The absence of tormented artists on TV hardly reflects a lack of influence of Byronic Romanticism in American culture. I think Don Larsson is on the right track in noting this perspective morphs into something else. I wouldn't say it's a trope, the harried liberal professionals and angst-filled teens of 'quality tv' are not metaphors for artists. For even if the creators of these shows are working out their own demons, they don't necessarily see themselves as artists, but more as harried liberal professionals and angst-filled aging teenagers. So I think what we have here is a kind of blending of the Byronic with a less Romantic strain of good old fashioned American individualism, in which we see that being that unique individual has its dark side along with its upside (genius!). Even in movies, tortured artists are generally only the subject of films for the art house crowd, not really the sort of mass audience fare one typically expects on broadcast TV. Artists are, after all, like intellectuals the sort of effete Euro-types mainstream American thought tends to denigrate. Even when the Romantic artists morphs into something else and/or mates with the rugged individualist the result still seems more appropriate for the movies than for TV, where the old dictum of 'the people have to want to invite the character into their home every week seems to apply.' Nevertheless, tormented geniuses of one age/occupation do pop up on TV now anad again: for example 'House' currently on Fox. One show that featured creative workers and angst was 'thirtysomething', though I don't think its view was all that Romantic, though one might analyse the characters, especially Gary, as deflations of the Byronic ideal. ---- For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives: http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html