How do these webisodes imagine and address their audience? How can we compare their transmedia logics to that of FlashForward? How does the imagined transmedia-savvy audience shape or influence the narrative form of the webisode? Does the transmedia audience imagined by The Resistance seem significantly different from the audience imagined/constructed by Chasing Dorota? And in turn, do these two series approach the possibilities of webisodes as transmedia narrative differently?
We’ve seen a range of ways in which media texts use invitational strategies to engage viewers, and we’ve seen what viewers do in response. In Gossip Girl, we’ve seen a representation *of* viewer engagement through technology (and that representation might be understood as an invitational strategy of its own…)
For FlashForward, I’d like us to now consider the impact of these invitational strategies (and the assumption of audience engagement) on the form of the media itself. How does the assumption of audience behavior impact the series’ narrative project, character development, formal language, and representational strategies?
Drawing from your Blogging book, how does Gossip Girl envision the power of the blogger? The reader? The cultural participant? How do digital technologies translate into power struggles, and between whom?
What audience do you feel Gossip Girl is addressing, and in what way? What forms of invitiation for teleparticipation does Gossip Girl use? Do you think its invitational strategies are effective?
How might we read Gossip Girl as addressing/hailing a millennial audience? How might we read it as a representation of the millennial generation as contemporary (digital) media audience and/or author?
Building on our conversation on Monday, do you feel aspiration, nostalgia, generational recognition, or othering at play in your engagement with Gossip Girl?
How do these vids depict the role of the viewer/producer? Where is the audience in these vids? What is the work of the audience? What is the work of the vid?
How do these vids deal with the vexed question of gender in the producer/spectator relationship–and in the source text itself?
How do these vids address their viewers? As spectacle? As narrative? As both? Think in relation to the screenings from the first half of the semester.
Do these vids encourage/invite teleparticipation, and if so, how?
How do these vids compare to the youtube remixes we watched last week–in terms of all the above questions?
How do these remixes construct meaning? What elements do they bring together to create meaning, and to what effect? How do they work with the limitations of source text, cultural context, interface, and technology to create and communicate meaning?
How do these remixes address their viewers? As spectacle? As narrative? As both? Think in relation to the screenings from the first half of the semester.
Do these remixes encourage/invite teleparticipation, and if so, how?
How does this episode interpellate the Xena viewer?
Drawing on Ross’ categories of overt, organic, and obscured invitation, how does it invite its viewer (you and/or the Xena fan) in?
How does this episode depend on teleparticipation?
How might we compare this televisual mode of participatory address (teleparticipation) to our discussions of audience address and engagement in silent cinema and in early sound cinema?
Supernatural Screening Prompts
How do these episodes imagine the viewer? The producer? The relationship between the two? The act of viewing? The act of authorship?
How do these episodes envision gender and sexuality playing a role in the act of viewing and/or producing?
How do these episodes address you as a viewer?
Is there a taboo here? If so, what’s taboo?
How is viewer emotion/investment represented? Is it encouraged or discouraged?
Do these episodes make room for/encourage alternate modes of participation? In other words, do they invite teleparticipation, and if so, how?
Singing in the Rain Prompts
Compare this film’s representation of the movie fan/movie producer relationship to the other films with similar narratives we’ve watched in class (Movie Crazy, Prix de Beaute, even Purple Rose of Cairo). How is this relationship gendered?
How does this film imagine the movie industry and its stars? Are they accessible to fans or held apart?
How does this film represent audience savvy about film technology? [Compare the sound play with that in Movie Crazy.]
How does this film imagine the transition to sound (and the transitional cinema audience)? In so doing, what narrative is this film constructing about contemporary cinema (at the time of its release, in 1952) and the history of cinema and movie audiences?
How does this film represent and/or trade on cinema as spectacle (or audience investment in spectacle) (as compared to 42nd Street, Steamboat Bill Jr., etc.)?
How do spectacle and narrative figure into 42nd Street?
How does 42nd Street envision the viewer/fan turned creator? How does this film depict the potential of the fan? Is the fan located in/associated with narrative progression, spectacle, or both? Is this vision of fan potential gendered?
How does this film imagine the cinematic (or, in other words, the medium of cinema)? How does it, as cinema, address its viewers?
How can we think about questions of race in 42nd Street? How do discourses and representations of blackness & whiteness manifest in the film’s narrative and/or spectacle?
Where might we recognize the work of spectacle/attraction in this film? Does spectacle rupture narrative (as we discussed in relation to Steamboat Bill), and if so, when/how and with what impact? Is spectacle gendered in this film, and if so, how and to what effect?
How, in this film, is Louise Brooks as Lucienne simultaneously the woman who looks (and thus perhaps a stand in for the spectator/audience member) as well as the woman we look at?
[This prompt will make more sense after you’ve read the Hastie] How does Louise Brooks’ star text (and/or the Lulu persona) intersect with her performance as Lucienne? How might her persona have impacted viewers watching this movie?
How do the Edison shorts address and engage the audience? What type of audience do you think these shorts imagine/construct [a credulous one, or a knowing one?]
Do you see traces of the aesthetics of astonishment? The spectacle of attraction? What about the work of narrative?
Steamboat Bill Jr.: Narrative cinema is in full force, of course, by 1929, and Keaton is at the top of his game. Yet the force of
astonishment still plays a key role. Where do you see the dynamic of astonishment at work in Steamboat Bill? How does it address its audience? Is the audience envisioned to be credulous or incredulous? What are we astonished by? Where is the spectacle here, and how does it interplay with the forces of narrative?
Edison titles we’ll be screening:
1904: Nervey Nat [2 min]
1905 Coney Island [4 min]
1905 Police Chasing Scorching Auto [3 min]
1906 Dream of the Rarebit Fiend [6 min]
1906 3 American Beauties [1 min]