The question arose, whether Golden Girls or Sex in the City was a more groundbreaking television show. To me the answer was obvious, but to others in the room it sparked a heated and often contentious debate that lasted for several minutes, before we decided it would be wise to continue working on the show.
The Golden Gals: Estelle, Rue, Betty, and Bea
The Sexy Hussies: Kim, Cynthia, Seabiscuit, and Kristin
Let's keep this a clean fight. Let's not insult any actresses facial features or get too far off topic. Let's limit this debate to the facts. I'll present the facts as we all know them and you can take these facts along with your own pre-conceived notions to help us determine which television show was in fact more groundbreaking.
I think it would be wise to begin this discussion with a definition of the word "groundbreaking." For this I've turned to the most reliable source for factually accurate information on the internet; Wikipedia. According to the guys and gals over at Wiki, the definition of groundbreaking when used as an adjective, means "being or making something that has never been done or seen or made before; 'stylistically innovative works'." Please keep this definition in mind when analyzing the data that I'm about to present.
Let us begin with The Golden Girls. I think we can all agree that The Golden Girls was without question was one of the great television sitcoms of the last thirty years. It aired from 1985 - 1992 for nearly 180 episodes and was followed by the short lived but equally entertaining Golden Palace. It starred Estelle Getty, Rue McClanahan, Bea Arthur, and Betty White. The show revolved around the lives of four women close to or past retirement age. But unlike most television shows, Golden Girls, didn't view these aging blossoms as mere conduits of matriarchal wisdom. Golden Girls explored edgy and contemporary issues, like sex and diversity and even gay rights. For the 1980s those were all extremely taboo subjects. We were given the opportunity to see the Grandma of the late 20th century and what she was talking about behind closed doors.
Sex and the City, on the other hand, ran from 1998 - 2004 for a modest 94 episodes. It starred Cynthia Nixon, Kristin Davis, Kim Cattrall and Pegasus. The show revolved around four New York socialites and tackled issues such as hooking up with guys, hooking up with young guys, and hooking up with old guys. It sought to capture the modern independent woman at the dawn of the 21st Century. Did it accomplish this? I guess. Who really knows.
In many ways Sex and the City and Golden Girls have a lot in common. Charlotte is a total ditz just like Rose. Samantha is an loose woman like Blanche. Miranda is hard as nails like Sophia. And Carrie is independent and has a lame ex lover just like Dorothy. Wait a minute, that's not entirely true. Carrie ended up marrying her lame ex lover (Big) while Dorothy decided to stay away from her mess of an ex (Stan Sbornak.) Hmmm. Not an opinion... just a fact.
So, the cast of [tos] wants to know your thoughts. Which show was more groundbreaking? Let us know in the comments below. And I'll leave you with a little video starring the incomparable Bea Arthur.
James
James, at risk of sounding like a complete suck-up, I have to agree with you. Don't get me wrong! I enjoy my SATC ladies. However, as far as groundbreaking goes, hands-down, it's the Golden Girls. Not only did those ladies show that just because a person gets "older" they don't have to stop living a full life, and tackle many relevant topics with humor, grace and gentleness, but they had very frank, innuendo-laden conversations about sex on broadcast television! Nowadays, it's par for the course, but back then? That was a big thing. And I think the fact that the show is still popular today through reruns and DVDs says quite a bit. Of course, the fact that I've rambled on and on about the show probably takes away any "coolness" points I may have had...but so be it. I'm a Rose through and through. ;)
ReplyDeleteThere is no debate, "Golden Girls" was definitely more groundbreaking and a GREAT show. After being forced to endure many episodes of SATC because a family member seemed to think it was good, all I can say is I don't know how it made it past the first season. Sorry SATC fans, the show has no redeeming value.
ReplyDeleteWhile I loved SATC, I would not consider in groundbreaking in that it followed a genre of femme entertainment beginning with Lysistrata, carried through to the 30s classic, THE WOMEN (I refuse to even discuss the remake). Young upper-class hotties talking about fellatio and fashion is not groundbreaking.
ReplyDeletePortraying senior citizens as fully actualized, vital, intelligent, spunky and sexually active is - especially from the female POV (see COCOON, still the boy's world). Nothing like it since, dammit.
James there is no debate. Golden Girls was groundbreaking. I agree with all the above comments. Sex and the City was just a flash in the pan.
ReplyDeleteWhile I wish I could completely go against the flow and stir up a little controversy, there's no doubt that The Golden Girls paved the way for the Sex in the City chicas. It's like the Old Testament has to be come before the New one. Dorothy begat Carrie. Blanche begat Samantha. Rose begat Charlotte. Sophia begat Miranda.
ReplyDeleteThe movie "Speed" was "Die Hard" on a bus. "Sex and the City" was "Golden Girls" in New York.
Signed,
Chad (The Dallas "Hunter")