Re: Adorno on TV

[Matthew Levy <mlevy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

oh no Ralph not you too ... this is getting scary.  Is my view so all
alone on this?


On Mon, 7 Jun 1999, Ralph Dumain wrote:

> The discussion about ironic/cynical obedience/collaboration reminds me of
> Peter Sloterdijk's CRITIQUE OF CYNICAL REASON, surely the philosophy book
> of our time.
>

I'll check this out, but I'd like to point out that I never equated irony
with cynicism.  That was Simon's move, and I think it's unjustified.

> I spent most of the 70s boycotting television, (never fear, I caught all of
> COLUMBO on reruns), and when I started watching again, I was outraged at
> what I saw almost every second, having had lost the habit of being
> violated.  (How quaint that I should have bothered to dissect the ideology
> of TRAPPER JOHN MD and QUINCY and BARNEY MILLER in view of where we're at
> today.)  TV is such an irresistable baby sitter, though, that once I
> learned to tolerate what I hated, I could keep on going indefinitely.
> What's going to happen next?  One can tolerate just about any piece of crap
> imaginable; sometimes there's a perverse fascination (I wouldn't call it
> ironic distance) in viewing what one despises over and over in a continual
> confrontation with one's enemy.  Freud's repetition compulsion?
>
> As low as my standards have become, one must draw the line somewhere.  When
> they were on, I would not watch MARTIN or LIVING SINGLE (more than once).
> I still refuse to watch JERRY SPRINGER, and I would rather put my eyes out
> before ever having to endure another episode of ALLY MCBEAL.
>

don't you get it?  Neither you nor Simon has produced anything here which
enlightens me or anyone else about the logic of television ... what you've
done is demonstrate to me that you can participate in a discourse about
selfhood and aesthetic value in which you strive to maintain your
"standards", to avoid being a "baby", to avoid being "violated", etc. ...
and I find this position indistinguishable from puritanical protestantism.
Why should I care which TV you will and will not watch?  If we're going to
have a discussion about how the content of television shows has
substantively changed over the last three decades, or to talk about what
political-aesthetic functions the shows you don't like perform, or just
basically to engage in anything beyond a list of what Simon and Ralph
don't like, we have to start somewhere other than where you guys are at.
I'm the only one so far who's said that I watch TV ironically and don't
have a problem dealing with that ... I believe ironic distance is a
perfectly serviceable way to engage the content of entertainment
critically ... but when it comes down to it I probably don't watch any
more TV than either of you does, since I really don't have the time and
when I do have free time there are other things I like better than
watching shows I don't like.  But this doesn't absolve me of the
responsibility, if I am going to critique these shows, of saying something
detailed and substantive about them, instead of just protesting that my
intelligence has been insulted.  And anyway if the point of discussing
these things is to produce knowledge that is useful to others, then we had
better be able to tell these others something about the shows they find
entertaining beyond simply calling them stupid.  But I guess if you're to
the point of wanting to rip your eyes out, the task is left to the rest of
us ...

Matt