Marc Alan Fishman: The Anti-Big-Bang Hypothesis

Marc Alan Fishman

Marc Alan Fishman is a graphic designer, digital artist, writer, and most importantly a native born Chicagoan. When he's not making websites, drawing and writing for his indie company Unshaven Comics, or rooting for the Bears... he's a dedicated husband and father. When you're not enjoying his column here on ComicMix, feel free to catch his comic book reviews weekly at MichaelDavisWorld, and check out his books and cartoons at Unshaven Comics.

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. George Haberberger says:

    I love The Big Bang Theory. Yes, the characters are bit socially awkward, even a bit inept. But realistically that is not a huge fabrication if we are being honest.

    I am 61 years old. When I was a kid a popular television show was Leave it to Beaver. One of the ancillary characters was Lumpy Rutherford. He was Wally’s friend and he was stupid. One of the ways you knew he was stupid was because he read comic books. This was the early 1960’s.

    On the BBT, the characters who read comic books are college professors, have PhD’s and one has been an astronaut. What’s to complain about?

  2. Jonathan (the other one) says:

    Well, technically Howard only has a Master’s (which Sheldon will never let him live down)…

    Speaking as someone with Asperger’s Syndrome, I find Sheldon to be a hilarious send-up of all our best stereotyped traits. I laugh at him because he reminds me of me sometimes.

    And it’s nice that all those whiteboards in the apartment get vetted by the physics department at UCLA to make sure they’re all technically accurate…

  3. max says:

    Ignorant of X simply means you do not have a working knowledge of X. I would assume if they called you ignorant after you said you hadn’t seen Wrath of Khan, they meant you do not have a working knowledge of Wrath of Khan. And since you’d said so yourself, I don’t know why that would be a topic of debate.

    The importance of that film to the general realm of sci-fi, that’s perhaps worth discussion. If it is a film of any importance, then your self-professed ignorance is worth amending. If it is not relevant any more, then there’d be no point. But that’s for others to discuss. I’m just a word junkie.

  4. facebook_vinnie.bartilucci says:

    It’s the subtle distinction of laughing with and laughing at. Yes, the show is rife with sci-fi and comics references, but they fly over the head of the vast majority of the audience. If every pop culture reference were replaced with generic non-existent names and references, the vast majority of the audience would laugh just as loud. Because they don’t get that the argument about Doctor Who is one that fans have every day, they’re just thinking “listen to those geeks talk about dumb things”.

    BBT can’t even stop doing it to itself. They had the episode a week or two ago that played on the “Eek, a girl in a comic shop, i don’t know what to do with my hands” trope. THIS is an image we’re supposed to be pleased with? And like with James Gunn’s recent blog post that set the internet on fire for a week, I saw no satire or irony in the scene. It wasn’t supposed to be turning the trope on its ear.

    I can’t recall a TV show that’s done a “geek” episode where the fans didn’t come off as comically clownish or hopeless socially incapable failures. Even when one of the characters of the show is revealed to be a fan, he’s either embarassed about it, or gives some half-hearted speech about how they were odd-ducks as a kid, and comics or sci-fi was a safe haven.

    I think the references in Roseanne were more in-line. The characters were not about being comic geeks, but they pervaded the show.

  5. Sean D. Martin says:

    n. Over the course of several seasons, Leonard (and Raj) have boinked Penny,

    Actually, Raj never boinked Penny.

    (And why is boinking something that would be done *to* her. She’s likely to be the more active party.)