MeIt goes without saying that, lately, we are concerned with what we have lost.
The immediate reaction is one of sadness and anger, but behind it is melancholy, especially if you extend things from the personal to the universal; when you think about what we lost as a culture.
Alex Trebek, Regis Philbin, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Lewis and, last week, Larry King, Hank Aaron, Cicely Tyson and Cloris Leachman. Different pop culture projects have brought renewed focus to the deaths and legacies of Fred Rogers, Robin Williams and Whitney Houston. These are people who have been icons for generations.
When Trebek died, it hurt deeply because it reminded us of how few institutions like him were left. He was an industry titan with whom people had an intimate and emotional relationship throughout their lives, as did their parents and, in some cases, grandparents or children. In a fragmented cultural landscape, it is no longer possible that there is something so beautifully resonant – a cultural connective tissue between us.
That is, it couldn’t be more comforting at this point to pay a visit to Sesame Streetand learn more about the infrastructure that has been in place since the show was conceived over 50 years ago, to ensure that your product would outlast the changing times, and even its creators – whether those involved knew or not.
The new documentary Street gang: how we got to Sesame Street debuted on Saturday at the Sundance Festival, before it aired later this year on HBO.
Directed by Marilyn Agrelo and inspired by the best-selling book by Michael Davis, it focuses on the first two decades of the program’s rise, from its beginning as a renegade disruptor, to ideas on how to talk and educate children, to its tanning in pedestal culture. : an institution solidified by itself, but malleable enough to remain relevant 20, 30, 40 and, now, more than 50 years after its debut.
Watching Street gang it is an emotional experience for many of the reasons mentioned above. It is rare to have the opportunity to pause and reflect on the ways in which something formative like Sesame Street shaped who you are and the way you see the world; how it connected him with friends, family and, perhaps most importantly, strangers; and how much your relationship with the characters in the series and the lessons you learned meant to you, even if you had no idea that the bonds were so deep.
The inherent fascination behind a documentary like this is learning what it took to create something so profound and long-lasting: what the creators went through to get the thing up in the air in the first place and the price it took to keep it sharp, fun and talking to the evolving needs and curiosities of children over the years.
More than 20 original cast and creators are interviewed for Street gang, which abounds with archival footage from the early days of the program and old news rolls revealing how the backstage reacted to its popularity and, in some cases, its real-time controversy.
You can know how to get to Sesame Street, but it’s a trip to find out how it was put on the map.
“You can know how to get to Sesame Street, but it’s a trip to find out how it was put on the map.“
The creation of Sesame Street it was a radical act, born of the counter-culture, the protests of the Vietnam War and the civil rights movement. In the late 1960s, the revolution was televised, but so was commercialization and – when it came to certain populations of children – stagnation. One of the main inspirations for Sesame Streetbelieve it or not, they were beer commercials.
Street gang introduces the viewer to the two people, other than Jim Henson, who are most responsible for the identity and mission that he would define Sesame Street.
Joan Ganz Cooney was a media executive who started working on public television, driven by the climate of dissent and social awareness at the time. At a dinner she gave, she was approached by Lloyd Morrisett, a Carnegie Foundation psychologist who focused on the socioeconomic gap in schools. He wondered if television, which children at the time were starting to watch in record numbers, could be used to help close that gap. But, he says, “academics were not interested in television. They didn’t have that in their homes. It was the breast tube. “
His reflections were music to Cooney’s ears, who had made adjacent observations, but not that connection. “All the kids in America sang beer commercials,” she says in the documentary. “Now, where did they learn beer commercials?” The answer, of course, was television. They were entering supermarkets and identifying products after seeing commercials on TV. “The kids loved the environment, so why not see if it could educate them?”
She commissioned a feasibility study in 1966 called “The potential uses of television in pre-school education”, finding that children aged 3 to 5 years watch television half the time they are awake. The only thing that exceeded him was sleep. If these kids are going to watch TV so much, why not find out what they like to watch, what is good for them to watch and put the two together?
