tumbledry

Radio Culture

One of my recurring themes here at tumbledry is the stunning, underutilized power of corporate/industrial money to subsidize fine works of art. Here, I continue to crystallize and extend this idea.

The GE Building (also known as the namesake of the show 30 Rock) houses, among many other things, NBC studio 8H. If you think carefully, you’re sure to recognize 8H as the studio from which Saturday Night Live goes out. If your grandparents think carefully, however, they’ll likely have a rather different memory.

This space didn’t always contain television studios: NBC Studio 8H is the former home of the largest radio studio in the world. It was over 10,000 square feet with 30 foot high ceilings… and, when it opened, was widely considered an “acoustical disaster.” While my left brain is distracted by the shortcomings of sound engineering, my right brain is quite intrigued by a group called the NBC Symphony Orchestra.

For 17 years, from 1937 to 1954, the orchestra performed first in studio 8H, then in Carnegie Hall under the direction of the legendary Arturo Toscanini. It wasn’t just an orchestra. It was the orchestra. The group produced fantastic, sometimes definitive, recordings of a huge variety of classical artists. How did this happen? How did an orchestra command weekly studio time to put out a network show featuring… classical music?

There is speculation, as outlined in the Wikipedia article, that the orchestra was assembled to “deflect a Congressional inquiry into broadcasting standards.” This may be true. I highly doubt, however, that NBC dedicated 17 years to dodging broadcast standards. Something about this Symphony program seized the public’s attention.

I think audiences are drawn to simplification: a limited scope, brilliantly executed. What’s that? You don’t like classical music? What if one of the best orchestras in the world went out live to you, for free, on a weekly basis? Would you listen? Would you care?

In the past, the answer to those questions was “yes.” Has the status quo shifted?

It makes me sad that the visceral thrill of live television is sequestered within the testosterone-driven box of the action packed (and golf). Viewing something live, knowing that others are simultaneously watching and, somewhere, the event is taking place right now, should be possible for more events. Unfortunately, classical music programming is relegated to the quasi-obscurity of prerecorded public broadcasts (not to disparage public broadcasting — I love PBS/NPR — but I’m looking for corporate-sponsored cultural touchstones here). If networks are supposed to tell people what to like, why don’t they tell people to dare to try something (anything!) different? “It wouldn’t sell,” they’d say. Really? Seemed to work pretty well before. Perhaps it wouldn’t sell because any attempt at replicating the success of the NBC Symphony Orchestra would be a sad caricature of music: tanned 20-somethings would appear on an overlit, chilled, cramped soundstage somewhere on the west coast, competing to play in “America’s Top Orchestra.”

Nobody would watch that.

Sure, that reality format sometimes works and it is entertaining. But I don’t understand why content is so imbalanced — must we all be constantly bombarded by the lowest common denominator? Why can’t the banal and transient subsidize the sophisticated and enduring?

Television averages a cut every 7 seconds. I don’t know if this is a good or a bad thing, but I do know that you can’t air an orchestra with a cut every 7 seconds. I think the vast majority of arts, humanities, logic, and reason have fled television, beaten out by smooth skin and sound bites. The internet is our next, best hope for bringing people together around the bright bonfire of artistic expression.

I’m hopeful.

4 comments left

Comments

Dan McKeown

I am not quite as hopeful. Some day I might bring a tape recorder to lunch while I am at work so that the world can enjoy the mindless banter and drivel that is spewed almost endlessly concerning ____(enter latest reality program or celeb scandal here). I used to laugh it off as ridiculous people talking about ridiculous things. However, I now realize that this view on life and culture is the purveying norm. There is no other explanation. Why else do these shows continue to be made and these “celebrities” continue to be paid? More people value this sort of entertainment than going to an orchestral performance (my team laughed at me when I told them that I had done just this recently), a local production of an Oscar Wilde play, or even something as simple and fun as hitting up a local comedy club or coffee shop to see what is on display.

Sorry for being the Debby Downer this time.

John +1

America’s Top Orchestra!!! When will that be on?

I don’t know what to think Alex. It is sad that people have to fill their brains with senseless nonsense (double negative?), but people are genuinely interested in the lives of others. Unfortunately, these reality shows aren’t necessarily the best portrayal of life as a whole. The question is: What is cool? In highschool, it would have been much “cooler” to be the starting quarterback than the lead male clarinetist in the band ;) In any respect, the fact that TV is more accessible to children, helps shape their view of what is “good” entertainment. And unfortunately, the shows that hit primetime are not in the humanities category.

Just my $0.02.

Nils

Did you know that the average shot length in feature films is only around 3 seconds? If I remember correctly, the movie Dark City had an average shot length of l.7 seconds. Attention deficit disorder comes to mind…

Alexander Micek

Dan — not a Debby Downer, I think they’re legitimate points. People don’t like anything that requires much attention. I think that’s it — in a population that never sleeps, you’d think there’d be more time to pay attention to different pursuits, but the opposite is true. Everyone pays half of their attention to 4 different meaningless things at once. Sure, we’ve all done it, but some people don’t do anything but that…

Primetime… no time for humanities. It’s like a catchphrase to remember. Though, if the deeper stuff is always buried underneath the dross, where will we end up?

So, with the shortening shot lengths (that feature film length shocked me…), how do we communicate anything of meaning?

Essays Nearby