Sloganeering.Org
home | archive | about | site policies | contact us | s.o store

Archive for September, 2008

Assimilating Their Culture (Poorly)

Tuesday, September 30th, 2008

[Warning: This post contains references to Doctor Who, which many people may find boring, or excessively nerdsome.]

"Doctor Who" is one of the great bastions of British television. We don’t want to get bogged down in the details here, but the classic series ran for something like 26 years, and its latest incarnation has been running for four. Not bad.

I myself have been a "Doctor Who" fan for a number of years now, in spite of the fact that I’ve never even set foot outside of the United States, never spent my Saturday afternoons eating beans on toast, waiting for Match of the Day to wrap up, and never saw a complete episode of Blue Peter or Basil Brush.

Now, a rumor (as well as some irrational panic in the face of baseless speculation) has sprung up over the possibility that the BBC might (possibly) be considering an attempt to produce "a domestic version [of "Doctor Who"] tailored to American audiences."

Of course, no such thing is likely, and we’d like to go on record, here and now, and say that it’s not going to happen. Not now, not ever. And if I’m wrong, why, I’ll eat a sandwich.

But, please, don’t expect us to hide behind that old "quintessential Britishness" argument (… at least, not until a couple of paragraphs from now…): given the special effects, explosions, violence, and vigorous make-out moments, I think an American production team could find a lot of familiar material to make hay out of.

No, what bothers us is this: any attempt to produce an American version of Doctor Who could only be seen as an attempt to take a viable, middle-of-the-road media property (which is what the show is, in America, at this point) and try to make a boisterous ratings smash out of it. And that just seems wrong to us.

Because it couldn’t possibly work.

Sure, we’ve stolen several shows from other countries that later went on to become hits: "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire," "The Office," and "Steptoe & Son (renamed "Sanford & Son"), just to name a few — but that’s no guarantee: Let us not forget the lessons of "Men Behaving Badly," and "Coupling". An American "Doctor Who" would probably struggle to find an audience and, let’s face it, U.S. networks have a poor track record when it comes to being patient with shows that need time to build viewership.

So, while we might agree with Christian Cawley’s assertion that the best hope for making "Doctor Who" a hit in the U.S. is to better position the British version on American television, we would also suggest that such a thing would be a hell of a long-shot.

In spite of the penetration of cable television in the U.S. market, it’s not total. Smash hits are certainly possible on cable, but network shows still do remarkably well, relatively. And there’s hardly any chance that a major network would pick up "Doctor Who" because, well, when’s the last time you saw a British show on American network television?

Actually, when’s the last time you saw a British program on any American channel, cable, network, or otherwise? Yes, there’s been a few — "Absolutely Fabulous" on Comedy Central, "Doctor Who" on SciFi — and there’s always BBC America, right?  A lager question, in my mind, is why there have been so few British shows re-broadcast in the States? What is it about Americans that we can’t seem to get on board with an un-retooled foreign TV show?

Well, that’s not entirely true, which is a cause for some hope. An informal survey of my own TV viewing leads me to believe that the king of British television in America is PBS, home to "Masterpiece Theater", "Mystery", and countless "Brit-coms". In fact, PBS was home to "Classic Who" before the term was even coined. Which makes it a good candidate to host any hypothetical "Doctor Who" block-buster-based campaign.

Except… well, I know this isn’t fair, but there’s one important aspect of British television in America that we’ve yet to address. It is, or at least has been, widely seen as a defining interest of American nerds. And what’s the nerdiest British show of them all? Well, it’s "Monty Python’s Flying Circus," actually — but "Doctor Who" is a close second. (This fact was confirmed by no less authority than "The Simpsons", in an episode where the morbidly obese Comic Book Guy is spotted pushing a wheelbarrow full of tacos down the sidewalk, proclaiming, "Yes, this should provide adequate sustenance for the Doctor Who marathon.")

(We should probably admit at this point, in the interest of full disclosure, that we do watch a hell of a lot of British TV, that we really like stuff like "Blake’s 7", Gerry Anderson, and whatnot. We are sad, frankly.)

This is the disconnect that will hinder any attempt to turn "Doctor Who" into huge hit, and this is the schism that will infect any hypothetical adaptation. "Doctor Who" is a good program — but in the U.K., it’s an institution. Here, it’s a cult show for open-minded people and oddballs. Someday, the barrier may be broken. I certainly hope so, at least. And it would be nice if "Doctor Who" was the show that did it.

But I really, really doubt that it will.

| September 30th, 2008 | by BCSilvia | Categories: Doctor Who, Entertainment, Pop Culture | Trackback | 2 Comments »



Do You Wanna Take a Picture?

Tuesday, September 30th, 2008

This post about "productive hobbies" over at Get Rich Slowly got us thinking about photography. Once upon a time, you see, we had quite an interest in the subject. It’s fun, it’s (relatively) easy, and it’s (relatively) cheap — if you’re careful. From the GRS post:

Cameras can be a money sink, but photography doesn’t have to be expensive. You can have a lot of fun with a cheap point-and-shoot digital camera. With practice, you may even be able to make money selling digital photos online. I know several people who do this (and I’ve done it myself).

Great advice. And, while the digital revolution has given anyone with a computer the ability to process and retouch photos, we do have a kind of retrograde suggestion on this subject: if you’re new to photography, um, maybe you should buy a 35mm film camera.