Her pitch earned her an original $ 8 million budget, mostly from the government’s Department of Education. That check alone had The New York Times predicting that she would be one of the most powerful women on television.
Immediately, she built an unconventional staff. She not only hired writers and producers, but also child development educators and researchers, and brought them together. This enterprise, which had never been done before, became known as the Children’s Television Workshop.
He was the original scriptwriter and program director Jon Stone, the other pioneer in the focus of much of the Street gang, who suggested bringing Jim Henson to the workshop. At the time, Henson’s puppeteer troop was a group of noble beatniks performing late-night comedic sketches on variety shows, determined to prove their shtick was above the kids’ birthday party tricks that their art form was for. more associated. But Cooney and Stone’s vision for this new germinating show intrigued him.
“A lot of our work was sophisticated and had that kind of quality black humor,” said Henson in an old interview. “And a lot of our audience was really college age. So this would be the first time that we would work for children. When I first heard from Jon, I loved the idea, the whole idea of taking commercial techniques and applying them to a children’s program ”.
That word – “commercial” – has become the cornerstone of Sesame Streetthe pioneering glow of. The program would treat young audiences the same way a commercial company would if it were developing an advertising campaign aimed at them. As executive producer David Connell says, “We are trying to sell the alphabet to preschoolers.”
“When I first heard about it from Jon, I loved the idea, the whole idea of taking commercial techniques and applying them to a children’s program.“
But there was more about its beginning that represented a marked change in how things were done on children’s television. Cooney was inspired by the civil rights movement and, especially after that first conversation at dinner with Morrisett, wanted to ensure that her program spoke specifically to – and entertained – urban children and children of color, the population often left out of children’s television development and at an academic disadvantage when they reach school age.
At the time, it was common for a children’s show to take place in a beautiful treehouse or club, or in a fantastic fairyland. Stone did not want this for his home base. The lamp moment came while watching an Urban Coalition commercial, which was filmed on location in Harlem.
“As soon as I saw it, I knew exactly where we should be in this,” says Stone. “I wanted to capture that New York energy, because for 3 year olds stuck in the upper room, the action is on the street.”
It is rare that looking at nuts and bolts behind the curtain is as fascinating as the one in Street gang. Then again, it is clear that it is interesting. This is Sesame Street– that meticulous and accessible look at how the world works is embedded in each episode.
You will be ecstatic while researchers discuss how they tested the content to determine what balance between education and entertainment should be maintained, or when comedy writers talk about being educated on the differences between concepts like counting and enumeration, to create a suitable script for an impactful scene with the count.
You will be amazed, of course, with the puppeteers, but you will also be amazed at the ways in which the human performers of the show broke boundaries when it came to various casts.
There is an in-depth discussion about the impact the race has had on the show and its legacy – and the unease of certain markets about it – as well as the darkness that can sometimes hang over the creators of a show that had so much content to produce in each episode. , and such a high standard and mission worthy of fulfilling each week.
You will revisit seminal moments, like the landmark episode in which, after the death in real life of Will Lee, who played Mr. Hooper, Garibaldo and the audience at home will learn what death means and how to process it, and you will probably cry again as if it were the first time you saw him.
All of this to say that the more you learn about the plot of the show so carefully and passionately woven by these creators in those early years, the less surprising it is that it has managed to remain essential and, in terms of audience and merchandise revenue, highly successful entertainment all those decades later.
There is an excerpt from a conversation between Cooney and Henson on the program’s 20th anniversary, a year before Henson’s tragically early death, that the documentary will air again.
“What is interesting, from the point of view of both, is that it is a kind of form of immortality. Because if you think about it, Ernie will live forever, ”says Cooney.
“Does that mean I can stop playing Ernie?” Henson laughs in response. “No, it doesn’t matter,” says Cooney. “But that means that 200 years from now people will be looking at Bert, Ernie and Caco the Frog.”
In a world that changes so quickly, it is remarkable – and perhaps more moving than can be expressed – to be so sure that she was absolutely correct in that prediction.