It's
kind of hard to talk about any fourth-season episode of Community
without
placing it in comparison to the first three seasons, which have been
reduced to a homogenous mass of quality, ignoring the ways in which
Community
has
always varied greatly from season to season and even episode to
episode. If we want to praise a fourth-season episode, we say that
it could comfortably fit into the first or second season. Most of
this discourse is the very boring discussion of quality and "jumping
the shark" which takes up so much of TV criticism. A lot of it
is also grounded in the figure of Dan Harmon as auteur, an idea which
ignores not just the death of the author and all that jazz but the
hundreds of other people that make Community
what
it is [1]. Another issue with the way people talk about this season
of Community
is
that it papers over both the discontinuities within the Harmon-led
seasons and the continuities between new and old.
Despite
the undeniable changes, the fourth season of Community
is
engaging with the same question as the second and third (maybe not so
much the first) were: in a cultural landscape cluttered with a
century of pop-cultural referents and a thick layer of irony and
media-savviness, how is it possible to create something as seemingly
straightforward and sentimental as a sitcom? How can we get past our
postmodern detachment and recognition of having seen this all before
in order to reach some kind of genuine moment of catharsis, whether
it be a big emotional Winger speech or simply a belly laugh?
"Herstory of Dance" attempts to grapple with
this problem in several ways. Plot-wise, it's a very conventional
sitcom episode. The A-plot is about a character telling a small lie,
and piling increasingly ridiculous lies on top of it to avoid embarrassment, which is the basic formula for many if not most sitcom
episodes. The B-plot is about a character going on two dates at
once, which is openly lampshaded as a cliche. Every joke carries
with it the weight of history; we cannot watch it without being aware
that this, like any other sitcom episode, is a rehashing and
recombination of long-established tropes.
Maybe
that last bit isn't entirely true. There are sitcoms that
occasionally have the power to surprise, and certainly plenty of
sitcoms that do their best to make the viewer see their content in a
straightforward way, not comparing it to comedies past.. But
Community
sees
this all as misdirection. In its view, every TV show (and maybe
every cultural product) is a rearticulation of what's come before,
and that's wonderful. It celebrates the cultural literacy of itself
and its viewers, and maintains a half-ironic, half-sentimental
relationship to the hackiest of plotlines. This is true in not just
the broader sweep of the plot but also small gags that work as
tributes, like the line of tape between the two dances in this
episode, reminiscent of every sitcom "feuding siblings split the
house in two" plot. Abed has become the core of the show
because he's simultaneously the most culturally literate and the
least cynical. Unlike Jeff (the ostensible lead) who simply disdains
the predictability of the world around him, Abed celebrates it and
makes it work for him.
These
ideas, and the ways in which "Herstory of Dance"
communicates them to various degrees of success, are all circulating
in the opening scene. This is one of Community's
much-vaunted table scenes, where the characters interact with each
other and make jokes at each others' expense without the pressure of
an ongoing narrative. These moments are kind of utopian, just long
enough for one to get a glimpse of the kind of camaraderie and free
exchange that exists when the group is in stasis before the events of
any given episode disrupt this status quo. They're usually the
funniest part of the episode, and one often feels the desire for a
whole episode of nothing but the study group sitting around the table
chatting. Part of me thinks that such an episode would be the best
thing Community
has
ever done, and its best episodes are usually ones that hew close to
the study space but never entirely dissolve into plotlessness
("Competitive Calligraphy" and "Remedial Chaos Theory"
com to mind). On the other hand, fully giving into the temptations
of simply hanging out with the characters would probably result in
disappointment. Maybe it's best if the study space hang-out is some
glimmering place we can only ever see glimpses of.
We
get especially few glimpses here, as the plot intrudes early. What
back-and-forth there is centres around the Pierce-designed American
version of Inspector Spacetime, a callback to a plotline in the
generally (and somewhat unfairly) pilloried "Conventions of
Space and Time". This is ultimately then not much of a table
scene (although it was more of one in my memory of the episode), so
the big paragraph above about the utopian space of the study-room
table is conjured entirely by the presence of the study-room set.
Which may just speak to my ability to be easily sidetracked, but I
think it also demonstrates how sets can build up complex emotional
associations over the course of a show, sitting right in the centre
of series space. As a single-camera comedy, Community
doesn't
have a lot of sets that have this quality, but the study room
definitely does.
