So week after week, Dancing with the stars brings in really high ratings, usually the highest. Critics hate it, for the most part. To be honest, I've never watched it. There's been nothing to really recommend it. But it beats the pants off of the ratings for Mad Men, or Friday Night Lights, or even The Vampire Diaries, so millions of people out there are passionate about it.
It strikes me as the tv equivalent of Dan Brown's books. Critics see nothing to recommend them, but they sell to millions. But is there anything wrong with appealing to a large group of people?
Ideally we'd all like to be both, critically adored, and get incredible sales. But I wonder if it is even possible. In book form there have been a few, The Lovely Bones, the Poisonwood Bible and anything written by Jonathon Frantzen come to mind, but on TV, I can't think of a huge critical and ratings success.
Maybe Grey's Anatomy for the first couple of seasons?
But if you had to choose, ratings, or critics, where would you go?
12 comments:
This is a tough one for me, because I do like strokes and have a huge problem when people don't take me seriously... (I think it stems from being the brunt too much mean teasing as a kid, but let's not go there...)
But ultimately, I think I want my books to appeal to many people, but still be proud of what I do. I'm sure Dan Brown is proud of his books. (I assume.) As for the producers of Dancing with the Stars? Don't know. Seems to me they'd more be proud of the money they make than the product, but who knows. I'm sure there's some art or craft to what they've done that they're proud of...
For all the TV I watch, some very "low brow"--yes, I even watched a season of that Tila Tequila show--I do not watch DWTS. I find it both irritating (don't like the judges) and painfully embarrassing (the dancing is so cheesy and bad.) But not bad enough to have that passing a car crash can't turn away effect that some shows have.
I've seen maybe 4 or 5 episodes over the seasons and haven't gone back for more...
Why do we ahve to be ashamed to admit it - of course part of us want to be Dancing With The Stars - we're not in this business to be not read. Or clearly, to make sentences make sense. It's how much of Mad Men are you able - and I do mean able - how smart are you? How clever? How diligent and true to your world? - to get into your DWTS.
And making something Unputdownable to millions of people is no easy task - It's not the only task I want - but it's something I wouldn't mind including in my work - however you do that.
Why is it when something gets popular - really popular - let's say JR Ward, it's suddenly fitting to pretend to like it despite your best intentions. It's guilty pleasures? I don't watch DWTS - but I do watch So You Think You Can Dance and I love it - I think it's (to keep the dancing theme going) a great mix of low and high.
ON a side note - I am writing a love poem to the Brown Sugar Snickerdoodle from the bakery down the street. Honestly. I'm leaving my family for this cookie - if it will have me.
It's a tough one. I'm always surprised at things that succeed despite bad reviews and things that fail despite good ones. I think it depends on what the target audience is in the first place. I think a bad review might kill a literary novel or an art film when it might not have as much impact on other endeavors.
That said, a good review don't guarantee nuthin'.
I totally want to be DWTS. It's too much work to have only a small handful of people appreciate you. Mad Men found it's niche audience... but look at Arrested Developement. Everybody and their brother LOVED that show from critical standpoint... but nobody watched it. Pushing Daisy's same thing.
Getting the mix of good and popular VERY hard to do. But that's absolutely what I want. And will I sacrifice good for popular? 1 MILLION PERCENT. Because popular means money. And popular means you get another chance to be good.
What if nobody read Sherry Thomas or Joanna Bourne. What if those books had been good, but then failed. We wouldn't have gotten those last two gems would we?
As for shows that have done this..maybe West Wing and the early days of ER. They seemed to be both.
Oh yes, the early days of ER and West Wing... Fabulous.
And as long as shows like DWTS or Two and a Half Men make enough money for the networks to allow them to take chances on shows like Pushing Daisies and Arrested Development, I'm happy. The same goes with fiction... whether we're talking macro across the entire industry (saying the revenue from genre fiction makes literary fiction possible) or within a genre with writers who take chances like Bourne and Thomas...
"Because popular means money. And popular means you get another chance to be good."
Brilliant point, Steph.
I agree - popular means another chance to be good - it's getting a post -it.
Yeah - I thought when I wrote it... Wow that's profound. "Popular means another chance to be good." That's f'in brilliant! (Clearly I have no modesty)
Okay... so how do we ensure popular?
Suddenly I'm sad again.
That line is brilliant, Steph.
And don't be sad. Even if popular and good don't always go hand in hand, I don't think they are antonyms. (or mutually exclusive)
I think the magic is to find a story and characters that will resonate. Easy, right? Sigh. Now I'm sad, too. ;)
You want to talk about sad - the cookie won't have me.
Let's all be sad together. Wish you were closer. We could drown our sorrows in drink together.
I agree with Steph - she summed it up beautifully.
Sorry to have disappaered for a bit, moved countries, etc - now I'm back on board and I look forward to reading more insightful posts from DWT!
ALLI
Post a Comment