-— Chapter 9 The Joke That Wasn't Funny Anymore: Reflections on the Metamodern Sitcom Gry C. Rustad and Kai Hanno Schwind Mien the hosts of the BBC's successful motor-themed programme Top Gear (BBC, 2002-present) indulged in some racist comments about Mexican culture (e.g. 'Mexican cars are just going to be lazy, feckless, flatulent, overweight, leaning against a fence asleep looking at a cactus, with a blanket with a hole in the middle on as a coat'), most people stopped laughing. The joke wasn't funny anymore. In his commentary on the incident, British comedian Steve Coogan argues (2011): It's not entirely their fault, of course. Part of the blame must lie with what wme like to call the 'postmodern' reaction to overzealous political correctness. Somclimes, it's true, things need a shakeup; orthodoxies need to be challenged. Bul this sort of ironic approach has been a licence for any halfwit to vent the Prejudices they'd been keeping in the closet since Love Thy Neighbour was Wan off the air. about the offensiveness of humour and comedy on television are °'d as the medium itself. It seems, however, that in recent years, the pas Particular, a shift in the tone of comedic discourse;M 5£tff*- ^visual formats and geores.BjjJ s" stand-up comedian Bernhard Manning in the 1970s. femiss. C «* 'decade of irony' in the 1990s, to the asct ofem ^ 200 Z°Ur " the 20005 throUSh Pr°gra,TirneS S"t Z more interested in W °3)' mediatised forms of humour now seem to hem rf,n8 with' rather than 'laughing at' the bull: of the j ^ ^ J* ** in taste from 'laughing at' to il«^n} ™ early twen^ ce mani*s.ly in American television comedy * |ft Parks and American sitcoms like Community (NBC 131 132 ('hapter 9 creation (NBC 2009-2015) and W FX 2010-2016) rep Markedly different .one of humour from postmodern shows. They also ° „ mark a new .rend in .he Amcricar, si.com. Shownmner Mike Sehur * continued his exploration of human kindness in Brooklyn Nine-Nine ™* 2011). which .reals .he cops it is about as decent albeit goofy do J"* mAThe Good Place (NBC 2016-) a high-concept science fiction thot Z poses the questions: 'What does it mean to be a good person?' Louis cZ Louie has been quite influential, and we can trace the tendency io be w ing with' in the Louis CK-produced semi-biographic anthology comedies Belter Tiling (HBO 2016-) and One Mississippi (Amazon 2015-). [„ thes( two comedies the viewers are invited to laugh with Pamela Aldon and Tig Nolaro. respectively, and their everyday lives. Community's live action aesthetics has perhaps not been as influential but can be found in Son ofZom (FOX 2016-1 where animated characters are mixed with real actors in order to dwell on Ihe alienated relationship between father and son. We can also trace this development of 'laughing with' in other Anglo-American countries like the British silcom Catastrophe (Channel 4 2015-) and Australian Please Like Me {ABC 2013) which both are 'laughing with' their flawed and deeply human characters in their search for human connection. If this new generation of sitcoms is compared with some of the comedies of the late 1990s and early 2000s. a subtle shift in tone becomes apparent. Instead of the blank parody in shows such as Family Guy (FOX 1999-present) or the self-conscious superficiality and cynical resentment in Seinfeld (NBC 1990-1998). Parks and Recreation, Community and Louie encompass a human warmth often missing in their predecessors and are often characterised by a sincere yearning for meaning. There are still plenty of stylistic and formal similarities with postmodern practice, and it is not like the 'new' comedy can't be parodist, self-conscious or cynical, let alone superficial; they still appear, though, to signify a distinct change in the overall tone in humour. But what does this new tone of television humour entail? We understand tone in accordance with Pye, as 'the complex but seemingly automatic process which enables us to understand the kind of film we are watching and how it wants us to lake if (2007, 7). Tone thus lies in a film or, in our case, sitcom's address and how it communicates with its viewers. This chapter explores the shift in sitcom tones and aesthetics from n P»'-modern ,„ what we will argue is a metamodern comedic sensibility, and a* wnil IMl metamodern tone and aesthetic or television humour m«J»' ma. We conceptualise what we lake to be representative for the M™* n, ,,con,, by investigating ,wo different aesthetic categories, name!)