7. Morally
expressive art
NewsRadio
thrives on being morally expressive. However, moral expressiveness is
a very difficult concept to grasp. The only film critics and theorists
who have ever understood it have been some of the great Cahiers du
Cinéma critics of the 1950s (mainly Rivette, Truffaut, Rohmer,
Godard, and Doniol-Valcroze) and a select few people who were influenced
by them and actually understood what they were writing about. The very
definition of morally expressive art is Howard Hawks, and to truly understand
the art of Hawks is to truly understand moral expressiveness. Even today,
Jacques Rivettes proclamation that "[Hawks] is the only American
director who knows how to draw a moral" ("Génie
de Howard Hawks," Cahiers du Cinéma 23, May 1953) is
ignored for its apparent obtuseness.
Briefly,
moral expressiveness is one of the three forms of expressiveness by which
film art can be moving: emotional, psychological and moral expressiveness.
Each of these moves us by communicating with different parts of our psyche.
Freudian terms are actually most descriptive here, and emotional, psychological
and moral expressiveness communicate with the id, ego and superego respectively.
Most of us understand what emotional expressiveness is, and some of us
understand what psychological expressiveness is (a Hitchcock film for
example). However, our reactions to Hawks films are less obviously
explained: we enjoy them immensely, we find them strangely satisfying
in a way emotionally and psychologically expressive films are not, and
when they are great we are profoundly affected by them (in other words,
moved). What is difficult to understand but is really going on is that
Hawks communicates with the superego that provides order and structure
to our psychic universe. Cinema being an art of desires, morally expressive
art expresses mans desires to order the universe in a way that concurs
with his psyche.
Most
critics have commented on the inherent professionalism of Hawksian characters.
The Hawksian hero is skillful at what he does, for the cinematic universe
is ordered to express inner desires in terms of outer behaviors and relationships.
Anti-moral characters betray this order of professionalism and skill;
when they are successful in their professional endeavors in spite of their
incompetence they become destructively anti-moral characters they
are anathema to the order of the moral universe. To oversimplify the point:
the more heroic the character, the more proficient he is at what he does.
In
similar fashion, NewsRadio was quintessentially morally expressive
art. All of the characters were morally expressive, because their skill
and proficiency was an expression of the superegos of these characters.
Some may be tempted to make too much of the fact that Joe was supposed
to be an electrician who cannot "rig" things properly. What
they would overlook is that what we really saw on the screen was a character
who had the proficiencies, intelligence and self-assurance to at least
attempt any electrical fix-it he wanted, and he actually often succeeded.
The man who built a stun gun out of a garage door opener and a battery
as well as a compact megaphone in "Goofy Ball" [2-1] was not
an incompetent. Nor was he incompetent when he devised elaborate electronic
surveillance and booby traps to find out who was stealing his gelato
in "No, This is Not Based Entirely on Julies Life" [2-1].
Who else could devise the spy cam in the Boba Fett doll in "Presence"
[2-19]? The examples go on and on.
What
applied to Joe applies to virtually the entire cast. Dave was a great
boss, and for all the aggravation he was the only one who could even begin
to control Bill. (There is a great scene in "Whos the Boss
(Part 1)" [4-12] where a frustrated Lisa, as boss, talks with Dave
about how she did not realize the job would be so "Bill-intensive,"
"Bill-centric," "Bill-alicious," "Bill-lesque,"
or "Bill-bastic.") Lisa herself was a very intelligent and talented
reporter who would also make a good boss (and actually does in season
four). Lisa could also do complex mathematical problems instantaneously
in her head, a morally expressive skill if ever there was one. Jimmy James
may have said things that were illogical or bizarre, but he was very good
at what he did: he was a great and caring owner, he was remarkably self-assured,
he was a businessman and deal-maker extraordinaire, and he could flat
out make money. Bill McNeal may have been childishly egocentric, but he
was a man of commanding stature due to his authoritative articulateness.
