Change? They Say It's Good...

[HeWolf]

Do characters in a sitcom need to change, grow or evolve? Numerous posters (myself included) have commented on the changes to Sheldon. Some see the changes as positive, while others say it is making him less enjoyable. Not as funny. Without taking a position on the pros or cons of the ‘new’ Sheldon versus the old, I wish to pose the question. Is the change truly necessary?

Having given several moments of contemplation to this idea I am not sure I see the necessity for Sheldon to change in any way. The character from the first season was hilarious and he continued to be so up until the end of season three. That is when we were introduced to Amy and Sheldon truly began to exhibit personal growth. In previous posts I have stated it is not those changes that I find less enjoyable. My dislike for Sheldon 2.0 is the tied more to the way Jim is playing the character than to his evolving attitudes about certain aspects of life.

So, in determining for myself whether or not change is necessary for a sitcom character I decide to peruse my personal memory banks for classic sitcom characters and try to recall if they, during the run of their shows ever showed any significant change. My list and conclusions are as follows. I don’t know how familiar some of these characters will be to non-US forum members and apologize for any you find obscure. The list:

Character -- Show -- Change?

Barney Fife -- The Andy Griffith Show -- No

Lucy -- I Love Lucy -- No

Mork -- Mork and Mindy -- Yes

Jack Tripper -- Threes Company -- No

Fred Sanford -- Sanford and Son -- No

Archie Bunker -- All in the Family -- Yes

Hawkeye Pierce -- M*A*S*H -- Yes

George Jefferson -- The Jeffersons -- No

J.J. Evans -- Good Times -- No

Steve Urkel -- Family Matters -- No

Jerry Seinfeld -- Seinfeld -- No

Elaine Benes -- Seinfeld -- No

Cosmo Kramer -- Seinfeld -- No

George Costanza -- Seinfeld -- No

Edmund Blackadder -- Blackadder -- No

I am sure there are many other examples people can put forth. My memory is not what it used to be and so I’m sure my list if flawed. But this is what comes to mind. Many of them did not change over their time on television, and my memory indicates that the ones that did actually resulted in the character losing its edge. The more human the writers made Mork the less funny he became. Archie Bunker mellowed a lot in his later years and became much less enjoyable. Only Hawkeye Pierce remained enjoyable to me through the final episode of M*A*S*H.

So, after examining my list, I believe an argument could be made that Sheldon could remain consistent and unchanged without losing his comedic appeal. And, that there is a real danger of his losing that appeal the more they try to ‘normalize’ him. Just my opinion and I am sure many will have a contrary viewpoint and maybe a list of your own.

[Br33na]

Elaine Newman -- Seinfeld -- No

her name is Elaine Benes.

[HeWolf]

Elaine Newman -- Seinfeld -- No

her name is Elaine Benes.

Thanks! Told you my memory wasn't good.

[Bear Guy]

Perhaps the phrase "constant" could be added to the list.HeWolf your list is awsome and definately shows depth, I think in the case TBBT is they are steering away from that "constant" that attracted viewers to the show.IMO everyone has there "favorite" character as we have seen thru a variety of threads here on this board.I just think that there has to be a constant character here on the show and perhaps thru trial and error with the writers they maybe are after five seasons a little confused.While change is inevitable and no sense in arguing the point maybe how much change is good?I think the character best chosen is Sheldon because he seems to be the most exposed to change here among the post and to your point I am also not taking a side here just observation.The Sheldon character has been the toughest to "normalize" with the show.I believe his persona needs to be the constant here, He has been the one you counted on in the past episodes to be well thats "Sheldon".It has been a great source of one liners to say the least.He is the "negative" to everyones "positive" while both are required for power.While each character presents thier own share of like and dislikes it has been my observation that Sheldons character has met the most difficulty with trying to incorporate change.Maybe a more slower approach would work and something that stays within his character outline because it seems to easy to see out of character scenes.Just a humble offering to very interesting post.

