Sunday, February 26, 2006
Module 4: Critical (lens) theory
To complete Module 4, we have decided to each view the Fox TV (Channel 9) show "American Idol". Each of us will assume the role and view the show through a different critical lens. We will watch "American Idol" from 8-9 p.m. Central Time Tuesday, February 21, 2006.
Click this link to read a synopsis of the show: http://www.idolonfox.com/about/
Our Assigned Lenses
I viewed American Idol through a post-modernist lens.
Thoughts given from a postmodern critical theory while watching FOX's "American Idol" Feb. 21, 2006:
American Idol follows a planned path that appears to be common and formulaic to the audience.
A host, Ryan Seacrest, discusses performances and emcees the show from a stage in front of an audience and sometimes on a couch with a performer. There are features on each performer before they perform. The flashbacks to their "tryouts" obviously assume a prior viewing of the show. The three judges comment on each performer and their previous comments are interwoven in the flashbacks.
From a single layer perspective, this show is based on the judges, not the contestants. The singing is basically karaoke (single performer with no band, just canned music) and not the main draw. The draw appears to be the comments from the trio of judges.
As each singer sings, a cgi nameline appears under a medium/tight shot of the performer with a telphone number and a Cingular cell phone advertisement. Advertising plays an important piece of this show. Red Coca-cola cups are in front of the judges and they frequently sip from the Coke. Brilliant placement and money-making.
The background of the stage is predominantly blue. The blue colors give a feeling of electronics and of a nightclub. It feels as if this is the hot place to be. It is no living room, but it's no large stadium either.
The judges are Randy Jackson (an African American), Paula Abdul (female) and Simon Cowell (Caucasian). Paula appears to be the nicest of the judges. She is where we go to release the tension of the moment of critique. Simon is dressed in a tight black t-shirt. Black clothes typically depict a flat character -- a character of negative energy. Black gives a feeling of the bad guy. Simon also enhances that reputation with his constant body language of crossing his arms. Crossing your arms is said to mean that you are shutting out whatever is being communicated to you. From this, I would say that Simon is acting as if he doesn't care what anyone thinks and is a bad guy. He appears to be the most honest of the trio with Randy being second.
The show continues to drive it's concrete formula. Introduce a performer, talk to her on a couch, interview package from outside the "club", she sings, name line comes up, people cheer, three judges critique, we are reminded to vote.
A woman named Lisa Tucker is not a woman at all, but a girl. She is 16. She is dressed like an adult, sings with a sensuality of an adult woman and appears to be as sexual an object as the other older women. There is no distinction of this between the judges nor the public aside from the "what a big girl you are!" type of comments.
I like the way American Idol has Paula Abdul as a judge. She is good looking, non-discernable in race, kind and she has a sexual tension with Simon that is readily available to all viewers. It works well because we are left wondering if they secretly like each other. It is a soap opera in our minds that we can assume.
Judge Randy Jackson speaks in a slang dialogue that assumes the viewer knows what he is saying and can translate it. He often uses terms like "Dawg", "What up?", and "Dude". All of which assumes our knowledge of slang. Jackson is African-American and these slang terms match his ethnicity. He uses these terms so much it appears as if he is setting his African-American-ness apart from the other judges. He is to appear cool. We would find that kind of slang cool in American society.
The content of the songs on American Idol assume an appreciation and recollection of the tunes. While many of us cannot sing on this level, we are to recall how the original sounds and compare the singer's brilliance or not. The songs appear to be older songs (not composed in the last five or ten years).
Paula Abdul just told a woman (Kinike) that she looked stunning. The director quickly had the camera cut to a full-body shot of the performer. This took the viewer where he/she wanted to go. The shot of the woman oozes sexuality. She has a dress with no sleeves nor straps. She is winning over the American public voters with sexuality.
The motion backgrounds give a feeling of movement and excitement. This show takes a basic talent show or karaoke competition and turns it into entertainment with swooping crane shots, dynamic colors, live stage, sexuality, "flat" predictable judges and tons of product and signage placement to show off the reality of American consumerism.
We are getting to the end of the show and there is a recap of the performances. These clips are short (20 seconds each maybe) and rely on our previous viewing of the performers. Each of these clips is flying around and coming in closer and closer. This makes me feel as if I am flying around the room. IT works well because there is simply a performer on a stage doing very little than standing there.
Generally, American Idol works well in pop culture. It appears to be pop culture because of how much it assumes we know of its structure and personalities. There are many references to other aspects of media: commercial products, sexuality and the nature of sex appeal in American society, format, colors, etc. It captures the attention of the viewer because of the non-scripted nature of the show. "Reality TV" is based on the idea of documentary. It lives off the conflict nature of news, that being the audience doesn't know how it will come out. It works because of America's love of conflict and sexuality.
