AUDIO

by Russell Powell
Archbishop Peter Jensen's Christmas Message 2011 on the centrality of Jesus to human history
Talkin’ ‘bout your generation
Mark A. Hadley
July 4th, 2009

A charismatic host firing questions at sharp team captains and interesting guests, about a topic everyone can feel they know something about. The ABC's successful music quiz show Spics & Specs? No. TEN's Talkin' ‘bout your generation - and sadly for it, that's where the comparisons end.

Talkin' ‘bout your generation would have looked great on paper to TEN's programming department. Host Shaun Micallef is a celebrated Australian comedian; the inability for generations to understand each other is proverbial. The idea of Shaun forcing teams drawn from the self-satisfied Baby Boomers, the embittered Generation X, and the globally-aware Generation Y to combat each other in a quiz of general knowledge should have been a hit. After all, it has 'something for everybody' right? Sadly, no. Talkin' bout your generation is profoundly 'disconnected' at almost every level.

The problems begin at the ground level and work their way up. The set is overly large, reinforcing a distance between host and talent. The strange plinths on which the teams sit emphasise the adversarial nature of the conflict, and the overly technical 'game board' guarantees to turn even the easiest segment into a head-scratcher. The activities themselves are often staggeringly simple yet ultimately unengaging. Unlike successful examples of the comic quiz format - Spics & Specs, Theatre Sports and What's My Line spring to mind - the good vibe and energy just leak away.

You would think that a comedian of Shaun Micallef's calibre could pull it all together, but here the producers have made another fatal mistake. Micallef's trademark is witticisms rather than belly-shakers. Consequently his grade-A punch lines always take that extra second to dawn on his competitors and the audience, and the show's pace suffers continually. And increasing the internal sense of disconnection is the host's propensity to make targets of his team captains. As a result they are more defensive than participatory - and who could blame them? Generation Y regular Josh Thomas is a frequent whipping boy, so much so that it makes me wonder what attraction any of his contemporaries would find in the show. Overall the series has assumed the character of grandparents and parents nit-picking their progeny at a particularly dysfunctional family gathering.

At the heart of the show's problems, however, is the basis for the program itself - identifying people according to their generation. Even though 'Baby-boomer', 'Gen-X' and 'Gen-Y' are terms that have worked their way into Australia's vocabulary, I'm not sure how strongly people identify with them at a personal level. To begin with the program itself demonstrates just how broad these terms are, with the Baby Boomers answering Generation Y questions and Generation X gaining points from either side. The truth is we tend to grow up spread across the generations - dressing like Y, listening to our sister's X CDs and maybe even indulging in a few 'retro' BB interests and past-times. The 'tribes' that we do identify with are more narrowly defined, and our individualism revolts against the idea of wearing such a bland label.

Strangely, many people - Christians and non-Christians - believe that this is how God sees us. The Almighty Creator is similarly 'disconnected' with us, and supposedly relates to us as 'humanity' in the same way that He might relate to 'animals', 'plants' or 'asteroids'. It's what a theologian would refer to as agnosticism. It’s that very uncomfortable assumption that all our generations are only another generalised type to God that makes Him seem so unapproachable to many, and dissuades others from even trying. However you couldn't sustain this idea in the face of the life of God's Son.

Jesus, the Bible argues, is ". the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being," (Hebrews 1:3), and so the best reference point for his Father's character. And what do we see the Son doing? We see Jesus going out of his way to travel through Samaria so that he can have a specific conversation with a particular woman standing by a well. We see him having compassion on one widow from the town of Nain whose only son has died, and giving him back to her. Possibly most powerfully, we see him stopping to talk to a leper on the outskirts of Galilee who says, "Lord, if you are willing, you can make me clean." What is Jesus response?

"I am willing. Be cleansed!" (Luke 5:13)

No broad labels for Jesus. He deals with characters and problems at the individual level. And he knows the best cure - himself.

 

Nick Brennan    05 July 2009 3:57am
I watch it purely for Shaun's Pythonesque one-liners :-)

#2 of 0 top
Michael Jensen    05 July 2009 7:02am
This show is a real disappointment. They don't play on the generation thing enough, for mine. Micallef just isn't that funny, either. I don't get it.

#3 of 0 top
Philip Cooney    05 July 2009 8:37am
Apparently this show is a ratings winner for Ten and appeals to a wide demographic. Our family lasted until about the first ad break of the first episode due to the prevalence of bad language. Unfortunately, bad language and sexual references are becoming all too common in the 7:30pm time slot on all channels.

