Dan, Dan, Things I Don't Understand.

FIRST THINGS FIRST. Got to see a preview of tonight's Dan For Mayor (CTV, 8:30 and it continues the genial promise of the pilot.) Do watch.  It's preceded by Hiccups, at 8, which I didn't like quite as much but enjoyed more than I thought I would. I look forward to seeing it improve as it finds its feet. And I'm more than happy to watch a Vancouver-based sitcom.  I think that city's nutty enough to host about three comedies.

Next, here's a blog post of a vintage I just don't get, but which is endemic to Canadian TV coverage.

The number of successful hour-long dramas in the history of Canadian television can be counted on one hand: Street Legal, Da Vinci’s Inquest,North of 60, Road to Avonlea, and Due South. The latest attempt, the 13-part, Toronto-shot series The Bridge, is up against long odds.

First things first -- what exactly is the yardstick we're using here? Does successful mean loadsaviewers? Then how is The Beachcombers and Seeing Things both off the list?  And, ahem...Littlest Hobo? How about Artistic triumph?  Well, then I'd say you've left out Slings & Arrows & probably the show that was so cool it was WAY ahead of its time, Wojeck.

Currently, Flashpoint & Heartland both connect seriously with huge viewing blocks by modern standards.  Being Erica is a critical darling with a passionate fan base both here and in the USA.  When you get your lead on Oprah for some praise, something is being done right.

Beyond that there are dirty little industrials that nevertheless sold like stink all over the world... Relic Hunter.  Psi Factor.  La Femme Nikita. There's Traders, which managed to cater to a devoted audience for five years up against the number one show in TV, and counted both Hart Hanson (Bones) and David Shore (House) among its alumni.

What's more likely is that there's somebody else making the pronouncement of God to put forward the same bullshit thing that due to journalistic laziness, becomes the dominant Canadian narrative.  It's the same reason why reportage of ratings numbers are so deadly here.  Nobody puts out the full picture, so there is no real context.  God forbid we'd have somebody like The Programming Insider actually parsing what things really mean.

Then again, in Canada, sometimes things go away for utterly arbitrary reasons.  Intelligence gets canceled for low ratings because they weren't looking for that critical audience that year. DaVinci is called a hit even though its numbers slid so badly by the end of its run they weren't all that much greater than Intelligence.

Did it matter to the quality of either show?  Hell no. They were awesome and Haddock's a genius.

Now John Doyle thinks the CBC's going for light fluff and that's great. Except when Intelligence got canceled a few years ago, when it was a tragedy.  Got it?

Blood Ties got canceled due to "low ratings" despite the fact that it did better than what preceded and followed it on both Canadian and U.S. channels, and sold everywhere in the world.

In Canada, the why's are rarely parseable down to one, dispassionate reason. Such is the curse and the burden of a system where fiat and political considerations trump entertainment value most days of the week.

Woe betide the person who builds the list of "the only successful one hour dramas" in Canadian history. It's a fool's errand, because the metrics aren't equal and the judgement is entirely subjective.

And since it's all bullshit anyway, let's just raise our glasses of sherry, toast the sunset, and hope there's a beer ad that comes along soon to tell us what it means to be good and proper Canadians.