American culture lacks centrality. Even though I don’t think this is a bad thing, there’s no denying the nostalgic longing for certain commonalities of the past. In the schoolyard on Monday mornings in the 80’s, my classmates and I were discussing the Saturday morning cartoons. For my parents’ generation, the corollary was The Ed Sullivan Show. Now, there is rarely—if ever—a common and sustaining media event that we are collectively a part of—either on a national scale, or as part of a sub-group. The closest thing recently might be Obama’s victory speech. However, I must admit that I watched it on the internet, after the fact, with an interactive transcript of the speech that I had to ignore, because I wanted to pretend that it was live. I have two young children, so I went to sleep early on election night. But if I didn’t have complete confidence that the cultural events would be stored on the internet, I would have stayed up, and watched with my fellow Americans. I mentioned that I think the lessening of a centrality in our culture is a good thing. Because so much of our media is now collectible, and easily portable, it all becomes very much like a newspaper. With newspapers, you can be sure that millions of people will read it today, but on their own schedule. We lose out on the romantic notion of false togetherness—that we were watching at the same time. But, we pick up on a very old and important value in our culture: independence. Can You Hear Me Now: Where we Americans Roam for “connectivity” in Pdf format
Even still, there are TV shows and the people who watch them. It’s just that the when and how of it all makes the single event of the show disappear. Michael Z. Newman, in a post on his blog zigzigger, titled “Notes on Cult Films and New Media Technology”, makes the distinction between “ephemeral media and collectible media.” Essentially, because we no longer have to wait for a show, movie, song, or any form of media to be there—or because we don’t have to make a place in our schedule to be there for it—that relationship that we have with these things has fundamentally shifted. Newman explains this in relation to the increasingly mainstream nature of cult films. To put it simply, cult films are less culty because it’s so easy for any of us to be a part of it.
One of my favorite words has always been “esoteric.” What is esoteric isn’t completely gone, but the moment, the fact that we “had to be there,” is dwindling. Anyone who was alive in the 60’s has that moment: when JFK was assassinated. People who didn’t know each other at the time can now discuss where they were, when they found out. This is a form of national bonding.
But the national moments of bonding are few and far between by their very nature. There must be an event so significant that all of us believe it is a national moment—that’s a tall order. On the Banterer the post, why did the chicken cross the road is a witty stab at the absurdity of a common question answered by several national and even historical figures. That there would be one thing that we all connect to and respond to is profound, absurd, funny, and unlikely all at once.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Can You Hear Me Now: Where we Americans Roam for “connectivity”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
Rather than connectivity, what we lack is collectivity: the necessity to do things together, in the same place and time. This provides freedom of choice, movement, distance... but sometimes the most magical moments happen when we are collective. The communitas that Victor Turner was talking about :)
Post a Comment