Television as Modern Art

On May 9^th 1961 Federal Communications Commission Chairman Newton N. Minow delivered a speech to the National Association of Broadcasters entitled “Television and the Public Interest.” This speech is often cited when the allegation is made that television is not art. Minow made the claim that when watching television you “observe a vast wasteland”. Since television’s inception, it has been under scrutiny due to its ability to enter into America’s home and so greatly influence the audience. Television is often viewed as kitsch and commercial. At best, television was viewed as merely a means of transmitting other, pre-existing art forms like theater, vaudeville, music and cinema. The study of television as a unique and prominent art form has been severely over looked, due to its association with middle, or even low-brow tastes. Television has been the most influential art medium of the past century and has increased interest in other forms of “high-brow” art.

In 1948 an NBC executive said, “There is no program history – everything is experimental.” Early television programming was filled with influence from other entertainment mediums. Most people working in television had come from radio and were unsure how to approach this new and unexplored medium. Pat Weaver, NBC president from 1949-1957, had a very optimistic view of television’s potential. He did not see TV as just an entertainment medium, but instead a way of exposing millions of Americans to sophisticated and educational art. As part of “operation frontal lobes,” Weaver designed programs he referred to as spectaculars. Spectaculars were 90-minute to three-hour long programs that did not necessarily follow a broadcasting schedule.  They were intended to show Television’s fullest potential, not only content wise, but also in terms of production values. It was Weaver’s philosophy that “viewers would feel cheated by a recorded performance” (Baughman 87) and insisted that his program be aired live. Many of Weaver’s spectaculars were successful, namely the Broadway musical rendition of Sir James Barrier’s Peter Pan, which had some 65 million Americans watching. Despite some success, viewers had a hard time following the spectacular schedule and did not appreciate when a weekly ½ hour show was interrupted or not aired. Weaver anticipated that an irregular schedule would not bother audiences, or might even entice them, but instead people were just confused. Although Weaver had high expectations for television’s influence, his eventual downfall was his inability to accept TV as its own distinct art form. Weaver attempted to create excellent broadcast programs by re-creating already established entertainment mediums, where he would have been more successful embracing and implementing a completely original format that suited the possibilities and restraints of television.

With television being a commercial medium, it is inevitable that corporate sponsors will have an impact on the programs being produced. In early television businesses often sponsored entire programs, for example Colgate Comedy Hour or Texaco Star Theater. This system gave the companies the control to change the content of the show or at least demand certain aspects be reworked. Weaver was one of the first people working in broadcasting at this time to develop a system where several companies sponsor one program. This was done originally to cover the high production costs of Weaver’s spectaculars, no one sponsor could afford to fund the entire 90-minute to three-hour broadcasts. The benefit of the multi sponsor set-up was that less control was allotted to individual sponsors and the creators of the program were given more artistic freedom.

Television is by no means the only art form that has been influenced commercially. Many artists and art movements, although seen as respectful and genuine have allowed the potential for status, fame or even the prospects of selling their work effect their style and content. An influential time in art history is between 1500 and 1900 where we see the rise and perfection of the oil painting. This style of art is particularly influential to us today because it “Supplies us with our archetypes of ‘artistic genius’” (Berger 84). The norms of oil paintings “still affect the way we see such subjects as landscape, women, food, dignitaries [and] mythology” (Berger 84).

What distinguishes oil painting is the artist’s ability to render people and objects realistically. Many oil paintings were portraits, usually of people who looked relatively wealthy and sophisticated. On the rare occasion there was a rendition of people in poverty, it never was done critical, or with any attempts to show the suffering of the oppressed people. Instead, poor people were represented as stupid, blissful and completely content with their societal standing. Possessions were also commonly painted, possessions that were associated with wealth, class and power.  The rise of the oil painting correlates with the rise of the open art market. Owning an oil painting was a sign of status and wealth, and often they were created with the potential buyer in mind. It was considered at that time that when “you buy a painting you also buy the look of the thing it represents” (Berger 83).  Although this time in history is often looked at as a particularly artistic and influential, many aspects of the artistic world were commercial. Commercialism in art is not specific to oil paintings either, “the art of any period tends to serve the ideological interests of the ruling class” (Berger 86).  A significant difference between art throughout history and television is TVs accessibility. It is not an art form that is created merely to appeal to the wealthy upper class.

William Golden was hired by CBS as the art director and was given much freedom and power to present the company as modern, artistic and sophisticated. Golden commissioned budding and established modern artists to create many print and on air advertisements for CBS. Ben Shahn, who was named on of the “Ten Best Painters” by Look in 1948 and had his art exhibited at many museums including MoMA in 1947, was one of the many artists that Golden hired. Shahn’s work as a modern graphic designer “had the strongest influence on the younger generation of graphic designers… He does not lose prestige by lending his work to industry” (Lynn 93). Because of Shahn’s and many other modern artists involvement in television in the 1950s, everyday American’s were being exposed to modern art whenever they watched TV. The American Institute of Graphic Arts (AIGA) held an exhibition in 1954 to honor the “50 Advertisements of the Year” which celebrated the artistic contribution certain modern advertisements were making. Museums were recognizing the artistic value of commercials and many artists were choosing to get involved with graphic design due to the modernism that existed in that field at this time. The factor that most greatly contributed to the argument that television is not art, its commercialism, was actually the most respected and celebrated artistic outlet in television at this time.

A large factor that contributed to the uneven or inconsistent outcome of television in the 1950s was, in part, because TV had not been clearly defined as a medium. Pat Weaver, NBC president, held the potential for television to a high standard. He believed that Hollywood was producing commercial and formulaic films, which he contributed to low box office numbers, and believed television was going to be America’s answer. He saw the ability to broadcast live into millions of American’s homes as an opportunity to educate the masses by exposing them to high-brow art including music and theater. His spectaculars were often theatrical reproductions. Although Weaver was able to see television as simultaneously a commercial industry and an artistic and education outlet, his downfall was his inability to accept television as its own distinct medium, opposed to simply a transmitting device of other, established art forms.

Theater often does not translate well to television because a theatrical performance does not read the same when it is filmed or video recorded. In Patrick Tucker’s Secrets of Screen Acting, he talks about how actors on film or television must be constantly “cheating” to the cameras and he discusses how a performance must change according to the size of the shot. In theater, an actor or director has no control over where the audience will be looking at any given time. Whereas in television, the cameras very much dictate what the audience is allowed to see at any given time. In television, it would slow down the pacing dramatically for an actor to give a physical reaction to something after they have spoken, so generally the rule on screen is to react before you speak. This rule is counter intuitive to how we act in real life and also how an actor performers in theater, but looks believable on television without slowing down the pacing. These vast differences between screen acting and stage acting are some of the contributing factors as to why “all attempts to videotape live theater performances have failed” (Tucker 13).

Movies made for the silver screen, although often are shown and enjoyed on television, are not as effective when broadcast due to differences in television and cinema. The aspect ratio for movies is 1:85:1, whereas television’s aspect ratio is 4:3, which presents a problem for networks attempting to show a film on TV. A commonly used solution was to add black horizontal bars to the top and bottom of the televised image, creating the illusion of a 16:9 aspect ratio, which made the image (which was originally created for a screen much larger than someone’s living room) even smaller, making it hard to see. Another solution was to pan the image by choosing what part of the frame is most important and cutting out the remainder. This caused the film to be viewed in a way not originally intended by the creators, and often deteriorated the cinematic impact. Another factor as to why film does not translate well to television is because the pacing made for cinema is often slower than television, which causes the expectant viewer to feel bored. Although despite the factors that distract from the viewing pleasure of films being broadcast, in general movies on TV were relatively well received. The re-release of movies on television actually was a large contributor to the increase of ticket sales at movie theaters, even though originally it was theorized that television would cause a decrease in theater attendance.

During WWII many artists living in Europe had fled to the United States to take refuge from the Nazi regime and the war. For the first time in modern time, the United States was beginning to form its own artistic vernacular independent of Europe. This was most prevalent in Modernism and abstract expressionism at this time. The base of the American art scene was in New York City, which is also where all broadcasting companies started and where many shows were produced, especially before CBS and NBC built studios in Hollywood. It was seen as a patriotic concern to encourage American’s involvement in museum and art culture. This was a time in “U.S. history when the arts played a crucial ideological role in cold war sensibilities about national progress and citizenship” (TBD 17). It was during the 1950s and 1960s that there was a “surge in gallery and museum attendance” (Lynn 149). This “surge” can be credited to the collaboration of network television and the Museum of Modern Art.

Many museums saw television as an opportunity to promote the art movement and their specific exhibits. As Americans were moving into the suburbs post WWII “these urban institutions of the arts saw television as a key tool in reaching the suburban family audience” (Spiegel 145). Most of these institutions recognized that women tended to be more art conscious and thus formatted their educational programs to be entertaining and to appeal to women. Most art communities in the US and abroad attempted to distance themselves from the feminine consumer culture and usually appealed to the high-brow male, but MoMA specifically rejected this norm when it collaborated with television, although it did fear the prestige of the institution might be questioned if the patronage become more “low” or “middle-brow”. Despite how seemingly progressive their outreach attempts were, MoMA was not representative of the women and people of color working in modernism and abstract expressionism at this time.

