No longer the "idiots lantern"

There is a stigma that comes with TV programs that, I think, is mostly unfair. The idea of “the idiot’s lantern” that regulates television to being a time waster for lazy people is outdated. And yet, some people still proudly declare their ignorance of anything displayed on the silver screen.

These people are so frustrating to me because no other medium is rejected with such pride. You don’t hear hipsters smugly stating “I don’t watch films” or “I don’t own any books.” While there might have been a time to differentiate between the artistic and intellectual differences between these mediums, that time is past.

We, as viewers and as a society, are currently enjoying what could be considered a golden age of television. The stories are more complex and compelling, and there are more distributors than ever before. Our television is more expensive, more pensive and more entertaining, and yet it is still being denied the credit it deserves.

No other medium is going through the cultural renaissance that television is currently experiencing. The quality of movies — generally considered to have intellectual and cultural value by the same pseudo-intellectuals who throw shade on television — has actually gone down in recent years with influxes of sequels and clichés. On the other hand, television is the most widely used media device in the United States.

Perhaps it is this mainstream appeal that repels some people. But willfully ignoring such a large and stimulating aspect of culture does not make a person seem impossibly intellectual, posh and busy. It just makes them out of touch.

Shows like “House of Cards” and “Game of Thrones” are offering engaging social commentaries on our political system and the drug-like effects of power on the human psyche, respectively. By choosing to not to engage in this conversation, people miss relevant observations about the world around them and are left behind. They are also missing out on some incredible entertainment.

The idea of entertainment for entertainment’s sake is perhaps another reason people hold disdain for the medium. These people should keep in mind that even intellectual darlings like Shakespeare were considered low culture in their time.

It offers the longest exposure time to interesting and complicated characters, like Walter White and Don Draper, giving the audience more time to digest, dissect and draw conclusions in a way that is impossible in a two-hour time frame. Its timely creation and distribution spanning multiple years also gives it the ability to reflect real time cultural issues with commentary.

On top of its political, social and cultural affects, it is also really fun to watch. So when I make a simple reference, and someone hoping to seem smarter than me smugly replies, “Oh, I don’t watch television,” they should know that I’m not impressed. That person hasn’t excluded themselves from the vapid entrapments of lesser folk, but instead revealed themselves to be hopelessly removed from the very thing they are trying to project — culture.

jordrile@indiana.edu
@RiledUpIDS