Shenny HQ

Once again, the writers have lost sight of the fact that Classic Howard was child-like, not child-ish, and you've all heard my opinions on the difference between those two adjectives. (the same is true of Sheldon.)


Howard arguing with his mother and asking for chocolate milk and such was funny and almost cute. That stuff was a *part* of his personality, not the whole of it.

Once they'd amputated the flirty/sexual/outrageous part of Howard's character, there was nothing left but the Mama's boy, so they had to ratchet that up and exaggerrate it and over-emphasize it.

Howard becomes MORE childish in S4/S5 once the H/B storyline begins. That is a fact. Because once you've pruned away the other parts of his character, only the weaker qualities remain.

I've always believed that if something happened to Howard's mother, or if she just suddenly refused to keep taking care of him, he'd be forced to adjust pretty quickly, and he *would* adjust, he wouldn't spend the rest of his life being lazy and helpless, because he's not stupid. It's *natural* for people to want to be independent.

Do I believe he's somewhat spoiled and self-absorbed? Yes. But people don't remain that way unless you let them, and if that's the only way he's ever known, and nobody taught him any different, then how can he be blamed, really? His dependence on his mother is *situational.*

That's why I think that watching Howard adjust to life outside his Mom's house, even temporarily, would've been such a cute and funny storyline.

Howard shouting with his Mom in "The Bad Fish Paradigm" was downright cute, compared to this bullsh*t...

I just cannot fathom these writers anymore. They are *obsessed* with pedophilia and infantilization scenarios. They're sadistic and they hate their own characters. It's like that Goya painting, "Saturn Devouring his Son."

How's *that* for a gory reference, huh? The Halloween season is doing weird things to my mood...

If there were a BBT episode named after me, it would be called "The Infinite Rageface Recurrence."

Mrs. White expresses my hatred beautifully:

Okay, this is my huge explanation of why the recent portrayal of Howard is OOC and incorrect. You don't have to read it if you don't want to, and I'm prob. repeating myself a bit (me? never!) but here it is:

**This is all facts, or at least things that cannot be disproven. It's not a case of "oh, Howie is my fave character, I love him, he is my woobie, he can do no wrong." Yes, I am biased in his favor, but I think these points are all factual, not emotion-based.***

We've already covered the question of "how much money does he make?" Lewstonewar posted some great stats about that, and I posted some, too. Exactly how much money he makes is not the point. Whether he makes more or less than B is not even the point, either. The problem lies in the way they are presenting his character.

There are no examples of Howard being irresponsible with money until at least five or six seasons into the show. It's OOC and it's a retcon. This idea pops up out of nowhere.

At the very least, he's not *more* irresponsible than the other three guys; their spending habits seem very similar. When the four guys bought the Time Machine, it didn't leave them broke. It's not like they bought the Time Machine and then Leonard couldn't pay the rent and Howard had to sell his scooter, or something.

It's unclear whether his mother supported him financially when he lived at home, but he was never shown asking her for money or making wasteful purchases on a whim when he lived in his mother's house. He has a lot of collectibles and comic books, as do all of the guys, but he could re-sell those on eBay if he really needed to.

If Howard was supporting his mother and himself while he lived at home, that actually makes him very responsible. His dependence on his mother is emotional/psychological, it's not like he's literally unable to leave.

About the idea that he can't/won't do chores:

I agree that Howard's mother probably never taught him any life-skills, but you don't graduate from M.I.T. by acting like a doofus and drifting along in a stupor. College involves meeting deadlines, time-management, starting a task and completing it, keeping track of details, etc. Young guys are not known for being great about housework, but Howard is so particular about his clothes and his appearance that I doubt he'd be content to live in filth. I'm totally willing to believe that his mother did his laundry and took care of all his needs in that regard; what's OOC is this idea that he wouldn't be willing to even *try* taking care of things on his own, if that support system suddenly went away. He seems pretty fastidious and detail-oriented, about his belongings and his surroundings. Everything in his bedroom arranged just so, etc. If he were forced to choose between living in filth and cleaning something, I'm inclined to say he'd clean something, or maybe pay for a cleaning service, which is also a perfectly legit solution.

A person who is so utterly helpless that they can't manage basic everyday tasks is not going to graduate from M.I.T. or be hired at Cal-Tech. These are skills that any cashier at the grocery store has.

Yes, Howard is a Mama's boy and I'm willing to believe that he's been spoiled and sheltered to some degree, but this portrayal of him as utterly useless is OOC.

Raj comes from a wealthy family with servants, so presumably he was spoiled/sheltered too, but they don't portray him as being unable to live on his own and manage everyday life, for the most part.

Until the 5th or 6th season, Howard never mentioned this idea of marrying someone for their money or finding a girl to support his collectibles habit. He was pursuing girls for sex, not with this idea that they would buy him stuff.

How did he survive at M.I.T. without his mother? If he was able to survive and do well at M.I.T. without his mother, that means he's capable of managing everyday life on his own. This version of Howard who is utterly dependent on Bernadette is OOC and a regression.

About that stupid "3D printer" episode, and the fallout from it:

His Vespa and his collectibles certainly add up to more than $5,000, and he had those from the beginning, and there's no indication that his mother bought them for him. Supposedly the 3D printer was $5,000, and he bought it with Raj, so his share was only $2,500.

And even if his mother *did* buy things for him, he was never presented as this freeloader character whose aim is to squeeze money out of people for his own purposes.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Howard's mother was supporting him (mortgage/rent, food, utilities, even clothes) while he lived at home. That means his salary would be pure disposable income, except for maybe his student loan payments. He could've bought a car instead of the Vespa, if he'd wanted to. He could've bought the 3D printer AND the Vespa AND a car, if he wasn't paying for rent/food/bills. Even a person who made as little as one or two thousand dollars per month could buy those things, if they had zero day-to-day living expenses.

Even a person working at McDonald's could buy all kinds of things, if they had zero day-to-day living expenses and were entirely supported by their mother.

What's much more likely is that Howard supported his mother and himself, or at least helped. Maybe his mother collects Social Security or something along those lines.

And yet, even if he and his mother, together, were living with limited means, he still bought that Vespa and all those collectibles, etc. So, it's not like he was totally unable to buy fun things and was salivating at the chance to marry some high-earning girl and blow all her money.

Who knows, he could've had a full or partial scholarship in undergrad, and a full or partial scholarship at M.I.T., which would mean no student-loan payments and therefore the ability to save more of his salary.

He's not presented as this greedy/lazy character whose goal is to live off a woman's earnings, whether that woman is his mother or his wife.

All those times when Howard was pursuing girls, he never says "yeah, I'm gonna find a rich chick who will buy me things." He's just interested in sex and having some fun. He never mentions being in search of a Sugar Mama.

It's not like we ever heard about Howard writing checks in his mother's name or exploiting that situation. People who love shopping but lack the money can end up with credit-card debt; we never hear about Howard having credit card debt or using his Mom's credit card, etc.

There is not one instance in Seasons 1-4 where we hear Howard saying "Mom, why won't you buy me a car?" "Mom, will you buy me a 3D printer?", "Mom, can I have some money?", "Mom, will you buy me some comic books?"

Yes, he is spoiled and he is a Mama's boy, but it's not like the writers spent four or five seasons establishing Howard as this con-artist character who is looking to get his hands on other people's money.

Raj supposedly comes from a wealthy family yet we never saw Howard asking Raj for money or attempting to mooch off Raj.

We never see him attempting to mooch off Leonard or Sheldon.

We never see him attempting to mooch off his various dates/girlfriends/sex-partners.

If Howard was determined to buy silly things with other people's money, he would've done that with his mother or Raj or someone. Even if Mrs. W is of limited means, which seems likely, he could've used her credit card, or lied and said that he needed the money for something important, etc.

It's OOC and it's a retcon. It's also getting uncomfortably close to the ugly stereotype of the money-grubbing Jew.

This person they're showing us now, could not graduate from anything, or get hired anywhere. He's not Howard. He's...I dunno, Leonard/Chandler/SH/Lorre.

They've made him LESS mature and LESS responsible than he was before Bernadette came on the scene, and that is a fact. This idea that "Bernadette is forcing Howard to grow up and teaching him to be independent" is total hogwash. If she controls his every move, how is he learning anything?

And how exactly will he "grow up" or learn to be independent if Bernadette controls everything? On the contrary, that type of treatment is guaranteed to keep him in a child-like, dependent state. A person becomes independent by doing things on their own. If Bernadette is constantly supervising him, he will *never* learn to do things for himself, by himself. Her behavior is totally counterproductive.

A relationship which mimics his twisted relationship with his mother is the very farthest thing from what he needs.

Howard could've "grown up" if he got away from his mother for a while, tried living on his own, and maybe got some counseling. Bernadette acting like his mother and taking on that role is totally counterproductive, pschologically icky, and unhealthy. If she *refused* to act like his mother or treat him like a child, that would be closer to a reasonable approach. She is more controlling than his mother ever was.

Howard went straight from his mother to Bernadette, with nothing in-between. Where was his chance to know himself, to learn about the world, to figure things out?

He goes straight from making one woman the center of his life and letting her control him, to making another woman the center of his life and letting her control him. That is no progress at all. Where is *Howard*, in all of this?

He has no identity outside of his mother and Bernadette. That is why it really made my stomach turn cold when they talked about him being a stay-at-home Dad, in the future, and not even having his work anymore. Where is his *personhood*?? It's like watching someone pull the wings off a bug, or purposely stunt the growth of a plant, or something. It's *sad.*

You don't "force someone to grow up" by treating them like a child. That is backwards. It was not until Season 4 or 5, maybe even 6, that we heard these references about Howard not being able to cut his own pancakes or cut his own meat, etc. They have dumbed him down, and I defy anyone to refute that.

Maybe after a long series of traditional sitcoms, CL decided to reverse everything 'traditional', to start with; the lower class couple are most powerful(S&P), women are physically powerful, the heroine makes the wrong choice, women earn more than men. Exprimental, contemporary. I think alot of the story line around Howard is just them having fun with their own traditions. Just cliches with some basis in reality. People write about what they know. Inter-marriage is a never ending source of complaint, and humour. But post A&B, it resolves to traditional. Maybe the next gen!

(10-24-2014, 04:16 PM)Louise Wrote: [ -> ]About that stupid "3D printer" episode, and the fallout from it:

His Vespa and his collectibles certainly add up to more than $5,000, and he had those from the beginning, and there's no indication that his mother bought them for him. Supposedly the 3D printer was $5,000, and he bought it with Raj, so his share was only $2,500.

And even if his mother *did* buy things for him, he was never presented as this freeloader character whose aim is to squeeze money out of people for his own purposes.

I found the ep ridiculous as well but $2500 is considered a major purchase along the same lines of a new refrigerator. You don't make a unilateral purchase like that without consulting your partner regardless who makes more money. Community Property.

except no one on the show treats any of their relationships like the partnerships they should be.

Quote: You don't make a unilateral purchase like that without consulting your partner regardless who makes more money.

I don't disagree with that, what frustrates me is that it's OOC for Howard, who was never shown to be irresponsible with money until that episode, or at least not *more* irresponsible than the other three guys. I've seen even Canons acknowledging this.

The pre-Bernadette Howard and the post-Bernadette Howard are really and truly two different characters, starting as early as S3 or 4...

My main point, in this huge post, is that they made Howard MORE immature and childish once Bernadette came on the scene, so as to set up these contrived conflicts. He was always a Mama's boy, but we don't hear about him wasting money, or needing someone else to cut his pancakes, until at least S5 or S6.

It's contrived, it's a retcon, it's OOC and it's just more of this "wise wife, foolish husband" crap.

I love absurdist humor, but this show did not spend 7 seasons establishing a pattern of that type of absurd, intentionally nonsensical humor, luminous fish notwithstanding. When engineers don't make any money and a waitress enters the medical field overnight, we are in bizarro land. We've gone through the Looking Glass, now.

---

Quote:I think alot of the story line around Howard is just them having fun with their own traditions. Just cliches with some basis in reality.

The problem is, it's not fun or entertaining to watch, it's cringey and awful. They've dumbed-down his character in much the same way as they've dumbed-down Sheldon.

I have no objections to portraying women as successful and powerful, but this "wise wife, foolish husband" stuff is older than dirt and beyond boring. It's a waste of SH's talent.

Howard is arguably supposed to be the most practical of the four guys: the other three are theorists, and he's more hands-on. He's clever and resourceful, he's a problem-solver. He's pragmatic, at least in comparison to the others. I think that scene with Gablehauser that I posted is a perfect example; he's supposed to be the rather cynical counterpoint to a lofty thinker like Sheldon.

Now he's utterly lazy and powerless and can't even be trusted with pocket-money? That's not the same character, period. It's simply not. That's just Dumb Husband #101, it's not the bright young guy from S1, who was full of ideas and inspiration.

He obviously bought a lot of collectibles and comics in the early seasons, but it didn't seem to cause any problems, then. All four guys have lots of collectibles, but it was never shown to be a problem or a shopping addiction or a source of conflict. It was never "The guys bought the Time Machine and now they can't pay the rent.." or anything along those lines.

If he was prone to wasting money, then I'm sure we would've heard his mother scolding him about it, because she's outspoken and doesn't mince words, to say the least...