Moreover, with his radio voice he was simply a great newsreader. Catherine
Duke exuded sassy style and let no man take advantage of her. She had
the power to put any misbehaving male in his place. Beths character
was purposely impoverished: she earned next to nothing and ate snacks
from the break room because she could not afford lunch, but she was also
not at all hard working and so short of professional skills that she could
not really type. Beths position lower down the moral order was used
to great effect in broadening the expression of human conditions in the
WYNX office. Matthew was the most professionally impoverished character
of all. He was totally useless (his work skills did not go much beyond
playing computer solitaire), and he was essentially a character designed
for comic relief a clumsy office weirdo, or as Bill
liked to call him, a Spaz. The fact that he earned a lot more
than Beth made him a slightly anti-moral character, but other than this,
his position at the bottom of the NewsRadio moral order was well
defined.
The
only character who was out of place was Jon Lovitzs Max Louis. His
was a very anti-moral character, a person who got by quite well in life
by being a pathetic and whining loser. While he himself could be funny
at times, his presence fractured and disrupted the dynamics of the morally
expressive relationships that had been established between the other characters.
Until they found a way to use him more like Matthew (for example, "Padded
Suit" [5-19], where he and Matthew try to improve upon their ridiculously
girlish fighting styles by studying the martial arts with Master Joe)
his presence was much more bane than boon.
The
shows best example of an appropriately anti-moral character was
season fours Andrea the efficiency expert (wonderfully played by
Lauren Graham). Andrea was given complete power to fire whomever she chose
despite the fact that she was portrayed as a rather clueless bimbo. Her
presence sent the moral order of the whole office into disarray and was
especially disturbing to Dave because he was the one who worked the hardest
to maintain the status quo. Appropriately, Andrea was the one who subverted
the moral order by eventually elevating Lisa to the job of News Director
at Daves expense (Dave would be reinstated later on in the season).
The
NewsRadio cast actually provided a complex breadth of morally expressive
characters in different positions in the moral order. It was this complex
morally expressive structure that would provide the means by which NewsRadio
made its most moving statements about life, living, desires and the human
condition. Exactly what those profundities were and how NewsRadio
expressed them will be revealed in the following chapters.
One
other aspect of the shows morally expressive art deserves mention,
and this is what I call the moral turn. A moral turn occurs
when a morally powerful character is put in a situation of (moral) compromise.
The joke is at their expense, and the absurdity of the moment is the source
of the comedy.
The main proponent of this was Tierneys Lisa Miller, Tierney being
the most morally expressive of all modern actors. Classic examples are
all the drunk Lisa gags from season five, Lisa getting fired
from Lucky Burger in "Lucky Burger" [5-3], her negative rapport
with children in "Look Whos Talking" [4-10], the revelation
about her criminal past in "Super Karate Monkey Death Car" [4-4],
her various escapades in "Pure Evil" [4-6], the staff making
fun of her Boston accent in "Boston" [5-9], Matthews tormenting
of her in "Spooky Rapping Crypt" [5-10], Matthew wearing the
same outfit as her in "Stinkbutt" [5-11], and finally, every
single sexual innuendo at her expense. This is the secret of most of Lisas
comedic moments. That scene where Beth laughs at Lisa and says, "Oh
my god! Fired from Lucky Burger. How humiliating!" while Lisa can
only give a non-plussed look is, to use a McNealism, simply delicious.
There is a scene in "French Diplomacy" [4-5] that subtly points
out the difference between the comedic styles of Maura Tierney and Dave
Foley, who uses psychologically expressive comedy. Andrea the efficiency
expert is upset about finding out that Dave and Lisa have been hiding
their affair from her. Lisa, trying to assuage her concerns, claims "We
werent trying to exclude you from anything. Nobody knows about me
and Dave." Just as she says this, Bill bursts into the break room
and, on seeing Dave and Lisa, says, "Oh good, you two are dressed."
The shot is essentially a two-shot of Dave and Lisa with Bill in the background,
and both Tierney and Foley provide their own reaction shots with their
facial expressions. But our eyes gravitate towards Tierneys face.
This is a moral turn, and it is a consummate moment for Tierneys
comedic style.

The
only other character who frequently had moral turns, albeit more sporadically,
was Joe Garelli. This usually occurred when his masculinity was questioned,
such as when he is mistaken for Beths "homosexual bachelor-friend"
in "Look Whos Talking" [4-10] or when he loses an ultimate
fighting match to Matthew in "4:20" [4-20].

|