To what extent is the argument of John Ellis (in Visible Fictions,1982), that that television emphasises sound over image, still relevant?
Assess this claim with detailed reference to two programmes relevant to
the unit, drawing on critical writings.
An academic argument surrounding
television is whether sound or image is more prevalent in television
programming (Ellis, 1992, Altman, 1986). I plan to look at both sides of the
argument, drawing upon the critical writing of John Ellis in Visible fictions: cinema, television, video
(1992) and Klinger in Beyond the
multiplex cinema (2006) as well as case studies of Doctor Who (1963, BBC) and Quatermass (1979, ITV). I will
investigate how accurate these views are in modern television culture, concluding
with how both arguments can be applied today.
Firstly, I am going to investigate the significance of Ellis’ argument that sound is more prevalent. For a long time, television was struggling to synchronise sound with image, merely combining some silent films with some music, and also struggling with the limitations of bandwidth. Despite this, sound is now an integrated part of our television culture. The argument that sound is the most prevalent part first officially came from John Ellis in 1982. In his book Visible fictions: cinema, television, video (revised 1992) he discussed the differences between the use of sound and image, concluding that the big screen holds our attention more consistently than the small screen. In the cinema the audience have no other choice than to watch what is in front of them, but for television, this is seen to be the total opposite. Ellis said “TV does not encourage the same degree of spectator attention” (1992, pg 128), depicting that at home we use television “casually”, rather than a special event, therefore TV is normally our secondary task.
The first aspect supporting the idea that sound is more important than image is the way sound has changed our consumption of television. Despite the direct mode of address, the image on the screen is stable and almost always restricted. Before sound, to coherently understand what was happening, direct eye contact to the screen was needed. Due to the smaller screen size and the fact that television is normally the secondary task, direct eye contact was not always achieved. Sound has allowed the viewer to move from using their full attention to using television as just a secondary task. This is viable as “sound can be heard where a screen cannot be seen” (John Ellis, 1992, pg 128). Sound can radiate in all directions, when the audience hears something interesting, the sound can drag attention back to the screen, this is described to be the “look and glance effect” (John Ellis, 1992, pg 128). In Quatermass, sound effects are used to catch the viewer’s attention; they are loud and interesting such as the sounds of shouting arguments, a back firing gun and at times even loud music interludes when an evil character appears on scene. When sound effects are heard the audience are likely to look at what is happening – this ensures that the audience will not miss an important/exciting part of the story.
The second way that sound proves to be more important than image, is the way sound saves television when visuals fail. When the image quality is bad, sound can fill in the gaps that the image is missing. A good example of this is Quatermass. The quality of recording image was much poorer in the 70’s, so from the very beginning of Quatermass, sound is used to fill the gaps where visuals fail to tell the story; at first from a male voiceover and later with the use of sound effects. For example in the first ever episode one particular scene opens in a dark alleyway, one that doesn’t give much in the way of detail visually, but the use of a roaring car engine and the heightened dialogue helps to depict what is happening. Also the imitating police sirens depict the dodgy area the character has found himself in and his footprints heighten the fear that he is alone. One can also note use of musical sound effects to shock the audience when he is captured. Similarly these factors are just as important in Doctor Who (1963), the footage shows the importance of sound, but in an entirely different way. This time the show is in black and white and the set lacks the detail we’d be used to today. So instead here we have lots of quick shots, with extreme close ups on the characters’ faces, highlighting their emotions and reactions, which cuts out as much of the set as possible. Also their dialogue seems to be a lot louder than contemporary television shows, to highlight every word they are saying.
The third way that sound proves to be more important than image is the way television has adapted images to almost delete the unnecessary information. Ellis (1992) believes that television shows are aware that the viewer’s attention is short and fragmented. “Being small, low definition, subject to attention that will not be sustained...it is unwilling to waste it on details and inessentials.” (John Ellis, 1992, pg 128). This means that texts have moved away from what you can see in the background and focussed on what is essential to the programme, as texts know the gaps can be filled with sound. Most of television is now shot multi camera, to allow for quick shots between cameras in order to focus on character’s facial emotions. This is much like I discussed earlier in the Doctor Who clip, where there are extreme close ups on the characters faces, instead of the set they are standing in.
Another example of this is the movement towards television “on-the-go”. With media platforms converging, television can now be viewed on smaller devices. Consumers can access their favourite television shows on the move, on their Smartphone and IPod. Because the screens on these devices are tiny compared to most televisions, the use of elaborate, expensive graphics are unnecessary as the audience simply cannot see the detail. Therefore texts would use an approach similar to Quatermass, where they rely on sound effects and music to tell their story. Perhaps the most interesting part of this is the fact that even though technology is advancing and television screens keep getting bigger, the screens on other devices are becoming smaller. Here Ellis’ argument (1992) is becoming more relevant in the contemporary television climate, as we move closer to the small screen.
