book & video reviews

This article was downloaded by: [UQ Library]On: 20 November 2014, At: 22:22Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Educational TelevisionPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjem18

Book & Video ReviewsPublished online: 03 Aug 2006.

To cite this article: (1993) Book & Video Reviews, Journal of Educational Television, 19:2,95-108, DOI: 10.1080/0260741930190205

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0260741930190205

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoeveras to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of theauthors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracyof the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verifiedwith primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjem18

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/0260741930190205

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0260741930190205

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Educational Television, Vol. 19, No. 2, 1993 95

Book & Video Reviews

Television and the American ChildGEORGE COMSTOCK with HAEJUNG PAIK, 1991Academic Press, Inc.386 pp., £31-50 hardback,ISBN 0-12-183575-8

This is a valuable survey of past research, and includes a pretty definitive bibliogra-phy extending to over 40 pages of citations. It draws on some major British studies,but concentrates on the American research, which has dominated the field (espe-cially on television and violence) in the past 30 years.

The authors take a cool and scientific approach to their survey of a subject thatcontinues to arouse political and public passions, generally negative in spirit. Thetenor of this book is therefore 'sensible, perhaps modest' (to use a phrase the authorsoften themselves employ) in terms of policy recommendations, described below.That makes the measured style of the review and interpretations the more authorita-tive.

Many stereotypes are demolished along the way. Across the world, for exampleit is believed that popular serials are slavishly watched, week in, week out: the realityis that only half the viewers of any particular episode in a soap are likely to watch thenext one. The key element in the decision to view is time available, not programmecontent. Children behave in the same way. Although they develop and expresspreferences for certain types of programmes, those preferences "increasingly haveonly a modest relationship with what is viewed".

In the same way as adults, children view carelessly, misunderstanding about 30per cent of the verbal information transmitted (p. 18), in fact monitoring rather thanviewing what is shown. Cues (changes in musical style, sibling commentary, etc.)influence the viewing response heavily. The famous dictum of Schramm, Lyle andParker (1961) has been confirmed again and again: what the child brings totelevision is as important in any influence the medium has on the child as whattelevision brings to the child. An important extension of this is that since childrentend to perceive television as requiring little mental effort, they will tend not to learnfrom it in accord with their basic ability (p.39).

If news and other informational programming is to be educationally useful

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

96 Book & Video Reviews

to children and teenagers, they must be encouraged to view with theexpectation that some effort will be required,

in fact, as suggested by Barrie Gunter, in Poor Reception (1987).Further evidence is cited (e.g. Desmond, Singer and Singer 1990) to support the

well-known finding that parents can increase the understanding of television, im-prove judgements about reality and fantasy and reduce total viewing; conversely,they can also influence children's attitudes adversely. It is interesting to learn that,since 1960, the percentage of American parents with 'definite rules' for the viewingof their children has risen from 40 per cent to 50 per cent (Bower, 1985).

This is hardly surprising. Television occupies more time in American children'slives than any other out-of-school activity, accounting for half or more of all leisuretime, and hours of weekly viewing have risen steadily in the past 20 years. The sameholds good, of course, for most other industrialised countries. The trend can soundalarming. As the authors underline, however, television use does not displacepersonally or socially important activities, instead curtailing the time spent on them.

The well-known inverse association between scholastic achievement and amountof viewing is discussed at great length. Again, while this association is clearly shownto be weaker than other relevant influences such as socioeconomic status, it isdisappointing to see how little benefit the 'window on the world' qualities oftelevision seem to have on American children. Educational broadcasters should takecomfort from the clear, if rather limited, evidence that confirms that educationaltelevision is not only effective in teaching, but can improve perceptual skills,especially when supported by "thorough, repetitive display of the process". Further,on the subject of children's knowledge, beliefs and perceptions of such matters asstereotyping, viewing in classrooms with discussion is far more effective than viewingin other situations.

Turning to other areas of concern, the authors also review the voluminousevidence on the influence of advertising on children and teenagers. Here, with onemajor caveat, direct and measurable adverse effects are hard to show. The caveat isthat children below about the age of eight cannot comprehend the persuasive intentof commercials. Television advertising aimed at young children is therefore decep-tive (p.98). More significantly, and with a warning for other societies, a number ofwriters (e.g. Palmer, 1987) have observed a 'secular pattern' in US networkprogramming for children:

(1) initially, programming for children is employed to promote family use, withthe result that it is comparatively plentiful;

(2) once channel use has stabilised, the amount of such programming declines;and

(3) to maximise revenue, the programming becomes increasingly commer-cialised.

