Television FTW

My Own State of the Union

Mark S — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 06:47:40 +0000

First time trying a blogpost from an iPad, so please excuse any typos/autocorrect issues!

I’ve been slack on my blogging, as many of my blogposts begin, but I get the feeling that the blog is going to be more functional than inspirational for the next 12 months. I am now into the last 12 months of my PhD writing, which means I have a whole heap of writing to do, and am steadily running out of time in which to do it. Having said that, it’s also hugely exciting, as all the work I’ve put into the last 2 years starts to come together!

As I did last year, I’m currently teaching in Summer School, on a Video Games paper, which is equal parts fun and challenging. I love delving into the theory, which is a little outside my wheelhouse (although anything to do with pop culture is gravy in my books), but it is a bit of a challenge not being so familiar with the latest texts. Postgrad has kept me from being a gamer for quite a few years. But I find the work inspiring, it’s given me great ideas for some papers to write once I get the thesis off my plate.

I’m lecturing the course that I lecturer first semester last year again, and definitely looking forward to it. My co-convenor and I have been able to make the course a little more our own again this year, meaning I get to add a lecture on storytelling in the digital age to the 2 other media culture lectures. It’ll make for a really fun run of lectures in the middle of the semester, at least for me, and hopefully for the students as well. Engaging a little more with transmedia, and with fan cultures – I love that I get to show students some of the awesome things that can be studied if you have the desire.

I’m also looking at a pretty busy year for conferences, and hopefully for publications too. Heading to Portland in early March for the What Is TV? Conference; thinking about going to ANZCA in Adelaide in July; and finally, this should hopefully be a FlowTV year, which would see me heading to Austin near the end of the year, funds willing. In addition to that, ANZCA produces a peer-reviewed proceedings, which if I can get into, will give me my first proper publication.

What this all means is what I need to have done by early March is:

conference paper for Portland

conference abstract for Adelaide

full journal article for Adelaide for peer review

two more sets of grading for the paper I’m currently teaching on

finishing preparing the course for first semester, including revising the first couple of lectures

finish up the current methodology/lit review chapter I’ve been writing for about 5 months now

make some good inroads into the next case study that I have yet to start

I’m thinking that should be enough to be going on with when you add in trying to keep up with all the TV content I try to follow, plus staying in touch with as many colleagues on Twitter as possible…

It’s going to be quite a year.

“Law and Order” as cultural history

Mark S — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 23:26:35 +0000

I have recently begun the slightly odd project of watching Law and Order start to finish. Although I have watched the most recent several seasons of L&O, as well as the various spin-offs, the earlier 10-15 seasons really passed me by. I’m well aware that L&O is almost ubiquitous on US cable TV (I had a sick day in a US hotel where I watched nothing but), but in New Zealand, re-runs of earlier seasons have been fewer and further between. However, one of our PayTV networks recently started from season 1, episode 1, and seems to be intent on just running right through them. That, combined with a DVR, encouraged me to go back and experience the whole lot. A fool’s mission, maybe, but one I’m finding quite interesting.

What has struck me, 3-ish seasons in, is the way that L&O operates as an artefact, as a cultural historical record. Early seasons are filled with references to AIDS, to DNA, to mobile phones. Incident reports are being completed on type-writers, a foot cop runs to a pay-phone to call in a crime. Sexual harrassment seems to become a common trope as the series progresses. Females serving in the police force and the military becomes a theme. Homosexuality becomes more and more in the public eye, as does racism. I’m struck by the number of derogatory terms used in the show’s early seasons, especially n***er, which seems to be used in every second episode.

This is not the world’s greatest show. And as it is still a work of fiction, it answers more to the storyline than to culture. But I feel that the 20 years (running from roughly 1990-2010) saw massive shifts in technology and culture in the US, and L&O seems to be marking the importance of various issues as they come up. I expect to see more concerns around new technology, around the rise of the internet, around concerns of identity, around sexuality, race and gender, around politics and the rise of the religious right, around corruption, around terrorism. And I really feel that I am in some ways getting a glimpse back into the US’s cultural history, seeing the issues that were preoccupying people at a given moment, and seeing attitudes change and shift.

Sexuality and Idol paper

Mark S — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 01:01:59 +0000

Following the excellent Gender Cultures and Reality TV symposium held in Auckland this past weekend (a follow-on from one held in Dublin earlier this year), I thought I would post the full text of the paper I presented. Obviously, I actually talked around it a little, and it is written for oral presentation, but I’m always interested in getting further feedback. The full text is after the jump. The suggestion was made that there might be enough of an idea here to work up for publication too, so that is also floating around in my mind.

