Splitsider

 
Friday, December 3rd, 2010
6

The Bart Show: When The Simpsons Were Almost Much Worse

With all this jibber-jabber about The Simpsons not being as good as it was when the writer was 12 (see: The Saturday Night Live Effect), it’s easy to forget that there was an early period in the show’s popularity when it was ready to take a turn for the much worse. Catchphrase-filled bumper stickers, key chains, video games, and music albums all pointed in one direction: The Simpsons was becoming the “Bart Show.”

For the record, I like Bart Simpson as a character. He is in many ways the show’s least cynical character. Despite all the parent group protestations that he was a negative role model for children, his rebelliousness was more a sign of his innocence than a dismissal of it. Episodes such as Marge Be Not Proud and Bart The Daredevil work because Bart is so unaware of his affect on the world around him. He confuses selfishness with individuality, just as all children do.

But Bart Simpson the character and Bart Simpson the hit television show character are two different animals, and in the first few years of The Simpsons, the latter threatened to take over. The marketing focus of the show fell almost entirely on Bart (or, at least, Homer reacting to Bart). “Eat my shorts!” became a catchphrase on the level of “Yeah, baby!”

Of course this is exactly what happens in popular television shows: a character gets popular. Family Guy had it in the super cute super genius Stewie and South Park had it in the ever-dying Kenny.

But while South Park was able to shift attention away from its breakout star (largely by no longer making the kid’s death the centerpiece of episodes), Family Guy has been trapped in a creative rut ever since it traded its intense weirdness in favor of a cute, catchphrase-producing main character. Family Guy has always just been Robot Chicken with storylines, but even those stories were weakened after the Stewie revolution. When Peter, the everyman, was at the center of the show, it felt like a fun ride into a stupid man’s brain. Now the Stewie-heavy episodes play out in the pattern of joke, t-shirt idea, joke, t-shirt idea, joke.

The danger in this pattern wasn’t just that America had more “Do the Bartman” cassettes than it needed. Rather, there was less space to consider the comedy merits of Marge or Homer or Lisa or anyone else on the show. The audience had been told that Bart was the funny one. The jokes were coming from Bart. Bart would be saying the thing you’d talk about on the playground the next day. And with Bart taking the spotlight from the other main characters, the side characters such as Moe or Lenny had no space at all.

This is the antithesis of The Simpsons that fans came to know and love.

At its heart, The Simpsons works so well because it’s a television show about a community. Much like South Park, many of the best episodes of The Simpsons deal with the town overcoming their differences to stop a ridiculous threat. Marge vs. The Monorail is much bigger than Marge herself: it’s about Springfield. Even the Treehouse of Horror episodes celebrate the diverse cast and the many comedic possibilities they provide, not just Bart or Homer putting on a mask.

If the show had stayed exclusively focused on Bart, we might never have had episodes like “Homer Loves Flanders” or “Sideshow Bob Roberts.” The flavor of Springfield, and many of the non-family characters fans love would’ve stayed in the background for quick cut-a-aways and sight gags – just as they still do on Family Guy now.

So what changed that saved The Simpsons?

According to some accounts – and the NBC Page tour if you took it before 2009 – then-writer Conan O’Brien lead the charge to shift the focus of the show from Bart onto Homer and Marge. And there is some merit to the claim. If you look at the episode list of Season 4 (often considered the Golden Age of The Simpsons) and compare it to Season 3, there are far fewer Bart-themed episodes and infinitely more based on Marge, a previously-boring nag character.

Or maybe the writing staff just got tired of using the same tropes for three seasons. Even as endearing as Bart can be at his best, having him say, “I’m Bart Simpson, who the hell are you?” can only be funny to a reasonable human so many times.

Mike Drucker is a lovely man with many positive characteristics. He has written for Saturday Night Live, The Onion, McSweeney's, and Nintendo. He's also a stand-up or something, I guess.

  • JoshUng

    Definitely agree that the show really picked up when Homer became a focus, though I have no regrets on getting my Simpsons Sing cassette.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Denise-Du-Vernay/608565074 Denise Du Vernay

    I am tired of hearing about a "golden age" of The Simpsons. People keep referring to it, but no one actually knows when it was. This post listed Season 4, my favorite seasons are 8 & 20, and I met some people while speaking in promotion of my book (The Simpsons in the Classroom) who argued that the Dana Gould years were hands-down the best Simpsons episodes. If the "golden age" is over, how does anyone explain the exceptional season they're having right now?

    Having said that, some fabulous episodes aired while O'Brien was involved with the show. And while I don't discount the brilliance of Conan O'Brien, we can't forget other key players from that time, Bill Oakley and Josh Weinstein to name a couple. And what about Mirkin, Swartzwelder, and Scully?

    As far as Bart the Image on Cheap Merchandise, that goes back to Groening making the most out of a show that he thought would be short-lived. None of the writers can be blamed for that.

    By the way, I do adore Conan. Team Coco all the way.

  • D.N.

    I'm sorry, but this is a widely-circulated myth that needs to be busted. Bart was NEVER the main focus of the series in its early seasons. It only appeared to be that way because Bart was featured most prominently on the merchandise, had all the oft-cited catchphrases, and was talked about more in the media. However, if you look at those early seasons, there were just as many episodes focusing on Homer than there were on Bart, and there were quite a few that focused on neither. Bart might have gotten the most publicity for the show, but that was never reflected in the actual episodes. If you want proof, check out this article: http://deadhomersociety.wordpress.com/2010/12/11/simpsons-history-there-never-was-a-shift-to-homer/

    Also Mike, no disrespect, but your article doesn't stand up to scrutiny: http://deadhomersociety.wordpress.com/2010/12/12/rehashing-the-“bart-show”-myth/

  • berda

    Denise I have to disagree. The "golden age" of the Simpsons is certainly over. I could go into longer detail but I don't think it is worth it when you claim Season 20 is your favorite. How the Simpsons lost its mojo is certainly an interesting topic that could spurn debate, I'd like to see an analysis on Splitsider at some point.

  • voodoo2

    The Golden Age of The Simpsons for me was Seasons 2,3,4, and most of Season 5 — spanning 1990–1994. The animation was the best, the writing was sharp and witty; just great episodes. After that it was all downhill, including the terrible Movie.

  • Fidelio

    There's a general consensus among Simpsons fans that the Golden Age began with either season 2 or season 3, and ended sometime around the end of Season 8.

    There are people who feel differently – such as the first commenter here, who thinks that season 20 was better than season 4, which is something that you virtually never hear – but there are always going to be a few dissenters. That doesn't mean that there isn't a general consensus.