 | Summaries and Customer Reviews are supplied by Amazon.com The Simpsons is one of the most successful shows to ever run on television. From its first moment on air, the series's rich characters, subversive themes, and layered humor resounded deeply with audiences both young and old who wanted more from their entertainment than what was being meted out at the time by the likes of Full House, Growing Pains, and Family Matters. Spawned as an animated short on The Tracy Ullman Show—mere filler on the way to commercial breaks—the series grew from a controversial cult favorite to a mainstream powerhouse, and after nineteen years the residents of Springfield no longer simply hold up a mirror to our way of life: they have ingrained themselves into it. John Ortved's oral history will be the first-ever look behind the scenes at the creation and day-to-day running of The Simpsons, as told by many of the people who made it: among them writers, animators, producers, and network executives. It’s an intriguing yet hilarious tale, full of betrayal, ambition, and love. Like the family it depicts, the show's creative forces have been riven by dysfunction from the get-go—outsize egos clashing with studio executives and one another over credit for and control of a pop-culture institution. Contrary to popular belief, The Simpsons did not spring out of one man's brain, fully formed, like a hilarious Athena. Its inception was a process, with many parents, and this book tells the story. John Ortved's writing has appeared in Vanity Fair, Interview, The New York Observer, and Vice. He lives in New York City. The Simpsons is one of the most successful shows to ever run on television. From its first moment on air, the series's rich characters, subversive themes, and layered humor resounded deeply with audiences both young and old who wanted more from their entertainment than what was being meted out at the time by the likes of Full House, Growing Pains, and Family Matters. Spawned as an animated short on The Tracy Ullman Show—mere filler on the way to commercial breaks—the series grew from a controversial cult favorite to a mainstream powerhouse, and after nineteen years the residents of Springfield no longer simply hold up a mirror to our way of life: they have ingrained themselves into it. John Ortved's oral history is the first-ever look behind the scenes at the creation and day-to-day running of The Simpsons, as told by many of the people who made it: among them writers, animators, producers, and network executives. It’s an intriguing yet hilarious tale, full of betrayal, ambition, and love. Like the family it depicts, the show's creative forces have been riven by dysfunction from the get-go—outsize egos clashing with studio executives and one another over credit for and control of a pop-culture institution. Contrary to popular belief, The Simpsons did not spring out of one man's brain, fully formed, like a hilarious Athena. Its inception was a process, with many parents, and this book tells the story. |
Average Customer Rating:   Meh Since you're a dedicated Simpsons fan, you're gonna buy it anyway, right? Just be aware that the tone is quite negative in the book. Instead of taking what might be a more proper journalistic stance, the author frequently eschews objective critique and reporting just the opinions of others for his own viewpoint. At times, this feels less like a history and more like a soapbox for the author to explain why he thinks the show is not as good in its later years. While the journey is interesting, the tone is quite off-putting. Great insight to The Simpsons I am a huge fan of The Simpsons, and I was very impressed with the book. Getting an in-depth look behind the scenes of the beginning of the show, the writing, all the great minds that were behind the show, and the eventual loss of some key people that greatly hurt the show. Now, there are some things that Simpsons fan will know (James Brooks and Sam Simon were a huge part of the show, Groening was a great merchandiser, not so much on the writing side, etc.), but there was still enough to keep a big fan like me interested, and into the book.
Overall, a good read, and even for a big fan like myself, there is still enough info that I felt gave me a better idea about the show. An opinionated but fun read This is an unauthorized biography of "The Simpsons". It's also unedited, un-impartial, and a really fun read. In style and tone this reminds me quite a bit of Live From New York: An Uncensored History of Saturday Night Live, as Told By Its Stars, Writers and Guests, although not nearly as comprehensive. For one thing, where "The Simpsons" is concerned, author John Ortved is clearly a fanboy rather than an outside investigator.
Nothing wrong with his being a fanboy, of course: the front cover of the book is a takeoff of the ever-rotating Bart Simpson chalkboard gag from the show's opening credits, so you know this book is kind of tongue-in-cheeck. Ortved does not pretend to be anything less than a fan, and as such (like Comic Book Guy), he's clearly giving us his own agenda rather than some Platonic truth. He defines his own personal "golden age" of the show, demarcates the moments when the show ceased to engage him (Season 8), and gets several of the show writers from that golden age to admit they neither watch nor like the show anymore. This is then a history of the early years only, winding up sometime in 1998.
The earliest chapters, describing the show's genesis, are perhaps the most interesting: I don't think this material has all been assembled into a coherent narrative form before. Matt Groening is the subject of the first chapter, and Ortved gives him due deference as one of the show's fathers. However, Ortved also goes back and gives equal time to the other two who "created" the show: writer/producer/Hollywood mogul James L. Brooks, and veteran TV scribe & show-runner Sam Simon. The media spent a lot of time painting Groening as the front man (and sole creative vision), and Groening gets some heat for not sharing the credit.
Similarly there's a brief history of the creation of the FOX Network in the late '80s, setting the stage for just how "The Simpsons" managed to become an upstart hit in an otherwise starchy TV landscape.