“You keep singing like that and you will be able to afford the rest of that dress” : Nascent Sexualisation in the Idol Franchise

This paper was inspired by a single incident from the most recent (2011) season of American Idol. There was a moment between contestant Lauren Alaina and judge Steven Tyler which when I first watched it left me feeling just a little uncomfortable, and seemed to leave Alaina feeling uncomfortable too. The incident made me think about the history of Idol and the Idol franchise, and how some of its ideological frameworks might gradually be shifting. It also inspired me to think about the cultural variation between the various regional versions of Idol, and I will make a couple of quick comments about that towards the end.

In order to understand why this particular moment (which I will show you in a few minutes) stood out, there a few things about the history of American Idol which need to be clarified. The show began in 2002, making its most recent its tenth season. The show was very successful in its first few years, garnering ratings which went counter to the downwards trend being experienced by most US network broadcast television at the time. During this period, Idol maintained a fairly consistent form, didn’t play around with the rules, the appearance, or the format. As the ratings eventually began to slide a little, the producers began making a few changes. The series had been relatively consistent in terms of its staffing, maintaining the same judging panel for the first 7 seasons. In season 8, a fourth judge, Kara DioGuardi, was added, and in season 9, Paula Abdul left the panel and was replaced by Ellen DeGeneres. Finally, in season 10, the judging panel was completely reformed, with Randy Jackson being the only original judge remaining, and being joined by Jennifer Lopez and Steven Tyler. Adding two highly successful musicians to the judging panel alongside a well-regarded musician and producer was seen by many as an attempt to bring authenticity to a competition that had begun to lose some credibility. However, this change may have also had some unforeseen consequences…

Another change which happened in season 10 of the show was a shift in the rules which govern eligibility. The initial age range allowed to audition was from 16-24, and the upper age was extended to 28 in the fourth season. However, with the success of shows such as The X Factor, which in the US allows contestants as young as 12, the decision was made to lower the age of eligibility for the 10th season of Idol to 15. This had an immediate impact, with 2 of the top 13 contestants in the season being 15 at the time of their first audition.

One key aspect of American Idol that I have noticed (although it doesn’t seem to have been highly theorised) is the relatively conservative ideology that it tends to portray. There is a consistent history of playing up religious affiliations that any contestants might have (assuming that they are connected to a dominant Christian organisation), and removing any forms of sexuality. Partners tend to be glossed over, unless “sanctified” by marriage, and even if the contestant is married, the reference is usually to devotion or dedication, rather than to romance, emotion, or sex. Homosexuality is also something which is completely glossed over during the show – I’m not aware of any finalist who has come out as gay during the run of the show, although several have following the completion of their respective seasons. Even Adam Lambert, who it could be argued coded himself as gay throughout the run of the show, refused to confirm his sexuality until after the finale of season 8. Part of the ratings success of Idol has been it’s appeal to the conservative and religious sections of the US, and this has been reflected by the fact that most of the successful Idols have at least made reference to their faith. Quoting Katherine Meizel: “As in the American presidency, a person outside the spectrum of Christian faiths has never filled the role of American Idol. It is perhaps not coincidental that, of the American Idols to date, most have spoken publicly about their faith during their Idol campaigns, seven of the nine hailed from southern states – as did recent Presidents George W Bush and William Jefferson Clinton – and six were elected during the presidency of Bush, a self-proclaimed born-again Christian” (104-5). Sexualisation and sexuality seem to hold no place in this depiction. Meizel again notes that sexuality “is one of the only identity markers not plainly exploited for its audience potential. Not only sexual alterity but any kind of sexuality is articulated more subtly here than is typical of the commercial pop world” (47).

Against this backdrop of conservatism, the selection of Steven Tyler to the judging panel seemed to impact the relationship between judge and contestant. Tyler seemed to be a slightly odd choice as a new judge for the Idol producers, given that his stage persona is one of overt sexuality, and that his addictions to drugs and sex have been well documented over the years. His lyrics are frequently sexual or profane, which does not seem to be a good match with the traditional conservative ideals of Idol. However, many critics, and I agree with them, suggest that Tyler was actually inspired casting, adding a new energy to a flagging series. He often acted as a provocateur, frequently needing to be censored for swearing, both in pre-recorded and live segments. In fact, in the first live show of the season, Tyler was given a sign to hold in front of his mouth when he swore, matching the censoring bubble used by editors to cover his lips.

