Note to Michelle Goldberg and other commentators: why don't you actually read Charlaine Harris' books first before writing about her characters! The show is based on the Sookie Stackhouse book series, so far there have been NINE books published. The t.v. show has only covered the first TWO books.

If you take the time to read the books, you will soon find out that your article is a very SUPERFICIAL analysis of the series. It's a lot more complicated than you are making it out to be. Along with vampires are also wereanimals (also in the closet initially), Fairies, and the usual Black and White racism of the South. And yes, the Fellowship of the Sun soon become extremely violent. The Sookie Stackhouse series is much, more, complicated and interesting than the kiddy Twilight series.
http://www.amazon.com/Dead-Gone-Sookie-Stackhouse-Book/dp/0441017150/ref =sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1247967384&sr=8-2

I have to agree with crymeariver, WTF have you been watching Michelle, not the same thing I have. I've enjoyed the books, as always, better than the TV show, but I don't know what you've been watching. Read Ms. Harris's books, they are wonderful.

ugh.. another forced, tortured article from goldberg's simple mind.
yes, ball has added cheeky analogies to the gay experience but this is a series about VAMPIRES. how funny that goldberg sees 'evil' republicans under every coffin lid !

Simplistic and pedestrian commentary. The show is layered and well-done, that is why it is popular--not because Alan Ball has created a self-hating screed.

Not like the two prior comments I have knowledge of this article's writer curriculum or have I read the books in which this amazing series are based on, but I can "sense' that this article is "much do about nothing". Actually I was almost expecting that something like this superficial was going to appear soon in the American media. Why? Because American likes to take "imagery without content" and make a huge big issue when so obviously there is none. Like a child will make a monster out of a shadow and go screaming his/her self into panic the American media will make fuzz out of a obviously out of the common narrative without bothering to check what is this about. Therefore this is just a simplistic "get into panic" article written by someone who didn't do her homework beforehand. I mean, to think that this program is homophobic is just ridiculous!

This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.

Ahem. I am speechless. Can't wait to read the political underlines of the Weather Channel.

This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.

I'm not surprised by Goldberg's opinion, the far left find anything that accurately reflects the reality uncomfortable. Pointing out that the advocacy of extremist leftist academics have created far too many fascistic goose steppers, perhaps she doesn't care for depictions of left wing liberal arts students who are shutting down free speech on campuses across the US and in Canada, because they have been indoctrinated to hate, are incapable of respect for the civil rights of others. Or left wing social workers who are nothing more than parasites, not working to help the poor, especially poor children, but to exploit them for their own twisted agenda.

I'm sure Goldberg also doesn't find convenient the fact that the terms left wing and right wing are European constructs, and that both extremes sprang from Marxism, that they refer to left wing and right wing communists, that both extremes are actually the same thing, intent on the same dangerous, undemocratic and totalitarian outcome. They have nothing to do with democrat or republican.

Hitler and the nazis, just as the fascists, communists and socialists all sprang from communism and socialism, they reflect the true face of the dystopian world that results from application of Marxist ideology. We see the left wing extremists in the Obama administration attempting to impose eugenics, forced death, censorship, theft, suppression of free speech, suppression of religious rights, intimidation, control of the media. discrimination against free citizens, bribery and all sorts of corruption. Goldberg finds the truth inconvenient, but that doesn't mean she has the right to not be confronted by it, and her own hypocrisies.

Maybe this will help the author of this article understand all of the elements of the series she is fretting about.

sat%u22C5ire%u2002%u2002/%u02C8s�ta%u026A%u0259r/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [sat-ahyuhr] Show IPA
Use Satire in a Sentence
-noun 1. the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
2. a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule.
3. a literary genre comprising such compositions.


----------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------

Origin:
1500-10; < L satira, var. of satura medley, perh. fem. deriv. of satur sated (see saturate )


Synonyms:
1. See irony 1 . 2, 3. burlesque, caricature, parody, travesty. Satire, lampoon refer to literary forms in which vices or follies are ridiculed. Satire, the general term, often emphasizes the weakness more than the weak person, and usually implies moral judgment and corrective purpose: Swift's satire of human pettiness and bestiality. Lampoon refers to a form of satire, often political or personal, characterized by the malice or virulence of its attack: lampoons of the leading political figures.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Satire

The story elements that author is fretting about are not supposed to be metaphor, but SATIRE. Satire, which uses sarcasm and irony, rather than metaphor which draws direct parallels. While the entire series is a metaphor about xenophobia, it uses satirical elements, like the vampires to get its point across. By failing to detect the irony, the author has unwittingly become a victim of the satire. Which I think adds to the comedy of the show.

Reading political ideologies from the script of a TV series is ridiculous.
Ms. Goldman needs to step back and give thought to why she is so obsessed with the picture box in her house that occupies so much of her time and thought.
It's a TV show, it's fantasy, enough said.

Michelle Goldberg needs to touch up on her film analysis skills. I'm quite sensitive to the often-underlying messages sent through formula and character-development in many TV shows that portray sexism, racism and homophobia. But quite honestly, unless you just read some plot summaries, you have really missed something about True Blood if you think it is homophobic. (My partner and I both love it.)

To begin with, yes, the vampires represent that which is "other" and that which is feared - just as us queer folk are seen by the right wing. But the show actually makes the vampires out to be the ones that are the sympathetic characters - perhaps even more reasonable than the humans. It's the religious nuts that are portrayed by the show as the truly scary, illogical force. Every time the vampires go to a place of violence it is a response to either the religious freaks or being taken advantage of.

There is an underlying conflict here that is about queer culture: the push to make "the other" mainstream.It is clear that Michelle Goldberg clearly thinks the only ways for something to not be homophobic is to have it portray queers (or those symbolic of queers) as normative.

