Frasier Online

In the Apparent Trap Frasier says: "You know, you should just do what I used to do. I used to tell the passengers that if Frederick cried, I'd buy them all a drink."

My question is: "How did that keep Frederick from crying?"

Each time I hear this part of the dialogue I wonder if the writer who made it up wasn't drunk himself at the time.

Second Frasier then says " Oh, yes. In fact, one time I awoke from a short nap, and the fellow sitting behind us was flicking the back of Frederick's little ear. Of course that was cheating, the man did not get his drink."


Personally, if I had seen an adult do that to my child, I'd have beaten the crap out of him so badly he would have needeed a straw to drink anything for quite some time.

What were they thinking with that?

The drinks were not meant to keep Frederick from crying, but to apologize to the passengers for having to put up with the crying. The part with the ear-flicker was simply to make a joke that the man really wanted a drink, so the strange fact that he was touching Frederick wasn't focused upon.

frasier floyd wrote:The drinks were not meant to keep Frederick from crying, but to apologize to the passengers for having to put up with the crying. The part with the ear-flicker was simply to make a joke that the man really wanted a drink, so the strange fact that he was touching Frederick wasn't focused upon.

I thought the whole story creepy, especially the casual way that Frasier said that the man was flicking his son's ear. It seems strange that he would even advise Roz to do something that had such consequences. Maybe it's a cultural thing, I don't know , but we don't let strangers touch our babies here.

A stranger touching a baby like this would not be okay in the US either. Most parents would probably make a huge fuss over it and potentially file lawsuits against that kind of creep. Hell, I'm a friendly 23 year old girl and I've been frowned at just for admiring cute babies from afar out in public- that's how protective some mothers are here. It's glossed over only because of the show; the emphasis was the joke of wanting a drink, that was all. There are probably a ton of instances such as this on Frasier- things that are apparently okay that in real life would not be. For example, if a renowned psychiatrist here were arrested for picking up a transvestite prostitute (illegal here), his career would not go back to normal the next day. I guess we're just supposed to accept that these things are acceptable in sitcom-land.

frasier floyd wrote:A stranger touching a baby like this would not be okay in the US either. Most parents would probably make a huge fuss over it and potentially file lawsuits against that kind of creep. Hell, I'm a friendly 23 year old girl and I've been frowned at just for admiring cute babies from afar out in public- that's how protective some mothers are here. It's glossed over only because of the show; the emphasis was the joke of wanting a drink, that was all. There are probably a ton of instances such as this on Frasier- things that are apparently okay that in real life would not be. For example, if a renowned psychiatrist here were arrested for picking up a transvestite prostitute (illegal here), his career would not go back to normal the next day. I guess we're just supposed to accept that these things are acceptable in sitcom-land.

Wow, really? I make it a habit to smile and wave at cute babies, and all I get is mothers beaming proudly back at me. Though I do suppose my country is nothing like the US.
And I don't have children yet, so I can't say with 100% certainty, but if someone was flicking my baby's ear on a plane, I'd consider it awfully rude and intrusive, but I don't think I'd go further than shouting at the man (unless he continued to do it later).

Yes exactly- the whole thing was meant to placate the other passangers on the plane- infact I seem to remember last year reading about an Australian couple who handed out little gift bags before the plane took off (a cute little typed message, a bag of mints, some ear plugs etc.) as they were bringing their baby onto the flight in question. I'll try and find a link to it at some point!

And yeah I never really thought about the joke about Frederick's ear being flicked. I suppose in "real life" it would be deemed unacceptable, but again in "real life" what kind of idiot would announce to a plane full of passengers that they would all be getting a free drink if his little baby son started drying during the flight?

PistolPoet wrote:

frasier floyd wrote:A stranger touching a baby like this would not be okay in the US either. Most parents would probably make a huge fuss over it and potentially file lawsuits against that kind of creep. Hell, I'm a friendly 23 year old girl and I've been frowned at just for admiring cute babies from afar out in public- that's how protective some mothers are here. It's glossed over only because of the show; the emphasis was the joke of wanting a drink, that was all. There are probably a ton of instances such as this on Frasier- things that are apparently okay that in real life would not be. For example, if a renowned psychiatrist here were arrested for picking up a transvestite prostitute (illegal here), his career would not go back to normal the next day. I guess we're just supposed to accept that these things are acceptable in sitcom-land.

Wow, really? I make it a habit to smile and wave at cute babies, and all I get is mothers beaming proudly back at me. Though I do suppose my country is nothing like the US.
And I don't have children yet, so I can't say with 100% certainty, but if someone was flicking my baby's ear on a plane, I'd consider it awfully rude and intrusive, but I don't think I'd go further than shouting at the man (unless he continued to do it later).

I'm not saying this is true of all mothers, but I think it happened at least once. I guess she could've been frowning at something else- but I was just pointing out how sensitive parents can be about their kids in public, depending on the circumstances. If a mother took her baby out of a stroller in closed off public place like a restaurant, it'd be expected that people would look over and smile since everyone loves babies. That setting is safe and calm and it'd be fair game to look since the baby was taken out I guess. However, I think I'd just admired a baby who was being pushed down the street in the stroller, so maybe the mother felt that I was being intrusive for looking in while she was hyper-vigilant of any strangers walking around.

