I know I’m not the only one who’s a sucker for reality TV shows. Something about them is frustratingly addicting, whether it be the characters you love to hate, the over-dramatisation of EVERYTHING or the desire to know who will be eliminated and who will win. Right now in fact I’m trying excruciatingly hard to sit down and blog instead of succumbing to the realms of X Factor, my not so guilty pleasure of the moment.
…Oops, I gave into temptation. X Factor just finished but I am back! Reigan Derry for the win guys!
Back on topic. So recently I tuned into the ABC’s Reality Check, which gives viewers an insight into what really goes down in the production of reality TV. Host Tom Ballard and a panel of industry experts analyse current and past programs and the reveal the secrets of their make up. The show really appealed to me as being a fan of the genre myself, it was interesting to gain insight into the perspectives of those involved in the production process.
One of the topics of discussion of last week’s episode was the representation of culture on Australian’s TV screens. In this case, the panel discussed the tendency of producers to either undermine or exploit the multiculturalism that exists within our nation. Whilst shows like X Factor and The Voice tend to feature competitors of a range of ethnic backgrounds, others such as The Block have a track record of an exclusively Ango-centric cast. In what appears to be an attempt to solve the issue noted by many, it is likely that their culturally rich Sydney couple Chris and Jenna intend to challenge the stereotype. Reality Check showed a controversial clip from The Block introducing the mixed-race couple, in which the pair were literally labelled (can’t find a visual, but it involved on-screen text and arrows) with their cultural background.
Way not to be subtle, Channel Nine! I respect that they are branching out and attempting to showcase a more realistic sample of our multicultural society, but I’m not sure if this was the right way to go about it. The debate is never ending however as there seems to be a fine line between cultural diversity and racism on our screens.
Nonetheless, Reality Check is definitely worth a watch. Check it out on ABC iview here.
For weeks now we have been exploring the theory and practice of hypertext: its origin, evolution, affordances and limitations. This week’s reading by Jane Yellowlees Douglas raises yet another new aspect of the medium to consider – that is, hypertext fiction.
As we have established in previous lectures and readings, traditional print texts contain a sequential, linear narrative, encompassing a defined beginning, middle and end, and generally the author intends for the story to be interpreted in one single way. Conversely, hypertext narratives, according to Douglas, consist of discrete segments of text (in the form of pages, sites or windows) which are associated by links. The ‘reader’ is active in that they have control over which path to take, and much of their understanding comes from the relationship between the segments of text they have chosen. No user experience is the same, and up to hundreds of possible versions of the text are inevitably created.
Interestingly, the text was written in 2000 and revolves around Douglas queries’ about the usage rates of print and hypertext fiction in the future. The way hypertext fiction was discussed about made it seem as though it was the next ‘big thing,’ not necessarily ruling books out of the picture, but certainly increasing in popularity. This left me a bit confused however, as I don’t think I had ever ‘read’ a traditional hypertext fiction myself. Thus, I deemed it necessary to jump on that bandwagon, and experience the unknown in order to give me a better understanding. I attempted to find the renowned ‘afternoon, a story,’ by Michael Joyce, but failed to find a version compatible with my computer. I branched out in searching for a hypertext fiction of any kind, but again didn’t have much luck. Instead, I came across the following article:
http://www.salon.com/2011/10/04/return_of_hypertext/
Author, Paul La Farge, discusses how and why the hypertext fiction did not find it’s place in society, with the last piece to be found have being published back in 2001. Perhaps it was ‘born into a world that wasn’t quite ready for it,’ or maybe it was found to be too difficult for authors to compose.
Assuming this information is accurate (however I’m sure Adrian will correct me if misinformed), many of Douglas’s interactive narrative based theories are now outdated. Whilst it sounded like an scheme with serious potential, it is interesting to see how some ideas seem to fail to launch. This is not to say however that hypertext in other forms was unsuccessful – I am purely considering it with this style of hypertext fiction in mind. No hate!
