Note: in fall 2024, after studying works of both classical and recent narratology, Narrative Lab student research fellows were asked to develop a research prospectus that describes a project that they might undertake, its rationale, scope, and methods. This example was written by Megan Rodriguez-Hawkins ’25.
When I was a child, my older brother introduced me to the show Community. Although the show was entertaining, I mostly watched it to spend time with my brother. It was not until I entered high school that I began rewatching the show. From my first rewatch I became hooked. The premise, plot, and character development are written and perfectly executed in ways that many fans would consider genius (Clamen 1). One character in particular, Abed, has garnered massive amounts of attention and praise. Drawing from narrative theory, It is through the character of Abed that I plan to explore the dynamic between audience, character, and assumed knowledge.
Community is a sitcom created by Dan Harmon that revolves around the experiences of seven individuals attending Greendale community college. The character who I will primarily focus on is Abed Nadir, a film student at the college. Although Abed is not the protagonist, his character serves as the driving force for many of the show’s narrative elements. This is mainly due to his inability to understand complex emotions portrayed by other characters, which also serves as his defining character trait. From the very first episode of the show Abed is introduced as socially inept. However, as the show progresses it becomes apparent that Abed has his own method for forming connections and relating to his peers. He interprets each conversation and interaction as it would play out in a television show. This method of processing the world around him causes his character to blend the boundaries of audience and television character. He is constantly referencing pop-culture moments that relate to the plot of the show. He therefore has an awareness and levels of understanding that the audience has towards the show.
To give an example, in season 2 episodes 23 and 24 (the two part season finale) the characters are involved in a paintball war wherein the last man standing gets $100,000. Episode 23 has the characters playing out a spaghetti western style narrative wherein each character is dressed like their from the old west and the paintball guns appear as pistols. The soundtrack of course leans into this style. There is no doubt what the show is referencing. However, in episode 24, the characters learn that the paintball war was instigated by a rival college to get the students to trash their own school with paint. It seems that the rival college succeeded, except for the fact that the prize money is real and the rival college would have to pay $100,000 if a Greendale student won. To attempt to avoid this, the rival college sent in paintball professionals to take out the Greendale students. The characters now must band together to take out the rival college’s paintball professionals and win the money to be donated to Greendale. With this plot development, Abed makes the observation that the plot is straying from its spaghetti western format to a Star Wars one (Harmon). He then takes dibs on being the Han Solo character and adapts his personality to be more jaded and charismatic. His interpretation of the events around him shapes the narrative of the episode. The paintball professionals come in looking like storm troopers and the music changes to be more ominous. His character is thus shown as being both tuned into the story around him, while also highly influential to it. As stated by Laura Detmering “much of the experience, both intellectually and emotionally, of watching a series like Community is being “in” on the joke, feeling that one is a part of the community” (Detmering, 39). Abed exists narratively within the story while also maintaining an external connection with the audience’s thoughts and viewing experience. He is therefore an extremely interesting character that operates beyond the typical boundaries.
Sitcoms are an American staple that have not wavered in popularity. Some of this popularity is due to the character driven structure and formulaic plot (notes on writing a 30 minute sitcom). However, the apparent simplicity of the storylines leaves room for exploration and experimentation with the rules of narrative theory. For example, “mockumentaries” have become a recent sitcom phenomenon that has gained popularity. This style of storytelling plays with the focalization and diegesis of the narrative as a way of immersing the audience into the plot (Rimmon-Kenan). With these new modes of storytelling, does the current theory accurately reflect what is being presented through these narratives? Does there need to be an update in the language used to describe certain aspects of characterization?
On online fan discussion forums and discourse channels, terms such as “audience insert character,” “audience surrogate,” and “self insert character” are well known, but often conflated with one another. There is very little academic research that compares these categories of characters or provides a clear definition of each. The term “audience insert character” can only be found in fan spaces and therefore is an area of unreached potential for further study. On reddit an audience insert character is defined as:
“supporting cast members who often give commentary and reaction on what’s happening and often share the opinions of the audience online watching it. For example, a boy and girl in a romance haven’t gotten together yet and their goofy friend is always saying stuff on the sidelines like “They’re sooo cute!” or “Just confess already dammit!”
My research would entail a comparative analysis of characters who are considered to be audience insert, audience surrogate, and self-insert characters. I am interested in exploring the perceived differences based on online and academic definitions of these terms, as well as how the characters operate with the larger narrative of their show. Abed will be the primary character studied in attempting to define an “audience insert character” as his complexity fits the perceived description while also being attributed as both an audience surrogate and a author insert character. His adaptability to many different categorizations will allow an investigation of what exactly these characterizations are and how they can be implemented.
