Episode Description:
Friendships get tested during a wild, wacky road trip to Chicago to visit Penny's art exhibit. Detours ahead!
Episode Review:
Summer 2020 was an interesting time to be a fan of Adventures in Odyssey. In one of its most long-awaited episodes, “The Rydell Revelations”, the show presented a rather controversial depiction of its central character, John Avery Whittaker. Many were bothered by how uncaring he sounded. Many had even thought he’d abandoned his biblical principles. Many thought that the episode ruined Whit’s character. While I touched upon many of these issues in my own review, I did not end up fuming over this depiction like many other fans did. No, to be honest, I was much more bothered by his depiction in an episode that was released a few weeks earlier -- the episode titled “Cars, Trains, and Motorcycles”.
Before I get into all of my reasons for why I was annoyed, I’d like to say that I’m not the biggest believer that an AIO episode can be “objectively good”. At the end of the day, a “good” episode will always boil down, one way or another, to your personal tastes. The reasons you may decide an episode is “good” may be backed up by certain storytelling rules (related to story logic, pacing, and character development), but, many of which are often influenced by storytelling trends that are shaped by society and which often change from year to year. I prefer not to tell people they’re wrong for liking or disliking an episode -- arguing that is like arguing whether pineapple on pizza is considered “good food”. After someone yells “it’s delicious!” and the other person yells “it’s gross!”, it’s often impossible to present any facts to prove your point.
Similarly, arguing for why I personally don’t like how Whit is depicted in “Cars, Trains, and Motorcycles'' is much like trying to persuade someone that pineapple on pizza tastes good -- just like you like your pizza a certain way, you probably like your Whit a certain way. And, personally, I don’t like it when Whit is being laughed at or is made to look foolish. This depiction doesn’t suit my palate, so to speak. It doesn’t matter if Whit was given a perfectly natural reason for acting the way he did (in this case, taking painkillers after dental surgery). Whit, in my view, should always be in on the joke (although there are some pleasant exceptions like in “Naturally I assumed”). The show has done such a good job of making Andre Stojka feel like “old Whit” over the years by giving him dialogue that emphasized the warmth of his voice, but the dialogue given to the actor here makes the character sound far too cartoonish. People who take painkillers do not act like this.
I think I would have liked this episode if they had just replaced Whit with someone who’s dignity wasn’t so heavily tied to the character. If Bernard was around, he would have been perfect in this part. Tom Riley might have worked too. But because it’s Whit, I’m too distracted by how much they’re disrespecting the character to enjoy any of the positives of the episodes. I can’t seem to quite enjoy the fact that our four main characters are interacting again, or that Eugene and Connie are bickering for the first time in I-don’t-know-how-long (although why do they care if they’re in the same league if one of them is, well, married?), or that Wooton’s providing some solid comedic lines, or that John Campbell has churned out some very interesting music (very Seinfeld-ish, isn’t it?). The experience of listening to this episode is like going out to dinner with someone who has spinach in their teeth -- you’d be far too distracted by that one problem to enjoy anything else about the evening. Similarly, any nice elements this episode has are ruined by how they decided to portray Whit.
You may disagree, and that’s fine. In fact, I’ve always been fascinated with how fans can all listen to the same show, but all react differently when a character is depicted a certain way. Why does one portrayal feel “out of character” to one listener but totally acceptable to another? I suppose it may be because we’ve all begun listening to the series at different times. Those who entered the show during Hal Smith’s reign were far more likely to judge every following iteration to that early portrayal. Those who began listening during Paul Herlinger’s reign, in contrast, probably can’t quite as easily spot when the character’s portrayal veers from Hal’s version, and, likewise, those who are entering the show during Stojka’s reign are less likely to notice -- or to even become bothered -- when he’s depicted in a way that we haven’t seen from the earlier two versions.
For better or for worse, the character of Whit is a constantly evolving creature. At the end of the day, I just didn’t much like the depiction I heard in the “Cars, Trains, and Motorcycles''. But I suppose I’m always free to go listen to the iteration of Whit that I like best -- you know, the one who had said stuff like “The best is yet to come'' -- and not the one who yells “Let’s get this hog moving!” Unfortunately, that line will stick in my head for a while
Friendships get tested during a wild, wacky road trip to Chicago to visit Penny's art exhibit. Detours ahead!
