Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious Essay

As Antonia Peacocke quotes in her essay, â€Å"The show Family Guy is one of the first in history that has been canceled not just once, but twice† (300-301). The show was brought back in August 2000 and again in July 2001 when fans could not get enough of the adult cartoon. As well as being a fan favorite, Family Guy is also a controversial topic for critics all over the world. In the essay, â€Å"Family Guy and Freud: Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious†, Antonia Peacocke analyzes the show and gives her reasons why it is not all negative and crude humor. Antonia Peacocke is a student at Harvard University. She is also a National Merit Scholar, and has won awards such as the Catherine Fairfax MacRae prize for Excellence in both English and Mathematics. She was asked to write this essay specifically for the book They Say, I say: with readings. The Peacocke’s main point of her entire essay is that she wants to let readers know why Family Guy is not a bad show, in her and others opinions, but one that has been criticized for solely bringing entertainment. Peacocke does a successful job in portraying this, but it is not completely clear until the end, where her thesis can be found. The very last sentence of the essay is her thesis: â€Å"While I love Family Guy as much as any fan, it’s important not to lose sight of what’s truly unfunny in real life – even as we appreciate what is hilarious in fiction† (Peacocke 308). Peacocke’s thesis could be a little more clear throughout her essay, therefore, I do not feel it is as effective as it could be, but the author clearly states her argument and presents her case. Peacocke starts the essay of by saying, â€Å" Before I was such a devotee, however, I was adamantly opposed to the program for its particular brand of humor† (Peacocke 300). She makes it clear her feelings about the show in the very beginning. Although she is a fan, she at one time disliked the show. She quotes Stephen Dubner, co-author of Freakonomics, as saying â€Å"a cartoon comedy that packs more gags per minute about race, sex, incest, bestiality, etc. than any other show [he] can think of† (Peacocke 300). She backs up her one time opinions by saying â€Å"It will come as no surprise that I was not alone in this view; many still denounce Family Guy as bigoted and crude† (Peacocke 300). Although the show is currently very successful, she says â€Å"It must be one of the few shows in television history that has been canceled not only once, but twice†¦ The show ran until August 2000, but was besieged by so many complaints†¦that Fox shelved it until July 2001† (Peacocke 300). Also, she says, â€Å"I must admit, I can see how parts of the show might seem offensive if taken at face value† (Peacocke 302). At one point Peacocke realized, â€Å" [I found myself] forced to give Family Guy a chance. It was simply everywhere â€Å" (Peacocke 302). One of Peacocke’s main points is that Family Guy has gained much positive attention. On Facebook, as Peacocke explains, â€Å"there are 23 universal separate Family Guy groups with a combined membership of 1,669 people (compared with only 6 groups protesting against Family Guy, with 105 members total). Users of the well-respected Internet Movie Database rate the show 8.8 out of 10† (Peacocke 303). As you can see, â€Å"among the public and within the industry, the show receives fantastic acclaim; it has won eight awards, including three primetime Emmys† (Peacocke 303). Also, when the show was on the brink of cancellation, â€Å" fans provided the brute source necessary to get it back on the air† (Peacocke 303). The more she was around the show, the more positively she viewed it. Peacocke then goes on to say that those who do not often watch the show, â€Å"could easily come to think that the cartoon takes pleasure in controversial humor just for its own s ake† Peacocke 303). The next main point that Peacocke claims is that viewers who â€Å"pay more attention and think about the creators’ intentions can see that Family Guy intelligently satirizes some aspects of American culture† (Peacocke 304). The next paragraph is a segment from an episode in season 4, which shows Stewie reading a book only because it was on the Oprah reading list. Peacocke says â€Å" [Brian and] Stewie demonstrate insightfully and comically how Americans are willing to follow the instructions of a celebrity blindly – and less willing to admit that they are doing so† (Peacocke 304). The jokes that Family Guy is known for, â€Å"attract a different kind of viewer. Such viewers are†¦conscious and critical viewers† (Peacocke 304). In my opinion, the very last sentence is the most powerful in the whole essay. Peacocke states â€Å"They are not – and I cannot stress this enough, self serving as it may seem – immoral or easily manipula ted people† (304). Peacocke says that it sheds light on, and allows viewers â€Å" the ability to analyze what they are watching, the creators of Family Guy point out the weaknesses and defects of U.S. society in a mocking and sometimes intolerant way† (Peacocke 305). A good example of this is the segment from the episode â€Å"I Am Peter, Hear Me Roar.† In this episode, â€Å"the ‘instructional video’ quoted above becomes not only funny but also insightful. In its satire, viewers can recognize the sickly sweet and falsely sensitive sexism of the 1950s in observing just how conveniently self-serving the speaker of the video appears. The message of the clips denounces and ridicules sexism rather than condoning it† (Peacocke 305). The last main point that Peacocke makes is that â€Å"Family Guy does not aim to hurt, and its creators take certain measures to keep it from hitting too hard†¦ Seth MacFarlane plainly states that there are certain jokes too upsetting to certain groups to go on the air† (Peacocke 307). Also, Peacocke states that â€Å"I believe Family Guy has its intelligent points, and some of its seemingly ‘coarse’ scenes often have hidden merit† (Peacocke 308). In the next sentence Peacocke does admit that â€Å"sometimes the creators do seem cross – or, perhaps, eagerly race past – the line of indecency† (Peacocke 308). In her closing paragraph, Peacocke questions the fact that â€Å"while Family Guy can provide a sort of relief by breaking down taboos, we must still wonder whether or not these taboos exist for a reason† (Peacocke 308). All three main points that the author makes are valid, and as seen in quotes, each main topic is backed up by main points. The first main point is that Family Guy is gaining positive attention. Although this is a valid point, as seen by the popularity, and the awards, this isn’t reason enough to call the show ‘good.’ As the author states, at one point she was not a fan of the show but it later turned onto it by exposure. The content of the show did not change for her opinion to change, she just gave the show a chance and realized she liked the humor. The second main point is that the show makes intellectual references to American culture. This is a valid point as to why the show is good. Any show with a little bit of substance makes references to the past and current topics. It tells what is going on in the world, and explains topics everybody should be aware of. The last main point is that Family Guy breaks rules that no other major TV program or network has been able to break. Although many critics believe these are rules that shouldn’t be broken, the creators believe it needs to be done. This makes it a ‘good’ because it crosses boundaries that others are afraid to cross. Conclusion will link back to first comparison to Freud. Work Cited Peacocke, Antonia. â€Å"Family Guy and Freud: Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious.† They Say, I Say: with readings. Ed. Cathy Birkenstein, Russel Durst, and Gerald Graff. New York: W.W. Norton, 2012. 300-308. Print.