The Cultural Gutter

unashamed geekery

"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." -- Oscar Wilde

Maybe Reality Isn’t the Point

alex macfadyen
Posted August 25, 2011

Define reality.

I’m not a big follower of reality tv shows, although I find myself sucked in to an episode if I start watching. Sometimes I appreciate the talent and sometimes I’m just rubbernecking at the train-wreck drama or the otherness of other people’s lives, but when my favorite contender on The Glee Project was eliminated and I was still sad the next day, I realized that I was actually emotionally invested. I kept talking about the show to my friends, even though they hadn’t seen it. I felt like it was different somehow, and that made me think about reality tv as a genre.

The Glee Project is a 10 episode competition show in the vein of Project Runway, with the contestants competing for a 7 episode story arc on Glee. It’s been billed as “a groundbreaking and authentic ten episode documentary reality series,” and although the overall format is familiar, I think the description fits.

TGP is structurally unusual in that it’s run by people who work on Glee. Choreographer Zach Woodlee, vocal producer Nikki Anders, and casting director Robert Ulrich produce the weekly music videos, act as coaches and mentors for the contenders, and choose who will give “last chance performances” for Glee co-creator Ryan Murphy each week. The fact that they will actually have to work with the winner makes the outcome personally relevant to them, and means that choosing the right person is a higher priority than getting ratings for the reality show.

Authenticity is one of the central themes of Glee. The show is all about being true to yourself even if what you get for it is a freezing cold slushie in the face every day. But as Andrew Potter explores in The Authenticity Hoax, authenticity and ethics are not necessarily related. You can be a total jerk and still be more authentic than someone who acts like a decent human being. I think what I found most interesting about TGP was how the idea of authenticity played out in the reality series.

Working hard and being supportive of one another are requirements for Glee cast members, and that is reflected in TGP. The contenders seem to care about one another, the mentors seem genuinely invested in helping them develop and perform their best, and most of the criticism is actually constructive. I think the difference is encapsulated in Zach’s and Robert’s encouraging expressions during the last chance performances and how thrilled they look when anyone does well. They remind me of dads at a school play.

Throughout the competition there’s a tremendous focus on “authenticity” or “fakeness.” TGP contenders are judged most harshly for not coming across as genuine. One contestant, Lindsay, is repeatedly described by other people as seeming “fake” and is accused of faking a breakdown by one of the coaches. But what does “fake” mean in the context of reality tv?

Everyone knows in their gut if something seems real or fake to them. But, to quote Gob from Arrested Development, “My gut is telling me no… but my gut is also very hungry.” As Malcolm Gladwell argues in his book, Blink, we subconsciously notice things that we aren’t consciously aware of, so sometimes what seems like a random hunch is actually based on observations we don’t know we’ve made. Or not. When we’re picking up on something in a real life interaction that mechanism works, but when someone else has selected and edited together the significant pieces to show us, it gets muddled.

Viewers are always presented with the question, are the editors reliable narrators? They have their own motivations and goals in choosing which threads of the story to weave together for us – truthful portrayals, perhaps, but also dramatic tension, audience engagement, and ratings – so even though we’re lead to believe it’s real, we also know enough about the process to be suspicious.

In the case of TGP, we’re told repeatedly that Ryan Murphy wants to be inspired by the contenders’ experiences and personalities to write a character for them, so in theory the goal is to show the audience what they are really like as people. I felt like I had gotten a sense of all of the contenders as three dimensional, sympathetic people, even the ones who didn’t appeal to me, but reading the fan sites I realized two things: one, not everyone had that experience, and two, some of the contenders did not sound in person like they came across in the footage.

Some contenders commented that things they said or did were distorted for effect but they know that’s to be expected on a reality show. Lots of viewers have commented on their dislike for Lindsay’s perceived fakeness, but the contenders generally seem to like her. She has said that after watching, her friends and family were appalled and said “That’s not you! What’s going on?” When the contenders have to choose a word that exposes their deepest insecurity and wear it for a public video shoot, her word is ‘fake.’