The most alarming findings reported in the book relate to the long-term develop-ment of aggressive behaviour, positively associated (over 20-year and 30-yearperiods) with early exposure to television violence. It seems that continued viewingof violent programmes by young children teaches them ways of solving interpersonal

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Book & Video Reviews 97

problems that lead them to be more punitive as parents, and more prone toaggression.

Even children as young as 14 and 24 months imitate what they see on a televisionscreen and can do so even after a 24-hour delay. The most sobering reading in thebook comes at the end. There has been a decline over the past decade in program-ming for American children, while at the same time there has been an enormousincrease in the amount of programming available to view. Educational and instruc-tional programming has shrunk and is now almost wholly confined to publictelevision. The authors compare the per capita annual support by the USA forpublic television ($4-85) with the equivalent sums for the BBC in Britain (S16-14)and NHK in Japan ($11-83), and appeal for an increase. Both the latter figures arecurrently in question, of course.

REFERENCESBOWER, R. T . (1985) The Changing Television Audience in America (New York, Columbia Univer-

sity Press).DESMOND, R. J., SINGER, J. L. & SINGER, D. G. (1990) Family mediation, in: BRYANT, J. (Ed.)

Television and the American Family (Hillsdale NG, Erlbaum).GUNTER, B. (1987) Poor Reception: Misunderstanding and Forgetting Broadcast News (Hillsdale, NJ,

Erlbaum).PALMER, E. L. (1988) Television and America's Children (New York; OUP)SCHRAMM, W., LYTE, J. & PARKER, E. (1961) Television in the Lives of Our Children (Oxford,

OUP).

ROBIN MOSS, Head of Educational Broadcasting,Independent Television Commission

Television and the Gulf WarDAVID E. MORRISON, 1992

London, John Libbey112 pp., £15 hardbackISBN 0-86196-341-5

British television viewers are sophisticated in their perception of news reporting. Itis the old story of the influence of the medium being as much what the viewer bringsto the screen, as what the screen brings to the viewer. David Morrison, from theInstitute of Communications Studies at the University of Leeds in his analysis ofnews reporting of the Gulf war and its effects on the public provides an insight intoboth the medium and the audience.

Television and the Gulf War published by John Libbey as part of their AcamediaResearch monographs covers audience interpretations, delves into children's anxietyand finishes with a detailed content analysis of the reporting of the war.

The research concerned television news broadcasts on BBC, ITV, Channel 4,Sky News and CNN, from 14 January (three days before the Coalition attack began)to 3 March (when the cease-fire was agreed). Some material shot for WorldTelevision News which ITN chose not to air was also provided for the interviews.Questionnaires and in-depth interviews were conducted with over 200 children andover 1,000 adults.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014


The viewers were able to spot falsehoods and appreciate the difficulties ofjournalists in reporting. They had a good understanding of the strictures placed onthe flow of news on the part of the Iraqi government and the Coalition and were ableto interpret the information accordingly. The audience wished the news reporting tobe impartial and factual, not balanced. Fairness was important, rather than present-ing both sides:

Fairness is taken to mean the situating of facts within the wider frameworkof the war.

The research grappled with the argument betweenShowing sufficient detail to convey the event as actuality, and not showingtoo much so that it revolted the sensibilities.

Concerning horrific pictures, viewers indicated if these gruesome shots were shownthey must be shown with a purpose or point.

In the examination of effects on children, the fear of war coverage creatinganxiety in children was not supported by the research. Much of the information andmany attitudes were shaped by conversation with adults and peers rather than themedia coverage, and the evidence indicated a much more complex interplay ofvalues than merely pumping ideas into the children's heads. Rather than shelterchildren from brutal scenes it was recommended that the events be presented insuch a manner that children can understand what is taking place.

Gender reared its head as boys talked mostly of weapons and girls talked aboutenvironmental aspects. Boys paid more attention to the news than girls, but this isto be expected when, as the content analysis showed, most of the reports containedarms and armaments.

Some surprising results came from the content analysis. One assumes thattelevision is about on the spot reporting and seeing events as they happen, yet overhalf of the visual material shown about the war was studio based. Estimates put totalcasualties in Iraq at 100,000 armed force personnel and 5,000 civilians. Yet only 300dead bodies were shown. Deaths were reported, but not shown.

