The Office

[tekcop]

I've always wondered why the waitresses they brought back to the office were different. It's never mentioned and it's bothered me since I first watched it.

 

[Hoff]

There definitely wasn't more to it than a glance from Jim. But, that was the point. The point was Michael was this ignorant guy, and that in offices all around the country people like Michael and even Todd Packer existed, and got away with stuff because they were rarely confronted or had power.

But, I would argue the heart of the show was that people like Michael (at least how he was portrayed in the early seasons) and Todd were wrong. That the system is broken, and that sometimes there isn't any justice. But, it was all just done with a comedic tone. With a show like The Office you can't just pick out one singular act done by Michael and say, "he wasn't called out for it". You have to look at the overall character.

I don't think that's the heart of the show at all. Maybe Season 1, which was rather poorly received. From then on, I'd argue that the show goes out of its way to cast Michael in a favorable and sympathetic light in spite of his insensitivity. And I think that's very true to life! Think of the trope of the older relative who uses outdated language or tells off color jokes but who is also beloved by the family and generally warm and kind to the people in their life. Michael throws parties, cheers for his people, talks to them about their issues; he goes through heartache and finds love. His final appearance in the show is akin to a family patriarch reflecting on how much he loves his kids.

And listen - this is all a very realistic portrayal of how people behave and interact with one another. My wife's boss is dismissive of women, and thinks he'd be a good head of the diversity committee as an older straight white man. He's commented on her poster of strong women about how "they're not all that great." But he also allows her to take time off for family issues, doesn't have a problem when she's home with a migraine, and asks about me and her family. People are not one dimensional; people are not 100% good or bad. But if you're telling a story, and part of that story includes behavior that needs to be addressed, and it isn't, that's not really demonstrating that you as a storyteller saw it as a concern. Yes this stuff goes on, but when a character (or ultimately a few) do and say some of the things they do, and people acknowledge it but no one stops it, and you wrap your show up with a nice little bow and a mostly happy ending, I think it's reasonable to view that as a tacit endorsement. Saying you can't look at one single act or episode - sure. Was he ever really called out for things? Maybe a couple times? And was there anything lasting that came of it? That side of his character experiences no real growth and at the end of the day no one really seems to mind.

Listen I'm a huge fan of The Office, I think it's a fun show, I think it's very realistic to how people are and that people should be free to watch it and make their own judgements. I just don't think the show wants to be a particularly biting social commentary, nor do I think it does a good job at it, and so in today's culture I can just get how people would be offended by it as social attitudes shift.

 

[Hoff]

I've always wondered why the waitresses they brought back to the office were different. It's never mentioned and it's bothered me since I first watched it.

I just assumed they (Michael and Andy) picked up whoever they could, but didn't make the connection that they were supposed to be the "ugly" versions. I always assumed this was part of the "they all look alike" joke that the episode was going for. That bit of info was news to me.

 

[909]

I think this is the worst part of the story and lends credence to what she’s saying. This was made to show that “Michael didn’t get with the hot girl and brought home the ugly one”. It felt like the joke was related to assigning value to their looks. That’s pretty sexist.

usually when Michael is superficial with a non-starring white woman on the show, we’re supposed to laugh at him. In the case with these Asian women, their looks were what the writers wanted you to laugh at. It’s hard to not notice it.

I think sexism is a lot more of a legitimate complaint, but I think people were supposed to think Michael and Andy were disgusting. But regardless of that, because she was playing a bit part, I think it's their obligation to tell her what the story is and explain these things. If they didn't do that, then there's something wrong with it. If they did, and she did it anyway, then I don't really know what to say. At the end of the day I think I should point out that these shows put out casting calls, and that this is a show that did the Mr. Ping skit. It is not hard to figure out what you're going to be asked to do. But again, I really don't think this is a racist role in a show that does have some of them.

