The Evolution of Sit-Coms

This past semester, I took a class on sit-coms, and for the final, I scribbled out this very lengthy review of sit-coms through the ages. I thought perhaps it could interesting to some….! Enjoy..

Situation comedies are one of the cornerstones of television. They’ve been around since the nascent stages of the smaller screen, and they have enraptured generations of people for the past 70 plus years. Since the 1950s, sit-coms have varied greatly. They have developed from single plot narrative structures to weaving, dynamic, and serialized plot lines that incorporate more than just “on the surface” types of jokes. This evolution would not have been possible without the multitude of contributions each episode of each show made throughout the many years leading to the modern day. From “I Love Lucy” and “Amos and Andy” to “Modern Family” and “Sex and the City”, there were so many minute and monstrous developments that made these shows what they are today. Each show would not be itself without its predecessors! Through the years, the plot lines, characters, and dimensions of sit-coms have become more dynamic, but they have all still been able to maintain a similar air of buoyancy and heart.

The origins of situation comedies really formed in radio, with shows like “My Favorite Husband” and “The Goldbergs”, both earlier iterations of “I Love Lucy” and “The Goldbergs”, respectively. These comedic, lighthearted and simple storylines were great for entertaining people in digestible periods of time. The formula of a sit-com is rather calculated, and the foundations of a sit-com are the same no matter the decade. Minus commercial breaks, there are usually approximately 22 minutes, broken up into a few acts. The acts are as follows: the Teaser, the Trouble, the Triumph/Failure, and the Kicker (Charney, the Atlantic). Each of these acts take about five minutes, and they are ample amounts of time to present the exposition, problem, argument, solution, and last laugh in the span of about 30 minutes of storytelling. This evolved eventually, especially with “Seinfeld”, for it had four different plot lines in the episode viewed in class. They were all seemingly unrelated, but they all tied together wittily at the end. Again, this would not have been possible without the beginnings of sit-coms in the 1950s.

To begin, the 1950s held a lot of power in developing the strong foundations of how a sit-com is meant to look. Coming from an aforementioned radio show, “I Love Lucy” was a major founder of the sit-com. Physical comedy, relatable topics, and good moral values are among the foundations of what made this show so impactful. From here, shows took this setting and adjusted it for their characters, purpose, and theme. “Amos and Andy” was a very notorious sit-com from the start of television and radio. When it shifted to TV, people were even more taken aback by the racial controversy and the unfair representation of Black people. “Amos and Andy” played on extremely offensive stereotypes, but its role in the early years of sit-coms and its insulting nature earned it a certain degree of notoriety in sit-com early development. “The Goldbergs” was another sit-com based around a certain subculture/ethnic group, representing a Jewish family and their American acclimation in a lot of ways. It really helped begin the movement of the family sit-com, which became one of the most popular formats of sit-coms, and it stressed the importance of heartfelt family values while still maintaining a silly air. This show, as well as “The Real McCoys” relied on stereotypes, and it appealed to both people with different ways of life and similar ways of life, as they could see a variety of different people on TV that they may or may not be familiar with, and it widens the lens of the industry. “The Honeymooners” and “Father Knows Best” were family-esque sit-coms, and the “The Honeymooners” was able to represent an adult couple without kids living in a lower middle class setting, and it was funny and rather simple, dealing with husband and wife dynamic that will be played upon in almost every family sit-com to come. Meanwhile, “Father Knows Best” played upon the nuclear family trope of the golden age 1950s. A white picket fence, a patriarch in the household, and silly, bantering kids who eat a chipper family dinner every night when the father comes home from work. While this motif is still seen in some respects in shows today like, the 1970’s “Good Times” and the 1980’s “Family Ties”, this model was soon sort of left behind, as the perfect family model became less and less relatable for everyone.

But there was a time where relatable was the opposite of what people wanted; people wanted a sprinkle of fantasy. The 1960s brought the world to a mindless version of the sit-com in a lot of respects, with “Mister Ed” being one of the most brain cells sucking half hours of sit-com television one could view. An entire show revolving around a talking horse. This fantasy-based, mindless, and niche show ran with the likes of “Bewitched” and “I Dream of Genie”, and these quintessential shows of the 60s allowed people to find escape in television from the harsh times of the 1960s. It really allowed people to find even more solace in tuning in to the shows with their families, and this pushed the sit-com viewing culture even further. On the other side of the 1960s, a more progressive development of racial representation was seen! In “Room 222” and “The Dick VanDyke Show”, African-American characters and various people of color were better represented than they were in years past. Yes, “The Dick VanDyke Show” used the appearance of the Black family as a sort of bud of the joke; however, they were still represented to be educated, kind, and just like the Petrie family. This was newer on television, and a huge innovation from the unjust representation in “Amos and Andy”. “Room 222” expanded on this even more, and it brought elements of drama, self image, and situations from the outside world into the plot even more so. It had a diverse and humanized cast, and the characters were very dimensional. Each character had more human emotions and were not just simply caricatures of people. Race wasn’t even a question; it was just coincidental. 

Spurred from more human depictions of coming-of-age adults in their homes and the workplace, the 1970s was huge in the first developments of an ensemble cast, and the ensemble cast (and its digression from solely family sit-coms) was huge for pushing relatable sit-coms forward for a more modern, independently living group of adults. Further, the problems that arose in situation comedies had exponentially more to do with the outside world; for example, “M*A*S*H” had to do with the war, “All in the Family” spoke about cultural and racial biases, and “Barney Miller” referenced law enforcement partaking in drug use. This was a very progressive era for situation comedies, and the subject matter was revolutionary in a lot of ways. In “Taxi” and “M*A*S*H”, the sexuality of characters was brought into light, and racial issues/representation were seen in “All in the Family” and “Good Times”. These shows also dealt with dramatic elements, similar to “Room 222”. “M*A*S*H” dealt with death and loss and sadness, “Taxi” dealt with self-image in intimacy issues, and “Barney Miller” referenced drug use in a funny yet taboo-slashing way. Overall, the 1970s were huge for character and plot development, and they made the 1980’s and 1990’s shows what they were, due to dramatic elements, breaking taboos, and ensemble cast formats.

Thus, the 1980s and the 1990s sort of ran together, and the 2000s did as well. But in focusing on the 1980s, there was a much more modern representation and variety of shows that could be considered situation comedies. “Cheers” showed a group of friends in a workplace and a common place, similar to “Taxi” and “Barney Miller”, in a way. The “Cheers” bar showed how a dynamic and serialized group of friends go through life together, with multiple storylines weaving throughout each episode. From here,“Golden Girls” and “Designing Women” were each a mix of a family show and an ensemble cast show, showing the women in their own lives as well as where they all converge as friends in a family-like dynamic. This ability to showcase women as they were inspired acts like “Sex and the City” down the line. As for the development of the family-based sit-com, “Roseanne” and “The Wonder Years” were two example. “Roseanne” encompassed a more… lowbrow family with a sort of dry, heckling humor that was relatable to many viewers and still reflects how certain familial relationships appear today. It found a way to poke fun at the motifs of brother-sister relationships and husband-wife relationships in a way that was personable. “The Wonder Years” was slightly different, as it was a “period piece” in its own right (if you can consider a reflection on 20 years prior a “period piece”), and it was told from the point of view of a young man looking back on his childhood. Because it was told from his point of view, it appealed to children who could relate with him and his strife as well as adults who could chuckle at the many layers and sweet simplicity of being a kid. Also incorporating dramatic elements, this show made such a strong name for itself, and by the end of the show, the audience was so deeply connected to these characters because they watched them grow, watched them figure out life, and watched them go through more than just a shallow comedic plot. 

Then, in the 1990s, “Sex and the City”, “Friends”, and “Seinfeld”, all encompassed the lives of a group of friends in New York City. In each episode, there were multiple storylines, and each show in and of itself found a way to break down barriers in subject matter and new ways to tell stories, in their own respects. To start, “Sex and the City” was groundbreaking in realms of femininity, womanhood, independence and sexuality. Somewhat reminiscent of themes in “Golden Girls” (while of course Carrie and her friends were meant to be half the age of the “Golden Girls” cast), these women were not considered less than to live unmarried, without a man, and they spoke candidly about sex, their opinions, their jobs, and more. The women were the center of the plots, and they could survive on their own without a strong man to hold them up. This show is still relevant today to women both young and old. While certain racial and LGBT depictions are outdated, it still made serious waves in both its film and television iterations. “Seinfeld” and “Friends” were somewhat similar on the surface-- a group of pals in a rather typical sit-com three camera scenario, but the way they impacted TV was different. “Friends” mastered the ensemble cast format, for no single one of the cast members were ever able to outshine one another. They all got paid equally, all had their own archetypal character type, and they all complemented one another very well. “Seinfeld” took grouchy, over-caricatured versions of real life people and made them the joke, in a lot of ways. This was based in more gritty and dry humor, but it still became a classic for many.  

Since the 2000s and 2010s, it is hard to say whether or not the sit-com has evolved much more, and it is hard to know whether or not it could evolve much further. However, examples like “How I Met Your Mother” and “That 70s Show” take from “The Wonder Years” in a way, as they were all reflective, semi-period pieces, as aforementioned. “That 70’s Show” fused a 2000s flair with styles, slang, and nostalgia from the 70s, and it appealed to many generations, much like “The Wonder Years”. “How I Met Your Mother” is told by Ted to his children, 20 or so years after his young adult life had taken place. The sort of ensemble cast and the weaving storylines on top of the unique format of the unknown “mother”/ that entire paternal storytelling storyline looped people in. Funnily enough, similar to “The Wonder Years”, both “The 70’s Show” and “HIMYM” had… greatly disappointing endings to their fans. However, the disappointment, as sad as it is, is realistic. Life is unpredictable and not always ideal, and the element of realism in the form of the “will they or won’t they” trope (i.e., Robin not ending up with Barney, Winnie not ending up with Kevin, and that whole Jackie, Kelso, Hyde, Donna, Eric, Fez mess… whatever that was) made the show so irresistible.

Mockumentary styles also came to light in the 2000s with “Modern Family” (and even “Curb Your Enthusiasm” and really gained the largest mainstream young adult followings with shows like “The Office” and “Parks and Recreation”. Confessionals (with the omittance of “Curb”), moving camera shots, and over the top personalities were utilized in these shows, all making for a sardonic take on a family or work environment. They showed a diverse and comedic snapshot of how people work and live together in the modern day, and it appealed to many people due to their newly developed fourth wall breaks and “meta” natures. 

Sit-coms, in all of its varied forms, are one of humanity’s sweetest television escapes. No matter how much they’ve evolved, they all have this key ingredient of comfort, humanity, and lightheartedness that make people stick around from episode to episode. This format has been widely popular for over 70 years, and while it has taken many forms, it does not seem like it will just up and leave anytime soon. From character progression, dynamic problem solving techniques, and dramatic elements, the realm of sit-coms has made a beautiful metamorphosis through all of its iterations.