May 30, 2018

Thoughts on the morning after the Roseanne debacle.

I'm skeptical. Did ABC really cancel "Roseanne," or are we sucked into high-drama theater with more scenes to come? Is this like the Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un show, where it's on, then it's off, then it's on?

There's so much politics-and-showbiz going on, and I'm not going to sit passively in a comfy chair as a good little audience member. 

I predict Roseanne Barr will have more scenes to play, perhaps some slow rolling out of apologies as the new TV season approaches and new episodes are teased about how Roseanne Connor said something racist and kind of might actually be a racist or maybe Dan is a secret racist and Darlene comes to the rescue and the little he's-not-transgender boy shows us how to love again.

What soppy goo we slurp up every day! It's always something new. For example, right now, I'm seeing "Roseanne Barr blames sleep aid Ambien for racist tweet" (Reuters)...
“It was 2 in the morning and I was Ambien tweeting-it was memorial day too-i went 2 far & do not want it defended-it was egregious Indefensible,” she wrote. “I made a mistake I wish I hadn’t but...don’t defend it please.”
What does "it was memorial day too" even mean? Roseanne has a disorderly mind — or speaks as though she does — but she's done a bang-up job of grabbing our attention and that draws into question how orderly our minds are. Step back. Get skeptical. You only have the hours and minutes in your life that you have. You must use that time as it happens in the now. Every second you pay attention to one thing, you lose a second that would have gone somewhere else.

How many seconds of human time can Roseanne or Donald Trump or Kim Jong-Un amass? Kudos to them for their unfolding victories in the game of paying attention.

IN THE COMMENTS: Eleanor said:
Personally, I think Roseanne saw some of next season's scripts, didn't like the way the story was going, and wanted out. She'll rehabilitate herself, maybe another network will pick her up, and she'll get more control of the show. If not, she can afford to enjoy her retirement, knowing she put liberal hypocrisy on grand display.
Leland said:
I think it is cancelled. She insulted the Obamas by insulting Valerie Jarrett. And the comment was definitely ugly, despite years of Chimpy McHitler. Fair enough, what she tweeted about VJ was not nearly as bad as dressing up as Hitler and pulling ginger bread men out of the oven. That latter joke didn't keep ABC from hiring her in the first place.
Yes, the problem of likening humans to apes, an interesting variation on the age-old resistance to the notion of evolution. We are primates, all of us, the same order as the apes. Bush was "Chimpy McHitler," and let's not forget that time Trump sued Bill Maher for joking that Trump was the son of an orangutan.

Oh! And I see that people have not forgotten. There's already: "Roseanne Supporters Are Calling For HBO To Fire Bill Maher For Calling Trump An Orangutan" (Hollywood Life).

Henry said:
I don't think Roseanne walks this one off -- at least not until she does a full Mel Gibson disappearance for a few years.

Pre-production on the next season was already underway. It wouldn't surprise me if Disney tries to reboot the show without Roseanne. Maybe she dies off-screen and Dan remarries Betty White.

Roseanne's next page is to go full Charlie Sheen. She's not getting her show back.
Yes, I thought that too. Do the show without "Roseanne." Before the reboot, the series had ended with Roseanne's husband dead. So come back with Roseanne dead. Was she really the without-which-none of the show? She's a bad actor compared to the others. John Goodman and Laurie Metcalf are at the complete opposite end of the scale — great actors. Sara Gilbert ("Darlene") seems to have been the brains of the reboot. She could become the central character. Build the new season around John Goodman, Laurie Metcalfe, and Sara Gilbert, and leave the dead weight of Roseanne behind.

Sal said:
My new script idea: Roseanne has an encounter with some black guy. He complains about her apes reference and she gives him ten bucks. His eyes light up!
LOL. (He's referring to this. I love comments that incorporate stuff from other posts.)

AND: daskol said:
Great actors are moons and need a planet. Great TV writers too, and even clever Sara Gilbert is merely a moon without a planet. Roseanne is a planet.

228 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 228 of 228
Alex said...

Roseanne is literally the only ABC show I was watching. Now millions of new viewers will abandon them for the right wing shores of Netflix.

Anonymous said...

Earnest Prole: Willfully obtuse or merely obtuse? I'm going to assume you're playing dumb, but it's unfair to your readers since so many of them (or at least the commenters) seem genuinely unaware that the "blacks are the offspring of apes" trope is so profoundly hurtful.

Bullshit statement from every angle. One can be in complete agreement that the trope is massively offensive to blacks, and stupid and rude regardless, and still disagree with the usefulness, prudence, or even sanity of the reaction to the use of the trope.

It'd be nice if people insisting that mocking blacks in this fashion should be verboten would actually bother to explain why, beyond telling us that it's Profoundly Hurtful Because History. As in, what are the concrete, measurable consequences to blacks of being mocked in this fashion, relative to other groups being similarly mocked? Does it lower their SAT scores? Does it cause the over-representation of blacks in criminal statistics? (Sure, the internet is crawling with progs who think that the Because History trope is the definitive answer to any such questions, but they're mistaken.) Because if all the use of said trope does is hurt feelings (profoundly or otherwise), the reaction to it is absolutely pathological, far more pathological than any use of the trope.

