Television is one the most influential phenomena of human history. Both as a technology and as cultural phenomenon. Life without television is unimaginable for most people in the developed world. Television takes a very central role, from politics to entertainment to social life. So why do science fiction writers rarely envision television in ‘the’ future?
One of the reasons might be that entertainment is not of interest when building new societies from the ground up. Another reason might be that a lot of science fiction deals with catastrophes and people just don’t have time to waste. Yet another reason is that people literally work all the time and work is fun and engaging and fulfilling. I don’t think so!
Considering the lack of television (or media recognizable as evolved from television as we know it) makes you wonder if entertainment is completely absent in the science fiction literature. It is rare but it is not absent. There are examples of life performances. Music is always attending the party. And some form of theatre usually finds its way into some of the scenes. But almost every manifestation of entertainment makes the audience part of the experience. Acting roles in holographic plays of Shakespeare is an example.
But why no (evolved) television? I think it is very very difficult to imagine television changing. Even our most imaginative science fiction writers choose other innovations to consider. They just don’t find it interesting to ponder television changing. Perhaps television is just never going away!!
(I have read a considerable amount of science fiction. Both recent and older. The obvious counter example is 1984, by George Orwell. Another counter example is Interface, by Stephen Bury.)
Image
I think television tends to appear in Science Fiction literature as part of what Liesbet van Zoonen characterises as the ‘apocalyptic’ view of television - that it represents a sinister trend towards control. I can’t think of examples where it just exists innocently as entertainment, or as a genuine source of pleasure. Usually it’s positioned as ‘guilty’ rather than ‘innocent’.
i agree. in both counter exampes this is the case. in 1984, though, the television itself ‘changed’, it got extremely big and unescapable while becoming an eye for control.
perhaps the other counter example is more interesting. Interface deals with polling systems and direct feedback into the brain of the politician running for office (through a mediator.) the television in this example is necessary to deliver messages to everyone. it is not necessarily described as ‘guilty’. i experienced it more as ‘just being there.’ but with a necessary role in the events of the story.
(still thinking of other counter examples. anyone?)