Have you ever been listening to an interview with someone, and they are asked a question, and you think: hey! I have an answer for that. No? Maybe it’s just me.
In any event, I was watching an interview with some Twitch streamers, and the interviewer asked why they thought long-form content had become so popular lately. Many Twitch streams last for hours, and have an audience for the whole time. You can go to Twitch and watch people play videogames, board games, tabletop roleplaying games, and you can watch them do it for a long time. Even interviews on Twitch are an hour or two long, compared to the 5 – 10 minutes that you might get on a primetime or late night talk show. And Twitch is not alone: podcasts can focus on one game or interview for hours, or have limited series that go on for dozens of hours of content. Turning novels into 2 hour movies is passé: nowadays they are turned into multi-season televsion shows. Of course, movies themselves are getting longer and longer ... an NPR article puts it like so:
Seven of the year-end top grossers released during the 1980s ran under two hours. But from 1991 to 2000, only three of the top earners were that compact.
Only two year-end box office champs this century have had sub-two-hour run times, and both were animated: Shrek 2 (2004) and Toy Story 3 (2010).
That article decided that movies are getting longer (at least in part) because they’re competing with long streams and television shows, which seems to be begging the question. More interesting was the answer of the streamers in the interview that prompted this whole meditation: they decided that, in today’s world of being increasingly disconnected from each other, sometimes you just want to experience personal interaction vicariously. It’s an interesting theory, and probably not entirely wrong. But I had a different thought.
I’m just old enough to remember movies with intermissions. They weren’t common even then; a holdover from the intermissions in plays or operas, which could last for 3 – 4 hours. (Sure, some were shorter, but then some were even longer.) Long-form content isn’t new, by any means: it’s old. Like so many things, it’s destined to come around again. These types of trends tend to be reactionary, in my opinion.
Becuase I’m also old enough to remember, much more clearly, the advent of MTV in the 80s and the growing popularity of quick cuts. This even has a formal name, apparently: post-classical editing. It was a stylistic choice, but somehow it became a mandate. According to Wikipedia, Lawrence Kasdan said in a documentary “that the generation of people who grew up on MTV and 30 second commercials can process information faster, and therefore demand it.” This assumption that the modern audience can’t handle anything long-form without getting bored was so prevalent by the 90s that the brand new “Comedy Channel” (which would eventually become Comedy Central) even anchored its programming with a “show” named “Short Attention Span Theater,” whose title was, so far as I could tell, completely non-ironic. What it actually was was small snippets of stand-up routines, because obviously no one had the brainpower to sit through a whole stand-up show, right?
Except that I challenge all this conventional wisdom. Short-form content wasn’t what the audiences demanded. It was just a reactionary fad, a way for the modern consumer to differentiate themselves from their parents and grandparents, who had sat through Wagner’s Götterdämmerung and Shakespeare’s Hamlet and even It’s a Mad Mad Mad Mad World and Lawrence of Arabia, both of which were 3½ hours or more long and written as recently as the 60s. We were young and hip and cool, so we wanted more stuff packed into less time ... or at least that sounded cool, because it was different. But you know what always happens: it’s only cool while it’s new, and once everyone is doing it, then it’s old hat and we want something different again. The magic of “Short Attention Span Theater” (which I watched a lot of) was that you could experience a bunch of different comics in a short time. The sheer quantity of people I was exposed to in that decade is completly unrivaled by any other time of my life. But, the thing is, once I discovered someone I liked, I wanted to watch a whole show with them. Five minutes of Bill Hicks is great, but two hours of Bill Hicks is fucking amazing. So I thank SAST for all its contribution
And now the pendulum has swung back in the other direction. Now people are just tired of little short snippets, and sound bites, and quick cuts. We want substance, and nuance, and we’re perfectly willing to devote the time to get it. So I think that is the truly the reason why long-form content is so popular now ... just as it was back in the “old” days.
Give it another couple of decades and there’ll be a hot new trend for watching everything at 1.5× speed, or watching two things at the same time, or somesuch. Or maybe it’ll be simpler than that: maybe everything will go to Talk Soup style summary shows of the long-form content that no one wants to invest the time to actually watch themselves any more. Who knows? But time is a flat circl
No comments:
Post a Comment