Video of Steven Tyler – Package from final episode of Season

Steven Tyler and contestant Lauren Alaina seemed to have had a specific connection since her first audition. Alaina was one of the youngest contestants to audition, still 15 when she first met the judges. There was immediate chemistry between the two.

An edited clip from Lauren Alaina’s audition

Tyler went on from this to frequently refer to Alaina as one of his favourites, if not his favourite, to win the title. The footage of Alaina doing a cartwheel in this clip was also used repeatedly during the season, with the effect of playing up her child-like qualities.

All of this led up to the moment which really piqued my interest, in the 22nd episode of the 10th season, where the top 11 were competing. Lauren Alaina performed Elton John’s Candle in the Wind, and I will run the clip from the end of her performance.

Lauren Alaina and Steven Tyler Incident

Alaina seems completely uncertain how to deal with Tyler’s comment, but the most telling moment of the segment for me comes a moment after the comment, as Alaina covers herself with the tail of her dress, and another hand covers her chest. She seems to feel completely exposed, needing to cover herself, to protect her modesty. Alaina until this point has come across as childishly sweet, young and immature. However, in this moment, she is cast as a sexual object, and made directly aware of it. As one of the youngest contestants ever competing on this stage, this moment seems to be even more jarring.

When I was first considering this paper, I did quite a lot of thinking about the sexualisation of children, especially the sexualisation of children towards a capitalist end. The Australia Institute produced a study in 2006 entitled Corporate Paedophilia, looking at the way that media and advertising might be sexualising children for corporate aims. While I think both the methodology and the conclusions drawn from the study are actually problematic, relying heavily as it does on media effects theory, I think that it shows a heightened concern for the depictions of pre-teens and teenagers in modern media imagery.

In retrospect, having engaged with the Tyler/Alaina incident in more depth, I’m not convinced that the concerns expressed by studies such as the aforementioned actually reflect what happened here. I don’t believe any particular corporate aims were accomplished by this moment, nor do I believe that it was in any way choreographed or planned. However, I do think that it might have been in some ways inevitable, when combining someone like Steven Tyler, not prone to self-censoring, and the lowered age bracket of Idol.

Alaina seems to have not been overly affected by this moment, after her initial shock and instinctive reaction. Immediately after coming off stage, her initial comment is “Apparently I need a longer dress”, but a clip from seemingly only a moment after that has her a lot more certain of herself, declaring “My dress is not too short”. The moment also did not seem to do much harm to Alaina’s performance in the competition, falling only at the final hurdle by coming runner-up. She also matured and grew throughout the course of the show, becoming visibly more comfortable with herself, and on stage. As Tyler said to her in a subsequent episode, following her performance of Carole King’s Natural Woman: “4 months ago you came in here an immature little girl, and tonight you are a natural born woman”.

I would also suggest that throughout the series, Tyler adopts an almost paternal attitude, especially towards Alaina, which might provide a slightly different frame of reference. [NB - in questions after the paper, it became apparent that some had read this comment as a nod towards a paedophilic, incestuous connection, which was not my intent. I was more interested in the way that a teenager might be embarassed by comments from his/her parents, although I do accept that the alternative reading could warrant further thought]

As I said earlier, I have thought about this moment in the context of other national versions of the Idol franchise, to try to decide whether this type of sexualisation could have happened in other editions, and whether it would have been noticeable. I didn’t have access to full seasons of other versions to confirm my suspicions, but these observations are based on having watched 3 seasons of New Zealand Idol and 4 seasons of Australian Idol as they aired. The key for me is that I don’t believe that either Australian or New Zealand Idol is based in the same conservative ideologies as the US version – religion seems to play a much smaller role in the New Zealand franchise, and is almost invisible in the Australian. The second side of this is that the judges in both antipodean versions made comments that were much more based around sexualisation or appearance, most famously Australian judge Kyle Sandilands, who made several derogatory comments around the appearance of female contestants, and was eventually fired due to an incident on his radio show where he had a 14yo girl attached to a lie detector, and then had her admit that she was raped when she was 12. On the third season of NZ Idol, shock jock and new judge Iain Stables told a contestant that she couldn’t sing, but would “make an excellent shag”. While these moments are all problematic, arguably a lot more problematic than the Tyler/Alaina incident, the incident on the US version seems to stand out even more because of the conservative context within which it occured.

