This article demonstrates how The Family (2009), a fly-on-the wall UK reality series about a British Indian family, facilitates both current public service broadcasting requirements and mass audience appeal. From a critical cultural studies perspective, the author examines the journalistic and viewer responses to the series where authenticity, universality, and comedy emerge as major themes. Textual analysis of the racialized screen representations also helps locate the series within the contexts of contested multiculturalism, genre developments in reality television and public service broadcasting. Paul Gilroy’s concept of convivial culture is used as a frame in understanding how meanings of the series are produced within a South Asian popular representational space. The author suggests that the social comedy taxonomy is a prerequisite for the making of this particular observational documentary. Further, the popular (comedic) mode of conviviality on which the series depends is both expedient and necessary within the various sociopolitical contexts outlined.
CornerJ.2002. Performing the Real: Documentary Diversions. Television and New Media3 (3): 255–69.
13.
DeeJ.2009. Meet the Grewals: A British Indian family just like yours. The Guardian, October31.
14.
DentG.2009. The Family: In-jokes, nagging, exasperation—and great reality TV. The Guardian, November11.
15.
DoveyJ.2000. Freakshow: First person media and factual television. London: Pluto.
16.
GillespieM.2003. From comic Asians to Asian comics: “Goodness Gracious Me,” British television comedy and representations of ethnicity. In Group identities on French and British television, edited by ScrivenM.RobertsE., 93–107. Oxford, UK: Berghahn Books.
17.
GilroyP.2004. After empire: Melancholia or convivial culture. London: Routledge.
18.
HallS.1972. The social eye of “Picture Post,” Working papers in Cultural Studies 2. Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies: University of Birmingham.
19.
HallS.1993What is this “black” in black popular culture?Social Justice20 (1-2): 101-14.
20.
HallS.2000. Conclusion: The multi-cultural Question. In Un/settled multiculturalisms: Diasporas, entanglements, transruptions, edited by HesseB.London: Zed Books.
21.
HamamotoD. Y.1989. Nervous laughter: Television situation comedy and liberal democratic ideology. New York: Praeger.
22.
HartleyJ.2008. Situation comedy—Part I. In The television genre book, edited by CreeberG., 78–81. London: British Film Institute.
23.
HolmesS.2008. Riveting and real—a family in the raw: (Re)visiting The Family (1974) after Reality TV. International Journal of Cultural Studies11 (2): 193–210.
24.
JacksonM.2001. The fourth way. The Observer, July29.
25.
JoppkeC.2009. Limits of integration policy: Britain and her Muslims. Journal of Ethnic and migration Studies35 (3): 453–72.
26.
LudersM.PrøitzL.RasmussenT.2010. Emerging personal media genres. New Media & Society12 (6): 947–63.
27.
MalikS.2002. Representing black Britain: Black and Asian images on television. London: Sage.
NelsonR.2006. Quality television: “The Sopranos is the best television drama ever . . . in my humble opinion . . . .”Critical Studies in Television1 (1): 58–71.
WerbnerP.2004. Theorising complex diasporas: Purity and hybridity in the South Asian public sphere in Britain. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies30 (5): 895–911.
