I think June Thomas has a provocative argument on her hands, suggesting that Rob, however much it may make with the humping-Grandma jokes, is doing something right in putting Latinos on screen without divorcing them from their heritage, or from Latino comedic traditions:

Rosa’s brother Hector, constantly scheming to line his own pockets, is played by Eugenio Derbez, one of Mexico’s pre-eminent comedians. His clowning doesn’t appeal to me, but Derbez is bringing a Univision-esque, south-of-the-border comedy style to U.S. television. In effect, he’s facilitating another kind of assimilation.

Many of Rob’s themes were first explored in Chico and the Man, which aired between 1974 and 1978 and was the first U.S. series set in a Mexican-American neighborhood. In that show, a charismatic young Chicano (Freddie Prinze) gradually won the affections of a crabby old white guy who didn’t hate Mexicans so much as he objected to the way changing demographics were shaking up his world. It’s a little depressing that nearly 40 years after Chico was first broadcast, we’re still stuck at the “first contact” stage in our depictions of the relationships between different communities, but at least television is once again paying attention to Latinos…On Modern Family and Glee, the Latino characters are cut off from their culture. On the former, there’s a discomfiting sense that the white Pritchett family rescued the Delgados from poverty (if we believe Gloria’s tales of her early life in Colombia) and bad parenting. (When Manny’s biological father, Javier, comes to visit, Jay always has to step in to save his stepson from disappointment.) The one time someone from Santana’s birth family appeared on Glee, it was a total downer: Her abuela broke her heart by kicking her out of the house after she came out. Wizards of Waverly Place sometimes explored Mexican traditions in a bicultural Italian-Mexican family—Alex celebrated her quinceañera, for example—but the kids’ more splashy heritage (as wizards, natch) tended to dominate. At least on Rob, the focus is on Mexican-American culture.

The question, though, is whether Rob is going to be the future of Latino comedy in America, or whether it’s backfill, making up for a dearth of representations that should have been there earlier and issues that should have been worked out on-screen long before this. The numbers are undeniably good overall, though as Joe Adalian points out, they’re not great among the coveted 18-34 year-old-viewers. Among them, the Rob does only slightly better than Parks and Recreation.

It’s probably worth noting that Parks and Recreation also has a half-Latina character in the form of April Ludgate. April’s fascinating precisely because she has an evolving relationship with her heritage. She’s annoyed by the idea that she’s supposed to be so lively and colorful.” But it’s not like she’s running away from her ethnic heritage. She tries on the idea of running away to Venezuela with Eduardo and she speaks Spanish particularly when she’s upset or tipsy. It’s interesting to contrast her to Gloria on Modern Family, who I think June is wrong to say is cut off from her culture—certainly, she’s constantly citing aphorisms, traditions, and superstitions, though most of them are clearly exaggerated and made up. But unlike April, we don’t necessarily see Gloria negotiating her identity now that she and Manny are in a new setting: Gloria and Manny’s heritage is a source of punchlines more than it is a source of plot or character developments. In other words, while on Rob, the identity conflicts are between multiple characters, on Parks and Recreation, that’s a negotiation process that’s going on within a single character. First contact between whites and Latinos is the past: figuring out how Latinos and elements of Latino culture are going to fit into both individuals’ lives and American culture as a whole is the future.

It says a lot about Work It that the way the show dealt with cross-dressing was so misguided that I didn’t even get around to writing an extremely angry post about the show’s poisonous sexism before it was cancelled due to faith-in-humanity reaffirming low ratings. But every silver lining has its cloud, which in this case were the strong initial ratings for Rob. Whether the latter continues to hold those numbers is a very interesting question, but I think the fate of each of these critically-savaged shows says something about the stories Americans want to here, and what compromises they’re willing to make to them.

