(no subject)

May 29, 2009 16:36

 I read a very interesting post on Old Feminist just now about TV casting and how it tends to reflect the whims of the male creator/executive producer of the show. I've been trying to think whether this rule can be applied to some of my favourite shows:

House

Yep. Of the three main characters, Cuddy is clearly the most conventionally attractive, not to mention the most scantily-clad. House, meanwhile, looks haggard and unkempt most of the time (fits in with the character, sure, but how often do we get this with women?), and Wilson is a litle big-nosed and puts on quite a bit of weight at one point (although God knows I love them both, you know that). As for the fellows - well, the first three were all young and attractive, but as for their replacements - two average-looking guys and Olivia Wilde. And then there's the fact that every single nubile young woman in the world salivates over House the second she claps eyes on him (okay, that's an exaggeration, and I would too, but still).

Battlestar Galactica

Gets points for ethnic diversity and older female characters, but Laura Roslin and Ellen Tigh are far more conventionally attractive than Bill Adama, Colonel Tigh or Galen Tyrol. As for the other female characters... um, excuse me a moment, I have to collect my thoughts.

Studio 60

Well, the two main male characters look like this, and the two main female characters look like this.

Mad Men

Well, this is a little more difficult to call. Peggy is a very major character, and she doesn't fit into the mould of a classically beautiful, sexy woman, but then again she scrubs up good, and the other two main female characters are definitely something to write home about, whereas there are several among the male cast who can't be said to have movie star good looks.

Six Feet Under

I'd say this one gets a pass. Most of the main characters are good-looking in a realistic kind of way, the women no more than the men, in my opinion.

Ugly Betty

Well, the title would seem to suggest that this is another exception to the rule. Of course, Betty is not ugly at all, just unstylish in a cartoonish kind of way, and given braces, glasses and crazy hair. Then again, that's kind of the point: she isn't actually ugly, she's just a fish out of water in the world of fashion. Claire and Wilhelmina are both older women, attractive though they are, and there's plenty of ethnic diversity. Maybe you could argue that Marc is a little odd-looking compared to Amanda, but he is an interesting gay character defined by far, far more than his sexuality, which I think makes up for it. On that topic, there's also Justin. Justin is adorable, a gay teenager who's comfortable with who he is, even if the world is sometimes cruel. Then there's Alexis Meade - okay, maybe getting a biological woman to play a MTF transsexual might be a problem for some people, but Alexis' sex change isn't played for laughs - she's a real, attractive woman and her choice to transition is in no way condemned (yeah, she's evil sometimes, but so are a lot of people on this show, that's part of the fun). Maybe it's just because today seems to be Ugly Betty appreciation day in my head, but I'm going to give it a pass too.

I want to point out that I don't mean to imply that any of the people I've mentioned are unattractive - it's just that some of them conform to prescribed standards of attractiveness more than others. Also, I love all these shows, but I wanted to try and honestly analyse whether they fit in with this idea.

What do you guys think? Anyone disagree with my conclusions, or think that I'm oversimplifying? I'd love to know.

ugly betty, house, six feet under, battlestar galactica, television, mad men, studio 60

Previous post Next post
Up