and Hollywood”. In J. Hill & P. Church-Gibson (Eds.), The Oxford Guide to Film Studies. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. p. 327-338

Sardar, Ziauddin.The A to Z of Postmodern Life. London:Satin Publications Ltd, 2002. Print.

Seeger, Linda. Creating Unforgettable Characters. A Practical Guide to Character Development in Films, TV Series, Advertisements, Novels & Short Stories. Ed. Henry Holt and Company. 1st ed. New York: Holt Paperbacks, 1990. Print.

9. 3 Web Publications “postmodernism” (n.d.). Georgetown University. Online. http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/theory/pomo.html) [2013, May 3].

“rhythm and blues” (n.d.).Wikipedia. Online. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhythm_and_blues [2013, May 7].

“lock and load” (n.d.). Urban Dictionary. Online. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=lock%20and%20load [2013, May22].

“Al Sharpton” (n.d.). Wikipedia. Online. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Sharpton [2013, May13].

“Hurricane Katrina” (n.d.). Wikipedia. Online. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_government_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina [2013, May 4].

“Boston Legal Crane” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#Denny_Crane [2013, May 4].

67

“Boston NRA” (2013, May 4). CbsNews. Online. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57582905/nra-ceo-wayne-lapierre-boston- proves-gun-control-is-dangerous/ [2013, May 23].

“Boston LegalGuisendolls” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#Guise_.27n_Dolls_.5B3.20.5D [2013, May 11].

“cling ons” (n.d.). Urban Dictionary. Online. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cling-ons [2013, May 23].

“Boston Legal Crane” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#Denny_Crane [2013, May 23].

“Boston Legal deep” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#Deep_End_of_the_Poole_.5B2.24.5D [2013, May 22].

“Boston Legal characters” (n.d.). Wikipedia. Online. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boston_Legal_characters [2013, May 28, 22, 18].

“Boston Legal Race” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#Race_Ipsa_.5B2.23.5D [2013, May 21].

“Pinko” (n.d.). Urban Dictionary. Online. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pinko [2013, May 20].

“Boston Legal Los Angeles” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#BL:_Los_Angeles_.5B2.27.5D [2013, May 25].

“Boston Legal Nutcrackers” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#The_Nutcrackers_.5B3.10.5D

68

[2013, May 20].

“Supremacist” (n.d.). Wikipedia. Online. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacism [2013, May 3]

“Boston Legal from whence” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#From_Whence_We_Came_.5B1.12.5D [2013, May 14].

“Boston Legal fine cannibal” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#Fine_Young_Cannibal_.5B3.04.5D [2013, May 11].

“Boston Legal Head case” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#Head_Cases_.5B1.01.5D [2013, May 11].

“Boston Legal cant we all get a lung” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#Can.27t_We_All_Get_a_Lung.3F_.5B3.01. 5D [2013, May 18].

“Buzz Lightyear” (n.d.). Wikipedia. Online. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buzz_Lightyear [2013, May 18].

“Boston Legal itgirls and” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#It_Girls_and_Beyond_.5B1.13.5D [2013, May 22].

“Boston Legal script pdf” (n.d.). Boston Legal. Online. http://www.boston-legal.org/script/BL04x17.pdf [2013, May 24].

“Boston Legal list episodes” (n.d.). Wikipedia. Online. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boston_Legal_episodes [2013, May 18].

69

“Capital Punishment Louisiana” (n.d.). Wikipedia. Online. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Louisiana [2013, May 18].

“Boston Legal stick it” (n.d.). Boston Legal. Online. http://www.boston-legal.org/19-stickit/ep19-stickit.shtml [2013, May 22].

“Adlai Stevenson” (n.d.). Wikipedia. Online. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adlai_Stevenson_II [2013, May 16].

“Boston Legal verdict” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#The_Verdict_.5B3.06.5D [2013, May 22].

“Boston Legal looselips” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#Loose_Lips_.5B1.08.5D [2013, May 12].

“Boston Legal whiff” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#A_Whiff_and_a_Prayer_.5B2.04.5D [2013, May 11].

“Boston Legal Nimmo” (n.d.). Wikiquote. Online. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boston_Legal#Finding_Nimmo_.5B2.03.5D [2013, May 3].

70