What do you make of this observation by Megan Garber of The Atlantic: “Soccer, in Ted Lasso, doubles as a moral and a metaphor …” with the understanding that “moral” as it is used here refers to a lesson taken from a story? [A metaphor refers to an object that is a symbol of something else, often something abstract.]
The New Yorker review of GLOW asked of lady wrestlers: "Is it O.K. to act out a crass stereotype if it makes you a star? How about if you get paid a ton? What if your performance is genuinely funny? Is it subversive -- or cathartic, or even therapeutic -- to expose the ugliest ways people see you? Or is that just an excuse you make because it's better than being ignored?"
How do you respond to this? What is the core question being asked here?
The intricacy of horse racing, its rules and peculiar language were cited by some critics as challenging to viewers. Are there some sports that defy entertainment narratives? If so, how so? If not, why not?
Reflect on this comment attributed to the producer
of The White Shadow, Mark Tinker: “it was the first television series to
faithfully portray a sport; but more than a series on basketball, it was a series on the concept of ‘fish out
of water.’” How does the pilot episode lay the foundation for this messaging?
Post your response in comments.
What do you make of this observation by Megan Garber of The Atlantic : “Soccer, in Ted Lasso , doubles as a moral and a metaphor …” with ...
