Dollhouse

Several recent events or scenes have been knocking around in my head, but they’re like puzzle pieces that won’t resolve themselves into a coherent image.

There’s the Roman Polanski affair, and how the debate about his actions has opened my eyes to the concept that there can be a debate about his actions. There’s the David Letterman situation, which of course isn’t on a par with the Polanski mess but which raises questions about the late-night host’s personal life and veracity, and also opens up a whole other can of worms.

As New Yorker critic Nancy Franklin noted in a review of Jay Leno’s program that ran before the Letterman scandal broke, there are no women on the writing staffs of the Jay, Dave or Conan O’Brien shows. None.

We all like to think we’re better than the blatantly sexist managers we see on "Mad Men," but are we? Has the composition of late-night writing rooms changed much in the past 40 years? Apparently not.

Speaking of "Mad Men," there was a scene in a recent episode in which a young woman was strongly pressured into having sex in order to pay back a favor bestowed by a more powerful man. It was — what was the word Letterman used repeatedly to describe his actions? — creepy. To say the least.

Dollhouse_sc-48_9937 All of which brings me to "Dollhouse," which is struggling mightily in the ratings. I very much want this show to continue, not because it’s perfect, but because it grapples with these very issues, which resist easy analysis yet can be fascinating (witness the strong ratings for Letterman’s scandal-related broadcasts).

"Dollhouse" sets out to do what network programs are supposed to do — to entertain — but it also examines thorny ideas about power, exploitation and gender. Few other shows on television are willing to do this (and here I have to mention of FX’s "Sons of Anarchy," which has made the fallout from a rape one of the most interesting stories of the fall). But complex questions about manipulation, deceit and the ability to make self-aware choices are built into the DNA of "Dollhouse," which is about attractive "Actives" who are frequently mind-wiped and sent on missions, some of which have a sexual component.

Like "Mad Men," "Dollhouse" doesn’t get blockbuster ratings, though the 2 million or so viewers who watch "Mad Men’s" first-run airings make it a winner for AMC. The even lower ratings that "Dollhouse" is getting make it a possible loser for Fox (though if we’re lucky, revenue from other platforms will ensure that we at least get a 13-episode Season 2). But the cancellation of this show would be a real loss.

I guess I can intellectually understand why the millions who watch "The Mentalist" every week don’t tune in to "Mad Men" and "Dollhouse." These shows aren’t about bad guys being punished or diseases being cured. They grapple with uncomfortable questions about power, exploitation, hypocrisy, selfishness and the lies people tell themselves so they can feel better about taking advantage of others.

Delving into these topics does not necessarily produce feel-good TV. But when these themes are explored with brutal honesty, the results can be extremely compelling.

It’s not as though "Dollhouse" is perfect; the show’s plausibility problems still crop up from time to time. I wonder why former Actives such as November (Miracle Laurie) are allowed to know that they were Actives, and why Dr. Saunders/Whiskey is allowed to know she is an Active who has been imprinted as a doctor (yet as Whiskey, Amy Acker is so great I can understand the desire to give her scenes in which she rages about what’s been done to her).

I also wonder how the Dollhouse stays in business, what with all the refunds they have to give for missions gone wrong. (Do they have a sign in the break room that says, "We have gone [X] days without a Rogue Active Incident"?)

Dollhouseguns Still, I find myself rooting for this show to keep going, not just because last season developed into such an adventurous, thought-provoking thrill ride.

I’m rooting for "Dollhouse" because it’s doing something different and difficult and it’s not a cookie-cutter show. It can be darkly funny (which is typical of anything created by Joss Whedon). It has an increasingly impressive cast and terrific guest stars. And even if it doesn’t get everything right, it involves me emotionally on a regular basis. It surprises me on a regular basis. Those are rare qualities.

And there’s this: I watch a lot of television (shocker!). And I see a lot of shows in which the female characters are shrews, sluts, killjoys, one-dimensional wives or bland girlfriends. I see that way too much. It can be depressing.

Writers of either gender can create rich characters of either gender, of course. But it doesn’t surprise me that these challenging shows, which have a number of women writers on staff, treat their female characters as far more than afterthoughts. ("Mad Men" has a majority-female writing staff and four of "Dollhouse’s" eight writers are women. In 1999, according to the Writers Guild of America, 26 percent of all TV writers were women. By 2005, that figure had risen to... 27 percent.)

"Dollhouse" is a show in which the women can be anything. A woman — Adelle DeWitt — can be the one who rents out the attractive male and female Actives by the hour (DeWitt even used one of the men as her own personal love toy). No one is blameless, no one is perfect.

It’s to Fox’s credit that the network has stuck with the show this long. I hope the network’s faith is rewarded with a bump in ratings, and to that end, there are a couple of "Save ’Dollhouse’" sites that have been launched recently, notably Activate Dollhouse and Why I Watch. Fans can also show their support by watching the show on Hulu, buying it from iTunes or accessing it via any number of other on-demand services.

Michael Hogan, who played Saul Tigh on "Battlestar Galactica," has a small guest role on the Friday episode of the show. Reason enough to watch, in my view.