[Br33na]

the characters in Seinfeld are a perfect example of not changing at all...

none of them showed growth, which is why the show ended with them being sent to jail for all their years of their "chemist indifference".

people discussing character change, reminds me of music.

if a band makes a new CD, you don't want it to "sound like their other stuff",

yet you don't want it to deviate from what you usually like.

it's a no win situation.

if Big Bang characters stayed naive and nerdy (as early seasons),

then people would complain that the show is the same and nothing new is happening.

but of course once the characters change (and they certainly have), people complain that they liked them before.

[Pomita]

That's an interesting post. Since I am very inexperienced about US sitcoms myself, I can really add nothing to the list. But I agree that in terms of changing characterizations in general, there is something to be said for both sides of the argument.

Maybe a more slower approach would work and something that stays within his character outline because it seems to easy to see out of character scenes.

A good suggestion. Maybe the 'Sheldon evolution' has been too fast for a fair section of the audience, in recent episodes?

people discussing character change, reminds me of music.

if a band makes a new CD, you don't want it to "sound like their other stuff",

yet you don't want it to deviate from what you usually like.

it's a no win situation.

if Big Bang characters stayed naive and nerdy (as early seasons),

then people would complain that the show is the same and nothing new is happening.

but of course once the characters change (and they certainly have), people complain that they liked them before.

This is very true. As I've mentioned elsewhere, The strongest points I see right now in favor of some degree of change are - a) it may be easier for the writers that way to think of new and fresh storylines, not just rehashes of earlier episodes (as we saw from Bus Pants and Wiggly Finger, such rehashes don't work too well). And the actors, especially Jim, seem to be happy with the change. He obviously enjoys playing his scenes with Mayim, and it shows. I feel it would harm the show if he lost interest and just went through the motions playing 'old Sheldon', and that's a definite possibility.

Of course, one can say it will also harm the show if Sheldon is played in a 'new' way that consistently disappoints and alienates most viewers. But we can't say that for sure yet. We don't yet know how far, and in what ways, they are going to carry forward the humanizing aspect. Ideally there needs to be a balance between 'new' and 'old' Sheldon, and I'm curious to see how (or if) they manage to keep that balance.

[djvang]

That's an interesting post. Since I am very inexperienced about US sitcoms myself, I can really add nothing to the list. But I agree that in terms of changing characterizations in general, there is something to be said for both sides of the argument.

Maybe a more slower approach would work and something that stays within his character outline because it seems to easy to see out of character scenes.

A good suggestion. Maybe the 'Sheldon evolution' has been too fast for a fair section of the audience, in recent episodes?

people discussing character change, reminds me of music.

if a band makes a new CD, you don't want it to "sound like their other stuff",

yet you don't want it to deviate from what you usually like.

it's a no win situation.

if Big Bang characters stayed naive and nerdy (as early seasons),

then people would complain that the show is the same and nothing new is happening.

but of course once the characters change (and they certainly have), people complain that they liked them before.

This is very true. As I've mentioned elsewhere, The strongest points I see right now in favor of some degree of change are - a) it may be easier for the writers that way to think of new and fresh storylines, not just rehashes of earlier episodes (as we saw from Bus Pants and Wiggly Finger, such rehashes don't work too well). And the actors, especially Jim, seem to be happy with the change. He obviously enjoys playing his scenes with Mayim, and it shows. I feel it would harm the show if he lost interest and just went through the motions playing 'old Sheldon', and that's a definite possibility.

Of course, one can say it will also harm the show if Sheldon is played in a 'new' way that consistently disappoints and alienates most viewers. But we can't say that for sure yet. We don't yet know how far, and in what ways, they are going to carry forward the humanizing aspect. Ideally there needs to be a balance between 'new' and 'old' Sheldon, and I'm curious to see how (or if) they manage to keep that balance.

This is why most sitcoms diminish the longer they run. The writers and actors get bored with doing the same old stuff so they make changes which move away from what made the show successful in the first place. Very few sitcoms avoid that fate.

[BazingaFan]

I do not have a problem with change if it is done without losing the essence of the character. I feel that was done well in season 4. We saw some gradual change, but the essence of sheldon was still there, and he was still funny. I feel they haven't been doing that well in the latter part of season 5, especially the last episode.