During the 1950s many modernist artists were working commercially to create print and on air material television, specifically the CBS network. Rene Bouche created print advertisements and title cards for entertainers including Jack Benny, Edward R Murrow, Lucille Ball, Desi Arnez, Bing Crosby, Eve Arden, Mary Martin and Red Skelton. His modern line drawings gave a sense of motion and immediacy to the images, whereas a simple photograph would seem motionless and past tense, not an appropriate representation of the live aspect of television. Feliks Topolski was commissioned to draw “Today the Coronation” (1953) the print ad for the broadcasting of Queen Elizabeth’s coronation. CBS, NBC, and ABC were going to be broadcasting filmed footage, which put much more emphasis on how each network advertised the event. Topolski’s association with British culture and government made him especially appropriate for this ad.

Georg Olden was the on-air graphic art director and CBS and created many modern graphic cards. His work with typography and simplistic symbols on specific shows’ title cards were strikingly effect at delivering the feel of the show while staying modern and sophisticated. He “made a significant impact on graphic design, winning some twenty-five awards for his title and promotional art” (Spiegel 100). Olden was in charge of the title cards and scrolling credits produced for CBS programs. Even formulaic dramas and comedies were being given a sense of modernism due to the graphic design that surrounded the programs. The simplicity and modern feel of on screen advertisements created by the networks encouraged many companies to redesign their packaging. This was usually done by reducing the clutter and keeping current with the “more images, less copy” theory of design prevalent at this time. The success of modern graphic design of title cards in television encouraged Hollywood to be more intentional with the design look of the films being produced.

In 1951 Golden debuted his CBS eye logo. The simplistic and clean design was become the icon for the CBS network, and is still in use today, which speaks to the timelessness of the image. The eye was an effective icon for a CBS it so clearly communicates the purpose of the network in all countries and cultures. The eye also distinguished CBS programs as visually powerful, which was suiting for Golden’s emphasis on design and aesthetic. The eye was the first step in unifying CBS’ image. Once created in 1951, it became a way to brand all things as a part of CBS, not just shows and advertisements, but cameras, curtains, equipment and walls. Even the CBS font Didot became a standard in most CBS production spaces. Golden went as far as to changing the faces of clocks and the words on vending machines to Didot font to further unify the image. After WWII many businesses were growing and expanding the services offered, many were transitioning from American companies to doing international business. It became very important during this time for businesses to have a unified and recognizable look. The job of the graphic designer had to encompass a much larger range of work due to this new need.

The 1950s is where we first start to see products, that when being advertised, the focus is on the design opposed to the function. To correspond with the post war economic boom, more products had to be produced to meet the needs of a generation who wanted to consume. With the invention of television, a visual and national arena to advertise was first established. It was at this time that graphic “designers were moving away from being just layout men to assuming creative responsibilities” (Bodenstedt and Remington 143) when creating a visual identity for products and corporations. In the 1950s is where the first graphic design companies open. Television created the need for businesses to be more visually conscious, not only in the products or services they sell, but also aware of the identity of the business itself. Golden created the example of how a corporation should unify their image “After Golden designed the eye for CBS, everyone had to have their own symbol” (Bodenstedt and Roger 149).  Paul Rand, a leading graphic designer who created many company’s logos and overall images, contributes his successes to modernist influences. The influence modernism has had on design “will continue to affect culture for decades to come, because it was so large, so imposing and so irrefutably convincing” (Bodenstedt and Remington 156).

Television has done something most other art and entertainment forms have been unable to do, appeal to a mass audience. Some say specifically that television’s inclusive nature is what determines its definition as “non-art”. Throughout history art has been exclusive partly because its availability purely to those in positions of power and wealth helps it to remain a commodity. Due to television’s commercial nature, modern art was exposed to everyday Americans, causing a sharp incline in museum and gallery attendance, helping the United States identify its own unique Modernism vernacular. Although some still believe it is an “unresolved issue of whether design practice should be an art or a business,” (Bodenstedt and Remington 141) many modern artists were able to comfortably enter in and out of the design business. Early television producers who embraced broadcasts potential and saw it as its own entertainment entity emerged more successful. Television raised a nation’s business leaders awareness on visual impact and the importance of image.

Television has “influenced more people more fundamentally than any other single art medium” (Zettl 3) and this influence has been looked at with close scrutiny as far as the content that is broadcast. The form and aesthetic, on the other hand, has been ignored almost completely by critics and historians. As a media artist, the knowledge of graphic design and television aesthetic will aid me in creating visually stunning television. I have also learned that creating television that is aesthetically pleasing, not only can largely effect the community that watches it, but also gives a television audience what they expect, nice looking images. With the rise of technology, it is now most important to be image aware because of high definition TV. As a culture we have come to believe this notion that television can be nothing more than a low-brow “distribution device for ready-made-messages” (Zettl 3), despite television’s history as a means of making an entire nation more artistically inclined and making the corporate world more design conscious. Television has played an important role in shaping how America relates to design and art, and in itself a distinct art form.