There is no possible way for THAT guy to evolve/devolve into THIS guy. They've thrown his characterization out the window. This isn't Howard, this is Generic Sitcom Husband, with a side order of Lorre's favorite messed-up themes. It's just "King of Queens" or "Everybody Loves Raymond", with the addition of this really disturbing infantilization fetish, which has also been applied to Sheldon...

I know it seems like I'm constantly defending Howard, but what I object to is the *inconsistency.* All the characters have flaws and failings and weaknesses, and I'm fine with that. But the failings they have now are worse, and *different in nature*, than before. Vintage Howard is a lot of things,and not all of them are pleasant or admirable, but "slacker" isn't one of them.

It is hard to understand where they are going with the characters. Boys and girls, watch everything, from real life, adverts, sitcoms,etc, it gives them some behaviourial code reference points. Feminism as equality. But often men are shown as weak, pathetic, shallow, stupid, in ads, because they believe that women control the money, in relationships. I'm sure they are not portraying positive role models if men become 'infantile' when in a relationship. If the wife has to take on a mother role, turn off! Unfortunately if your favourite character gets cast as the jester, however wrongly(we know Howard is great at practical application, the others couldn't even open his toolbox!), it's hard to break free of that. What was the whole point of the 3D printer scenario? They did make a joke about goods from China!

He's adorable in that Jester costume

That's a fun ep. Too bad the canon now has "funny" confused with "stupid"....

Y'know, it JUST hit me, just now, that the dual nature of Howard's costume in "The Middle Earth Paradigm" (Robin Hood/Peter Pan) could represent the two sides of his personality. Peter Pan ( child-like, magical, whimsical, carefree) and Robin Hood, which is more like what he *aspires* to be: brave, bold, dashing, heroic.




I really think S1 might be my personal favorite, although S2 gets more acclaim. It's underrated.

I just DON'T understand how they can portray Howard as irresponsible, careless, oblivious, lazy, et cetera, when there are so many early-season moments where he's the "straight man" and the relatively sensible one. Yes, he makes bad decisions and acts foolishly sometimes. They all do. But it's **so clear**, watching old eps, that he's the practical, problem-solving, "brass tacks" one, the one who sees a situation as it really is, and cuts through the bullsh*t. Except when he's bewitched by a woman, so maybe I just answered my own question. But still.

This new idea that H. is the *most* immature out of the four guys, simply does not scan. Again, I think "immature" is not really the correct word for any of these characters, hence my distinction between "child-like" and "child-ish.", etc. There are *so many* early-seasons scenes where H. is the only one who will stand up to Sheldon, H. is the one trying to advise Raj or Leonard against doing something iffy, H. who cuts through the others' navel-gazing to find the simplest, most straightforward solution to a problem. That's why he and Raj are a complementary pair; they are Yin and Yang, H. is more calculating while R. is more about emotionalism.

Yes, Howard does some very silly things, too, and gets led astray by his own fantasies and delusions of grandeur. That's part of what makes him so fun. He's foolish about certain specific things, not foolish about life in general. He has areas of weakness, as every human being does. But he's *not* this helpless man-child who will do literally nothing unless his wife holds a gun to his head, about it. That's not merely a dilution of his former character, it's a reversal of his former character. A guy this lazy and feckless and emotionally defenseless couldn't accomplish the things Howard has accomplished. We hear so much about Howard being an immature man-child now, and while there were hints of that in his original characterization, it really makes me sick that *this* is the version of the character which people now accept as legit.

I just re-watched Codpiece Topology, an ep. where Howard doesn't even have many lines, yet I'm smacked in the face with "No, this guy is not an idiot, this guy is the one telling Leonard to knock it off and be reasonable."

When you look at the earlier seasons and then look at where we are now, it simply does not add up. There is no possible path from there to here. People who say that this is "character development" or "evolution" have zero understanding of what those words mean. This is TPTB tinkering with the works. I'm not sure what to call it, but it's something like "authorial interference" or "authorial intrusion." The writers come along like the hand of God and make arbitrary, artificial changes.

I'm more convinced than ever that they've simply given us different characters with the same names. It's really that simple. If they wanted to make a generic romcom, they should've simply ended BBT and made that new romcom. Instead, they did something very sneaky by hitching this new romcom onto an already-existing show. If Classic BBT were a boat, then Romcom BBT would be a stowaway.

Isn't there some type of bug or parasite which eats its host from the inside-out, until the host body is just a shell, with all its innards having been replaced by the predator? That's exactly what has happened, here. This is an imposter wearing BBT's clothes. The Big Bad Wolf ate Grandma and assumed her identity.

ETA: It's pretty sad that Howard had more dignity while he was wearing the Jester suit, than he does nowadays.