GIven that getting an idea to a TV executive is practically impossible for the average writer, getting a show into production is already a massive success. Even getting yourself an agent is a mission that many writers won't succeed at. Whilst Dan Levy is an excellent writer, his success with Schitt's Creek can be partially attributed to the work done by his father and uncle a generation earlier. Not many people have a family based production company to assist, or have relatives with the connections he did. When you look around the TV industry, you will find that this form of nepotism is very common.

And yes, the casting was excellent - Annie Murphy was awesome, as was Catherine O'Hara and most of the cast were great. Sarah Levy wasn't as good (my opinion) but they gave her the role anyway and she didn't screw it up in a noticable way. The issue I have isn't with the casting, or the writing, it is with simultaneously holding a production up as an exemplar of how great a fair and equal world can be, when that fairness didn't apply to the creation of the product itself.

If you read my other stuff on Medium, you will see that I don't support minority quotas or any of that sort of social engineering - that is attempting to create equality of outcome. Instead I think that many industries need to focus on equality of opportunity. Dan Levy created an excellent show, but he had all the opportunity to do so, the opportunity to create beautiful shows that TV executives would consider funding is not universal. The best ideas and best shows could be inside the brains of people who aren't connected, who lack the social or financial capital and who will never get the opportunities afforded to the creators of Schitt's Creek.

I do think creative decisions should be made blind and anonymous. Meritocracy rather than nepotism. That's a different argument and one for a different day. The question you should answer is.... if Schitt's Creek was written by a random person without any connection to Eugene Levy or any financial backing at the point they gave it to the TV execs... would it have been made? Honestly.... I don't think so. The writing is very flat (not much happens dramatically) and most of the early humour comes from skilled acting and not the writing.... there aren't that many jokes. The show only takes off once the characters are established and you care for them and they 'find their voices' - most non-connected writers won't get a chance like that. Dan Levy lucked out by being Dan Levy, and we lucked out because he was given the space to develop a wonderful, moving show that packed one hell of a punch.