one of the best oral histories i’ve read. though it’s a little long and i definitely don’t agree with all of the choices made for the show and opinions expressed in the book, the love and passion everyone involved has for the show and each other is just so palpable (and by far my favorite bits of the book) and makes it a joy to read.
content/trigger warnings; instances or discussions of ableism, sexism, sexual harassment, horseback riding accident, injury, hospital, anxiety, depression, sex, death of a loved one, pregnancy, postpartum depression, miscarriage, divorce, amatonormativity, compulsory sexuality, allonormativity, aphobia,
everybody seems pretty cool and chill and just love the shit out of each other and the show. probably my favorite bits to read are when they all talk about how much love and respect they have for each other, how much fun they had with each other, and their off screen relationships. kaley and johnny’s relationship, specifically, is really cute and loving. the way they were able to form such a supportive bond that didn’t dissolve when they broke up but became even stronger is admirable.
before we get into, like, character/relationship/storyline things, i’ll start with general things.
as far as construction of the book goes, i don’t like that something will be mentioned, such as kaley’s pixie cut or the contract negotiations, and we’ll get a “but more on that later” before moving onto a different topic. or something will be discussed, such as a development in penny and leonard’s relationship, and instead of completing the topic, we’ll get another “but more on this later” before moving onto a different topic and then eventually back to it later. it makes it feel a little messy and disjointed at times. and coupled with some quotes being repeated in different chapters, it feels like some more editing would’ve been beneficial to help the flow. obviously oral histories are not one a single long ongoing conversation on page, but it helps when the construction of how the interviews are pieced together flows as if that were the case and it doesn’t feel like a bunch of random and separate quotes were copied and pasted out of order. which this book sometimes does.
there’s sometimes an almost self-congratulatory tone to some of the things said in the book, most glaringly when the patting oneself on the back isn’t deserved. mayim said amy’s obsession with penny was “really ahead of its time in terms of gender fluidity and sexuality. it was amy saying, i appreciate that this woman is beautiful!” but a woman being obsessed with another woman because she’s so excited to finally have a friend has absolutely nothing to do with gender fluidity and sexuality. another example is saying it’s “interesting” that they had a scene discussing consent “a year before the me too movement” but this show was not breaking ground regarding consent in any way shape or form.
i find it frustrating and disingenuous for people who dislike or criticism the show to be dismissed multiple times in the book as simply not liking multicam shows, not actually having watched the show entirely or at all, or simply being haters who trash what’s popular. do those people exist? sure. but people who have legitimate criticisms of the show exist, too. this framing, to be like, “obviously anyone who hates the show feels that way for silly, invalid reasons” is insulting, arrogant, and false. following that arrogance is a weird dig at modern family. the big bang theory lost an emmy to modern family and this is said “modern family—while a groundbreaking and deserving show—lost its luster as the years went on. big bang, on the other hand, only got better.” and while that’s said by the editor of the book, it’s also expressed by one of the creators or writers that it was understood by everyone (including those at modern family) that the big bang theory deserved that award, not in addition to modern family, but instead of modern family. and i just don’t think that’s a good look. especially so many years after the fact to still be so bitter about it. you can argue your show should’ve won an award without putting down the show that did win. and tbh, i’ve rewatched modern family start to finish multiple times but never managed to finish the big bang theory once. (i like the early seasons and adore sheldon as a character but i just lost interest. maybe one day i’ll finish it idk.)
now if you don’t care about the big bang theory, then you probably won’t care about the rest of the review, which is basically just going to be opinions regarding the choices made for the characters, storylines, relationships, etc.
starting with some quick stuff, then the slightly bigger stuff, then the final big topics. there’s plenty of justification of questionable or problematic portrayals or jokes, which is disappointing (a lot of “of course we’d do it differently today” as if the show was made 60 years ago instead of 16.) and for a book so long, there’s a lot of aspects of the show that weren’t touched on. a comment about how the show became “more universal” by focusing more on romantic relationships than a group of guys being nerds is annoying because romantic relationships are not universal. a comment about there’s “a lot of diversity in that cast. there was something for everyone” is baffling because....in what way shape or form is this show diverse?
my least favorite aspects of the book is the romanticization and praise for the sheldon/amy and leonard/penny relationships and the amy/penny friendship, as i can’t stand them. i don’t really feel like getting into the issues i have with each relationship, so i’ll just leave it at i don’t find them to be healthy or positive relationships that would ever realistically last longterm. and it’s annoying that they were so close to not having penny and leonard be endgame but didn’t go through with it because they thought it would be cruel to the fans. ah, what could have been. realistically, penny and leonard would never last as a couple and would more likely be one of those couples who are on and off again and eventually end up super close friends.
now the slightly bigger stuff. penny as a character. oh boy. they dropped the ball with her so badly. they never gave her a last name, which is fine on its own. but i wish they had talked about it in the context of her being underdeveloped and then taking leonard’s last name. kaley said it was “so cute” that penny only got a last name when she married leonard and took his, but names are a super personal part of who someone is, so for her to be deprived of her own last name and only get her husband’s is almost like depriving her of that personhood. which also comes into play regarding penny having kids, something she never wanted throughout the show, only to end with a surprise pregnancy, which kaley also said was “cute” even while expressing loving that penny didn’t want kids because that’s a reality for a lot of people, solely as a “pay off” to the line in the pilot about leonard’s fantasy of having “smart and beautiful babies” with penny, who he had literally just met. you can’t get more gross than that. then there’s penny giving up on her dream of being an actress, which feels unfair for her. i always thought she deserved to be a successful actress. and not in the way that kaley felt was too unrealistic to happen on the show, like her being in some major movie or whatever, but in a way where she’s booking roles that she truly loves, a way where her being an actress is the goal, not being famous. everyone else gets to be successful in their dream, but penny.