#4 of 0 top
Mark A. Hadley    06 July 2009 11:19pm
That's right, Philip, it debuted as the top program for the week, and has consistently occupied the top five in the following seven weeks. Currently it averages 1.7 million viewers (VERY respectable) and the number three spot, behind Masterchef and Seven News.

Match this, though, with the almost universally negative comments I have received from viewers and you've got to start wondering, 'What is happening?' and more importantly, 'Will it last?'

Currently I think Shaun Micallef is the draw-card, but are there enough other things in the program to hold people for the following six weeks?

#5 of 0 top
Ian Tyrrell    07 July 2009 1:42am
My wife and I like it (and find it funny), but I'm normally heading off to Bible study half way through, so I don't get to watch the full thing.

Maybe it's just generation-Y that like generations battling... or is that getting too meta?

#6 of 0 top
Mark A. Hadley    07 July 2009 2:44am
No, I think you're on to something though 'conflict' has been an essential part of story-telling for a lot longer. Actually in a discussion today one friend of mine was wondering if the core audience was actually composed of Gen X and BBs who took a perverse pleasure in mocking Gen Y. Certainly I think Josh Thomas is set up as a bit of a fall guy.

#7 of 0 top
David McKay    07 July 2009 4:22am
I wonder if the night my friend Phil Cooney watched part of the program was a one-off, of if I have been so desensitised that the bad language is passing over my head?

I don't have young children watching with me.

#8 of 0 top
David Maegraith    08 July 2009 11:23pm
I think the generational thing is very important - though not at the conscious level, rather the sub-conscious.

I was turned to this way of thinking at a recent conference where it was shown the massive social upheavals each gen went through and how it shaped them - very roughly:

Builders (70+) - children of the depression - stoic, resolute

Boomers (45+) - children of the post-war - happy, spoilt, rebellious - sexual revolution

Gen X (25+) - the lost generation, disillusioned with the false hopes of the boomers, computer age beginning

Gen Y (<25) - the i generation - tech savvy and constantly online

YES I know these are generalisations but think about how the big things that happened in people's formative years - they must have some impact

And how does this relate to today's church? I wish I had a dollar for every church controlled by builders and boomers that WON'T let the GenXer's in!

In fact would it be too long a bow to draw to suggest Gen X Driscoll and borderline X Al Stewart are spearheading the church planting charge to 1. get some control at last, 2. wave goodbye to those pesky Boomers and Builders for good?

#9 of 0 top
Mark A. Hadley    08 July 2009 11:42pm
Heh, less than charitable thoughts regarding Driscoll and Stewart's motives :)

I agree that the terms are significant in the way common experiences have tended to shape whole generations. I'm just wondering whether if it's very useful at the personal level.

Do people personally identify as members of these generations? My experience is that there are other 'tribes' they are more likely to use in describing their identities.

#10 of 0 top
David Maegraith    08 July 2009 11:47pm
Heh, less than charitable thoughts regarding Driscoll and Stewart's motives :)


Mark, you know me, if I could upload a pic with my tongue in my cheek I would do it

Do people personally identify as members of these generations? My experience is that there are other 'tribes' they are more likely to use in describing their identities.


I for one personally identify strongly as Gen X. I look at the Builder gen with admiration for what they went through, and the Boomer generation with disgust at the way they turned out!

I know of other Gen X friends battling with their Boomer 'SKI' mindset - Spend the Kid's Inheritance

#11 of 0 top
Mark A. Hadley    08 July 2009 11:59pm
Agreed, I have met more Gen X people who identify as Gen X, but that's because it seems we are the source of all these labels (speaking as a Gen X).

I haven't met that many Baby Boomers who are comfortable with referring to themselves as such, given all of the negative stereotypes.

I haven't met any Builders who consider themselves Builders.

Now for the $64 question. If Gen Y doesn't actually identify with a term like Gen Y, do we risk alienating people in this age group by trying to target them this way?

(Of course I realise the value of these terms for understanding broad social trends, but it's their usefulness at a personal level that I'm questioning. To put it in the context of this television series, are people watching because they're saying, 'Yay, my team!' or do they just like Shaun Micallef's jokes?)

#12 of 0 top
Ian Tyrrell    09 July 2009 12:03am
To put it in the context of this television series, are people watching because they're saying, 'Yay, my team!' or do they just like Shaun Micallef's jokes?
The second one.

All the Gen-Y "celebrities" that I have seen on the show seem pretty dumb, and I have no idea who they are. But I guess I probably fit more in the Gen-X category than Gen-Y anyway (although I am only 27).

#13 of 0 top
Martin Kemp    09 July 2009 12:30am
I like it for the same reason everyone used to like 'Sale of the Century' (which had the most tired format ever) ... I get to sit at home and see how many questions I can answer. A few laughs (yes, from the contestants as opposed to the host) is not a bad extra. Quiz shows are perhaps the most basic form of interactive TV there is.

