{"id":1561,"date":"2008-10-28T20:12:26","date_gmt":"2008-10-28T20:12:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/etbscreenwriting.com\/\/?p=1561"},"modified":"2008-10-28T20:12:26","modified_gmt":"2008-10-28T20:12:26","slug":"mad-men-art-vs-commerce","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/etbscreenwriting.com\/mad-men-art-vs-commerce\/","title":{"rendered":"Mad Men – Art vs Commerce"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Mad

The question boils down to:\u00a0 What audience do you want?\u00a0 Once you target the audience the question becomes:\u00a0 What does that audience want?\u00a0 High brow audiences look for a very different experience than mass appeal audiences.\u00a0 In fact, the very things that attract one audience repel the other.<\/p>\n

This is not to say art is better or worse than commerce– they just are DIFFERENT.<\/p>\n

What exactly are the differences?\u00a0 What is necessary to attract a wide audience?\u00a0 Below are a couple of articles on Mad Men<\/strong> I have annotated that get to the core of the art vs. commerce divide.\u00a0 My comments follow.<\/p>\n

LA Times: The TV Hits That No One Watches<\/strong>
\nBy Scott Collins<\/p>\n

\u201cMad Men<\/strong>\u201d was the most-honored of any drama series this year, a surprising achievement given that it represented AMC\u2019s first real stab at traditional series development. It was only the latest stop in \u201cMad Men<\/strong>\u2019s\u201d astonishing trip from a spec script hammered out by a moonlighting TV writer to cultural phenomenon, critics\u2019 darling and Golden Globe winner.<\/p>\n

…Too bad, then, that about 98% of Americans have never watched the show. In fact, whatever the interest in this acting showdown or that snub, this year\u2019s Emmy nominations may be most notable for underscoring a growing cultural trend: the yawning gap between what critics and industry veterans cherish and what the rest of the public actually watches.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s the relentless narrowing of what was once, in a pre-Internet era, a mass culture, a shift that mirrors what\u2019s happening in movies, books and other art forms.\u201cIn terms of nominations, it is a very elite group,\u201d said Shari Anne Brill, an analyst at New York-based ad firm Carat.<\/p>\n

Referring to today\u2019s most-honored TV shows, she added: \u201cThey get an upscale audience; they just don\u2019t get a mass audience. \u201dScripted series, from \u201cI Love Lucy\u201d to \u201cDallas\u201d to \u201cFriends,\u201d traditionally netted some of the biggest audiences in television history. But now TV\u2019s comedies and dramas are, with a sprinkling of exceptions, becoming expensive diversions for the cultural elite, akin to opera in the 19th century or foreign films in the 1960s.<\/p>\n

Critics may love shows such as \u201cMad Men<\/strong>,\u201d FX\u2019s \u201cDamages\u201d (seven nominations) and HBO\u2019s \u201cThe Wire,\u201d but not many other Americans have caught the fever. Even popular network dramas such as ABC\u2019s \u201cLost\u201d and NBC\u2019s \u201cHeroes\u201d have far fewer viewers than comparable series even a few years ago.<\/p>\n

Instead, the TV masses tend to flock these days to major sporting events\u2013 such as February\u2019s Super Bowl telecast on Fox, which drew a record audience of 97.5 million\u2013 and live reality shows such as \u201cAmerican Idol\u201d or \u201cDancing With the Stars.\u201d The latter were Emmy-nominated but mostly in the relatively low-prestige \u201creality competition\u201d category.<\/p>\n

http:\/\/articles.latimes.com\/2008\/jul\/18\/entertainment\/et-emmysmad18<\/p>\n

My comments:\u00a0 What makes these “low prestige” show so compelling to audiences?\u00a0 They are immediate, urgent and authentic. Yes, these shows (and their contestants) are also manufactured, manipulated and managed.\u00a0 But the contestants, in any situation or challenge created for them, respond by revealing their true characters.<\/p>\n

They are real people struggling, failing or overcoming obstacles in real time.\u00a0 They can’t help showing us who they truly are– that’s what every human being does under extreme pressure.\u00a0 Over time these contestants’ facades are stripped away.\u00a0 The audience sees everyone at his or her most vulnerable.\u00a0 Strengths and weaknesses are exposed. The contestants fall and battle to rise again.<\/p>\n

Forget the shiny floor or the flashy lighting.\u00a0 In these shows something is at stake.\u00a0 There is struggle, pain, and disappointment but most importantly there is hope.\u00a0 If your football team falls to take home the trophy at this year’s Super Bowl, there is always next season.\u00a0 If your favorite singer or dancer is defeated there still is joy in seeing a new star emerge.\u00a0 And you can pick a new favorite next year.<\/p>\n

Another key factor is that these “low prestige” shows are entertainment the whole family can watch together.\u00a0 This is viewing that isn’t dark.\u00a0 It isn’t edgy.\u00a0 It doesn’t “push the envelope.”\u00a0 And then at the end, there is a sense of affirmation, joy, triiumph or even redemption.<\/p>\n

Contrast this with Mad Men<\/strong> and it’s dark relentlessly downbeat tone and stylish but rather empty lives. The characters seem to drift through the story much like the cigarette smoke that fills their homes and offices.\u00a0 There is little flesh and blood urgency and little worth fighting for.\u00a0 There is pervasive disillusionment, detachment and disappointment.\u00a0 Each of the characters is distanced from their emotions (and from us as viewers). The show is stunning in its careful attention to period detail.\u00a0 It looks beautiful and is beautifully written.\u00a0 It is also as slow, measured and somber as a classic Requiem Mass.
\n
\nThe Hollywood Reporter
\nMad Men Bottom Line: All Pitch and Windup with a Soft Delivery<\/strong>
\nBy Randee Dawn<\/p>\n

\u2026(I)f the pieces are in place for “Mad Men<\/strong>” to break big, why does its center feel so hollow? Watching characters indulge with relish in what today are vices has a transgressive quality, yet it’s all done with an insider’s wink to the audience. A fawning tone would grow just as tiresome, but who can identify with characters from whom even the writers seem to shrink?<\/p>\n

…There’s much to admire about “Mad Men<\/strong>,” and much worth tuning in for. But so far, it’s all soft sell. At one point, Draper advises a cigarette exec (John Cullum) that they’ll promote his product’s “toasted” quality,” thus ushering in the era of pitching lifestyle over product, the birth of selling nothing. Unfortunately, at this stage, “Mad Men<\/strong>” is giving its audience pretty much the same thing.<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.hollywoodreporter.com\/hr\/television\/reviews\/article_display.jsp?&rid=9514<\/p>\n

If you are a fanatic fan.\u00a0 Here is a great site analyzing each episode along with PDF episode scripts.\u00a0 High art or “low prestige” mass audience. It is your choice.<\/p>\n

Resources<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n