Carmine Sarracino and Kevin Scott, in their book “The Porning of America” discuss the idea of sexualisation. They note: “sexualised (…) does not mean hypersexed. It means, rather, that a person, male or female, young or old, is divested of all other qualities he or she is said to possess – intelligence, spirituality, sense of humour, athleticism, compassion, talent – and reduced to an outward husk, utterly empty but for a single potential, the ability to satisfy someone else’s sexual needs” (198-199). I think that this idea perfectly encompasses the “make a good shag” comment from Stables, but seems to not quite explain the affect of the Alaina/Tyler moment. There, Tyler is not seeking to reduce her to a sexual object, but simply makes a comment that is inappropriate for the contestant’s age – Alaina is not objectified in that moment, mortified possibly, but I would argue not sexualised.

So where does this leave us? I think that reality television does need to keep in mind its treatment of children and youth, especially in these competition reality shows which blur the boundaries between competition and commodification. While the apparent sexual gaze which falls on contestants might often be problematic, it is even more so when the contestants are younger. And as competition reality shows age, they seem to be seeking out a wider contestant base. The success of 13 year old Rachel Crow in the US version of The X Factor indicates an ongoing appeal of younger contestants. What producers and presenters do need to be aware of is how these younger contestants are addressed, presented, and constructed. Is there, as I suggest in my title, a nascent sexualisation in American Idol? I remain unconvinced, although I do believe that the presence of Steve Tyler does mean that there might be more moments where his liberal and open attitude, and the traditional conservative ideologies of American Idol, collide.

Gender Cultures and Reality Television conference paper

Mark S — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 02:33:25 +0000

Better late than never, I’ve got most of my conference paper together for the Gender Cultures and Reality Television conference I’m attending tomorrow and Saturday. Since almost noone who sees this blog will be there, I figured I’d put it up online. Feel free to make any constructive comments you might have, either before or after I deliver it

-edit-

I’ve removed the link here, as it was to an old version. The final version of the paper delivered can now be seen at:

http://televisionftw.wordpress.com/2011/12/06/sexuality-and-idol-paper/ ‎

What Is Television? conference abstract

Mark S — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 23:20:53 +0000

So, after much to-ing and fro-ing, I’ve decided to put an abstract together for the What Is Television? Conference in Oregon next year.

The current incarnation of the abstract can be seen at:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/13WJnGCoXj91PMdMXxph8bntbY7mfdWlxIEtEAnrl_3Y/edit?hl=en_US

And the details about the conference can be found at:

http://journalism.uoregon.edu/whatistv/

As always, any comments, criticisms, advice, gratefully received.

Stepping outside my comfort zone

Mark S — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 06:56:42 +0000

The abstract I posted last has been accepted. Which is excellent. But that now means that I need to write the paper. Which is scary.

Ever since I came back into the loving embrace of the tertiary institution, I have pushed myself, sure, but I have worked pretty much within my comfort zone. I have worked with texts that I know, well. I’ve stuck to areas that I have felt relatively comfortable in – the TV industry, fandom, new and social media. This is the work I’ve pretty much focused on over the past 5 years, meaning that I’ve grown with it.

But none of the work I traditionally do would have fit the CFP for this conference, that I really wanted to attend. So I took a deep breath, and I wrote the abstract. And imperfect as it might be, it was accepted. And now, I need to start from scratch with writing it.

Most things I write are based on a literature I know well. If I want to write about cult television, or quality, or televisual eras, I know the 5 or 6 key texts I need to turn to. But all of a sudden, I’m writing about sexuality and sexualisation. And I’m doing a whole new set of literature searches.

It’s incredibly disconcerting to not know the most basic level of academic research about this. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of academic work about my specific niche take on this (Idol and sexualisation), which is good – nice niche area for a paper, possibly means it’s even worth expanding it to a publication if I come up with something useful to say. But it also means I’m doing very broad Google Scholar searches, and trying to distil out some fairly broad concepts. And I don’t even really know what sorts of theoretical bases I could be using.

So it’s something that is very exciting, but simultaneously utterly terrifying. I have several months to work on this, and I get the feeling I’m going to have to devote a reasonable amount of time to this.

So, how do other academics feel about this? Do you ever have the feeling of stepping out of your comfort zone?

