Communications and Media

AN INTRODUCTION TO SITCOM
The situational comedy, or what is popularly known as the sitcom, has been the most enduring genre in primetime television since watching TV became a staple household activity in the 1950s. It has entranced people from all over the world, from different social backgrounds, ages and genders with its classic plotlines and side-aching comedy. But in the over fifty years that sitcoms have made the world cry tears of laughter, there has been minimal changes in the format and content of the genre. When we compare and contrast sitcoms of past to the ones airing today we can visibly see the similarities, not just in the manner of which it was delivered but in the ideological bearings of the shows. As Jonathan Bignell reiterates Robin Nelson certain sitcoms have such a hold over the popular imagination that they can still gather audiences in the millions.

Sitcoms found their humble beginnings as radio shows in the mid 1920s. What sets it apart from other comedies is the use of a more episodic plot in place of a linear narrative. There is a set of principal characters that get involved in different comedic situations on a weekly basis. Critics call this circularity and it is also one of the primary reasons to the timelessness of the genre. This circular storytelling, though, relies heavily on the existence of a status quo that is continuously attacked throughout the series. These status quos usually revolve around a domestic or domesticated setting and involve a family or a family of substitutes such as the workplace network, and in recent years, the friendly circle. This is just one of the reasons behind the immense popularity of sitcoms by showcasing familiar characters and plots, people find in the show a connection that easily draws them in. But what hooks audiences completely is the dramatization of the everyday events and conditions. Sitcoms are also supposed to suggest an attitude towards things and towards ourselves. Sitcoms provide us with a point of view that we may or may not agree with.

It is this exact quality of the genre that is being criticised by educators and viewers alike. There are even some who contest calling the sitcom a genre, saying that it doesnt push an aggressive plot and that is not radical and groundbreaking. Ideologically, sitcoms are very conservative, focusing on everyday dealings and stereotypes than pushing social principles. Some even call it a world of its own, stating that traditional sitcoms are impervious to the social change that affects its people. Because it follows a status quo, at times the view of its characters and issues are outmoded. For example, in an episode of I Love Lucy in the fifties, we see Lucy Ricardo being spanked by her husband Ricky Carmichael for causing trouble, a sight that contradicts the bubbling feminist ideals that are very popular during that time.

But, Barry Langford argues, sitcoms circularity betrays its inherent conservatism its narrative energies are directed towards containing transgression and reasserting norms. Such is the case with the American black sitcom The Cosby Show. Unlike other sitcoms of its time where wise-beyond-their-years kids lecture their un-hip parents on correct child-raising, The Cosby Show re-establishes the typical parent-child dynamics and upholds it, veering away from the television trends that show otherwise. The show deems to assure not just Black-American families but American families in general that their traditional parenting is still appropriate. But it is a good show precisely because it doesnt conform to a new age ideal that, in retrospect, is unhealthy.

Over the course of time, sitcoms have been subdivided into different categories as defined the kind of comedy it showcases. There is domestic comedy wherein the emphasis is put not on the situation but on the characters and the setting (home). There are also physical comedy, like I Love Lucy, and verbal comedy, as emphasized by Our Miss Brooks.

FROM HANCOCKS HALF HOUR TO 22-MINUTES OF FRIENDS
One of the pioneers of sitcom started as a half-hour radio program in the early 1950s and broke conventions when it appropriated the new genre called situation comedy. It was originally intended to follow the mechanics of a variety show, filled with sketches, guest stars and musical interludes, but instead showcased single situations that derived humour from the comedic reactions of the characters involved. Finally, in 1956 it launched in television, at the same time its radio show continued broadcast. Hancocks Half Hour featured the antics of two reluctant friends as they go through life in London. It featured comedian Tony Hancock, as an exaggerated and much poorer version of himself, and Sid James, Hancocks criminally inclined sidekick and confidante.

British comedy of the 1950s, as viewed by Bignell, adheres to a completely different plotline than its American counterpart. He says that British comedy focuses on social entrapment and frustration while American comedies focus on the power of love, friendship and familial solidarity. Such is the description of Hancocks Half Hour. In the show we see how Hancock and James manage to go through a life of poverty amidst a changing environment. In one particular episode called The Babysitter, which we shall be concentrating on in this paper, Hancock and James moonlight as babysitters to supplement their income. They arrive at a wealthy, modern home and are completely enthralled by its amenities. Unfortunately, they do not do their job well and end up sleeping while the house is being robbed. By the end of the show, Hancock and James surrender their own meagre furniture to the owners of the house they were supposed to take care of as a plea bargain. Lying in the middle of their barren room, they realize that in their attempt to get themselves out of their financial rut, they became completely mystified by visions of affluence and ended up poorer than ever. We see precisely the frustration that came from the need to progress in an environment that was progressing faster.

