Gin and T.V.
This is in response to Gin and the Cognitive Surplus, itself a review of Gin, Television, and Social Surplus.
I’m not sure if it is ‘waste’ to not do productive things all the time, as the article seems to imply. I don’t think it is optimal for humans to work at full mental capacity continuously. Sometimes you need to waste time by watching T.V. and enjoying an extra-dry gin martini, stirred with ice and served with a twist . I’m also not convinced that participatory media should be seen as a superior form of entertainment. I prefer it, but others might not.
I may not have a good reference for it, as I’ve never really watched a lot of T.V., preferring to spend my time in front of a computer. When I was young, it was highly productive time as I was learning to program, but by the time I got to college to receive my “formal” training in computer programming I was so efficient I only needed to do maybe thirty hours of it in a week (of which maybe five was spent on actual assignments). My remaining school work amounted to maybe another fifteen, most of which I did during lectures. I spent the rest of my time playing video games — basically the same as watching the boob tube.
The video games made my reflexes superior, and if I had gone pro in 2000 playing Starcraft for money I suppose this would have been time well spent, but I didn’t, so all those years playing Doom and Jazz Jackrabbit can now only be considered a complete waste of time. Now do I feel bad about this? No. I needed something to cool my brain down when I wasn’t coding.
Fast forward to the present, I still spend a lot of time in front of the computer and practically none in front of the T.V. Instead of video games, I mostly read and write blogs. Is it superior to veggin’ out on the couch watching the box? I suppose I’m learning new things occasionally and helping others from time to time. But to be frank, a good chunk of what I read is shit, and I’m man enough to admit a good chunk of what I have written over the years is shit too. Virtually all the Wikipedia articles I’ve done any serious work on have been reverted or edited to the point I don’t recognize them. In fact, the only one that remains largely unchanged, the one where my social surplus actually made a difference, is an article about a fictional television character!* Now do I feel bad about this? No. I need something to cool my brain down after fixing computers all day.
Indeed, the very act of writing this post is mostly a waste of time, it teaches little, not very entertaining, written more poorly than the article it references, etc… But it’s Sunday and I really don’t feel like being productive today. Although it has taken about 300 more words then required to actually say it, I think for most people, the time we are not working at our ‘real’ jobs should not be seen as unproductive time, merely regenerative time. For some, a by-product of that is something useful. For others, it produces nothing more than their relaxation — it’s not wrong or a waste.
—
* Now that the character is dead, edits on the article will slow down to almost nothing, which likely means that the work that I, and the editors who followed me, will remain largely unchanged. My Wikipedia legacy so far then, is the being the guy who rebuilt the article on Callandra Henderson-Tyrol.
Everyone has times when they are too tired to do anything useful whether that’s reading something challenging, writing, or coding, etc. I don’t think anyone would argue that we should never do activities that are unchallenging like most TV is. If a funny TV show makes you laugh and allows you to relax that is probably a good thing.
However, I do think it is fair to say that participatory activities such as blogging, sports or even gaming are better on some level because they allow you to improve yourself (even if the skill is not that useful).
Also note that the article was mostly picking on sitcoms. While there is TV that is challenging and educational sitcoms are not.
[Also posted at http://www.coverfire.com/archives/2008/05/03/gin-and-the-cognitive-surplus/#comment-200036
Comment by Dan Siemon — 2008/5/4 @ 20:25
And I have an idea of which television show you have in mind. :) If it triggers conversation, even T.V. can do more than simply entertain. But it would be hypocritical for me to come down hard on sitcoms — I really liked Seinfeld when it was on, I found it hysterically funny and very entertaining for some reason.
If nothing else, participatory activity on the Internet brings people together. I’ve often thought this about online video gamers. They are often painted as basement-dwelling misanthropes, but in reality they are out there fraggin’ and slaying bog monsters with other people. Even the adversarial games often build bonds and friendships and that sort of thing.
I remember one Counterstrike player plopping down the credit card to pay for a new system and she commented that she never would have thought she’d upgrade for a single video game. “Guys do that,” she said. I told her that you are buying this kit so you might excel at your sport. When you haul this thing down to that big match in the fall you’ll get to meet a lot of those people who’ve been fragging and that’s all good. You might even win. It’s really no different than meeting up with your old rivals at the Tour de France.
In her case, gaming was a possible career. For me, it’s an unproductive diversion only. I’m rambling now. I guess I just would never want others to accuse me of wasting my “cognitive surplus” on activities that were not seen as productive. Given that, I don’t see how I could criticize someone else for enjoying Big Brother or American Idol or any of the brainless shows you get on the T.V. these days.
Comment by cobolhacker — 2008/5/5 @ 11:32