-» b cho,! 'CSC C!"°80ric8 »re ""-dated: a programme's .one is £*J me t w,, V" Mylc-bul *■« »'» encompas.eN how n programme^ " *"h * viewer, through choices in narrative, dialogue, pari*"** The Joke That Wasn't Funny Anymore 133 we consider how choices in style and tone facilitate „dmusic-FUrth,ecm°ent'iment. This metamodern sensibility is explored in ^distincl *enialCo three contemporary American sitcoms as follows: (1) detail bv.a?a'y,!,'|e and how it seems to represent a metamodern sitcom aes- Co»«" heiics; (2) the performance tone and temperature of Louie wf in a historic context of the stand-up as performer sitcom; and (3) the nana ,jvj scope and socio-cultural trajectories of Parks and Recreation The latter analysis enables a discussion of a metamodern sitcom discourse and themes Finally, these new shows are juxtaposed with two dominating postmodern siicoms Family Guy and Seinfeld. We will focus on Community, and in particular Louie and Parks and Recreation because of their influence on current Anglo-American comedies. SITCOM: HUMOUR, GENRE AND SOCIETY ,„ his study of contemporary sitcom, Antonio Savorelli asserts (2010,176): Even some less conspicuous shows may have relevant P«J£J** as fields of debate, as sources of inspirat.on. The pubhc s mere neec£ ugh let could not explain the success of a genre .hat remained for decades, unchanged, at least firmly anchored to its own productive principles. In ttying to identify a shift of tone within the silcom genre. arises: how does situation comedy reflect the socio-cultural xitgeist or, put in other words, how does humour take societies te |* The vast and interdisciplinary field of humour studies proposes ^ theories in order to explain what makes people laugh and un> ^_tj^ ^ jokes, performances and situations as funny: superiority. ^ ^ relief. Without exploring these theories in detail, they all pomi^ ^ ^ humour occurs as a result of social interaction between in ^ ^ 8">ups. Hence, the kind of humour chosen reveals somein s fgming ^ u«. codes and hierarchies prevailing withinlhal "^"^diatiscd forms, of that, we argue that humour in one of its most Jj*"* ^ uhoos. * situation comedy on television, reflects on the socia ^ „ on issot "all as a general cultural status quo of (Western) soc^ crtnedKS a remarkable parallel between the themes of succc*^ and *=social history of modem s.Kiery'tPaierson1 to ,.N° doubt, humour's volatile nature has infi" - ^ * p£ ^oghou, the pas, dec„des - from the spirit of the 1970s. visible in show,isuch" ^H lU d* ***«■ KBS, 1970-1977) and M'A'S'H(CBS. 19» Chapter 9 domestic conservativeness and subvereiveness in i980s til Family Ties (NBC, 1982-1989), The Bill Cosby Show «tt and Rostaw (ABC, 1988-1997) and the poS|modern 198^ in The Simpsons (FOX, 1989-present) and Seinfeld (NBC 'hc 1$ the 00's excesses of mockumentary embarrassment in Ci a "98| arm (HBO, 1999-prescnl) or 77* C^rc - An America,, ttra &>C 2005-2013) and inlertextnal play and self-rellexiviiy in ljv p/acMf% Scrubs (ABC, 2001-2010) and 30 Rock (NBC, 2006-2012)° T'0" changes, humour changes. In (lie next seclion, wc rum n„ras s«in, ' turn our ait of the most recent tonal shifts of humour in a more detailed a Ss<*n ion i0 ety oi u» uiw. ."v-------... -..... - -------„ ,„ure detailed anal« 0 °»t contemporary sitcom formats: the intertextual and seir-refle °fll"tt Community, the stand-up-based genrc-defyine Lnui,. „„a ... X'Ve livc Ocii„. Community, the stand-up-based genre-defying Louie and t />'lf Ihcrclorc serve us a point oi comparison in our nnnlysis of Commit" The Joke That Wasn I Funny Anymore ends family Guy's use of parody, irony and pastiche results Cra«*rd c0 -c realism and should be understood in light of the 'concerns in»kindofindern age' (2009, 63). Drawing on Jameson's argument about „f die Posim0es,hetics and culture she continues: 'The fact that Family Guy postmodern ae^ |ime sitcorns are s0 sophisticated intertextually is and a"1"5' °nxieties that the postmodern writer experiences. The postmod-dU« ,olhefae|s (here is nothing left to say' (63). Family Guy has translated ern «'rller , n0|ion into an aesthetic often criticised for being blank and ,,,!