Before the screening, an HBO executive took the podium, informing us that “what you will see tonight will astound you.” In his introduction, the supernaturally coiffed Sorkin opened with an apology that Olivia Munn was not actually in the first episode of the season, and so we would thus not be seeing her work this evening. When the crowd settled down from its horror, he muttered that, oh yeah, Jane Fonda isn’t in it, either.
He told the story of the moment a few years back when his agents asked what he wanted to do next. For a man aspiring toward the elite, there could only be one answer. “I said I wanted to do a show for HBO.” Sorkin said his agents retorted in jest, “That will never happen. Maybe we can get you a staff job on iCarly.“ (iCarly being a situation comedy favored by idiot tweens as opposed to the sophisticated novelistic adult entertainment purveyed on the Home Box Office network.)
”—I have been to Sorkin. And share my journey amongst the elite’s favorite elites at Grantland.Observing a political paradox this election year a fascinating phenomenon seems to be unfolding - that we may have reached a phase in our cultural evolution where there is no such thing as good attention.
(Side note: I am observing politics here as a petri dish through which to study a particular cultural phenomenon. I am not looking to debate the election and if anyone grabs on to my mention of certain political figures to argue with me about politics, I swear by all that is unholy I will block you forever from my every social network and blogging platform til the end of my days.)
A poll today revealed that Mitt Romney’s favorable ratings have risen over the past few weeks, during a time when he’s largely been off center stage. There’s been the Bain brouhaha, but Romney himself has mostly let others take on the fight, with Pres. Obama and Romney surrogates occupying the foreground, while he’s taken a step or two back. Compared to the primary battles when he was standing in the floodlights every day.
Likewise, I’ve seen it demonstrated before that Obama’s approval rating tends to go up when he was out of the limelight, during the Republican primaries or when he’s been on vacation for instance.
Looking at this it seems very clear that there is no such thing as positive attention in the Twitter age; that anyone who sticks their head up is going to just have it picked apart by 100,000,000 gnats. The internet has largely become a roving lynch mob and you can’t stop a lynch mob with comedy GIF’s.
What might perhaps be true in politics at this point absolutely holds true in entertainment, that any attention you receive only serves to inspire an even greater backlash. (e.g. Girls). I dont think its possible any more to have hype without inspiring a greater reaction. Unless your hype is ironic to start with like Betty White’s.
Another scenario is the Game of Thrones model, in which your core hype-base is so nerdy and unwholesome it scares off everyone else from jumping on your hype parade. Until the series is off and running anyway. I’m not sure if that model could translate to politics but it’s worth trying.
Also helpful - if like Veep or Justified or Adele actually you are really bulletproof level good. But that almost never works even in entertainment and it’s a metaphysical impossibility for anyone in politics to be that good, because if they were, they wouldn’t be in politics, and certainly wouldn’t have risen in it.
For TV shows and movies, however, we have almost reached an inflection point where nobody talking about a show or movie is better than anyone talking about it. This Longmire last night, which not a single person on all of Twitter or Tumblr mentioned, got 4.2 million viewers - as much as GOT, or Mad Men and Girls combined on a typical night - shows that having no buzz may be the new path to media enormity.
As for would-be Presidents, asking them to get through their party’s convention, the debates and the fall campaign without anyone talking about them is a tall order. But if they want to win it all, they’ve got to try. The Longmire/Lou Diamond Phillips strategy is the only one that stands a chance in the post-buzz era.
Dave Eggers explaining why the enormously successful writers are the only people whose opinions about books are valid or should be trusted.
And he wonders why some of us go to a dark, dank place where we just want to throw things.
As I’ve stated before, the internet, in particular as it lets people hide behind cloaks of anonymity to launch attacks, is often little more than a gif’d up, electronic lynch mob. As a matter of principle and emotional survival, I don’t read comments on sites that allow anonymous, unfiltered registration.
However, arts criticism was not invented by the internet and is in all likelihood as old as the arts themselves. Aeschylus and Euripedes wrote their dramas for Athens’ annual theater contest, in which there were winners, and losers.
No one is forcing anyone to perform on a public stage. If you’ve written a book about New Orleans flood survivors that is too precious to bear criticism, you are perfectly entitled to just make copies to distribute to your family who will tell you nothing but how wonderful you are. No one is forcing anyone to take a book deal or a movie deal and if you turn it down, civilization will go on and your void will be filled.
But if you put something out into the public, it is presumably because you wish to communicate and provoke a response, and you realize not everything is for everyone’s tastes; that not all responses will be simply adoring smiles and pats on the head; that in fact, those positive words are meaningless without some opposition. That if all we hear is praise, the praise has no meaning.
And that, in fact, perhaps not every book is the best book ever written. Perhaps not every book is even your best book, inconvenient as that may be to hear once you’ve climbed to the top of the heap and feel the best thing for everyone would be just to keep the spigot of praise flowing until the end of time without qualification.
Yes, not all criticism is great or insightful - just as not all books or movies are great or insightful. In the short run, it is the loudest that gets the most attention. But eventually, if all you have to say as a critic is “I hate that” you’ll be drowned out in favor of others who have something more insightful to offer…just the same as an author who has nothing more to say than “Awww…yay for us” is not likely to be making too many people’s top tens twenty years from now.
via