As our 3rd Critic on the Spot, we welcome Matthew Gilbert, television critic for the Boston Globe. Among the shrines at which he has worshipped during his tenure: The Sopranos, Freaks and Geeks, Six Feet Under, Scrubs, Lost and The Office. He has written celebrity and author interviews for the Globe, served as literary and managing editor at Boston Review, clerked at a number of local bookstores, and gotten his MA in Literature. He has had other jobs and assignments, too, but he can no longer remember them because TV has destroyed his brain. Today's question comes from John Yearley.
Q:
Everyone bemoans the state of our culture today, the supposed "dumbing down" of America. How then do we explain the fact that TV (that most populist of mediums) is in such a phenomenal renaissance? TV is so superior to film these days it's barely worth comparing. "The Wire", "The Sopranos", and "Deadwood" strike me as not only three of the greatest things ever shown on television, but as three of the most powerful works of art created in my lifetime. "Mad Men" shows signs of being every bit as good. Even "Will & Grace", while hardly earth-shattering, was a hundred times better-written than the average Hollywood romantic comedy.
What do you think happened? And given the fact that all of the shows I mentioned except "Mad Men" are gone now, do you think the renaissance is coming to an end?
A:
I love this question, because I think it gets at an ongoing polarization and fragmentation in American culture, and the way TV reflects and accommodates that. Like it or not, TV is almost always the finger on the pulse.
The dumb do seem to get dumber and more base (no political analogies allowed; OK, allowed, required). That takes form on TV as an onslaught of reality shows that celebrate the worst in human nature, as well as brainless, retro sitcoms such as “According to Jim” that reinforce gender stereotypes. Also: Jerry Springer-ism, Nancy Grace-ism, Bill O’Reilly-ism.
And that stuff gets a lot of eyes.
But the smart seem to get smarter and more savvy and sophisticated. On TV, that has meant an amazing collection of dramas and comedies that represent some of the best storytelling of our time.
I agree on the shows you mentioned, and I would add to that list “The Shield,” “Dexter,” “Lost,” “Arrested Development,” big segments of “Rescue Me” and “Rome,” miniseries such as “The Corner” and “Bleak House,” and more. Some of them are genre pieces, bu t nonetheless revelatory. And there are scads of really strong documentaries in the mix, too, amid all the history-channel footage regurgitation. And they continue to arrive, if not at quite the level of “The Sopranos” or “The Wire.”
The smart stuff is less popular, of course; that’s always and forever. Even “The Sopranos” at its biggest couldn’t touch “American Idol” in the ratings. But that doesn’t matter so much anymore, as cable has enabled so many niche markets. Smaller, more intelligently crafter series can survive and thrive. And they do, and will. No one has to dumb them down to bring in big numbers.
Related point: the perfecting of home media, an increase in computer-related insularity, discomfort with public venues, and the obsessive marketing of movies to teens.