Conforming to the right wing's ideas of what is good is not victory for the queer community. It is our affront to the oppressive system of gender that makes us scary to the right wing. And that is a good thing.

Recently in my blog post about why I like Bruno, I named Layfatte, which is an amazing strong and 3-dimensional character as one of my favorite campy queer characters played by straight people. Read why here: http://nedtherednet.blogspot.com/

I got confused just by the byline:
The "right wing's worst nightmares" would be BAD things for the right wing, like a socialist becoming president.
Yet this show allegedly has a "reactionary, antigay worldview."
So which one is it? Hmm? Where's the proof reader?

While all of this may be, it is really the incredible atmosphere & chemistry amongst the characters that makes it so hypnotic and addictive... much like Six Feet Under.

I have serious doubts that there are no political undertones in the True Blood television series. I do think it is more a socio-cultural commentary, though, than simply political.
All creative work reflects something of its creator.
Could be, the creators of this series are simply asking hard questions.
That said, I do not like the television series. I reserve judgement about the books upon which it is based, having yet to read any of them. The series offends me with its sadomaschostic sexual violence.
It has challeneged me to ponder issues I have yet to resolve in my own mind.
from that standpoint, creating the 'aha' moment in a single audience member, the series has accomplished the higher purpose of all creative endeavor.
I still don't like it, though.

"[Maryann is] a wonderful creation, but she also seems like something sprung from the mind of a lip-smacking, hungry-eyed televangelist railing against feminism."

Actually, she's something sprung from Greek mythology; she's a maenad (if the series follows the book).

Reading this article, I'm reminded of two quotes sayings:

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. (attributed to Sigmund Freud)

If you want to send a message, call Western Union. (Louis B. Mayer)

I don't know enough about the series to make specific comments on the accuracy of the analysis, but all there are way too many commenters here claiming that what's on television doesn't reflect a society's cultural myths and values. Particularly regarding a show that so explicitly references these issues (I've seen a few episodes), the level of critical thought is kind of sort of depressing me.

Yes! I totally agree with Goldberg, this article's author. It reminds me of a discussion I was having about the "Where's Waldo" books. How they're really the lament of truly lost, confused, and desperate souls living in unwanted anonymity. In fact, Where's Waldo is a lesson in how the government and other unsympathetic right-wingers spin these tortured, lonely cries of woe into a child's game of hide and seek, thereby diluting the true nature of their abysmal lives...
Goldberg's insight is spot-on!

i can't tell if this is an article or an advertisement.

While there are some obvious parallels between what could be called the civil rights struggle of vampires and the actual civil rights struggle of gays/lesbians, I must agree that Michele is making huge assumptions about the series from only a few episodes.
Sometimes a vampire is just a vampire.

PS I love how the leader of the church is a dead ringer for Ralph Reed

"the Fellowship kind of has a point"
and what point would that be Michelle, judging people on who or what they are as opposed to their actions?

Forget the gay angst. This is the best show on tv right now. It is very provacative and sexy and I cannot wait to see the next episode. I think the show is more of a denial of the Southern Conservative "christian" way of life than anything else, but, they are such easy targets it's funny. Awesome show !!!!

Love the show. Not so sure on the commentary. While I can see the gay symbolism I disagree about drawing direct comparison. I personally view the writing as a good vs bad with the lines obviously blurred. I think the writers are clever in their portrayals of the vampires and of the prejudices of the deep south. I think the shows underlying themes are an obvious satire of the right wing fundamentalists views on anything that doesn't fit into their preconceived notions. I think calling True Blood anti-gay is missing the message here. While perpetuating stereotypes for the right wing it makes you sympathize with the vampire strugges against fundamentalist religions. Its more a commentary on right wing coopting of religion to kill in the name of their god those that they do not understand. Setting it in the deep south only amplifies this message.

Just totally missing the point. Certainly there are certainly elements of the show that seem to go directly at particular features of society - most notably the attitudes of the rural Christian Right. But when it comes to Vampires, reducing it to a simply allegory for modern-day homosexuals is a real reach. For example, I can't really see what Ball would be trying to say about Homosexuals through his Vampires' superpowers. And I'm not buying the "temptation" thing.

The "coming out of the coffin" thing, as well as "God Hates Fangs" are certainly evocative of the history of prejudice again Homosexuals in America, but it's not JUST about homosexuals. The author is correct that Ball is trying to stoke the fears of southern conservatives, but it's about ALL prejudice. That's what seems to be totally missed in this piece. These are not gay people - these are vampires. And there are both gay vampires, and straight vampires. While there may be more details that constitute intuitive parallels to one form of prejudice over another, ultimately what Ball is treating in this show is the often judgmental and prejudicial nature of our culture. By choosing vampires, he takes something that is ingrained in everyone's mind as a monstrous and evil being, and has them fighting for acceptance in the world.

That's one of the reasons why Bill Compton is such an interested character, particularly in light of the show's setting in the rural south. He fought for the Confederate Army, and therefore commands a profound and intrinsic respect from many of the citizens of their corner of Louisiana, especially the elders. This, combined with his 19th-century southern manner, creates in Vampire Bill a sort of symbol for a racist and prejudiced past culture--and just as the sentiments still linger today in the modern culture of the deep south, so too does Vampire Bill linger. However, while epitomizing the South's struggle in the civil war, he simultaneously stands for a highly progressive attitude--namely that vampires and humans can integrate.

This is just one of the many reasons why True Blood is so richly textured and complicated. And because it is so, please spare us the over-simplification and grandiose point-making that comes with reducing a show to a statement about gay people. I mean come on.