Several of the readings this week critically address the notion of quality TV. Feuer tackles the so-called difference between primetime and daytime soaps. McPherson examines the masculinization of the serial form. Kackman posits the “elitist aesthetics” of quality TV are threatening to obscure TV studies roots in feminism.
These
readings, combined with readings from other works, reinforce the suggestion
that quality TV has come to mean rich, white, masculine, appropriated the
serial form, and adopted cinematic aesthetics. Yet, I’m wondering if the
embrace of cinematic aesthetics is truly a detriment to TV. Kackman would say
so. He writes, “I’d argue that our pleasure in the operational aesthetic
doesn’t come simply from observing the workings of a finely crafted watch, but
from a sense that the product of its machinery will be something more broadly
meaningful – it tells us what time it is. This is, essentially, a cultural
operation, not an aesthetic one.” Both McPherson and Kackman chide 24 for its treatment of women
characters, as well as its troubling nationalism. But that does not mean 24 cannot deal with other cultural
issues. McPherson notes, “Finally we can read this multifaceted ambivalence as
a manifestation of (and perhaps a latent critique of) a broad cultural and
individual sense of having lost control: of information, of time, of
technology, of gender boundaries, of the comforts of genre, of our work lives,
of our government” (186).
The show
seems to meet most of criteria for quality TV (maybe not rich since it was on
network TV), and it even meets Kackman’s requirement since it taps into
cultural anxieties. Yet, there is a hesitancy to hold up the show because of
its conservative values. The devaluing of feminist criticism in favor of
aesthetics seems to afford shows like 24
a pedigree it may not have been granted had it arrived in a cultural context
other than immediately post-9/11. Do aesthetic or formal considerations have to
depoliticize criticism? After all, the recognition of cultural anxieties in
McPherson’s piece came from the recognition of 24’s use of running clocks and split-screens.
No comments:
Post a Comment