Flanderization - why TV series characters become simpler over time and what does The Simpsons have to do with it (15 photos)

Today I'd like to talk about an interesting effect in TV series called Flanderization.

This is when, over the course of a series, a character degrades to a single, exaggerated trait that overshadows all other nuances.

And ultimately, the character becomes a caricature of themselves.

I'll explain the origins of this phenomenon, as well as the main examples and counter-examples.





History of Origin

The name of the phenomenon actually comes from Ned Flanders from The Simpsons.

He started out as a refined and polite "perfect neighbor" (as a contrast to Homer), whose faith was just part of his character.

But after many seasons, all the traits faded, and Flanders became simply an exaggerated religious fanatic.



For example, here's Flanders' look in Season 2: he has a cool basement, full of games, entertainment, and even a bar.





Furthermore, he even helps his son with a science project (later, Flanders will perceive everything scientific as dangerous and blasphemous).



Well, here's the image from Season 17. It all boils down to the fact that Flanders is a fanatical Christian, constantly shouting about God.





And all of Flanders' other traits are barely explored later in the series.

Other classic examples

My favorite examples:

Dwight Schrute from The Office. At the start, he's an ambiguous careerist who's vain, sycophantic, ambitious, and fiercely loyal. In the later seasons, he's simply a radical freak, responsible for having a crazy opinion on any normal situation.



Rajesh from "The Big Bang Theory": in the early seasons, the character has a ton of storylines—pressuring parents, multicultural complexes, and complicated relationships with women. By the end of the series, all of this is overshadowed by the constant gag about him being a closeted gay.



Barney Stinson from "How I Met Your Mother": at first, he's a traumatized and vulnerable character who's afraid of loneliness and therefore tries to get attention (from friends or girls) by any means necessary—but gradually degenerates into a sexually obsessed clown.



Why is this happening?

There are actually two main reasons:

Long production times and writer fatigue.

Sometimes a show has dozens of characters who are physically impossible to fully develop (unless you're making "The Sopranos"). Over time, attention focuses on two or three characters, while the rest are simplified into clear, repeatable traits.

Comedy inertia.

It's trite—but jokes are hard to write. So characters are reduced to a single, striking trait, which can be used to constantly build gags, like an assembly line. Examples include the radical Lisa Simpson and the dimwitted Joey from "Friends."



Not Just TV Series

Interestingly, simplification isn't limited to TV series—for example, Jack Sparrow from Pirates or Thor from Marvel are clearly victims of Flanderization. Incidentally, Marvel's example shows a simplification/primitivization of almost all its characters.

Here, it's a stretch to mention the situation with the simplification of mass media images.

For example, Sherlock Holmes or James Bond are more profound characters in their literary sources than in most film adaptations or in the popular imagination.



Essentially, Flanderization works wherever there is multiple repetition—it almost always leads to simplification, and subtle nuances are lost along the way.

Not-Flanderization

Another important point: don't confuse eccentricity with Flanderization (although they can be very similar).

A classic example is the characters of "South Park."

Yes, Randy Marsh and Cartman are indeed exaggerated sources of chaos—but they were also declared as such in the beginning.



I'll express my opinion—I also disagree when Michael from The Office is cited as a clear example of Flanderization.

Yes, there was a big change between Seasons 1 and 2, where Michael was given more vulnerability and awkwardness to make his original character less repulsive.

But then, right up until the end of his arc, Mike doesn't lose his traits (eccentricity, narrow-mindedness, and optimism), essentially remaining the same as he was initially announced.



Not always bad

An important point: Flanderization isn't always bad.

There's an example with Hannibal Lecter (I'm more talking about the literary image).



In the first episode, "Red Dragon," Lecter is portrayed as an intelligent and sarcastic man whose knowledge of psychiatry makes him an extremely dangerous criminal.

In "The Silence of the Lambs," he becomes arguably the greatest psychiatrist in the United States, having treated all other serial killers in the country.

And in "Hannibal," he is simply synonymous with an ominous fate, elusive and unattainable.

On the one hand, we clearly see a degradation and simplification of the character. On the other, it was precisely the more simplified character from "The Silence of the Lambs" that became iconic.

Reverse Flanderization

Finally, I'd like to point out that characters in TV series don't always deteriorate over time.

Actually, it's "The Office" again!

Jim Halpert is initially billed as simply a sarcastic "normal guy" (whose primary function is to respond appropriately to Michael or Dwight's antics, creating his signature comical awkwardness).



But over time, Jim develops new character traits like ambition and indecisiveness, and along with them, complex conflicts and ambiguous situations.

To be fair, the term "reverse Flanderization" sounds redundant when we already have the clear term "character development" :)

Thanks for reading!