The Technological Hierarchy

for the Removal of Undesirables and the Subjugation of Humanity.

David demanded to know. but even had he not, I heard from Paul, who said he still owned all twelve U.N.C.L.E. paperbacks and the only two Girl From U.N.C.L.E paperbacks printed. and Stewart, who also professed great love of the show.

I have not heard yet from anyone who, like myself, owns all 105 episodes on DVD. if anyone can take a guilty pleasure way, way too far, that be me. every night for over three (happy) months, 48 minutes of U.N.C.L.E with dinner.

but I think the real question is burning in the brains of the Readership, those of They who think this subject is worthy of any brains at all...

just how guilty is this pleasure?

I mean...was the series always shooting for camp? the writing...cold war spies out to save the world...had to be called serio-comic...by the time Batman came out, the series completely yielded to the not-to-be-taken-seriously side of the tube.

but...was it...bad? and if so, was it always bad? and if so...why do we remember it is being so..............good? could it be.....us?

I mean, not to unnecessarily deepen the trench - but one of my studies as I follow my media preference for intelligent dumb comedy is exactly this question -

is there not something in every show, however tongue in cheek, that is designed to have a direct impact, made to be taken seriously? if not, can the show really work at all?

if we don't care at all...and, let's face it, there is no real reason we should care...whether or not Dr. Evil succeeds in getting his "one millllion dollars", if we don't have a moment of empathy when Austin tries to play the "Mr. Tambourine Man" CD on a 45rpm record player...can we enjoy the bright colors and hijinks of the film?

some folks don't enjoy it anyway.

but the point is...a song, a TV show, a movie needs to find its level of cartoon. it needs to know what its world is, what can and can't happen in it. and then stay there. once you make a movie about The Green Lantern...my favorite DC superhero, and also the nickname for my new microphone...you can't resolve the plot by having King Brian, the leprechaun from Darby O'Gill and the Little People, trick Sinestro into making one too many wishes.

you can have a villain whose super power is that he was reliably lucky...that some impossible fortunate coincidence always enabled his plan to succeed. like, that Hal Jordan had parked his car on the street during the six hours a month it is designated for street sweeping, and got towed. it's vaguely within the level of cartoon you've established. similarly, you don't really want Robin to be embarrassed to go out and fight crime because of a bodacious zit at the end of his nose...in the movie, let's say...whereas in "Teen Titans", that is exactly what you'd expect to have happen to him.

no one...no one!!...would ever tell you that that we really ought to be taking the Spinal Tap movie more seriously. that it was meant as drama, and to be evaluated for its Shakesperean heft.

but when Nigel goes backstage to be a "messenger", at least over here in my world, you can hear a pin drop.

it fascinates me that the stupidest smart dumb comedy still needs the viewer, in some way, to take it seriously, and even more incredibly that we, as smart people suspending our disbelief in hopes of a worthy storytelling experience, can still be willing to do exactly that.

of course the hero wins!!! especially in this kind of joint!! you really, at 59, need to watch all the way through to make sure that happens?? the third time?? it's fiction! it's made to order! it's made to give us reliably what we can't rely on in our lives!

last night, on Who Wants to be a Millionaire, the question was, what was true about the fictional character Harry Potter? that he a. lived in New York, b. wore glasses...

anyone but Immanuel Kant would choose b. and get the $500.

but what if we predicate something true about a fictional character? he wears glasses...but could he do that, if he did not exist? so if it is true that he wears glasses...Harry Potter, and all seven books, exist somehow, somewhere.

a laugh riot, eh? except for Anselm of Canterbury.

he proposed one of the middle period ontological proofs for the existence of God by saying...when we say, God is that which, greater can it cannot be conceived...we are speaking in an intelligible way, which can be understood. thus, what is referred to either exists only in thought, or in both thought and reality. but since in thought we can always conceive of something greater that what we just thought of (but wait! there's more! you get two Snuggies and a Pajama Jean for the same low price, plus separate shipping and handling)

then God must exist in reality.

to put too fine a point on it, Kant countered that existence is not a predicate. that you cannot say of a fire truck, that it is red and has a siren and also exists. things just don't work that way. once you go there, you can posit the existence of all sorts of ultimate things...greatest island, greatest pizza (reader's choice), greatest version ever of "Dark Star".

existence is not a predicate. just as you cannot bring up the subject of the King. because the King is not a subject. try parsing a sentence with those rules.

I will also put too fine a point on my answer to the question posed so so far above, Weary Reader.

be at peace. U.N.C.L.E could be quite good. even beyond Illya Kuryakin's allure to both chicks and unconventional role model seeking guys. beyond star charisma and cool gadgets.

I cite in my defense, "The Never Never Affair", starring Barbara Feldon and Cesar Romero.

it was an inclusion in every U.N.C.L.E episode, the outsider propelled into a world of espionage they had never dreamed of. in this case, the coup is that Barbara already works at U.N.C.L.E, in the Portuguese translation department. but she is bored to distraction, and looking for just a taste of the front lines.

that's all I'll tell. except to say, it's good...watchable today with nary a moment of guilt. you wouldn't say, theatrical, but you would say, involving. and it finds and keeps to its level of cartoon surefootedly.

we come to a storytelling ready to be manipulated, hoping that the teller can do it well. U.N.C.L.E. did sometimes do the job.

and, of course, if teller is sufficiently skillful, then we don't have to be caught wildly suspending our disbelief like children. a real embarrassment saved there.

me, I suspended my disbelief for Dave Dee Dozy Beaky Mick and Tich when they put out their Zorba the Greek sounding hit, "Bend It". I'm lost. those of you who can, save yourselves.

Dave, next visit, let's throw that episode in the DVD player.

p. s. wouldn't this reading have been more fun if you had not Googled the THRUSH answer?

tsk tsk.

p.p.s. I was too young to have caught Bond books, or the movies before Goldfinger. but the organization he battled in the early Ian Fleming books was SMERSH. actually (yes, I Googled this) Stalin made up the name...a Russian acronym, so no letter filling in for me...but the SMERSH in the books was a far broader outfit than Stalin's unit.

U.N.C.L.E., the only one with periods. hmm...

we'll leave CONTROL and KAOS to another time.