[ElegantChaos]

Well said, and I agree. I guess you found a way to put the issues that I've been having for awhile. Sheldon in the beginning seasons was funny just the way he was. I don't feel that the show was supposed to be about "normal" people. To me it was about these people with various quirky personalities and how they got along with each other. If you keep trying to "normalize" them, it loses something along the way. The reason I began watching the show in the first place was because of the way they all acted. It wasn't something I saw in everyday life. Then to add all of these personality types together and watch them interact was fascinating to me. So if you take all of that away from these characters so they can "grow" and become more "normal" it takes away the originality for me. I like them the way they are. I guess for me it is the old adage "If it ain't broke don't fix it." If this was real life and we knew Leonard, Sheldon, Howard, Raj, and Penny, could we accept them as friends the way they were or just keep wishing they could be "normal" and want to keep seeing them change? Uniqueness is the spice in life. If everyone was the same and there was no variation, how boring this world would be. I'm actually going through a situation concerning this right now where I am staying. My husband's mother trying to change us into her. Sorry, but not gonna happen for either of us. And of course, that causes a lot of problems. Better in my opinion to either accept someone for who they are or just leave them be.

[rickfromillinois]

Personally I like character growth. If Sheldon didn't have any then Howard and Raj wouldn't be on the show. Sheldon would seldom if ever speak to Penny. Amy wouldn't be on the show. Sheldon has been growing since the first episode when he only had two lawn chairs in the living room because he didn't want other people coming over and he took Leonard to task for even speaking to Penny. It should be a slow and steady growth, but growth non the less. All of the characters need to grow or risk becoming stagnant and boring.

One thing I would like to point out about the list above and that is that when most of the shows listed, not all, there were only 3 channels to choose from and the variety of shows that a viewer was able to watch was limited to the 3 major networks. As more and more households are able to have many times that amount to choose from, the competition has grown much stronger. Shows such as Lucy, Mash, and Andy Griffith would probably not make it in today's market. The competition has grown stronger. When these shows were on the air they only had to beat out 2 other shows to be on top.

[Bear Guy]

3 channels carefull Rick you will show your age but good point non the less.

[rickfromillinois]

3 channels carefull Rick you will show your age but good point non the less.

Hah! I can remember when I was in the 1st grade we lived in the country and got ONE channel.

[HeWolf]

3 channels carefull Rick you will show your age but good point non the less.

Hah! I can remember when I was in the 1st grade we lived in the country and got ONE channel.

Yeah, but did you ever hold onto one of the rabbit ears on the tv so the picture got better?

[Moonbase]

Well said, and I agree. I guess you found a way to put the issues that I've been having for awhile. Sheldon in the beginning seasons was funny just the way he was. I don't feel that the show was supposed to be about "normal" people. To me it was about these people with various quirky personalities and how they got along with each other. If you keep trying to "normalize" them, it loses something along the way. The reason I began watching the show in the first place was because of the way they all acted. It wasn't something I saw in everyday life. Then to add all of these personality types together and watch them interact was fascinating to me. So if you take all of that away from these characters so they can "grow" and become more "normal" it takes away the originality for me. I like them the way they are. I guess for me it is the old adage "If it ain't broke don't fix it." If this was real life and we knew Leonard, Sheldon, Howard, Raj, and Penny, could we accept them as friends the way they were or just keep wishing they could be "normal" and want to keep seeing them change? Uniqueness is the spice in life. If everyone was the same and there was no variation, how boring this world would be. I'm actually going through a situation concerning this right now where I am staying. My husband's mother trying to change us into her. Sorry, but not gonna happen for either of us. And of course, that causes a lot of problems. Better in my opinion to either accept someone for who they are or just leave them be.

I agree with this. Its possible to show growth in Sheldon without giving him a new personality. We have seen changes before. The apology to Amy is a good example, that worked well. But they don't need to give him a marked character change.

If Sheldon wants to have a girlfriend and heaven forbid, even have sex, he will come up with all manor of reasonable excuse and still come out sounding superior because that's who he is. We can and probably will see changes but they could keep him on character as they do it. Lets not make him normal though, he wouldn't be half as funny.

