Wednesday, October 2, 2013

Art vs. Entertainment



Whoever controls the media, the images, controls the culture.
                                              Allen Ginsberg

 

 

                 The zeitgeist in America is held in high esteem, and is quite an eclectic collection of things. Last week, the finale of Breaking Bad seemed to be followed by almost everyone, and those who hadn’t seen it where brushed aside as uneducated and uninformed cultural refugees. Everyone was talking about it, tweeting about it, interviewing the cast and crew, counting down and spoiler alerting like mad. Breaking Bad, with all its writing quality and savvy storytelling represents the pinnacle of American television culture right now, maybe ever. People were sad to see it go, because to have something so well-crafted and intelligent to watch every week was comforting in both the act of watching it and the knowledge that it was there.

                Yet I remember a time when the most talked about thing on television was six orange idiots walking around a boardwalk in New Jersey, romanticizing pettiness and objectification, pouring moronic ideals into our minds about nothing that mattered. Jersey Shore to me represented everything that was wrong with American society in today’s day and age, and although I do appreciate that it was viewed through different lenses by different people, there is no way that it didn’t damage the outlook of some.  

                Now, there is a section of the audiences of these two television programs that actually cross over. There are people that consumed the Jersey Shore from its first episode to its last that could tell you the name of every Breaking Bad character and their respective cast member. That is to say, it is unfair to judge the intelligence of an audience based on the intelligence of a show. There is however, a difference, in my mind, between art and entertainment. While art can be entertaining, I don’t believe entertainment, done for its own sake, can be artistic.

                These two television shows illustrate this perfectly, because while cases can be made for both shows being entertaining, only one could be considered an artistic achievement.

                Now, perhaps it is unfair to compare the two just because they are both presented on the same medium. One is perhaps meant to be pulpy and shallow, the other, not so much. But maybe that is one of the many great purposes pieces of art like Breaking Bad and its ilk can serve, it can be a bounty hunter of drivel, it can elevate the consciousness of its viewers to the point where the next time the media tries to serve them up a “Teen Mom” or a “Two and a Half Men” they look upon it with distaste and ask for something better.

 

Television shows can only survive if they are watched, and if we ask for something more as a culture, it will be produced.

1 comment:

  1. To be popular art must be entertaining and accessible, but entertainment to achieve the same does not need to be art.

    But sometimes base entertainment can masquerade as art.

    People think Nicholas Sparks is art, people are not correct.

    ReplyDelete