Anyway, I personally don't think nationality has anything to do with the subject. Humans are naturally protective of their parents, and it seems kind of silly to assume that Americans are either more negligent or more neurotic than parents of another country based off Frasier or one frowning mother. Strange ear flickers are probably not welcome anywhere

frasier floyd wrote:Anyway, I personally don't think nationality has anything to do with the subject. Humans are naturally protective of their parents, and it seems kind of silly to assume that Americans are either more negligent or more neurotic than parents of another country based off Frasier or one frowning mother. Strange ear flickers are probably not welcome anywhere

You're the one who said that it wouldn't be OK in the US either, so I continued down that path. I do think there are cultural differences in terms of parenting and what you can or can't do with a baby (e.g. my grandma, bless her soul, put a head of garlic in my brother's cot because it was supposed to protect him from evil, which Americans would probably consider very strange), but I do agree that there's hardly a place on Earth where it would be OK for a stranger to flick your baby's ear .

(Incidentally, talking about neurotic parenting in the US, I was talking to one of my students recently, and she told me that her family lived in Pennsylvania for a year. She was playing with her brother outside her apartment building, and a neighbour from across the street actually called the police because the kids weren't supervised. Both of them were school-age children, and here, in Serbia, we let kids of that age go outside freely, as long as we can see them from our windows and there aren't any dangers around (speeding cars, nasty dogs etc.))

The kids playing depends on where exactly they were. Maybe they were in the street or in the parking lot and the neighbor was afraid they would be hurt. Or maybe it was just a nosey neighbor being ridiculous. I can assure you, kids play outside of my apartment complex all the time and I've never once called the police to report they were playing unsupervised.

CatNamedRudy wrote:The kids playing depends on where exactly they were. Maybe they were in the street or in the parking lot and the neighbor was afraid they would be hurt. Or maybe it was just a nosey neighbor being ridiculous. I can assure you, kids play outside of my apartment complex all the time and I've never once called the police to report they were playing unsupervised.

Yup, it sounded extremely strange to me, and I've never heard anything similar before or since. My student swore up and down that they were right outside their building and in no danger whatsoever. So I guess, as you say, that the neighbour was overly cautious or paranoid or something .

All of the posts on this thread have made me go 'What???' Frasier is a comedy programme, in case you hadn't noticed, and is not supposed to mimic real life. Frasier, Niles, Roz and Co. do humour and irony like nothing else on the TV screen and the reason these scenes are written is just because they are extremely funny and most definitely wouldn't happen in real life.

I'm amazed to find so many Frasier fans don't appreciate irony. It's the show's (and Frasier's of course!) 'raison d'etre' after all!

heartofmotion wrote:All of the posts on this thread have made me go 'What???' Frasier is a comedy programme, in case you hadn't noticed, and is not supposed to mimic real life. Frasier, Niles, Roz and Co. do humour and irony like nothing else on the TV screen and the reason these scenes are written is just because they are extremely funny and most definitely wouldn't happen in real life.

I'm amazed to find so many Frasier fans don't appreciate irony. It's the show's (and Frasier's of course!) 'raison d'etre' after all!

Just because something is comedy doesn't mean that it can say absolutely anything. I do suppose you draw the line somewhere, even if you feign not being aware of it.

heartofmotion wrote:All of the posts on this thread have made me go 'What???' Frasier is a comedy programme, in case you hadn't noticed, and is not supposed to mimic real life. Frasier, Niles, Roz and Co. do humour and irony like nothing else on the TV screen and the reason these scenes are written is just because they are extremely funny and most definitely wouldn't happen in real life.

I'm amazed to find so many Frasier fans don't appreciate irony. It's the show's (and Frasier's of course!) 'raison d'etre' after all!

I've been saying the same thing for the past few months with no success. I totally agree.

heartofmotion wrote:All of the posts on this thread have made me go 'What???' Frasier is a comedy programme, in case you hadn't noticed, and is not supposed to mimic real life. Frasier, Niles, Roz and Co. do humour and irony like nothing else on the TV screen and the reason these scenes are written is just because they are extremely funny and most definitely wouldn't happen in real life.

I'm amazed to find so many Frasier fans don't appreciate irony. It's the show's (and Frasier's of course!) 'raison d'etre' after all!

The thing is that this forum has existed for a looong time and there is only so much you can say about a sitcom before you finally start overanalysing it because there's simply not much more to say otherwise. I absolutely agree that there's too much overanalysing here these days, but I'd like to see people who are bothered by that to start fresh, non-overanalysing threads if they want things to change around here.

It's funny the way we can over-analyse things, but i guess it's no bad thing to keep the discussions going in any way at all. I'd rather that than the show dies and is forgotten.

Anyway, the likes of Seinfeld built its comedy around overanalysis of the minutiae, and Frasier himself was as neurotic as it gets about such things - so i guess it all fits

Moon-Crane wrote:It's funny the way we can over-analyse things, but i guess it's no bad thing to keep the discussions going in any way at all. I'd rather that than the show dies and is forgotten.

Anyway, the likes of Seinfeld built its comedy around overanalysis of the minutiae, and Frasier himself was as neurotic as it gets about such things - so i guess it all fits

As we've said before - the only thing better than a great episode is a great episode with "one tiny little flaw we can pick at all night". And as Daphne would say "oh, just the way you like it".

The thing is that this forum has existed for a looong time and there is only so much you can say about a sitcom before you finally start overanalysing it because there's simply not much more to say otherwise.

Very true. The solution may be to go cold turkey on 'Frasier' for a year or two. I haven't regularly watched the programme since I was a fan in the late 90s and early 00s - until just recently when I've been in a position to catch a lot of the morning re-runs. I really appreciate the skillful writing and the perfect delivery of the main characters - Frasier, Niles and Roz especially.

and Frasier himself was as neurotic as it gets about such things

I love this aspect of the show - the counterpoint between his rampant neuroses and his advanced reasoning skills!

The truth is that Frasier and Niles have rubbed off on us. We all are now compulsive overanalysers.