An interesting parallel was drawn between the Gulf and Vietnam wars. The"British viewer did accept the war as correct and just". Therefore the acceptance ofcasualties was high. In Vietnam the tolerance was low, not because of what wasshown, but that it was seen as "death without sense".

One particular example of the sophistication of the viewer came in the discussionof the most frequent reason given for the war. The content analysis resulted in thereasons of "liberating Kuwait" and "upholding international law" being predomi-nant in the broadcasts with scarce mention of "securing a supply of oil". However,in the group discussions the oil was given as a major reason for the armed response:

The number of times a particular person or position is presented does notquantumly affect the attitudes of viewers when the position or reason thatis represented runs counter to their understandings of the world.

The conclusions are drawn from carefully gathered research evidence. Thestatistical tables provided are at first daunting, but soon, as a reader, I wasexamining the evidence in an attempt to draw my own conclusions to be confirmed

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014


by the narrative which followed. Care was taken in the methodology. The evidencefrom the interviews, although open ended, still maintained the rigour of goodresearch. Techniques, such as methodically changing the order of examples shownto avoid leading respondents, gave confidence in the data. Questionnaires were usedto collect the responses and interviews to capture the reasoning behind the re-sponses.

Morrison has done well to synthesise a massive amount of data into a readablemonograph without overburdening the reader with statistics. Yet there is enoughdata to give confidence in the balanced conclusions. Dealing with a subject of suchrecent history has its problems, but also its attractions in that the research adds animpartial dimension to our own expectations and experiences of the war.

It is a comforting confirmation of earlier research findings about the effects ofmedia reporting, but confirmation to counter often unfounded criticism and nega-tive qualities attributed to television. No doubt television has power and aprominent place in the information spectrum, but too often we sell the viewers shortby not attributing to them the intelligence and sophistication which they deserve.

MARTIN A. GIENKE, DirectorUniversity of Cambridge Audio Visual Aids Unit

Media Education in the Primary SchoolCAROL E. CRAGGS

Routledge, 1992185 pp., £35 hb, £9-99 pbISBN 0-415-06370 hbISBN 00-415-06371 pb

Curricular requirements may come and go, but media education as an entitlementfor all children is an idea that is here to stay. More and more teachers wantaccessible, practical books that tell them what media education for young childrencan look like as well as tracing its conceptual roots. We do not need more rhetoricabout how significant the media are in children's lives and how schools have aresponsibility to recognise that. Nor do we really need more tips for teachers aboutimage analysis or news situations and other well-worn formulae. What we do needare accounts of practice that are sensitive to children's understanding and to theircapacity to learn. The question of how children's media learning may progress interms of knowledge, skills and understanding is an interesting pressing one if mediaeducation is to retain any credibility.

What a disappointment, then, to find that this book is little more than acompendium of what is wrong with media education today. The disappointment iscompounded by the recognition that Craggs is evidently a dedicated and energeticteacher who has amassed an enormous amount of informative and critical materialto support her media education practice. In fact this book is likely to be most useful

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014


to busy primary teachers who, like Craggs, are seeking further academic accredita-tion and need accessible summaries of the relevant texts.

The problem is that it just doesn't hang together. Craggs begins the book,appropriately, by calling for "carefully reasoned educational arguments" in order to"clarify the rationale for media education at the primary level" (p.2). Within a page,two goals are proposed: children should "begin to question both the manifest andcovert values which are transmitted by the mass media"; and to become "citizenswho can, where and when necessary, read against the media's manufactured repre-sentations" (p.3). But within another two pages, we find that media education hasto "introduce popular culture into the classroom in a non-judgemental way" and tobe "a celebratory experience" (p.5). Careful reasoning has flown out of the window,and we are left with a tired set of contradictory received ideas.

This wouldn't necessarily matter much to the teacher who is looking for class-room ideas, of which Craggs offers plenty, rather than rhetoric about long-termaims. But when we turn to the practical advice which forms the bulk of the book,rather more dangerously confused objectives are revealed. For example, Craggsimports Masterman's account of semiotic analysis as used with secondary studentsto discover how any human artefact "is the result of historical and culturally basedhuman choices which represent social values". This, she says, can quite easily beattempted by primary children. She quotes an eight-year-old's written analysis of adigital watch, which concludes a painstaking description—"one strip has holes in it,the other has a sliding bit on it"—with the statement "This signifies we like to beaware of things so we can make the most of our time" (p.48).

