Window on the World
How was early television figured as a “window on the world,” according to Lynn Spigel? Do you think television fulfills (or is portrayed as fulfilling) a similar role today? Take a look at this early broadcast and describe its aesthetics. How is the viewer positioned or addressed? How do the formal elements of this program compare to contemporary television?
According to Lynn Spigel early television was figured as a "window on the world" because each show that was on the air during this time depicted a different type of American family. For example, The Goldbergs centered around an American Jewish family and gives an inside look into their heritage and everyday life. American families have many different ethnic and religious backgrounds and are all unique. With a newfound variety of television shows, people could now choose what they wanted to watch - it could be one about a family much different from theirs and ultimately they could end up learning something. I feel like television today still remains very similar to Spigel's "window on the world" theory. The comedy has changed and evolved but we still have many television shows that focus on contrasting families in America, one very obvious example would be Modern Family.
ReplyDeleteLynn Spigel uses the phrase "window on the world" to desirous television because the programs then and now in a way display what the American household is like. The audiences at that time could somewhat relate to the shows presented. However, the American household has changed within the past 5 or 6 decades. There are more "windows" that people can relate to in terms of ethnicity, religion background, sexual orientation, etc. Since the family dynamics have changed in the, television has evolved in a way with the "new morn".
ReplyDeleteWhen Lynn Spiel describes early television as a "window on the world," she's writing in reference to the depiction of American families of the time. There was supposedly something for everyone to relate to. The industry has come a ways since the dawn of television, most notably with representation. Prior to watching NBC's broadcast from 1936, I expected a fairly bland group of faces and voices. White men talking about white men while white women occasionally added soundbites. Frankly, I wasn't shocked. The only major coverage of a non-white male was the segment about Jesse Owens' utter domination on the track, and women were openly used for men to ogle at. Toward the 20 minute mark of the broadcast, a woman is narrating an ad for women's clothing. I was struck by the voiceover telling Alice May to "turn all around so that the men can get the full effect of the very smart line of this thread." At this time, still before WWII, women weren't usually in the workplace. Men were the gatekeepers of funding in most households, so the most effective way to push merchandise onto consumers was to appeal to the men of the house. That's striking in comparison to today's landscape, where programs that openly do the same are lambasted. Major networks broadcast shows like "This is Us," where the diversity of the cast plays directly into the plot of each episode. Television has seen some dramatic makeovers, and it's no longer just a white man's activity.
ReplyDeleteAs explained by Lynn Spigel, television was a “window on the world” because it allowed you into the lives of people you may never meet, families you’ll never encounter, and places you may never visit. This can be seen in her explanations of the Goldbergs - a look into a Jewish family, “Make Room for Daddy” whose setting was in a New York Penthouse, “The Burns and Allen Show” - about a couple and the their lives as television stars, and “I Love Lucy” where the characters spent an entire season giving viewers an amazing look into the Hollywood Hills. The best part about giving viewers this look into a life they may never lead is that they were able to do it in the comfort of their own home. Meanwhile, unlike the theater, the TV allowed you to choose the life you wanted to lead for that hour or so with the ability to switch channels, while doing it in an area that is comfortable for you.
ReplyDeleteI believe that today, TV continues to accomplish this theory that Spigel brought up. No matter what program I’m watching, I have the ability to be transported into the character’s lives and see what their everyday is like. In fact, I think TV accomplishes this even more today than it did when it first was created. The various angles that make us feel like we’re physically the protagonist, the voice-overs, and the various angles to show emotions (which wasn’t a very popular thing to do when television first became popular - was almost like filmed theater) are just a couple of the examples as to why I believe television transports us into others' daily lives more today than ever before.
What’s so interesting about this broadcast clip is that the entire interview and majority of the show are from one angle. The camera never changes and the view is that of filmed theater (aka a wide angle). The viewer is positioned as if he or she is an audience member literally sitting there watching the interview in real time. The viewer isn’t addressed during the interview portion of the video and it is only recognized that an audience exists at the point where the men are being introduced. Also, the angle, for the first time in this entire broadcast, changes to a close up when RCA and NBC come together to “witness a historic event”. Overall, the audience really isn’t addressed throughout the duration of the broadcast. This differs greatly from contemporary television in that audiences have more connection with the television and the stars on the TV more than ever. Late night show hosts always address the camera and their screaming audience (again bringing more attention that an audience is present) at the beginning of their show and the angles contemporary television shows employ make it more of a fun experience for audiences, greatly differing from the filmed theater technique employed at the conception of television.
