I really enjoyed this reading primarily because it gave me a good insight as to how a live production works coming from a first person perspective. For instance, a lot of the readings we’ve had thus far was more academic and thus felt like a third-person perspective but having read this article/journal felt more personal and even credible.

What stood out for me was how much prep was done in for the live show yet in the end the pre-rigged car for one of the stunts had to be removed with a forklift during a 3 minute commercial break. On top of that, camera angles and script changes probably had to be made during that slim 3 minute time frame. It goes back to the idea of managing live; the idea that anything could happen and that is what makes it live television. Just as Gadassik reiterated, ” the attraction of television liveness, …… , depends precisely on such brief, unexpected ruptures in television’s controlled daily flow. ” ( 2010, pg 117 ).

I felt like even though MacDonnell’s reading did not introduce any new ideas or concepts relevant to liveness etc, it acted like more of a case study on a live production and therefore was valuable in it’s own way in terms of being a pre-cursor as to what we should expect in the coming weeks with the last assignment.

References:

Gadassik A, 2010, At a Loss for Words: Television Liveness and Corporeal Interruption, Journal of  Dramatic Theory and Criticism, pg 117-134.