The
Inspector
Spacetime jokes
aren't funny, but they do serve an important purpose here. In its
opening seconds "Herstory of Dance" draws the same
dichotomy that fans and critics draw all the time -- between somewhat
obscure but clever and complex cultural objects and popular but
simple and stupid ones. The dichotomy between the British and
American versions of, well, anything usually illustrate this [2].
Community
aligns
itself with the obscure and the outsider, befitting its status as a
cult television show.
If
we imagine TV shows as existing in a Bordieu-esque cultural field,
Community
has
made a conscious move towards the sphere of autonomous art, although
not necessarily the kind of avant-garde work that Bordieu meant by
that term. Instead it gestures towards the status of the cult, which
falls somewhere in the middle in terms of cultural prestige, esteemed
by nerds and pop-culture aficionados (like Abed) but not necessarily
by a higher cultural authority (although one wonders whether such
authorities even exist in a significant form today). Community
has
made similar moves in the past by referencing cult texts ranging from
Dungeons
& Dragons to
spaghetti westerns, but the connotations of these references are
distinctly different. With the dismissal of Dan Harmon fans are more
inclined to see new Community
episodes
as not autonomous works of genius but as a commercial production
affected as much by studio whims as by artistic inspiration. So the
kind of references and in-jokes that would once be seen as simply a
natural expression of the show's cult aesthetic can now be read as an
attempt to preserve that aesthetic and reassure fans that Community
is
still Community.
The exact same joke or reference could take on radically different
meanings depending on which season it occurred in. This is not to
suggest that either of the previously-mentioned readings are
incorrect or distorted, but rather that a text's meaning is always
rooted in the historical conditions of its production and reception.
There's
a much more natural and effective example of meta-humour that
immediately follows this, which is the black-and-white Dean that
comes in to invite the group to a "classic Greendale dance"
(another reference to the show's past). This is a great visual gag
that the costume commits utterly to, which makes it all the more
jarring. The Dean's black-and-white image stands in contrast to the
typically bright colours that Community
uses,
and he literally looks like a segment of film cut from an old film or
TV show and transplanted inside the world of Community.
The Dean is not dressed as anything natural, but as a mediated
image. His jarring presence within the colour world of the study
room also makes us see the seemingly natural world of the TV
mise-en-scene as an artificial, mediated image as well. This
defamiliarization, the act of making the audience aware that it is
watching a TV show, is the result of much of the Community's
meta-humour, but the Dean's costume defamiliarizes in a way that is
new and hence much more productively jarring. And all of this
without much in the way of explicit reference to or discussion of his
costume.
So anyway, the Dean's announcement of the Sadie Hawkins
dance leads to Britta calling out the fake feminism of that kind of
event and proposing a counter-dance. Of course, she confuses Susan
B. Anthony with 90s alt-folk singer Sophie B. Hopkins, and spends the
rest of the episode scrambling to cover up this mistake. As in most
of the plotlines that draw on her quasi-activist side, Britta is more
or less right about the dance, which sort of makes me uncomfortable
with how ridiculous the show makes her. Britta's a much stronger
character when the writers get away from the trope of the flighty,
superficial female activist, which is both reactionary and misogynist
(see also: Bluth, Lindsay). Of course, this is a comedy and it has
no obligation to play anything straight, but it's disappointing to
see a generally intelligent program fall back on hoary stereotypes
that ultimately make any kind of political engagement look
ridiculous [3]. Abed's pop culture obsession, on the other hand, is
the source of a lot of jokes while nevertheless being presented as
valuable and worthwhile in a sincere way.
But politics aren't really the point of "Herstory
of Dance", despite a title that references the long-mocked
rhetoric of 1970s feminism. The A-plot quickly becomes about
Britta's stubbornness and refusal to admit she's made a mistake.
Again, this is a standard sitcom theme, and interestingly enough it's
one that isn't openly identified within the episode. The usual story
of this type would result in increasingly strained and ridiculous
attempts to maintain the charade, with lies piling upon lies until
the whole thing collapses, the lying character fesses up, and there's
a moment of cathartic reconciliation. This is not what happens here.
Britta is mentored in duplicity by Pierce, who
identifies with her desire to not give Jeff the satisfaction of his
usual cooler-than-thou mockery. As others, this is a bit of a
rehabilitative turn for Pierce, whose character has basically
degenerated to a stock racist old coot since his central role in the
second season. Even if he is motivated purely by spite, he is
unusually supportive of Britta and ultimately responsible for the
plot's happy ending. Chevy Chase's affect in this episode is even
notably different from usual, less angry and more happy and open.
