Elizabeth
White, author of “Aristotle, drama and the craft of reality TV” claims that
Aristotle is the main reasons that reality TV shows exist today. She states that
Aristotle found the answer to the question “What makes a play work?” The answer
is Character matters, gimmicks and the plot. These essential elements are what
it takes to keep the audience engaged and coming back for more. She brings up
the show “Survivor” as being the main show to bring all three elements
together.
Her first
point she brings up is Character matters, a show without problems between
characters is like watching paint dry, it’s boring and nobody gets into it. The
problems created between characters gives the audience a chance to pick a side
or character that they like and cheer for them to win while hoping the other
loses. If there were no teams on the game of survivor and everyone was just
playing for themselves (even though that’s how it ends up) it wouldn’t be as
entertaining to the viewers, you wouldn’t be able to pick out the villains or
good guys and root for them throughout. Another example she brings up is the
MTV show “Real World” this show is literally pointless without problems between
roommates and fights that break out. Every season they are brought to a huge,
beautiful house and they always end up trashing the place and some people
trying to rip each other’s heads off, and that’s what keeps the viewer’s coming
back. More problems, more views in the producers eyes.
Elizabeth’s
second point of why reality shows stay alive is gimmicks, “Gimmicks are a
necessary evil” says white. A gimmick is a game or challenge that the players
are put through in order to move on to the next round. When the players on
survivor are put through challenges, which is just another way of getting
viewers to watch and stay interested. Another gimmick is telling an emotional
story about a certain character just so the audience will feel badly for that
character and see how he or she does in the next episodes. However, white does
say that too many gimmicks is a bad thing! If there are too many games or
loopholes that the characters have to go through it just makes it too
complicated to follow and in the end the show loses views, for example the show
“The Mole” you probably have never heard of it because it only lasted one
season, why so short? The show was filled with games inside of games and the
audience couldn’t keep up with it and the ratings went down.
The final
point that White makes is Plot, perhaps the most important of them all. The
plot of the show at hand is arguably the most important reason viewers keep
coming back. Watching a show about people surviving on a tropical island with
no interaction with other people besides the ones on the island, and having to
use their surroundings to survive is a great way to draw people in. Liz says
that “Real people n real time are boring” and she lists the NBA and NFL as
examples of being boring. I strongly disagree with that because the amount of
people that watch sports on TV such as the NFL and NBA surpasses the number of
people that watch reality shows by far. Yes there isn’t much of a plot when it
comes to sports but it is still very entertaining and people keep coming back
to watch their favorite teams. The producers of these reality shows often
create the plot themselves by going through hours and hours of film and cutting
out certain pieces to make a story come together to capture the attention of
the viewers. These directors are almost like authors themselves except it is a
show not a book.
All in all,
I do agree with Elizabeth White on certain things such as the three basic
elements to a reality TV show and what gets people to keep coming back. Other
things such as sports being boring and Aristotle being the genius behind the
entire reality TV department I don’t agree with as it is a little farfetched.
After reading both the article and blog, I agree and disagree with both Eric and Elizabeth White. The article claims that Aristotle, although not his intention, is the man who should be credited behind reality televion shows. Elizabeth goes on to use Aristotle’s book about how to make a play work, “Poetics,” to support her argument and present the three major focuses of reality tv shows. I agree with both Eric and Elizabeth that the three basic elements to a tv show are characters, gimmicks, and the plot. However, I also disagree that Aristotle is the one who was the creator, if you will, of the start of reality television. I believe that he wrote about the key elements that makes a common story but did not specifically write the basics of a reality tv show.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point, Tyler, that Aristotle is not the creator of reality television. Though Aristotle may have listed some key factors that make for an interesting story, this was obviously not meant to be applied to a form of entertainment that was not even created for thousands of years. Having an interesting plot, characters, and conflicts do indeed make for interesting programs that attract many viewers. However saying Aristotle is a major reason reality shows took off is very farfetched. Credit is definitely due to the producers, writers, and other people who helped create the first reality TV shows. Whoever came up with the first reality show that really took off and put reality TV on the map is the person who should be considered the main reason reality shows exist today. I don't understand the point in creating nonsensical connections between scholars of the past and contemporary things such as television shows.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Tyler said about Aristotle writing the key elements to a common story but not with specificity to reality television shows. In my opinion, most reality shows don’t even meet those three criteria. The plots of these shows are completely reliant on the character matters. There is no separation between the two. Elizabeth said “Real World” is literally pointless without character matters but that directly contradicts her point that these shows possess all three elements that Aristotle came up with. The basic “plot” for almost any reality show on air today consists of a group of people living together, arguing, forming alliances with one another, later betraying each other, and participating in challenges. Some shows will promise finding “love” or requiring contestants to “survive.” Hopefully viewers actually understand that none of that is real. For example, Michael Skupin burnt his hands in a fire on Survivor: Outback and was immediately air lifted out of the game and taken to a hospital. I do not mean to be cynical by pointing this out but rather show that Survivor is simply a typical reality show which has been moved to a more exotic setting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AlkGHOuxkQ I think Tosh is too hard on our country as a whole in this segment from his stand up “Completely Serious,” but he makes a good point about the show/game Survivor. The producers make it a game worth a million dollars to survive for 30 days where people already are and have been living for years. The contestants are also given beginning supplies and have constant support from the production crew. My point is that even the shows that seem to have a slightly different “plot” from the rest of them, are still identical in basic structure. Therefore, reality television shows don’t fit into Aristotle’s three elements of a play because their “plots” are totally reliant on their character matters and gimmicks.