[Aevitas]

I agree with what's being said here. The analogy that pops to mind for me is if you went to a salon, and you asked the stylist for a new look for a change, and the stylist shaves your head instead of say, getting highlights or trimming a few inches. While yes, it is different, it's not a desirable change. My love for Sheldon has actually decreased while working through Season 5 because his behavior is so inconsistent now. I still see glimpses of the Sheldon I'm familiar with in The Vacation Solution, but in some other episodes he was just alien to me. I thought the writers hit the happy medium in Season 4, where you see him getting attached to Amy, but he was still very much Sheldon. I did think the Spittoon episode was a good one as well in terms of character development for Sheldon (except for the dressing up as a cowboy bit).

I think it's important to have some remnants of the old Sheldon as a reference point, otherwise he's a completely different character. For example, he laughs differently now, he doesn't use as much elaborate vocabulary as he used to, he's less worried about his spot, he's less arrogant but more quirky and childish, etc. If there was one thing I'd love for them to fix, it would be that they make him less of a man-child. If change is supposed to be positive, and Sheldon is supposed to be maturing as a human being, this is not the way to go about it.

[Pomita]

If Sheldon wants to have a girlfriend and heaven forbid, even have sex, he will come up with all manor of reasonable excuse and still come out sounding superior because that's who he is. We can and probably will see changes but they could keep him on character as they do it. Lets not make him normal though, he wouldn't be half as funny.

Sheldon's stag party speech can be called remarkably awkward and unfunny, but can it be called 'normal' by any stretch?

I have a feeling that Sheldon's present deviations in behavior are not the endgame, they are the path to somewhere. He's clearly going through some degree of emotional upheaval, which will stabilize at some point - maybe not exactly converging to 'old' Sheldon, but certainly to a less hyper-excited state. Whether Amy is the reason or not can be debated, but something has to be causing him to behave differently. I don't think the writers are mindless enough to be making significant character changes without a plan. Especially in this season, they have at many times given hints of pre-planning, like Sheldon's epiphany regarding the bird in Ornithophobia Diffusion building up to his epiphany regarding Amy in the next episode.

[snow*flower]

I enjoy seeing Sheldon getting close to a girl. In the past seasons he interacts with a few of them. It's like from time to time, seeing Sheldon deal with something different and normal is always an interesting so maybe having Amy is just making these scenario repetitive and boring to some people. I don't know if Amy is just taking away who he was but I think if this is reality then it's only for the better but it's not, so I know where everyone is coming from. Cause I don't think Sheldon is that funny anymore, but if anything I think it's definitely a difficult task on the writer's part to still have growth and also maintain the Sheldon Cooper we've known and love.... alive, without destroying his real personality. It's like, think about it. How would Sheldon behave when two personalities (the real quirky self and a more normal version) sort of emerge?

Though personally, I love a character who can show maturity. I know there isn't much to accomplish because it's only a show about a group of friends who live their lives hanging out with each other.

But especially with Sheldon who has so many flaws that it's just a fun story to explore. You can see him struggle and go through trouble. It's practically become a journey and if there are more stories about this then it's a goal for him. A lot of stories are revolved around him. At times, I see bbt as something that is dedicated to him (even though it's mostly the filler episodes). We've seen him be himself in many plots, while others show a sweeter, softer side which is less entertaining but I adore a lot very much. I mean, I like the old Sheldon as much anyone else but it's him changing to be a better person is what I love. And since it's Amy who has the ability to make that happen, he's probably going to be willing to do it for her whether he realizes it or not.

Gosh... I'm starting to think this post should belong in the Shamy Thread of FF as well.

[BazingaFan]

I agree with what's being said here. The analogy that pops to mind for me is if you went to a salon, and you asked the stylist for a new look for a change, and the stylist shaves your head instead of say, getting highlights or trimming a few inches. While yes, it is different, it's not a desirable change. My love for Sheldon has actually decreased while working through Season 5 because his behavior is so inconsistent now. I still see glimpses of the Sheldon I'm familiar with in The Vacation Solution, but in some other episodes he was just alien to me. I thought the writers hit the happy medium in Season 4, where you see him getting attached to Amy, but he was still very much Sheldon. I did think the Spittoon episode was a good one as well in terms of character development for Sheldon (except for the dressing up as a cowboy bit).

