I see a note from my sister on Facebook: "I HATE CABLE TV." In theory, I'm with her. The cruelest part of getting more channels than you can count is the joke whose punchline we all know: Now you get to watch 500 channels of garbage.
Why then, do I have a satellite dish installer on the roof right now, replacing our old DirecTV dish with a brand-new dish that will enable us to receive a high-definition signal? I think it's got to be more complicated than we want to see the garbage more clearly.
sLet me catalog the reasons.
--Curiosity: I've wanted to see whether HD television really is better--especially for the Tour de France in July.
--Weakness: I know that changing to HD isn't going to improve the quality of the programming. I know it's probably not worth whatever extra amount DirecTV will charge us. But we've been talking about getting new service for awhile and now I'm just giving in.
--Distractability: I'm as willing as anyone to slough off my chores and responsibilities in favor of a nice "Seinfeld" episode. (Do I still read? That seems to be the culturally correct alternative to watching the tube--as opposed to gardening, cooking, paying the bills, or going to work. Yes, I try to, though sometimes it takes me forever to get through stuff. Right now I'm reading two nonfiction works: a biography of John Brown and a first-person account of Robert Falcon Scott's last Antarctic expedition.)
--Keeping in Touch with the People: Here's a self-justification that often pops up in my brain: "I work in the media, so I need to know what's going on out there with the culture and with media consumers." That's partly true; but only partly. If this were really an exercise in keeping current with popular tastes and the concerns and fascinations of my fellow citizens, I'd be watching a lot more "American Idol," and I'd regularly check in with the crowd-baiters on Fox News. (In practice, I find about 15 minutes of "Idol" fulfills my annual requirement, and I'm so enraged and depressed by Fox News that the only way I can deal with its spew is the occasional Glen Beck deconstruction on "The Daily Show." Speaking of "The Daily Show," though, and "The Colbert Report"--I find I can live without them. Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann on MSNBC? Turns out I don't like left-directed pandering any more than I can stand the right-directed ravings on Fox.)
--The Love that Dare Not Speak Its Name: Well, maybe it's time for me to come out. It turns out I actually like television. I think there's plenty of inventive storytelling on the tube. Some of it can be deep, compelling, and memorable. -"Lonesome Dove," anyone? Or "Band of Brothers"? "The Wire"? "Deadwood"? (I could go on.) A lot of the programming is superficial beyond a catchy gimmick--"24." Some shows are based on formula and gimmicky, but work the formulas and gimmicks well: the whole "CSI" and "Law and Order" franchises. But the point is: on occasion, there's real content out there that is--I hope this doesn't set off a sacrilege alarm anywhere--on the same level of all the popular entertainments of the past, from "The Iliad" to "King Lear" to "Wuthering Heights"--that we have been taught to think of as classics.
Enough said on that. The dish guy is still on the roof.
Recent Comments