This letter is associated with the following article:
Letters
Sunday, January 14, 2007 12:00 AM

I Like to Watch

The lusty ladies of "The L Word" take an early lead in our first On-the-Nose Dialogue Contest. Plus: Who's more dangerous, Jack Bauer or Jack Osbourne?

Read other letters about this article

  • Sunday, January 14, 2007 01:52 PM

    It's "branding" (and I don't mean with a hot iron).

    There's no point in putting up disclaimers like "I don't kill gay people at night" or "Some of my best friends..." because, if you're determined to hate me, it won't matter.

    My point is that these Showtime shows are simply "branded" as being gay. If they were about straight people they'd be cancelled in ten minutes over on Fox. From what I've seen, there's nothing very special or very good about them; it's only the "gay friendly" label that keeps people watching.

    On the old Quinn Martin series "The Invaders," one episode was the Black People episode. For the most part the series had been all caucasian, and someone must have shamed Martin into doing something with black people. So he had a couple of black actors appear on this episode, and produced black aliens. (Besides the un-bendable pinky finger, the black aliens' palms were not pink-colored; they were the uniform brown color of the rest of their skin.)

    That episode closed with some yadda, yadda, yadda about brotherhood and how the few black humans who survived now knew there was an "alien race" out to kill them. And that was that. I don't believe there were any more black characters in any other episodes, alien or human.

    So, by doing an episode which contained some stuff about black people, did Quinn Martin prove himself not to be a racist? Did he break the color line in mid-60's dramatic television? I'll bet all he did was get a grumbling notice of approval in "Jet" or "Ebony" about it. ("Hey, David Vincent comes up against black aliens. We're so appreciative.")

    Meanwhile, an earlier Showtime series, "Brothers," was the first series to have gay characters on a regular basis. It even had a "flaming" character, Donald Maltby, who was more than just a rimshot joke; he could become deadly serious. This show was forgotten, perhaps because it did something that the current Showtime "gay shows" don't do; they showed gay people as people, interacting with the whole world, not just other gay people.

    But that isn't what Showtime wanted. So they ghettoize gays and lesbians. They're pursuing them as a niche audience, an audience which just happens to spend a lot more on entertainment (pay cable channels included) than the hetero audience. Hey, there's a whole night of shows that do a lot of gay stuff! None dare call it exploitation.

    Hey, "Weeds" has its characters encountering a gay drug dealer and a gay FBI agent. We're so appreciative.

Most Active Letters Threads

515

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
426

A key British official reminds us of the forgotten anthrax attack

A vast array of establishment and expert sources do not believe this episode was really resolved.
349

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
210

Is Obama's civil liberties record understandable?

Was it unreasonable to expect him to adhere to his commitments regarding the Constitution?
174

Bigotry wins in Switzerland

By voting to ban the construction of minarets, Switzerland apes the most extreme intolerance in the Muslim world

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon