Yellow Journalism: Q. and A. With the Unauthorized Historian of ‘The Simpsons’
By Lisa Tozzi
“The problem of writing about comedy is that it’s like trying to hold a gas,” Conan O’Brien told John Ortved during an interview for “The Simpsons: An Uncensored, Unauthorized History” (Faber and Faber). “The tighter you squeeze, the more it dissipates.” Despite that warning — and the refusal of many key figures behind the series to cooperate with him — Mr. Ortved set out to write an inside look at the longest-running comedy series in American television history, which has just begun its 21st season. Mr. Ortved, 29, a self-described “comedy nerd,” who says he likes to laugh “more than the average person,” first pitched the idea of an oral history of the show when he was a 26-year-old editorial associate at Vanity Fair. ” ‘The Simpsons’ has been so influential that it is difficult to find a strain of television comedy that does not contain its bloodline,” Mr. Ortved said. Three years, 80 on-the-record interviews and one Vanity Fair article later, Mr. Ortved has produced a 300-page combination of juicy entertainment gossip, rich television history and notes from a disenchanted lover. Mr. Ortved recently spoke about the challenges of writing the book, the show’s legacy, Spider Pig and the possibility of a Simpsons Land theme park.
Q.
Some of the biggest players in the show’s history — Matt Groening, James L. Brooks — would not talk to you for the Vanity Fair article or for the book. How big a challenge was that?
A.
The advantage was that it was kind of a crash course in investigative journalism. It was hard, but it also weirdly worked to my advantage. It would have been wonderful to interview Matt Groening, James L. Brooks, but frankly, they’ve been interviewed 50 times about “The Simpsons” over the past 20 years. What new were they going to tell me?
I mean, I would be insane not to want to interview them. But not having that option, I had to start digging, and the advantage there is that by them not cooperating, I found tons of sources and background that I might not have found if they had cooperated.
Q.
Why an oral history?
A.
Even before I knew this became “unauthorized,” I knew it was a story with a lot of voices in it, and with something as contentious as a collaborative creative project, sometimes the best and most objective way to display the different sides of that story is through an oral history. Outside of that, I am a fan of the form. “Edie: American Girl” [about Edie Sedgwick] and “Please Kill Me” [a history of punk music] are two of my favorite histories, period, never mind that they are oral histories.
Q.
Who was your favorite interview?
A.
Conan O’Brien [a writer and producer from 1991-1993 ] was one of the best interviews I ever had. He speaks in perfect paragraphs — it is remarkable — and everything he says is funny. The bummer about interviewing him, is that of course I am such a little comedy nerd, I was trying to make him laugh and I did not make him laugh.
Q.
Talk a little about the “Simpsons”-Fox relationship. People often point out that it is interesting that a show that was initially criticized by the right (most notably George H. Bush during the 1992 Republican national convention) has run for so long on Rupert Murdoch’s Fox network.
A.
The most telling anecdote I have is that one of the people I sat down to interview was Rupert Murdoch, and I asked him, “Rupert, how much money has ‘The Simpsons’ made for you?” And he just sat back, smiled and was like, “Let’s just say it’s a lot.”
Q.
You make a number of references in the book to the decline in quality of the show. Have you ever heard of Fox or the folks behind the show pulling the plug at some point soon?
A.
In terms of its spiral, to be fair to the writers, there’s only so much you can do with a set of characters. I mean, 20 years? I don’t know how they do it. But if they’re still trying to break ground, they should have canned it 10 years ago.
But I don’t see them ending it anytime soon unless it becomes unprofitable. They just opened “The Simpsons” ride at Universal Studios, and I see a trend in that way. In the interviews I conducted, someone compared Matt Groening to Walt Disney. “The Simpsons” is a brand at this point that is as recognizable or getting to be as recognizable as Mickey Mouse and Disney, and I don’t know why they can’t have a Simpsons Land at some point.
Q.
What did you think of the movie?
A.
It was 90 minutes of throwaway jokes. It was about as good as a very good episode in the later seasons, but I don’t think it worked. Its kind of shocking to me that that group of writers couldn’t come up with something better. I mean the final scene in the movie literally involved a ticking time bomb. I think that’s what happens at screenwriting class at the Y.
The funniest stuff involved the pig. That’s Homer at his very best: Homer becoming absorbed with something ridiculous. Whether it’s a trampoline or a pig — or sugar, there’s one where he gets involved with sugar — that stuff tends to be the best.
Q.
“The Simpsons” fought a pretty long, disappointing battle with the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences for a chance to be nominated for outstanding comedy series. Do you think people behind the show were upset by the “Family Guy” Emmy nomination?
A.
I find it funny. I can’t speak to what they thought of it. James L. Brooks is probably rolling his eyes, the guy has so many Oscars and Emmys, he’s probably like, “Who cares?” “The Simpsons” deserved the Emmy back in 1992, when it was the fastest, funniest thing on TV.
But any head-slapping that would had gone on over the [Family Guy] nomination would have happened 15 years ago. Now, “The Simpsons” would never stand a chance.
Q.
Who’s your favorite character?
A.
Good Lord. I mean, obviously it’s Homer, but I think that’s everyone’s favorite. There’s something about Homer that speaks to — well, men especially — but everyone. In the canon of Western entertainment, people will look back and see Homer Simpson as this perfectly malleable American stereotype.
Q.
If you had to pick one episode as your favorite, could you?
A.
It’s a paradox: If you watch your favorite one over and over, it becomes not your favorite, but the Monorail episode and the Burns bear episode is as good I think as that show ever got.
Q.
Are you one of those people who walk around quoting “The Simpsons” all the time?
A.
Yes, I would always walk around and annoy people and say “Simpsons” things to them, but I have nowhere near enough cool or comedic timing to get the line out without giggling.
Q.
Give me your three favorite lines.
A.
This is really hard. O.K., No. 1:. “Does whiskey count as beer?” — Homer (after being asked by a TV announcer, “Are you on your third beer of the evening?”)
No. 2. “That man is my exact double … that dog has a puffy tail! [Chasing the dog] Heehee. Puff!” — Homer (on seeing a man who looks as exactly the same as him, lying bloodied outside Moe’s tavern, then being distracted by a dog with a puffy tail).
No. 3. “Me fail English? That’s unpossible.” - Ralph Wiggum
Q.
How would you describe “The Simpsons” in a sentence to someone who has never heard of it?
A.
It’s a cartoon sitcom about a family and their town that better than any live-action show satirized the American way of life.
By Lisa Tozzi
“The problem of writing about comedy is that it’s like trying to hold a gas,” Conan O’Brien told John Ortved during an interview for “The Simpsons: An Uncensored, Unauthorized History” (Faber and Faber). “The tighter you squeeze, the more it dissipates.” Despite that warning — and the refusal of many key figures behind the series to cooperate with him — Mr. Ortved set out to write an inside look at the longest-running comedy series in American television history, which has just begun its 21st season. Mr. Ortved, 29, a self-described “comedy nerd,” who says he likes to laugh “more than the average person,” first pitched the idea of an oral history of the show when he was a 26-year-old editorial associate at Vanity Fair. ” ‘The Simpsons’ has been so influential that it is difficult to find a strain of television comedy that does not contain its bloodline,” Mr. Ortved said. Three years, 80 on-the-record interviews and one Vanity Fair article later, Mr. Ortved has produced a 300-page combination of juicy entertainment gossip, rich television history and notes from a disenchanted lover. Mr. Ortved recently spoke about the challenges of writing the book, the show’s legacy, Spider Pig and the possibility of a Simpsons Land theme park.
Q.
Some of the biggest players in the show’s history — Matt Groening, James L. Brooks — would not talk to you for the Vanity Fair article or for the book. How big a challenge was that?
A.
The advantage was that it was kind of a crash course in investigative journalism. It was hard, but it also weirdly worked to my advantage. It would have been wonderful to interview Matt Groening, James L. Brooks, but frankly, they’ve been interviewed 50 times about “The Simpsons” over the past 20 years. What new were they going to tell me?
I mean, I would be insane not to want to interview them. But not having that option, I had to start digging, and the advantage there is that by them not cooperating, I found tons of sources and background that I might not have found if they had cooperated.
Q.
Why an oral history?
A.
Even before I knew this became “unauthorized,” I knew it was a story with a lot of voices in it, and with something as contentious as a collaborative creative project, sometimes the best and most objective way to display the different sides of that story is through an oral history. Outside of that, I am a fan of the form. “Edie: American Girl” [about Edie Sedgwick] and “Please Kill Me” [a history of punk music] are two of my favorite histories, period, never mind that they are oral histories.