#14 of 0 top
Mark A. Hadley    09 July 2009 12:47am
Yep, there's that - the attraction of the personal test. 'Just how good am I?'

However quiz shows have been dumbing down the content for a fair while now, or at least broadening their measure of intelligence to include any form of knowledge altogether. I suspect this is part of a much larger strategy (terrestrial and infernal) to make us feel that much better about ourselves. The truth is we may be much dumber than we think...

Does anybody else think the questions on TBYG are at best water-cooler topics, at worst vehicles for jokes?

#15 of 0 top
David McKay    09 July 2009 12:55am
Prefer the questions on The Einstein Factor. Questions on Spicks and Specks are sometimes OK, but often far too current for me.
We like Mr Micallef's quirky manner.

#16 of 0 top
Kevin Goddard    09 July 2009 1:28am
At the heart of the show’s problems, however, is the basis for the program itself – identifying people according to their generation.


As it is considered a HIT show by any definition within the industry ( "just look at those numbers baby"- they cry ), I am sure that many other producers would love to have such a problematical success on their hands.

My own thesis is that basically we ( the people of Australia ) just want to have a good laugh ! Programmes such as this are a much needed antidote to all the negative news stories and tales of approaching end-of-world global and financial meltdown gloom. In our hard paced lives, we just want to get home and relax with a few belly laughs - before tomorrow's woes grind us down again.

Why is TBMG a success ? Just look at that 7.30pm Tuesday slot - what's it up against ? Not much from my point of view anyway. Monday has "Good News Week" - my preference over "Sea Patrol" - because "I want to laugh" - and I can always record Sea Patrol for later viewing. Wednesday has "Thank God You're Here" - followed by "Spicks and Specks" and then "The Chaser". Laughs galore for the first three days of the week. Then , after that, we can start to think about our footy tips for the coming weekend and whatever else we plan to get up to.

PS I haven't watched Rove for several years now - ever since they dropped "What the ?" - the funniest segment of all. You see, I just want to laugh.

#17 of 0 top
Mark A. Hadley    09 July 2009 1:41am
No arguments there Kevin ... the problems I refer to are more the clunkiness of the production. But I'm sure you're not suggesting that because something draws large numbers of viewers that it's 'good' (Rove is a good case in point), just 'successful'.

It's a testament to just how much Australians want to laugh (or think of themselves as 'knowledgeable') that it succeeds so much.

#18 of 0 top
Kevin Goddard    09 July 2009 1:55am
I'm sure you're not suggesting that because something draws large numbers of viewers that it's 'good' ..... just 'successful'.

I agree with you there Mark. Just look at how 'successful' "Home and Away" is - but, as a credible guide to show impressionable young people how to deal with life, it's a disaster - with all it's 'wrong message' solutions to personal problems. Another example ( from so many shows ) of what a mess our lives can become when we leave the God-factor out - and forget to look at God's Instruction Manual for Good Living.

Regarding TBMG :
Overall the series has assumed the character of grandparents and parents nit-picking their progeny at a particularly dysfunctional family gathering.


Rather than being part of the "clunkiness", I think that may be part of it's charm.
Or else that phrase is one to think about when we meet next Sunday at our local 'loving' congregations ;)

#19 of 0 top
David McKay    09 July 2009 2:11am
Concerning Phil Cooney's comments about bad language in TBMG, I tried to listen carefully for infractions on Tuesday, and did hear someone blaspheme by saying "God" as an expletive, which I hear so often it washes over me [somehow saying "Jesus", "Christ" or both sounds worse: don't know why], but I did not pick up any other rude language in the entire program.

The program that was the crudest, I think, was The Glasshouse. And not only was the language profane, the people on the program continually showed their ignorance in the foolish things they said about God, the Bible and Christians.

#20 of 0 top
Mark A. Hadley    09 July 2009 2:25am
@ Kevin

Rather than being part of the "clunkiness", I think that may be part of it's charm.


- for Gen-X and the Baby Boomers ;) I haven't seen a breakdown of the audience figures for this time-slot. It would be interesting to know how appreciative Gen Y is.

#21 of 0 top
Kevin Goddard    09 July 2009 2:36am
Regarding generational terms, I can accept "Gen X" and "Gen Y". But I have always pondered my generation being termed "Baby Boomers" - as we are the product of what others ( namely our parents ) produced - namely us. As we tend to be a more optimistic, inquisitive and advice-giving age group ( at least in my circle ) perhaps we should better be known as Generation "Why not ?"

#22 of 0 top
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.