So what registers with an audience as “real” or “fake,” and in the end does it matter? As a kid, I used to watch WWE wrestling on saturday mornings, and what hooked me was watching The Undertaker fight Jake “The Snake” Roberts with his hand stuck in what appeared to be a real coffin, dragging it laboriously behind him. If the coffin didn’t weigh “at least 200 pounds”, what did that mean about the wrestling itself? I wanted to know, I wanted to believe, but I also didn’t care ‘cause it was just plain fun to watch.

Fake isn’t necessarily bad. All stories are simultaneously real and not real, even the ones we tell ourselves about our lives. Accuracy isn’t necessary to a sense of emotional reality. Isn’t that part of why we read and watch tv and immerse ourselves in different worlds? We know fiction isn’t real, but it feels real. Maybe reality just isn’t the point.

~~~

alex MacFadyen is still trying to figure out who he wants to be when he grows up. It’s not the reality he was expecting, but it has it’s finer points.

Comments

Leave a Reply





  • Support The Gutter

  • The Book!

  • Of Note Elsewhere

    At the New York Observer, Ashley Steves writes about Craig Ferguson’s The Late, Late Show. “No one could ever prepare you for watching an episode of Ferguson’s Late Late Show. A friend could not sit you down and explain it (“Well, it’s really meta and deconstructive and there’s a horse”). There was really no good way to recommend it. It was something you discovered and became a part of. You had to stumble upon it on your own, perhaps restless or bored or simply curious while flipping through channels when your eye quickly caught some of the madness. And that’s the best part. It was an unexpected gift. At its worst, it could still send you to bed grinning and comforted. At its best, it was art. It was silly and fun and truly not like any other late night show.”

    ~

    At Comics Alliance, Chris Sims interviews Ed Brubaker about his work on Batman, Gotham Central and Catwoman. “When I look back at [Catwoman], I’m so proud of the first 25 issues of that book, when I felt like everything was firing on all cylinders. I probably should’ve left when Cameron Stewart left instead of sticking around. That’s one of those things I look back at and think “Ah, I had a perfect run up until then!” (Incidentally, Comics Editor Carol’s first piece for the Gutter was about Brubaker’s first 25 issues of Catwoman).

    ~

    At Sequential Art, Greg Carpenter writes a lovely piece about Charles Schulz’ Peanuts. “After only two installments, Schulz had solidified the rules for his comic strip.  Random acts of cruelty would punctuate this irrational world, and Schulz’s trapped little adults would be forced to act out simulations of human behavior, using hollow gestures to try to create meaning in a universe where no other meaning was evident.  If Shakespeare’s Macbeth had been a cartoonist, the results of his daily grind, “tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow,” might have looked somewhat similar—each character a “poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage” until he or she was heard from no more.”

    ~

    The Smithsonian Magazine has a gallery of US spy satellite launches. “Just as NASA creates specially designed patches for each mission into space, [National Reconnaissance Office] follows that tradition for its spy satellite launches. But while NASA patches tend to feature space ships and American flags, NRO prefers wizards, Vikings, teddy bears and the all-seeing eye. With these outlandish designs, a civilian would be justified in wondering if NRO is trolling.”

    ~

    At The Guardian, Keith Stuart and Steve Boxer look at the history of PlayStation.“Having been part of the late 80s rave and underground-clubbing scene, I recognised how it was influencing the youth market. In the early 90s, club culture started to become more mass market, but the impetus was still coming from the underground, from key individuals and tribes. What it showed me was that you had to identify and build relationships with those opinion-formers – the DJs, the music industry, the fashion industry, the underground media.” (via @timmaughan)

    ~

    Neill Cameron has re-imagined the characters of Parks & Recreation as members of Starfleet. (Via @neillcameron)

    ~

  • Spilling into Twitter

  • Obsessive?

    Then you might be interested in knowing you can subscribe to our RSS feed, find us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter or Tumblr.

    -------

  • Weekly Notifications

  • What We’re Talking About

  • Thanks To

    No Media Kings hosts this site, and Wordpress autoconstructs it.

  • %d bloggers like this: