Blogs & News

Anonymous Critic

One Nanny Too Many

March 14, 2007

If only we Americans could handle our children. That seems to be the message on a few prime time realities. In the world of the long running nanny-fixer-upper shows, unhappy couples with unhappy children need only a visit from a gentle, but firm English nanny to ~~make the medicine go down~~ fix a broken home. If only everyone could get a visit from one of these parental geniuses, there could finally be world peace.

I can’t stand these shows, and I’m tired of how they create this unrealistic illusion that all family problems can be solved by a complete stranger over the course of a few days. That a troubled family can become “perfect” and all spoiled or violent or belligerent children can be “cured” of their evil ways in about a half and hour (even less when you consider the commercial breaks).

The show begins with a montage of destruction. Children hitting, punching, scratching, screaming, and crying their way into getting exactly what they want. And, in spite of seasons and seasons worth of episodes, there are only two reasons why this happens: the mom won’t discipline the kids, or the dad. It’s just that simple. Sometimes mom is scared of her kids, or wants to spoil them, or wants to be the good cop. Sometimes dad is lazy, or travels too much, or he wants to be the good cop. And sometimes you get a house with two perfectly well-meaning adults who just have no idea what they’re doing.

And so the kids run wild in these lovely homes, abusing each other, their belongings, and their parents. They terrorize everyone and everything in their path, and usually have the cruelest, foulest things come out of their mouths. It’s the polar opposite of “Kids Say The Darnedest Things”.

Usually, though, the problem isn’t the kids at all. After all, kids don’t learn to be manipulative, cruel, and demeaning without a little guidance. What we’re really watching in these shows is an unhappy or non-functioning marriage, with the kids playing the role of victim in the middle. Why does a three-year-old kick think that kicking and screaming will get them their way? It isn’t a character flaw, and it doesn’t take a doctor to figure it out: somewhere along the line, someone taught them tantrums were the way to get what they want.

In swoops the nanny, complete with a series of firm punishments, stern words, and inspirational lectures. A few tears are shed, a few lips are pouted, and a few fits are thrown. And that’s not even the children I’m talking about.

Then the show ends with an unrealistic montage of familial bliss. A voiceover of the parents, talking about how wonderful everything is now, and how great the children are, while we watch clips of them playing respectfully, or helping around the house, or generally behaving like angels. And all this in just a few days. Forgive me if I sound cynical, but yeah right.

The real lesson here is that apparently, we Americans cannot care for our own children. Only a Mary Poppins accent will subdue and reeducate them. The best we can hope for is that parents across the country will get the message and develop a British accent so we can trick our children into thinking they have qualified parents.

Comments

Zippy de Brain wrote:

Look, if you don't like the show, then don't watch the thing. Oh wait, I rather get the impression that you do not. Firstly it is a 1/hr show, so 45 minutes without comercials. The events in the show take place over 2-3 weeks, though I am not sure how far after the show their 'Family Updates' are.

The whole POINT of the show is that if the kids understand that the easiest way to get what they want is to follow the rules, they do just that. Kids will ALWAYS do whatever the easiest way to get what they want is, it is just about that simple. If they believe that 4 hours of whining and complaining and crying and biting will end up getting them what they want, then that is what they do. If they understand that the whining and crying is a guaranteed way to NOT get what they want they will look for other ways.

Having worked in child care for more than 7 years, kids respond to the environment they are in. It was very rare that kids didn't figure out how to fit in in a child care environment in less than a week. I imagine that the changes are easier WITH the nanny there than without since the kids understand that there are new rules to follow. It is up to the parents to keep it up, and one would hope that if they understand what they are told, they will keep it up, because guess what, LIFE is easier that way.

That being said, I would be interested in knowing how many of the families do revert back onto chaos, though I imagine they put some effort into picking families that can 'fix'.

Regardless, Supernanny is far better than the nanny 911 show (this site isn't affiliated with Fox is it?) which is ridiculous. She clearly loves the kids, understands what THEY need to want to act better (if the kids don't see a reason to improve their behaviour they won't) and at least half the time, the parents are 3/4 of the problem to begin with.

posted at March 15, 2007 10:33 AM

carla wrote:

My dear Zippy-

The whole POINT of the show, and every other show not on PBS, is to make as much money as possible. It is not an educational program, and it is not a study in child behavior. If you like it, watch it. If you don't like Anonymous Critic, then don't read it. Why post about it, Zippy?

posted at March 15, 2007 06:55 PM

Zippy de Brain wrote:

The whole point of TV Shows for the producers is to make money (except for the CBC.) The whole point for the person who dreams up the show, or for the person who Does the show (Jo Frost in this case) isn't. When you watch the more ghastly Nanny 911 the lover for the children isn't always obvious, but with her it is.

It is intended to be an educational program, with a touch of voyeurism thrown in I guess.

As for why post about things that I don't agree with? Are you seriously asking that question? Are these posts only intended for people to GUSH about how much they LOVE the anonymous critic? I don't think so. A little healthy criticism is good for everyone.

The critic made to substantive errors about the technical details of the show (duration of show, and duration of filming) which suggested minimal research to begin with, and expressed disbelief that children can change their behaviour that fast, which most perfectly normal children can. Children with serious beheviour problems will need more help, clearly.

posted at March 16, 2007 10:39 AM

Carla wrote:

Oh, Zippy-

Have you learned nothing from reading BBC? It's always (always) all about the money. And can children change their behavior quickly? Certainly. But if 75% of the problem is their parents (those are your numbers, Professor), are those Nannies fixing them, too. Please.
And yes, I am seriously asking you why you post. If someone doesn't agree with someone's opinion of a show around here, it's always "if you don't like the show, don't watch it". So, I say to you, Zippy, if you don't like the Critic, don't read it. What is the difference, exactly?

posted at March 17, 2007 10:09 AM

Babs McGoo wrote:

Kudos, Zippy for pointing out why SUpERNANNY is fascinating (and in spite of the filthy stench of commerce) essentially helpful and uplifting. Mentos (or some other antithesis of kudos) to you Carla for picking out the one misplaced phrase in an otherwise spot-on post and running with it in direct opposition to all logic. If you don't like the comments why do you insist on reading them? Whoo hoo, I've burned you on that one - yes, indeedy-doo!

posted at March 18, 2007 04:04 AM

Aimee wrote:

You are exactly right! This is the reason there are so many "problem" children in the world- it all statrs with the parents. I believe there are no such thing as bad kids just bad parents. If these parents would spend more time with their kids and discipline them we wouldn't need these stupid shows. If these children really have that serious of a behavioral problem they need professional help- not some British woman. You hit the nail on the head.

posted at March 21, 2007 07:07 AM

coco wrote:

Zippy, if you think people watch these shows for 'education' you're kidding yourself.
Without the drama, tantrums and Mary Poppins stereotype it would these shows would be nothing.
If you think it's about education maybe you can explain why 'The Mom Show' on Life network (a REAL educational parenting show without family drama and temper tantrums) is infintely less popular.

And sorry, setting a few rules does not fix a family's problems. Telling kids to 'not hit each other' doesn't address any of the reasons why they were hitting each other in the first place. Unless you get to the root of each family's problems, setting a bunch of rules makes for a patchwork solution that lasts until probably the moment the cameras are off.

This show is about as educational and helpful as telling a herion addict 'don't do heroin.'

Jo might be enthusiastic about kids, that doesn't mean she has a magical ability to alter the human pysche with logical 'rules'. The rules may make sense but people don't deal with things according to logic. Their reasoning is deeply psychological which the show never touches on.

Anyone can go to a family in turmoil and make a 'stop yelling at each other' rule, so in a sense we're all supernannies.

Now if only we all had british accents and a cape we'd have our own prime time tv show.

posted at April 1, 2007 10:56 PM

plop wrote:

Guys, this show is shown in the UK too, with english nanny AND families. It's not about the accent ;) It's full of BS but not because of the accent.

posted at April 2, 2007 03:38 AM

Mary wrote:

Zippy,

Everyone is jumping on your case, but I am here to defend you. I love Supernanny! I have a 4 year old nephew who can be a handful and I get so much help from Supernanny. She gives great tips and it's interesting to see her tips played out. The show reveals that it's not a magic cure, her tips will take work. But with hard work and love, there will be positive results. I, for one, really enjoy this show and learn something from it every time I watch.

posted at April 2, 2007 10:06 AM

A wrote:

Guys- you are all insane! why jump on each other, and repeat things OVER AND OVER? It's just a waste of time. And to be hypoocritical- Zippy, you have a misnomer- your not much of a brain if you think that this is a education program. The show is designed to raise money, NOT peoples IQ.

posted at April 2, 2007 07:16 PM

Mac wrote:

I agree that the critic was too harsh on the show.
I didn't get the message from the show that all family problems can be solved in a week. What I saw was the problems observed in a week were talked about.
I also didn't get from the show the idea that a family could become 'perfect' in a week. What I saw was the nanny enforcing several times along the show that they didn't need to strive for perfection.
It didn't seem also that the show was trying to pass the message that all the parents in the entire country couldn't take care of their children. It seemed that families are picked who had problems at the most extreme of the range and are willing to seek help in exchange for being filmed.
BBC may or may not care only about money. It doesn't mean that there is no true advice on the show, and that everything there is evil.
It seems that Carla doesn't like different opinions than the AC's posted here. So according to her this is not supposed to be a place for the exchange of ideas and opinions. Why have a forum, anyway, then.

posted at June 21, 2007 04:03 PM

Send to a Friend

Anonymous Critic Archive

June, 2007 1 entry
May, 2007 1 entry
April, 2007 1 entry
March, 2007 2 entries
February, 2007 2 entries
January, 2007 4 entries
December, 2006 2 entries
November, 2006 2 entries
September, 2006 3 entries
May, 2006 2 entries

NewsWire

Emmy in a Box

The Creative Arts Emmy Awards were held over the weekend, and while many technical...

Television Reviews - TV Shows & TV Reviews - TV Series Recaps & Reviews | TWoP

Recaps, Weecaps, Recaplets and More

Mad Men

You May Not Like Pete...

{ Recap }

...but if his delivery of "Absolutely!" doesn't crack you up, you're not human. Don gets in a car accident, Peggy bails him out, and more about their relationship is revealed.

Double Your Pleasure

{ Weecap }

Dan successfully backdoors Michelle, sees his ally win HoH, wins PoV, and votes Ollie out, all in less than an hour.

The Shearest Genius of Them All

{ Weecap }

After each of the stylists has to style four models in just three hours, the Shear Genius Season 2 crown is set upon one spiky-haired, blonde-streaked head.

Baby, You Can Drive My Dress

{ Recaplet }

The designers learn how to strip cars of their parts in order to create designs. Next week, they'll learn how to make designs from copper stripped from the plumbing in suburban homes.

25% More Filling

{ Weecap }

Five contenders are eliminated, five move into the Top Twenty, and ten perform. Two two-hour shows this week.

I Want Candy

{ Recap }

Drag queens are the clients this week. And maybe, just maybe, Tim Gunn has finally found love.

Under the Counter

{ Recap }

What do you call medicine stolen by pirates? Pharrrrrmaceuticals.

And the Band Played On and On

{ Weecap }

After an Olympic-sized hiatus, we come to the first live show of the very long, drawn-out elimination process, proving that not only do Americans have talent, but so do producers when it comes to squeezing the most out of highly-rated show.

Dan, the Man with the Plan

{ Weecap }

Even with April gone, Ollie's still getting screwed.

Did Newton Need Blake?

{ Weecap }

Nancy notices that dealing drugs is a bad idea.

You Say It’s Your Birthday?

{ Weecap }

Spencer crashes his sister Stephanie’s birthday, as welcome as a fart in an elevator. Man, that guy can clear a room!

The Bomb In The Garden

{ Recaplet }

Baghdad! Kind of like a vacation, but with exploding!

Global Dynamics Almost Destroys the Universe. Again.

{ Recap }

GD’s time maintenance man traps the universe in a freaking time loop, forcing Carter to re-live Allison’s wedding day over and over again. He tries to figure out how to restore time’s linear progression before the universe falls apart as Allison and Stark attempt to get married. Carter probably wouldn’t mind interfering with that progression, either.