Why do people who love a new ...
Question: Why do people who love a new program insist it is the greatest program in the world without letting it stand the test of time? Don't you agree that a TV show should be on the air for more than one season before honors are heaped upon it, or on the air for several seasons before awards are even considered? It's like getting a new toy for Christmas. It's fun for a few minutes, hours or days, but will it still be the favorite in a week, or will it become just another item in the toy box?
The West Wing, for example, had great writing and acting for a few years; then its quality went down for a couple of seasons, but then it finished great. New TV shows shouldn't be on anyone's top-10 list unless they’re on a list of the top 10 new shows.
Answer: Boy, I couldn't disagree more with this one. This is the same tension the TV industry faces come awards time: How to balance new breakthroughs against old favorites. Plus, you seem to be confusing a show's long-term reputation (as in assessing the overall quality of
The West Wing, which I'd still rate as pretty fantastic, even considering its off seasons) with the quality of a show in the moment. And it's "in the moment" that counts when putting together a top-10 list or in assessing a show from season to season or covering it in real time. To think you could put a year into perspective without acknowledging the breakthrough shows of that given year because they may not follow through in the long run is an awfully unfair and uncharitable way to approach the business. Almost no series makes it to the end without faltering at some point, but that shouldn't prevent or inhibit us from celebrating a show at its peak. And a show is often at its peak in its earliest seasons. To ignore or undervalue them at that point just seems wrong. I think I'll stick to accentuating the positive whenever I can, thank you very much.