« Dostmoaxrn ;„clo„„. ..... (his p°sl empty ainly, Trey Parker and Matt Stone have, for instance, criticised faulty Guy for relaying too much on gag humour that has nothing to do wilh ,he story (Gillespie and Walker 2006). Crawford continues to argue that the leasure of Family Guy lies in its aesthetic deconstruction. The aesthetic function of Community's intertextual play and use of parody and pastiche, however, does not appear to be deconstruction. It rather appears lo function as an aesthetisation of the characters' quest for friendship and community. Take, for example, the episode 'Contemporary American Poultry' (21:1). The entire episode is more or less a pastiche on Good/ellas (Martin Scorsese, 1990) from the (freeze) framing and camera movements to the doo-wop music and the voice-over. The plot centres on something as silly as chicken fingers. The student-cafeteria's chicken fingers are immensely popular and run out fast. Goodfellas-sly\e, the study group lakes control of the production and distribution of the chicken fingers, turning it into a neat black market operation. As Abed states in his voice-over: 'The entire campus is controlled by our group. Our group is controlled by chicken and the chicken is controlled by me'. However, not everyone is happy with Abed obtaining so much power as the chicken finger cook/mob-leader. Jeff, the study group's unofficial leader starts to sabotage Abcd's operation. In the inevitable comedown between the two, the episode takes an unexpected turn. The episode is revealed lo depict something as real and raw as Abcd's struggle with his in-diagnosed Asperger syndrome; Abed und JcITshare an incredibly sucet moment, deepening the characters' relationship and their emotions lor each oilier. As such, what at first seemed like just another Good/ellas pastiche tran-s<*nds into a character-developing vehicle for Abed and highlights rvxa. "ruggle to connect to other humans. Indeed, the episode also "'<"<■' general level, as it exposes nnd —...on selves c~^1 ,. , ,. ----------""'^ Christmas'(Hi) .. • ^wiiUtv to process his feelings towards his absentee mother £ Abed ""^ characters are turned into stop motion animation fi" a nostalgic, fantasy winter wonderland, indicating that h, L — order to move forward. In 'Digital Estate Planning' (3 W T10 » «4, into eight-bit game animated characters, as they nlav to game his dad made before he died as a battle for his inheri, P game, both Peirce and his father's assistant, revealed to be hist' to terms with the passing of their father. """tain* The animation sequences are interesting because they disrupt wit the viewers from the physical actors. The animation indeed allows ftnS of magic realism but, unlike Family Guy, the magic realism does not fa tion as deconstruction. The choice in animation style visualises and mi,, scores the characters' emotional states and the themes of the episode. n« use of animation simultaneously creates aesthetic distance as well as a spas wherein real emotional connections occur. Thus, Commumry's use of pan* and pastiche cannot be understood as empty and blank. Rather, ii endro the programme with emotional realism and meaning. If, as Jameson areus. postmodern aesthetics' main characteristic is emptiness and blankress,C» munity cannot be postmodern. If Community's use of pastiche, parody and irony is not postmodern, I should be conceptualised in the context of what follows postmodeimsi namely metamodemism. Vermeulen and van den Akker argue that«W« arrived at a stage where postmodernism can no longer explaincer,au1' cies in the arts and culture. Their account of irony, in to describe Community's use of aesthetics. They write: M; ,|Vll9j is intrinsically bound to desire, whereas postmodern irony' i ^ to apathy' (2010, 10). Community does bestow it!.usei oip-^^ and inlertextual play with ironic knowingness, but ai u» srnWdeiw* because intertexluality and irony have - after decaaes J^y^i - become so common, our desire to obtain ^nnf'°0.;,ar cultural!*1* sincerity and empathy has to be articulnled througn pop ^ and pastiche. ^.flcmonstnii^'*11*!.^ What this analysis of the use of style in °J0„ 0f, dis*** metamodem comic sensibility is not so much n qucs ----|nelhe out « ralhcr defined by the tone of the humour i and the meaning1 The Joke That Wasn't Funny Anymore i are i croP*5 °" pecific comic tonality. Therefore, to conceptualise this shift defii'ed.b>'l !,7nre we will now turn our attention lo what appears to be a . ttjih Thus, a metamodem sitcom is perhaps in particular IV 8 CIiiK." ' 2eru-e we <■»»---------------— ~ -•■»• -vv^"" w « » , UK s" e by comparing two on the surface very similar yet incredibly L-hangc in '""nm's and contextualise them more broadly in terms of the his-*t,Sewn performances and humour lory °' pERFORMING COLD AND WARM: SEINFELD VS. J.OUJE re is an interesting moment in the HBO special Talking Funny (2011). which four of the world's most well-known comedians (Ricky Gervais, Chris Rock. Jerry Seinfeld and Louis CK) engage in a conversation aboui [heir careers, comedy and humour. Jerry Seinfeld re-tells one of his favourite jokes by Louis CK. CK, watching in awe. concludes: 'That's a completely Seinfeld-ed version. You really polished it up'. Leaving the specifics of this particular joke aside, the little episode strikingly illustrates ihe fundamental differences between the comedians, as performers, as crafters of jokes, indeed as representatives of different comedic trajectories. Jerry Seinfeld started out as a stand-up comedian on New York's comedy circuit in the late 1970s before gradually establishing himself as one of ihe most influential comedians on a global scale culminating with the silcom Seinfeld (NBC, 1989-1998). Seinfeld created a unique comic voice based on his observational humour about the inanities of the everyday life faced by mostly white urban middle-class Americans, developing a comedic discourse about nothing. Interestingly, over a decade later, CK has had a similar asccnl from the comedy clubs of New York City to the world of television silcom. His humour, though equally observational, nevertheless has a more straightforward, personal, edgier, perhaps even tragic feel to it. For the purpose of "us chapter, we will now juxtapose the performance styles as pari of the comedic trajectory of both sitcoms, locating them within different histon-cal ca.- '* """wr* onow \v\o^>. ■ „_j The Simps'*11 X l99^005). Will and Grace (W^™t™oi to l«* '^w->), win ana urun v---- -Aueisl' Present), which successfully illustrate tne - 138 Chapter 9 represent the last heyday of successful sitcom programmine work television before the arrival of the digital broadcast a°" ^lerican*tt-NBC's Must-See TV Thursday night line-up (1981-2014) wh h episodes of various sitcoms back-to-back into one generic t'elev """^i be regarded as one of the most successful examples of attaching ^can to a particular slot of television programming. What Seinfeld did" n*1'"** was to carve out a distinct kind of humour, which interestingly con**"' many of the basic rules of trying to attach an audience to a nradlcls format and, as a consequence, established detachment. sitcom cynical as wen as his friends Georpe nV,P'ayin81 Kramer (Michael Richards) and Elaine (Julia Louis-Drevfh u "*>' ous plots the characters engage in, seemingly meaningless by the urban expenence of a life in Manhattan, with memorable SST a contest of who can withhold masturbation the longest ('The Contest' IIt an encounter with a bossy soup salesman (The Soup Nazi' 6:7), a frusiratin wait for a table in a restaurant, presented in real time ('The Chinese Resta! rant' 11:2) or the desperate search for a parked car in a multilevel shopping mall car park ('The Parking Garage' 6:3). The storylines are framed by excerpts of Jerry Seinfeld performing routines as stand-up comedian, which often take up the themes of the episode. The series successfully established a functioning world for its character to exist in. However, Seinfeld neither actively tried to attract the largest audience possible nor play up to a lowest common denominator sitcom humour Indeed, as Hurd suggests, 'The show actively resisted popularity: it even openly invited network disapprobation in its flagrant contempt for the firm!) entrenched sitcom conventions so revered by network executives as indicators of commercial success' (2007, 763). It did so by refusing to indulge" the many possible options of soap opera narratives. Even though Jem Elaine have been dating in the past, there is no overarching narrative line trying to get them back together in contrast to, say, Frien' Rachel, and they actually seem quite happy to not be together a y rf ^ Note' 1:5, 'The Mango' 1:5). Even more so, all r°man,1CJects 0fridicul« main characters seem to have the single purpose of being o J ^ ^& or serve as battle urounds for the protnconist's quirks,Ji<*> ^ racters seem to have the single purpose 01 Deing ^ . js battle grounds for the protagonist's quirks, ticks one' ^'."^(f from Kramer's long line of bizarre dates - in 'The Pu^L ^^aliiy , heteroses I llllv Ul ni/.im uuii-j ---- dales a woman who is a 'low talker'; he converts a 'esD'an/° """-^atsli' (The Smelly Car'); and dates a woman whose sole personificatio^ has long fingernail! ('The Pie') - via George's ill-fated engag"" f;erry's ,L..t_____i.