This reveals, Craggs claims, that

Children can begin to demythologise culture objects to reveal ideologicalmessages which have been cloaked in what Barthes referred to as 'natural-ness'; a naturalness that suppresses politics and history, both or which needto be reasserted (ibid.)

I have to confess that the ideological message of the digital watch remainedunrevealed to me, while at the same time I cannot see that the child's concludingstatement would have been any different if, instead of demanding 150 words ofdenotative analysis, Craggs had simply asked him, 'why do people wear watches?'.

Media Education in the Primary School is shot through with claims for the powersof media education in ideological consciousness-raising. Not one is substantiated. Itis twelve years since the problems of teaching ideology were debated in the pages ofScreen Education, most notably in Judith Williamson's seminal paper, 'How does girlnumber 20 understand ideology?' (Screen Education 40, Winter 1981-1982).

Despite constant disavowals of any inoculative slant to her project, Craggs isstuck within a 'false consciousness' model of ideology which prevents her—orperhaps allows her to avoid—engaging with the daunting complexity of youngchildren's cultural and political identities. She thus zigzags uncomfortably betweenreconstruction and celebration as the twin lodestars of her classroom practice,apparently unaware that they pull in opposite directions.

Any tendency on the reader's part to worry about these contradictions is

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014


forestalled by Craggs' lavish application of academic references. Too often sheuncritically imports North American research findings without acknowledging thesubstantial institutional cultural differences between UK and US media (see forexample Chapter 5, 'Representations of Reality'). The findings and writings ofexperts are mapped on to classroom work, and quotations from children's oral orwritten language are used to 'prove' their validity. This procedure just isn't goodenough. We need to be asking much tougher questions about what children knowalready about the media and about what they can learn: questions so far largelyunaddressed by researchers on either side of the Atlantic. Once these questions—and their answers, however provisional—are placed at the centre of the enterprise,then media education can start to grow as it should.

CARY BAZALGETTE, Education Officer, British Film Institute

The Reactive ViewerBARRIE GUNTER & MALLORY WOBER, 1992

John Libbey, London128 pp., £18 hbISBN 0 86196 358 X

Television: the public's viewBARRIE GUNTER & CARMEL MCLAUGHUN, 1992

John Libbey, London67 pp., £14-50 hbISBN 0 86196 348 2

A Matter of Manners?ANDREA HARGRAVE, 1991

John Libbey, London112 pp., £9-50 pbISBN 0 86196 337 7

Taste and Decency in BroadcastingANDREA HARGRAVE, 1991

John Libbey, London64pp., £7.50 pbISBN 0 86196 3318

The new Broadcasting Standards Council and the Independent Television Commis-sion (child of the Independent Broadcasting Authority) are both publishing researchmonographs through John Libbey, and this offers an interesting chance to comparethe research activities of two very different bodies, both of which were created inresponse to political pressure. Of the two, the Broadcasting Standards Council hadthe clearest ideological remit, while the Independent Television Commission was to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014


be a less powerful influence in the independent television scene. These publicationsreflect that background.

Television: the public's view and The Reactive Viewer are from the IndependentTelevision Commission, but they reflect the heritage of research reports from theIBA. Indeed, both monographs draw heavily on previous research, and the generalapproach is one which stresses the continuity of television behaviour in audiences.In Television: the public's view the authors survey two main areas: the use of televisionand opinions about television. In an admirably concise way they summarise theirmain research findings of the last ten years, with sections on television in the home,viewing habits, programme standards, sources of news, impartiality, and 'Offence,Acceptability and Regulation'. It is very useful to compare this final section withboth the publications coming from the Broadcasting Standards Council: it seems atleast arguable that Television: the public's view presents a more balanced (and muchshorter) account of the issues that seemed to have so vexed the last ConservativeGovernment. This monograph is impressively controlled and informative, and helpsestablish a context for informed debate about television behaviour.

