This entry spurs from the Ken Burn's documentary we watched a few weeks ago. At the time, I jotted down some notes in my notebook (go figure) and now finally decided to document them online.
Woo-Hoo.
Here are some thoughts I had many moons ago:
Television is a social event. We watch televised programs in communal groups -- with friends, co-workers, family members, etc. If other people are not physically present with us while we watch t.v., there are people across the country and the world watching the very same program at the same time. Therefore, television is a social medium because it involves more than just the individual.
A television show premieres at a specific time (present) and releases specific information (active). Episodes of American Idol, House, Monday Night Football, and the 11 O'clock News are only fascinating to the extent that people do not know what will happen. The information, when it is revealed on t.v. is fresh and exciting. The program itself will be dull (or perhaps less exciting or interesting) after it has premiered because it is not present. However, the medium as a whole is present and active because each t.v. program premieres to an audience, whether it's a repeated episode or not. It is in motion nevertheless.
The reason for these thoughts originated from one instance during the K-B Documentary. There was a shot of Japanese teenagers watching a televised baseball game at a restaurant. They were cheering for Ichiro. The act of watching t.v. is demonstrated as a social event: they were together as a group of people in public place. The act of watching t.v. was also present and active: they watched t.v. a specific time (during the game) and received information (about the game).
Some other thoughts to consider:
- You don't have to limit yourself to just watching t.v. while watching t.v. -- you can do other stuff at the same time! This doesn't mean that you'll escape the grip of t.v.'s influence. Instead, I think it suggests the opposite. When you watch television and do not multitask, you can be consciously aware of its many influences. However, when you dull televisions blade, its influences are less obvious and more unconscious.
- Both film and television are passive in nature: you sit and watch. However, I think film is even more passive than television. If you are multitasking during a t.v. program, you can usually return after a commercial break and pick the story up again, aware of what you might have missed. The story is completed by the end of the episode (or maybe prepares you for a second part of that episode's story -- but there is a sense of completion within that time slot). A movie doesn't allow its audience to multitask. If a viewer misses time during a movie, the experience is lost and the story is incomplete. Films do not repeat in the same manner that t.v. programs do. You must be passive in watching a film; therefore, you are subject to its advertising more than t.v. (Hello McLuhan!).
- Film is a social event, too. We go to the movies together, rent movies together, watch old movies on television together, and watch home-videos together. But, since we cannot multitask while watching a movie, movies are also a very independent event. We cannot interact with one another or else we will disrupt and interrupt the movie and its story. I think this element of film also emphasizes its passivity. We must sit and watch the movie without having human interaction, even though it is presented as a social event.
- The way a story comes across creates and releases a different mood or tone within us when we change or alter the dynamics of the viewing options.We will experience and react to t.v. programs and movies differently when we watch them by ourselves versus in group settings. It's an interesting alteration of the viewing experience.
No comments:
Post a Comment