While Ortved sprinkles the book liberally with opinions about which episodes of the show are praiseworthy, and why the show deserves such scorn today, he's also writing an oral history and as such does a good job assembling a lineup of behind-the-scene figures, "Simpsons" guest stars, and scholarly observers. There are interviews with people who were there during the pre-"Simpsons" years: Art Spiegelman sheds some light on Groening's early years as an underground cartoonist, and many early FOX TV executives describe what it was like to start up a network. We hear from a lot of the original show writers (including a lot of material from Conan O'Brien); observations from noteable guest voices like Steven Tyler and Stan Lee and Tom Wolfe; and analysis from others who have built on the success of "The Simpsons", such as Matt Stone of "South Park" and Seth MacFarlane of "Family Guy" (and every other Sunday night FOX animated program).
There is sloppy copy-editing, and the transition between impartial history and Ortved's attempted but occasionally sophomoric critical analysis is a bit awkward. On the whole this didn't detract from my reading experience, since Ortved's opinions aren't too off from my own. Your mileage may vary. Still, for any "Simpsons" fans there's a lot of material worth reading that isn't perhaps yet widely known. Good research, poorly written book The Simpsons: An Uncensored, Unauthorized History is written in "oral history" style -- the author obviously spent a great deal of time conducting interviews with those who would cooperate and compiling quotes from secondary sources from those who would not(which, as the author freely admits and the title suggests, is nearly everyone involved with The Simpsons.) The result is an interesting look at the forces behind one of the greatest television series of all time. I certainly appreciated the candid assessments of the show's driving forces -- Matt Groening is depicted as a talented guy who hit upon a great idea and has spent years taking personal and financial credit for the hard work of others. Jim Brooks is drawn as a selfish, egotistical, and sometimes spiteful person, but nevertheless someone with the industry power to put The Simpsons on the map. Sim Simon, Conan O'Brien, Richard Sakai -- all are put under the microscope as well.
My biggest problem with the book isn't the oral history -- the quotes are mostly juicy, and the chapters are well put-together, if a bit repetitive -- it's the shoddy writing style and quasi-"fanboy" prose that strings the oral history together. Some of the book is written in journalistic style, with sources to back up assertions. Other parts are written with the author's opinion expressed as fact -- which episodes are good, which are bad, when The Simpsons started its decline. By the same token, the prose is sometimes formal, sometimes informal. Some text almost reads like a post on a Simpsons message board, yet other text reads like a formal essay or magazine article. Examples of each style, pulled from the same section of the book: "episodes like this indicate apathy in The Simpsons' satire" versus "the episode was so lame." So lame? Really? My 9-year-old could have written that.
The book is also riddled with typos. Al Jean becomes Al Jeans. Richard Appel is Richard Apple sometimes. The grammar is often poor, which again made me feel like I was reading a comment on someone's blog. That would be fine for a blog post, but I also don't pay 27 bucks to read message board comments. After a while, I started skipping the author commentary and just reading the quotes.
I hope that the second edition gets another review by the editors.
interesting but slanted The way Ortved has tied together quotes from people formerly part of The Simpsons' inner circle (as well as quotes found in various places by those still working on the show) is very interesting, making the book hard to put down. It's almost like being at a friend's house while her family is arguing-- you know it's none of your business, you don't want this discussion to taint your view of certain members of the family, but for some reason you just can't tune them out. This book is NOT for regular Simpsons fans; it's really for the gossip-loving, People magazine set. It's for people who want to know what was going on with Fox in the late eighties and nineties. And this book definitely should only be read by critical thinkers: it is biased. Big time.
Ortved (and/or his editors) make some pretty glaring mistakes: names of characters are wrong (not just spelling, as in the case of Karl, voiced by Harvey Fierstein in the episode "Simpson and Delilah") but Waylon Smithers is called "Wayland." He doesn't know his Patty from his Selma, and at one point a hilarious spellcheck error occurs where "parody" is the intended word but "parity" is the word used. (I plan to show this one to my students as another reason why they shouldn't place all their trust in spellcheck.) With all these errors, it's hard to trust the author. These mistakes have damaged his credibility, making the fact that there is no context for most of his quotes even harder to take and specious. He places quotes (with no questions and usually no dates attached) in a particular order and manner as if to create conflict and argument between "speakers" when such differing of opinion may or may not exist. For all the reader knows, the words could have been uttered by the speakers ten minutes or ten years apart. For all the reader knows, the quotes were unsolicited rants or grudging responses to leading questions. There is no way to know.
Perhaps most striking about the subjectivity in this book is the degree to which the author overtly dislikes Matt Groening. (As a reader who's never met the author, I should have no idea who at the show he likes and who he doesn't, but I do). Early in the book, Ortved includes quotes by people who have negative things to say about Groening and others who've worked on the show, which in itself is not problematic. It's the continued snide remarks Ortved makes throughout the book that show his personal opinion about Groening that contribute to the damage to his credibility. I also take issue with Ortved talking about the "golden age" of The Simpsons (the seasons they were at their prime) as if it's fact that there actually was one. In fact, he never actually defines "the golden age" for his readers, and frankly, every Simpsons fan I know will tell you different seasons, episodes, maybe even writers, directors, and showrunners (depending on their level of fandom) that were "the best" in their view. It seems Ortved is a self-ordained expert on which writers, showrunners, etc. are/were the best, which isn't fair or right. Friends arguing between themselves about any TV show (or any other work of art) don't allow that kind of "take my word on it" mentality-- if a friend tells me he or she likes certain seasons better than others, they better give their criteria. If I insist on logical, definable criteria from my friends, you better believe I demand them from journalists. And any good journalist should know better than to try to get away with that kind of sloppy subjectivity.
|  |
Select button not working? 
