By Rose Graner
Entertainment Editor
NBC’s “Harry’s Law” is a refreshingly respectful addition to the often-insipid catalogue of “recession-era” television series.
“Recession-era” entertainment is hot right now. Television shows from “Entourage” to “Grey’s Anatomy” have featured storylines where a character experiences brief financial trouble before bouncing right back into a financial safe zone.
For the most part, this type of television falls just short of insulting its viewers under the guise of being relatable. For example, the recently released film “From Prada to Nada” chronicles the plight of two rich, spoiled twenty-somethings as they make the transition from a lifestyle of complete and utter decadence to a lifestyle that is more culturally enriching and still completely financially comfortable.
The gleeful pride with which such fare is advertised is somewhat sickening. Major studios give recession-era audiences very little credit. Films like “From Prada to Nada” feign sympathy with viewers, many of whom are experiencing true day-to-day hardships themselves.
Instead, they bombard viewers with the message that they should be perfectly content with their present circumstances as long as they have family or friends, and that a desire for anything more—for instance, the luxury goods that the characters on the screen are so accustomed to—is selfish, unreasonable.
“Harry’s Law” is one of few modern programs that depart from this paradigm. It chronicles the development of a small, startup law firm as its employees attempt to gain a foothold within the economically destitute Cincinnati community it is based in.
The leader of the firm, Harriet Korn (Kathy Bates), comes from a much more prosperous position and often expresses sincere concern that she has made an unreasonable choice in beginning her own firm.
Admittedly, a suspension of disbelief is required when watching “Harry’s Law.” It is highly unlikely that a high-paid patent lawyer would leave her position to start a firm in a run-down area where her clients could only pay her in a “sock full of coins.”
Even more unlikely—and simplistic—are the legal situations and the cases featured in the show. In one episode, Korn defends a poor woman who robbed a liquor store out of desperation. In her closing argument, Korn states that “the government” is responsible for the woman’s plight and, as such, she should not be held responsible for her actions.
Although audiences’ hearts do go out to the person on trial (an entirely plausible character for whom the working world just never panned out), the idea of her being declared not guilty in real life is absurd.
Beyond its stylistically “Boston Legal”-esque antics (unrealistic situations juxtaposed with genuinely heartfelt messages), “Harry’s Law” accurately depicts abject poverty and class disparity currently airing. It fearlessly emphasizes the plight of the urban poor and highlights the contrast between the mindsets of the lower and upper economic classes.
The show is not perfect, but it’s nowhere near as obnoxious as the majority of shows that attempt to portray modern poverty. Anyone interested should tune into NBC on Mondays at 10 p.m.
Leave a Reply