The Tao of "Seinfeld"

Irwin intends the book for a general audience, rather than serious philosophy scholars. "The book is 'Seinfeld and Philosophy,' not 'The Philosphy of Seinfeld,'" the professor has insisted. "I'm not claiming that there's some abstruse philosophy behind the show, just that the two can be linked in some way. I would never recommend 'Seinfeld' over classic philosophy texts. It is just a good pedagogical tool to get students interested in philosophy. I don't take this stuff too seriously. I hope no one takes these essays too seriously." It's in moments like this that Irwin dances like a boxer. He takes enough of a jab to make a marquee name for himself and stir up musty academe dust, but instead of following up with a convincing upper-cut, Irwin sputters, "But I was only kidding!"

It's one way to dodge an opponent. For someone who doesn't take anything seriously, Irwin is as earnest as a missionary. He and the other contributors followed each episode as if it were a Rosetta Stone, seeking dogma in every plot development, facial tick or failed joke, including scenes left on the cutting-room floor. Irwin cries wolf when he advises against earnest interpretations of the "Seinfeld and Philosophy" pieces and criticizes people who would mock the endeavor. "For 2,000 years emerging forms of scholarship have been lambasted," Irwin proclaims. "One hundred years ago, people would have scoffed at scholarly examinations of Charles Dickens since his work was considered pop culture at the time. History will render whether or not [studying "Seinfeld"] is worthy." And "Star Trek" was once just a corny sci-fi show. But just because fans translate "The Illiad" into Klingon lexicon doesn't mean the show had inherent depth.

Irwin's next project is a book about "The Simpsons" and philosophy; University of Virginia literature professor Paul A. Cantor won an award from the American Political Sciences Association for his essay, "The Simpsons: Atomistic Politics and the Nuclear Family." "Seinfeld and Philosophy" joins thousands of other pop television texts now crowding bookstore shelves: "An Analytical Guide to 'Battlestar Galactica'" and "PopLit, PopCult and The X-Files" as well as "A Critical Exploration: 'Planet of the Apes' as American Myth."

"A lot of TV studies are trash," Thompson admits. "A show like 'Gilligan's Island' is not a cultural bellwether," said Gary Edgerton, chairman of the department of communication and theater arts at Old Dominion University in Virginia and editor of the 30-year-old academic "Journal of Popular Film and Television." "But 'Seinfeld' has had a lot to say about urban culture in the '90s. Thompson concurs with Edgerton that "Seinfeld" is indicative of contemporary culture. "If you look carefully, the show speaks volumes about what our culture is all about. 'Seinfeld' tells us more about ourselves in the '90s than the New York Times."

Edgerton and Thompson rally against the cultural elitism that thwarts television studies. "Television is an 800-pound gorilla that shapes and changes us every year," Edgerton said, noting that TV has only been around for 50 years and it took print media many years before it warranted attention from scholars. According to Thompson, "TV studies is a great equalizer." And to think that television used to be an escape from homework.

• View blog reactions