ildu: the argument certainly isn't new but look at how many critics argue that mass entertainment is heading for an all-time low. Johnson argues that so far - mass entertainment has been becoming more and more intelligent with each passing decade. And what's incredible is not the claim that he's making but the rhetoric and the basis in science he uses to prove his point.
One passage that I found extremely insightful was the evolution of mainstream TV. In the seventies, Johnson argues, TV execs pushed for shows that were the Least Objectionable to the most people. Shows like Laverne and Shirley, the Brady Bunch, and Mork and Mindy were big hits with mass audiences. These shows were extremely simple and never pushed the limits as far as morality or indecency or gore.....
Today's popular shows COMPETE with the most complexity, violence, etc. They have to push the envelope with more and more to gain their market. And Johnson argues that these shows do not attempt Least Objectionable content but rather Most Repeatable content (Sopranos, 24 etc.). Viewers have to cling to the TV to catch what just happened in 24, or go online to read fansites, or rewind on their Tivo, or ultimately buy the DVD and search through the bonus features.
Without going into much detail (for fear of garbling Johnson's argument) I think this makes TONS of sense for any sign of moral decay or "dumbing down" of television. It s not the case that TV execs avoided complex, violent, scandalous shows in the seventies because our moral standards were higher back then. Its that mass audiences could not keep up with those stories because of a lack in technology and therefore: a certain kind of intelligence. Audiences could not rewind or read those websites etc. Today's mass audiences yearn for layered stories that utilize multi-threading narratives due to the technolgy that has grown alongside us. His best example of this was Seinfeld and its tendency to refer back to previous scenes or episodes.
DG: you're my kind of guy. Thanks for pointing out that even the crap is better. That's a really important point in the book. Oh! I love Johnson's scenario of "imagine a world where video games had been invented before books." Johnson writes his own critique of books and their disadvantages to video games for kids' spatial intelligence etc.
Great stuff!
One passage that I found extremely insightful was the evolution of mainstream TV. In the seventies, Johnson argues, TV execs pushed for shows that were the Least Objectionable to the most people. Shows like Laverne and Shirley, the Brady Bunch, and Mork and Mindy were big hits with mass audiences. These shows were extremely simple and never pushed the limits as far as morality or indecency or gore.....
Today's popular shows COMPETE with the most complexity, violence, etc. They have to push the envelope with more and more to gain their market. And Johnson argues that these shows do not attempt Least Objectionable content but rather Most Repeatable content (Sopranos, 24 etc.). Viewers have to cling to the TV to catch what just happened in 24, or go online to read fansites, or rewind on their Tivo, or ultimately buy the DVD and search through the bonus features.
Without going into much detail (for fear of garbling Johnson's argument) I think this makes TONS of sense for any sign of moral decay or "dumbing down" of television. It s not the case that TV execs avoided complex, violent, scandalous shows in the seventies because our moral standards were higher back then. Its that mass audiences could not keep up with those stories because of a lack in technology and therefore: a certain kind of intelligence. Audiences could not rewind or read those websites etc. Today's mass audiences yearn for layered stories that utilize multi-threading narratives due to the technolgy that has grown alongside us. His best example of this was Seinfeld and its tendency to refer back to previous scenes or episodes.
DG: you're my kind of guy. Thanks for pointing out that even the crap is better. That's a really important point in the book. Oh! I love Johnson's scenario of "imagine a world where video games had been invented before books." Johnson writes his own critique of books and their disadvantages to video games for kids' spatial intelligence etc.
Great stuff!