Moreover,
through the scenes of Pierce sympathizing with and supporting Britta,
"Herstory of Dance" introduces the idea that being the butt
of a joke matters,
and it's something that characters like Britta and Pierce are aware
of and have to live with. Which is really one of the central ideas
that "Herstory of Dance" and Community
at
large insist on: jokes, the ways we tell them, and the ways we
remember them, matter. Using "Britta" as a synonym for
"mess up" is funny, and Community
lets
us laugh at it, but it also reminds us that it's much less funny if you're Britta. A
seemingly extraneous scene of Jeff berating Britta, right after the
premise is established, helps to reinforce the stakes and produce
Jeff's status as the cool jokester as a kind of hierarchical
position. Jeff physically looms over Britta in the scene, which is
in part simply due to the heights of Joel McHale and Gillian Jacobs,
but the framing of the camera specifically seems to emphasize the
smallness of Britta. By contrast, in both the opening and scene Jeff
and Britta are seated, in a position of equality and equilibrium, and
in the conclusion Jeff sits down when he admits he has been bested.
This scene is repeated a couple times as Britta's
pretense that she originally meant Sophie B. Hawkins balloons into a
pretense that Hawkins herself will play the dance. We anticipate the
usual payoff of confession, forgiveness, and reunion, but then Sophie
B. actually shows up, summoned by some obscure Pierce magic. When
Jeff asked if she did it, Britta says "If it's possible to make
something happen by willing it, then yes". While there's a plot
explanation for it, "Herstory of Dance" subtly suggests
that yes, perhaps it is possible to make something happen by willing
it -- or by proclaiming it forcefully enough. The lie becomes truth,
and discourse becomes reality. Instead of Britta being punished for
her deceit, her stubborn pride and insistence on a coherent narrative
-- her "commitment to the bit", as Jeff puts it --
ultimately win the day.
An
ending like this could only be found in a comedy as thoroughly
postmodern as Community.
Not only does the main plot of "Herstory of Dance" invert
the usual sitcom moralism, it draws on the idea that our discourse
and the stories we tell ultimately shape the reality we see around
us. The struggle over the definition of "Britta" in this
episode suggests the mutability of language and discourse. "Britta"
was first simply a name signifying an individual, but it eventually
came on to take on a second meaning of "screw up", which of
course stemmed from and influenced the meaning of Britta the person.
This suggests that rather than there being a simple one-way
relationship between a word and its meaning (or its sign and its
signifier, if you will) the two are part of a complicated web of
ideas. Community
celebrates
this mutability of meaning and the free play of signifiers, most
frequently in its rapidfire wordplay but also in larger plots such as
this one.
The
B-plot in "Herstory of Dance" also rests on distinctly
postmodern grounds (which is to say grounds that are shaky,
uncertain, and possibly entirely ficticious). Abed re-enacts a plot
from countless sitcoms by trying to go on two dates at the same time.
As is typical of Abed (and of Community)
he does it not out of any interest in either of the women involved
but out of a desire to fulfill a trope. "I'll get to wear two
outfits, mix up their names, maybe hide under a table" he
enthuses.
This
is more than a simple lampshade hanging. Community
emphasizes
the performative aspect of comedy. The humour in Community
does
not arise from an unplanned and organic collision of characters but
from people actively deciding to be comedic characters. In the
background of this episode is Troy desperately trying to create a set
of wacky hijinx, openly attempting to put together a comedic plot as
a rival to Abed's. "Herstory of Dance" also suggests that,
while Abed's enactment of these tropes may be artificial, so would
any other choice. Prior to embarking on the two-dates scheme he was
making a conscious effort to "display growth" -- that is,
to perform an idea of character development that is just as
artificial and referential as zany sitcom tropes[4].
But
not all of Community's
characters have equal access to irony and performativity. In this
plotline Abed is the postmodern author, self-consciously
regurgitating tropes and stories -- and four women are the passive
characters in his scheme. Annie, Shirley and the girls they suggest
Abed to are not allowed much if any meta-knowledge, and are left out
of the play of tropes and texts. Unlike Abed, the women are
motivated by straightforward, unironic emotion, and "Herstory of
Dance" largely does not take these emotions seriously -- Abed's
two dates vanish once their narrative purposes have been served, and
Shirley and Annie are swept up in Abed's new romance. None of them
seem to mind being passive objects in Abed's shenanigans, and
Community
has
suggested in the past that this is the right attitude to take for
those not blessed with metafictional magic (most notably in "Virtual
Systems Analysis").
This
gives the Abed plotline a distinct lack of stakes. In a
straightforward rendition of this trope, the tension would consist of
the protagonist trying to avoid having his plans exposed and being
rejected and humiliated by both women. But for Abed said
humiliation, rather than being legitimate emotional damage, would
just be another part of the story -- he would be rather pleased that
his shenanigans resolved as they always did on TV. Because of this
there's little to no dramatic tension. While dramatic tension is
certainly not necessary for a comedy plot, it's hard to centre ten
minutes' worth of jokes on self-consciously repeating something
everyone has seen before (as Community
has
discovered the hard way several times).
Enter Brie Larson's Rachel, the lowly coat check girl.
Rachel proves herself a better love interest for Abed than either
Shirley's churchgoer or Annie's "quirky girl"[5]. She
immediately recognizes the appeal of Abed's play and is conversant in
the same tropes and references that he is. Unlike the other women in
this plotline, Rachel is fully fluent in Abed's meta-language of
cultural references, and can partake in his narrative play as a full
and willing participant. Notably, though, she still only takes on
the role of helper, providing costume changes and distractions for
Abed as he exercises his master plan.
Rather
than becoming an equal participant in Abed's metafictional play,
Rachel takes the role of a viewer substitute. She responds to Abed's
antics just as an idealized Community
viewer
would, with a mixture of unquestioned enjoyment and savvy
understanding. She figures out the tropes he's playing off without
having to be told, loves them ("it's one of my favourite bits")
and moreover loves Abed's re-enactment of them ("I think it's
awesome"). Her reactions signal that the viewer should see
Abed's ruse as entertaining and not sociopathic. I'm quite
interested in this subject of viewer substitutes in TV, which occurs
in everything from Homeland
to
Mystery
Science Theatre 3000,
and hope to do some Serious Academic Writing on it in the future.
But back to "Herstory of Dance". Abed is so
caught up in his performance of the two-dates plot that he fails to
realize the romance plot he is now involved in, and as a result
alienates Rachel. As he says, "I was so caught up in one trope
that I missed the trope that was right under my nose -- that the
right girl was right under my nose". Of course, he deals with
it by making a big public declaration of love, a trope that Rachel
had previously identified as being one of her favourites [6]. She
accepts it, and even the direction of the scene is straight out of
any teen movie. (These movies aren't usually set at college, but
Greendale is basically high school for adults, so there you go).
And
so we have a romance plotline told entirely through metafictional
play, moving from trope to trope like a high-wire act, without ever
touching some kind of authenticity. Except Community
isn't
content to leave it at that. Before the proverbial cane pulls Abed
and Rachel off stage, Rachel proposes that on their upcoming date
they act out another sitcom plot. Abed is tempted, but ultimately
wants to "do real". The suggestion is that Abed has "shown
growth" by moving past his complex meta-jokes and embracing
authentic and emotional human interaction. But "Herstory of
Dance" has already established that this romance plotline is
just another trope, and "doing real" would just be another
kind of performance. If Abed and Rachel went out for a dinner and a
movie, they wouldn't be doing so out of some kind of authentic
prehistoric desire, but because a dinner and a movie are part of the
cultural romance narrative. Community
knows
this, but it seems to want to forget it in favour of a traditional
form of closure.
This
is the central tension at work in much of Community.
For all of its postmodern awareness, it also has a penchant for
moments of straightforward sentimentality. When Jeff uses "Britta'd"
positively, it may be a message delivered through postmodern
wordplay, but it's also one that conveys an honest friendship, an
emotion that the show takes seriously. When it comes to the
relationships between its characters, Community
is
about as far away from cynicism and critical distance as you can be,
often resulting in big emotional speeches and group hugs.