In literary analysis, an audience surrogate character is a common and recognizable tool that allows the author to give important information without breaking the immersion within the story. As stated by Salao, “an audience surrogate is a character that acts as a proxy for the reader within the narrative” (1). The limited knowledge of the reader is reflected by the limited knowledge of this character. Subsequently, “they think as you do, ask the questions you’re curious about, and get confused by the same things you would” (Salao 1). Therefore, this character acts on a presumed lack of understanding on behalf of the audience. This is where a character like Abed differs.
The primary function of an audience surrogate is to have “the perfect excuse for [the character] to ask questions about things that are considered basic,” at least basic to anyone who is familiar with the world they inhabit (Salao 1). Abed, however, only works as a character if the audience is presumed to have knowledge and understanding. Unlike audience surrogate characters who ask questions that the audience is not expected to know, Abed asks questions that the audience is expected to know. Not just based on pop-culture references, but the emotions of the other characters. Abed’s lack of social awareness means he has trouble reading situations (hence why he relates them to television) and responding appropriately. He has to ask characters why they are making the face they are making. The audience is positioned to pick up on certain information even before he does. To this end, Abed should not be considered an audience surrogate. This can be conflicting as some have labeled Abed as an audience surrogate. On reddit, Piercinald-Anastasia stated “Abed is a representative of us (the viewer)” to which Detla_Hammer responded, “yes! Abed is the audience surrogate (Reddit). It is undeniable that Abed is a representative of the viewer, however I would not consider him to be an audience surrogate.
My proposed research would investigate these distinctions to expand upon the current dialogue surrounding audience based characters. To accomplish this, both academic and fan spaces will be utilized to gather information. Although largely undercredited, “anyone, it seems, can be an expert in an online community; these communities provide a space in which people who are not scholarly experts in subjects can feel that they have some authority and a right to speak about what they know” (Detmering 42). Sophisticated language exists within fan spaces to discuss these topics, the main issue is the lack of clear and consistent definitions. This research would create a more comprehensive vocabulary and basis of understanding. The research would also broaden the academic conversation of narrative theory.
There are two final formats in which this research will be presented: the first will be an academic paper and the second will be a video essay. The academic paper will contain much of the same information as the video essay, it will just be in a more scholarly format. This will allow other researchers to cite or reference the research done for this project. Hopefully, having this information available for academic purposes will better establish the topics of character design in sitcoms. The video essay will engage with a larger audience and be better suited to integrate with fan spaces. Since some of the information for this research will be taken from fan sites, it would be remiss to exclude those individuals from the research product. Those who have contributed to the knowledge should not be barred from the information. A video essay will therefore address and honor that community. Additionally, the video essay will provide a multimedia approach. Since Community, and many of the other examples that will be discussed, is taken from television, having an audio-visual approach will strengthen the evidence. This will also make the information more accessible and easy to process.
Works Cited
“A Fist Full of Paintballs.” Community, created by Dan Harmon, season 2 episode 23, NBC, 2011
Clamen, Mark. “Meta-Sitcoms Are People Too: Reflections on the Murky Future of NBC’s Community.” Criticsatlarge.ca, 2018, www.criticsatlarge.ca/2011/11/meta-sitcoms-are-people-too-reflections.html.
Detmering, Laura. ““Just Tell Me the Rules, and I Will Follow”: Active Viewership, Community Engagement, and Dan Harmon’s “Community.”” Studies in Popular Culture, vol. 37, no. 1, 2014, pp. 39–56, www.jstor.org/stable/24332699.
Feccomandi, Andrea. “Audience Surrogate – Andrea Feccomandi – Medium.” Medium, 24 Oct. 2022, andreafeccomandi.medium.com/audience-surrogate-d1a945ca1548.
“For a Few Paintballs More.” Community, created by Dan Harmon, season 2 episode 24, NBC, 2011
Notes on Writing a “30 Minute” Sitcom.
r/anime. “Reddit – Dive into Anything.” Reddit.com, 2016, www.reddit.com/r/anime/comments/4f93ev/who_are_your_favorite_audience_insert_characters/.
r/TopCharacterTropes. “Reddit – Dive into Anything.” Reddit.com, 2024, www.reddit.com/r/TopCharacterTropes/comments/1etreq0/hated_characters_that_are_just_made_to_be_an/.
“Reddit – Dive into Anything.” Reddit.com, 2015, www.reddit.com/r/community/comments/15ym9w1/is_abed_the_main_character/.
Rimmon-Kenan, Shlomith. “Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics.” Routledge, 2002.
Salao, Cole. “The Audience Surrogate: Characters That Represent the Audience.” TCK Publishing, 24 Feb. 2022, www.tckpublishing.com/audience-surrogate/.