Toward a unified theory of why some pop culture endures
Why does some entertainment stand the test of time, while other shows and bands fade away?
Jonathan Kay made some interesting observations on Xwitter a few weeks ago:
I think I can explain the Rolling Stones/Beatles thing, at least. While the former group is still a going concern, perhaps long after they should have hung it up, the Fab Four broke up at the absolute height of its creative and commercial powers.
All four members had successful solo careers - seriously, anyone who dismisses Ringo hasn’t heard his 1973 album Ringo, which featured two number-one hits and can stand with any solo album released by his bandmates which isn’t titled All Things Must Pass - but, the occasional AI-generated reunion aside, the group never had a chance to get old and past its prime.
It’s not unlike the difference between James Dean and Marlon Brando. Dean was killed in a car accident after making only three movies, and is in our hearts and minds forever young. Brando was arguably the greatest actor of all time at one point, but he was a bloated, barely coherent punchline for longer than he was a movie idol.
I know James Dean from Rebel Without a Cause. I know Marlon Brando from The Godfather but also The Island of Doctor Moreau.
As for Friends and Seinfeld, I’m inclined to agree that Friends has a greater presence in 2023 pop culture than does Seinfeld. I wouldn’t say the latter is forgotten, though: indeed, my twelve year-old son is more familiar with it than with its former “Must See Thursday” companion show, thanks to relatives introducing him to it at a tender age. As we all should, really.
When I think back to the eighties and nineties, though, I am struck by how many shows which were wildly successful in their time are mostly forgotten today, while programs which didn’t do as well in the ratings remain as popular as ever.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Rigid Thinking to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.