I think it's important to have some remnants of the old Sheldon as a reference point, otherwise he's a completely different character. For example, he laughs differently now, he doesn't use as much elaborate vocabulary as he used to, he's less worried about his spot, he's less arrogant but more quirky and childish, etc. If there was one thing I'd love for them to fix, it would be that they make him less of a man-child. If change is supposed to be positive, and Sheldon is supposed to be maturing as a human being, this is not the way to go about it.

I agree completely with this. I have no problem with sheldon growing and changing, but it has to be done correctly without losing the sheldon we already know.

[Slicknickshady]

Great thread! I'll add some of my thoughts later! I will say now thought that Characters grow and change! Without change it would be boring.

[mjc45]

3 channels carefull Rick you will show your age but good point non the less.

Hah! I can remember when I was in the 1st grade we lived in the country and got ONE channel.

Yeah, but did you ever hold onto one of the rabbit ears on the tv so the picture got better?

wow-- i remember the rabbie ears on my first tv

[Vortex]

Sure, change can be good for characters in a sitcom but if you change them too much then you might as well just call the show something else.

I think that's what Big Bang Theory is in jeopardy of. Sheldon is changing in ways I don't like. On the other hand I actually like the way Howard has changed to a more reasonable and respectable man. His unrelenting pursuit of women was very funny in the beginning of the show but he has changed from that with a steady girlfriend but he's still been able to stay funny.

Raj has had some great 'almost change' moments in the show. Of course his character being mute around women is unique and funny but it is kind of sad that his way of being able to talk to them is to drink. It'd be nice if he found another way, maybe some way he could still sometimes be awkward and mute around women but also so he doesn't have to be drinking all the time to talk to women. But honestly, he is a nerd like all his friends and is one of the more realistic characters on the show in that he is awkward around women and despite being a pretty nice guy he hasn't been able to sustain any sort of long term relationship with a girl.

Penny and Leonard are anomalies in my opinion because of their diffrences but also because of their on again off again relationship which, some might say, would usually cause of the two people to move away but for the sake of the show they keep it close.

Bernadette hasn't really changed that much since she debuted, which is good because she is a good compliment to Howard.

Amy has changed... too much, in my opinion. I would have been pretty content if she maintained the type of relationship with Sheldon that she had in the beginning; more one of the mind than body. She needs to dial it down a bit or have more visits with Gerard so she isn't so sexually charged.

[BazingaFan]

One character that comes to mind was Chandler on Friends. He is the only character on that show that I feel changed too much from beginning to end. The others changed some, and I think coming in a close second was Rachel, but hers was a good change and I think she actually became more funny as the seasons went on, while I feel Chandler became less funny.

[djvang]

Amy has changed... too much, in my opinion. I would have been pretty content if she maintained the type of relationship with Sheldon that she had in the beginning; more one of the mind than body. She needs to dial it down a bit or have more visits with Gerard so she isn't so sexually charged.

I agree. I liked her when she and Sheldon were mirror images of each other. Since then she's gotten very creepy with her comments to Penny. But the writers like Mayim Bialik and they're overusing her character.

[Convict13]

.

Raj has had some great 'almost change' moments in the show. Of course his character being mute around women is unique and funny but it is kind of sad that his way of being able to talk to them is to drink. It'd be nice if he found another way, maybe some way he could still sometimes be awkward and mute around women but also so he doesn't have to be drinking all the time to talk to women. But honestly, he is a nerd like all his friends and is one of the more realistic characters on the show in that he is awkward around women and despite being a pretty nice guy he hasn't been able to sustain any sort of long term relationship with a girl.

I think a nice "on-going" storyline for Season 6 would be ways for Raj to combat his "mutism", be it drugs (I know that have touched upon that), but they could make it an ongong storyline for him and the different side effects, or meditation or hypnotherapy. It could finally solve his issue and give Kunal something to actually do.

[Guest I'm not dead Cheryl]

I always thought that a cool storyline would be to have Amy using Raj as a guimea pig on some selective mutism experiment.. she is a neurobiologist after all, it would't be hard to make it believable at all and it would be nice to see an Amy/Raj dynamic since we've never seen that.

Two birds with one stone.