And btw, I don't believe for a minute that the likes of Valerie Jarrett, or any other black, was harmed in any non-trivial way, concrete or intangible, because a nutcase comedienne all hopped up on Ambien and God knows what else made an obnoxious if barely decipherable claim that Jarrett was the offspring of an existent political organization and a population of movie characters.

Earnest Prole said...

So "house negro" and Uncle Tom are far enough in the past? And I don't think that you know what impunity is.

Perhaps reasoning from analogy will help. When someone on the left uses anti-semitic language, it doesn’t suddenly make it okay to call Jews the offspring of animals. And the history of lynching in America is well documented and easily accessed through the magic of google, so I encourage you to employ it and discover the meaning of the word impunity.

Earnest Prole said...

What are the concrete, measurable consequences to blacks of being mocked in this fashion, relative to other groups being similarly mocked?

From the experience of the last century, we've learned there's a correlation between calling blacks and Jews animals and their oppression and extermination. There's now a taboo on this kind of talk -- call it a societal hunch.

n.n said...

It was about Israel. Roseanne is a committed Zionist which is another reason why the liberals want to destroy her. Jarret is a noted anti-semite who has been railing ...

That's the likely explanation for an out of the blue truth to power Tweet. Although, Muslims Brotherhood was a threat and defeated (a la Palestinians in Jordan) in Egypt. The Persians seem to have an ISIS complex that perceives Jews (or just Israel) as a competitive threat.

tim in vermont said...

I think that your position of high dudgeon clearly trumps the tradition of freedom of expression that we had heretofore enjoyed, E.P. Sorry for questioning it.

Earnest Prole said...

Your position of high dudgeon clearly trumps the tradition of freedom of expression that we had heretofore enjoyed.

Like Kathy Griffin and the Dixie Chicks, Roseanne is free to say anything she wishes.

HT said...

She is fighting to get the show back. I just listened to her 2016 interview with the rubin report and posted excerpts from yesterday's roseanne posting.

She reminds me of Howard Stern in so many ways, but far less balanced.

Is it possible that under stress, drink or drugs, racist people say racist things, and those who are not race-hating or -obsessed do not?

Sebastian said...

"millions of new viewers will abandon them for the right wing shores of Netflix"

Sure. After ABC cans Roseanne, what better place to go for TV comedy than Michelle Wolf's new Netflix show?

(Personally, I'll wait for the Obamas-curated stories.)

Trump is already milking the double-standard meme.


langford peel said...

“Where was Bob Iger’s apology to the White House staff for Jemele Hill calling the president and anyone associated with him a white supremacist? To Christians around the world for Joy Behar calling Christianity a mental illness? Where was the apology for Kathy Griffin going on a profane rant against the president on ‘The View’ after a photo showed her holding President Trump’s decapitated head?” asked Sarah Sanders.

Press conference May 30, 2018

langford peel said...

The apology game is stacked in favor of the ultra liberals.

You should never apologize. Fuck them if they can't take a joke.

Aussie Pundit said...

The new civil norm is that insults are acceptable, but race-based insults are not. If Roseannne had denigrated Jarrett's intelligence her show would still be on air.

Anonymous said...

Earnest Prole: From the experience of the last century, we've learned there's a correlation between calling blacks and Jews animals and their oppression and extermination. There's now a taboo on this kind of talk -- call it a societal hunch.

Wow, that correlation only applies to blacks and Jews? I suggest you expand your "experience" beyond a restricted subset of the history of the last century. People have been dehumanizing, oppressing, and exterminating each other throughout history.

If you're going to invoke "Because History", you don't get to apply selective temporal and geographic parameters to suit yourself, so you'll have to drop your special pleading for your preferred groups. If you insist that dehumanizing speech is dangerous, how exactly do you know that the dehumanizing speech that doesn't happen to bother you isn't going to spill over into much nastier stuff? What? Because privilege? "Privileged" people get exterminated, too. Are you all right with that?

Now, I don't really think you're dumb enough to actually be arguing that dehumanizing speech correlates only with bad things happening to certain groups of people, but not to others. Or vicious enough to think that it's an abomination for bad things to happen to certain groups, but no big deal if it happens to others. But apparently you are dumb enough to think that invoking lynching or the Nazis persuades everybody that yeah, you're right, some animals are more equal than others.

And btw, outside of the race hustlers and select sets of virtue-signaling/brain-addled whites (corporate, academic, governmental, or catlady) in Western countries, there is no "taboo on this kind of talk". There is an almighty effort from those quarters to enforce such a taboo, but ordinary people really aren't shocked and appalled by dumb racist (or, far more often, "racist") comments.

You'd be seeing a hell of a lot more oppressing and exterminating if oppressing and exterminating and "this kind of speech" really were causally connected, and not just correlated under circumstances where other dysfunctional conditions prevail. Also, there's precious little evidence that "hate speech" laws or other kinds of unequally-applied speech suppression and coercion do anything but increase social tensions.

Anonymous said...

HT: Is it possible that under stress, drink or drugs, racist people say racist things, and those who are not race-hating or -obsessed do not?

Depends on how stressed, drunk, or wasted the person is. If only low- to middling-toasted, the righteous non-racist probably won't say racist things.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

Did ABC really cancel "Roseanne," or are we sucked into high-drama theater with more scenes to come?

What is wrong with you people? The president of ABC is black. She doesn't appreciate being compared to an ape and neither do her black and non-racist viewers. I simply don't understand what makes right-wingers think that black Americans are not worthy of self-respect. How many personal attacks do you think an employee of any other company could level at a CEO and get away with it? And yet, because Barr's attacks were racist, you think they're ok and that ABC's CEO should just take it. Unbelievable. Welcome to Example #5,546 of why America is impervious to overcoming its race problem.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

It was about Israel. Roseanne is a committed Zionist which is another reason why the liberals want to destroy her. Jarret is a noted anti-semite who has been railing about the move of the embassy and the close alliance of Trump and Bibi. Jarret hated that Trump nixed the Iranian Cash for nothing deal that she engineered to help her homies in the Muslim Brotherhood.

Roseanne took the gloves off and mocked her in a short tweet. Since Jarret is in a protected class and they were looking for a reason to drop her show she was destroyed. Simple as that.


Simple? THat's the most convoluted Bizarro reasoning I've ever heard. How many impertinent speculations and half-truths and conspiracies did you have to lard that down with to make it fly? Talk about the simplest explanation being the most likely. The black president of ABC had more self-respect than you deemed her worthy of. One sentence, one idea, explanation's done.

Drago said...

I am going to wait to see what homophobic 9-11 Truther Joy Reid and anti-semitic Riot and Murder Organizer Al Sharpton have to say about this.

chickelit said...

"Roseanne is literally the only ABC show I was watching. Now millions of new viewers will abandon them for the right wing shores of Netflix:": 5/30/18, 3:14 PM

Alex is leary of ABC. I like that.

Ray - SoCal said...

Trumps tweet and Sarah Sanders answer seized beautifully on the double standards shown.

As Glenn Reynolds tweeted, this may have handed Trump the midterms.

Thanks ABC!

langford peel said...

So it looks like the black president of NBC lost the network 100 million dollars by firing Roseanne. She is going to monkey around with the network until she turns it into Baltimore.

Great job Brownie!

tim in vermont said...

’According to sources ABC President Channing Dungey had a long conversation via phone with former First Lady Michelle Obama before deciding to cancel the Roseanne show,' read the tweet.

‘Michelle Obama was reportedly enraged and insisted an apology was inadequate.’
- Daily Mail UK

So Michelle Obama cancelled Rosanne’s show.

Meanwhile, Rosanne says, plausibly, I might add, that she though that vj was white.

“I though she was Jewish or Iranian.” - Rosanne

She’s not obviously black. Well, no need to investigate. Shoot first, ask questions later. Our betters hated the Rosanne show, therefore she is guilty.

tim in vermont said...

“I would never have told that joke if I thought she was black. I’m not stupid!” - Rosanne

Too late now, These trials are over before they begin, and you have been found guilty and banished and professionally destroyed.

Incidentally, I don’t know what went on in Barr’s mind, but I don’t believe she is a racist.

tim in vermont said...

She is no doubt the biggest nut on that macadamia nut farm in Hawaii that she owns, but I don’t think she is a racist. Whackadoodle, that’s for sure.

Michael K said...

"She’s not obviously black. Well, no need to investigate. Shoot first, ask questions later."

I saw a press conference ValJar called to raise hell. She was the whitest person there. Al Sharpton was there, of course.

I wonder if he charges for these events ?

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oso Negro said...

@Tim in Vermont - At least Roseanne didn’t use the term “negro”. That’s a tell for the KKK.

Known Unknown said...

Wanda Sykes: “White people don’t steal wallets.” They steal countries. #FaceValueBET

Africans needed long ago to up their game. Why didn't they? Two reasons: 1) Most of the continent are (or were) animists. Animism is a
religious cul-de-sac. When nature is divine, man has no dominion over nature. He cannot conquer it or bend it to his will. It's off limits. 2) Continental Geography kept tribes isolated and living in fear. Africa is still a uniquely dangerous place and even the most intrepid explorer would have a hard time getting from one side to the other. A lack of navigable rivers denied original Africans from the all-important sharing of ideas and trade that progresses cultures on an continual and natural basis.

Outside of the Alps, Europe was easily traversed. Christianity bestowed upon mankind the gift of the Good Earth to do with as he saw fit. It's no wonder the impetus for exploration and exploitation came from the heart of Europe and not Africa.


TRISTRAM said...

"Roseanne is literally the only ABC show I was watching. Now millions of new viewers will abandon them for the right wing shores of Netflix:": 5/30/18, 3:14 PM


Korg: The damage is not too bad. As long as the foundations are still strong, we can rebuild this place. It will become a haven for all peoples and aliens of the universe.

[Obama get $50 Million Contract with Netflix]

Korg: Oof. Now those foundations are gone. Sorry.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 228 of 228   Newer› Newest»