I wrote the whole paper because it really did fit perfectly. It wasn't just that Judge Smails was the antagonist; there was a specific type of pompous antagonist that plays a very specific role in the story, and he fit it to a T. But it was legitimately clear to me that Caddyshack was, on purpose or not, following in the exact footsteps of a very well-established tradition for how to make a well-functioning comedy.

I honestly don't remember whether the paper was well received. This was quite a while ago.