Mitchell Hadley's Blog: It's About TV!, page 28

Around the dial

The picture above is of Sinatra Sr. watching Sinatra Jr. on television. Whether it's staged or not, it's still a pretty candid shot. Interesting, isn't it?
My latest appearance on Dan Schneider's Video Interview is up; this month, Dan and I discuss some of the notable (as well as some of the lesser-known) legal dramas on television, and their place within the larger cultural zeitgeist. I also tried to touch on some of the larger socio-political issues raised through these programs, such as the correlation between the law-and-order movement of the late 1960s and the decline of popularity in shows featuring defense attorneys; that alone is worth a show from someone. Anyway, take a listen if you've got a couple of hours.
It's been an appalling week or so for deaths in the world of classic television and movies, and the most recent—such as Bob Newhart—will probably be covered in-depth next week. However, Terence at A Shroud of Thoughts keeps up with this remembrance of Hill Street Blues veteran James B. Sikking , who passed last week at the age of 90, and Beverly Hills 90210 and Charmed actress Shannen Doherty , who died at the far-too-young age of 53. Travalanche remembers the deaths of Dr. Ruth Westheimer and Richard Simmons , who also died this week.
At Comfort TV, David has one of those think pieces I'm so fond of: how dead shopping malls serve as an allegory the state of television today . Both malls and TV rose in the 1950s, offered something for everyone, and now have audiences that are a fraction of what they once were. There's much more to his essay; I urge you all to take a moment to read it.
Jordan returns at The Twilight Zone Vortex with an in-depth look at volume 3, number 5 of The Twilight Zone Magazine , from November/December 1983. There's coverage of the premiere of The Twilight Zone: The Movie, filming Stephen King's Dead Zone, an interview with David Cronenberg, a retrospective on The Outer Limits, and more.
At Cult TV Blog, John reviews " The State of England ," an episode of teh 1971 series The Guardians, which presents an alternative history of England in which the country is ruled by a fascist dictatorship. As you know, I'm partial to these kinds of stories, which—as John points out—almost always rely on a heavy dose of fear. A nasty piece of work.
At Garroway at Large, Jodie celebrates the birthday of the blog , as well as that of the master communicator himself, Dave Garroway. It's an update along with a couple of pictures that continue to give us insight into the early years of Today, and the progression of time on Garroway.
An additional post from Travalanche reminds us that looks can be deceiving, asT he offers a retrospective on the voiceover career of Dallas McKennon , veteran character actor (and Denver Pyle-lookalike) from Westerns like Daniel Boone, Wagon Train, and Bonanza, and voice artist of, among others, Gumby!
And one more from A Shroud of Thoughts that I wanted to touch on: a reminder of the three books that Terence has written , along with information on where to get them. Remember to support your bloggers in all their efforts! TV

View more on Mitchell Hadley's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on July 19, 2024 05:00

To think or not to think

One of the (many) phrases that rubs me the wrong way is someone saying, most likely in an accuseatory manner, "You're overthinking things." It doesn't even have to be aimed at me; it raises my hackles whenever I hear it said or see it written. It carries imbedded within it, in some subtle yet insidious way, the idea that the process of thinking is, in and of itself, something that is to be discouraged.
Now, I know what you're thinking, and it's true that people can sometimes overanalyze things, that they can research something to the point that they enter into a kind of decision paralysis, unable to make up their minds because they're they're drowning in information. But when one is accused of "overthinking," it most often implies that you're devoting your mental energies to something that has been adjudged not worthy of expending your little grey cells. That, in and of itself, displays a kind of arrogance, suggesting that you're a better judge of what's important than they are.
The other day, at one of the Hogan's Heroes message boards I frequent, someone (not me) was speculating about one of the many implausibilities implicit in the show's concept. He was, of course, promptly accused of overthinking things. And while there are times when one has to suspend their own disbelief, not only with Hogan but with many other programs, the thought occurred to me: what, exactly, is wrong with thinking about various aspects of a television show? As long as you're not allowing it to intrude on the pleasure you derive from watching the show, why should you be scolded for "overthinking" it? Isn't it just part of the creative process wired into some people's minds?
Think of it this way: would you ever accuse someone of overthinking War and Peace or The Brothers Karamazov? Would you suggest to a film student that she's overthinking Citizen Kane or 2001? Would you stride into the Louvre and tell someone studying the Mona Lisa that they're overthinking the smile, or try to convince worshippers in the Sistine Chapel that they're overthinking Michelangelo's Last Judgment? They'd probably look at you like you ought to be locked up for such thoughts, and they'd be right. I'm not even sure you can overthink Jackson Pollock. (On the other hand, I might grant you Mark Rothko.)
What I'm trying to say here is that it's absurd to suggest that one can overthink art, whether it's in the form of literature, cinema, painting, sculpture, dance, and the like. Why should we exclude television from that list? Granted, I'm not trying to suggest that a show like Hogan's Heroes belongs in the same classification as, say, East of Eden (there is such a thing as perspective, after all), but it's also foolish to deny that there is an element of art present in the creation of any television program. What that show says, what it signifies, what (if any) messege it intends for the viewer: these are all topics worthy of thought—and, possibly, overthought.
You might recall that a few years ago I wrote about a conversation I had with a Catholic ethicist regarding the treatment of the Just War doctrine in Hogan's Heroes . Now, some of you might consider this a classic example of overthought; it's only a sitcom, after all, a form of entertainment (and a low one, at that). But how many of us accept the things we see on television—not just on Hogan's Heroes, but on any program—without even giving them a second thought? Assassination, lying, physical intimidation, robbery, blackmail: it's all good if it's done in a good cause, right? We don't think about it at all, and over time we can become lazy about it, inured to it, just like the video game players who become so used to their killing games that the sacredness of life itself begins to lose its meaning. I'm not suggesting that television, whether drama or sitcom, should be relied upon to give you a moral education—far from it! But what do we accomplish with our leisure time if we spend it doing things that produce absolutely no thought on our part? Even the most "mindless" entertainment should spur at least a little activity up there, whether it's on the left or right side of your brain. To do otherwise—well, that's just a foreign concept to me.
Over the years, my thoughts, my philosophies, my beliefs: all of them have been influenced, to one degree or another, by programs I've seen on television. Sometimes the impact is minor, no more significant than learning the importance of laughing at yourself; other times, I find myself being challenged to defend long-held opinions after seeing them in a quasi-real world environment, rather than the vacuum of the intellectural laboratory, with the result that I'm either strengthened in that opinion, or open to other ways of thinking about it. Seeing the plight of an innocent man being persecuted on a police procedural or the agonies of soldiers in a war drama should cause you to at least give some thought about these things, even if it's just to ask "what would I do?" in a similar situation.
Again, I'm not advocating that you form your opinions on important issues around what you see on TV, where the dice are often loaded and the issues slanted, but having an awareness of these things, an awareness that perhaps you didn't have before, should at least enter into the equation when you consider them more deeply. Remember the old public service messages on CBS that would run after some dramas or movies, where they provided a list of books in case you wanted to "Read More About It?" That's what I'm talking about.
Of course, some of this is dependant on the willingness of programmers to provide programs containing even the barest of thought-provoking content, and, quite frankly, we should be demanding more from them in terms of how we spend our leisure time. But if that's the case, we should also be demanding more from ourselves. "There’s grace in wrestling with thoughts," a Catholic priest once wrote, and the ancient Greeks believed that leisure was "an active state of mind," a time that included not only sports and physical activities, but "learning music theory, debating qualified peers and doing philosophy. Leisure was not easy, but it was supposed to be gratifying." And as we've seen, even a sitcom like Hogan's Heroes can be the source of a thought-provoking gratification.
Speaking of thoughts, next week I'm going to continue on this train of thought, by looking at one of the most challenging and thought-provoking programs that television has produced, and how it can serve as a model for the way in which we use the programs we watch to stimulate our own thinking, both individually and in a group. TV

View more on Mitchell Hadley's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on July 17, 2024 05:00

What's on TV? Monday, July 17, 1961

We came very close, it would appear, to having a different lede altogether for today, one not nearly as light-hearted; as it is, however, it's business as usual, at least looking at the week's TV listings. And a good thing it is, because today we have one of those wonderful juxtapositions in programming that I'm so fond of, the kind that almost makes you wonder if the local stations conspired to create the effect for TV Guide readers. At 11:25 p.mn., WHIO in Dayton is showing the movie The Devil is a Woman, with May Britt. Meanwhile, at 11:30 p.m., WCPO in Cincinnati has Brigette Bardot in That Naughty Girl. So who do you go with? When it comes to misbehaving, you've got to go with Bardot, right? This unintended humor, as well as the rest of the listings, comes from the Southern Ohio edition.
-2- WLW-D (DAYTON) (NBC, ABC)

MORNING 6:15

FARM OUTLOOK

6:30

SUMMER SESSION

7:00

TODAY—John Chancellor

John Chancellor takes over as permanent host today, replacing Dave Garroway.

Local programming at 7:25 and 8:25