Quote:
Originally Posted by lisarea
I haven't actually seen (a whole of) Honey Boo Boo or the Kardashian show, so if I'm way off, fight me and you win.
Honey Boo Boo is a child, which is problematic, but the Kardashians are adults who are making some pretty good money I assume by playing themselves on TV.
How is that really concretely different from a biographical or lifestyle documentary, apart from the TV versions usually being more scripted? Would you judge someone the same for enjoying Marwencol or Grey Gardens or Brother's Keeper or the Up series? They're really all pretty voyeuristic, and the subjects' lives are trainwrecks to varying degrees, but people never seem embarrassed about liking those.
Isn't that probably some sort of cultural value judgment, like a high vs. lowbrow sort of thing? Not that it's unwarranted or anything, because reality TV is superficial and lacking the nuance, analysis, and stylistic elements that makes those documentaries great. But that's also the difference between most low vs. high brow media.
I don't think it's bad to make those distinctions, BTW. |
LOL, that's a lot of thinking hard. I was mostly kidding with my original statement, but I do happen to think that 99% of (voyeur type) reality TV is about really gross people whose lives have had no significant or positive impact on society, or history, or technology, or whatever and who have nothing to teach me...and I don't personally find their televised lives interesting, informative, enlightening or enriching in any way. I can see people living life most anywhere.
Documentaries and biographies quite often are interesting, informative, enlightening, or enriching in some way. I can often learn something or be inspired by stuff like home improvement shows, and some reality competitions.