Q.
Who was your favorite interview?
A.
Conan O’Brien [a writer and producer from 1991-1993 ] was one of the best interviews I ever had. He speaks in perfect paragraphs — it is remarkable — and everything he says is funny. The bummer about interviewing him, is that of course I am such a little comedy nerd, I was trying to make him laugh and I did not make him laugh.
Q.
Talk a little about the “Simpsons”-Fox relationship. People often point out that it is interesting that a show that was initially criticized by the right (most notably George H. Bush during the 1992 Republican national convention) has run for so long on Rupert Murdoch’s Fox network.
A.
The most telling anecdote I have is that one of the people I sat down to interview was Rupert Murdoch, and I asked him, “Rupert, how much money has ‘The Simpsons’ made for you?” And he just sat back, smiled and was like, “Let’s just say it’s a lot.”
Q.
You make a number of references in the book to the decline in quality of the show. Have you ever heard of Fox or the folks behind the show pulling the plug at some point soon?
A.
In terms of its spiral, to be fair to the writers, there’s only so much you can do with a set of characters. I mean, 20 years? I don’t know how they do it. But if they’re still trying to break ground, they should have canned it 10 years ago.
But I don’t see them ending it anytime soon unless it becomes unprofitable. They just opened “The Simpsons” ride at Universal Studios, and I see a trend in that way. In the interviews I conducted, someone compared Matt Groening to Walt Disney. “The Simpsons” is a brand at this point that is as recognizable or getting to be as recognizable as Mickey Mouse and Disney, and I don’t know why they can’t have a Simpsons Land at some point.
Q.
What did you think of the movie?
A.
It was 90 minutes of throwaway jokes. It was about as good as a very good episode in the later seasons, but I don’t think it worked. Its kind of shocking to me that that group of writers couldn’t come up with something better. I mean the final scene in the movie literally involved a ticking time bomb. I think that’s what happens at screenwriting class at the Y.
The funniest stuff involved the pig. That’s Homer at his very best: Homer becoming absorbed with something ridiculous. Whether it’s a trampoline or a pig — or sugar, there’s one where he gets involved with sugar — that stuff tends to be the best.
Q.
“The Simpsons” fought a pretty long, disappointing battle with the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences for a chance to be nominated for outstanding comedy series. Do you think people behind the show were upset by the “Family Guy” Emmy nomination?
A.
I find it funny. I can’t speak to what they thought of it. James L. Brooks is probably rolling his eyes, the guy has so many Oscars and Emmys, he’s probably like, “Who cares?” “The Simpsons” deserved the Emmy back in 1992, when it was the fastest, funniest thing on TV.
But any head-slapping that would had gone on over the [Family Guy] nomination would have happened 15 years ago. Now, “The Simpsons” would never stand a chance.
Q.
Who’s your favorite character?
A.
Good Lord. I mean, obviously it’s Homer, but I think that’s everyone’s favorite. There’s something about Homer that speaks to — well, men especially — but everyone. In the canon of Western entertainment, people will look back and see Homer Simpson as this perfectly malleable American stereotype.
Q.
If you had to pick one episode as your favorite, could you?
A.
It’s a paradox: If you watch your favorite one over and over, it becomes not your favorite, but the Monorail episode and the Burns bear episode is as good I think as that show ever got.
Q.
Are you one of those people who walk around quoting “The Simpsons” all the time?
A.
Yes, I would always walk around and annoy people and say “Simpsons” things to them, but I have nowhere near enough cool or comedic timing to get the line out without giggling.
Q.
Give me your three favorite lines.
A.
This is really hard. O.K., No. 1:. “Does whiskey count as beer?” — Homer (after being asked by a TV announcer, “Are you on your third beer of the evening?”)
No. 2. “That man is my exact double … that dog has a puffy tail! [Chasing the dog] Heehee. Puff!” — Homer (on seeing a man who looks as exactly the same as him, lying bloodied outside Moe’s tavern, then being distracted by a dog with a puffy tail).
No. 3. “Me fail English? That’s unpossible.” - Ralph Wiggum
Q.
How would you describe “The Simpsons” in a sentence to someone who has never heard of it?
A.
It’s a cartoon sitcom about a family and their town that better than any live-action show satirized the American way of life.