The simple fact is that roles in a comedy show aren't going to be empowering, and at some point everyone is going to have to come to grips with that. And I'm not talking about this person, just making a general statement. Almost everyone is in a comedy show so that we can laugh at them, but it seems that I took this episode the opposite way of some people.

The Office does have a race problem though and it takes a minimal amount of effort to notice it. It's still funny though.

 

[909]

Also, having read a bunch of articles, I think the way the general public reacts to television shows like this is an even bigger problem. She said that a coworker drew on her arm the way it happened in the episode. That's pretty repulsive and an indictment of regular people showing they can't understand that the people they see on television are human beings. That's where I see racism kicking in. People did this to Dave Chappelle too and look at what happened as a result.

 

[909]

I just assumed they (Michael and Andy) picked up whoever they could, but didn't make the connection that they were supposed to be the "ugly" versions. I always assumed this was part of the "they all look alike" joke that the episode was going for. That bit of info was news to me.

They aren't ugly. I think that's where I'm getting confused. If she feels that way then I feel p. bad about her not having higher self esteem, or about there having been people who made her feel that way.

 

[geniusMoment]

I don't think that's the heart of the show at all. Maybe Season 1, which was rather poorly received. From then on, I'd argue that the show goes out of its way to cast Michael in a favorable and sympathetic light in spite of his insensitivity. And I think that's very true to life! Think of the trope of the older relative who uses outdated language or tells off color jokes but who is also beloved by the family and generally warm and kind to the people in their life. Michael throws parties, cheers for his people, talks to them about their issues; he goes through heartache and finds love. His final appearance in the show is akin to a family patriarch reflecting on how much he loves his kids.

And listen - this is all a very realistic portrayal of how people behave and interact with one another. My wife's boss is dismissive of women, and thinks he'd be a good head of the diversity committee as an older straight white man. He's commented on her poster of strong women about how "they're not all that great." But he also allows her to take time off for family issues, doesn't have a problem when she's home with a migraine, and asks about me and her family. People are not one dimensional; people are not 100% good or bad. But if you're telling a story, and part of that story includes behavior that needs to be addressed, and it isn't, that's not really demonstrating that you as a storyteller saw it as a concern. Yes this stuff goes on, but when a character (or ultimately a few) do and say some of the things they do, and people acknowledge it but no one stops it, and you wrap your show up with a nice little bow and a mostly happy ending, I think it's reasonable to view that as a tacit endorsement. Saying you can't look at one single act or episode - sure. Was he ever really called out for things? Maybe a couple times? And was there anything lasting that came of it? That side of his character experiences no real growth and at the end of the day no one really seems to mind.

Listen I'm a huge fan of The Office, I think it's a fun show, I think it's very realistic to how people are and that people should be free to watch it and make their own judgements. I just don't think the show wants to be a particularly biting social commentary, nor do I think it does a good job at it, and so in today's culture I can just get how people would be offended by it as social attitudes shift.

I fully agree Michael being moved from essentially a Dbag in seasons 1-3 into a loveable doofus by the end is an issue. I mentioned that earlier. I would argue through about season 4 Michael is portrayed pretty harshly. Season 5 is where I stop on rewatches because the show goes off the rails quickly.

Michael isn't the only character ruined though. Jim ends up running a hugely successful sports agency featuring the biggest athletes in the world, Andy sails across the world, Angela marries a gay politician, etc.... Basically the entire show went to shit IMO so Michael not effectively growing or understanding what he did was wrong is par for the course.

 

[Hoff]

That is extremely true

 

[Mickey Massuco]

They aren't ugly. I think that's where I'm getting confused. If she feels that way then I feel p. bad about her not having higher self esteem, or about there having been people who made her feel that way.

it’s not about how she feels but about how she was cast. She is aware of that, they admitted they were making jokes about their looks, though they “failed”. The portrayal of Asian women being centred around their looks is not new in Hollywood, and that’s what happened here in a way that didn’t happen with other non-starring white women in the show. That’s racist to me.

I also think it’s problematic to point fingers at them for going on a show they knew featured racism in it. There aren’t a lot of jobs for actors and they can’t pick and choose which racist show not to be a part of. Especially back then, they didn’t have much of a choice because most shows stereotyped Asians to a degree at some point. Saying that ignores the environment they are trying to work in, what they deal with, and the sacrifices they have to make to try and follow their dreams in an industry that constantly marginalized them. It’s also easy to say in 2021; if you even talked about this stuff back in 2007,you would be looked at like you were delusional, whining too much, reading into it something that’s not there, that you should have thicker skin, Etc.

 

[Valeyard]

Gotta take out all the times Jim and Pam cruelly fucked with the autistic guy.

 

[geniusMoment]

In a year The Office really just will be "an office" on Peacock. Just them going in and doing their work, leaving at 5 with no hijinks.

 

[Baby Shoes]

God King Trump tried to warn you all, the peacock censors are taking our freedom to express bigoted beliefs, clearly

 

[909]

it’s not about how she feels but about how she was cast. She is aware of that, they admitted they were making jokes about their looks, though they “failed”. The portrayal of Asian women being centred around their looks is not new in Hollywood, and that’s what happened here in a way that didn’t happen with other non-starring white women in the show. That’s racist to me.

I also think it’s problematic to point fingers at them for going on a show they knew featured racism in it. There aren’t a lot of jobs for actors and they can’t pick and choose which racist show not to be a part of. Especially back then, they didn’t have much of a choice because most shows stereotyped Asians to a degree at some point. Saying that ignores the environment they are trying to work in, what they deal with, and the sacrifices they have to make to try and follow their dreams in an industry that constantly marginalized them. It’s also easy to say in 2021; if you even talked about this stuff back in 2007,you would be looked at like you were delusional, whining too much, reading into it something that’s not there, that you should have thicker skin, Etc.

It might be problematic, but I think in taking a step back there's a greater context here that has to be discussed. To answer any casting call in comedy is to know that in doing so your character is either going to be a butt of a joke or is there merely to service the main characters. Regardless of your race or your gender. That is literally all you are there for. I'm not really trying to blame her for answering the call or not, but I'm saying that's literally what the casting calls are for, and one of her complaints was that she was there to be the joke. I don't really see it that way, but if it was, that's the point of the casting call. We can say that it's not right, and anything else, but it doesn't change that these casting calls are there for that purpose. And if you don't have them, you can't make TV. The producers either told her the full context of her character or they didn't, and that's where things are wrong or they aren't. At the end of the day if nobody is telling them they're wrong, it isn't in their capability to read minds. But if they're not even telling the actors what their characters are there for, that's a bigger problem.

Like I said though, this show does have a race problem, and it's largely in how the main characters were cast. I do disagree with one part of this though:

The portrayal of Asian women being centred around their looks is not new in Hollywood, and that’s what happened here in a way that didn’t happen with other non-starring white women in the show. That’s racist to me.

Nah, they did plenty of that with the other women and men. It isn't exclusive to this episode. I think it also bears mentioning that this episode was written by a woman, and I'm mentioning that because I definitely think the point of the episode was to make Michael and Andy look like shit.

 

[BruiserBrody]

WrestlingClassics.com Message Board: wrestling-adjacent topic: Peacock editing non-WWE content? (The Office)

wrestlingclassics.com

More Office editing.

 

[King Kamala]

If you keep sharing threads from that board, I hope @cobainwasmurdered edits you off TSM, @BruiserBrody !

 

[909]

MSN

www.msn.com

The article title is dumb, but I guess now you can’t show a character being racist without that now also being a racist act.

 

[HSJ]

The funny thing is Diversity Day is satire about racism in the workplace.

 

[Laz]

The funny thing is Diversity Day is satire about racism in the workplace.

That's why people who say "cancel culture doesn't exist" aren't paying attention to what's actually getting "cancelled." They hear naughty words or touchy subject matter and go "nope."

