Big Bang Theory isn't made for geeks; it's made for people who want to laugh at geeks. Mostly, it's made to sitcom conventions and happens to use geekery as the punchline to conventional setups, situations, and timing. It's a show on rails, with ostensible 'nerds' as set dressing. Provided you watch it as a formulaic, mildly entertaining sitcom, it serves that purpose. Occasionally you can nod knowingly at catching Sheldon's obscure-to-the-general-public science references. But if you're the kind of person who catches Sheldon's references, the show's not for you. (In the aggregate, at least. Personally speaking, I enjoy Sheldon, even though I recognize him as a caricature.)
There have been some great commentaries over the last few years about shows for nerds vs. shows about nerds. Compare, for example, Big Bang Theory and Community. The former has more putatively 'nerdy' characters, but it's by no means a nerdy show. The latter revels in its obscurity, geekery, and absurdity, even though only one of the characters is supposed to be a 'nerd' in the vein of BBT's Sheldon. General Population watches BBT for entertainment, but also for a sort of paradoxical validation: to feel 'in' on the nerdery, but mostly to place a safe distance between itself and nerdery. Nerds, meanwhile, watch shows like Community, which make no bones about their nerdery.
Traditionally, the gulf between content 'for nerds' and 'about nerds' has been pretty wide. That's because the non-nerdy public finds the genuine article to be unfamiliar and vaguely threatening. If Judge's take on Silicon Valley succeeds, it will be the first time in years that someone's bridged this gap.
> Big Bang Theory isn't made for geeks; it's made for people who want to laugh at geeks.
It's important to note that BBT's jokes are largely predicated on academia and NOT tech culture since their inside consultant is a physics prof. It's amusing when the "geeks" complain how the show portrays them, when they don't just get the humor having never shared the experiences of the academics on the show.
That said, the volume of nuanced yet poignant physics jokes has dropped since season 1. Still not bad though, and enjoyed by those without the misplaced egos.
The physics jokes are probably the best part of the show, and they're sort of an easter egg for people who get them. That's the part of the show where the effort invested (expert consultant, etc.) really shines through.
In general, I find the show mildly to moderately funny. I'm certainly not offended by it, as a lot of people seem to be. I just take it for what it is. It's a mainstream show that happens to feature some insider humor, rather than the other way around. Characterizations of the show as "nerd blackface" seem misguided, IMO. Legitimately offensive "nerd blackface" would be, for example, the portrayal of Asian-American characters in '80s comedies like Revenge of the Nerds and Sixteen Candles.
All true, but the main point is that the subject of BBT isn't "geeks", which explains the misguided haterade. For example, Raj seeking research/grant funding from Sheldon and their university office sharing hijinx hits home for a segment of nerds who aren't the type to frequent reddit or HN where the "laugh at geeks" narrative became popular.
This is esp. cogent if Community is supposed to be a "proper" nerdy show. The reality is a single-camera format is more conducive to a more subtle script (eg 30 rock, which geeks similarly like) than a cheap/quick multi-cam sitcom. The love seems to stem from the nature of the material, which is conflated with the material itself.
There have been some great commentaries over the last few years about shows for nerds vs. shows about nerds. Compare, for example, Big Bang Theory and Community. The former has more putatively 'nerdy' characters, but it's by no means a nerdy show. The latter revels in its obscurity, geekery, and absurdity, even though only one of the characters is supposed to be a 'nerd' in the vein of BBT's Sheldon. General Population watches BBT for entertainment, but also for a sort of paradoxical validation: to feel 'in' on the nerdery, but mostly to place a safe distance between itself and nerdery. Nerds, meanwhile, watch shows like Community, which make no bones about their nerdery.
Traditionally, the gulf between content 'for nerds' and 'about nerds' has been pretty wide. That's because the non-nerdy public finds the genuine article to be unfamiliar and vaguely threatening. If Judge's take on Silicon Valley succeeds, it will be the first time in years that someone's bridged this gap.