‘Murphy’: Doing Its Job as Television

Since the first salvo was fired last spring in the Dan Quayle-Murphy Brown controversy, the story has obeyed the rules of journalism, appearing in, disappearing from and reappearing in the headlines as ongoing stories tend to do.

It was a good Calendar story to start with. It reappeared during the political conventions late in the summer. Howard Rosenberg hooked his Emmy telecast critique on it. And now, with the premiere of the new season of “Murphy Brown,” there has been another round of articles in Calendar in which the political implications of this fictional character’s story line in a network sitcom seem to be the major focus (among them, “ ‘Murphy Brown’: A Diversion or a Legitimate Cultural Debate?,” Sept. 20; “ ‘Murphy Brown’ to Dan Quayle: Read Our Ratings,” Sept. 23).

Let us be reminded here that before its elevation to the status of political hot potato (or potatoe ), “Murphy Brown” was, as it continues to be, a television show. Those who analyze such things may call this single-mother story line a projection of its creators’ beliefs, a rejection of family values or a reflection of what’s really happening out here in the real world.

But in its essence, it is a portrayal of a group of made-up characters cast into sometimes outrageous and sometimes realistic situations. Perhaps Calendar should spend a little less space on the politics of the series and a little more on how the show is doing at its real job.

Part of that “real job” for the producers of “Murphy Brown” has been to responsibly portray the situation of one woman faced with terrifying choices, and we believe they have done an outstanding job. Over the years, we’ve seen Murphy’s sexuality, as well as that of all her compatriots, expanded and played mostly for laughs.

But last season, beginning with the first episode, the series addressed some real issues with great sensitivity as well as humor.

From that first episode, we saw this character in the agonies of making a difficult decision about what to do about her pregnancy, itself a result of one unguarded moment. Told by the father that she would be on her own, she showed us what so many women go through every day.

It’s television. The producers could have portrayed this dilemma and then ducked out of it with a miscarriage or the now-classic “It was all a dream.” But they were committed to the story and forward they have taken us.

Through the moment of her decision, to the questions of balancing a challenging career with the demands of motherhood, to dealing with friends, family and employers, to facing fears about her ability to raise a child alone, “Murphy Brown” has delivered the issues in the palatable form of entertainment: It’s a portrayal, not a position paper.

You may question its politics, but “Murphy Brown” is doing its job as television. Well done, well done.