A COUPLE of readers take exception to a benign view of the ’60s TV sitcom The Beverly Hillbillies. One suggests it includes Masonic signs. And the reader Paul A. writes:

A review of the first episode shows that the first jokes are about Ellie-May: Her lack of femininity and her abundant breasts. Ellie-May has not even been on stage yet, but we are set up for her two-dimensional personality, which perdures for the whole series, in three jokes. She is a sexy, powerful, young woman, who can out do any male in physical pursuits. Much like modern feminism, with the difference that modern feminism has cast aside any aspiration to retaining sexiness or youth.

The first episode, which is indeed set in the 1960’s, shows that the Clampetts are ignorant of the telephone (circa 1874)and the airplane (circa 1914), including the helicopter. They are unfamiliar with any other modern conveniences. It is not just that they do not have access to them. It is that the world has passed them by, and they are completely ignorant of the progress that Modern Man has made. The strapping young Jethro is portrayed as being in school – an accomplishment- having reached 5th grade. For these backward rubes, a mature adult male is struggling with an education of the most basic sort.

I wonder if a Jed Clampett / Jethro hybrid is not the precursor to the Homer Simpson of the 90’s? A character who demonstrates certain masculine traits, while at the same time, continually shows that he is out of his depth, and adrift in the new and improved world. There is probably a PhD dissertation wrapped up in this concept.

I would also suggest that this sitcom only reinforced the idea of fly-over country. The area (outside of the power centers) where ignorant hayseeds cling to their guns, religion, and whatever, demeaning themselves in the eyes of the elites, and thus demonstrating that their values is only utilitarian, if that.

I guess that my question is: How would public opinion and culture have been shaped if Hollywood had given us sitcoms that showed the absurdity of the Sixties sex culture, along with its rebellions and self-destruction? Certainly, there is a lot of material that could showcase liberal foolishness while reinforcing a father role model, femininity, and basic morals. Why was that not done? Why was, for example, Archie Bunker not given a bit more dignity and “meathead” (Rob Reiner) not shown as the fool and buffoon the he continues to be in real life? I guess I’d chalk up the Beverly Hillbillies as more of an attack on the American Culture than anything showing its remaining appeal.

— Comments —

Neil writes:

I watched the first episode. There were a couple of unfortunate jokes about Ellie-May’s bosom (which seems average before the boob job era – LOL, I never thought Id mention that) but I didn’t see anything objectionable other than that.

As far as not using a phone and the like, I don’t know how unusual that was for its era. The idea of country bumpkins meeting modern civilization probably goes back to Twain’s “A Yankee In King Arthur’s Court.”

John Purdy writes:

I was waiting for this rebuttal from someone, in this case Paul A. I think it’s going to be hard to find any sitcom made in the sixties that satisfies all conservatives. One reason is that humour is almost always at someone’s expense it’s just a question of whom. And I agree with Paul A. that the situation with “The Beverly Hillbillies” is a bit ambiguous as to who is making fun of whom. One might propose “The Dick Van Dyke Show” except that the Petries are clearly old-fashioned liberals. A better line of approach might be to look at dramatic series. “Little House on the Prairies” or “The Waltons” could be viewed as examples of the last gasp of conservatism in mainstream entertainment.
I think if conservatives are going to engage with popular culture they may have to hold their noses and praise what’s good and denounce what is bad. Or, maybe, walk away altogether.

Please follow and like us: