At My Whit’s End: Portrait of a Family on Fire (Part 2)
(Photo: Cover art of the 2012 re-release of Family Portraits, Focus on the Family. Image courtesy of The Odyssey Scoop.)
A question I keep coming back to as I work on this project is, “am I giving these writers too much credit?” I don’t mean for their skills as storytellers. For all the problems Family Portraits has, it laid the groundwork for a massive franchise, one that I still have a lot of (conflicting) affection for.
Am I giving the writers undue credit for not holding the same twisted morals as James Dobson?
After all, they do work for Focus on the Family, which has no shortage of crimes to its name. For many this would be enough to declare everyone associated with the show monsters and leave it at that. But I can’t shake the feeling there’s more going on here. That, at the very core of Family Portraits, there’s a tension between what the writers intend the show to be and what Dobson uses it for.
While Dad’s Away
Salesman Mike lands a job that requires him to spend long periods away from his wife and kids but can he handle them adapting to life without him?
The “adult” focused side of Family Portraits returns, with kids barely featuring. Interestingly it doesn’t start with Mike’s family drama but instead Whit showing a different couple a house that has to be sold in a hurry. The husband’s suspicious.
Whit: “Let's just say that circumstances forced them to sell in a hurry.”
Husband: “Circumstances, huh? All right, Mr. Whittaker, what's really wrong with this house?”
Whit: “Why, nothing, as far as I know.”
Husband: “Don't give me that. I saw Poltergeist. Is this place built over a graveyard or something? This Brettman character, what was he? Some kind of an ax murderer or something?”
Wife: “Peter! You'll have to pardon my husband, Mr. Whitaker. He's been watching too many Stephen King movies.”
Husband: “I don't watch JUST Stephen King movies….”
Whit: “That's quite all right. Besides, when I said circumstances, I meant something much more serious than some idiotic movie.”¹
Putting aside that Poltergeist isn’t a Stephen King movie, this is a fun exchange that quickly gives the husband a bit of character. Yet it’s weirdly undercut by Whit’s “idiotic movie” comment. I don’t love watching horror movies either, but what’s the deal? Why so harsh?
Speaking in a 2012 retrospective on Family Portraits, writer Steven Harris discussed how he’d need to polish every script before they were sent to the higher ups at Focus because, “there was always this creative tension between what we wanted to do and what we knew we could get approved.”²
This isn’t uncommon in media. Writers almost always have someone to answer to, whether it be a publishing editor, a TV network head, or whomever else. You rarely get 100% of what you want into the final product, especially when you’re just starting out. But Family Portraits is unique because, as we discussed last time, Focus had next to no experience in drama and the writers had to make it up as they went along. But that didn’t mean they had carte blanche.
Harris recently recalled, “even though there was not a lot of direction, there was a lot of oversight and some pretty specific expectations.”³
While I doubt Dobson and the leadership of Focus on the Family were giving in-depth notes on story structure, character development, and other writerly things, anything that had to do with morals would be under strict scrutiny. That’s what Focus is all about! Back in the ‘80s Focus were decrying secular media, which they continue to do to this day. A recent article from Focus (well, recent in that it was originally written in 1999 and they’ve continually updated it) marks The Beatles’ release of “I Want to Hold Your Hand” as the start of society’s moral erosion when it comes to casual sex. That lurid song directly lead to Olivia Newton-John “beckoning a lover” on “Physical,” Nelly Furtado’s “casual hook-up” endorsement in “Promiscuous,” and the song that truly slid society “into the sewer,” Cardi B’s “WAP.”⁴
(I’m picturing Paul McCartney, sitting on the same boat where he was interviewed during The Beatles Anthology documentary, chipper at the idea that he has a direct connection to “WAP.” “Right on, man,” he’d say.)
But secular media is a huge part of culture, even if you’ve been told to isolate from it. So much a part that, if you need to quickly define a bit character in a story, it’s useful to draw on. So when Phil Lollar, the writer of “While Dad’s Away,” centers a character around his fear of “secular media” writer Stephen King, it can’t be left without comment. Dobson would never allow it! Stephen King movies are part of the downfall of our society! Dobson would call them...
Idiotic.
I have no doubt this part of the episode got approved by having Whit unleash his full Dobson-sona. What better way to please your boss than to have your main character, played by well known actor Hal Smith, spout his talking points? Hell, throw enough of those in and you’ll be able to write more of what you, as a writer, want.
Getting back to the episode, Whit tells the couple about the previous owners of the house, Mike and Janice. A loving couple with two kids, Mike gets a promotion that requires a great deal of travel. He knows it’ll be tough for his family but they’re all willing to make the adjustment. Months and months go by, with Mike out of contact for weeks at a time. He tries to be there for them but can’t do much over the phone.
It all comes to a head when Janice, not wanting to worry Mike, neglects to mention their son broke his arm. Mike flips out, why didn’t she call him? Janice fires back, “what good would it have done? Would you have come home?” Mike admits he wouldn’t have been able to but tries to recover some ground, sniping back that she’s acting so dramatic! It’s not like their kids are orphans, he spends time at home when he can! It’s here where Janice just lays into him.
Janice: “Michael, even when you're here, you're not really here. You're on the phone or behind your desk, shuffling papers or something like that.”
Mike: “What, what do you think? That all business comes to a grinding halt at 5:00 every Friday night?”
Janice: “Not at all. As a matter of fact, I understand only too well that it doesn’t.”
Mike: “Look, look, I'm sorry I wasn't there, all right? But there wasn't a whole lot I could do about it. There is a world outside our family, you know? And like it or not, I have certain responsibilities in that world.”
Janice: “I realize that. I also realize that you've worked very hard to get into that world, and that it means a great deal to you. But you can't have it both ways, Michael. It just doesn't work that way.”
Mike: “What's that supposed to mean? What do you want from me, Janice?”
Janice: “Nothing, Michael! Nothing at all.”
Mike: “Fine.”⁵
I. Love. THIS. Janice refuses to accept Mike’s flimsy excuse. She lays bare the hurt that even when he’s home he’s still mentally checked out from the family. She’s tried so hard to accommodate his dream and all he does is criticize her for it. It’s a no-win scenario. She either takes on the responsibility of running the household and gets blasted for it, or she does nothing and would suffer Mike’s indignity for not “supporting” his goals.
Janice is tired of it and Mike doesn’t help his case with his last line of defense. He has responsibilities to people outside his family. It’s soul crushing to Janice, that her husband would choose his job over his family.
We’ve been here before. “While Dad’s Away” may as well be an updated version of the first drama Focus produced, “Spare Tire.” There, Jennifer stood up to her husband but quickly backed off. Will this episode go the same direction?
After the tense phone call, Adam’s given the chance to reflect on his actions. When he gets back home he doesn’t offer another excuse, like he’s afraid she’ll get a job and sleep with her boss. Instead, he offers a genuine solution. Moving the whole family closer to his job in Detroit so he won’t have to travel as much.
On paper that doesn’t sound amazing but it’s the way the scene’s written and performed that makes it work. This isn’t Mike giving Janice an ultimatum; submit to the compromise or you’re a horrible woman! No, this is a man who’s realized how badly he screwed up and desperately pleading to fix it. Mike has done some serious reflection. While he took the job with the intention of being a better provider and the perfect husband? The real outcome is that he hasn’t been, “much of a husband at all. And an even worse father.” He’s missing his kids growing up. He’s missing growing older with his wife.
Most importantly, he takes full responsibility for how he’s failed his family. Because of his actions he doesn’t even deserve to think of himself as a part of it.
Mike: “I know I've blown it with my family. I let ‘em get away. I was just wondering, is there any way maybe, you know, I could join yours? If you're dead set against Detroit, I'll look for another job. I mean it. I don't know what I'll do, but-”
Janice: “Oh, Michael. Do you know how long I've prayed to hear you talk like this? There's more to being a family than just paying bills on time. There's commitment and devotion and caring and giving. It’s sharing broken arms and bruises and hurt feelings and… And laughter and- And the love.”⁶
Mike willing to quit his job if Janice doesn’t want to move is the key moment here. It shows how serious he is; that he’s willing to do whatever it takes to keep her and the kids. Janice does end up agreeing to the move but it’s not because her husband decreed it. It’s because she recognizes his commitment to salvaging what he nearly destroyed. It won’t be easy, but she’s willing to let him try.
Comparing the ludicrous resolution of “Spare Tire” to this heartwarming scene, where a woman gets to be in the right?! Is this... Growth from the Family Portraits writers?! Have Steve Harris and Phil Lollar broken free of Dobson’s kid punching spell?
Is this why Whit had that “idiotic movie” comment at the start of the episode? To distract Dobson from what the writers really wanted; portraying the healthy mending of a broken relationship? Are Steve Harris and Phil Lollar learning from their earlier missteps? Did Susan McBride provide notes or an uncredited rewrite? Whatever the case, maybe this whole, “try out thirteen pilots in front of an audience” actually has some merit! We’re halfway through the season and the creative team have already figured out how to keep Dobson off their backs.
“Ohohoho,” a voice softly chortles in the distance.
…Oh no. Not another ad for Dobson literature.
“OHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHO.”
Dobson: “I would guess that if you asked 100 people to comment on that drama, no one would say what I'm about to say.”
…
Nothing good can come from this. Nothing. Dobson goes on,
“The most salient feature of this drama, to me, was the responsibility of the wife in the problem that this family had. Maybe it seemed like a loving thing for her to do, to hold inside what she was really feeling, until the marriage got into some serious trouble, instead of expressing to her husband, the conflicts, the deprivation that she felt for herself and her children associated with this new job.”⁷
….
(tl;dr on Dobson's above comment.)
Dobson listens to a story, told completely from the perspective of a man about how that man failed his family, and the one thing he latches onto? HOW IS THE WOMAN IN THE WRONG HERE?
No wonder no one else would make that comment, Dobson, because you’re pulling it out of your ass. I thought women were supposed to “accept that which cannot be changed.” Remember, from your own book, What Wives Wish Their Husbands Knew About Women. Where you said, “you could easily go to pieces over the adverse circumstances beyond your control, but you can also resolve to withstand them. You can will to hang tough, or you can yield to cowardice.”⁸
Janice was doing just that! She “resolved” to “withstand” the “adverse circumstances” Mike introduced into their lives. If she admitted she was struggling, that would have been yielding to “cowardice.” Can’t have that, right? But Dobson will never allow a man to be completely at fault. So what SHOULD have Janice done, oh wise Dobson?
“It would have been better if (Janice), without nagging, had been able, early on, to express her needs and to get his attention.”⁹
And how should she have done that? Don’t worry, What Wives Wish Their Husbands Knew About Women has got you covered! You just need to TEACH your husband about your needs because, remember, men’s emotional needs are SOOOO different that you need to gently lead them into understanding your our very complex needs. Like, you know, needing to feel loved. Very complex, that. Don’t nag him though! Nagging is equivalent to “pounding (your husband) behind the ear with a two-by-four.” (Oops, some of his kid beating tips must have gotten mixed in here.)¹⁰
Janice SHOULD have carefully waited for the moment Mike was “most responsive and pleasant,” had HIM take them to a “pleasant area” far from home, and make sure her words could in no way be interpreted as a “personal attack” on him. She needed to be warm, loving, supportive, and she MUST, “take his emotional state into consideration as well.” If he’s under “unusual stress” from work? Postpone it! And of course a single conversation won’t fix it, Janice needs to remember that she must “continually teach her husband about her feelings and desires, while doing her best to meet his unique needs.”¹¹
Dobson goes on, in his end of episode lecture, to pay slight lip service to the idea that Mike had SOME responsibility here, but he makes sure to keep most of it on Janice. After all, Dobson wryly adds, “it takes two to tango.”
It doesn’t matter that Janice did everything he suggested in his own book. She’s in the wrong. She’ll always be in the wrong.
But the writers intended Mike to be the one in the wrong... Right? Dobon’s remarks undercut the whole episode! They can’t agree with him… Right?
The Letter
The gruff Stan refuses to let his teenage daughter, Stacy, hang out with her friends, which drives a wedge between them until Stacy’s mom reveals what’s going on with Stan.
Yes, “Stacy’s Mom” is the only name she gets. Which is the least infuriating thing about this episode where-
Hmm.
I think I have a different way of going about this.
Do you all mind if I blaspheme God?
Ahem.
Stacy, you wanted to hang after school (Sinful fool.)
But your dad said that wouldn’t be cool (Such a tool.)
You made him feel so deeply ashamed (You’re to blame.)
He isn’t mad, he’s just a man who can’t explain (Apologies to Fountains of Wayne)You know you think your dad’s just a big meanie
But you’re a teen now, baby, can’t you see?Stacy’s Mom, reveals what’s goin’ on
You gotta change yourself, even when your dad is wrong!
Stacy, can’t you see? Men can’t express hurt like you and me.
Dobson says it isn’t wrong, you’re responsible for the emotions of Pa.
The hell? Did the writers get their hands slapped that hard by Dobson after he swooped in and changed the meaning of “While Dad’s Away?” (I imagine Dobson gleefully piledrived them, testing out new ways to beat kids.) Or is this just another attempt by the writers to find the series’ defining format? Will Adventures in Odyssey be a show where kids get insight into how parents are just as immature as them, including such wisdom as,
“It’s not always easy for a man like your dad or most men, come to think of it. They don't often communicate the same way women do. Sometimes nobody teaches them to do anything different. It takes a lot of patience and love to bring them out. If you could just let him know he’s got a place in your life, he’d feel a lot better about letting you live it.”¹²
Or, more plainly,
STACY, CAN’T YOU SEE
YOUR DAD'S AN INSECURE BABY
I KNOW IT MIGHT BE WRONG BUT PLEASE VALIDATE YOUR PA
Sure, you get to live your teen life. But ONLY if you take the high road with your adult father. It’s more a threat than words of wisdom.
Does that make “While Dad’s Away” a fluke? Was I giving the writers too much credit? Perhaps, but there’s another factor at play here. The acting.
The performances in “While Dad’s Away” did a lot to sell the way I interpreted the story but even here, with a more clearly monstrous message, the actors give it some level of nuance. Stacy’s mom sells that she’s saying more than just “lol men are babies we have to coddle them.” She understands what society makes men believe and how Stan’s been impacted by that. Perhaps because of love or something we don’t get to see in this story, she willingly wants to help him through that. It’s all there in the performance.
Stacy perfectly portrays the teenage realization that even as you get older you can still struggle with youthful insecurities.
Stacy: “Are you saying that he's insecure?”
Stacy’s Mom: “Well, yes, sometimes. Right now he is anyway.”
Stacy: “Wow.”
Stacy’s Mom: “Is that so surprising?”
Stacy: “Kind of.”
Stacy’s Mom: “Haven't you ever felt insecure?”
Stacy: “Yeah, all the time. It's like a way of life, especially at school.”
Stacy’s Mom: “-laughs- I guess so.”
Stacy: “Hey, but I- I'm a kid. Kids are supposed to be insecure. Daddy's grown up.”
Stacy’s Mom: “Do you know the difference between an insecure child and an insecure adult?”
Stacy: “No.”
Stacy’s Mom: “The insecure adult can vote. -chuckles- Well, maybe some of the details change, but it feels pretty much the same.”
Stacy: “Well, it's still no reason to embarrass me in front of my friends.”
Stacy’s Mom: “No, no, it's not.”¹³
The two portray a warm, lived-in dynamic between mother and child. This may not seem like anything to make a big deal out of. The performances aren’t Oscar worthy or anything, but for the target audience of Family Portraits, who were instructed to avoid secular media? This would have been an awe inspiring display of acting talent. Typically, “acceptable” media made for Christians, especially ones targeted at kids, were… Well…
(Beating your kids. So hilarious! Credit to this upload for the footage.)
So what made Family Portraits different? Part of it, as discussed previously, was the commitment to not talk down to kids. The kind of buffoonish acting in the clip above assumes its audience is stupid. It’s the kind of acting that adults THINK kids enjoy but rarely works outside the confines of a Christian summer camp assembly, where poor performances are acceptable because of your familiarity with the actor/camp counselor. To anyone outside that isolated group? It’s a chore to watch.
But how did Family Portraits attract its level of talent? Katie Leigh, Stacy in “The Letter,” was (and still is) an in demand voice actress, known in the ‘80s for voicing Rowlf on Muppet Babies, Sunni in Adventures of the Gummi Bears, Dumbo in Dumbo’s Circus, and many more. Unlike other one-off characters in Family Portraits, Leigh wasn’t plucked from an acting class or a church drama department. But it’s not like she needed the work, so why did get involved?
(Photo: Kate Leigh's demo tape from 1987, Courtesy of The Official Adventures in Odyssey Podcast)
As Leigh recently recalled, in 1987 she had just become a “dedicated follower of Jesus” and was praying for a way to use her voice-over talent for God. One day she was listening to Focus on the Family in the car and heard an early Family Portraits episode.
That perfectly explains why she got involved, right? She wanted to use her talent for God, she discovered there was a dramatic radio series for Christians, and she jumped at the chance to be involved. Makes sense… But that wasn’t the main thing that attracted her to working for Focus on the Family.
“I recognized Hal Smith’s voice, and I knew him. I’d been working with him. And I thought, ‘wow, they’re using professional actors. Maybe they could use me over there.’”¹⁴
The fact Focus was using a “real actor” of Smith’s caliber is what got Leigh to drive over that day and drop off her demo reel. To understand why Smith was such a draw, you need to look no further than his massive list of credits. Best known for playing Otis on The Andy Griffith Show, his work covers decades in live-action and animation voice over. Gyro Gearloose and Flintheart Glomgold in DuckTales, Winnie the Pooh and Owl in many Winnie the Pooh productions, and he notably worked with Kate Leigh on Dumbo’s Circus and the English dub of The Adventures of the Little Prince anime.
(I discovered that last credit when my fiancé and I were watching the excellent PopArena overview of the Little Prince anime. Every few minutes I’d go, “hey, that’s Connie from AIO! Wait, that’s Whit from AIO!” My fiancé is used to this sort of thing these days.)
Smith first came on board with Focus on the Family thanks to actor Chuck Bolte (Mike in “While Dad’s Away,” Adam in “Spare Tire,” and more) who’d previously worked with Smith on a Christmas album that Smith narrated.¹⁵ As Bolte later recalled, “Hal was such a contributor to helping establish and ensure that Family Portraits would lead to Adventures in Odyssey because of the quality of what he brought to the program. He was a key factor in that.”¹⁶
Smith brought an air of legitimacy to Family Portraits and Focus on the Family by extension because of his talent and fame. Everyone who speaks about working with Smith can’t help but bring up The Andy Griffith show and that star power no doubt distracted from Focus’ seedier underbelly. (That and this was pre-internet so it wasn’t as easy to dig up the really bad stuff.)
It also validated Focus’ unconventional airing of a season worth of pilots. Smith’s involvement directly lead not just Katie Leigh to working for Focus but many others who’d become the core cast of Adventures in Odyssey.¹⁷
Ironic. For as much as Focus on the Family shunned the secular media of Hollywood, Smith’s part in it attracted the talent necessary to ensure the franchise’s future. His and others’ impressive acting abilities brought layers to these stories, layers that allow its audience to read something positive even in the morally dubious “The Letter.” It’s a critical part of how I can keep giving these writers so much credit… But will it be enough to save the show as a whole from Dobson?
A Different Kind of Peer Pressure
Richard reprimands his daughter for bending to peer pressure when she calls her childhood friend a “nerd,” but discovers he’s no better when he joins in on mocking a co-worker friend.
Much like “While Dad’s Away,” this episode demonstrates the tension raging between Dobson and the creative team of Family Portraits (or, well, at least my positive reading of them.) There’s clear Dobson pandering from Richard, who reacts to teens at the mall with the most boomer line imaginable.
“Can you believe how crowded it is? Used to be, when I was a kid, people gathered at the park on weekends. They'd play ball, roast some hot dogs. Now they come to the mall and shop.”¹⁸
Yet the episode takes what could be a banal lesson, don’t give into peer pressure, and conveys real depth. I particularly love the exchange where Richard goes to Whit for advice, guilty over how he treated Jerry, his co-worker and friend. Especially the opening joke.
Richard: “There's this kid she grew up with. We ran into him at the mall. She told me flat out she didn't want anything to do with him because he's some kind of social outcast.”
Whit: “What is he, a nerd?”
Richard: “Yeah, that's exactly what she called him. How did you know?”
Whit: “I get my share of kids in here. They keep me up to date on the language, for better or worse. Of course, when my kids were growing up, they hadn't invented nerds yet. But all the kids that weren't part of the in-crowd had cooties.”¹⁹
After Richard vents about the struggles of needing to fit in with the “lifestyle” of his fancy co-workers, he admits what he did to Jerry.
Richard: “There I was laughing at him along with the rest of them. Only this time... I got caught.”
Whit: “Oh, I can imagine how that must have hurt.”
