Bringing up baby: How to make Parks and Recreation great

I don’t know if you cowboys have heard, but there’s a new show in town, goes by the name of Parks and Recreation. Stars that blond chick from Saturday Night Live? Yeah, that’s the one.

Here at fictional CliqueClack headquarters, the job/responsibility/privilege of who’s going to write up this show has been going around like a hot potato or a really technologically advanced version of the Nose Game (which, I would like to add, still solves a great number of disputes in my household). But as the newbie around here, I’ve decided to step up and not touch my e-nose. Hold on to that hot potato. Burn my metaphorical hands a little.

Another awesome writer of ours, Aryeh, wrote up a great open letter on why the Michael Scott Paper Company should have been the new spin-off. Sadly for Aryeh, this week has shown us why, exactly, such a dream is impossible (though I won’t spoil anyone waiting to read our inevitably mind-blowing review of this week’s episode). In this post, Aryeh makes a great point that he completely didn’t mean to make, but is true — Parks and Recreation is suffering from what I like to call “younger sibling syndrome.”

Now anyone who is a younger sibling knows exactly what I mean when I say this, but for you older siblings or only children, let me explain.  I am sure you have have, at one point, been in a class with a kid, and that kid was the brother or sister of a student that teacher previously had. Did you ever notice that the teacher would sometimes treat that kid differently, like they had a preconceived notion of them? I’ll give you a hint as both a younger sibling and a twin (double whammy!) — they did.

I don’t know whose fault this is. Is it NBC’s, for touting this show first as the “Office Spin-Off”? Is it the executive producer’s, for making these two shows so similar? Is it ours for not being able to look past those similarities? Because once you get past them (the documentary style, the incompetence in the workplace, the confessional talking heads), you’ve got two very different kids, and I think that Parks and Recreation is suffering from the comparison. Ironically, let me remind you that The Office had the exact same problem — originally it was exactly like it’s British counterpart, and didn’t really achieve brilliance until it became it’s own show, free of the Americanized parroting of already done lines.

Sure, there are some things The Office excels at. Parks and Recreation, for instance, does not have the same ensemble feeling as it’s older sibling does. There are over a dozen characters on The Office who are  fleshed out enough to carry their own shows, but Parks and Recreation is sticking with a core group of around six. But that’s not to say the supporting characters aren’t just as delightful. There are certainly some weak points, or, well, one weak point, in the form of April, the soulless intern. But the rest of the ensemble absolutely should not be ignored. Aziz Ansari, for instance, is no Dwight Schrute. He’s a savvy, butt-kissing slacker, which is probably my least favorite type of human being on the planet, and I still love him. I’m equally fond of the unlikely playboy (and, I hope, Leslie’s romantic interest) Mark Brendanawicz, as played by the strangely cute in a Jason Sudekis sort of way, Paul Schneider. I find Chris Pratt as an unlikely poster boy and deadbeat bassist, absolutely hysterical. But I think my favorite character is without a doubt Rashida Jones’ Anne, and not just because she’s played by Rashida Jones, who I feel was tragically overlooked by Office fans simply because she was Jim’s not-Pam love interest. She is, per usual, plays the straight-faced everywoman unwittingly thrown in with a bunch of crazy people, but she is absolutely stellar in that role.

Parks and Recreation also isn’t as subtle as it’s counterpart. The Office relies on carried in-jokes and “it’s so true it’s funny (and tragic)” moments, where Parks and Recreation goes more for the laugh-out-loud deadpan soundbites that Amy Poehler is so gifted at delivering.  (Favorite quote of the week: “To this day, I am still haunted by those remaining penises. One penis in particular.”) Perhaps this is a conscious choice, since most people cannot relate to the trials and tribulations of local government, but most people have worked in an office. I have to say, though, as someone who has never worked in an office but has absolutely endless experience with local government thanks to my extremely involved mother, I can tell you that this show is tragically, mind-bogglingly, almost heartbreakingly true to life. And hey, that could be another unforeseen downfall. Perhaps people are more willing to make fun of their work situation but feel less comfortable taking a look at the fallacy of their local government.  (But that is a whole other article for a whole other site, and I will refrain from going into it.)

I guess what I’m saying is, give Parks and Recreation a chance. Sure, it’s not The Office, but I don’t think it should be.  It’s got a lot of things going for it. And if it, like it’s older sibling, can step out of the shadow of what it was originally supposed to be modeled after and become it’s own show,  it’s got the makings of having a long and glorious run all on it’s own.

Clacked by Julia Hass
on Apr 24, 2009 @ 15:07 EST5EDT