Sunday, December 7, 2014
The History of the Present (last blog post due anytime before the final exam)
It's always difficult to write the history of the present. However, if you were attempt to look at television today through the lenses used in this course, how would you describe it? Take one example of a current trend in television and analyze it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think television today is increasingly more socially aware of feminist agendas. However, television often plays on feminism in overt manners that can both help and hinder gender equality depending on context. For example, in 30 Rock, Liz Lemon’s gender is a key structure of this TV show yet the producers sometimes use blatant gender stereotypes to mock the gender script in society and television. In one episode Liz Lemon enforces the idea that a women on her period is irrational and incapable of conducting herself in a profession manner. Through a series of ridiculous scenes the audience witnesses Lemon transforming from a competent TV producer to an emotional, furious, senseless woman who fires people, wants to ‘bomb’ random countries and screams instructions upon getting her period.
ReplyDeleteAnother show, The Mindy Project, also commonly plays on stereotypes of emotional women who, although are successful professionally, are a mess socially and romantically. Mindy is often scheming, manipulating and questioning her romantic life. She is often selfishly enwrapped in her own issues, ignoring the problems of coworkers. This enforces the stereotype that women are self-absorbed. In one episode she tells a male nurse to stop talking to her because his problems are irrelevant compared to hers. She often obsesses over her body, exuding confidence while also reflecting insecurities. These contradictory messages are masked by humor but are nonetheless pivotal to analyzing how gender equality is treated in television today.
While hilarious to the common viewer, these tactics enforce the idea that women are not to be considered equal to men because of their uncontrollable womanly urges and needs. Through an academic lens, this blatant illustration of stereotypical women is a nod to ridiculous gender stereotypes. The danger in overt, exaggerated displays such as these, however, is that it does draw attention, acknowledges and in some ways validates the hilarity in mocking gender equality. There is certainly a danger in doing this as it trivializes feminist agendas. It almost uses the excuse of having a strong female character to then engage in stereotypical behavior.
Ethnic, working class sitcoms have been an integral part of television since the beginning. In the 1950s and 1960s "I Remember Mama" to "Amos 'n' Andy" focused on the ideas of the American dream and cultural assimilation. This ideas still play a large role on the ethnic, working class family sitcoms on television today.
ReplyDeleteOne newer television show on ABC is "Black-ish". It stars a middle to upper class, black family. The name of television show expresses the idea that the family does not fit the old, stereotypes of being a black family. But throughout the episodes, the daily, universal family struggles are portrayed and many people (of all backgrounds) can relate to. This show has received many positive reviews for its diverse cast and characters. However, the notion of a family being "black-ish" and not black leads the 1950's ideas that it was possible to live the American dream if you were non-white. Additionally, the titling also shows the large amount of cultural assimilation in society today.
Another current example is "Fresh of the Boat" which will appear on ABC staring in 2015. Although it has not debuted, from the book it is based off of as well as trailers the idea of cultural assimilation is very presented. The whole premise is based on a Taiwanese family moving to the United States and attempting to fit. Therefore, there is this idea that this family needs to change to be a part of society and live the American dream. Personally, I think this show, and especially the title, is a bit to ethnocentric.
Overall, ABC has brought back many of the ethnic, working class sitcoms, which I personally enjoy. However, there is some controversy in the possible ideas of the American dream and cultural assimilation. Yet both of these television shows have come a very long way from the 1950s versions of ethnic, working class sitcoms and are attempting to work to change current stereotypes of various minorities. Plus, both of these televisions I enjoy (or hopefully will enjoy when they début).