Symposium + Abstract

Mark S — Wed, 27 Jul 2011 01:43:39 +0000

There is an excellent symposium being run at the University of Auckland near the end of the year. The theme is Gender Cultures and Reality TV, and there have already been some exciting speakers announced. If this is at all in your area, and you think you might be able to justify a trip to Auckland, then I strongly recommend taking a look. I’m a little late pimping this, so abstracts are due Friday! Details can be found at: http://www.genderculturesandrealitytv.com/

And so to me. As much as I do work with Reality TV, and enjoy listening to discussions and chiming in where I can on issues of gender and sexuality, this is a little outside my comfort zone. But this is too good an opportunity to pass up, so I have put together an abstract. I’m still pretty new to abstract writing, so any advice on it would be gratefully appreciated.

“You keep singing like that and you will be able to afford the rest of that dress”: Nascent sexuality in the Idol Franchise

In the first nine years of its run, American Idol was relatively careful to avoid overt sexualisation of the contestants, playing very carefully to a conservative family audience. Judging panel comments regarding appearance or wardrobe of participants frequently came from Paula Abdul, taking on a sisterly or motherly role towards most contestants. However, in the tenth season, the changes made to the judging panel saw the introduction of Steven Tyler, a rocker known for, amongst other things, his lasciviousness and history of promiscuity. Tyler’s presence on the panel saw a shift in the dynamic, with him frequently making comments of a sexual nature towards both male and female contestants. Tyler joining the panel only a year after the success of the most overtly sexual contestant on Idol, Adam Lambert, may not be a pure coincidence, and may indicate a shift to attract new demographics to the show in order to arrest falling ratings. Where this may be problematic is in its coincidence with the lowering of the age limit for competing in Idol, meaning that contestants Lauren Alaina and Thia Megia were both fifteen years old at the time of their auditions. This paper will analyse the increased sexualisation of contestants over the 2011 season, identify moments at which this sexualisation became uncomfortable or problematic, and will attempt to draw comparisons to Australasian versions of the format.

Teaching vs Writing

Mark S — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 00:03:58 +0000

For a number of reasons, I have no funding while I am completing my PhD. I am not in a position to apply for any of the standard doctoral scholarships, and being white, middle-class, and male, most of the other scholarships do not apply for me. Now, don’t get me wrong, this isn’t a reverse discrimination complaint, and I am receiving some support from my family in order to get through this. But what it does mean is that I have needed to take on work in the department. For this, I will be eternally grateful.

I have no idea whether or not I would have taken on as much, or for that matter any work, had I not needed it. But instead, I am in my 4th year of work as a GTA (graduate teaching assistant), on three difference courses, and have just completed my first co-convenorship of a course. The money earned on any of these is not great (not the department’s fault, just the reality of the tertiary education system in NZ), but my CV is now starting to look a lot healthier than it might have done. As well as an undergrad course on television, I have worked on an upper-undergrad media studies course, dealing with some fascinating and very current issues, as well as a course on video games. Both of the latter two were slightly outside my wheelhouse to begin, but have given me some strong skills, as well a the confidence that I could get myself up to speed to teach on pretty much any course that I might need to.

The opportunity to convene/lecture on the media studies course this semester was an incredible one, and so lucky – the regular lecturer got a research grant, and used it to buy out of his teaching for the semester. Another PhD student and I were given the opportunity, and seized it with both hands. We both had to very quickly get used to the week-in, week-out production of lectures (very different to the first lecture I gave a couple of years ago, where I believe I spent 50-60 hours preparing and rehearsing the lecture). We also had to get used to being the place where the buck stopped, the person to whom all the most difficult questions come. I feel incredibly grateful as well that I had a co-convenor who was also very interested in the material of the course and interested in trying some pedagogically-interesting techniques, as well has having a tutor who was dedicated, interested in the material, and who really worked to inspire her students. And we got there, and from the accounts I’ve received, did pretty well.

The semester is now over, the exams have been graded, and all that remains is a little paperwork (and by a little, I mean a lot more than I ever realised was possible). And now I look at the sorry state that my PhD has been left in. The amount of work I was doing, and how much I was enjoying that work, meant that my PhD has been a little neglected. A couple of bits and pieces were done, but now I sit and survey the amount of writing I should be doing between now and 3 weeks time, when the second semester will start. There might be some other reasons why my PhD hit the back-burner, including some structural and conceptual issues that are still haunting me, but I think they should be the realm of a separate post.