Episode Review:
Summer 2020 was an interesting time to be a fan of Adventures in Odyssey. In one of its most long-awaited episodes, “The Rydell Revelations”, the show presented a rather controversial depiction of its central character, John Avery Whittaker. Many were bothered by how uncaring he sounded. Many had even thought he’d abandoned his biblical principles. Many thought that the episode ruined Whit’s character. While I touched upon many of these issues in my own review, I did not end up fuming over this depiction like many other fans did. No, to be honest, I was much more bothered by his depiction in an episode that was released a few weeks earlier -- the episode titled “Cars, Trains, and Motorcycles”.
Before I get into all of my reasons for why I was annoyed, I’d like to say that I’m not the biggest believer that an AIO episode can be “objectively good”. At the end of the day, a “good” episode will always boil down, one way or another, to your personal tastes. The reasons you may decide an episode is “good” may be backed up by certain storytelling rules (related to story logic, pacing, and character development), but, many of which are often influenced by storytelling trends that are shaped by society and which often change from year to year. I prefer not to tell people they’re wrong for liking or disliking an episode -- arguing that is like arguing whether pineapple on pizza is considered “good food”. After someone yells “it’s delicious!” and the other person yells “it’s gross!”, it’s often impossible to present any facts to prove your point.
Similarly, arguing for why I personally don’t like how Whit is depicted in “Cars, Trains, and Motorcycles'' is much like trying to persuade someone that pineapple on pizza tastes good -- just like you like your pizza a certain way, you probably like your Whit a certain way. And, personally, I don’t like it when Whit is being laughed at or is made to look foolish. This depiction doesn’t suit my palate, so to speak. It doesn’t matter if Whit was given a perfectly natural reason for acting the way he did (in this case, taking painkillers after dental surgery). Whit, in my view, should always be in on the joke (although there are some pleasant exceptions like in “Naturally I assumed”). The show has done such a good job of making Andre Stojka feel like “old Whit” over the years by giving him dialogue that emphasized the warmth of his voice, but the dialogue given to the actor here makes the character sound far too cartoonish. People who take painkillers do not act like this.
I think I would have liked this episode if they had just replaced Whit with someone who’s dignity wasn’t so heavily tied to the character. If Bernard was around, he would have been perfect in this part. Tom Riley might have worked too. But because it’s Whit, I’m too distracted by how much they’re disrespecting the character to enjoy any of the positives of the episodes. I can’t seem to quite enjoy the fact that our four main characters are interacting again, or that Eugene and Connie are bickering for the first time in I-don’t-know-how-long (although why do they care if they’re in the same league if one of them is, well, married?), or that Wooton’s providing some solid comedic lines, or that John Campbell has churned out some very interesting music (very Seinfeld-ish, isn’t it?). The experience of listening to this episode is like going out to dinner with someone who has spinach in their teeth -- you’d be far too distracted by that one problem to enjoy anything else about the evening. Similarly, any nice elements this episode has are ruined by how they decided to portray Whit.
You may disagree, and that’s fine. In fact, I’ve always been fascinated with how fans can all listen to the same show, but all react differently when a character is depicted a certain way. Why does one portrayal feel “out of character” to one listener but totally acceptable to another? I suppose it may be because we’ve all begun listening to the series at different times. Those who entered the show during Hal Smith’s reign were far more likely to judge every following iteration to that early portrayal. Those who began listening during Paul Herlinger’s reign, in contrast, probably can’t quite as easily spot when the character’s portrayal veers from Hal’s version, and, likewise, those who are entering the show during Stojka’s reign are less likely to notice -- or to even become bothered -- when he’s depicted in a way that we haven’t seen from the earlier two versions.
For better or for worse, the character of Whit is a constantly evolving creature. At the end of the day, I just didn’t much like the depiction I heard in the “Cars, Trains, and Motorcycles''. But I suppose I’m always free to go listen to the iteration of Whit that I like best -- you know, the one who had said stuff like “The best is yet to come'' -- and not the one who yells “Let’s get this hog moving!” Unfortunately, that line will stick in my head for a while
Writer: Marshal Younger
Director: Kathy Buchanan
Producer: Nathan Hoobler
Executive Producer: Dave Arnold
Post-Production: Jonathan Crowe
Music: John Campbell
Original Airdate: June 1st, 2020 (Club)
Date Reviewed: 03/20/2021