A big trend in television these days is the use of anti-heroes. It is fairly obvious that characters pre-2000s were mostly characters who had conventional qualities such as courage and morality. Many networks and producers wouldn't have taken the chance of making a questionable character who didn't end up in the moral right at the end of an episode. But the 00's and 10's have seen many characters who don't always make the right choices and sometimes become downright evil. Most of the time the anti-hero is the protagonist since it is most effective seeing someone fall from grace such as Walter White in "Breaking Bad," but sometimes a character is simply scheming and clever such as Tyrion in "Game of Thrones." Other times a character can act like an asshole to people only to realize his behavior and try to change it like in "Bojack Horseman." This trend of not-so-great characters seems to echo society's lack of interest in the same old goody-two-shoe characters (who are still prevelant in many shows today) and a bigger interest in bigger, grander character arcs. It probably also has something to do with networks and producers trying to create more relate-able characters since people are not as morally black and white as older shows seem to assume.
ReplyDeleteI think one important trend to call attention to is that of the new leading black feminist character in television shows. Diversity is still a problem in television, but the rise of this new kind of character is slowly changing the face of television by introducing the possibility of different races and genders playing the leading professional role. This first became apparent with the character of Mrs. Huxtable in The Cosby Show. Her character introduced the idea that a black feminist could also be a working professional, wife and mother. She juggles all of her responsibilities and blows away does who question her capabilities because of her gender or race. Today this same kind of character can be seen in characters like Miranda Bailey in Grey's Anatomy, Olivia Pope in Scandal, and Annalise Keating in How to Get Away with Murder. Miranda Bailey is a leading surgeon at the hospital and represents the idea that you can work yourself to the top. She started as a resident and later became one of the surgeons of the hospital. She is known for her strong attitude and intimidating character. She also juggles her professional responsibilities with being a wife and mother. Moreover, Olivia Pope is a black feminist who handles all of the political problems and scandals in Washington and for the White House. She runs her own firm, flawlessly handles anything thrown her way. She is single, but has various love interests and has complete of her body and what she does with it. Finally, Annalise Keating is a leading law professor at University and still functions as a defense lawyer and wife. She handles her multiple responsibilities by functioning her firm and the majority of her duties from her home.
ReplyDeleteThis trend is becoming more popular, but there is something more interesting about 3 of these female characters. All of these characters were created by producer Shonda Rhimes. Perhaps this trend has more to do with Shonda's attempt at changing the face of prime-time television and so far she is doing a great job at it.
I think that original programming from non-traditional television sources is one of the most interesting developments in television. With new media sites like YouTube in place, more people can broadcast their ideas and content. For example, I often watch the YouTube channel of jimmy Tatro , who has parlayed his short bits into potential television deals. It is a different mode for ascension to traditional media like the networks and cable companies.
ReplyDeleteBeyond that, there are companies who don’t broadcast on television creating original content. Netflix is a fascinating example because they piggybacked the success of television (by paying networks/channels for their original content) into enough money to start their own shows. With hugely popular stars like Kevin Spacey and Will Arnett turning to Netflix for new shows, there is a sense of legitimacy, as if these shows could have actually appeared on television. It also introduces a (usually) more pleasant experience for the user, with the ability to watch the shows without waiting for commercials or even next week. The fact that companies not based in media (like retailer giant Amazon) have started their own original programming is another interesting movement in the television world. It affords anyone with enough capital and a website the possibility of a show.
This leads to an interesting paradox. With more people able to create money-generating content (even in the absence of ads), there is a greater possibility for a greater variety and pool of talent. It also allows niche shows to reach a certain demographic withot fear of cancellation. On the opposite side of the coin, there is the possibility that the market will become too saturated and ideas will wear thin because of the massive ways the talent pool can expand.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat can I say about television today? I can’t say that I really watch it that much anymore, it’s largely something that I now associate with living at my parents house over long summers, and not with being in college. I’m not sure why that is.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I have seen recently, I feel like television (or at least broadcast television) is grasping for straws, trying to keep people engaged while watching. I mean, everyone watches some type of television - whether it be online after it airs, from an online source, or physically sits down to watch a show when it airs. But it seems there’s an increasingly smaller number of people who are really engaged with shows they watch.
For example, a couple of my friends really like the show Community, so much that they both try to reference it as much as possible in any situation where it can even be a little be relevant to something that just happened. This same group of friends do this with plenty of other shows that are widely considered to have cult status.
I started thinking on this path after reading some of the past responses to this topic, one of them being ABC’s inclusion of more ethnic groups in their sitcoms this season. Part of me realizes that it’s just a reaction to racial identity and relations becoming a more salient topic in the past few years, but the other parts of me view it as a testament to the use of “diversity” as a buzzword: it’s something that people use to make themselves and their actions seem better or more moral. Overall, it’s just really interesting seeing that major networks adding more diversity (specifically, people of color) to their programming when more and more people aren’t watching. There’s just a little suggestion that the type of people who tune in to watch these shows aren’t the same people who get most of their entertainment from channels like HBO - not a new suggestion in the slightest, but kind of an ironic one.
I think that looking at television today with the same lens that we’ve looked at television of the past, I would have to say that at this point in television history, television programming as a whole - even the consumption of shows outside of broadcast - has lost its populist appeal/ability. One of the tenants of post-network television is the increasing amount of niche audiences and programming, however, I feel like most of this programming has become too specific for someone to just dive into - something that considering television is *the* passive pastime, feels very off. Or, maybe I’m just taken the wrong dose of cynicism and laziness.
As aforementioned by Adam, I find the growth of television across multiple platforms one of the most fascinating and important developments in the post-network era. Programming through these non-traditional sources allows for shows to not only reach and appeal to the mass audiences, but also the furthest recesses of demographics. Furthermore, as mass amounts of online content and shows become readily and rapidly available through sites such as YouTube, Hulu, Netflix, HBO Go etc… it appears the amount of consumption of content increases. Because media is more easily accessible through these platforms and the style of the text has moved beyond hour and half-hour formats, it is effortless to move from one subject and/or subject matter to the next.
ReplyDeleteExpanding on this idea, I believe an important notion to be remembered of modern day television is the development and increasing encouragement of binge watching. Since the implementation of television, shows have consistently been released in a timed, usually weekly, format. However, with the growth of non-traditional sources, primarily Netflix and more recently Amazon, entire seasons of shows are released at one time allowing for viewers to continuously move from one episode to the next. I feel that the idea of binge watching will turn into a major development as audiences’ consumption grows and they become discontent with the monotonous “waiting game” of network and cable television. Delivering shows in this format also allows for the option of watching as little or as much of a show at a time of the viewers choosing, not having to rely on a pre-determined schedule. Audiences correspondingly grow exponentially because the shows can be started at any period. Big name stars (such as Kevin Spacey) involving themselves in Internet based original content and the high production quality of such shows, popularizes the format and encourages binge viewing. Furthermore, shows with syndication rights is another opportunity for binge watching as sites like Netflix pay to show other producers’ original content where it is all in one place and easily accessible. Essentially, television today will be remembered for its increased association with the multiple Internet created platforms, and I believe the "one time" release structure will continue to grow with the popularity of this format. Ratings of shows are no longer reliable based on standard television viewers, but audiences are now taken into consideration across all platforms.
I find the developing idea of cult TV to be fascinating and very in-tune with our generation. The definition has expanded - from originally being focused on fan practices and the combining of genres, to a more complex interaction between inter-texts. The development of a cult TV show seems to be able to come from almost any genre at this point – from shows like “Community” (a sitcom syle comedy, set in an ‘other’ world), to Law and Order SVU (a cumulative narrative drama that has drawn a loyal audience).
ReplyDeleteMy favorite aspect of cult TV is the idea of fans as producers. I think it is an important part of TV to have the audience’s input. Turning toward a more interactive, challenging viewership only improves TV as an art form and media. I anticipate the move through multi-platform TV (like the transition to the Internet) as a good thing that will only increase audience involvement and awareness. Taking part in the creation of content to any degree allows for a more educated culture to emerge. I hope platforms like Kickstarter and other crowd funding sources continue to develop and encourage interactivity. Veronica Mars totally had the right idea, and I’m excited to see more cult TV shows take advantage of their viewership’s dedication.