- i_ ___• ia.i\ m the Dortroy-" which results in her death ('The Invitations' 24:7) to Hie po" ■ Tlie Joke Thai Wasn I Funny Anymore 1j# depiction is first and foremost a parody of Jewish peasioneni parents w)lose , As O'Brien suggests, 'Seinfeld is defined by a series of living %F'°"nt;c love is not even a possibility' (1997, 13). refusals- ^n unlike pr;ends, does not necessarily opt for the •friends T|,e seri"^ for rami|y or partners' approach either. Rather, it presents JS subst""^ ists as a group of highly neurotic people randomly stuck its main Jjjj p0Ssibly out of laziness and convenience, not bothering to move logether^ re]ationships or indeed to, socially and psychologically, °n '°i themselves. One could argue, of course, that this facet is mostly a suit of the genre's elliptic nature denying its protagonists a true sense of ^owth and character development. There is another aspect where the series is deliberately trying to avoid an audience's deeper emotional attachment or to encourage any kind of senous interest in the notion of empathy when engaging with its (main and supporting) characters: the aspect of cold performance. Mills, in his attempt of theorising sitcom performance, hints at this phenomenon when he admits (2005,92): I find Seinfeld virtually unwatchable, and know I'm in a minority for saying to. Yet my problem with the programme has nothing 10 do wilh its politics, selling, characters, or any other of a number of factors: 1 just think ii's really badly performed, with an overeager excessiveness that feels like die programme is trying too hard to demonstrate its funniness. Even though there seems to be a general tendency to accuse Jerry Seinfeld in particular of 'bad' or 'slack acting' in the series (in fact, there are numerous websites dedicated to his tendency 'to corpse' in scenes and reacting with genuine laughter to the joke deliveries of his fellow actors), it seems more appropriate to ascribe the performance concept oiSeinfeldxo a constant des,re l° foreground the jokes and punch lines, and by no means to engage in an authentic portrayal of characters and behaviour. It thereby creates*icoM Performance style', which, in turn, reflects the cynicism and detain. 0' *e tries' comedic trajectory. Hence, Seinfelds playing t? an aud J «990, which was aware of the potential 'meaninglessness 0££0% J*" «d which, through the series was able .0 reconcile ,isfc*£* WMmoden, existence with the generic workings of a sitcom on pnme network television. In the words of Hurd (2007, 771): 2«, world of Seinfeld is an aesthetic one. in which the m«n,ng rf ^ *el|-made episode and the show's thematic negation ol m ^ „ „ *'fte*"s are bound to. Rather than minu.ely '''jfi' ****""" °"> supposcd jn discussjons of the meaning of nothing , II lnt° humour 11,»., SHrfild In Indwd drenched In Pi■> pcrloiincd in Selnfeldlt 'cold' ..I /..../>■ (HIX. 2HIO ) inielil derive from a cold'w^dT"'a"hchu">«. imloiined Willi wnrnilli. Louie CK hat developed iwo "nn'nK dan lout* uid Lucky £twte(HBO, 2006), The liter which f""w"; ituon before being cancelled, iricd to combine the irndiiLn°|lly lltcom look, recorded in front of a live audience, with adul"1^''^**1 language, Loult.CK't second attempt at the gcnrc.'provcd mor In itself, il would Ik an interesting task to compare the comcdic 7"°* of bold of CK's sitcoms to determine why his first attempt failed tonT audience, but it extends the scope of this chapter. In lliis section, wejj * the aesthetics, narrative and performance style of Louie wilhourpniSm analysis of Seinfeld. loult is produced as a single-camera hybrid sitcom. A hybrid sitae abandons the traditional generic features of sitcom, such as the laugbia track, multi-camera shooting style and theatrical setting. On an aesthete narrative and performance level, it successfully borrows from other genu such as television drama, soap or reality TV. The premise of Lorn rai like a sibling to Seinfeld. Louie CK plays a fictional version of himself.i quite successful stand-up comedian living in New York City, divorced ad sharing custody for his Iwo daughters. There arc a few recurring chandm most notably his daughters, his friend and, at times, love inletatM (Pamela Adlon). Although they are not featured as regular recurring characters, the sitcom also includes his brother Robbie (Robert feByl shockingly young-looking agent Doug (Edward