Why? Oh, lots of little reasons. For one thing, the initial investment cost is lower… sort of. If you compare the image quality of a film camera and a digital camera at the same price range, you’ll find that film looks better — at least for the lowest priced, entry level models. Better still, you can often find perfectly good 35mm cameras on the used market, making them cheaper still.

A somewhat shoddy 35mm camera will produce photos with chromatic aberrations, streaking, and blurring (especially along the edges of the frame). A similarly shoddy digital camera will give you photos with chromatic aberrations, streaking, blurring, and grotesque pixelation. If you’re committed to pursuing hobby photography, certainly you should buy the best digital camera you can afford. If you but dabble, however, you’ll get better pictures in the short term with a point-and-shoot 35mm camera.

Even with the cost of printing, your initial investment won’t be that large. Many film processors can put your photos on CD if you need them in a digital format. And they can print individual pictures for a cheap as 25-cents a copy (less, if you get more copies).

Even so, the equipment isn’t what makes for good photos. I’ve heard stories about photojournalists going into war-zones with not much more than a duffle-bag of disposable 35mm cameras, and coming out with some of the greatest shots of their careers. The trick is to keep your eyes open, look for interesting things, and always have a camera on you.

But if you just want to test the waters, you shouldn’t feel compelled to make any kind of major purchase. Go grab a disposable 35mm, keep it with you at all times, and consider going someplace you haven’t been in a while to take a few pictures.

Happy snapping.

| September 30th, 2008 | by BCSilvia | Categories: Art, Money & Commerce | Trackback | No Comments »



Excused Absence: Spirit of ’99

Monday, September 29th, 2008

When my already irregular sleep pattern is disturbed beyond all reason; when the central awareness in my brain begins hopping from branch to branch like a rabid squirrel; when any random thought refuses to connect to another in any coherent way; and when work begins to demand more time and creativity than it ordinarily calls for; that is when blog posts don’t get written.

The hard-and-fast rules for blogging seem to have coalesced into a kind of received wisdom over the years: Post often, keep it short, use informative titles that have something to do with what you’re writing about, never blog about not blogging — and, most importantly, don’t blog about blogging, period.

I seem to be doing everything wrong. I tend to write long posts, after long periods of silence, my titles are often obscure references or inside jokes — or just deliberately misleading — and I often am so reflexive and self-referential that it seems as I’m so far up my own ass that I’m peering at the world from behind my own clenched teeth.

Maybe I’m just retro, and don’t know it.

But the real problem is that it seems like a pointless waste of effort to react to anything right at the moment.

| September 29th, 2008 | by BCSilvia | Categories: Meta | Trackback | No Comments »



Surround Sound

Friday, September 26th, 2008

I didn’t watch the debate tonight — I had other stuff to do.

But I did catch a little bit of it. I was at a "senior living" apartment complex, getting my grandma’s mail for her. On the long walk to the mailboxes (which are on the other side of the complex) each door I passed in the hallway seemed to be practically rattling off its hinges from the force of dozens of televisions, all booming in unison. It was a little creepy.

I don’t know what the final numbers on the debate will be, but the old people are definitely paying attention.

| September 26th, 2008 | by BCSilvia | Categories: Politics | Trackback | No Comments »



Please Stop Now: Campaign Ad Edition

Monday, September 22nd, 2008

Do you remember the year 2004? Or have you been sinking all your cash into vast quantities of hard liquor in a desperate attempt to forget it? If you have, you can probably ignore the rest of this drivel.

But seriously… if there’s one thing about 2004 that we really, really don’t want to see come back (aside from those screwed up voting machines) it’s all those damn jokes that go something like, "I’m Jack Jackass, and approve this message."

I’m not going to name of any of the products currently being advertised with this hil-arious tag-line because, well, you know the drill.

Here’s a fundamental truth about people: some of them are lazy. Just because marketing firms have managed to trick corporate America out of billions of dollars, doesn’t mean that such organizations aren’t chock full of dumb-dumbs who just want to get through the day without having to burn out their brains trying to think of a new way to sell toothpaste. Let’s face it, to folks like this steaks and prostitutes are labor-saving devices.

But this "I approve this message" horseshit is just too easy, and as consequence of that, this shtick was run into the ground back when Frankenstein’s monster was running for office.

Okay, we get it. Your car or hamburger or whatever is pretending to run for office, you hack. Also, you appear to think that we’re so stupid and forgetful that we’ll completely fail to retain any memory of prior events, thus your apparent faith that we’ll wind up going for the same old dreck no matter how lousy it was the first time around. No, no — we’re smarter than that.

Oh, hell, let’s face it — this is the 2nd election we’ve seen where inanimate objects have been enjoined to approve their own dismal, joy-destroying advertising messages, and that can mean only one thing: Pointless, nonsensical approvals have become one of those irritating cold-sores of advertising that express themselves on a mult-annual basis. Elections, the Olympics, and, uh… you get the idea. Do we need this crap? The same jokes every four years? Yeah, the athletic chicken McNuggets were funny, but even McDonald’s knew when to give ‘em a rest.

So, at long last, we’d just like to make it clear that the only thing we’re in the mood to approve of is an end to this tired joke.

Advertisers of America? Please stop now.

| September 22nd, 2008 | by BCSilvia | Categories: Please Stop Now | Trackback | No Comments »



Site Feeds

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives:

By Category

By Date


Search This Site


RSS Posts at Snappy Patter

RSS Links of Interest

Arts & Entertainment

Books & Literature

Comic Strips

General Interest

Money & Commerce

Politics & Philosophy

Science & Technology

Meta