 

[Dandy]

The other side to that coin are the people that misuse the term Cancel Culture or being Canceled. You are not being “Canceled” when you make a Facebook post saying Michelle Obama is “an ape in heels,” or even worse racist/horrible things. That isn’t Canceling; that is the public not putting up with your overtly racist rhetoric.

So it is a wide spectrum and it is happening in the middle. I tend to believe that the best way to handle it is to acknowledge it; disclaim that it is not glorifying it or endorsing the character’s actions or words; and then move on.

 

[Valeyard]

The whole thing is dumb, abused, and has had little staying power unless you're really as bad as they say (the James Franco Rule). But this is just ridiculous and Comedy Central should embrace it. If they can run South Park reruns during the day, they can run an episode of The Office. Besides it's racist to pretend racism doesn't exist.

 

[Laz]

Besides it's racist to pretend racism doesn't exist.

We should call this the Blazing Saddles Rule.

 

[909]

‘Anchorman’ Actor David Koechner Arrested on New Year’s Eve

The actor was reportedly arrested for suspected DUI and hit-and-run on Friday in Simi Valley.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

This seems like something Todd Packer would do.

 

[Epic Springs]

Mindy Kaling’s Comedy Has Gotten Tired And Now She’s Being Dragged For It

Recent criticism of the comedian’s artistic laziness has fans reexamining her whole career.

buzzfeed.com

Am I missing something with this attempted cancellation of Mindy Kaling? I know Velma has gotten an overwhelmingly negative response from audiences but are we trying to find more problematic things in her work?

 

[JHawk]

I don't think it's so much her being problematic as it is her not being funny but still getting fairly big projects.

 

[BruiserBrody]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656811450688770048

 

[BruiserBrody]

We ALMOST went to this. Sounds like we avoided an expensive disaster.

---
Cost 60 dollars a day.
You had to pay to see each person 1 on 1 (like C2E2) Autographs and pics cost more on top of that.
Dude stood in line for several hours to see Dwight. Some people stood in line 5 hours and Dwight had to leave before they got to him.
4 different levels of tickets and the staff was confused as to who got what.
General admission apparently were not allowed to go in and out to eat and stuff as they limited your exit and entries.
It was mostly people selling merch in a bunch of stands.
And they didn't have any sort of fake Office sets, just back drops pictures of the set u could pose in front of. There was 3 Q and A sessions and trivia events but otherwise the extra events were weak. They had a dog petting zoo (? Was that a episode thing?) and some lawn games set up as a "Beach day". I think we missed an expensive disaster.
Dwight left the Q and A early to go sign more autographs.
The dude paid for the after party stuff, which was 2 comedians who were not connected to the Office. Todd Packer did a trivia bit (which he tours with - we missed him Milwaukee in March! Damn it) and the kicker was the public bathrooms were by the vendor hall, which was blocked by security for the after party and the security wasn't sure where people could go to the bathroom. If you left the convention hall, you may not be allowed in again

 

[Valeyard]

The entire notion of an Office Con sounds fucking atrocious to the point of being a scam.

 

[BruiserBrody]

The entire notion of an Office Con sounds fucking atrocious to the point of being a scam.

It is a hot fan base and they did it in a major tourism hub, so you technically could plan to see the big city and meet some beloved celebs.

People pay a decent chunk to see an Office set that they put up in a convention hall, with no celebs attached. You tour the set, then go to the "warehouse", which is where you buy merch. This was in Chicago a while back too. Also in DC and wherever else.

 

[Valeyard]

That sounds miserable. Buncha sweaty millenials paying out the nose, waiting in line to get a picture with Meredith, Q&A's straight out of the Chris Farley Show to bored character actors, abusive merchandise. Like if it were at least a NBC Thursday 2005-13 con where you could wander through My Name Is Earl panels moderated by Judah Friedlander on day two or something I'd at least feel like the money wasn't a waste.

 

[alkeiper]

I don't get it. I like the show but I can drive through Scranton virtually anytime I want. It's not that exciting.