The Principal and the Pauper- Is it really THAT bad?

T

terrysains

New member
Inspired by the debate over "Homer's Enemy", let's do another Bill and Josh that all out of their controversial episodes, this one is the most negative. Even "Two Bad Neighbors" have it fans.

And yet, I really feel sorry with this episode. Personally, I see nothing wrong with this episode. Yes, we know more about Skinner, but it didn't destroyed his character, we just know more about him. Just because it was never brought up in previous episodes doesn't mean it's wrong or anything.

But here's something I don't get. As Ken Keeler said, Skinner's just a minor character, not a part of the citizen's life, but if one change happens to him, the community doesn't accept it, just like the fanbase. I mean, most of us treat this episode like it destroyed the character, but really, it didn't. "Destroying" a character is like him getting a personality change that doesn't fit him. This episode, on the other hand, didn't, and again, it makes sense. I mean, I'm willing to suspend my disbelief with it.

But I digress. Any thoughts you guys want to say?
 
I like this episode. Anyway I think most of the hate for this episode comes from the ending, the horrible cop out "Lets act like this event never happened" Ending. Because soon these types of endings became common place in the Simpsons.

but the episode itself, I like it.
 
This was Bill Oakley and Josh Weinstein's ultimate fanbase parody, even bigger than "The Itchy and Scratchy and Poochie Show" in my opinion. It was a bit subtle, and very few people saw it as satire, but I think that was the point - Ken Keeler wrote it as an experiment, with the show's fans as his guinea pigs.

You may not remember, but there was a significant fan backlash from the fans in Seasons 7 and 8 in response to Oakley and Weinstein's efforts to delve into the supporting players' pasts and unveil some surprising or shocking tidbit about them that we never knew before. People generally didn't care for the plots of episodes like "Lisa the Iconoclast" and "Hurricane Neddy", where they took side characters and looked at them in a new light. Keeler wrote "The Principal and the Pauper" as a pastiche of all that - a horrifying secret is revealed about Principal Skinner's past, and the people of Springfield hate it so much that they decide to undo it and forget that it ever happened.

Not only is it an indicting poke at the fans, it's actually a fascinating experiment, because Keeler expected the fan backlash to be just as vitriolic as it was, and in fact it may have been even bigger than that. He proved that Simpsons fans don't like their favorite TV show to change, even if that change is to a fairly minor character that they never really cared about before - and it's true, it's quite unusual for people to get that attached to a character who really doesn't have that much impact on the show. I guess you could say it was the beginning of the "screw the fans" mentality of the show, which has pertained to this day and which I personally don't care for, but at least "The Principal and the Pauper" did it in a clever way.
 
maybe I'm the minority here but I loved the early episodes that dived into character's pasts, ones about Krusty's past, Apu's Past and Ned's past were all great episodes. It did not ruin these characters if anything it made them better in my mind.

I realize that the fan base as a whole does not seem to agree with that.
 
it was at least better then "Homer vs dignity", I wish a Simpsons Halloween special episode where Homer got its revenge against that panda. :evil:
 
One of the most underrated episodes ever. Even if one doesn't know about the backstory behind what Ken Keeler was going for, it was better fleshed-out than such a plotline could've been. If I had no knowledge of this episode and you told me the log line: "Skinner's a fraud and the real Skinner comes to town to replace him", I would've thought the worst and assumed the writers were out of ideas. But they really did a good job retconning his past and actually got a touch of emotion in there with Agnes realizing she knew Armin better (not to mention got along with him better) than her real son. Hearing the backstory only made this episode richer.

It's also a pretty funny outing. One of the better jokes was Skinner saying "Up yours, children!" But I also liked "All my dreams involve me combing my hair!", or the joke with so many people crammed in the car, among other moments.
 
I never did a faster 180 in my opinion of any episode of any show than I did when I heard the audio commentary for this episode on the season 9 DVD. Suddenly, everything just made sense.
 
I think the Agnes scene is the highlight of a wobbly episode. We're used to seeing her as a parody of a clingy mother but that whole scene where she opens up and emotes how she feels about her adopted son is brilliantly done.
 
This felt like one of those episode that didn't need to be made. I wouldn't say it's horrible since I liked some of the jokes ("Up yours, children.", "Keep looking shocked and move slowly towards the cake") but having Skinner as Armin and then become "Skinner" again where everyone forget what happened felt like a cop out. The real Skinner wasn't exactly a likeable character so his send off put a smile on my face. I forget: Where was that train's destination anyway?




I guarantee this will happen again with more episodes. Heck, I may change my tune after watching the commentary for this and "Homer's Enemy".
 
Yeah, I loved the episode about Krusty's conflict with his kantor father a la The Jazz Singer. It's one of my all-time faves. So what's the big deal about these back stories? I can't believe fans get upset about them...
 
I guess history hasn't been too kind to this one. Based on Ken Keeler's intentions, this would have been a hilarious way to end the show. Too bad with the seasons after it's gotten awfully easily to look at this as one of the "beginning of the end" points.
 
I hated this episode. I think it's completely unecessary, and destroyed Skinner's character. As much as it was a good episode as far as rating it's 'quality' or whatnot goes, the 'cop-out' ending seemed a trifle silly, and the whole episode stank of something. Something i only just discovered when reading an above post about it being a parody of the fanbase. Not knowing this i just took it in my stride as part of the degradation of the show at the time. Armin Tamzarian... I mean seriously.

I reckon Principal Skinner should be Principal Skinner, Apu should be Apu, etc etc, and i'd agree with the fanbase they were parodying that things shouldn't change if they work already. This is one of the reasons my favorite episodes tend to be from the shorts to season four, with seasons 1 and 4 being the highlights imo
 
I liked this episode a lot. It had an element of visible self-awareness that made it actually very clever. Otherwise it would have been a big cop-out.

And that self-awareness carried into the "Behind the Laughter" episode when they referenced this episode for having a gimmicky, outlandish plot. I love that kind of stuff.
 
Some fans do abhor change, but some can accept it if it's more natural change rather than change for the sake of shock value. And even then it's not absolute as:

- People are still watching despite Maude's death.
- Bart's lack of edginess compared to the earlier seasons.
 
Agreed.



And you lost me. He was basically the same guy with a different name. He still holds up in previous episodes when he has those war flashbacks. His character (the revelation of his real name was the only thing that really hurt) wasn't damaged at all, IMO.

As Mumbo pointed out, they were self-aware of it the whole time. That quality of the series is why it's still great to this day. As a matter of fact, they did a reference in a recent season where Lisa went through a series of Snowballs.
 
People who hate this episode feel bamboozled that Skinner essentially tricked the audience into thinking he was something he was not. But he was still the same person, as you realized when the real Skinner came back and he was nothing like him. Arman Tanzarian is the same person with a different name.

The fans just didn't like being the butt of a joke this time.

I always liked it, the episode expanded the universe a bit and added a new side to Skinner's personality. The ending was even a nice parody of Sitcom endings.
 
This episode was actually borderline epic in diving into Principal Skinner's past. People who hate it also don't see the satire of the entire thing.
 
I didn't hate any of those episodes people apparently hated. Even Homer's Enemy, which is sort of an analogy for real life. It's hated because it's also true; I've seen quite a few people skate by on life due to luck/connections while people who work hard end up overlooked.
 
It was a great episode. The ending kinda ruined it though. It bugged me that everyone accepted that Armin was still going to be called Skinner, and that the real Skinner still didn't live with his mom. And that they never referenced Armin's alias or whatever in later episodes. (correct me if I'm wrong about that)
 
Back
Top