'The cinema spectator gazes, the TV viewer glances.'
Screen Studies: Assessment 2
'The cinema spectator gazes, the TV viewer glances.'
How far do you agree with this statement?
Introduction:
In order to analysis the statement 'The cinema spectator gazes, the TV viewer glances' first you must understand the terms 'gaze' and 'glance'.
According to Chambers standard Dictionary (1972: 540, 552) a:
* Gaze: A fixed look, to look in wonder or admiration.
* Glance: A quick momentary view, to look with a sudden rapid cast of the eye.
These definitions do give some indication of how viewers react to the cinema and TV.
To say that you look in wonder or admiration in the cinema environment is true for reasons that will become apparent further into this essay. The same can be said for the definition of glance. These definitions also seem to referrer to the importance of the medium in question. Is TV a 'throw away 'medium that is a mundane experience compared to the cinema which is something of a special event?
If so, are there definite reasons for this?
There are many different elements to be considered such as the context in which cinema and TV is presented and the form they follow.
Context: TV vs. Cinema.
Although they are both showing moving images the contexts in which they are presented are completely different.
The cinema is a public place where people attend screenings of films; this is the only reason why a cinema is built. Occasionally there are other attractions such as shops or bars but its primary role is the screening of new movies. Because of this it is seen as an event to visit a cinema, the excitement of seeing a movie for the first time.
The cinema is designed with no distractions, prior to the film being shown the audience is shown a brief advert inadvertently asking them not talk during the film, to switch off mobile phones in order that them do not disturb other members of the audience while they are concentrating on the main feature. In this sense the audience are already gazing at the screen, the cinema is in darkness so there is nothing else to distract them.
The screen, the sound system and the picture quality are all larger than life, when a movie begins, particularly an action movie, the audience is encouraged to watch intently. Because of the size of the screen, the quality and volume of the sound all the senses are focus on one thing, the 'Big' screen.
Finally, because the cinema is a public place, social convention dictates certain behaviour. Certain noise such as laughter in a comedy is accepted however the reason why viewers go to a cinema is to watch the film they have chosen to pay to see.
TV is viewed in private homes; it is an accessory as opposed to the main focus of domestic life.
It is viewed everyday which can make it become a rather mundane activity, with repeats of programmes already viewed, older films and soap operas.
The majority of TV viewers do not watch TV in the dark because of the context in which it is seen. At home there are many distractions which would make this impractical. Because the TV is usually found in the main living area of the home it is not practical to view it ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
TV is viewed in private homes; it is an accessory as opposed to the main focus of domestic life.
It is viewed everyday which can make it become a rather mundane activity, with repeats of programmes already viewed, older films and soap operas.
The majority of TV viewers do not watch TV in the dark because of the context in which it is seen. At home there are many distractions which would make this impractical. Because the TV is usually found in the main living area of the home it is not practical to view it in the dark. The average TV set is small in comparison with a cinema screen; it therefore is easier to be distracted from what is being shown. This element coupled with domestic life and what that involves it is a fair assumption to make that TV is harder to concentrate on than cinema.
But are these the only differences between the two mediums which mean viewers pay more attention in a cinema setting?
The Form of TV and Cinema:
TV is presented on average in 30 minute segments which involve ether fragments of narratives or multiple narratives. Although they are consistent, in the example of soap operas they are ongoing narratives in order to keep the viewers watching over long periods of time. With cinema, a whole narrative is shown, a story from beginning to end. Though, in the case of sequels there may be a continuation of the primary narrative the film itself is a single narrative in its own right.
TV also has to cater for a general audience, meaning there are points of interest for everyone who may be watching, cinema and films are there purely for the viewers who want to watch. Attending the showing of a film is a conscious decision as apposed to watch TV which is a convenient distraction.
Going to the cinema is an event; it is not something that is done everyday which is the case for TV. When going to the cinema, you are making a decision to pay to watch a film that you 'want' to see.
The desire to see something that you are interested in and the expectation of what you are going to see is what motivates you to leave the safe viewing space of your home to watch a film, hopefully with like minded people in a public place.
It can be an intense experience, particularly in the case of a film which has been anticipated some time, to be transported to a fantasy world, to watch characters you identify with in surroundings that are unfamiliar.
The actors/characters on the screen are larger than life in both senses, they are untouchable stars who are not part of everyday life while at the same time they appear ten feet tall in stereo sound, and they are quite literally looked up to.
TV revolves around 'personalities', the stars of the small screen, and for the most part they are everyday, down to earth people. They appear small because of the medium in which they are presented. It is a safe medium and while it can sometimes be disjoined it is relaxing and unconfrontational. It is very rare that TV takes the viewer away from normality.
The reasons why cinema audiences gaze is because they are there for that reason, they are there to be entertained, to be deceived into thinking they are somewhere else or in another time. The context of the cinema experience is why they are not distracted from the big screen where as in the case of the TV viewer there is nothing but distractions. With a few exceptions TV viewers glance unless there is something being shown of special interest.
