Television and the conjugal state - 5/23/07

[Smartmarriages]

- MARRIED IN AMERICA

TELEVISION REVIEW
An engaging look at marriage in America
Los Angeles Times 
By Robert Lloyd
May 23, 2007

((I found a review and sharing it to encourage you to watch. This project
gives us a good reminder of our target - who these people really are.

> These couples are all different, which means some of them are different from
> you, possibly to the point of strangeness. Yet in their very variety they
> stand for any of us, for better, for worse, in sickness, in health, and so on.

The review also makes an interesting observation:

> For whatever nexus of reasons, and notwithstanding various bridal-themed
> "reality shows" on lifestyle cable nets, television has lost interest in
> exploring the conjugal state. Where once the married couple was a fixture of
> the medium, nearly all of the major characters and most of the minor ones on
> series currently running are some form of single (never married, divorced,
> separated, widowed). ("The Sopranos" and "Big Love" are among the exceptions,
> and how weird is that?) Dating is the name of the game. "Grey's Anatomy,"
> whose characters seem perennially condemned to a kind of emotional high
> school, wound up its year with one marriage narrowly averted and another
> veering toward the rocks. Two shows about getting married, "Big Day" and "The
> Wedding Bells," flopped midseason, though this may have something to do with
> the fact that neither was very good.
> 
> But it's a rich story, marriage, and a bigger story than the relationship it
> defines ‹ as seen here, it involves issues of work, ambition, community,
> money, place and children. It's dramatically advantageous that the film
> focuses mostly on young people,

I hope you'll watch tonight or record it and watch soon.  It's 3 hrs long
and on 9-midnight on Hallmark channel.  I'll share some of your comments. -
diane)) 


Michael Apted, whose "7 Up" documentaries have tracked a group of ordinary
Britons through the years just to see how they're getting on, has also been
making a series about marriage. The second installment, "Marriage in America
2," airs tonight on the Hallmark Channel, owned by the card people,
appropriately enough. (The first ran on A&E in 2002.) The films track nine
couples, representing a variety of sometimes mixed colors, cultures and
classes ‹ none too upper crust ‹ and it's a natural progression from "7 Up,"
from the life of an individual to the life of a couple.

The result is something not in the least extraordinary and yet absolutely
captivating. Like "7 Up," "Marriage in America" is designed to make its
points over time, and a marriage is, of course, all about time: It starts as
a prediction two people make about the future ‹ that they'll spend it
together, for better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, etc. And it is
also retrospectively defined by time: "They were married all of six weeks"
or "They were married 50 years," the longer figure generally being
considered the greater success. (Though perhaps not if "and were miserable
the whole time" were to complete the phrase.)

The fact that no one actually can tell the future is really the point of the
project, which is planned to go another five years, although theoretically
such a series could follow these couples until death or divorce do them
part, as long as Apted or his creative heirs can scratch up the money to
keep going. "Marriage in America 2" carries a production credit from Faith &
Values Media, whose stated goal is to "use the electronic media to enrich
spiritual life, heal wounds by advocating religious tolerance, and build
bridges of understanding among people of faith." We of little faith should
not, however, be put off by the association ‹ like marriage itself, the film
does not need God to work. (And it isn't necessary to have seen the first
chapter, which the present one recaps.)

For whatever nexus of reasons, and notwithstanding various bridal-themed
"reality shows" on lifestyle cable nets, television has lost interest in
exploring the conjugal state. Where once the married couple was a fixture of
the medium, nearly all of the major characters and most of the minor ones on
series currently running are some form of single (never married, divorced,
separated, widowed). ("The Sopranos" and "Big Love" are among the
exceptions, and how weird is that?) Dating is the name of the game. "Grey's
Anatomy," whose characters seem perennially condemned to a kind of emotional
high school, wound up its year with one marriage narrowly averted and
another veering toward the rocks. Two shows about getting married, "Big Day"
and "The Wedding Bells," flopped midseason, though this may have something
to do with the fact that neither was very good.

But it's a rich story, marriage, and a bigger story than the relationship it
defines ‹ as seen here, it involves issues of work, ambition, community,
money, place and children. It's dramatically advantageous that the film
focuses mostly on young people, for whom five years can represent a world of
changes, though all but one couple are still together. (Another is back
together.) But while a few have "stories" ‹ one couple who lived blocks from
the World Trade Center were on their honeymoon when the towers came down,
another come from lives marked by violence and alcohol, a lesbian couple
(and parents of twins) work for same-sex marital rights ‹ it's the ordinary
stuff that is most exciting to see.

While in one sense this is a big, ambitious project, in another there is
nothing to it. Apted, while a penetrating (off-camera) interviewer who
doesn't shy from asking uncomfortable questions, is not pushing for any sort
of answer or working to support a thesis. He's simply showing up and paying
attention, in his dry British way. It is a wonderful thing to be taken
seriously, and to be taken seriously for who you already are, without having
to perform for the camera ‹ and it is wonderful to watch. These couples are
all different, which means some of them are different from you, possibly to
the point of strangeness. Yet in their very variety they stand for any of
us, for better, for worse, in sickness, in health, and so on.


**************************
Send submissions and comments for the listserv to: diane at smartmarriages.com
Do NOT hit "reply". If you hit reply your email will go into cyberspace and
NO ONE will see your email.

This is a moderated list. Submissions and comments are read by Diane Sollee,
editor. Please indicate if your comment is NOT to be shared with the list.
PLEASE include your email address or url as part of your signature.

Please also understand that with thousands of subscribers, not all comments
can be shared. Also realize that opinions expressed are not necessarily
shared by members of the Coalition.

To SUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, or Change your subscription address,
use the form at: http://www.smartmarriages.com. Click Newslist - in the
column under the puzzle piece.

To read past posts to the listserv, visit the Archive at:
http://lists101.his.com/pipermail/smartmarriages/

11th Annual Smart Marriages Conference, Denver Adam's Mark Hotel,
June 28-July 1, 2007
Download a brochure: http://www.smartmarriages.com/Brochure.07.pdf


List your program and resources on the Directory of Classes at
http://www.smartmarriages.com

Order conference audio & video CD/DVD/MP3s: 800-241-7785 or
http://www.iPlaybackSmartMarriages.com

Coalition for Marriage, Family and Couples Education, LLC (CMFCE)
Diane Sollee, Director
5310 Belt Rd NW, Washington, DC 20015-1961
http://www.smartmarriages.com
202-362-3332

FAIR USE NOTICE: This e-newsletter/site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We make such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of marriage, family, couples, divorce, legislation, family
breakdown, etc. We understand this constitutes a 'fair use' of such material
as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes. For more
information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you
wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own
that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner.