”˜The Office’ won’t be the same without Carell

Steve Carell, as usual, has impeccable timing: Just as I’m faced with leaving UCLA and entering the job market, his dear, idiotic character Michael Scott is leaving “The Office.”

This sort of thing happens every now and then, when art imitates not just life in general, but your own particular one.

Admittedly, the parallels between my situation and Michael Scott’s are fairly shallow. I’m not moving to another state after I graduate. I’m not engaged to the love of my life.

And, as far as I know, I won’t be replaced by Will Ferrell, who signed on for a four-episode run as Deangelo Vickers, Scott’s successor as the regional manager of Dunder Mifflin. Two episodes in, a couple questions remain: whether Ferrell’s presence helps ease the loss of Carell, and whether he will remain in place for the seventh season of “The Office.”

We can speculate the answer to the latter question, but ultimately that’s up to the show’s creative team. As for the former, it’s a matter of personal opinion, a wide range of which I’m sure will colonize the Internet at least until the show goes off the air.

For now, let’s just say it’s strange. For more than six seasons, “The Office” has been at times hilarious, wonderful, misguided and boring, but Carell was the constant. He wreaked havoc until you wanted to punch him but showed just enough heart that you held back and laughed instead.

Now we’ll have to divide “The Office” into two eras, like Van Halen or “American Idol,” and it’s hard to imagine the post-Carell show measuring up.

Two episodes in, Ferrell has been decidedly unfunny. Part of that may be the actor’s nervousness at filling such big shoes, but it also seems the writers are hedging their bets. Last week’s episode actually revolved around Vickers’ inability to tell a joke, a worrisome sign if the character is going to stick around much longer.

At this point, though, it’s hard to imagine something that wouldn’t be worrisome ““ this being television, a resistance to change is unavoidable.

We form relationships with TV show characters in a way that extends to no other medium, deepening and complicating those connections as the seasons turn. With the passage of so much time, we have to allow for at least some amount of development, or we’ll be watching the same episode over and over again.

To some extent, though, we rely on television as a form of reliable comfort. Every week we tune in to the lives of our favorite characters, wrapping ourselves in the false idea that they’ll be there forever.

When those characters’ paths are diverted, or stopped short, we’re forced suddenly to face a grim reality. If you ever need proof that humans maintain an illusion of immortality, just watch a group of die-hard fans when their beloved show gets cancelled.

So maybe there’s no good way for Steve Carell to leave “The Office.” Maybe it doesn’t matter who replaces him ““ we’ll all be mourning the TV death of Michael Scott, rendering all future laughs bittersweet.

It might have helped, though, if “The Office” were leaving too. No matter how much we loved Jim and Pam’s love story, or laughed in disbelief at Dwight, this was always Carell’s show, and to watch it carry on without him, even with his blessing, bears a hint of scandal.

The problem, of course, is that “The Office” was so great to begin with. We invested ourselves fully in the early years, convinced on some level that this time it would go on forever.

We’ve been fooled before, and we’ll be fooled again.

Tennyson said it’s better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all ““ what a prescient statement that was, so many years before the first television show. He would have told us to remember the good times we had with Michael Scott, rather than dwell on his departure.

And with graduation moving ever closer, maybe this is good practice.

If you’re mourning the loss of Michael Scott, email Goodman at [email protected].

“Pop Psychology” runs every Monday.