But it does raise some interesting issues of balance in the modern PhD (at least within the NZ system) – even those who are on scholarship still need to take some teaching (or other paid work) to be able to live, and there certainly aren’t enough scholarships to go around. So how do you balance these two elements competing for your time? Teaching is in theory only 10 hours per week roughly, but I think anyone would agree that, especially when marking/grading is on, it’s closer to 40+ hours per week.

And so it comes down to balance. This semester, that balance failed. And I’m ok with that, because it was an opportunity that just couldn’t be turned down. But it does raise larger questions about how people balance teaching and writing, whether they are still grad students, or even post-employment, when they have to balance lecturing, departmental requirements and administration with the production of their own writing, research and publication.

Any suggestions or comments gratefully received.

Storytelling Conference paper draft

Mark S — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 07:04:27 +0000

My abstract was accepted to present a paper at the Australasian Universities Language and Literature Association conference on Storytelling. The abstract I sent can be found elsewhere on the blog. I’m presenting on Wednesday our time, and true to form, I’m only just finishing my draft of my paper. I’m a little nervous about it, as it is my first conference paper presentation, and it will also be my first encounter with ‘traditional’ conference papers – the only other conference I have attended is Flow, and while that was AWESOME, I expect this to have a slightly different feel!

So, please, any and all responses, comments, criticisms, are welcome, even if it is that I need to start from scratch and re-write! I can’t promise I actually will, with time constraints, but it would be useful to know that I should if that’s the case!

Note: This is a very, VERY rough draft, and I may continue to edit over the next few days on my own. I’m particularly concerned by the lack of a strong conclusion – any advice there would be appreciated. Also, the paper is mostly without references, since it will be delivered verbally. I will probably go through and add the full references in at a later date for my own interest and use.

____

-edit- Change of plan – I’ve decided I should make use of the tech I’m using anyway – the most up-to-date version is available at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CphlAqQoXlcVB8i0PiMEcZoFICUBNis-XVve1hd2afw/edit?hl=en&authkey=CIDWmpQM

I’ve made it non-editable, so if you have any comments, please either make them on this post, or via twitter: @markboynz

Storytelling Conference

Mark S — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 04:46:47 +0000

So, my inability to craft a decent abstract continues. I really struggle to craft a 200 word statement about a paper I haven’t written yet – and at this stage, I don’t have a store of papers built up, just waiting for the appropriate forum for presentation.

There is a local conference being held in February, run by a Languages and Literatures Association, but with an over-arching theme of storytelling. I felt that this certainly opened up room for a paper on the changing nature of storytelling in television. But as always, my abstract feels vague, generalised, and without any real direction.

I realise this is the third or fourth time I’ve put an abstract up for advice, and I do hope I am making some progress, but any advice that people might be able to give would be gratefully appreciated.

Happy holidays, everyone!

______

Traditionally, primetime Television has utilised an episodic mode of storytelling, mainly for practical, industrial reasons. Recent years have seen significant shifts in televisual storytelling, embracing a more serial narrative, specifically within the genres of Cult and Quality television. Programming such as Buffy The Vampire Slayer saw a mixed model, with stand-alone episodes which also furthered an on-going series-long story arc. In the past 6 years, series based around a central enigma, such as Lost or The Event have taken this serialisation even further, requiring a more dedicated viewing model, rewarding audience engagement, and encouraging a forensic model of fandom, where active viewers work together and individually to decode the narrative (Mittell). I suggest that television has finally found its own unique narrative style, distinct from every other medium, allowed for by changing audience models and reception technologies.

______

-edit- I have qualified television to prime-time television to remove the complicating factor of soaps. Yes, there are primetime soaps. I realise this doesn’t quite solve the issue. But I believe this better indicates the type of programming I’m interested in. I would also argue that soaps, whilst being serial, occupy a similar space to episodic programing, as the inherent redundancy of soap operas means people can dip in and out, the same way they might with a procedural or a sitcom.

@noelrk has also pointed out that comics work to a similar form of serialisation. While I 100% agree with him as my argument stands, I truly believe that there is a fundamental difference between the serialisation of enigma television, such as Lost or The Event, and most comics. Whether it is ‘unity of purpose’, or something else, I’m just not quite sure. I’m working to put my finger on it before I submit my abstract.

But I guess this raises another question – how do you cover all the bases of your argument in a 200-word abstract. Or do you just lay out a position, and it is accepted that the details of the argument will be covered off in the final paper?