<!--Paul Lane--><table width="234" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" background="http://static.cnhi.zope.net/flashpromo/niagaragazette/images/byline_234x60.jpg" height="60"><tr><td><div align="center"><font size="3" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By Paul Lane</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></font><font size="1" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="mailto:lanep@gnnewspaper.com">lanep@gnnewspaper.com<br /></a></font><font size="1" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.niagara-gazette.com/blogs">Click for Blog</a></font></div></td></tr></table>
Anyone who’s ever worn platform shoes with goldfish in them, jean jackets or backward overalls with one strap undone has felt the effects of popular culture in their lives.
But these fads had no long-lasting effect. The fiction we create sometimes has more permanent ramifications on us, whether it’s in how we speak, the technology we use or how we entertain ourselves.
Following are but a few examples of how art has affected life.
Albuquerque Isotopes
The minor league baseball team in New Mexico’s largest city pretty much stole its name from an episode of “The Simpsons.”
In the 2001 episode “Hungry Hungry Homer,” the fictional Springfield Isotopes planned to relocate to Albuquerque, prompting Homer Simpson to go on a hunger strike to keep the baseball team in his hometown.
Meanwhile, back in the real Albuquerque, the city’s Dukes franchise relocated to Portland, Ore., in 2001. After the city acquired the Calgary Cannons in 2003, the team’s owners allowed the public to vote to help choose a new team name; Isotopes took 67 percent of the vote, according to a Seattle Post-Intelligencer report (New Mexico does house several facilities that house nuclear technology, making the name somewhat appropriate).
The team, an affiliate of the L.A. Dodgers in the AAA Pacific Coast League, led all of minor league baseball in merchandise revenue in 2003, according to the Albuquerque Journal.
‘CSI’ effect
Nobody makes science look cooler than the folks in the “CSI” crime lab, and that’s led to real-life problems for the criminal and legal systems.
Using various spinning gadgets and fictional computer programs, the “CSI” technicians always find the right piece of DNA evidence to convict the criminal, allowing the investigation to wrap up into a neat little package. Real life, though, isn’t that easy.
Experts have said that only a small fraction of what’s seen on “CSI” and other forensic science shows is based in fact, and that jurors looking for the clinching piece of evidence are often left lacking. This, in turn, leads to more potential jurors believing there’s a lack of evidence when, in fact, what’s presented is all that can be had.
A 2007 study conducted by Arizona State University staffers, for example, found that “CSI” viewers were critical of forensic evidence presented at a hypothetical trial in which all other evidence was weak, with 29 percent of non-”CSI” viewers said they would convict compared to 18 percent of “CSI” viewers.
While reaffirming that belief, a 2006 study done by University at Buffalo law student Michael D. Mann suggested that there are benefits to the phenomenon, as well.
“Perhaps the best and most overlooked result of shows like ‘CSI’ is that they contribute to the public’s understanding of the law,” he wrote. “Few Americans have ever seen a real trial up close, and even fewer have witnessed a criminal investigation. However, almost all Americans have watched, from their living rooms, what they believe both should look like. Crime dramas not only provide us with a basic understanding of the criminal justice system but provide us with a ‘dream world of justice.’ ”
May ‘The Force’ be with you
Pop culture phrases have become staples of the general public’s vocabulary since Ralph Kramden was wishing his wife Alice to the moon, but several examples have caught on to such an extent as to become actual language.
“The Simpsons” has contributed several words to modern vernacular that have since made their way into the dictionary, including d’oh (an annoyed grunt), meh (an interjection expressing boredom or indifference) and cromulent (positive/acceptable).
“Star Trek” has also contributed several words, such as Trekkie (a fan of the show). The series, in fact, has spawned an entire language, Klingon (spoken by an alien race of the same name); Trekkies have taken Klingon expressions used on the show and used them as the springboard to the lexicon.
“Star Wars” has contributed, as well, with terms such as The Force and lightsaber now a part of modern speak.
Phones go ‘sci-tech’
Even if you despise “Star Trek,” you’re probably at least somewhat familiar with the communicator units the characters used to speak to each other.
As it turns out, that fictional technology inspired similar devices that are now in widespread use.
Martin Cooper, a Motorola researcher and fan of the 1960s series, devised the first practical mobile phone in 1973. He gave credit to “Star Trek” for acting as his technological muse; modern flip phones, in fact, closely resemble the communicator devices used on the show.
Many other examples exist of fiction inspiring real-life technology, whether that technology was realized or remains a desirable dream. Even before the days of Jules Verne — author of “From the Earth to the Moon” in 1865 — people fantasized about going into outer space, a fantasy that became fantasy about a century after Verne’s book was published.
Trekkies, meanwhile, are familiar with transporter units that teleport a person from one place to another, a technology that remains as improbably today as it did when H.G. Wells wrote “The Time Machine” in 1895.
More modern examples include the flying cars that were used on “The Jetsons” in the 1960s and the hoverboards (floating skateboards) that tantalized young viewers of “Back to the Future II” in 1989 (frequent rumors of the boards’ existence have repeatedly been denied in the two decades since that film’s release).
Presidential politics
Any doubt about the result of November’s election was pretty much laid to rest the first time Tina Fey did her skirt-suited Sarah Palin impression on “Saturday Night Live.”
Did people opt not to vote for the John McCain/Palin ticket because of how silly “SNL” made the vice presidential nominee look this past fall? Maybe, maybe not.
But did a good deal of people — especially in the 18-40 age group — gain most of their knowledge about Alaska’s governor from the late-night skit comedy show? You betcha.
Almost from the days of the Richard Nixon/John F. Kennedy Jr. debates, the media have played a role in forming voters’ opinions on the candidates. But unlike perhaps any other election, the fate of the 2008 presidential race laid in the hands of TV jokesters.
Whether it was Fey nailing Palin’s deer-in-the-headlights look during her interview with Katie Couric or seeing the actual Palin sit at the “Weekend Update” desk with a rapping moose dancing around her, “SNL” — however accurate it might have been — did nothing to glamorize the Republican VP nominee to the public. The NBC series saw its highest ratings in more than a decade in the weeks leading up to the November election, and nearly every pair of eyes taking the show in couldn’t help but at least peripherally be influenced by the person being parodied before them.
That’s all for now. Live long and prosper.
Contact editor Paul Laneat 693-1000, ext. 116,or paul.lane@tonawanda-news.com.
• Visit the Life in the Slow Lane blog to read more examples, including a city that erected a statue to a fictional boxer Life in the Slow Lane