Richard: “I've never felt so, so- Small in all my-”
Whit: “I wasn't talking about you. I meant what's his name? Jerry.”
Richard: “Oh, I-”
Whit: “I'm sorry, I can't help it. I guess I'm just a Red Cross nurse at heart. I can't help looking out for the one with the deepest wound first.”
Richard: “No, no, no. You're right. That's my problem. I look at everything in terms of how it effects me. My status, my position.”²⁰
Whit refuses to let Richard wallow in self pity and make it all about himself. He helps Richard to see the hurt Jerry’s feeling. It’s empathetic but keeps all the responsibility on Richard for what he’s done. Even when Whit encourages Richard to patch things up with Jerry, he shares wise words of caution,
“If he won’t accept your apology, that's all you can do. So you'll have to live with that. Things don't always work out nice and neat the way we'd like ‘em to.”²¹
Just because you want to apologize doesn’t mean the person you wronged has to accept it. In Evangelical/Christian circles, asking for forgiveness and making things right, is really more about you. To rid you of guilt and anguish. Here, Whit wisely makes clear it’s not about what Richard wants, Jerry has to come first. He’s even able to relate it back to Richard’s daughter and how he should share this story with her. Yes, he’d look like a hypocrite after what he punished her for, but it would help both of them become better people. What a wonderful lesson.
One that Dobson ignores to focus on something far more important.
A reason to beat your child!
In his post-show comments, Dobson laser focuses on the early scene of Richard arguing with his daughter, characterizing her as “disrespectful.” He notes that Richard, responding to her with heated anger, made the situation more tense than it needed to be. Shockingly not a bad point, but Dobson doesn’t explore how Richard SHOULD have gone about dealing with his daughter, unlike his on-air vilification of Janice in “While Dad’s Away.”²² He instead promotes his 1978 book, The Strong-Willed Child: Birth Through Adolescence. Dobson avoids scolding a man AND give us another ad! That’s So Dobson!
The advice Richard could have gleaned from Dobson’s book, which you should totally (NOT) buy?
“With regard to the ventilation of anger, it is possible to let a child express his strongest feelings without being insulting or disrespectful. A tearful charge, ‘You weren't fair with me and you embarrassed me in front of my friends,’ should be accepted and responded to quietly and earnestly. But a parent should never permit a child to say, ‘You are so stupid and you never do anything right!’ The first statement is a genuine expression of frustration based on a specific issue; the second is an attack on the dignity and authority of the parent. In my opinion, the latter is damaging to both generations and should be inhibited.”²³
Ah, so Richard should have held up his daughter to the standards of a fantasy world where children perfectly articulate their emotions at all times. If a child can’t convey their emotions like an adult? You every reason to compress your chakra and pop off a rasengan on their ass.
Dobson cites a “true story” to illustrate why his advice works: A five-year-old “disobeys” so hard in a restaurant that his father marches him out to the parking lot where he proceeds to, “administer a spanking.” A “meddling woman” comes by, shakes her finger at the father, and “screams” at him to leave the boy alone! The son stops crying and says to his father in surprise, “what's wrong with that woman, Dad?” As Dobson observes, the son “understood the purpose for the discipline, even if the ‘rescuer’ didn’t.”²⁴
Dobson stresses you must respond to your strong-willed child “early in the conflict,” while your adult emotions are still under control. Otherwise you may not be able to help but do a child abuse.²⁵
It doesn’t matter what the Family Portraits writers intend. All Dobson cares about is how their work relates to selling HIS values. It’s Dobson’s world and Family Portraits is just living in it, baby. But that’s always how it was going to be. Family Portraits aired inside Dobson’s pre-existing Focus on the Family program. One of the chief concerns of the creative team during the production of Family Portraits was, “people listen to Focus on the Family to hear Dr. James Dobson, not hear drama.”²⁶
No words can rise above Dobson’s. It’s disturbingly similar to how he recommends parents deal with their children. Force them into submission.
Yet here I am, finding the positive in all this, in full spite of Dobson. But is it enough? Am I giving the writers too much credit? Maybe they cheered Dobson on as he giga drill broke every child in his path? Or were they simply making the best of a bad situation?
In official retrospectives on Family Portraits, you get these tiny glimpses of the creative team’s frustration at what they were up against. How no one within Focus understood what they were trying to accomplish. That they tried, “to push the envelope a little bit… And the envelope pushed back quite often.”²⁷
Can worthwhile media be created within a den of evil? Does a media’s association with its top brass damn it for all eternity? Even with Dobson breathing down my neck, there’s good things to take away from these episodes. Many can be read in a positive light! When I was first exposed to AIO through the “Castles & Cauldrons” episodes? I didn’t convert into a Satan-fearing child; casting my role-playing games into the depths of hell. I simply appreciated a good story about not letting your imagination run away with you.
It’s important to remember that the primary audience for Family Portraits were forced to avoid most media. They were starved of entertainment. The mere breadcrumbs they were allowed were more akin to ash. But Family Portraits was different. It had good things to say in ways that respected its audience. Intentionally or not, it exposed them to positive messages they may never have received otherwise. Perhaps, like me, they were able to take the good and mostly ignore the bad. That makes the show worth something, right? But maybe not. Perhaps they simply internalized Dobson’s words over all others. Perhaps the writers did as well.
To listen to Family Portraits is to witness more than just “tension” between the writers and Dobson. It’s a full-on war, Dobson’s values clashing with the subtleties of drama, which invite listeners to look past the surface. To find glimmers of hope in the Evangelical darkness. Even if I’m giving the writers too much credit, there’s something there. Something more than what Dobson wants it to be.
In my day-to-day life I bring up AIO and this blog a lot. Yet even with my constant info-dumping about the franchise, its history, and the wild turns it takes? I still have yet to answer the question a friend continually puts to me.
“What is this show?”
It’s the question that started this blog in the first place and, over halfway through Family Portraits, I still don’t have an answer. Perhaps by the end of this season, when we find out what side of the war Family Portraits comes out on, we’ll have an idea. Will it be a simple mouthpiece of evil for Dobson? Or something more wonderful and exciting?
Next Time: A Child Beating Two-Parter!
Note: Can you believe that, at one point, I thought I could cover all of Family Portraits in one post? What a beautifully naive fool I was. Now it’s stretched to three parts! (Next time will be the last post for Family Portraits. I hope.) As I’ve gotten deeper on this project I’ve had to break a lot of ground when it comes to researching. A lot of the resources I utilize here aren’t easily accessible but they’re the worth the time it takes to uncover them. There’s so much more to write about than what I envisioned at the start of this project. Which means these posts will take awhile to get done but I know they’ll be all the better for it. Thank you all for coming with me on this journey of discovery!
Sources:
While Dad’s Away: Written by Phil Lollar, Directed by Phil Lollar and Steve Harris, Production Engineer Bob Luttrell, Focus on the Family, 1987
(1)
(5)
(6)
“BONUS! The creation of "Family Portraits": A Discussion with Steve Harris, Phil Lollar, and Chuck Bolte,” Focus on the Family, 2012.
(2)
(16)
(26)
“Rewind from 1000 to 0001 with Steve Harris and Phil Lollar,” The Official Adventures in Odyssey Podcast, Focus on the Family, 2024
(3)
(17)
(27)
“Choosing God-Honoring Entertainment: A Guide for Christians,” Focus on the Family, 1999. (Updated 2024.) Originally titled “What’s Up With Today’s Entertainment? Separating Trash From Treasure.”
(4)
A Member of the Family Cassette Release, Archived by OdysseyFan.com
(7)
(9)
What Wives Wish Their Husbands Knew About Women by James Dobson, Tyndale House Publishers, 1980
(8) Page 183
(10) Pages 76-77
(11) Pages 77-78
The Letter: Written and Directed by Steve Harris, Production Engineer Bob Luttrell, Focus on the Family, 1987
(12)
(13)
“FREE EPISODE: ‘The Letter’” The Official Adventures in Odyssey Podcast, Focus on the Family, 2021
(14)
"The Complete Guide to Adventures in Odyssey” by Phil Lollar, Focus on the Family Publishing, 1997
(15) Page 3
A Different Kind of Peer Pressure: Written and Directed by Steve Harris, Production Engineer Bob Luttrell, Focus on the Family, 1987
(18)
(19)
(20)
(21)
A Different Kind of Peer Pressure Cassette Release, Archived by OdysseyFan.com
(22)
The Strong-Willed Child by James Dobson, Tyndale House Publishers, 1978
(23) Page 84
(24) Pages 39-40
(25) Page 37