Gelbinovichjandto* Janet (Susan Kelechi Watson). The plots and storylines do not «^ ear structure; instead, the episodes ore fragmented, conslslingJc B p sequences, similar to u stand-up comedian's dramaturgy. u* ^ /eld, actual footage of Louie CK performing in comedy clute ^ of the episodes. However. Louie is less a show about 'noHM more about CK's own fictionalised accounts of how to rcc*"(|rt ||0(tef 'single-dadVMand-up comedian' pcrsonas. Explorations cnilly feature various ntela-narrolivcs commenting 0,11 Us 0f ihcm*''10 . with many actual comedians playing fictionalised ve^10"*'n ,|K. niJ'11 On an aesthetic level. Louie departs significantly av(fl&* silcom-ness ol Seinfeld instead of laughter track or ^cn(Jfy ntN«*^ style, louie opts lor a s.uiliislicaled niivimc ol n»'C ""1 _ The Joke Thai H'tun 'I Funny Anymore i ^ | nemntic misc-cn-sccne of the more recent films of Woody Allen tt"> "a Morse. Allen's regular editor, co-edits Ihe scries). In a way, the tSu5°" sequence perfectly cncapsulales this dichotomy: il captures scries inlro UIC CK on his way to work, ascending from the metro slop ai Washington Square walking to llic streets of Chelsea and grabbing a slice of pizza before descending the stairs to the Comedy Cellar. CK's demeanour is passive, ihouglnful. even world-weary and contradicts the chirpy cheerfulness of Jerry Seinfeld in his series. Similarly, the theme song, a re-recording of Ian Lloyds 1970s song 'Brother Louie' (an excerpt from the lyrics: 'Louie. Louie, Louie you're gonna cry /Louie. Louie, Louie you're gonna die!') sets the tone for Ihe melancholic, often lethargic tone of the scries and could nol be further from Seinfeld's slap-bass happiness. Despite Seinfeld and Louie fictionalising the same world - the life of a stand-up comedian in New York City - their depictions could nol be more different. Where the experiences of Seinfeld"s protagonists are drenched in sitcom wnckincss and populated by artificial characters who mostly serve as targets for the distanced and cynical mockery of Jerry and his friends, the world of Louie consists of gritty New York streets and aparlmeats, the shabby and narrow backstage areas of comedy clubs, populated by 'aulhentic' people. The tonality of the series is fuelled by its main protagonisl's feelings of oscillalion between personal doubt and self-loathing on the one hand and a desperate search for love and human kindness on the other. Returning to our analogy of performance temperature in ihe silcom genre. Louie serves as a striking example of what Mills identifies as the switch between serious and comic modes of sitcom performance, arguing thai 'silcom performance is not purely comic performance, just as all comic performance, in theatre, stand-up, film and radio, often uses a variety of interpretive modes' (2005, 90). To illustrate the length lo which Louie is willing logo 10 display the serious mode of performance with the sitcom genre and how 'his influences the comedic tonality of the show, we would like to singfc ou, a ^quence of the episode 'Eddie' (9:2). Here, Louie runs inlo >'*°™ «* Wlow comedian Eddie (Doug Stanhope, whom he: has no. two started out together as young comedians, befo :U : « °\ Louie's success and broke with him. Now he is bac* a ^ ^ 'ake a nigluly drive. Louie soon realises that Eddie has in , ^ ^ ^ ,le's living out of his car and is an alcoholic, wne , ^ ac(u i Mi ■ ones vii ,v r ... timj to boltom: , coholic When they — ■» using qui 01 Ills car win " -■' "' . , on to pen"'"- — -mi"« show in a small club in Brooklyn. Bddto go w ^ w1lh the % delivers some funny material, but on the" ^ a|s l0 Louie thai he is Brooklyn Bridge looming in ^^^of^^^ thinking of ending his life. He indulg"£dy Ttal'»(he" 1 don't want anything. I don't want any > by ^ enl w"nt goes, that's had'. Louie, visibly*" L „,',„, p.m When.he enure encounter, then 142 Chapter 9 delivers a monologue in which he reflects on Eddie's r i outlook on life: '"^g^ Fuck you, man. I got my reasons to live. I worked hard trying to r they arc, I am not just handing them to you . .. ok. You want '8Urt Du'"to Have a drink of water, and gel some sleep, wake up in the re!lson 'o live? again like everybody else docs . .. You know, you're hying this"™"8 ^ ^ (a couple, loudly arguing walks by and Interrupts them)... |_istc„ma°" I haven't seen you in twenty years, and you're right, I don't think mu. you ... I hope you don't kill yourself... I really do . I gotta pick up my kids