This
is something that a lot of contemporary artists seem to be grappling
with -- how to tell stories with genuine human emotion when we live
in a postmodern culture that distrusts any such straightforward
emotional displays. This is why former postmodern authors like
Jonathan Franzen and Michael Chabon have drifted over to writing
stoutly naturalist bourgeois family novels. Community
has
a more complex answer to this challenge. It suggests that real
emotions and genuine desires are still in abundance, but the way we
express them now is through reference and metahumour. Even Jeff's
final text message in "Herstory of Dance" is narrated in a
sarcastic voice (as Britta presumably reads sarcasm into the message
at first). This is the postmodern condition, according to Community:
sappy sentiment conveyed through cynical posturing.
What's
striking is that it does this while often being line-for-line the
funniest comedy on TV. (Less so in the fourth season, admittedly).
Postmodern theorists often talk about the liberatory potential of
linguistic play, but it's hard to find anything joyful and liberating
in struggling through a volume of Derrida. (Although I'm sure old JD
was having fun while writing it). Community
actualizes
the joy of postmodern play and makes it broadly accessible. The
endless referentiality of Community's
script may admittedly be a shallow idea of play that depends the
objects of commercial mass culture, but if nothing else it provides
an example of how metafictional play can happen in the
broadest-aiming, most conservative cultural realm -- that of network
television. And that's no small feat.
[1]Arguably the exodus of writers and directors from the
show over the past couple of years has made much more of an impact
than the departure of Harmon alone has.
[2]Of
course, many British shows that are held up as obscure works of
genius in North America are viewed in their home culture as broad
entertainment, Doctor
Who being
the most prominent example. Anglophilia has more than a bit to do
with this, but I would say that the difference mainly demonstrates
how the public status of a work shapes our view of it.
[3]In
this respect Britta forms a dyad with Shirley, whose devout
Christianity is the source of most of the jokes surrounding her
character, and is never really anything but a joke. Some would
praise "going after both sides", but I think ultimately
this suggests a "centrist" politics that views both
political extremes with equal horror, which ultimately supports the
status quo if not absolute apathy. (The linear political spectrum is
also a heavily flawed idea). This ultimately obscures the
radicalness of the current state of the world. Of course, Community
isn't
and doesn't have to be about the neoliberal world order -- it takes
place in a comforting fantasy world in more ways than one. But
invoking real-world politics as a source of jokes makes it easier to
believe that we actually live in that fantasy world where everything
will be all right by the end of the episode.
(I may have just Britta'd this review.)
[4]Just
think of all the things that dramas (and increasingly comedies) do to
flag to the viewer that they're developing characters and are hence
Quality Television. Think of long philosophical monologues,
revelations about a tragic childhood, or extended romance plotlines.
Alternately, just think of every flashback plotline on Lost,
and you should have a good idea of what I mean by performing
character development.
[5]The
"quirky girl" Kat is a pretty expert parody of the
archetype that appears in countless movies and films, the one who is
supposed to be a loveable free spirit but more closely resembles, as
Troy puts it, "a toddler with a growing disease". Nathan
Rabin famously dubbed this trope the "Manic Pixie Dream Girl"
and denounced it for the nice-guy misogyny it embodies. I can't
really argue with Rabin, even if the term he coined has been
overused, nor can I deny that Community
gets
a lot of good comedy out of Kat. However, it's interesting to
contrast the portrayal of her and that of Abed, who suffers from a
similar level of oddness and arrested development. Abed is
self-consciously aware of his quirkiness and the tropes it embodies,
and expresses his strangeness through approved American popular
culture. By contrast Kat seems to be remarkably unaware of her
strangeness and expresses her strange personality in a
straightforward and honest manner. For this she is entirely a joke,
someone that can be shrugged off without incident, whereas Community
sympathizes
heavily with Abed's eccentricities. Of course, not every character
can have a complex internal life, but one wonders if Kat would be
presented as more relateable if she made the occasional comment about
how she totally resembles that girl from Garden
State right
now. There's a larger point to be made here about postmodern
metahumour and social deviance, but this is already a bit of a
tangent.
[6]Interestingly
enough, when Kat makes this comment, Abed dismisses the public
confession by say ing that it "takes something private and makes
it a public performance". This is funny in a kind of subtle and
ironic way, as Abed is clearly in the midst of making a public
performance out of private romantic affairs. Whereas in a
straightforward two-dates plotline the man (and it's always a man who
attempts this) wants to keep his plans entirely secret and private
and is doing the scheme because of internal motivations, Abed is
performing for an audience -- himself, Troy, Rachel, and implicitly
the TV viewers. Abed should know better. In Community,
everything is always already a public performance. Maybe he just
needs to read his Butler.