Quote:
| Originally Posted by BorisTheCheese Obviously he’s a “Karen” man much like myself. |
To be clear, I’m a “Pam” guy. That being said, Karen? I’d hit that. Oh yeah, I’d hit that big time.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Chris Anthony That’s a bit much. For me, I want them to be able to find happiness in a place that is usually known for sucking it out of you. It’s about finding that person or thing that makes you get up in the morning (like Stanley and his pretzel). |
I think Stanley and his pretzel were supposed to be perceived as kind of pathetic. I guess I can see an argument that the Office is about making the most of a bad situation, but Jim and Ryan have both had lines that suggest they can’t imagine themselves at that crappy job years down the road (which is why Ryan’s promotion puts an interesting, even sort of tragic, spin on his character), and, as with her British counterpart, Pam obviously has aspirations beyond being a receptionist.
I think we’re supposed to see the corporate life, rather than a specific aspect of it (like a manager promoted beyond his level of competence), as the chief antagonist of the show.
There was a monologue that Tim gave at the end of the British series about finding the bright spot in a dull place that I think carries over to this one as well.
Ryan’s storyline was already tragic at the beginning of season 3 when we see that he decided to become an employee and was no longer just a temp. I’m looking forward to seeing what they do with his character and how him and Michael interact.
I see the series ending with Pam getting out of The Office and following her artistic side. Jim will still be there though.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by DaveB I think Stanley and his pretzel were supposed to be perceived as kind of pathetic. I guess I can see an argument that the Office is about making the most of a bad situation, |
See, I think it is about making the most of a bad situation. I loved the Stanley/pretzel episode and I’ve liked the Stanley character a whole lot more since it aired. At no point did I think of it as pathetic. Worthy of sympathy, yes, but then again most people stuck in jobs they aren’t passionate about in the real world are worthy of the same sympathy. Instead I got the impression that Stanley was a good family man doing what he needs to do to make it every day and finding what bright spots he can to keep himself going.
I’d agree regarding to Stanley. He looks out for his family and provides for his daughter. I don’t see how that’s pathetic. I figure the same could be said for Kevin who just enjoys the simple juevenile things of life to pass the day.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by A-Pathetic See, I think it is about making the most of a bad situation. I loved the Stanley/pretzel episode and I’ve liked the Stanley character a whole lot more since it aired. At no point did I think of it as pathetic. Worthy of sympathy, yes, but then again most people stuck in jobs they aren’t passionate about in the real world are worthy of the same sympathy. Instead I got the impression that Stanley was a good family man doing what he needs to do to make it every day and finding what bright spots he can to keep himself going. |
That may be the case for Stanley, but why in the world would you root for the younger and less committed employees like Jim, Ryan, or Pam to be tied down to this horrible, mundane life? The writers go out of their way to remind us over and over what a terrible job and company it is. Just as they heighten the horror of working that kind of job, I think it follows that our expectations for these characters are supposed to be heightened, as well.
I’m sorry, but, sympathy for Stanley aside, it’s totally sad when the highlight of your year is a free pretzel. It’s funny, sure, but it is most decidedly sad.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by EdHocken I’d agree regarding to Stanley. He looks out for his family and provides for his daughter. I don’t see how that’s pathetic. I figure the same could be said for Kevin who just enjoys the simple juevenile things of life to pass the day. |
It’s not pathetic that he’s supporting his family. It’s pathetic that he seems to hate his job in nearly every conceivable way with the exception of the annual free pretzel.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by DaveB It’s not pathetic that he’s supporting his family. It’s pathetic that he seems to hate his job in nearly every conceivable way with the exception of the annual free pretzel. |
Pretzel day was just something good for Stanley to grab on to.
“I wake up every morning in a bed that’s too small, drive my daughter to a school that’s too expensive, and then I go to work to a job for which I get paid too little, but on pretzel day … well I like pretzel day.”
I agree that the viewer shouldn’t be rooting for Jim and Pam to stay at the job, and Stanley is partially a cautionary figure (this is what happens to good people who don’t get out). I think you’re taking things a bit too far in thinking Stanley has been living for that one day all year long though.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by A-Pathetic Pretzel day was just something good for Stanley to grab on to. “I wake up every morning in a bed that’s too small, drive my daughter to a school that’s too expensive, and then I go to work to a job for which I get paid too little, but on pretzel day … well I like pretzel day.” I agree that the viewer shouldn’t be rooting for Jim and Pam to stay at the job, and Stanley is partially a cautionary figure (this is what happens to good people who don’t get out). I think you’re taking things a bit too far in thinking Stanley has been living for that one day all year long though. |
It’s one of the only times we’ve seen Stanley animated and happy about something. I’m sure he enjoys things offscreen, as well, but in terms of his working life, that appears to be a highlight. When a pretzel is a highlight of your job, you’re not in a good place. It was played for amusement and not tragedy in the episode, but most of the people on the show, funny as they are, are cautionary figures (as you mentioned), obstacles, or some sort of combination of the two.
This is what separates the main characters like Jim and Pam from Dwight and Michael (obstacles, generally speaking) and Toby and Stanley (cautionary figures - perfectly nice people who got sucked in). You may kind of like Stanley, Toby, and Phyllis, but you don’t want to see Jim and Pam end up like them. That’s sort of the point, and that’s why Ryan, who was sort of the third fully sympathetic protagonist in that he wasn’t quirky or an obstacle to others, buying into the corporate ladder thing is tragicomic.
I don’t see Stanley as a cautionary tale at all. His desire to support his family is supreme and I find honor in that.
I don’t view the pretzel day as pathetic either, but maybe I’ve been a student for too long. I work hard so why shouldn’t I relish in simple pleasures like free food?
Quote:
| Originally Posted by englebert I don’t see Stanley as a cautionary tale at all. His desire to support his family is supreme and I find honor in that. |
Supporting your family can still be done from a job you enjoy, or at least most people would certainly like to believe that. Supporting his family is definitely honorable, and it’s one of the key ways we know he’s a good guy.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by englebert I don’t see Stanley as a cautionary tale at all. His desire to support his family is supreme and I find honor in that. I don’t view the pretzel day as pathetic either, but maybe I’ve been a student for too long. I work hard so why shouldn’t I relish in simple pleasures like free food? |
It’s not that it’s a simple pleasure. It’s that, from what we see on the show, it’s the only simple pleasure that he derives directly from his job (and, no, supporting his family doesn’t count - as A-Pathetic wrote, he could technically do that from a job he doesn’t hate, as well).
If you aspire to be Stanley, godspeed and good luck. I can understand how you might defend the character on the basis of noble self-sacrifice, but I’m not talking about his character or his nobility. I’m talking about being stuck in a shitty job, which he most certainly is.
Was Ryan a sympathetic character? I agree that he wasn’t an obstacle or quirky, but isn’t he more of the cautionary tale, an early version of Toby or Stanley perhaps, of how one gets sucked in that cycle?
Just tossing it out there.
The person in the office I most relate to is Stanley, and the line that particularly resonated was when he halted Ryan’s harder, efficient work plan with the forceful, “Eh eh eh…what we have here… is a run out the clock situation”.
He truly hates the job he’s in, and his greatest sin against his person is somehow allowing himself to be static. So he sits and runs out the clock and takes advantage of every thing he can- pretzel day, the chances at cutting sarcasm, and doing as little work as possible. Everyone in the office does this, and we cheer them all on, but Stanley actually seethes- he hates it more than anyone. He’s a good man, smart, hilarious, but pretty damn pathetic too, because unlike Jim, there’s no hope in his soul to be fulfilled in his work. He’s not a character to help us see that we can turn any lemon into a tasty beverage, he’s a cautionary tale.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by DaveB It’s not that it’s a simple pleasure. It’s that, from what we see on the show, it’s the only simple pleasure that he derives directly from his job |
Not true! Stanley was never happier than when he embarrassed Ryan when they were on a sales call together and Ryan asked Stanley to sit out and let him handle it. That’s the hardest he’s ever laughed.
If you relate primarily to Stanley it is time to reassess your life. He is a noble guy who makes sure his family is taken care of, but who wants to spend 40 hours each week being apathetic and occasionally miserable?
I’m with DaveB, the corporate culture of a typical office is the main point of satire for the show and the most grounded characters strive for something more. We are supposed to root for Jim and Pam to escape this environment.
I don’t feel like escaping the office is the point of the show. I think this show resonates with people because at one time or another they have been stuck in jobs that they hate. A potential Jim and Pam romance serves as an example of “find what makes you happy and make the best of everything else.”
The return of Creed!
God bless this show.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Jcassady Was Ryan a sympathetic character? I agree that he wasn’t an obstacle or quirky, but isn’t he more of the cautionary tale, an early version of Toby or Stanley perhaps, of how one gets sucked in that cycle? Just tossing it out there. |
He’s absolutely a cautionary tale. In fact, judging from the preview, he’s the ultimate cautionary tale in that he’s taken the cookie of a promotion and appears to be becoming a dick due to the workings of the machine. It’s an interesting contrast with Michael, who is entirely focused on being liked, but can’t reconcile this desire with his position as manager and instead ends up abusing his power in misguided efforts to be liked or respected. Ryan, I suspect, will not have this preoccupation.
Anyway, none of this makes working in the Scranton office any more desirable. As everyone keeps pointing out, it’s a bad situation. What I don’t get is why so many of you are so convinced that escape is impossible and that the best any of these characters we like can manage is to make the most of it. If you’re in a bad situation, isn’t the ideal to extract yourself from it?
Quote:
| Originally Posted by DaveB Anyway, none of this makes working in the Scranton office any more desirable. As everyone keeps pointing out, it’s a bad situation. What I don’t get is why so many of you are so convinced that escape is impossible and that the best any of these characters we like can manage is to make the most of it. If you’re in a bad situation, isn’t the ideal to extract yourself from it? |
The only thing I can say is that with the economy we’re in if you have a good paying job w/benefits you keep it like it or not. For a lot of people, that’s the reality of life I guess.