When shows lose their way

I remember when the first ads started running for House back in 2004. I knew immediately this show would be something special. Call it a trained eye. Then the show premiered and consistently I was proven right. There were some hiccups along the way but all in all I was a true believer in the show. Fast forward to the season 7 finale. I heard about it before I could even watch it and what I heard kept me from watching it. I heard enough to clue me in that there was no possible way what they'd done could be redeemed by a season 8 premiere and in the time that elapsed between the two, it seemed everyone else was on the same page. No one was clamoring for the new season like they'd done in the past. You could just smell it. The show was as good as over. It didn't take an expert on the business of show to see that it wasn't a story designed to evolve the character. It was desperate. Can you imagine Lisa Edelstein's Cuddy having to justify her character forgiving House (as she would have been written to do at some point in S8) if she'd stayed with the show? This was the story equivalent of a drunk chick making out with her friend just to hear the guys howl. "Pay attention to me!" was the thinly veiled message David Shore was trying to send us as the audience. He'd lost his way and he thought this sad excuse for a story could distract us from that fact. What it did instead was give us roughly 17 useless episodes of Post Mortem making us wish the show was gone already rather than existing in some sad undead state. In TV, its alot easier to set up a premise than it is to pay it off. That he resorted to something so artless and sad tells me he didn't know where House was going anymore or didn't know how to end it or didn't want to end it just yet. Maybe because he didn't have an ending or didn't know where his next meal was coming from but the long and short of it is, we're looking down the barrel of the very last episode of House and I'm just wishing that there was a hotline showrunners and producers could call when they've lost their creative mojo. Someone possessed of great wisdom and insight who could talk them down of the ledge that takes a once brilliant show right down the rabbit hole into the timeless land of squandered possibilities. Considering the influence those flickering lights and artfully arranged words have on our culture, that's a job vacancy we've gotta get filled. Maybe a council of elders? Joss Whedon, Joe Straczynski, Shawn Ryan, Aaron Sorkin, Bill Lawrence, MCG, Sara Gamble, Hart Hanson, Ronald D Moore. Am I missing anyone?

The Conversation Begins: Free Speech

Generally speaking, people believe in their own right to free speech more than that of the guy saying something they don't want to hear. When they have something to say, the protection afforded it is absolute. When it's an idea that offends their world view, the issue is suddenly less black and white.

The fact is that, as much as its drilled into our national consciousness that freedom of speech is absolute and inviolable, there are many exceptions to freedom of speech. Prior to the terrorist attacks of 911 it was easier to argue that the limits of free speech were carefully weighed and reasonable when imposed. In the Post 911 world the floodgates seem to have flung wide on abridgments of our most fundamental rights. Where at one time we only had exceptions including laws against inciting to riot and libelous or slanderous speech that harmed a person's reputation causing significant harm; now we have precedents for so called Free Speech Zones, where protesters at a political event can be cordoned off and restricted in where they are allowed to protest, preventing said protesters from reaching their desired audience. The various Occupy protests have fallen under similar restrictions. Here in Winston-Salem, the Occupy protesters had to negotiate with the city for a mutally agreed upon location for their protest. If you want to silence a voice, the first step is isolating it. For decades our policy as a nation for dealing with Communism was containment, almost like a disease. These people are already infected, nothing we can do about that but we can keep it from spreading. Which now seems to be the approach to dissent of any kind. Contain the free speech so that you can minimize its impact.

Hearing all this, you might assume my position on free speech is that it's absolute but I remember when we had limited reasonable restrictions that seemed to be carefully considered and balanced to favor the common good. I still think those are reasonable limitations. An idea like any elemental force can be a tool for good or evil, for creation or destruction, it can free a people or enslave them. The first step in recognizing something for what it is are the boundaries that separate it from everything around it. Boundaries define what an individual, a town, a nation and a species are by what they find acceptable and what they do not. We have crossed into dangerous territory recently with our new broad and sweeping limits on freedom of speech. Whether we find our way back to a more measured and reasonable approach or become increasingly polarized and entrenched in our positions will say who we are and what we will become for the world that surrounds us.