Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Fake Reality

The idea of a reality show initially seemed like a brilliant idea. The general audience was, I think, becoming fairly disenchanted with the fictional nature of most television shows, and so someone (whether it was the writer of the movie "The Truman Show" or one of the day-time talk show hosts) decided to present real life to people.
The execution (and by this I do not, unfortunately, mean "killing" but rather "carrying out") of reality shows has proven to be rather the opposite of this "reality."
The first obvious problem with the idea of reality shows is that, unlike in "The Truman Show," today's (fortunately) unknown individuals are quite aware of the cameras jammed in their faces at all awkward times of the day. This leads inevitably to a great deal of showboating, as displayed in so many shows where conflicts are blown out of proportion and emotions let loose over the most absurd of circumstances (e.g. "Oh. My. Goodness. She totally just used. my. comb. I hate her- I hope she dies. I'm going to ruin her life")
Second, it is quite obvious by this point that, much like the ignominious Jerry Springer, it is quite obvious by this point that reality show heads must be choosing their participants quite purposefully. Your average reality show seems to consist of an ethnically balanced group of young, mostly attractive individuals. The girls are all either immodest/ditzy, immodest/women power, or modest/women power types of people (with the rare addition of a quiet nice girl who's going out with the seemingly nice guy who ends up cheating on her). Guys range from your dirty jock to the nice-ish guy to the player.
All of them tend to portray an average IQ level normally associated with 10 year olds (especially in conflict situations). It is also rather likely that, like Jerry Springer, the "reality show" folks are encouraged, if not contracted, to start fights and cheat on each other. After all, "reality" might be far more boring.
This is all, of course, saying nothing of such gems of ideas as "Hey let's put these 4 married couples on an island and keep setting up scenarios where we try to get them to cheat on each other," or Big Brother's idea of cramming a bunch of either rich and "ghetto" girls and boys into a mansion and letting them hash things out.

The question might be posed, then- if reality shows fail to portray reality- or at least what most of experience as reality- then why do they have such a widespread appeal?
I have an opinion which I haven't researched (preferring to ignore reality shows on the whole) but which seems to make sense:
Reality shows provide not only the escapism of any TV show (no matter how lame); they also provide validation and relative-worth-association options. Since reality shows purport to portray "real life individuals," the events and personal expressions of the people we watch on TV can provide a couple of very helpful services to us. If an individual has the same character flaws as I do, but seems to lead a good life anyway, I receive validation for my character flaws (more often known as "sins"). If somebody is just a scumbag on the show, I get the opportunity to cast myself against their monstrous shadow and, by association, paint a pretty character of myself to myself and others. After all, I may have dumped so-and-so, but at LEAST I didn't cheat with Helga (as if there would be someone named Helga on a reality show) first like Scott did.
Again, the ability to validate and paint ourselves in the perspective of the characters on a reality show is much more powerful because, as the TV networks tell us, what we're seeing is "real life" and "real people."
This is the same sort of power I think the daily talk shows previously had, but reality shows are much more "in the moment," and they're also dressed up with story-lines and plot twists as opposed to the public-confession-booth style employed by talk shows.

When it comes down to it, escapism itself is not a bad thing. If it was, fiction in general would not be Christian. However, escapism which not only lies to the audiences but also promotes a general lack of morality through validation and attempts to paint the world in ways that make our sins seem normal is not okay. It is an abuse of God's creation, art in general, and it is a waste of whatever bits of talent are employed in the industry. It's time for us to turn our backs on reality shows and wake up to the reality of life around us.

2 comments:

  1. I agree with you concerning most reality T.V. shows, but are you not forgetting shows such as amazing race? I'm not sure if those are considered to be reality T.V. shows, but I always thought they were. And, if that is the case, it seems to me that a different explanation for these shows must be offered. I would suggest that these shows are a way for people to imagine themselves as being able to achieve something great. It is the braveheart syndrome brought to life in that we get to watch real people do real things.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't think Amazing Race counts technically- it's really more of a game show, much like Fear Factor, Deal or No Deal (AKA "look at the models we paid to stand here") and the like.
    Survivor, on the other hand, is some sort of sick and dying hybrid of the two, but after fumbling with game-showiness in the first season they took the full plunge into reality show + exotic surroundings + bathing suits for all the following seasons.
    Game shows I generally don't have a problem with- except of course such things as the objectification of women and the transformation of some game shows into drawn-out gambling sessions (again, Deal or No Deal) which take no skill to win.

    ReplyDelete