in the moming. I '""OjObotJ, After the fragmented nature of the episode's plot up to this no CK's performance as passive observer, among other things subtly' l™"** how his fictional self struggles with drinking too much cheap boo31"18"" a bottle - a nuanccd, but nevertheless sitcom(ic) moment - he thenlia' mode into serious acting and grounds his character in a way which used toht unthinkable for (his genre only some years back, delivering the speech I«h a humble sense of bewilderment that his character is confronted with these thoughts, at this hour, in (his place. Louie compared to the apathy of EddV (and Seinfeld) is filled with a detached desire for life. As TV critic Jam Poniewozik observes (2011): It would be so easy for the scene to become preachy. It would be easy to delta it, to lower the stakes and puncture the tension, to assure us that, nan, Eddie not really going to off himself in a crappy motel in Maine. Instead. Louie nc>o relents on the idea that this is a dead-serious moment, and it has the characto Louie make the case for life in a drunk, nngry, humanly imperfect way. Thll kind of acting, then, which refuses lo sacrifice nil of a character! ft* lioni ami conl.ndiclions for a joke or a laugh (like the more pMUiwW* /,/,/). and is primarily interested in portraying luthentic emoUoMtan-human Iwings, is incluinodcri. and what we cull 'warm petit PARKS AM) RECREATIONl TAKING ON THE TOWN I lie Iraiwition from cold lo warm performance Kyle, we argue. «1»*' "In i fin,,, „ posimoden, ,„ „ mclmnodcr|1 lone nm| *emibiliry. "" ,M'"' "'l"is.ll( a uimnci lone ol lllllliotir Ihnl «< .....lent ton, 11| humotii leenw lo *nccmp||"TJ •ciilimcni 1.11,1 world u,-«. „,„1 |t(,c ,|lc llleia,„„dein discourse *«"^ iMpbvd l>y a modem nnVvcle yel informed by postmodern K*F* The Joke That Wasn I Funny Anymore „r«p consciously commits itself to an impossible possi modem d'scoiu-s iry ciSITI. ■"^^ulm'^dvandei. Akker2010, 5). " his sentiment - and the constant osctllali, and the commitment to the impossible possibility - is perhaps parti'cu-I 'evident in NBC's critically acclaimed mockumentary comedy Parks and Recreation, created by Greg Daniels and Michael Schur. It centres on the life of the employees of the Parks and Recreation Department in the small fictional town Pawnee, Indiana. Through six seasons, viewers have been able lo follow the main character, dedicated civil servant and the assistant director of the Park Department Leslie Knope (Amy Phoeler), fight to fill a hole and mm it into a park, organise a Harvest Festival, run for city council and fight to keep her city council seat under the threat of a recall vote. What sets Parks and Recreation apart as a comedy is its focus not only on the core group of colleagues but also on political process and the town of Pawnee. For a sitcom to focus on an entire town's politics is quite unique: usually, sitcoms focus on the family, a group of friends or a workplace. The situations in the sitcom usually arise in a domestic or a workplace setting; thus the fictional world of the sitcom has traditionally been limited lo the family, the family of friends or the work place family (Mills 2009). Often, characters seem to only interact wilh the core ensemble with some recumng characters and guest stars. Parks and Recreation with its focus on local government has a rather unique all-encompassing world view. Schur has even compared his sitcom to the expansive socio-political urban drama The Hire (HBO 2002-2007) in terms of scope (see Rosenberg 2012). Like The Hire Ihe bureaucracy in Parks and Recreation is sometimes treated as surreal, irrational and - as Leslie's libertarian boss would argue - a gum waste ot money. Unlike The Wire, though, bureaucracy and civil servants are mostly represented with sincerity and as something positive ^ , T"ke, for example, the episode 'Sweetums (I5-2I- ,UDDosed has struck a deal with the local candy factory, Sw-«£| J ^ 10 start selling its energy bars from ~ncess,<",S^p „„d are extremely '™ Ihe energy bars only contain high f™c,0S^T.ja Jones) trv to slop the unhealthy, Leslie and her friend the nurse Ann (Kasn ^ ^ ^ H(W_ d«'l by hosting „ ,own meeting to inform ihe P" a{ims of Pownee are •VOT, during the town meeting it becomes clear m ^ so ^ wny dld lluPPy eating sugar, as one of the cili/ens arg" * ^ ^ explained how J«us make it taste so good?' Even after L« - ( J«us nuiKc it tnsie so gw~. - slj]| voie to,,. vf)cr being defeated had Ihe energy bars arc, the citt«n» .wp, . ^ ^ can do-eclinns stulT [their] children J» A lhe puM^ ^ pwnce. bul she Leslie mutters: 'We did OUTjoh " ||Cd by & c'" hct ,|,cy want her to Leslie's idealistic spirit ii rf,0 cltlW* slill continues fighting for'" 14-1 Chapter 9 or not. The season six storyline - wh„ c.