The Good Neighbor: The Life and Work of Fred Rogers by Maxwell King (Harry N. Abrams, 2018), 320 pages
Won't You Be My Neighbor? directed by Morgan Neville (Focus Films, 2018), 94 minutes
2018 was a significant year in remembering Fred Rogers, the creator and star of "Mr. Roger's Neighborhood." Over the summer, Oscar-winning filmaker Morgan Neville released a documentary on Rogers, which had significant popularity for a documentary. It grossed almost $23 million and at one point was screened in almost 900 theaters in the US. (It was also well regarded, earning a 98% fresh score from Rotten Tomatoes.) This fall, a new biography, The Good Neighbor, was released. And, to put the cherry on top of the sundae, a new film was shot, in which beloved actor Tom Hanks will portray Rogers; currently it's scheduled to be released around Thanksgiving 2019.
By happy coincidence, I read the new book and then watched the documentary in a two-week period. There is noticeable overlap between the two projects, perhaps owing to the fact that the book's author, Maxwell King, provides on-camera interviews for Neville's documentary.
In general, both the movie and book are wonderfully affectionate tributes to the life and career of Fred Rogers, and both rely heavily on personal interviews with many people who knew and worked with the television pioneer. While it would be unfair to describe either as hagiographic, both King and Neville have a deep appreciation for Rogers' career. Even more, they both seem motivated by the conviction that the same popular culture which seems to have moved on from Mr. Rogers desperately needs his approach today.
King provides more details from Rogers' childhood, which he believes shaped Rogers' career and provided a significant part of the foundation for the elements of his television career. Raised by wealthy parents in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, Rogers was an only child until his parents adopted his sister, Elaine. A sensitive boy, Rogers was often bullied at school, and for years ate lunch at home with perhaps one other schoolmate. During these lunch breaks, he would often perform puppet shows for an audience of one. At age 10, his grandmother gave him a piano, which he learned to play. Eventually, he studied music in college, where he also met his future wife, Joanne. (Joanne Rogers provided interviews for both the book and documentary.)
From this point, the book and documentary have significant overlap, detailing Rogers' career in television. After an internship at NBC, gained though his father's connections, Rogers learned about a new public station beginning in Pittsburgh. Hired as a program manager, again perhaps because of family connections, he created a children's program, The Children's Corner. Rogers was almost never seen on camera, but he bantered with the show's host through his puppets, especially a cat who became known as Daniel Striped Tiger.
During the show's seven year run, Rogers also pursued a seminary degree at the Presbyterian seminary now known as Pittsburgh Theological. In this education, he had a passion for working with children, and he studied extensively with Dr. Margaret McFarland, who became a much-relied upon consultant for "Mr. Roger's Neighborhood." After receiving his degree, he pursued ordination in the Presbyterian church for "on-air ministry." King offers some insight into how the traditionally conservative presbytery was convinced to approve Rogers' ordination. Both the book and documentary find important meaning in Rogers' vocation as a minister and highlight it.
Rogers' education and ordination led to some frustration with the limitations of The Children's Corner, and he began to look for other opportunities. Eventually, he was hired to create a new program for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, which became the precursor to "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," which he created after he returned to Pittsburgh four years later.
The heart of both the book and documentary is an assessment of the classic children's show, detailing many aspects of its creation. In both, it becomes clear that Fred Rogers had a singular vision, which he insisted upon. In both, it also becomes clear that he was otherwise a generous creator and collaborator with the cast and crew. Neville's documentary is filled with a variety of touching scenes from the long-running show, many of which are described in King's book.
They describe the focus on valuing children, speaking directly to them, and addressing their issues in healthy ways, often relying on McFarland to edit scripts. Rogers wrote dozens of songs to explore these many issues of childhood and encourage awareness and acceptance of a variety of emotions. While the puppets played a large role in the show, Rogers insisted on clearly marking what was "make-believe" and what was not. No issue was off-limits, as the show explored things like death and divorce.
While both the book and documentary pay special attention to the show's music, King is obviously enamored of what he describes as Rogers' 11 operas. These were virtually all musical episodes that eventually were produced as part of "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," and which he mentions and describes again and again and again. (If the documentary mentions them, I missed it.)
In the late '70s, Rogers decided to stop making new episodes of "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," hoping to create programming for adults. This program, Old Friends... New Friends, did not draw much attention and quickly ended. King shares, on camera in the documentary and more extensively in the book, his opinion that the program was basically unwatchable given Rogers' trademark on camera style, though the clip shown in the documentary doesn't seem too bad.
After a few years, Rogers resumed making "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood" for another two decades. Often, the later episodes became the most memorable, as Rogers employed a technique of creating week-long studies of various issues -- the concept that inspired his return to make more episodes in the first place.
By the time he filmed the final new episode, Rogers had become a beloved icon for two generations of children, offering an example of acceptance, kindness, and love. He received a number of honorary degrees, and was a popular commencement speaker. He was awarded a lifetime achievement Emmy, and his acceptance speech, inviting the audience to silently remember those who helped them become who they are, is one of the most memorable and moving of all time.
In the late '90s, Rogers was the subject of a surprising profile in Esquire, written by Tom Junod. (This, reportedly, is the basis for the upcoming Tom Hanks film.) King describes the article at length in the book, and Junod appears on-camera in the documentary, though, surprisingly, Neville does not identify or contextualize why he is speaking of Rogers. I remember reading Junod's profile of Rogers when it was originally published, and have remembered it ever since -- a testament, I think, to both its subject and its author; it remains a stunning piece of journalistic excellence. Personally, I think it is a missed opportunity for Neville not to explore it more in the film.
Fred Rogers died of cancer in 2003, and both the book and documentary try to move beyond nostalgia to suggest his legacy. King highlights the ongoing work of the Fred Rogers Company, which still produces shows for PBS. Neville seems to think that Rogers' patient approach and obvious kindness and love for everyone are in short supply today. Both present Rogers as a one-of-a-kind individual, seemingly too good to be true, but a real-life person.
Overall, both works do an admirable job of highlighting the impact of "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood" and how Rogers' fastidious eye for detail shaped the program into such an influential one for children. They both answer the obvious question -- why has the program's impact faded in recent years? -- in the same way: Rogers refused to commercialize his show, in contrast to many others on television. Both are uplifting and emotional, pointing to the ways that oft-spoken Christian virtues -- love, patience, kindness -- can really positively impact those around us.
At points, both the book and documentary look for examples of Rogers' human foibles and imperfections, but they do not highlight many. Perhaps this is due to the involvement of so many friends and family members, including Rogers' wife and two sons, in the interviews on which both book and documentary are based.
King, though, offers a fascinating tidbit suggesting another part of Rogers' life that was unexplored. While he created his own production company for "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," Rogers also was, at least for a time, the head of his family's business and also their charitable foundation. Aside from one paragraph that suggests Rogers publicly lied about this during a labor strike at the business, this part of his life is completely unexplored. While perhaps outside the limited purview of a documentary, a book should offer plenty of space to provide details of this part of Rogers' life. I found myself wanting to know more, not because I was looking for imperfection, but because King introduced the theme of how wealth allowed Rogers freedom to pursue his unique career, and I wondered about how the family obligations related to that wealth persisted as he pursued his television career.
Like many my age, I grew up watching "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," and I've long admired Fred Rogers. As I grow in my ministry, I also become more aware at how the television program was a ministry; I can see the religious fingerprints more clearly, and I appreciate them more and more. So I imagine I'm part of the target audience for both this book and this documentary. I enjoyed both of them. King's book was a page-turner; Neville's film, an emotional delight. (And, yes, I can't wait for the Tom Hanks' film later this year.)
Won't You Be My Neighbor? directed by Morgan Neville (Focus Films, 2018), 94 minutes
2018 was a significant year in remembering Fred Rogers, the creator and star of "Mr. Roger's Neighborhood." Over the summer, Oscar-winning filmaker Morgan Neville released a documentary on Rogers, which had significant popularity for a documentary. It grossed almost $23 million and at one point was screened in almost 900 theaters in the US. (It was also well regarded, earning a 98% fresh score from Rotten Tomatoes.) This fall, a new biography, The Good Neighbor, was released. And, to put the cherry on top of the sundae, a new film was shot, in which beloved actor Tom Hanks will portray Rogers; currently it's scheduled to be released around Thanksgiving 2019.
By happy coincidence, I read the new book and then watched the documentary in a two-week period. There is noticeable overlap between the two projects, perhaps owing to the fact that the book's author, Maxwell King, provides on-camera interviews for Neville's documentary.
In general, both the movie and book are wonderfully affectionate tributes to the life and career of Fred Rogers, and both rely heavily on personal interviews with many people who knew and worked with the television pioneer. While it would be unfair to describe either as hagiographic, both King and Neville have a deep appreciation for Rogers' career. Even more, they both seem motivated by the conviction that the same popular culture which seems to have moved on from Mr. Rogers desperately needs his approach today.
King provides more details from Rogers' childhood, which he believes shaped Rogers' career and provided a significant part of the foundation for the elements of his television career. Raised by wealthy parents in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, Rogers was an only child until his parents adopted his sister, Elaine. A sensitive boy, Rogers was often bullied at school, and for years ate lunch at home with perhaps one other schoolmate. During these lunch breaks, he would often perform puppet shows for an audience of one. At age 10, his grandmother gave him a piano, which he learned to play. Eventually, he studied music in college, where he also met his future wife, Joanne. (Joanne Rogers provided interviews for both the book and documentary.)
From this point, the book and documentary have significant overlap, detailing Rogers' career in television. After an internship at NBC, gained though his father's connections, Rogers learned about a new public station beginning in Pittsburgh. Hired as a program manager, again perhaps because of family connections, he created a children's program, The Children's Corner. Rogers was almost never seen on camera, but he bantered with the show's host through his puppets, especially a cat who became known as Daniel Striped Tiger.
