Television now stands in the foot prints of where film was once stranded. This statement is referring to television being viewed as an art.
Television now stands in the foot prints of where film was once stranded. This statement is referring to television being viewed as an art. Over the last few decades film studies within universities have elevated film to that of an art. Television studies seem to be few and far between. So where does television stand in terms of art and what needs to happen to elevate its status and acceptance within the art community.
Television today is produced much like film during the major studio hay day. When something works (ex. Reality TV) they run with it until it runs dry. This is naturally part of the TV enterprise because viewers are needed to keep advertisers interested, and advertising is needed to keep the networks financially happy. Old Hollywood’s answer to the studio was the auteur. This was a filmmaker who was able to work within the heavy constraints of the studio and still add his/her artistic touch. In television today you have a handful of shows that cross this boundary (ex. X-Files etc.) and overcome the constraints of a national broadcast. Another positive for TV is networks such as HBO which have done away with constraints altogether. Since HBO has its own in house productions and doesn’t rely on advertising (viewers pay to have access to it) it gives its own productions much more time to develop into there potential. This is in sharp contrast to that of major networks that are on a daily basis competing for viewers and advertising dollars. Shows on major networks have been cancelled after one episode. This is a major hang up for TV as art. Composition art can only be viewed in its entirety. A film isn’t judged by individual scenes, but from its beginning to end; the sum of its parts. The upper right portion of the Mona Lisa has never undergone significant study. A television program can only be critiqued from its “New Season” to its “Season Finally.”