< ,h°"ghifshe ult„ , USe L«lienua|j» separates the postmodern'^TnTT " ^ ^ Porks and Recreation, CommJ^J^ and^^ob.^ — - vunerence .-----Ui iiumour and style. Postmodernism is often associated with the death of mea narratives, a disbelief in progress and reason, and the idea ofline ^ ^ is replaced by deconstruction, irony, nostalgia and nihilism This' was in the late 1980s first translated into a handful of dysfunctional"? sitcoms like Married with Children (FOX 1987-1997), Roseanne andn? Simpsons, and eventually into the blank and entirely cold Seinfeld and Fan ily Guy. The characters in Community, Parks and Recreation and Louie seem to live by a 'this is going to hell, but in the end at least we tried' mentality It is particularly visible in Parks and Recreation because of its grand scope and focus on politics, but it is also apparent in how Community tends to end every episode with all the characters rallying to help each other establish a tiny community. It is also apparent in Louie and how, despite being tough, he always seems to lose the girl or the job; he is still aiming to be a good comedian, friend, boyfriend (material), lover and dad. The characters Eddie and Louie in the scene discussed earlier are perhaps the perfect manifestation of postmodern and metamodem sentiments, respectively. Where Eddie has lost all desire, Louie has also struggled with finding 'a reason to live', and knows that he has to pick up his kids tomorrow. These characters seem to be defined by their commitment to impossible possibilities. CONCLUSION Tracing tendencies in the sitcom is difficult because of the wide variety of (often-conflicting) formats, styles, temperatures and sentiments that characterise both the history of the genre and the contemporary American sitcom Our case studies - Parks and Recreation. Louie and Community - are contemporaries of other comedies, including (to mention a few): the very Set" fcldesque The League (FX 2009-2016); many traditional multi-cam sitcoms like the somewhat 'cold' 7Vo and A Half Men (CBS 2003-presenl) and foe ■wamier' Vie Bin Bang Theory (CBS 2007-present); a 'cold' cynical am-mation sitcom like Archer (FX 2008-prcsent) and a 'warm' one like Bo Burgers (FOX 2010-prcsenl); and worm mockumenlary sitcoms like M°Ji"\ Family (ABC 2009 present). However, Community, Louie and Parks and n.eJokerha, Wasn't Funny Anymore 145 I tie----- stand out in their balancing acts, constantly oscillating between ffcreattot *.ncerjty apathy and desire, naivete and scepticism. p3n"J> Tift tone from the coldness of Fami'y G"y and Seinfeld to the ne Sof community, Louie and Parks and Recreation, as well as (heir wor|d view and discourse indicates that a shift in comedic lone is ^valent As Parks and Recreation and Community ended in 2015 and Louie Prel hiatus, their legacy is as mentioned continued. Parks and Recreation's focus on human idealism is continued in Brooklyn Nine-Nine where the cops nortrayed come across as the idealised version of cops - true civil servants. The Good Place drives this exploration even further focusing on the afterlife. The answer to what constitutes a good person seems to be that there arc no really good people just flawed ones who do their best. Louie's search and longing for genuine human connections is continued in Better Things where viewers follow Pamela Aldon's everyday struggles as a single mom and aging actress and One Mississippi as Tig Notaro's return to her home town to deal with the passing of her mum. Like Louie these two programmes focus on felt everyday situations, like a the death of a parent or the struggles of single parenting facilitate an affective feeling of lived-in-ness not found in the postmodern sitcoms These situation comedies feel metamodem because they derive from a specific cultural logic within Western capitalist societies (van den Akkerand Vermeulen, this volume) in which sitcoms as products of television entertainment merge the mode of production with their distinct mockumenlary aesthetics and focus on everyday life. It is here that a clash between irony and authenticity emerges, reconciling audiences with flawed and complex, but ultimately lovable characters.