I’ve been writing this column since my sophomore year, and it’s time to put an end to this tangent-stuffed nonsense. I’m glad I stuck with it this long, and I only received one e-mail calling me a sexist, but I’m done with this shit. It’s kind of like LBJ in ’68 ... hopefully the past two years don’t cause me to have a heart attack in five. But I’m not going to bore you with a “farewell column” in December because I know no one's interested in dealing with that brand of tomfoolery right now. (Plus, I guess I could have held on for one more semester, so I’m not really sure I deserve it anyway.) But it does seem like the proper time to bring up a topic I haven’t tackled in my two years as the Daily's TV Columnist: the television finale.

Before I nerd-out here, I think some disambiguation is in order. (Yes, just like Wikipedia.) As far as I can tell, television shows end in one of three ways: 1. They go out on their own terms (e.g. “The Sopranos”). 2. They’re forced out but are able to wrap up the show in some way (e.g. “Freaks and Geeks”). 3. The show is abruptly canned (e.g. “Undeclared”). I’m not particularly interested in options two and three because even in case two, it’s generally some kind of haphazard ending that no one really intended. (I’m not going to write a thesis on "Let It Be" either.) But the proper finale is important because there’s really nothing like it in contemporary entertainment. A band’s last album isn't always deemed so in advance, and even when it is, that sort of proclamation has to be taken with a grain of salt — especially if said artist happens to share a bed with Beyoncé. And film and book franchises can’t compare because the “finale” of even a substantial series is rarely more than one third of its totality, so those are basically non-entities as far as this column is concerned.

The problem with TV finales is that they’re rarely very good. Finales almost never capture a show at its peak; even shows that go out earlier than they had to generally wrap up a little too late, typically having acquired some bad habits. “Seinfeld” started relying on outlandish plotlines that weren’t true to the show’s original conception. “Arrested Development” was drowned in an insane amount of in-jokes, etc. It’s kind of like this column (I cannot give an adequate explanation for the proliferation of this parenthetical bullshit).

Which is why I’m not especially interested in finales that have already happened. (Well, almost. I need to touch on “The Seinfeld” finale. In short, it’s significantly better than it’s given credit for. It’s not easy to end a show where each episode was almost inconsequential to the entirety of the series. It was almost a cartoon in that sense. The most significant plot moment in the series was probably Susan’s death in season seven, and that was basically a non-event. But they found a way to actually end the show in a manner that made sense given the characters, and it was probably a better way to go than killing George off in a wreck. Plus they brought back Babu, which was nice.) But I am intrigued by two current shows, the finales of which will absolutely not live up to my expectations; although, only one of the conclusions actually matters.

I’ve heard “The Simpsons” is going to end one day, though I’m not sure I believe this. I don’t really care for the new episodes, but the day Groening and Co. close shop will be a rough day for me. I assume it will be kind of like losing the loyal pet that was around your whole life and finally passed away. (R.I.P. Mittens and Tiger.) But as far as I can tell, this show will not end until it has to, and Fox isn’t going to cancel “The Simpsons.” Ever. This is pretty morbid, but the series could very well continue until one of the voice actors dies.