Here is what I feel Post-modern means
Postmodern theory appears to be a fluid and almost non-descript critical theory. It is almost the antithesis of theory. Postmodern has one look at a subject from the purely surface images and is lacking in any form of "truth" or "meaning" in anything.
A good example the text gives for this kind of form is the 1994 Quentin Tarantino directed movie Pulp Fiction.
Pulp Fiction is described as a surface movie. It strays from conventional movie-making and elements of fiction. The movie draws on forms of fiction and slides in cultural media references that give it a campy feel, but don't detract from the story.
For instance, one of the characters is Vinnie Vega, played by John Travolta. There is a dance portion of the movie where Vinnie is dancing with Mia Wallace (Uma Thurman). The dance is a pure parody or satire of Travolta's role in the 1977 disco film Saturday Night Fever. This scene is interesting for interest sake, nothing more, according to the postmodernist. In addition, a postmodernist approach would find that the mixture of these two fictional pieces in a film would be well done if most of the audience caught on.
I would also say that TV shows such as South Park, Family Guy and The Simpsons take a completely postmodernist approach to their humor, satire or references.
No Truth is The Truth
While most theories look for an overriding truth or meaning, postmodernist theory doesn't. Postmodernists like to mess with narratives and time frames and alternative manners of getting across information. It draws on popular culture. Stories can also be best told to a postmodernist through use of several forms of texts: photos, animation, music, etc.
Surface level
Using a postmodernist lens, one would first ask how clever is the difference from convention. Next, it would be important to look at how well the text works on a surface level. Here, one would look at if the satire works in the present time with only other surface knowledge and does it work in the present in conjunction with other prior knowledge. It may be easiest to think: does this work if I know a lot of trivia? Does this work if I don't? Does it work evenly if I know this and don't know this?
Postmodernist = deconstruction
According to Carleton College's Deborah Appleman: "Deconstruction is, by far, the most difficult critical theory for people to understand. It was developed by some very smart (or very unstable) people who declare that literature means nothing because language means nothing. In other words, we cannot say that we know what the “meaning” of a story is because there is no way of knowing. For example, in some stories (like “Where Are You, Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been”) that do not have tidy endings, you cannot assume you know what happened."
For more of Appleman's definitions, see http://www.carleton.edu/departments/EDST/faculty/Appleman/Handouts/Glasses.html
Click this link to read a synopsis of the show: http://www.idolonfox.com/about/
Our Assigned Lenses
I viewed American Idol through a post-modernist lens.
Thoughts given from a postmodern critical theory while watching FOX's "American Idol" Feb. 21, 2006:
American Idol follows a planned path that appears to be common and formulaic to the audience.
A host, Ryan Seacrest, discusses performances and emcees the show from a stage in front of an audience and sometimes on a couch with a performer. There are features on each performer before they perform. The flashbacks to their "tryouts" obviously assume a prior viewing of the show. The three judges comment on each performer and their previous comments are interwoven in the flashbacks.
From a single layer perspective, this show is based on the judges, not the contestants. The singing is basically karaoke (single performer with no band, just canned music) and not the main draw. The draw appears to be the comments from the trio of judges.
As each singer sings, a cgi nameline appears under a medium/tight shot of the performer with a telphone number and a Cingular cell phone advertisement. Advertising plays an important piece of this show. Red Coca-cola cups are in front of the judges and they frequently sip from the Coke. Brilliant placement and money-making.
The background of the stage is predominantly blue. The blue colors give a feeling of electronics and of a nightclub. It feels as if this is the hot place to be. It is no living room, but it's no large stadium either.
The judges are Randy Jackson (an African American), Paula Abdul (female) and Simon Cowell (Caucasian). Paula appears to be the nicest of the judges. She is where we go to release the tension of the moment of critique. Simon is dressed in a tight black t-shirt. Black clothes typically depict a flat character -- a character of negative energy. Black gives a feeling of the bad guy. Simon also enhances that reputation with his constant body language of crossing his arms. Crossing your arms is said to mean that you are shutting out whatever is being communicated to you. From this, I would say that Simon is acting as if he doesn't care what anyone thinks and is a bad guy. He appears to be the most honest of the trio with Randy being second.
The show continues to drive it's concrete formula. Introduce a performer, talk to her on a couch, interview package from outside the "club", she sings, name line comes up, people cheer, three judges critique, we are reminded to vote.
A woman named Lisa Tucker is not a woman at all, but a girl. She is 16. She is dressed like an adult, sings with a sensuality of an adult woman and appears to be as sexual an object as the other older women. There is no distinction of this between the judges nor the public aside from the "what a big girl you are!" type of comments.