On the other hand, The Reactive Viewer is more contentious and, perhaps, moreinteresting. It deals with audience appreciation research, with sections on Britishresearch, American research, European approaches, further developments in quali-tative approaches, advertising, and issues for the future. The central argument ofboth the monograph and the research projects it reports on is that the audience'sresponse to television broadcasts cannot be measured simply by audience size:appreciation is also a vital ingredient in television behaviour. Looking at manyresearch projects over the years, the general conclusion must be that this is an areain which more research needs to be done, particularly in the measurement ofappreciation and the links between appreciation and other aspects of viewing.Nevertheless, the research which has been carried out strongly suggests that viewers'appreciation is a significant variable and one that will be of greater importance as thenumber of available channels grows.

The monographs from the Broadcasting Standards Council do not have the yearsof research to support them that the publications from the ITC have, and this shows.I certainly don't envy the BSC researchers working to such a prescriptive politicalagenda, and the great complexities of cultural analysis and definition inherent evenin the titles Taste and Decency in Broadcasting and A Matter of Manners} are merelya foretaste of the problems the reader encounters. The first monograph has sectionswhich proclaim the political agenda: "offences against standards of taste anddecency", "children", "warnings and labels", "complaints", "changing fashions"and despite the fact that some of this seems to deliberately parody itself (the tableon p. 12 is certainly an entertaining example), on the whole it doesn't really cometo grips with its subject in an informed and enlightening way. More successful is AMatter of Manners} because it largely avoids any claims to impartiality, but ratheroffers two sections: one on some preliminary research findings, and the otherdevoted to a collection of essays by different people. The Introduction by ColinShaw is, in my view, worth the whole of Taste and Decency in Broadcasting despitebeing only two pages long. Colin Shaw here manages to compress a great deal of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014


good sense in carefully balanced prose, something that is sadly lacking in much ofthe rest of the writing. The approach is a better one however; what is lacking is asection like that in the ITC monograph referred to above (Offence, Acceptabilityand Regulation) that would put the activities of the BSC in a suitable perspective.

PAUL KELLEY, The Television Literacy Project

A Midsummer Night's DreamRomeo and JulietTwelfth NightMacbethHamletThe TempestWILLIAM SHAKESPEARE

Video: 30 minutes, £8-99Island World Video

These productions have been extensively discussed, both on television and in thepress, and it hardly seems appropriate to rehearse the main discussion points in ajournal such as this. The place of these productions in the context of educationaltelevision has always been central to the debate: do they make a positive contribu-tion to the resources available to teachers?

The introduction of Shakespeare's plays as a required part of the school experi-ence of most children, to be tested when they are only 13, has been met with dismayby most English teachers. Shakespeare is not immediately accessible to children inpart because they cannot easily be introduced through performance, and this isalways the best way. Performance in the classroom needs to be supplemented bywatching performances: this is easier said than done. As an editor of A MidsummerNight's Dream for Cambridge University Press, I can boast the dubious pleasure ofhaving examined all the currently available film versions of that play, as well asphotographic images of the many productions. As an introduction to youngerchildren, the BBC stage production—which includes every word of the play andlasts longer than most stage productions—is hardly ideal. Other versions suffer fromsimilar drawbacks. There was a need for an introductory production, or somethingthat made the play both accessible and attractive. From personal classroom experi-ence I can vouch for the success of the animated version in engaging younger pupils'attention and helping them begin to engage with Shakespeare's play.

I also think these films bear serious scrutiny as interpretations of the plays.Although I found Puck a rather Russian version of the English "sprite", thepresentation of Oberon and Titania was thought-provoking. The use of colour in thefairies, and the way in which both Oberon and Titania were visually related to naturein the wood, offered a view of these two that mediated between the harshness of theBrook production in Stratford in 1970 and the traditionally fey fairies of popularimagination. In The Tempest, the elegance and beauty of the main characters was

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014


curiously undermined by the use of puppets in a way which made Prospero'scontrolling influence as a metaphor for Shakespeare's more apparent. The otherplays also offer what I feel to be interesting interpretations in their own right.

There is no two ways about it: at this price, and with the kind of qualityproduction values evident in all six plays, these are tremendous value. In produc-tions such as this television comes into its own, offering a unique contribution to thepupils' experience in a prescribed area of the curriculum.

PAUL KELLEY, The Television Literacy Project

How to Write for TelevisionWILLIAM SMETHURST, 1992

How To Books Ltd, Plymouth152 pp, £8-99 pbISBN 1-85703-045-1

How to Make it in Films and TVROBERT ANGELL, 1991

How To Books Ltd, Plymouth144 pp, £8-99 pbISBN 1-85703-000-1

The 'How To' series of books encompasses a wide range of titles covering suchdiverse subjects as How to be an Effective School Governor through How to Claim StateBenefits and How to Enjoy Retirement to How to Survive Divorce or How to Write aReport. A title How to Write a Review might have been of some assistance in how todeal with two books on related topics but with varying levels of merit. Perhaps thisis inevitable in a series such as this where the writers have nothing in common exceptthe publisher and a generic series title.

William Smethurst has a long and distinguished track record as a drama scriptwriter for both radio and television, and it shows, not least in the choice of title.Anyone ordering this book from a publisher's list is liable to be surprised (andpossibly disappointed) to find that it refers only to television drama. A short(two-page) chapter in the middle is called 'Other Markets for Scripts' and proceedsto give a paragraph and an address for each of the categories of science programmesand documentaries, children's programmes, light entertainment, Scottish and re-gional programming and educational broadcasting. The increasing number ofprogrammes being provided by independent production companies in these fieldsgives the lie to the author's statement which opens this chapter:

Almost all television work for freelance writers is in drama and situationcomedy, but a few opportunities exist in other areas.

One cannot help feeling that these 'other areas' merited more than two pages butmaybe this is merely a reflection of where the author's real interests and expertise lie.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014


Certainly this is the only disappointment in the book. What he has to say onwriting for television drama is always clear, sensible and apposite, written with alightness of touch and laced with gentle humour that makes for easy reading. Onchoosing a subject for your play and whether or not to make it controversial, hewrites:

Over the years writers and producers have garnered a fruitful harvest fromthe fields of social discord, while studies in fidelity, honesty and loyalty aresighted on television more rarely than golden eagles over Ealing.

Or

. . . the children of the Sixties who went into television and becamethe enfants terribles of the Seventies are now firmly in power as commis-sioning editors and Heads of Drama and are more concerned, these days,with property values in the Dordogne than social values in inner-cityBritain.

The author takes us through all the stages of writing a drama script from theinitial idea through the elements of story-telling (structure, plotting, visual interest),the pitfalls in creating good dialogue and real characters to how to find the rightmarket for the work and how to present it in the most effective way. Throughout,the text is well illustrated with examples from his own and colleagues' scripts. Mostusefully, perhaps, he often follows the same script through a number of stages,showing reproductions, for example, of a page of drama as originally written, thenre-typed as a rehearsal script and finally how it appears as the camera script. These,like all the other reproductions, are always clear and relevant and well integrated intothe text. Each chapter begins with a 'menu' to prepare the reader for what follows:"This chapter will look at:

• Visual interest on screen• Using pictures instead of words• Ways to maintain dramatic tension• Opening scenes of a Boon episode."

Use of Pica dots to highlight these and other main points makes for easyreference back. Finally, a generous leavening of quotations from practitionersprovides a pithy commentary on the craft, from E. M. Forster

The King died and then the Queen died. That is a story. The King died andthen the Queen died of grief. That is a plot.

to the cynical comment of a former producer of Boon:

A good Boon episode? The girl shows her tits and you end up with a carchase.

This is a book to be recommended for its practicality and readability (providedthat it is television drama scriptwriting that you wish to know about). The difficultywith How to Make it in Films and TV is in not knowing who is being addressed.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014


Among the most useful features for someone trying to break into the film andtelevision world would probably be the wealth of addresses and telephonenumbers scattered throughout at appropriate points but mainly in the twelve pagesof chapter 7 (Training for Film and Television) and in the Appendix. The restof the book takes the reader through the various stages of film production startingwith feature films (which takes up more than a third of the book) and working insubsequent chapters through commercials, documentaries and animation to apenultimate chapter of ten pages on television. Jobs in the industry from that of thefilm producer to the humbler levels of clapper/loader, grips and runner aredescribed in terms which could be of interest to the general reader. Other sections,however, such as a good deal of the section on post-production of film, requiresome specialist knowledge which would appear to put it out of the reach of thegeneral reader, or, more particularly, the novice seeking entry into the profession,for whom the book is apparently intended. This dichotomy becomes even moreapparent when dealing with specialised areas such as animation. The twoexamples of animation shooting script illustrated (the dope sheet and the barsheet) would appear to be totally meaningless to all but those already experiencedin the process, in which case it seems to be inappropriate in a book aimed atbeginners. Interesting though the descriptions of obscure jobs may be to the layperson, it seems unlikely that an ambitious career seeker sets out with a desire tobecome a clapper/loader or focus-puller and is, therefore, going to be drawn to thisbook.