I think there’s no question that the impact of the recession on gender and economic power has been important and thought-provoking for a lot of people. If you’ve been a provider, and see that role tied up with your gender, and then lose that role, I imagine you have some thoughts about manhood, womanhood, etc. But I don’t necessarily think the recession set off a gender war. And the wildly aggrieved nature of Work It was sour beyond being interesting or resonant. On the show, Lee, the main character, complains bitterly about how much better his friend Angel is at selling pharmaceuticals in drag, calling her a whore, not that the experience leads him into clarity or sympathy for women who can’t or won’t let a man get a leg over to get a leg up in business. Lee’s toxic brother in law rants endlessly about how women are emasculating men. All three men appear to meet at the bar where they hang out because they want to escape whatever women in their lives, and those women are set up in a way to make that escape possible. They’re wretched people to spend time with, and even worse tools to get at the painful truths of the American economy through humor.

Rob, on the other hand, is not a good show either. The “shucks-I’m-sodomizing-Grandma” scene in the pilot will justly go down in infamy. But there is a real need for a show about American Latinos, and for a show that satirizes the efforts of white Americans to understand their changing society that opens up more space for conversation and shutting it down. Is Rob that? It’s not particularly clear yet. But the design of Cheech Marin as a conservative immigrant small businessman who wants to defend the border with cannons and employs undocumented immigrants himself is intelligent in intention if not in execution: not all non-white people think alike, and not all of them hold positions that we think of as progressive. His interactions with Rob, who tries to ingratiate himself by supporting immigration reform and talking about how much he likes guacamole, are probably the parts of the show that work best: the target is Rob’s desire to be accepted even though he hasn’t tried hard to be knowledgeable, and the jokes don’t suggest that he should try less hard, just try better.

Where Work It was hostile in its proud ignorance, Rob is amiable in its attempts to get at something true. Neither of them are good shows, but Rob could become a decent one with the right intentions and some heavy lifting. Work It never would have been. It’s too bad ABC didn’t realize that before airing it.

In his review of Rob, Todd VanDerWeff says something: “Everybody’s trying to figure out the way to do these vaguely politically incorrect shows where the characters talk about race and culture and so on frankly and honestly. Everybody’s chasing that whole envelope-pushing thing that cable does so well because they vaguely sense that this is something network could do well, too.” In that case, they might well look to David Nevins and to Showtime for tips on how to do those things right without being obvious, or without making a hash of things trying to represent the full range of a debate.

At his executive session yesterday, one of my fellow critics asked if he thought House of Lies glorified the 1 percent and the people who produce their wealth at a time of rising anger against them. “House of Lies is all about excess and confronting the contradictions of it and the hypocrisies of it. I think House of Lies is an incredibly timely show,” he said. “We’re not really about taking the sanctimonious, obvious route to confront those issues of income disparity. But I think it’s got very interesting things to say about how business is run.” He trusts his audience to see something on screen and to interrogate it, rather than to simply accept that because it’s on screen, it must be good.

When I asked him about whether, given the nice ratings for Homeland and House of Lies, he thought there was an unmet appetite for shows that took on the issues of the day, he agreed heartily:

Relevance is a big deal for us. I want to do shows that resonate in the wider culture. I think theere’s a huge opportunity to challenge the world that we live in. Relevance, timeliness, is, I think, one of the things that can define Showtime…I feel like that’s a big part of what happened with Homeland. I got to Showtime the summer of 2010. My first day was in August. And that script showed up. I’d had conversations with Howard [Gordon] and Alex [Gansa] back when I was a producer. They gave me the script within my first week there…we started talking about what the pay cable version of that would be. I realized we didn’t have a show that played in the fall with Dexter, and a year from then, the fall of 2011 would be the 10th anniversary of 9/11, and her was a script that if we were smart about it, was going to resonate with a lot of the things that were going to be occupying journalists and pundits. It’s rare that something lines up like that…In a similar way, House of Lies, some of it is by coincidence but some fo it is by design.

The political cycle moves much faster than the television development process, so Showtime would have be unusually good at forecasting to have shows land in the same way that Homeland and House of Lies have. But I appreciate hearing anyone say that trying is worthwhile.