According to Lynn Spigel early television was seen as a "window to the world" because it was a way for people to see how other people lived, and what other parts of the world looked like if they had never seen it before. People no longer had to travel to know and see what was happening in the world or what it looked like, watching a television was like looking out a window to their home and watching the world outside of it. Television also blended in well and fit with the aesthetics of modern suburban architecture. Spigel also talks about how television was said to not just give an illusion like cinema does," but a sense of being there." It would deliver sound quality and picture so real that it would be just like they were there and it would come alive in their living room, though i beleive that to be an exaggeration both then and today.
ReplyDeleteI do think that television portrays a similar world today because people who have never left their small home town can know how things such as the Eiffel Tower, Great Wall of China, and the Egyptian Pyramids look like without ever having to pay to go there. They can experience these things from the comfort of their own homes thanks to television. Many people today use TV as a resource to learn about the world around them in a way that would not be possible if the television was not as big as it is today.
Lynn Spigel's concept of television being "the window of the world" stems from the idea that families were able to travel and see the world without leaving the comfort of their living room. Young families at the time were settling down in suburban neighborhoods where they led this ideal "American dream". The television almost became a part of the dream. Early television shows often looked at what ideal suburban families should be and It gave people "attractive" and ideal images of their own lives.
DeleteIt allowed people to see things they normally were not able to and learn more about the world without having to travel or experience it firsthand. The world could be included all at once but they could also see it for themselves rather than just hear it over the radio. I believe this remains true today, we are also able to search for past content and watch current content. Communication is much faster and more simultaneous.
In the first live broadcast above, the men being filmed do not address the camera directly. This could have been NBC's way of assuring people that it is a live broadcast and that they are seeing things in real time. They do not look into the camera and no other angles are shown. They did address the audience but kept the same camera position, behind a crew that was supposedly filming close up. I wonder if they actually filmed anything or if it was just t show that there was a crew there. They switched the broadcast back to film to make it easily distinguishable from pre recorded and live. I'm sure people were in disbelief that they could stream a broadcast live on the air because it had never been done before.
When television was first introduced into the home, it seemed to have a strangely contradictory status as both the main focus of the room, and also something which needed to be hidden. It seemed to be viewed quite literally as a "window on the world," as the family could view something going on outside of their home through the screen. While furniture was arranged around it in such a way to maximize viewing pleasure, the television was also often in a case that allowed it to be hidden away when not in use. This points to the idea that people thought of the television screen as a literal window. They could see the world through the screen, and they had a kind of anxiety that maybe the other side could see them too. Though most people probably wouldn't have consciously understood this anxiety, they idea helps to explain the desire to hide the screen from view when not in use, similar to the use of curtains or shutters on windows.
ReplyDeleteThere is also a contradiction between the discourse of calling the television a "window on the world" and what was actually being portrayed on tv. While "window on the world" would suggest seeing the sights of far off places and exploring the world beyond domestic life, many television programs showed scenes of domestic life, and nearly all programs took place inside studios. What viewers saw wasn't really "the world," but a fantasy conjured up by corporations.
Spigel's depiction of television is very similar to how modern day television works, but more broadly in the past. His view is on par with my own opinions about what television used to be: a way in which individuals could see other individuals live different lives. Living bi-curiously through this "window to the world" is what enticed families to turn their sets on in the first place. The visual stimulus viewers received was crafted in a way that made them feel directly interacted with. Imagine a zoo; you feel close to the animals you are viewing and the "picture" that they live in is crafted to make you feel that connection. Just as you are "in Africa" at the zoo you were with the people and atmosphere that was televised.
ReplyDeleteModern day television is similar, but more specialized. Each broadcast is crafted in a way that lets you feel that connection (like before), but it is less about the spectacle of viewing another place. We do not tune in to our televisions to see what it's like to be an ER doctor on House, but we do feel engaged with the hospital. I believe that the allure of television has obviously dropped, and it is more about a personal experience and connection with a story as opposed to a conscious decision to peer into a different world.
Spigel thought that television was a window the world because it connected people to other parts they wouldn't see otherwise. It also works as a window for producers to reach millions of audiences. So, just like literal windows, it works both ways. It transports viewers to places, but also brings ideas to the world's homes. I think that this is still true but has also evolved past this. With SciFi and fantasy all over television these days, it also works as a window to other worlds. I don't think that streaming and Netflix has changed this window-like nature; it simply gave us a few more windows to look through.
ReplyDelete