On the other hand, American comedys essential virtue is still being explored in todays sitcoms. Perhaps the most popular and enduring American sitcom of all time, Friends echoes the ideals of love and friendship in the midst of modern-day dysfunctions. Their plotlines usually centre on ones quest for love in a city that prohibits it and finding family among ones friends.

When looking at these two sitcoms, despite being representative of different times, cultures and ideologies, we can gather that there has been but few changes in the way sitcoms are being made. Usually these changes, brought about by technology and different techniques, are on the surface level and involve just the format of the show. But in terms of the purpose of the content, there is not much difference.

One of the few minor changes made on the sitcom format is the shortening of show time. As the title Hancocks Half Hour implies, sitcoms during the fifties were usually thirty minutes long, a quality picked up from sitcoms origins in radio. In fact shows like Hancocks Half Hour didnt even have any commercial breaks that would make the show longer. Today, sitcoms usually last from 22 to 25 minutes, a quality that makes these shows nowadays faster paced.  

With this in mind, we can deduce that past sitcoms followed a slower pace. In the episode The Babysitter in Hancocks Half Hour, we see the two protagonists sitting or standing casually and simply arguing. Camera angles tend to be stiller and, if need be, simply zooms in on the characters to break the monotony. Sitcoms right now are faster paced and, with the onset of technology and better quality cameras, experiment more in terms of cinematography and lighting. In Friends, we see a lot of physicality in the action. Actors tend to move around their sets and interact more with each other Monica punches Ross, Rachel runs along the sidewalk of New York City, Joey runs after his goose.
Aside from this, the sitcom has retained much of its original form. We have previously mentioned that the sitcom relies on the establishment of social norms or status quos for the circularity to be delivered. Such is the case with the The Babysitter. Hancock and James enter the scene as poor, underemployed men seeking to find ways, whatever they may be, to get out of their current situation. Hancock and James are stereotypes of the 1950s working class, who in the midst of rising fortunes have to cope in the fast paced world. Their characters reached out to the many that watched them and suffered the same implications of the current social and economic atmosphere.

At the same time, the characters in Friends also relate to the majority of their audiences young, professional twenty-somethings who live apart from their families in a city that can get very lonely. Rachel, Ross and the rest of the cast of Friends show the hardships that these individuals have to go through in order to attain a certain kind of happiness in their lives.  The show clearly follows the circularity format since these characters are largely based on stereotypes Rachel is the rich, spoiled girl Phoebe is the kooky artist Monica and Ross are the neurotic siblings Chandler is the funny guy and Joey is the moron. At the heart of every episode we see them struggle against their typecast in order to prove that they are more than what they seem to be. They try to fight the status quo but eventually they are reverted back to it.

This is where we find another difference between past and present sitcoms. In todays sitcoms, there is an effort to create a more stable linear narrative. Each episode is geared towards a larger goal in the plotline, a tipping point that will define what will happen to these characters. Early sitcoms, though they are focused on only one or two characters, can still be deemed as lengthened sketches, leaning more on the situation rather than on the story arc. In Friends, one of the larger story arc involves the love that occurs between Rachel and Ross and how they deal with it amidst many negative circumstances. Their story motivates the movement of, not just an episode or a season, but of the entire show.

The rise of the many sub-categories of the sitcom is also evidence of this difference. The plotlines of the new generation of sitcoms are now more diverse and aggressive. Back in the day, All in the Family was cancelled because it tackled issues such as racism, gender and environment, issues that raise too much eyebrows. Now, because of our more liberal views, sitcoms have also become arenas for the discussion of current issues. Such is the case with Cheers and the new comedy show The Sarah Silverman Program. The sitcoms breadth has widened and its scope more impressive.

CONCLUSION
In the many years that it has evolved, the heart of the sitcom remains true to what it originally envisages the sitcom absolutely depends on making comedy out of the collision between social change and tradition. Though many critics of have denounced the comedy of the sitcom as shallow or conservative, we can still see that its essence comes from analyzing social norms and making a show the platform for debate. Its entertainment that shakes our social consciousness in the most benign way possible. And this is where its effectiveness lies, that until today, more than fifty years after, in a world where trends come and go fast, it remains one the most popular genres in television.