ReplyDeleteAristotle is generally thought to be the mind behind various subjects, including certain ideologies of literature and story-telling, driven by plot, character, and gimmicks. Though we cannot credit Aristotle for reality television per se, he may have been involved as the attributing factor that led to leading theories on modern story telling and production of pieces in which reality television would fall under said context. When analyzed you can clearly see what Elizabeth White is attempting to get at with her article. It is true that character conflict and plot devices are what lead an audience into attraction, while gimmicks add extra "meat" and "flavor" to the productions. Look into reality television and these devices are evident in most shows on air today and in the recent past. To add to the sports comments, clearly every season denotes some sort of plot of its own. We have "Cinderella teams", returning champions, player conflicts, coach and player backgrounds; weekly, monthly, and annual progression, etc. Aristotle was right when it came to these three rules in "What Makes a Play Work".
ReplyDeleteThe three main components that make a reality television show are character, gimmicks, and plot. Every reality television show has at least one of these. IN A&E's Storage Wars, there are plots and gimmicks, but there is not enough detail about the character. We know what the character does, and who he is, but why should I care that he got stuck with a bad storage unit? Producers need to add drama between characters in order to keep the reality show a success, which is why unnecessary drama is added to shows. Every show has a gimmick, and while they can be entertaining, the gimmicks in television shows are also unnecessary. These three components are necessary in order for a reality television show to work, which is why a majority of them are fake or scripted.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.vulture.com/2013/03/why-major-networks-cant-make-new-reality-hits.html
There is nothing like watching an interesting show with two smokin' hot Betty's who have a problem with each other, while stranded on planet Neptune... Oh wait, that pretty much sums up most of the shows on MTV (minus Neptune). From the looks of it there is a mathematical formula: (good looking people)+(gimmick)+(unrealistic plot..for reality television?) = $$$. Maybe this is not what I should have taken from this article but this is what jumped out at me, how producers pretty much have a "Recipe" for a successful show. As for Aristotle, of course he is synonymous with reality television everyone knows that, this is why the Greeks named him "Grandfather of Modern Reality Television."
ReplyDeleteElizabeth White’s claim that Aristotle is the reason reality shows have succeeded is true in my opinion. At the same time, any major book, television show, and movie all have character matters, gimmicks, and a plot. A lot of these reality shows are very scandalous so people continue to watch them. A lot of books, tv shows, and movies are scandalous as well so people continue to read and watch them. Producers, authors, and anyone a part of the entertainment industry are smart because they know viewers want to experience the highs and lows with the cast or characters and that makes for successful entertainment. I also do agree with your opinion that Aristotle is not the sole reason that the entertainment industry has done well and continues to produce revenue. There are many more factors that come into play for a producer and Aristotle should not be getting all of the credit.
ReplyDeleteThis idea that Aristotle created should be compared to literature in general, not specifically reality television. Elizabeth White doesn't seem to mention any comparison between this concept and written literature; and although she mentions this idea influencing theatre, she never comments on any sort of theatre production. Without these, it seems as though she is assuming the character development of "The Mole" from Survivor is greater than that of someone as influential as Hamlet. If you were to remove this "mole" from the show Survivor, you would still have a show of people living on an "abandoned" island. Where as, if you were to remove Hamlet's existential crises, it would have changed the entire plot of the play. It's also interesting to point out that if White is analyzing the character development of reality television, which are supposed to be shows about real people, shouldn't there not even be character development?
ReplyDeletePerhaps, I just don't understand the context of this article. Why would someone compare Aristotle to reality television?
DeleteBecause he is the reason reality television exists, duh. Read the article.
DeleteI agree with Taylor about being completely confused on Aristotle being named the "Grandfather of Modern Reality Television". They have nothing in common. That's like comparing my little sister's favorite show, Dance Moms (dear god help humanity) to real team parents. Playing Varsity lacrosse for 4 years, there was a lot of competition between players to be on the starting line up each week. The players respected each other and held secret gripes while the parents were all supportive and cheering for each other's kids. It's hard for me to believe that these moms are getting into cat fights over trash talking each other and their children. People watch reality television because they either are interested in the outcome (storage wars) or want to feel better about their own lives (jersey shore). Shows like Jersey shore and Dance Moms shouldn't even be aired in my opinion, their bad role models on how people are suppose to act in public and with each other.
ReplyDeleteThe connections between Aristotle's components of a play and modern reality television did make a little sense, but it's a little ridiculous to say that he is the reason why it exists. In addition, these guidelines don't apply to all reality shows. What is the gimmick for Jersey Shore? Granted, I haven't watched it but I doubt theres some challenge their trying to complete throughout the series. Aristotle was just highlighting key elements of entertainment in general, and I'm sure his idea of "character" wasn't throwing some obnoxious, overpriveleged people into a house and film them as they argue.
ReplyDeleteI can see how interesting characters, gimmicks, and a good plot are all incorporated into reality tv shows. I don't think all three parts are necessarily needed for there to be a reality tv show but in the majority of the top rated ones, I can see how the three parts are incorporated in the tv show. I think gimmicks are most frequently used in game and talent shows where the audience has some effect on the outcome of the show. On singing competition shows such as X factor and American Idol, gimmicks are heavily used when the contestant has a sob story to tell. On the UK version of X Factor, the contestant, Sam Bailey, who although ended up winning the show that season, accused the producers of the show for favoring the sob stories rather than the actual singing talent. Because of the effectiveness of using gimmicks to get votes, many contestants make up a fake sob story and that is when it is taking it too far.
ReplyDeletehttp://metro.co.uk/2013/12/15/sam-bailey-accuses-x-factor-producers-of-favouring-sob-stories-over-real-talent-4231062/