As recently as last year, I published an op-ed about Television's New Golden Age in Newsday, arguing against the same near-sighted, mostly academic, attacks on TV.
But lately I've noticed a different kind of criticism of television, with just the opposite grievance: television may be too sophisticated nowadays, too complex in some of its storylines for its own good - in other words, too good! (See, for example, this Too sophisticated for most discussion of NBC's Studio 60, shortly before it was cancelled.)
I've also seen grumblings that television deliberately gives us overly complex storylines as a bait for DVD sales. Mourned are the good old days, of simpler, unconnected episodes on television, when buying a DVD of a series, if it existed, would be laughable.
Television, it seems, can never win. There's something about that screen that always seems to attract ire from somewhere, about something it does or doesn't do.
But this critique of TV, though it seems to be media savvy, is even less astute than the older attack on TV as an idiot box. Sure, someone might want to get a DVD of Battlestar Galactica, The Sopranos, or Lost - but those shows could just as easily be TiVo'ed, seen in one way or another on the Web, etc. and of course have been. The world of narrative delivery has changed. Whether book or movie or TV series, buying a copy of it on a discrete piece of material is yesterday's news.
And it seems that those who are critical of television's new storytelling sophistication may not have much to worry about anyway. Rome and The Sopranos have ended on HBO. Season 4 of Battlestar Galactica will be its last, and so may be the next season of The Wire. 24, Lost, Heroes, and Big Love are continuing, and Showtime has been taking up some of this slack with The Tudors, Meadowlands, Brotherhood, and Dexter. But new golden ages don't last forever, and we may be seeing the beginning of the end of this one.
I hope not. But I'm sure whatever television next becomes, it will have no shortage of sage, caustic, savvy critics.
And maybe that's good for television. The worst thing that can happen to any medium is to be taken for granted.
4 comments:
I am sad to see that this will be the last season of "the wire". This is one show that has not gotten the recognition it deserves, in my book it is one of the best to air on television, besides being realistic, it shows all walks of life. It will be missed. Television is definetly my outlet and I am probably one of your more average down to earth posters. I think the fools with these studies are trying maybe subconsciously to feel superior. That is why I adore you, you are probably the most educated, well known person I know and your down to earth and take the time to be genuine. Hey, don't let this blow your head up. I like the fact that you make me think. Thanks
The reason Studio 60 got cancelled wasn't that it was "too good" but that at the thing it was about(sketch comedy), it was terrible, and the surrounding stories became sanctimonious and less than entertaining(I have been saying it was great until the Christmas show when it drove off a cliff).
dawn - I'm definitely letting it go to my head ... :)
but I agree with you in any case - I've always believed that television is in some, even many, ways better than books, movies, theatre and all other narrative media ... nothing like sprawling in a chair, on a couch, whatever and watching some good tv...
matt - you're more generous about Studio 60 than I am - I found it irritating from the start ...:)
but you're right that the irritation wasn't because it was too sophisticated, but too too talky...
In my opinion, I think we have reality TV to thank for the increase in the quality of writing and production in TV shows.
When you have to compete with the real life silliness that is appealling to the voyeur side of the general public, you can no longer risk putting a TV show out that isn't spectacular to begin with. Truth is often stranger than fiction, which is why when fiction is forced to compete with truth (or at least what is perceived to be truth) it must be as out there, if not more. So now you rarely see the 'safe' rehash of old ideas, and instead you see new innovative ideas.
Another reason is simply supply and demand. With fewer jobs, for writers (because you don't need a huge writing staff for reality TV), you have a deeper talent pool to draw from, and the new writers coming up with fresh ideas, get a chance because networks are looking to compete with the Big Brothers and the Survivors of the world and so they need the next, fresh idea.
Finally, look at the trends. The sitcom is all but dead and replaced by comedies like My Name Is Earl which gets away from telling when the audience should laugh with canned audiences—thereby insulting their intelligence—and instead getting rid of the laughtrack and relying on actual good writing to make you laugh.
And one of the most recent trends that is making TV that much better is the infusion of would-be big name hollywood stars opting for the small screen over the big screen. It's a snowball effect. As the quality of TV goes up, actors who—in the past—wouldn't consider leaving movies for TV, are now making that very decision. Actors such as Keifer Sutherland, James Woods, Marin Sheen, the list goes on and on.
Sorry for the long comment.
Post a Comment