Stand for Something or Fall for Anything

     Make a stand Tom! I’m still looking for an instance in which Doherty really comes out and takes a side on any of the issues that he raises, which has only made my dissention that much more difficult. That said, I suppose that this ambivalence in Doherty’s presentation of the events he covers is itself a problem. Too often we find him walking the line between cool acceptance and moderate indignation without tying himself to one or the other. His fluid and skillful prose style, while perfectly enjoyable to read (someone needs to take the initiative and send a copy of this book to our friend Leerom), masks it more of a historical account rather than a cultural commentary.

     I fully agree with Janice’s aggravation when she notes how Doherty seems to resist delving further into the emergence of the black actor on television. He brings up how, “the African American press worked both sides of the street, attacking the show on the editorial pages while puffing up the black actors on the entertainment pages and pocketing the revenues” (79). Great! This is where I felt that the conversation should begin, rather than end. Were the portrayals of African Americans in Amos n Andy nothing but backhanded racism, or necessary growing pains in the rise of the black actor? Both positions could easily be argued, but the question not only goes unanswered, but is never even raised.

     Another instance in which we could use more of a “for or against” standpoint is in the view of the FCC. It would seem that the creation of the “highway patrol” of the airwaves is a defining moment in both the history of television and the government’s first steps down a path that leads to decisions of what is and is not appropriate viewing material for the public at large (60). (It’s birth being the dark clouds on the horizon for Janet Jackson) Here is a polarizing agency if ever there was one, and we still get only a brief hint as to Doherty’s goal in including it in his book. One would think it nearly impossible to mention a group that creates the guidelines for public airwaves without inserting some emotion, yet Doherty remains oddly apart from it. He begins to make a point when talking about the influence the FCC had on executives and its close ties to the Republican party and McCarthy when he says that, “the early actions of the Republicanized FCC seemed to confirm the worst fears of the networks” (93). Even after this, however, I find myself wishing he had gone further. Like many other places in the book, I’m left wanting more.