During the show's seven year run, Rogers also pursued a seminary degree at the Presbyterian seminary now known as Pittsburgh Theological. In this education, he had a passion for working with children, and he studied extensively with Dr. Margaret McFarland, who became a much-relied upon consultant for "Mr. Roger's Neighborhood." After receiving his degree, he pursued ordination in the Presbyterian church for "on-air ministry." King offers some insight into how the traditionally conservative presbytery was convinced to approve Rogers' ordination. Both the book and documentary find important meaning in Rogers' vocation as a minister and highlight it.
Rogers' education and ordination led to some frustration with the limitations of The Children's Corner, and he began to look for other opportunities. Eventually, he was hired to create a new program for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, which became the precursor to "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," which he created after he returned to Pittsburgh four years later.
The heart of both the book and documentary is an assessment of the classic children's show, detailing many aspects of its creation. In both, it becomes clear that Fred Rogers had a singular vision, which he insisted upon. In both, it also becomes clear that he was otherwise a generous creator and collaborator with the cast and crew. Neville's documentary is filled with a variety of touching scenes from the long-running show, many of which are described in King's book.
They describe the focus on valuing children, speaking directly to them, and addressing their issues in healthy ways, often relying on McFarland to edit scripts. Rogers wrote dozens of songs to explore these many issues of childhood and encourage awareness and acceptance of a variety of emotions. While the puppets played a large role in the show, Rogers insisted on clearly marking what was "make-believe" and what was not. No issue was off-limits, as the show explored things like death and divorce.
While both the book and documentary pay special attention to the show's music, King is obviously enamored of what he describes as Rogers' 11 operas. These were virtually all musical episodes that eventually were produced as part of "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," and which he mentions and describes again and again and again. (If the documentary mentions them, I missed it.)
In the late '70s, Rogers decided to stop making new episodes of "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," hoping to create programming for adults. This program, Old Friends... New Friends, did not draw much attention and quickly ended. King shares, on camera in the documentary and more extensively in the book, his opinion that the program was basically unwatchable given Rogers' trademark on camera style, though the clip shown in the documentary doesn't seem too bad.
After a few years, Rogers resumed making "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood" for another two decades. Often, the later episodes became the most memorable, as Rogers employed a technique of creating week-long studies of various issues -- the concept that inspired his return to make more episodes in the first place.
By the time he filmed the final new episode, Rogers had become a beloved icon for two generations of children, offering an example of acceptance, kindness, and love. He received a number of honorary degrees, and was a popular commencement speaker. He was awarded a lifetime achievement Emmy, and his acceptance speech, inviting the audience to silently remember those who helped them become who they are, is one of the most memorable and moving of all time.
In the late '90s, Rogers was the subject of a surprising profile in Esquire, written by Tom Junod. (This, reportedly, is the basis for the upcoming Tom Hanks film.) King describes the article at length in the book, and Junod appears on-camera in the documentary, though, surprisingly, Neville does not identify or contextualize why he is speaking of Rogers. I remember reading Junod's profile of Rogers when it was originally published, and have remembered it ever since -- a testament, I think, to both its subject and its author; it remains a stunning piece of journalistic excellence. Personally, I think it is a missed opportunity for Neville not to explore it more in the film.
Fred Rogers died of cancer in 2003, and both the book and documentary try to move beyond nostalgia to suggest his legacy. King highlights the ongoing work of the Fred Rogers Company, which still produces shows for PBS. Neville seems to think that Rogers' patient approach and obvious kindness and love for everyone are in short supply today. Both present Rogers as a one-of-a-kind individual, seemingly too good to be true, but a real-life person.
Overall, both works do an admirable job of highlighting the impact of "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood" and how Rogers' fastidious eye for detail shaped the program into such an influential one for children. They both answer the obvious question -- why has the program's impact faded in recent years? -- in the same way: Rogers refused to commercialize his show, in contrast to many others on television. Both are uplifting and emotional, pointing to the ways that oft-spoken Christian virtues -- love, patience, kindness -- can really positively impact those around us.
At points, both the book and documentary look for examples of Rogers' human foibles and imperfections, but they do not highlight many. Perhaps this is due to the involvement of so many friends and family members, including Rogers' wife and two sons, in the interviews on which both book and documentary are based.
King, though, offers a fascinating tidbit suggesting another part of Rogers' life that was unexplored. While he created his own production company for "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," Rogers also was, at least for a time, the head of his family's business and also their charitable foundation. Aside from one paragraph that suggests Rogers publicly lied about this during a labor strike at the business, this part of his life is completely unexplored. While perhaps outside the limited purview of a documentary, a book should offer plenty of space to provide details of this part of Rogers' life. I found myself wanting to know more, not because I was looking for imperfection, but because King introduced the theme of how wealth allowed Rogers freedom to pursue his unique career, and I wondered about how the family obligations related to that wealth persisted as he pursued his television career.
Like many my age, I grew up watching "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," and I've long admired Fred Rogers. As I grow in my ministry, I also become more aware at how the television program was a ministry; I can see the religious fingerprints more clearly, and I appreciate them more and more. So I imagine I'm part of the target audience for both this book and this documentary. I enjoyed both of them. King's book was a page-turner; Neville's film, an emotional delight. (And, yes, I can't wait for the Tom Hanks' film later this year.)
Comments
Post a Comment