bookphile1

Lucy Ricardo wants to be in show business, but Hyacinth Bucket wants to be upper class. It's not an accident that these shows have been compared because both touch on a central nerve in their respective countries' psyches. Lucy will never make it, although Lucille Ball did. Ditto Hyacinth, although the actress Patricia Routledge is magnificent. Both of them excel at physical comedy and both of them express a longing experienced by countless others in their impossible aspirations.

A working class Paul McCartney can still buck the system in England and end up with a title, but the bottom line is that England still has a Queen, a royal family, an aristocracy and a house of Lords and a highly stratified social system.

Despite her family's relentless assaults on her aspirations, simply by being exactly who they are, Hyacinth stubbornly refuses to give up. She drives everyone insane and she is hilarious. Because the reality is that England will tolerate all kinds of crazy behavior from an eccentric peer but historically ordinary people are expected to "know their place" (although that may be changing) We KNOW the mysterious aristocracy will never accept her, but she keeps at it. Her triumph is that she's relentless; no matter how many knocks she takes, she refuses to acknowledge them, she keeps coming back. We know what Onslow knows, that the only way to win this game is to not be in it, but Hyacinth is forever game, dragging her husband, family and friends behind her into her imaginary world where her name is pronounced "bouquet" not "bucket." I love to watch her gamely leap into the fray week after week trying to extract some small victory from every situation. Knowing her would be exhausting as Emmet keeps telling us, but watching her at it is a hoot.

first of all, the reason Mary became "the bad girl" was because Jessica Biel was bored with her role, and I have no doubt that the reason she hasn't been back is her choice. She just doesn't want to do it anymore.

I'm fascinated by what isn't talked about in this show. On the surface, it preaches abstinence all the time, meanwhile half the kids are having sex or thinking about having sex.

Without saying so on the surface, the "messes" that several of the kids get into are the result of not having decent sex education or using birth control. Of course, abortion is legal but no one ever mentions that. This show is a good argument for teaching teenagers about responsible birth control, and not just to prevent pregnancy but to prevent disease as well. It's like a forties movie when they had the Hays code and you couldn't even show a married husband and wife in the same bed. It's in a time warp.

Conflicts between generations are accurately reflected, it's just that this show could have taken place in the sixties.

As for all the different characters, it's obviously a showcase for young actors like Ashlee Simpson.

As for the issue of the week, good for them. Families across the country and communities are struggling with a lot of of these issues. this is what television does. With the exception of their anachronistic denial about teenage sexuality, dealing with these issues in a family framework is relevant and important.

As a cultural artifact, it fascinates me.