I always knew that the show was based on a hit BBC comedy, but I was so satisfied with my viewership experience that I never had an inclination to watch the U.K.'s Office. I have, since, watched a few episodes of the U.K. Office, and I think I know why the American version has run seven seasons longer than its predecessor.
It's all about character development. I know, this sounds cliché, but I think it's true. Michael, played by American Steve Carell, and David, played by British Ricky Gervais, star as the bosses of their respective offices. Michael is a lovable, innocent, crude child, while David is a mean-hearted and petty authoritarian. No matter how ridiculous Michael is, the workers, along with the audience, pity and coddle him. On the other hand, David is hated by his employees. Watching nine seasons of Michael's Office is much more enjoyable than watching David's wrath.
Nevertheless, it is undeniable that the U.K. Office came first. The U.K's Telegraph posted an article that compares the characters of the different shows. The article supports the concept of the American show being a copy of the British one.
So why has the American version been so much more successful? I first thought that maybe its because Americans watch more TV. The American Media Usage and Consumer Spending Report chart by the U.S. Census Bureau shows that Americans spend approximately 1,650 hours per year watching some form of television, while BARB's British Television Usage shows that the average Brit spends 1,460 hours per year watching television. Americans do watch more TV, but this increase, although it may seem large, is not large enough to exclude the watching of an entire show such as The Office.
I believe that the reason the American version of the show was wildly more successful has to do with its American-ness. Princeton's site provides an explanation of Herbert Schiller's ideas of media and cultural imperialism. He says that certain societies are brought into the global community by institutions like Hollywood, and this shapes those societies mind sets to believe that what Hollywood says is good, right, true, normal, etc. Hollywood reigns over all other film industries. It is idolized. I remember, on one of my travels to Africa, wondering why only American movies that I was already very familiar with were being shown on the TV.
The U.S. Office is globally popular. Hollywood, because of its legacy and its skill in such arenas as character development, as I mentioned above concerning Michael Scott's lovableness, is highly influential over Americans and foreigners. This enables it to generate successful film and TV.
For further investigation into the power of Hollywood, watch this video. It's a glimpse into stars' understanding of the City of Angels, and it helped me understand how idolized the place really is.
Sources:
Steve Carell and Ricky Gervais
The Office
Jim and Pam
This article in The New Yorker
article that compares characters
U.S. Census Bureau's American Media Usage and Consumer Spending Report
BARB
BARB's British Television Usage report
Schiller's cultural imperialism (via Princeton.edu)
this video on the influence of Hollywood
In addition to what you are saying about Michael, I think his characterization was specifically made different from David in order to be more accepted by U.S. viewers. American television has frequent tropes of the stupid, working class father/husband (ex: King of Queens, Everybody Loves Raymond, the Simpsons, the American Dad, etc.). A "lovable," yet "crude child" character is expected. The setting is different, but Micheal as a boss is connected to him being a father figure to his employees. In real life, you might expect the persona to be more like David. But in TV reality, U.S. viewers want the familiar stereotype. We've seen goofy bosses in older shows like The Drew Carey Show before too: http://youtu.be/9RMGZ5lDnCY . We've also had a fair share of bosses who just don't have it all together, such as in Cheers and Fraiser. Therefore, Michael is much more suited for American consumption, whereas David would not be. And since globalization has conditioned many to accept American conventions, the American Office becomes more successful.
ReplyDeleteThis is interesting because it is partly contrary to what is the purported norm of the U.S. as the dominant global cultural power, yet also substantiates it. The authors in Thussu emphasize the power of the United States to spread their dominant culture. However, in this case, it's the U.S. that is importing media from the U.K. Like many other countries do with our media, the U.S. took the U.K. version and put their own spin on it. Yet, due to the sheer power of U.S. media, they are able to better capitalize on the show. By putting it on a top network (NBC), it's garnering a wide reach. Furthermore, NBC and the show have capitalized on the advertising of the show. Similar to Bollywood vs. Hollywood, although the non-U.S. country is producing a comparable product, the power of U.S. media conglomerates greatly outweigh the others. This is a prime example of U.S. cultural imperialism in that, although they didn't create the show, they utilized their power to assert their cultural dominance.
ReplyDelete