Sunday, October 6, 2013
'Low Brow' Genres
How does Horace Newcomb's essay complicate Newton Minow’s assessment of television as a “vast wasteland”? Why does he believe that 'low brow' genres such as the western can be more complicated than they seem? Do you agree? Perhaps give an example of a contemporary 'low brow' show and explain why it might or might not have social relevance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In Newton Minow’s memorable Wasteland Speech, Minow said that when a viewer sits to watch television, all he or she “will observe is a vast wasteland” of bad shows depicting “western bad men, western good men,” and other predictable characters and low-brow plots. From Old Frontier to New Frontier, however, gives us more insight into the implications of westerns, and the potential they had to be more than “low-brow” shows. Newcomb notes that TV westerns in the 1960s touched on “issues of race, nationalism, and citizenship.” Motifs in western programs were not always obvious, but lessons were taught through “allusions” and symbols. In one example, Newcomb suggests that in an episode of a once popular western, an analysis reveals that the episode is more than just a story of “good guy with a gun vs. bad guy with a gun,” but a lesson about gun control. He also notes the historical significance of such low-brow shows. Westerns in the 1960s, for example, once “meshed perfectly with the…crusade-like temper of the Cold War era,” then the genre changed to better “fit into a society of conflicting, articulated, and relatively informed political awareness.”
ReplyDeleteI agree that television programs considered “low-brow” have more significance than critics (like Minow) believe. Shows like South Park and Family Guy thrive off inappropriate, often controversial content. But these are some of the most popular shows on TV. Seth McFarlane has made millions of dollars creating Family Guy. In today’s world, many viewers are attracted to shows with “dumbed down” content. We use TV as a way to unwind, be entertained, and take a break from the critical thinking the rest of the world demands us to do. Shows like Family Guy are aware of this, and are purposefully “low-brow.” I wouldn’t say TV shows today are praised for being low-brow, but they do not get as much criticism.
Newton Minow was partly correct to declare television a vast wasteland, but this broad generalization is more problematic as Horace Newcomb has illustrated. It is true that much of television programing was dominated by the noise of commercialism and formulaic tropes in comedy and drama were exploited along with violence and sadism seen in gangster and westerns genres. Minow does claim that television has great potential and when it is “good” it is superior to all other media.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that Newcomb’s analysis of the western genre focuses on this potential of television. Newcomb does acknowledge that many westerns incorporate an “industrial production” of formulaic characters, gunfights, and narratives and he even states in his conclusion that opposite to the problematic (having greater cultural and thematic significance) endings, there exist many “conventional, unproblematic endings.” (pg. 301) Conversely, Newcomb illuminates for us the thematic issues that were a reflection of the changing times in which the shows were created. For instance, the paternal issues and rebelliousness brought forth in “The Misguided Father” would become prominent in the sixties counter culture. Furthermore, Newcomb finds broad cultural correlations between the genre and Cold War America. He likens the new legislation and social order brought about by the JFK administration to a new frontier that was readily depicted in the western.
As Lauren Lucas pointed out in her comment, there is greater value in “low-brow” television than what might normally be attributed to it. Also, shows like South Park and Family Guy not only provide humor and entertainment; they usually do so through parody and criticism. South Park especially seems to take a very critical stance towards a current cultural issue or trend and builds its narrative off of that. This is probably what has not only made the show popular but also significant.
I think what Newcomb is complicating is that he believes the generic “low brow” television show is capable of bringing valid attention to certain aspect that continue to happen and the westerns he is referring to are a reflection of the social relevancy of the time. For “low brow” television to date I think that it is a reflection of the general public and can showcase certain issues taking place in society, allowing for the show to have depth and complexity, but lacks in its ability to distinguish itself and provide something long lasting/ worthwhile. It was said in Newcomb’s excerpt of Erik Barnows, Tube of Plenty,
ReplyDelete“Although many fine films thought film history have dealt with internal character conflicts, such conflicts were seldom important in telefilms. Telefilms rarely invited the viewer to look for problems within himself. Problems came from the evil of other people and were solved…”
The degradation of television saw many of these shows that are considered the lowest in the hierarchy of quality present something worthwhile the issues weren’t focused toward the audience and were quickly rectified. For example South Park, tends to showcase multiple issues happening in America during this time, like this past week episode dealing with George Zimmerman, the stand your ground law, racial issues yet in the end the potty humor and Cartmans use of violence quickly outshined the issues at hand and muddle the complex issue the show used. In the end I think what the overall message of the essay is getting at is that low brow shows can express material and have great narratives etc, but in the end their relevancy relies on the social level of the viewer and they can easily be forgotten down the road, although popular at the moment.
Horace Newcomb's "From Old Frontier to New Frontier" complicates Newton Minow's assertion that television as a "vast wasteland" because television shows, even the "low brow" ones that are boiled and dumbed down for the common denominator of the population, could serve as an intelligent critique of society. Even genres like westerns, which were known for their gratuitous depictions of equally gratuitous violence, would touch upon sensitive, contemporary issues, such as racism and gun control in a 1958 episode of Trackdown, according to Newcomb. Also, in the western Have Gun - Will Travel, the protagonist, Paladin, is characterized as a sophisticated gunslinger, quoting philosophers and debating about morals of a father willing to do anything to protect his psychopathic, murderous son, as seen in the episode "The Misguided Father." If these shows were truly "low brow," their writers would not have gone through the effort of creating these complex plots and could have easily resorted to weeks and weeks of writing action and adventure scenes and plots.
ReplyDeleteEven today, I feel that "low brow" television shows are more complex than they seem. Examples included adult animated TV shows. For most people, shows that are animated are treated less seriously than their live action counterparts, since most animated media are for children (ie. cartoons). However, episodes for shows like The Simpsons and South Park have plots that are driven by current social events, and the creators of both series will take a side and critique it and its opposition.
Newton Minnow's "vast wasteland" speech was about the evolution of television so far. He decried that television had become "commercials -- many screaming, cajoling, and offending. And most of all, boredom". He decried the significant overlap of television into westerns, gangsters and game shows. The reason? "[The] Demands of your advertisers; competition for ever higher ratings; the need always to attract a mass audience; the high cost of television programs; the insatiable appetite for programming material." Interestingly enough, these are the same reasons that modern television has become a long list of sitcoms with laugh tracks and TLC style reality television. Newcomb believed that even the most mundane genre could give social commentary or become more than its genre had traditionally allowed.
ReplyDeleteThis can be true. In comtemporary terms, The Big Bang Theory seems to give a similar vibe. It is a very stereotypical sitcom, rife with tropes, the omnipresent laughtrack, and the multi-camera system. At first glance, it seems like a show that gives a social commentary to geeky culture and begins to glamorize it as opposed to deriding it as the punchline of the joke. The main characters are proud geeks who show off their knowledge and collections as badges of honor. The viewer is meant to emphatize with them, as they are the protagonitsts.
The issue is that any social commentary is subject to a certain level of interpretation. Some people may say that this show may glamorize geek culture and allow it to enter the mainstream. I am not one of those people. The show continuously derides the nerdy behavior and forces the viewer to emphatize with the lead girl, who is "normal".
Was Newcomb correct? Yes. The one caveat is that the social commentary may not give the social relevance necessary to raise the show above low-brow fare.