andrewducker | (no subject)

What's interesting, to me, is that the media we have now will never die.  Every year there are a few more pieces of art that are 'classics'.  And we'll always have those to watch/read/listen to/experience.

I have a season of West Wing, one of Six Feet Under, the complete Reginald Perrin, all of This Life and a whole host of other tv waiting to be watched.  Once the whole backlog of TV is available to us on a demand basis, there's almost no need to make any more.

There's no musical genre that someone somewhere isn't churning more out of.  Once something's been created it never dies.  Once you find your taste tribe(s) you'll never run out of recommendations.

Every year more and more art is produced that's a rehash of a previous style, less and less is produced that's in any way original.  Is this because we've explored most of the phase space of human experience?  Has everything from monobloc simplicity to stories so postmodern they seem to be pure static now been attempted?  Is all that's left finetuning?

Or will some other genre pop up next week that makes everyone wonder how we ever lived without it?

Something to look forward to, I guess.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Dude, you so totally need to go read this. Like, right now. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.

Read it before.

And yeah, I despise long-term copyright.

:->

Mefuckingtoo. I adore Spider, though. :)

There will always be a market for new shows/movies, because existing ones always eventually become noticeably outdated... out of style. Even when they're very good, they eventually reflect a bygone past, and people still want to see shows reflecting aspects of their current world, not only of things gone by. Even the idea of something being "new" sometimes makes it preferable to something "old", even when the old one is a classic, and when the new isn't even good enough to ever become a classic.

For music too, old stuff can be very good, yet in one's mind, just knowing that it is old may make it seem to lack the vibrancy of something which was created recently. It may make one feel that one is wallowing in ancient history, a history which no one can really touch anymore and which can't touch one back... as opposed to touching/hearing/feeling something current, something which has the Power of Now... knowing that the people who created the music are still around, making even newer music... knowing that there will be change...

Yup, what he/she said.

I once loved Butterflies, Poldark, Blakes' Seven, Tom baker era Dr Who to name but a few - but if you see them now they look slow and badly produced and silly with bad hair and awful clothes - good for nostalgia but not much else.

Our cutting edge tv will look the same in, oh, five years tops I expect. This is probably even truer of naturalistic dram a than sf/historical, I suspect.

I am also one of these people who likes to pick up new music as it arises and rarely plays "back catalogue". we're not all compulsive collectors/archivists y'know :-)

On a relatd note: I love that I can own, ostensibly forever, copies of the handful of TV shows that I'd actually want to watch again. But now that DVD players are getting cheaper and cheaper, companies are starting to cater to the lowest common denominator. Or perhaps I just feel that way because I'm a cultural snob.

I own box sets of The Prisoner, Angel, The Tick, Mr. Show, The Young Ones ... and I feel no shame in that. But really, am I any better than whoever it is that'll buy "Gilligan's Island: Season One" on DVD? (no, really -- http://tinyurl.com/yrdno )

Well, yes, actually, I am. Or so I'd like to believe.

Well, yes. And TV On Demand will make things even 'worse' as it makes pretty much the entire shitty history of television available to anyone who wants to see what terrible nonsense has been watched.

One man's sponge is another man's cup-cake, bub. Diversity is good, and should be celebrated. The same people you deride for watching what you class as "shitty television", probably think Babylon 5 is the biggest pile of muck yet filmed.

What I'm trying to say is, without people willing to take chances on different things in TV, half of the shows you now know and love wouldn't exist. There's room for everything - that's the beauty of digital media, and TV-on-demand. We can ALL watch our favourite shows, at the same time, without impacting on anyone else. Freedom of choice.

won't tv on demand make it better because you will only watch what you want to watch?

in fact i would have thought it more likely to reduce viewing spectrums to only what you have seen before. you wouldn't be able to channel surf onto a new gem by accident or watch things by accident. much more personal responsibility would be required in seeking out new territories. i feel that music is already like that.

btw this has been going on for hundreds of years, not just this last century.

the 60s looked back to the 20s, who were nostalgic for the victorians. the 18th c enlightenment looked back to the renaissance that was in turn a revitalisation of ancient greek ideals.

the text of the bible can be found in different forms in creation myths and legends that predate it by millenia (epic of gilgamesh and the like)

i am not trying to say something smug like "all culture is relative dude" but we have been rehashing things for fucking ages, and yet we still seem to keep developing. whether that is in a forward direction or not is a matter of opinion.

so yeah, creativity's been working with the same old materials for ages. don't get complacent.

There's the seed of an argument here for shifting the balance away from recorded media and towards live performance; shows that are performed, possibly repeated, but never, ever recorded.