In How to Write for Television, ironically, the only typographical error noticed byyour reviewer came in the section warning against carelessly typed and presentedscripts (The script eidtor [sic] will not be impressed or indulgent). Was this adeliberate mistake to catch the unwary reader or reviewer? In contrast, How to Makeit in Film and TV does not reach this high standard of presentation. Carelessmistakes, both typographical and in content, abound. The idea of reproducing realworking copies from productions is admirable and works well in How to Write forTelevision. In How to Make it in Film and ITFthe quality of many of the reproductionsis poor and, in the worst cases—pp. 32, 50 and 89—totally illegible. The section onscripting for films refers to the four stages of script development: treatment, outlinescript, dialogue script and shooting script. Examples of two of these (treatment anddialogue script) are reproduced. Why not all four? On p.25, reference is made to a"breakdown of the script" shown as "fig. 1 p. 17" which is, in fact, the treatment andthe "breakdown" referred to does not appear.

Both of these books will have their uses on the shelves of establishments trainingfor the media, the latter if only for the useful contact addresses and generalinformation about the processes involved in film (and, to a far lesser extent,television) production. Mr Smethurst's book, however, should be on the book-shelves or in the briefcases of every aspiring writer of television drama and, possibly,also those of some current practitioners.

ROY COLQUHOUN, NCTV, Hilton Place, Aberdeen AB9 1FA

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014


Effective Audio-Visual: a user's handbook; 2nd editionROBERT S. SIMPSON, 1992

Focal Press, London241 pp., £29-50 hbISBN 0-240-51327-4

This revised second edition consists of 23 chapters, 12 colour plates and numerousblack and white photographs and diagrams. There is a completely new chapter oncommissioning audio-visual programs. The book covers a wide range of topicsincluding not only the more traditional AV approaches such as tape-slide, film andvideo, but also the now rapidly converging video and computer technologies, in theform of computer graphics and interactive AV. These are examined in a variety ofsituations, in the most part very effectively.

The book's stated primary objective is to help the audio-visual user in two ways;firstly by conveying advice on the choice of medium and how to prepare pro-grammes and materials, secondly by conveying facts about equipment presentationmethods and environments that will help in the practical implementation.

In the preface the author writes:

A technician cannot reverse a management decision to give presentations ina totally unsuitable room. On the other hand the manager with responsibil-ity for the success of a presentation who also understands the basicprinciples involved can ensure that the problem never arises in the firstplace.

Because the book contains factual information the author feels it will also be usefulto those already working in one area of the audio-visual business who may needbasic information about another.

Each chapter is intended to be complete in itself and thus to be able to be readon its own. Nevertheless, chapters 1 and 2, on the choice of audio-visual media andon the preparation of visuals, should be essential reading and noted as such in eachsubsequent subject area, particularly since some of the ideas may not be obvious tothe AV user. Chapter 4, on commissioning audio-visual programs, is a welcomeaddition and highlights some common problems and solutions. Perhaps this shouldhave been chapter 3, thus allowing the first three chapters to be highlighted as being'essential' reading!

Some of the diagrams have suffered compared with the first edition by havingbeen reduced in size, making some of the associated legends too small for easyreading. The chapter on video production is disappointing in that insufficientemphasis is given to the fact that viewers will judge the quality of what they see andcompare it with the quality which can be seen every day on broadcast television. Allvideo editing is achieved by copying which causes picture and sound degradation,therefore it is important that the original recording and production techniques are tothe highest affordable standard. Poor pictures and sloppy techniques will onlydetract from the message. Since it is admitted that this chapter is in a way designedto put off the small user from video production, why not replace it with a chapter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014


on the merits, limitations and characteristics of video compared with other media,so that the audio-visual user may then make an informed decision as to whethervideo is the appropriate medium in any particular instance? Video production is inany case probably beyond the scope of a handbook such as this.

The book is well designed for easy access, has a good index and glossary and iswritten in clear precise language, even if the American spellings are a little irritating!Despite the above reservations, the book amply achieves its stated objective ofhelping the audio-visual user with advice and information, and indeed will be auseful asset to anyone with an interest in the audio-visual world.

DAVID W. HURWORTH, University of Cambridge

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

22:

22 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

book & video reviews

Documents