After a 15-year absence, “King of the Hill” is returning to television. It’s a quiet resurrection, without much fanfare or frenzy — fitting for a show that always preferred a low boil to a rolling one. In its original run (1997–2009), the series often felt like the wallflower at the animated sitcom party: less manic than “Family Guy,” less irreverent than “South Park,” less wacky than “The Simpsons.” But that understatedness was its strength. If “The Simpsons” was chaos with a conscience, “King of the Hill” was small-town order with a heart. It didn’t shout its satire. It let it smolder.

Now, in a vastly different media ecosystem, the return of “King of the Hill” feels like more than nostalgia. It feels like a moment to pause and reassess the way we sort culture — especially what we call “lowbrow.” The show returns as part of a broader conversation about cultural intelligence and the long-running bait-and-switch known as the “smart dumb” artifact: works that look like nonsense but contain deep intelligence, warmth, or satire. Think “This Is Spinal Tap.” Think “South Park.” Think “Idiocracy,” Mike Judge’s other great act of Trojan horse filmmaking — a movie dismissed as juvenile when it came out and now widely regarded as morbidly prescient. Released in 2006 with almost no promotion and only a limited theatrical run, “Idiocracy” satirized a dystopian future ruled by corporate idiocy, degraded language, and anti-intellectualism. At the time, it was treated as a throwaway. Now, it reads like prophecy. These are texts that hide their depth under a thick layer of flatulence jokes, loud guitars or Texas drawls. They use stupidity as a delivery system.

And then there’s the other kind: the truly dumb dumb. Culture that neither hides nor delivers anything at all.

The Art of Playing Stupid (Well)

“Smart dumb” isn’t a genre, but a sensibility. It involves camouflage: the mask of idiocy concealing something sharp, emotionally resonant, or subversive. You can laugh at it without knowing you’re being taught something — or being asked to feel something deeper. And it’s not necessarily political. “Spinal Tap” isn’t trying to change the world. But it is trying to show you how ambition and mediocrity often wear the same leather pants.

The original run of “King of the Hill” worked this way. It was a cartoon, yes, but not an animated free-for-all. It was rooted in character, in rhythm, in a particular kind of Texas speech pattern that sounds funny until you realize it’s telling the truth. Hank Hill — stiff, sincere, propane-worshipping — wasn’t a joke. He was a man trying to live with dignity in a world that didn’t seem to care much for it anymore. The show rarely went for easy laughs. Instead, it found them in the margins — on a patio with four guys drinking beer and saying nothing.

When it first aired, Hank came across as conservative in the classic sense: suspicious of change, reverent toward authority, slow to embrace anything new. He seemed like a relic, even then. But he wasn’t cruel. He wasn’t angry. And — crucially — he could change his mind. The satire, such as it was, worked in both directions. Hank wasn’t above mockery, but he wasn’t beneath sympathy either.

In many ways, Arlen, Texas, is a modern Mayberry — if Mayberry had strip malls, conspiracy........

© Arkansas Online