I don't know it another thread addressed this.

It was in the much later episodes after it Jumped The Shark and there was a new regular character, Stephanie ( to take the place of Mike and Gloria) .

In the episode that led up to Stephanie becoming a new regular character, (Edith's wandering cousin Floyd leaves his daughter with the Bunkers because he feels she is better off staying with them than following him to homeless shelters) Stephanie was always referred to as the "niece" of Edith and Archie. But as most of us know, if Floyd was Edith's cousin, then it makes Stephanie Edith's 2nd cousin ( or cousin once removed). There was never any dialogue or scene in which Edith and Archie told Stephanie that she can call them Aunt and Uncle rather than "Cousin" if it makes her feel closer to them, or if it makes her feel as if they are more like parents to her.
In reality there are people who have been brought up by older cousins or cousins once (or more) times removed, but I don't think there has been a regular TV show that depicts it because in modern American culture and probably in some other cultures "Uncle" and "Aunt" tends to have a more parental ring to it than "Cousin ." Also I am sure that the producers felt it would be odd that Stephanie has cousins so much older than her. It seems that people are just used to the idea that a cousin or even a cousin once removed is around your age and practically like a more distant brother or sister.
But sure, on TV there is a tendency to alter things even though it is obviously altered.

But why then did they not just make Edith's cousin Floyd, her brother?

I guess if he were Edith's brother there would be some question about where he'd been all these years, and then for a lot of people it would probably be a much more certain call to agree to take care of your brother's child than the child of a cousin you rarely saw.

But again, a child of your cousin is not your niece (or nephew) . It is a "more distant" relation than your niece (or nephew). So how can the idea be to make cousin Floyd be a "distant figure" in the Bunker's lives and then make his child be a relative that the Bunkers are more willing to care for? On one hand, Archie was reluctant to take in the child because it was Edith's cousin Floyd's kid. And Floyd was a habitual drifter, and only after a decade of not hearing anything about cousin Floyd on AITF (even though Edith sometimes did talk about different relatives of hers) did cousin Floyd's name even come up.

I think it would have been very possible and probably more effective for Floyd to have been depicted as Edith's brother. The Edith character could only have been in her very late 50s at the youngest and probably was in her 60s when the episode was broadcast and Edith was already a grandmother and probably most people don't keep very strict contact with their siblings so many years after having a family of their own, and especially if their siblings also are old enough to be parents and have children or a family of their own.
It seems that with certain words put into the episode it could have been explained that Edith and Floyd only kept sparse contact because Floyd has always had problems with money and he has had to find ways to leave Stephanie with different friends and other people temporarily while he washes dishes for minimum wage, but he tends to lose work and then has to wander with the child from town shelter to town shelter, and he feels that Edith is kindhearted enough to take Stephanie in even though she has to argue with Archie about it.

Of course your view is interesting and contributes perspective to the issue.

I I don't think so much of All in the Family today, but I didn't think it jumped the shark when Stephanie arrived. I thought Danielle Brisboise was pretty good for a child actor, and interacted well with the Bunkers.

From what I have seen on the AITF threads most people think that when a new character, particularly if it is a child, is introduced into a long-running TV show, it means that the show has Jumped The Shark and a great majority of comments (if not most comments) seem to think that the Stephanie character ruined the show. Danielle Brisboise may have been good as a child actor, but even if an actor plays a part well, his or her character may still be thought of as detrimental to the show. But by this time Mike and Gloria had moved out and the episodes were about Archie and Edith.
And indeed I heard that the criteria for a TV show Jumping The Shark is that the show had been on the air for many years past most TV shows and that some of the main characters had left and a new regular character has been introduced so as to be a major and new change to the initial set-up of the lives of the characters.

Still, it was "Little Joey" who was the first new character brought into AITF, and I think this was after the show was on the air for about 5 years or so. It might be said that the show Jumped The Shark then. But Little Joey was not really a major influence to most of the plots nor did he have adventures of his own. He was too young.

Back in the 70s there was a tendency to have child character become regulars on TV shows that had not had regular child characters in them during their run and there were few good ideas left for the adventures of the adult characters.

The show was still viable and well written after Joey was born, and as you said, he really didn't figure much into the plots even in the two and a half years he was on the show.

Yes, the show did jump after Mike and Gloria left, but it wasn't Stephanie's fault, nor the actress who portrayed her. The character was OK, and so was Brisebois; it was just that with no counterpoint to Archie, all the tension was drained after Mike and Gloria left, so any attempt to continue the show was doomed, IMO. They REALLY should have ended the show after eight years.

And yes, I always thought the "cousin/niece" thing was weird, too, and they never did address it properly.

"Jumping the Shark" had its origin as the description of a moment - that moment when a regular viewer of a show would be watching, and just say, "This isn't the same show I used to like, and it's never going to be like that again." It's a realization that the show had completely lost its way. That meaning has been expanded now, to where it just means a show has gotten very bad.

Things like adding children or changing locations are often associated with jumping the shark, but they're not proof that it "jumped." It's just that things like that, or pushing toward a wedding or having the whole cast travel to some exotic location are the types of things the producers and writers grab at when they've run out of ideas that flow from the characters themselves.

I don't put much stock in what people say on message boards - there tends to be herd behavior, and some people parrot what critics (who have their own herd mentality) say. Anyway, I thought Danielle Brisebois did a pretty nice job, and I thought the character was a little more interesting than the precious kids who were brought onto shows earlier in the 70s.

Everyone has a right to their opinion as to if or when a show jumped the shark. Just because a lot of people think that AITF JTS when Stephanie came on board, that's not proof that it's herd mentality and that people can't think for themselves.

For me, AITF jumped when Mike and Gloria moved next door. To me, the major source of conflict/humor in the shows was the fact that all four people were living under the same roof. Once Mike and Gloria moved out, that changed the entire premise of the show... they moved next door, but they could have just as easily moved across town and it still would have jumped. Heck, the show might have jumped if Mike had gotten a job early on instead of going to school all those years. The fact that he didn't have a steady job for many years added to the tension in the household. And his political differences with Archie didn't mean anything once they moved out of the house.

Although I had pretty much stopped watching it not long after mike and gloria moved next door, I agree with you that Danielle was a good actress... she seemed to be a real kid and not just another actor in front of the cameras. But to me, the episodes from the time she joined the cast had absolutely no relation to my reason for watching the show in the first place.

She was good though. For a kid to be able to join a cast like that and not look ridiculous was a tribute to her talent and hard work. I guess she had a lot of stage experience prior to her joining AITF and that had to help.

Everyone has a right to their opinion as to if or when a show jumped the shark. Just because a lot of people think that AITF JTS when Stephanie came on board, that's not proof that it's herd mentality and that people can't think for themselves.

For me, AITF jumped when Mike and Gloria moved next door. To me, the major source of conflict/humor in the shows was the fact that all four people were living under the same roof. Once Mike and Gloria moved out, that changed the entire premise of the show... they moved next door, but they could have just as easily moved across town and it still would have jumped. Heck, the show might have jumped if Mike had gotten a job early on instead of going to school all those years. The fact that he didn't have a steady job for many years added to the tension in the household. And his political differences with Archie didn't mean anything once they moved out of the house.

Although I had pretty much stopped watching it not long after mike and gloria moved next door, I agree with you that Danielle was a good actress... she seemed to be a real kid and not just another actor in front of the cameras. But to me, the episodes from the time she joined the cast had absolutely no relation to my reason for watching the show in the first place.

She was good though. For a kid to be able to join a cast like that and not look ridiculous was a tribute to her talent and hard work. I guess she had a lot of stage experience prior to her joining AITF and that had to help.


Of course there are other ways of looking at the element of "Jumping The Shark" than already-established ones. There is more than one or two criteria for JTS moments. Kids joining a cast is very known about and recognized; also anyone joining the original cast after many years, also major changes such as certain characters moving out of the original household, younger characters growing up, older characters getting older, personalities changing etc.
Probably a lot of people feel that AITF JTS when Mike and Gloria moved next door, but considering the decade-long run of the show, that was still very early on. I don't think Gloria had yet become pregnant with Joey when Mike and Gloria moved out. The tensions in the Bunker household was not exactly the same with Mike and Gloria having their own home, but there was still plenty since Gloria and Mike came over to their parents/parents-in-law's home or maybe Archie and Edith came over to their daughter/son-in-law's home.
It could be said that when Gloria and Mike moved next door, the Hispanic lady who I think was a live-in maid for the Bunkers filled in so that there could be the potential for Archie's anger and prejudices and impulsiveness to come out.

As far as Danielle Brisboise's acting abilities, I think she was one of the original orphans in the most original production of Broadway's "Annie."

I remember very well when Stephanie was introduced. At the time and in all the years since, I never thought about how she was related, although it's an interesting question.

As far as jumping the shark, in my opinion as long as Edith was there, the series was still viable and not straying too far from its original premise. I think sometimes people take for granted how well Jean Stapleton did with the character.

Edith in some ways "softened" Archie. Once she was gone, it was only natural that the Archie character himself become softer -- which more or less happened -- and then it's a different vibe altogether.