|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891 |
>>>>I'm not afraid of "the man" collecting data on my tv watching habits.
Do they really check what you are recording on tivo (Illico in Québec)?
Sheesh, they must think Hubby and I have the most disparate tastes.
O.T. I really enjoy having Illico. I love documentaries but they don't always play when I feel like watching. Being able to record them means I can watch them any time I want.
Last edited by belMarduk; 04/24/06 11:22 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 72
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 72 |
I am, of course, preaching to the choir regarding books. I dare say the monthly, if not weekly, consumption of books by awad fans could fill large libraries. I just wish intelligent people weren't so down on tv. You can actively watch tv. TV doesn't just happen. Clever formulas are used, obscure references made(even on the WB!). Now, how can fans of Holmes not enjoy a little House every now and then? And then there are poorly written shows (Prison Break) with a million plot holes I personally enjoy catching. That's not even diving into cable or the brainier channels.
Just sayin'.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,055
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,055 |
...
The nearest analogy to the addictive power of television and the transformation of values that is wrought in the life of the heavy user is probably heroin. Heroin flattens the image; with heroin, things are neither hot nor cold; the junkie looks out at the world certain that what ever it is, it does not matter. The illusion of knowing and of control that heroin engenders is analogous to the unconscious assumption of the television consumer that what is seen is 'real' somewhere in the world. In fact, what are seen are the cosmetically enhanced surfaces of products. Television, while chemically non-invasive, nevertheless is every bit as addicting and physiologically damaging as any other drug...
Most unsettling of all is this: the content of television is not a vision but a manufactured data stream that can be sanitised to 'protect' or impose cultural values. Thus we are confronted with an addictive drug that delivers an experience whose message is whatever those who deal the drug wish it to be. Could anything provide a more fertile ground for fostering fascism and totalitarianism?...
Television induces a trance state in the viewer that is the necessary precondition for brainwashing. As with all other drugs and technologies, television's basic character cannot be changed...
[p.p. 218-220, T. McKenna, Bantam, 1992. ISBN 0-553-37130-4]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 72
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 72 |
I personally find music to be the food of the gods. A good rock star has way more influence over me than a tv show.
I often don't agree with the political/secular undertones of tv, so I believe I'm maybe more alert than other viewers who might feel validated by what they are watching. It's more fun for me to say, for example, "ooh, did you see the way the writer just completely misrepresented the Patriot Act?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
Great quote, by. In case anyone imagines this is a cross-pond issue it ain't - some of my entertainment highlights in the last year or so have included smart shows from the USA like '6 Feet Under' and Serenity. No-one can doubt there are good, sometimes superb TV programmes made. Conversely, no-one in full command of their powers of observation and independant reasoning can doubt this fact: that the overwhelming tidal wave of TV output is mind-sapping drivel delivered to the lowest common denominator of commercial expediency. > can actively watch tv. TV doesn't just happen. Very true, and I'm sympathetic to your approach. Trouble is, I don't think you are adequately conveying the addictive power of the medium. After all, if this was not true how do you think the advertising industry would have grown so fat on the endless 'profits of doom'? I know I have frequently started out 'in full control' to watch Programme A and ended up surfing to Programme Z. In belli's context, this boast of being in control of the box can sound uncomfortably reminiscent of any other substance abuser, don't you think? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379 |
Quote:
after all, a book is the same when I read it as it is when you read it and it is even more solitary than watching tv.
A book is not even the same when I read it and when I read it.
***
Mozart/Rap. I guess I fundamentally don't understand the comparison: I don't know how you would say one was better, worse or equal. I prefer tomatoes to post hole diggers, except when I'm building fences.
**
Great passage, reb.
**
In truth, I lean toward Mav's position on television.
But I don't think much of Six Feet Under.
And I don't think (TV) *can* be anything much different than what it already is, but worse.
And that is a statement about television, not about people who watch television.
***
I can't recommend enough Richard Pryor's comeback movie, the routine about his relationship with his crack pipe.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819 |
Even the most educational programming in terms of content is delivered via a medium that affects the brain adversely. A highly informative show on the history of Henry VIII, for example, might have frequent "cuts" where the camera changes angles. This conditions the brain to nearly constant visual stimulation unlike reading, which relies on constant mental stimulation to make the reader produce the images in their own head. So you could learn something about Henry VIII, but your brain would be conditioned just a little bit for the worse, making your faculties less sharp than the scholars whose work originally provided the material for the program. Of course a single hour doesn't do grave harm, especially not if you're motivated to turn off the tv and read more about Henry VIII in this case. But when I fall into the lazy habit of vegging out to the History Channel all Sunday afternoon, I'm not doing my brain much good, although perhaps it has value merely as a relaxation technique.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210 |
> cuts
how about a museum?
formerly known as etaoin...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 72
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 72 |
I see your points. Merely trying to provide possible solutions to channel flipping and got soap box, side-tracked.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891 |
Even the most educational programming in terms of content is delivered via a medium that affects the brain adversely. A highly informative show on the history of Henry VIII, for example, might have frequent "cuts" where the camera changes angles. This conditions the brain to nearly constant visual stimulation unlike reading, which relies on constant mental stimulation to make the reader produce the images in their own head.
I don't know about that point - it doesn't seem right to me. If you slam television because of the constant visual stimulation, then you'd have to slam every play that involves a lot of action.
For example, I've seen plays where people are coming in from all angles, things are dropping from the sky, loud banging and sounds are also being blasted from different places. LOTS of visual stimulation there.
And why is a lot of visual stimulation bad for you? Why is it bad for your brain?
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,315
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
263
guests, and
2
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
