This week, we were asked to view a television show that we had never seen before, but to view it on mute. The point was to observe individuals and the relationships between them, form some assumptions and then re-view the program and assess your assumptions. For this exercise I initially though of watching a children's show, out of curiosity as to what subtle messages are being imparted, but ended up watching "Schitt's Creek", a series on Amazon staring Eugene Levy and Catherine O'Hara. The only knowledge of the series that I had prior to viewing was "The Rose family must relocate to a small town Johnny once bought as a joke" (Amazon, 2017).
My initial assessment of the series characters is that the family (mother, father and 2 adult children) is highly affluent, but due to some legal issue, their home and possessions are confiscated, and the family is forced to take up residence in a small town motel. The family appears to be close, however under considerable stress. The two adult children appear to interact with one another, and with others to a large degree, as if they were adolescents. The adult daughter appears to be the princess of the family. The mother and father appear as a unit, with the father being somewhat passive and the mother being the primary voice of the family. No physical contact was demonstrated, either loving or nurturing or negative, yet the family gave the impression of one that cares for one anther (in a petulant teenagery kind of way). The additional primary role in the series is a scruffy, "local-yokel" appearing man from the town (Chris Elliott), who appears to initially help the family find residence in the motel, but quickly tramples boundaries and becomes an antagonist for the family.
After veiwing the series with dialog intact, my basic assumptions about the show were correct. The family, though very sarcastic and clearly under considerable stress, does appear to care for one another. The mother is the matriarchal powerhouse of the family (at it appears that it was her company that was seized due to tax evasion by their financial manager), yet she and her spouse remained a united front throughout the episode. The adult son and daughter both react to situations and one another in very adolescent ways with name calling, "shut-up" fights, and sarcasm. The one person that I misjudged the most was the scruffy local, who turned out to be the mayor, however I was correct in my assumptions related to his boundaries.
This was an interesting exercise, and one that I think would be interesting in repeating with different kinds of programs, particularly children's programs as children tend to be very observant of non-verbal communication.
Sarah,
ReplyDeleteI am happy to hear you found this exercise to be as helpful and eyeopening as I did. It really reiterated the power of non verbal behaviors and reminded me that I am constantly sending messages to others, whether I am doing so verbally or non-verbally. This is especially important when working with children and families because the messages we send them are so powerful. I think it also helped me to realize the importance of never assuming anything. Although you were correct about many of your assumptions, and so was I, there were assumptions we made that were inaccurate. I think it all comes back to knowing and understanding our own communication, while also taking the time to get to know and understand others so the most effective communication is able to take place.
Just our of curiosity, do you think this is a show you would continue to watch?
Thanks for sharing :)
Sarah,
ReplyDeleteI also found this to be a pretty interesting exercise. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out what show I would watch, only to actually pick one at random after a Facebook poll. I was surprised by how I could read the tension and seriousness, but when I found out what was actually the center of the controversy, it made the second viewing seem strange and foreign, like it had somehow been misinterpreted from another language and I couldn't follow the subtitles.
Thanks for your thoughts,
Eric