Cinema vs. Television:
There are very different circumstances in which television and cinema are consumed but there is also a difference in the quality of the experiences. According to Bordwell and Thompson: (Film Art, An Introduction:2001 p9) 16mm film carries over twice as much information as a standard home television (425 scan lines for a TV Vs. 1100 scan lines for 16mm film). Because of this many feel that the original film, when transferred to video loses a lot of its original picture quality making the whole experience less enjoyable. It would be fair to suggest that a cinema goer is more inclined to gaze at a film being shown in its original 16mm format as the quality of the experience is superior to that of viewing the film at home on TV or video.
Having said that the convenience and comparative safety of the home environment does have a bearing on how consumers react to the two mediums.
TV though its history has become a habit, it is no longer an event or an item reserved for the social elite, rather it is an everyday appliance that has become a normal part of domestic life. Because of this broadcast TV is not under the same pressures that cinema is under to gain an audience, according to John Ellis (1982:160)
"Broadcast TV does not have to solicit its audiences in the same way that cinema has to... Up to half the population can be counted upon to be watching TV at some point during most evenings".
Broadcast TV is there to be glanced at, by its very nature the more challenging the subject matter the lower the ratings, however TV will always have a larger audience than cinema due to its assess ability, content and place in peoples lives.
TV is sometimes regarded as a relaxing experience, many people use TV as an aid to falling asleep in the evenings or to entertain them while they are involved in other domestic chores. A typical cinema audience doesn't go to the cinema to watch an action film in order to relax after a hard days work, a visit to the cinema is a way of distancing yourself from reality, escaping from the domestic, mundane world for a short time.
Ellis (1982:162) goes on to say,
"The TV viewer is cast as someone who has the TV on, but is giving it very little attention: a casual viewer relaxing at home in the midst of the family group".
A question of power:
The cinema audience is in a position of power, something they have little of with regard to TV. Ellis (1982:81) says that entertainment cinema offers the possibility of seeing events from a position of mastery and separation. Without the audience there would be no film. Ellis (1982:81) goes on to say:
"The film is offered to the spectator, but the spectator does not have anything to offer to the film apart from the desire to see and hear".
This illustrates one of the key issues regarding the question, gaze vs. glance.
The TV is there as a part of domestic life, the content of the programmes reflects this and reinforces the idea of being safe and secure from the outside world in the comfort of the home. The cinema offers a far different experience, where fantasy and escapism are important. Though real life events are dramatised in films they are a far cry from the docu-soaps which have become popular in the last few years.
According to McLuhan (1994:267)
"The social practise of sitting in a cinema effectively isolated from other members of the audience disallows audience forms of participation". The cinema forces its audience to 'gaze' by its very nature, a dark auditorium with a large screen give little opportunity for distraction. Also, due to social conditioning, certain rules regarding disturbing other cinema goers are usually observed.
Conclusions:
The cinema spectator gazes because cinema exists for that reason. Before TV the cinema was a universal communicator and entertainer, reporting news, public information as well as showing films. Its audience was guaranteed due to a lack of other options. Now the cinema is seen as more of an escape, a fantasy world where everything is larger than life.
"The medium of film is centralised and authoritarian, requiring the film maker to transform the audience into another world" (McLuhan, 1994:285).
The latest film is always advertised as being bigger and better than the last, boasting new special effects and starring film icons. This is not the case for the latest home improvement docu-soap as the audiences are regarded differently because they react differently. TV audiences glance because TV is a part of domestic life, an everyday item that is not designed to excite, rather to relax and entertain.
Ellis (1982:163) says:
"It is not the TV viewer's gaze that is engaged, but his or her glance".
There is no separation between TV and everyday life, there is with cinema as it is separate from the domestic sphere, an almost voyeuristic experience.
The cinema hold its audience enthralled, playing on their desires and their need for escapism, where as TV holds its audiences attention for a brief time by using familiar music and canned laughter. The cinema is an experience, it is not an ordinary every day experience. The picture and sound quality are far beyond and domestic TV experience and the films shown are new. TV is familiar, showing repeats of repeats and entertaining without needing anything in return, it is there if it's needed.
References:
* Bordwell, D and Thompson, K. (2001) Film Art: An Introduction. 6th ed.
* Chambers, W and R. (1972) Chambers Standard Dictionary. Chambers.
* Ellis, J. (1982) Visible fictions: Cinema/ Television/ Video. London, RKP.
* McLuhan, M. (1994) Understanding Media: the extensions of man. London, Routeledge.
Bibliography: (as above)
* Gauntlett, D and Hill, A. (1999) TV Living: Television culture and everyday life. Routeledge and BFI.
* Stevenson, N. (2002) Understanding Media Cultures. 2nd ed. Sage.
- 8 -
