"Conventional show-biz savvy held that Americans hated to be the objects of satire"
About this Quote
Carroll O'Connor's declaration, "Conventional show-biz savvy held that Americans hated to be the objects of satire", highlights a dominating belief within the entertainment industry concerning the American audience's level of sensitivity to being mocked or parodied. This shows a much deeper understanding of audience psychology and industry norms before and during O'Connor's time.
The expression "conventional show-biz savvy" describes the cumulative knowledge or typical beliefs within the home entertainment community about what viewers react to, and what they might decline. This is the lens through which producers, writers, and entertainers typically assess possible tasks, relying greatly on perceived audience choices to form material. These standards can determine the level of threat show creators want to take when attending to contentious or sensitive topics.
The apprehension about "Americans hated to be the things of satire" suggests an assumption that audiences prefer content that aligns with their worths, instead of facing or challenging them. Satire, by its nature, is a category that points out societal flaws through humor and exaggeration. Nevertheless, this kind of comedy risks of angering its topics, which, in this context, is the American public itself. There's an implicit fear that people may dislike being straight criticized or buffooned, possibly leading to reaction or disengagement with the material.
O'Connor's observation is particularly interesting when considering his function as Archie Bunker in the groundbreaking television show "All in the Family". The series defied the traditional wisdom he explains, embracing satire to comment on relevant social issues, ultimately becoming a seminal part of American tv. This recommends that while conventional beliefs may hold certain assumptions about audience choices, ingenious content can challenge and improve these perceptions.
In conclusion, O'Connor's quote underlines a cautionary approach traditionally taken by program company specialists towards satire, revealing concerns about alienating audiences. Nevertheless, it simultaneously opens a discussion on how pushing limits can redefine entertainment and audience engagement, as evidenced by the success of jobs that attempt to challenge the status quo.
About the Author
