Parenthood,
NBC's comfortably cozy series about the Braverman family, has ended after six
years. In one of those internet pseudo-magazines, Craig T. Nelson
(who portrayed Zeke Braverman, the clan’s patriarch) is said to have been
unhappy about the series ending. (I had
to read the article to understand that “ending” in this sentence was a verb and
not a noun.)
Mr.
Nelson was unhappy that the series had to end.
While I share that sentiment (a bit more on that later), I am not at all
unhappy with the way it ended. Attempting
not to spoil it for those who may not have seen it, I will simply say that what
I saw was a celebration of life – its continuity, its ups and downs, and a
testimony to the fact that, as long as we hold our loved ones in our hearts and
memories, they live in our lives and in our love.
.
.
Those
are the sorts of comfortable, cozy sentiments that made up much of
Parenthood. Yes, there was actual and
potential infidelity; a couple of out of wedlock children; some substance abuse;
there were family members and loved ones whose social abilities or sexual orientations
were what some would call different – there were most of the myriad of issues
and concerns normally seen in society, but they were all painted on a canvas of
the family unit. The Bravermans became a
multiracial family. Some may say that
multiracialism was “whitewashed;” I would offer that it was simply subordinate
to the theme of family.
Which
is why it’s so sad the story ended. Dax
Shepard, who played Crosby, the Braverman’s younger son, who began to walk into
both manhood, fatherhood, and “husbandhood” over the last six years – Dax Shepard
tweeted “Tonight is the series finale of Parenthood. Best 6 years of my life J let’s all watch and try
to equal the viewership of a kardshian rerun.”
I thought that tweet was quite powerful, as it summed up why it’s so sad
the story ended. We talk about all that’s
wrong with entertainment, and all that’s wrong with our society, and all the
negative influences. Yet, when a good,
wholesome show comes along, one with lovable characters, one that advocates
love of family – when a good old fashioned, G-rated tv show comes on, what do most
Americans do? They turn to a show called
“Scandal.” Now I can’t pretend to know
what “Scandal” is about, because I’ve never watched it. But a quick check of its wiki shows that the
main character is someone who’s having an affair with a politician. I’m sorry – can someone explain why I’d want
to watch a show about this when I don’t even watch the news? And if this is the sort of stuff that’s in
our news, why are we fantasizing about it?
Wouldn’t it be more productive to expend our psychic and spiritual
energy on more positive things?
This
is nothing against the writer, Shonda Rhimes.
I’m a tremendous fan of Grey’s Anatomy; not so big a fan of its spinoff,
Private Practice, which was essentially a breeding ground for affairs of former Grey’s Anatomy characters.
Thankfully, that series (Private Practice) was short-lived.
I thought its short life sent a message that people preferred Ms. Rhimes’ more
wholesome writing – and then I saw the Scandal ads, followed shortly by “How to
Get Away with Murder.” Why would anyone
other than a criminal want to watch something with that name? While I think Ms. Rhimes is brilliantly
talented, I prefer positivity. And never
having watched “Scandal” or “How to Get Away with Murder,” I can’t definitely
say they’re not positive. What I can say
is that their titles destroy any potential interest I may have had in the
writer’s skills.
I
can’t fail to mention the fact that “Scandal” and “How to Get Away with Murder”
have almost cult-like followings. The
viewers call themselves gladiators – I don’t know what else they do to
distinguish themselves – but seeing so many people galvanized behind these
programs simply calls to mind the saying that “the devil doesn’t come dressed
in a red suit with a pitchfork and a spiked tail. The devil comes dressed as everything you’ve
ever wanted.”
When
we salivate over “Scandal” and “How to Get Away With Murder,” or when we’d
rather be Scandalized than to contemplate the joys of Parenthood, I can’t help
but wonder if the devil is sitting in a corner somewhere laughing?
So. Back to Parenthood. The way the storyline ended was, in my opinion,
very skillfully done, and left the viewer with appreciation and celebration for the gift of
family. The cessation of the series,
though, leaves me so, so sad. I’m not sad
only because a great series is no longer on the air (I have over 30 episodes on
DVR); I’m sad because my thought is that its departure from our tv screens
represents another departure, which is the departure from our consciousness of the strength, power , and sanctity of the family
unit. That family unit may not look the
same in this generation as it did in generations past; family is who you say it
is. It’s the bond, the everlasting
family bond that’s important. In a world
that wants to get away with murder, in a world that’s looking for the next good
scandal, I fear we’ve overlooked the essentials -- the ties that bond us together, the things we celebrate and hold sacred, the relationships that make life worth living. It's not about the drama, the scandal, or how to get away with murder. After all, those are sort of "first-world" issues. What's essential are some very common human themes -- love of family, the bond of friendship, and the trials and tribulations of parenthood. All these relationships (Family, Friendship, and Parenthood) may look different today than they did a generation ago; my definition of them may look different than yours, but they are relationships to which nearly all human beings can relate and which are cherished by nearly all human beings.
And
that’s why Parenthood’s ending is such a sad occasion to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment