CYNIC'S COMPLAINT: When I started writing this it was merely a rant about episode #401 (or "Partner's Complaint") but when I was finished I noticed that it had grown into something bigger. Sure - it's still mostly about PC and why I don't like it - but it's also a modest analysis of the show as a whole, about what makes it great and about what should/shouldn't be done in it. (All of these things naturally being my opinions with a highly variable degree of humility to them.) I intended to write this in order to further specify what I meant with the things I wrote in "A Sick Sad Goodbye", because although that story quite accurately describes my feelings toward PC it doesn't really reveal a lot about what lies behind them. I therefore hope that this essay will clarify this a bit and maybe even get some discussion going, who knows? So, let's just get to the point... When I first saw PC I didn't know what turned my stomach the most - the episode itself and the fact that it was the worst Daria episode I had ever seen, or the fact that people actually seemed to like it. It was really a minor shock to discover that although people like the same show as I do, they apparently like it for *entirely* different reasons. Really - If there has ever been any episode that has been outrageously overrated (IMO), that episode is "Partner's Complaint". In fact there is so much wrong with this episode that it would probably be easier to answer the question: "What's *not* wrong with it?" Despite this I'll resist the temptation of answering "Nothing." and instead try to explain why this particular episode is so repulsive to me and in the process hopefully say something about the show as well. The first thing I'll have to do is state a postulate concerning the show as a whole, and it goes as follows: Daria's cynicism is one of the major corner stones of the show. It is one of the things (not the only one, mind you, but one of the most important - if not *the* most important) that makes the show what it is and makes it "stand out of the crowd". Were it not for this I would never have become a fan of the show (or probably even given it a second glance). An uncynical Daria simply isn't Daria. (I will later expand on this a bit and explain why it in my eyes plays such an important role.) Also: This cynicism runs deep. It's an integrated part of her character that can't be replaced with just a few witty/sarcastic comments here and there like many comedy writers often try to use in other shows with very varying results. Or in other words: Daria isn't a character that merely says cynical things every now and then - She *is* a cynic. Now in order for this statement to be meaningful in any way, we need to define the term cynic. So... I turn to my trusty dictionary and dig up the word cynic, and I get: "An emotionally cold person. A disillusioned person. A person resorting to coarseness, shamelessness or impudence. (Opposite: idealist, romantic) Used in sentences such as: His dry comments regarding the rights of the strongest, revealed him to be a true ~." This definition is pretty good, but not good enough for our purposes. Daria after all is an idealist as well, which the dictionary claims is the opposite of a cynic - of course she's a *disillusioned* idealist ("We're preaching to the converted." - WWIH) and that is in perfect harmony with the definition of a cynic I'm going to use. Also the whole "coarseness, shamelessness, impudence"- thing is something Daria doesn't resort to too often (which is to the show's advantage). It has happened, though - after all comparing Brittany's mother to "a childhood nightmare" in her face in TOATB was pretty coarse. So... coarseness, shamelessness, impudence are very much optional in the precise definition which will consist basically of the first two statements of the dictionary. (An emotionally cold[*] person. A disillusioned person.) [*]: Just so that there are no misunderstandings: "Emotionally cold" doesn't mean the same thing as not having any emotions - such people do not exist. It simply means that the person doesn't reveal his/her emotions, and acts much more on reason than on intuition. There is still one exception to the rule that we have to deal with: Trent. The dictionary states "romantic" as an opposite to a cynic and this is quite true. Daria can be expected to act more vulnerable and less cynical around Trent. Let it also be stated that this is the *only* exception to the rule and even this exception I would be happy to ditch as soon as possible. (My anti-shipperism is not based upon a dislike of Trent - it's a purely idealistic thing. Not that I *believe* the folks at MTV will ever break up the tension, at least not without replacing it... That would be too good to be true. :-) ) Now with that in mind let's take a look at the episode, ("Partner's Complaint" in case you've forgotten) and the things that went wrong in chronological order: 1) Daria's and Jane's interaction was wrong from scene 1. "Jane's Addition" went wrong here, and PC just kept going. Seriously - did anyone really think they acted like a couple of friends would act? (If you answer "yes" it means that you know even less about friendship than I do. In that case: Seek professional help ASAP!) IMNSHO they acted like two 12-year olds who've known each other for a week but for some reason think they know each other a lot better than they really do. What makes this even more serious is that Daria's & Jane's friendship is the single most important relationship of the show. It's even more important than the hostilities between her and Quinn. Daria and Jane are the two legs that the show is standing on - I dare in fact say that all other characters would be replaceable (this doesn't mean that I *think* they should replace anyone, of course). But remove either Daria or Jane and what you have left isn't Daria anymore. Am I really the only one who can feel the foundation shake here? I don't like when episodes have Daria's and Jane's friendship "creak at the joints" - it feels like watching a small kid juggle eggs in your living room. It only results in an uncomfortable feeling of "This is going to hell!" 2) The "car dealership" subplot - Well aside from being *extremely* boring there was nothing wrong with it... 3) Daria having her heart to heart talk with Helen. RED ALERT!!! RED ALERT!!! CYNICISM POSTULATE COMPROMISED! LOSING LIFE-SUPPORT! FUBAR INEVITABLE! Let me spell this out: A... cynic... does... NOT... reveal... emotions... that... way... ESPECIALLY... NOT... TO... HER... MOTHER!!!!! Having Daria act this way should be considered a deadly sin, and this scene alone would earn the episode a big fat "F". (I'll go deeper into this later.) 4) The moral of the story: Remember that sucking up to people is *good* and straightforward honesty doesn't pay. Should you happen to disagree with this do not under any circumstances state your opinion - if you do you're acting like a clod and should apologise immediately. Sucking up is good because it gets you what you want in life - for instance, important things like an "A" in high school economics (a grade that somebody may actually want to see when you're applying for a job six years later - yeah, right!). Should you happen to have a bigger fish to fry and you notice that... for instance a genocide would be necessary to accomplish this goal, just remember that it's okay, because after all - it's the way things work in the real world and a smart businessperson wouldn't leave any resources that were at his/her disposal unused. Whoa! One of the reasons I like Daria are her high moral standards and I never expected to run into the "The cause justifies the means"-moral (which this is if you look close enough) in this, of all shows. Some people might claim that the show didn't take any standing point itself, it just showed a realistic argument between two people with a moral dilemma. Fine. But when Daria and Jodie later apologised to each other it *did* make a statement. Look at who apologised for what, and you'll see what I mean: Daria apologised for "being wrong and acting like a clod" while Jodie (in effect) only apologised for the latter. By doing this the show states that Jodie was right. Had the apologies gone the other way around I wouldn't have had any objections - at least not for the morality part... Also... Wouldn't using resources that other people don't have access to for a school assignment be considered cheating? What if someone else had tried to do a similar thing - put together a business plan (by himself) and get a loan based on his own merits alone? He, of course wouldn't have gotten it - does that mean he would have gotten a "C" on the same assignment for being honest? Hardly a fair deal. OTOH - if he would have gotten an "A" just for giving it his best shot, then all the sucking up Jodie did was completely unnecessary... "Don't tell me what's ethical and what's not." -Jodie Landon "That which is, is right." -Marquise de Sade 5) Back to where we started: The episode started with some lousy Daria/Jane interaction and ended with even worse such. Jane "forgiving" Daria at the end brought to mind the lyrics of a song by Tourniquet... "I greet you with a brother's kiss and crank the knife another twist." (That's why I used it at the end of "A sick sad goodbye".) I think I would have been more comfortable just seeing her kick a handicapped person to death. Really - FORGIVING SOMEONE means that YOU LET THE WHOLE THING SLIDE, not shove it up that person's ass when (s)he is already in a weakened position so that you can "mercifully" announce absolution from above. I really hope that people realised that this wasn't *really* a case of Jane forgiving Daria, but rather a case of Jane getting back at her dressed in a devout mask of pseudo-magnanimity. The question *I* want to ask (especially the realism-rules-fans) is: Do you *really* think a *payback* of this kind could in any way substitute forgiveness and cause a relationship to heal? The entire scene seemed completely surreal to me leaving me only with the question of what kind of object might have hit Glenn Eichler on the head before he wrote it. That pretty much settles that on my account... Now for some of the objections I already know some people have: Q: Shouldn't we at least give PC some credit for character growth? A: If that's what you want to call it... Daria's & Jane's friendship didn't grow - it was retarded. (Okay, at the end of the episode it was bluntly forced back to square 1 - so what?) And as for Daria's talk with Helen - let's save the sappy outpourings for soap opera viewers who deserve it, or let's at least safely leave them to Mr. O'Neill. This is partly what I meant when I announced my concerns about "the show possibly becoming a parody of itself" in "A Sick Sad Goodbye". Daria is a cartoon. It's an unusually realistic cartoon, but as a cartoon it often exaggerates, and that is the right and privilege of a cartoon. It's also a cartoon that often (through exaggeration) parody different things (like dumb jocks, shallowness, emotionalism etc.). This is a good thing - it's part of what makes us like the show, but the parody comes at a price and the price is the following: Once you start making fun of something there is no turning back. You can't make fun of overly emotional people (like Mr. O'Neill) one day and display similar emotions the next. You can't make satirical fun of a political party in public and join it the next, or even show any sympathies toward it for that matter. If you do, you'll look like an idiot and nobody will take you seriously. You're bound by your own satire and the fiercer and the more exaggerated the satire, the harder you bind yourself to the opposite. I for one do not want to see any more of Daria's emotional side. The writers of the show have already burned that bridge and "crossing" despite this is something only soap opera writers would do. They could just as well have her join the fashion club. (My point is: I've got nothing against character development as such, but it has to happen within the boundaries that the show has already imposed upon itself - and let's face it: They're pretty narrow - especially for Daria. The writers have already chosen the path of the parody and that can't be changed. They are basically left with the options of making fun of others or making fools of themselves. So... My advice to the writers wouldn't be the all too common: "Increase character development." - I'd prefer to tell them: "Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works..." :-) Just to clarify this some more: I do understand what the people who like to see character development are after, but I tend to look at the show as a whole. (At least I like to tell myself that *I'm* the one who sees the big picture. ;-) ) I look at the show as an... well *ideology* is perhaps too strong a word, but I like to think that the show represents certain values (that happen to be very close to my own). And if you want to go to the bottom of it, *this* is what made me a fan of the show. The problem is that I also get quite upset should these values be compromised. Well, what are these values I talk about? There are a few principles that I think are quite "Darian" that deserves to be mentioned: 1) Choose your own path, and don't succumb to peer pressure. Just because everyone else jumps into a well, it doesn't mean that you have to. 2) Don't let people judge you by the usual shallow values (like for instance looks) that are commonly in use. 3) Always try to do the right thing, even if you know that it will probably add up to nothing, get you into trouble or make you hugely unpopular. 4) There are few things in this world as valuable as *true* friendship. Cherish it, and be sure never to confuse it with shallow pseudo-friendship or you'll miss the point. 5) You've got a brain - use it. 6) You don't have to fake anything, and you don't have to apologise for being you. 7) Don't smile unless you have a reason. ;-) Now the important thing to realise here is that the "character development" crowd (if I've understood anything about them) want *realism*, and according to them characters that slowly change and develop are more realistic and more interesting than static such. Fine. I don't have a problem with that. The problem appears the second the *realism* clashes with my *idealism*. Almost all stories that I *really* like, follow a very distinct path: THE IDEAL IS NEVER COMPROMISED (or if it is, that is bitterly regretted). The "good guys" can be defeated, sure. Misery and injustice may prevail - no reason to get all optimistic all of a sudden. But the ideal is never compromised. The people representing the ideal gladly die rather than give it up - and frankly I was hoping that Daria would follow the same pattern, and I get upset when it doesn't. So, the thing I really like about the show, is in a nutshell the same thing I recognise in myself, the thing I took up in the very beginning: THE DISILLUSIONED IDEALISM THAT IS MANIFESTED IN DARIA'S CYNICISM. This is IMO the ultimate corner stone of the show - remove this and everything will collapse like a house of cards. Q: But wasn't PC realistic? A: With the exception of the Daria/Jane-thing, maybe - but if that's the only quality of the episode, isn't that pretty weak? Realism is good - yes, but alone it's worthless. If I wanted realistic and nothing else I'd be watching documentaries not cartoons. This also BTW goes for a lot of other things as well - such as the show being more intelligent than most. Sure. Intelligent is good, but if I *only* wanted intelligent I'd be reading a book about whatever the subject is I wanted to increase my knowledge/understanding about. The *primary* reason I watch the show is still that I want to be entertained. I don't have to resort to TV for my intellectual stimulation. :-) I'm saying this because I occasionally get the feeling that the writers get so impressed with their own intellectual fancywork that they try to "bring up issues" that in fact clash with the show as a whole. Take for instance "Through a Lens Darkly" where Daria's non-conformist attitude was so seriously compromised that it completely ruined an otherwise very strong episode. Most people think that JA was the precursor of PC, but philosophically the real precursor was TALD. It was the first episode where the character "development" went overboard and Daria sold out on a principle. Yes - she did in fact sell out. She had a principle (of not conforming just for the sake of conforming) - which IMO is a very good principle for real life as well. She ditched her own principle without any real arguments for doing so. She also passed judgement upon herself when retreating to the bathroom, and in the end her only excuse was that "We're just human, or whatever." That is IMO the worst excuse in the world - just take a look at the state the world is in, shrug at it and say that, "Well, it's because we're just human, or whatever." and I think you'll see what I mean. It's not really an excuse - it's admitting utter failure. (See? Again we have this realism/idealism collision.) (Had she *first* realised that in a way she was *already* vain about her non- conformist image, and based upon this insight made the decision to ditch the principle as too difficult to live up to, I could have been *slightly* more forgiving...) The general rule for compromising with the general nature of the show in favour of something else goes as follows: The disadvantages *always* outweigh the advantages. You can't sacrifice something that fills a primary function in favour of something that only fills a secondary or tertiary function and expect the results to be good. There is a place for such experimentation as well, but that place is called fan fiction. We fanfic writers operate under much less strict rules, and what works for fanfics doesn't necessarily work for the show. So just to make myself clear as to what I mean with "the general nature of the show" and to set the priorities straight... PRIORITY CLASS 1: The ideals (as stated above). If only the ideals are kept straight the episode can't be a complete failure as long as it has *any* substance at all. If they are compromised it's immediately a lost cause. The interesting thing about this is that the line is very fine here. "See Jane Run" came very close to the line by straining Daria's and Jane's friendship, but it didn't *quite* cross it, and I liked the episode. TALD went a bit over the line and I hated it. It's a steep and slippery slope... PRIORITY CLASS 2: The realism, The comedy. I'm not a realism fanatic. Sure, I like episodes that are so realistic that I can relate to them, but it's still a cartoon and that allows for certain liberties. This is not an unimportant feature, though - DTAH failed badly here, and we all know how that was received. (Once again I would like to add to all "realism-fans". Yes, realism is good, BUT IT MUST NEVER CLASH WITH THE IDEAL. (Am I getting tedious here?)) Hey, we still watch the show to get a good laugh, don't we. The comedy is so important that it can occasionally be allowed to override the realism. One has to find balance between these two. PRIORITY CLASS 3: The drama, The character development, The messages.[*] [*]: With messages I mean the points that some episodes try to take up and discuss. (For instance the message of not letting others judge you by your looks in "Too Cute".) These things are not unimportant, but their importance should not be overestimated. We've had several good episodes that have featured none of the above. For a *really* good episode with some real depth, at least *something* from this category is needed, though. PRIORITY CLASS 4: Everything else. I don't know about you, but all the Daria episodes that I've *really* liked, have followed this set of priorities. Now, I know very well that by setting up a list of priorities like this, and by defining an ideal I'm setting up limits that the writers of the show probably have never really thought about, nor have any intentions of following. The times they've gotten it "right" according to my definition may have been plain co-incidences. I am also aware that it's quite silly of me to tell the writers how the show should be written, but I just felt I wanted to give this brief analysis to explain *what* I think makes this show great and *why*. I also wanted this analysis to point out the pitfalls of writing, and why I think the show is going the wrong way. My answer is simple: I think they've given the realism too high a priority when compared to the idealism. Also - I harbour no heart-warming illusions that this essay would change anything. I just felt I had to get this off my chest. We disillusioned idealists are that way... Thank you for reading this. I hope I haven't stepped on any sore toes, although I am aware that my opinions are quite unusual. If you want to comment on this you can always mail me at: daniel.suni@kolumbus.fi This essay was written by: Daniel Suni (c) March, 2000