I like the way American Idol has Paula Abdul as a judge. She is good looking, non-discernable in race, kind and she has a sexual tension with Simon that is readily available to all viewers. It works well because we are left wondering if they secretly like each other. It is a soap opera in our minds that we can assume.
Judge Randy Jackson speaks in a slang dialogue that assumes the viewer knows what he is saying and can translate it. He often uses terms like "Dawg", "What up?", and "Dude". All of which assumes our knowledge of slang. Jackson is African-American and these slang terms match his ethnicity. He uses these terms so much it appears as if he is setting his African-American-ness apart from the other judges. He is to appear cool. We would find that kind of slang cool in American society.
The content of the songs on American Idol assume an appreciation and recollection of the tunes. While many of us cannot sing on this level, we are to recall how the original sounds and compare the singer's brilliance or not. The songs appear to be older songs (not composed in the last five or ten years).
Paula Abdul just told a woman (Kinike) that she looked stunning. The director quickly had the camera cut to a full-body shot of the performer. This took the viewer where he/she wanted to go. The shot of the woman oozes sexuality. She has a dress with no sleeves nor straps. She is winning over the American public voters with sexuality.
The motion backgrounds give a feeling of movement and excitement. This show takes a basic talent show or karaoke competition and turns it into entertainment with swooping crane shots, dynamic colors, live stage, sexuality, "flat" predictable judges and tons of product and signage placement to show off the reality of American consumerism.
We are getting to the end of the show and there is a recap of the performances. These clips are short (20 seconds each maybe) and rely on our previous viewing of the performers. Each of these clips is flying around and coming in closer and closer. This makes me feel as if I am flying around the room. IT works well because there is simply a performer on a stage doing very little than standing there.
Generally, American Idol works well in pop culture. It appears to be pop culture because of how much it assumes we know of its structure and personalities. There are many references to other aspects of media: commercial products, sexuality and the nature of sex appeal in American society, format, colors, etc. It captures the attention of the viewer because of the non-scripted nature of the show. "Reality TV" is based on the idea of documentary. It lives off the conflict nature of news, that being the audience doesn't know how it will come out. It works because of America's love of conflict and sexuality.
Here is what I feel Post-modern means
Postmodern theory appears to be a fluid and almost non-descript critical theory. It is almost the antithesis of theory. Postmodern has one look at a subject from the purely surface images and is lacking in any form of "truth" or "meaning" in anything.
A good example the text gives for this kind of form is the 1994 Quentin Tarantino directed movie Pulp Fiction.
Pulp Fiction is described as a surface movie. It strays from conventional movie-making and elements of fiction. The movie draws on forms of fiction and slides in cultural media references that give it a campy feel, but don't detract from the story.
For instance, one of the characters is Vinnie Vega, played by John Travolta. There is a dance portion of the movie where Vinnie is dancing with Mia Wallace (Uma Thurman). The dance is a pure parody or satire of Travolta's role in the 1977 disco film Saturday Night Fever. This scene is interesting for interest sake, nothing more, according to the postmodernist. In addition, a postmodernist approach would find that the mixture of these two fictional pieces in a film would be well done if most of the audience caught on.
I would also say that TV shows such as South Park, Family Guy and The Simpsons take a completely postmodernist approach to their humor, satire or references.
No Truth is The Truth
While most theories look for an overriding truth or meaning, postmodernist theory doesn't. Postmodernists like to mess with narratives and time frames and alternative manners of getting across information. It draws on popular culture. Stories can also be best told to a postmodernist through use of several forms of texts: photos, animation, music, etc.
Surface level
Using a postmodernist lens, one would first ask how clever is the difference from convention. Next, it would be important to look at how well the text works on a surface level. Here, one would look at if the satire works in the present time with only other surface knowledge and does it work in the present in conjunction with other prior knowledge. It may be easiest to think: does this work if I know a lot of trivia? Does this work if I don't? Does it work evenly if I know this and don't know this?
Postmodernist = deconstruction
According to Carleton College's Deborah Appleman: "Deconstruction is, by far, the most difficult critical theory for people to understand. It was developed by some very smart (or very unstable) people who declare that literature means nothing because language means nothing. In other words, we cannot say that we know what the “meaning” of a story is because there is no way of knowing. For example, in some stories (like “Where Are You, Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been”) that do not have tidy endings, you cannot assume you know what happened."
For more of Appleman's definitions, see http://www.carleton.edu/departments/EDST/faculty/Appleman/Handouts/Glasses.html
# posted by Jim @ 9:41 PM 
