For the few of you who haven't watched (or read this blog before) the show is set in current day New York City and follows the lives of four women in their mid-twenties as they try to “figure out” what to do in the grey area between youth and adulthood that plagues their post collegiate years. It’s largely a show where no major events happen; we just watch these four women go about their lives in New York City.
The show is the brainchild of Lena Dunham, who made a splash in the indie film industry with her 2010 film Tiny Furniture. Tiny Furniture was remarkable for depicting the ennui of life after college with perfection; the muted tone and understated acting really brought unexpected nuance and depth to the complicated emotions depicted in the film. The themes of Girls are strikingly similar: the show has a muted and wry tone, covering disparate topics like sex, text message etiquette, and joblessness in a big city with equal amounts of detached amusement and bleak honesty. Girls is a show that deals with all the joyous, embarrassing, fleeting, and sad moments of women searching for themselves in the hustle and bustle of America’s biggest city.
Given the show’s widespread coverage, I wondered about what I could add to the Girls conversation that hasn’t already been said a thousand times over. I thought about commenting on the claim that Girls only caters to a select demographic of privileged white young women. I thought about the oft-made comparison of Girls to Sex in the City, and how the latter show simultaneously acknowledges and avoids any clear correlation to the former one. I also considered countering the argument that Girls is the voice for a generation of women. Any of these topics have been covered exhaustively by bloggers, critics, and everyday readers alike.