Where Would I Be Without TV?!

Taking the class, “Television Criticism,” seemed initially very intriguing due to the connotation I gathered from the word “criticism.” Over the course of the past two weeks however, it has become evident to me that criticism is more than just nit-picking network programming and all the elements of creativity it has to offer. “Criticism is the practice of informed judgment… television criticism is subjective in that it subjects a program to interpretation through the critic’s perceptual filters,” (O’Donnell 18-19). With that brief definition in mind, I plan to carry on with my television criticism in exactly that manner. My goal is to make the critical process of television viewing a validation of a program’s finest qualities, rather than an excuse to tear apart its weakest elements. As a person, I find myself over critical, in a negative sense. It will be a refreshing challenge to consider that other people are reading my critiques, and I must be careful as not to tread into offensive waters.

Television has always been my weakness. In this sense, television has kept me from going out to play as a child. It has kept me from also doing homework, being social, helping round the house and doing all the other things that have been expected of me growing up. However, television has also taught me a lot about creativity, social norms, discourses, and accepted values. Beginning with Barney and Friends, all the way up to Design on a Dime, Gossip Girl, and 7^th Heaven, numerous creative elements and perspectives have been taught to me through televisions. For that reason, I value the TV as not only a way to pass time but also a life learning device- as backwards as that sounds. Imagine growing up without MTV, VH1, or simply the news channels, you would be completely shut out of reality and popular norms as they have changed over time!

With the TV as a tool of discovery, I also find that television is a comforting way to relate to my life to that of others. In this sense I can almost identify myself in the program, making me feel as if I’m a part of something bigger, that many people are also experiencing. This connection is commonly considered a “viewer-centered” approach. This approach emphasizes that, “…audiences seek to make what they watch fit their own experiences and lives…” (Corner 10). To me this is comforting but to others, problematic because the field of critical study has “… shown a tendency to proliferate theories rather than provide for a rigorous exchange of ideas.” (Corner 11). By taking away the exchange of ideas, it is thought that democracy is distorted in a way. To me, it seems as if television has been too hegemonic, meaning it has been controlled to closely by social norms. It is said that hegemonic relationships created by television programming often create over-generalized division between various groups of television viewers (Brundson 313). However, with the arrival of cable networks, television programming has become more of a forum than a hegemonic system. For this reason, I wish to look past the thought by Corner (and slightly by Brundson) that culture is displaced and democracy is distorted.

An additional aspect of television that is fascinating to me is the idea of polysemy, or multiple meaning. If you’re thinking, “huh?! Polysemy?” that’s ok, I was too. Considering multiple meanings within television is hard to imagine, however, multiple meanings in television don’t center on the program but the people who watch the program. For example, I watched the movie Crash, and thought it was intriguing yet bizarre due to its controversial nature and aspects I didn’t quite identify/ agree with. However, I went to see this movie with my mom, and she was deeply concerned after watching it. She related to the discrimination that occurred during her time and had a perspective that I would have never taken away from the movie. The different perspectives we can all gather are the greatest elements of television viewing. Seeing and discussing different perspectives with people of different backgrounds, or even those in your same family, will always stir up an interesting conversation and a new personal view of the program you had already criticized. As many people consider critiques either right or wrong, we are all able to offer our perspective without an excuse to defend the means to which we reach our end conclusion/ perspective. O’Donnell considers the critics as “transformers” and I truly like that term (4). One person should only be in charge and capable of presenting new ideas that other viewers might not have gathered on their own- this is my intention with television criticism, and more specifically, this blog.

Furthermore, through this blog I want to convey a transparent relationship between myself and the program, rather than a fragmented relationship. The transparency will be seen through the democratic way in which I relate myself to the other viewers, instead of taking an elitist view as a critic, which the fragmented relationship would imply. Fragmented relationships, (for example, between women and feminists) cause a pause in criticism and televisual evaluation. This pause is due to the ability to generalize and relate to other viewers and critics (Brundson 312). For obvious reasons, I want to be seen in this class and as a critic, as an approachable person with values and attitudes similar, yet at the same time unique from others. I want to add to the full potential of television criticism. I certainly hope that through this blog I can create new ways to process thought and interpret text. I look forward to this semester’s adventures in blogging!

References

Brunsdon, C. (1993). Identity in feminist television criticism. Media, Culture and Society, 15: 309-320.

Butler, J. (2002). Television: Critical Methods and Applications (2^nd ed). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Corner, J. (1999). Critical Ideas in Television Studies. New York: Oxford University Press.

O’Donnell, V. (2007). Television Criticism. New York: Sage.

Sillars, M. O. and Gronbeck, B. E. (2001). Communication Criticism: Rhetoric, Social Codes, Cultural Studies. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.