Separating "Reality" From Realism: Why You Should Watch "Friday Night Lights"

I must begin with a disclaimer - I love the show Friday Night Lights. More than any other show ever. I'm emotionally invested in it to the point that it's basically unhealthy - I mean, I cry when I hear the theme song.

That being said, the end of the series has stimulated a lot of discussion about the show - what made it so unique and special. Not only has this discussion taken place within the media, but also just between me and my friends; those who love it, and those who I harangue into watching it, including my roommate.

When she told me that she didn't find the show compelling because of its purported subject matter (small town life and football), I have to admit it was a blow. However, in my experience, what the show is about transcends any superficial attachment to religion or sports. And that's a good thing.

Similar criticism of the show emerged in response to a piece in the Times by Heather Havrilesky about why Friday Night Lights is better than Glee. This editorial, although in essence correct, describes Friday Night Lights in almost negative terms - "mumbling, downbeat, old-fashioned" - which are then echoed in the comments. Most of the responses can be summed up as 1. don't care about football, high school, or small towns, 2. the show is depressing, the world is depressing enough and I want TV to be an escape, or 3. the shows are both good, but incomparable.

While I sort of agree with point three, I heavily dispute points one and two. The reason the show is compelling (more so to me than, for example, Glee) is because of its realism. The show reflects the reality of very few of its viewers: we might all have things that are depressing about our lives, but it's unlikely that they are at all related to a Texas high school football championship. In this sense, it is an escape. The viewer enters into a carefully constructed world of tangled relationships and events that are so close to reality you can't see past them. The thoughtful plot (ok, ok perhaps less so in season two) and carefully developed characters that form the world of Friday Night Lights are irrelevant to the success of Glee, a show whose theatrics take precedence over its narrative. The fact that FNL is so realistic means that the viewer is that much more involved in the show. Take, for example, the final critique from Ginia Bellafante, a NYT TV critic - she actually expressed her wishes for the futures of all the characters... as if they were real people. How much more escapist could the show be? And it's not the ability to transport people that I'm saying is laudable here; I'm attempting to say that the quality of the show is such that it is a more effective diversion, piece of entertainment, or whatever than a less carefully crafted show. In other words, truth is stranger than fiction.

To respond to the idea that it is depressing - it's true that there is a lot of misfortune on the show, a lot of losing. In this sense, the chant "clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose" takes on a cruel irony as time after time, the clear eyed, full hearted people of Dillon just keep losing. But seeing people overcome adversity has its own thrill - and also, the moments of happiness on the show seem that much more resplendent in contrast to the grimness and smallness that so often characterizes rural life on the show. Also, the show is, at its core, beautiful. Filmed with beautiful people, in a hauntingly beautiful place, with cinematography that forces the viewer to get intimate with the story - it's not forced, but at the same time there's no escaping it. The duality, the agony and the ecstasy as it were, is why it's so entertaining. The show is complicated, but that's what makes it exciting to watch. 

"It’s rare for a TV show to acknowledge that happiness is a fragile, transient thing. Although the tenure of “Friday Night Lights” may have proved just as fleeting, its exquisite snapshots of ordinary life won’t fade from our memories so quickly."

These are probably the most important ideas from this article. I suppose my fundamental problem with the negative assumptions about the show are that people believe what is thought-provoking cannot also be entertaining. 

Here's the article.

And for anyone looking for further reading material about the show, this link has everything you could ever want (except this article, of course) (also, spoiler alerts in advance).