Ken Tucker's Watching TV
A good thing, since he's a TV critic for Entertainment Weekly. Since returning from from a stint as movie critic at New York magazine, Tucker has contributed to ew.com, but now he's doing a daily blog for the site. The premise: Tucker watches TV every night. Then he writes about what he watched. Simplicity itself.
I was happy to see it, because Ken's been one of my favorite critics since before I was a TV critic myself. But it's also an example of how a new medium has, ironically, revived an old way of doing criticism.
Long ago, before the widespread use of screeners, TV critics would most often review shows after they aired. (In Britain, for some reason, this is still much more common practice.) Now print critics more commonly preview shows for an audience that hasn't seen them yet.
These are two different concepts of how criticism works and what it's for: is it a consumer service that gives practical advice on how to spend money and time, or is it a form of analysis that sheds light on an experience you've already had? Is it a platform for someone to hand down the first opinion by dint of privileged access, or a forum for people to agree or disagree from a standpoint of equal information?
Ironically, some print journos claim that new media have dumbed down discourse, but by bringing back the idea of critiquing works after they've come out, blogs have helped restored the idea that criticism is something more than a buyer's guide—that discussing a work has value, maybe even more value, even after you've shelled out for a ticket or spent a couple hours of your life.
I'll take Ken's thoughts before or after any day, so I'm glad to bookmark him.
-
1
I remember having that conversation with my professor 20 years ago during a class on film criticism: should reviews serve as a consumer alert, or as a discussion for an audience already familiar with the material? The best answer I could come up with was "why not both?" -- with Pauline Kael sitting on one end of the spectrum and daily newspaper critics on the other.
Today dailies are firing critics left and right, and the demarcation line seems to have moved to blogs-versus-print. I write film reviews for a chain of weekly newspapers, and I long ago abandoned the delusion that I had the opportunity in that medium to shape viewing habits in any significant way. For Tucker (or even you, James), the traditional weekly print deadline -- and the resultant readership cycle -- means that even when you publish a pre-view of a televised event, many readers will have already seen (or chosen to not see) the show by the time they put eyes to ink.
Blogs, on the other hand, offer immediacy that even daily papers couldn't match. (I like your system of using your blog to preview a show today and deconstruct it tomorrow.) Tucker's blog idea does sound interesting, and I'll follow it -- but there's a counter-intuitiveness to the exercise that sounds almost decadent, like using iTunes to listen to player piano music rolls. That all by itself could make it interesting; Tucker's considerable reviewing skills will help too.
-
2
Agreed re: consumer alert and post-airing deconstruction - they're two sides of the same coin, I find both useful in different ways. I appreciate warnings about what shows to avoid, because it lets me be more efficient about which shows I try out. Over the past couple of years, I've come to rely heavily on this blog for pointers about upcoming/new shows. Then, I very much look forward to the discussion groups the next day, because getting to discuss it with the group adds so much to the enjoyment of any given series.
-
3
Criticism (for tv/movies) should almost never be used as a consumer alert. Definitely not for television, there's no reason. Just spend an hour finding out for yourself. And when it comes to movies, I would never let a critic sway me into not watching a movie. In fact, I'd hate to be looking forward to a movie, and have a negative review dampen the experience. I'd only let critics talk me into watching a movie, especially an obscure one.
-
4
Interesting topic.
.
Seems to me the traditional-academic critic's role has been unfortunately reduced to more or less attempts to instruct a 'naive' or 'less astute' spectator of art how to have a 'true' aesthetic experience. Basically, predigest the piece's (TV show/film's) meaning for the general public and spare the spectator the effort of engaging in or trying to perceive what the artist's original intent was/is.
.
The hoity-toity connotation aside, I do appreciate a TV critic's heads-up on kitsch. But if a show's premise sounds interesting, I'll make an effort to check it out, since as it were, I am master of my own aesthetic experience, regardless of how enticing JP or K-Tuk's POV is
.
Incidentally, I'm enjoying Ken Tucker's new blog. Old school snark makes a comeback in new media TV criticism? Nice. -
5
"since as it were, I am master of my own aesthetic experience..."
The thing is, I think this is how a lot of critics see it too. By which I mean "me," at least. I've always said that the least interesting part of being a TV critic is pronouncing whether a show is good or not, saying whether you should watch it or not or telling you how to receive it. I mean, yeah, if there's a great show I think gets too little attention, I'd like to throw some viewers its way. But I think writing about why a show or a phenomenon is interesting, how it plays off of or answers or corresponds its predecessors, or reflects something else happening in life--that's more worthwhile than putting a thumb up or down on it. I doubt many critics write with the expectation, or even desire, that people will follow their orders, though that's often the perception people have.
And I think it's cool that, for all the potential new media have to turn criticism into something quantifiable (e.g., the star ratings at Amazon), it's also made more room for criticism (or just "opinion" if you want to use the non-fancy word) that isn't consumerist-oriented.
-
6
JP, the way I see it, there are 3 forces influencing (for good or bad) current aesthetic discourse: 1) A co-dependent relationship between the general public and media professionals (reviewers, journos, PR depts etc.) 2) The omniscient 'corporate' stakeholders (sponsors, studios, networks)3) A ravenous hunger for information in the collective.
.
Like you say, TV critics might not (in general) be premeditatively attempting to influence viewers' watching habits, but that's how it plays out. Your particular brand of criticism is refreshing since it balances your professional viewpoint with your obvious passion for the medium. Kudos to "... writing about why a show or a phenomenon is interesting, how it plays off of or answers or corresponds its predecessors, or reflects something else happening in life...". For this, a whole bunch of us keep tuning in to Tuned-- um, to this blog.
.
Nevertheless, the profession has been infiltrated by baser motivations. -
7
[...] | Comments (0) | Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email This After putting up my post about Ken Tucker's new blog, I had an e-mail exchange with a fellow critic about the value of writing about shows after the [...]
-
8
[...] of kooky over there, not gleaming pretty like the hard copy magazine), so it wasn’t until Time’s James Poniewozik reported on his blog did I learn about Ken Tucker’s Watching TV blog on EW.com; Tucker’s blog seems pretty [...]
- poniewozik Loved the season. Mrs Tuned In wd have put u on the main list RT @boredtodeath Thank u for incl us in Time's Top 10. We'll take hon mention. - 8 hours ago
- poniewozik @carr2n Virgin is the best, LAX-JFK - 9 hours ago
- poniewozik Did NPR interview abt multiscreen multitasking. After, automatically reached for iPhone in pocket. Like don draper wd have for cigarettes. - 10 hours ago
Most Popular »
- Sex and 'The Saboteur': Dev Talks Nudity in New Game
- My Life as a "Science Fetishist"
- Top 10 Shows of 2009: The Best, and the Rest
- CNN Poll: Man Made Global Warming Takes a Hit
- A Jobs Speech with Elbows
- War of the Supermen: Q&A With Matt Idelson
- The Top 10 Games of 2009
- Best of the Decade: Sci-Fi Movies
- The PlayStation Turns 15, We Reminisce
- CT Sen Poll: Dodd Trailing All Foes
- That Viral Thing: Facebook's Secret Code
- The Truth Behind the Leaked Climate-Change E-Mails
- College Degrees More Expensive, Worth Less in Job Market
- Mexico Witness Protection: Corrupt Program, New Killings
- Helicopter Parents: The Backlash Against Overparenting
- Taiwan: World's Lowest Birthrate Could Affect Society
- India's Friends: Dinner in the U.S., Dessert in Moscow
- Afghanistan War Surge: Might the Taliban Compromise Now?
- How Strong Is the Evidence Against Amanda Knox?
- U.S. Doesn't Know Where bin Laden Is; Time to Let Go
Quotes of the Day »
RSS