Starting off as a new television critic is, to some extent, terrifying. There are many approaches that a critic can take while evaluating television shows. Throughout my adventure I will be learning certain approaches to criticism that will eventually help focus and direct my critiques. In the past six months I have definitely expanded my knowledge as a television viewer, especially after a hefty purchase of a 32 inch plasma television that sits perfectly atop my dresser in my bedroom. This was the beginning of the end, seeing as now I have spent relentless hours watching an embarrassingly large amount of programming on cable networks. Although I love sitting and watching reruns of Wifeswap I have never been the type of person who strictly views anything, let alone television, with only one interpretation. This is one thing I hope to bring to the table as a new television critic. Throughout my semester long adventure I hope to convince my readers that, even as a beginning television critic, I can attempt to interpret a program but I may not always be right. My hope is that by helping people become better at analyzing television themselves they will then understand and help me reevaluate my own interpretation of certain programs. As I always say, “two heads are better than one”.
As a television critic, I do not intend on swaying people in one particular direction. I understand that people interpret everything differently and there is absolutely no fault in doing just that. My job as a new critic is to open up viewer’s eyes to different possible aspects of a program such as Sons of Anarchy or Real Chance of Love: Back in the Saddle. Television isn’t just “what you see is what you get”, this comes into play with critics because they aren’t always right. As Sillars and Gronbeck (2001) pointed out, “A communication critic makes an argument that describes, interprets, or evaluates….The definition is general because the specific purposes of particular critics are so varied.” (5) My eventual goal for people who read my blog is not only to understand what I am discussing but to open up more doors for analysis and to potentially see something I may not have noticed. I do not plan on terrorizing individuals when they disagree with my analysis. O’Donnell (2007) states that critics are capable of transforming, “As a critic, you become a ‘transformer’ capable of generating new understanding and new awareness in the minds of other television viewers.” (4) I hope to transform people’s opinions but I would also take pleasure in people making their own decisions, O’Donnell (2007) “the critic serves as a guide, offering standards of criteria for judgment along with factual data, so readers can make up their own minds.” (5)
Whichever program a person may view will eventually influence what they believe to be true about cultures or specific values. Corner (1999) discusses this very idea, “all of the television which we watch will bring about some modification in our knowledge and experience, however minor and temporary.” (6) Critics can be very powerful in modifying knowledge in people as well; television isn’t the only thing to possess this power. As a critic it is important for my own viewpoints to come through but everyone should be capable of correcting my errors of faulty criticisms. Individuals should be critical while viewing certain programs because each of us has had experiences separate from others and this is what makes a good piece of criticism. O’Donnell (2007) articulates that before we even begin to watch television we have certain perceptions, “Our perceptions are based on our values, beliefs, attitudes, and experiences.” (6) People come from so many different places and each television viewing experience is not the same. I believe anyone can be a critic or can help a new critic, such as myself, develop better and stronger ideas. Butler (2002) discusses the idea of polysemy, “…conflicting meanings reside within the same program and facilitate the viewing pleasure of a broad range of individuals. With so many different meanings being signified, we are bound to find some that agree with our world view.” (10) Hopefully, you as readers of this blog can help me achieve this broad range of interpretations throughout the semester.
Relating to people has never been a problem for me and I hope to come off easy to understand and enjoyable to read. I enjoy relating to people through humor and stories about my experiences. I also want to improve my critical ability by listening to other people’s experiences and potentially interpreting programs through another reader’s lens. Butler (2002) mentions television as becoming a “participatory model” (15) in which people are creating their own programs for other people to view their ideas through communication channels such as YouTube. This is exactly how I want people to view my blog. It should be a place where anyone can actively engage and argue about my own interpretations about television.
After this lengthy piece, what exactly is my point? My point is that I want to hear from you! I want readers to feel comfortable telling me what they think about my
critique of a particular episode of Tool Academy. I also want readers to understand that more than likely the shows I am analyzing are ones I secretly enjoy. I would be the first person in line to watch a brand new reality television show on VH1, so as much as I want to hate those trashy shows, those are a majority of what I watch. Please feel free to help me interpret and understand all of the shows from your perspective as well as from mine.Works Cited
Butler, J. (2002). Television: Critical Methods and Applications (2nd 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment