The New York Times: While this was written prior to the cancellation of the show Roseanne, this still offers great perspective into what’s happening in America, or at least, Roseanne’s America. And what does that look like? Her show focused on a family struggling to meet ends for one, health issues, and while some think this was a “Pro-Trump” show, in essence it was not. It focused on a family, their lives, their disagreements, and how to navigate through it all.
Excerpt from The New York Times:
The show engages people based on who they are, not how they vote. That’s refreshing and necessary in this hyperpolitical moment, and it demonstrates a rare and welcome humanity. Roseanne is older, her health is increasingly precarious, and the family’s finances are, if anything, more uncertain. The Conners struggle with all kinds of problems for which people often seek political solutions.
Yet the show is not overtly political. That is both its power and its charm. Ideologues will be quick to tease meaning from every plotline, but that misses the point. “Roseanne” is not ideological, offers no policy prescription and endorses no candidate or party. Instead, the show depicts the natural drama of family life and how one American family holds itself together under duress.