i have Thoughts regarding raj’s selective mutism and the choice to get rid of it. the writers/creators chose to write raj with this disability (yes, selective mutism is a disability, not just a quirk or shyness), so for them to suddenly write it out of the show because they sick of writing it is incredibly shitty. they’d write a whole scene and then be like “wait, there are women here, so raj can’t be saying any of this” and then have to rewrite it. and sure that can be annoying, but again, they made that choice. real people with selective mutism don’t get to just opt out of it when they get tired of it. and they use the justification of “growth,” but if they wanted to show growth, they could’ve shown growth in his selective mutism rather than in the absence of it. considering he can speak to the women in his family without help from alcohol, they could’ve done a storyline where he’s gradually able to talk to penny, bernadette, and amy without alcohol as he gets closer to them and feels more comfortable around them, indicating that they have become family to him. that way, his disability isn’t suddenly completely gone, but they’re able to do more with his character, as those are the only women he consistently interacts with. i think what they did with that was a lazy, offensive cop out.
now my two big issues, both regarding sheldon. that being his autism and asexuality. it always, always bothered me that these aspects of sheldon were not outright named, and not because i have anything against character coding, but because they were both handled horribly. sheldon’s autistic traits were the butt of the joke or source of annoyance and his asexuality was undone by the end of the show.
chuck lorre said they didn’t label sheldon as autistic solely because they didn’t want the “responsibility” or “pressure” to then thoughtfully represent autism. which to me translates into feeling like they wouldn’t be able to get away with portraying all those traits as a joke or burden. steve molaro said not labeling sheldon as autistic was nice because “like anybody on the spectrum, they should just be able to be who they are.” which is all well and good, but you’re basically saying autistic people can’t “be who they are” if their autism is acknowledged. which is very much not how the actually autistic community feels. did they ever stop and think about how it would feel for them to see their traits and characteristics be blatantly used without ever being named and often mocked and put down? or to see the character dismissively and defensively say, “i’m not crazy, my mother had me tested”? on the flip side, jim parsons said “the writers can say no,” but as he read about autism, he realized sheldon fit the bill. and peter roth, wendi trilling, and bill prady said sheldon was “definitely on the spectrum, there’s no question about it,” “clearly on the spectrum,” and “clearly not neurotypical,” respectively.
chuck lorre and bill prady both believe sheldon was asexual. lorre talks about how a character not being interested in romance or sex wasn’t being done elsewhere on tv, that sheldon “broke ground” and was “iconic” and “heroic” for “transcending the cultural pressure on all of us through advertising and television and film and magazines” and that when sheldon did enter a romantic relationship, it was done in a way that didn’t feel like they done a “ninety-degree turn.” however. i find it hard to listen to that praise about sheldon’s asexuality (which they seem to be lumping romantic attraction into) when they eventually give him a girlfriend who he is constantly pressured to have sex with and eventually does. i don’t think it matters how it was done (which was very insensitive, let’s be real), it’s the fact that it was done at all. changing a core part of a character that reflected a marginalized community to conform to the societal status quo while being constantly questioned and pressured just feels icky. and like a slap in the face to people who don’t want those things and are constantly told they’ll grow out of it, are just late bloomers, or haven’t found the right person yet. sheldon wanting romance/sex is actually often described in the book as “real growth” or him “maturing,” as if asexuality (or aromanticism or just disinterest in them) are things one needs to or inevitably will grow or mature out of.
never mind that if they felt the need to pair sheldon off too, one can have a romantic relationship without sex. sheldon and amy having sex is even described once as “no longer avoidable” the longer the show went on, as if one can’t have a romantic relationship without sex. however, sheldon and amy could’ve had a loving, happy, healthy relationship without sex, but instead they made the conscious choice for her to desire sex and for him to not desire sex but eventually give in. that’s an incredibly harmful and unfortunate path they took his character down. i appreciate mayim for saying, “i would have been happy for their relationship to never be sexual, and instead just be a romantic, intimate love. and i think it was really neat to have a nonsexual committed relationship on a sitcom.” but i wish that was what happened, because as mayim noted, it would’ve been such a breath of fresh air in terms of representation rather than having three relationships that ultimately conform to the norms of heteronormativity, amatonormativity, and compulsory sexuality.
another shitty comment is that sheldon’s mom always worried that he would “end up alone” so him marrying amy was emotional for her. but not having a romantic relationship or marriage (or kids, which it’s revealed he does have with amy in young sheldon...sigh) does not mean you’re alone or sad. sheldon had leonard, raj, howard, penny, bernadette, and amy. even if he never dated or married amy (or anyone else), he was not alone. he had a life he loved and friends he loved. he was fulfilled. just because his life looked different to what is assumed everyone’s lives will eventually look like does not mean it was lonely or sad.
(to be clear: none of this is to say that asexual people can’t have/like/want sex. but sheldon specifically did not, it was a very clear part of his character, so to suddenly change that in order to maintain a relationship with someone who does want that for no reason other than thinking one must have those things is very problematic.)
i think that’s it. overall i did really enjoy the book, even if towards the end i lost a little bit of steam.