Another illustration of sound’s dominance of image can be found in television advertising and the use of jingles (where broadcasters use music to advertise to a huge audience). Television adverts are part of most television consumption, with adverts on almost every channel, up to every ten minutes. For instance, the Go Compare (gocompare.com, December 2009, various channels) adverts are written so they get stuck in the audience’s heads and cause discussion. Normally the adverts volume are set much higher internally (which means this is out of the viewer’s control), shocking the audience, whose attention is then drawn to the screen by the “look and glance effect” causing very successful advertising campaigns. However, recently the difference between the volume of the show and the advertisements were becoming so vast that America banned the changing the volume of in advertisements (BBC, 2009). This technique is also used throughout television drama, for example the sound effects and dialogue in shows such as Quatermass and Doctor Who is placed at a much higher volume than we are used to.
The opposing view to this argument is that the image is the more prevalent part of watching television. Whilst the image is consistently put down and graded to be unimportant by Ellis (1992), this makes no sense if you look at the arrival of new technologies. The publics’ new fascination in High Definition and 3D, as well as larger television screens is evident by the increasing amount of television set advertising that appears on television. Therefore if it’s true that we favour sound over image why is this market so huge? This is also relevant when discussing the sets used in television production. Producers spend millions on sets and special effects to make their show look realistic. An example of this is Lost (ABC, SKY1, 2004 – 2010) rumoured to have cost between $10 and $14 million just for the opening two hour pilot episode (Sky 2010). Which is interesting when the consumers of television know that all that we see has been reinvented or remade; it is evident that what is seen is fake, nevertheless the use of impressive visuals are still used to help astonish the audience. Knowing this it is just impossible to say that visuals have now become secondary in our viewing experiences.
In the new series of Doctor Who (2005 – present, BBC) the story is told in a completely different way to the old story discussed earlier. In an episode named The Doctor’s Daughter, we open with a birds-eye view of the “Tardis”. This time the series is shot in colour and the set seems to be carefully designed for every specific detail. The show has not stopped using close ups on the actors faces to see the expressions and emotions, instead they are paired with close ups of the set and lots of special effects (within three seconds flames and sparks are flying all over the set). However it becomes apparent that this is just a small special effect, when within three minutes a much larger explosion is visible. With programmes like this being made, how can anyone say that image is being overridden for sound?
However the use of sound effects is also not forgotten, still being prevalently used in the new series; from background music, to the Tardis’ unique sounds, to the sounds of guns loading. Also the use of the dialogue is still very important, no sound effects override what a character is saying, the dialogue is set at a high volume and there is also differentiation in accent between the characters (one that seems amplified to some extent). Here we have a programme which is combining the best of both worlds; sound and image. For example, when Martha escapes to discover a derelict land, there is a strong emphasis on the visuals –yet Martha’s screams and sighs are amplified for the audience; here neither sound nor image are being favoured.
The forerunner for this argument is Klinger, in her text Beyond the multiplex (2006) she empathises the significance of high quality visuals in home cinema opposing Ellis’ argument on sound. One of Ellis’ biggest arguments is the fact visuals are secondary due to the small screen, whereas cinema has a large screen. However home cinema systems have made small screen in the home almost non-existent, the invention of home cinema is bringing a big screen into a small screen environment. If the consumer is interested in how big their screens is, high definition and how all this is going to impact their viewing experience, it’s incredibly unjust to then say that the visuals are secondary to sound as “HDTV alone powerfully aligns television with quality image-making” (Klinger, 2006, pg 27).
Another aspect that supports the high quality visual experience is the introduction of recording television shows on film. This was introduced in 1955, with the first to be shot on 35mm film in front of a studio audience being I Love Lucy (1951-1957, CBS). The use of film allows the shows to be filmed and played back at a much higher quality and therefore enhances the consumers’ visual experience. This is also important as it meant that programmes such as Quatermass and Doctor Who are now here in 2010 on DVD for the audiences to relive. The home cinema system, as discussed, provides for a visual experience in the home, this is one that Doctor Who successfully provides for due to its high quality image, this is where Quatermass falls short of impressing the audience. Even though the sound skills used in Quatermass are still important factors in creating traditional television and on devices such as the IPod, the low quality images made in its time do not work as well in the home cinema.
Both Ellis (1992) and Klinger (2006) have interesting arguments for the sound over image debate. Ellis believes that television within the home could never compare to the quality of the image in the cinemas, but his model of thought can be seen as outdated. As Klinger (2006) discusses, with the introduction of HD and 3D, the technology we have in 2010 can easily compare to what we see the cinema, we can even go as far as creating our own cinema. Ellis (1992) says that sound is much more distinct than image, saying that we pay much more attention to what we see rather than what we hear, but Klinger disagrees: how can the image still be unimportant? Combined the two arguments can create a coherent explanation of the advantages of sound and television, but I do not feel that one reigns more powerful. In conclusion, I feel that the use of new technologies is allowing the viewer to have the best of “both worlds” (as discussed with the latest Doctor Who series), meaning that in 2010, the viewer need not pick between the sounds or image.
Firstly, I am going to investigate the significance of Ellis’ argument that sound is more prevalent. For a long time, television was struggling to synchronise sound with image, merely combining some silent films with some music, and also struggling with the limitations of bandwidth. Despite this, sound is now an integrated part of our television culture. The argument that sound is the most prevalent part first officially came from John Ellis in 1982. In his book Visible fictions: cinema, television, video (revised 1992) he discussed the differences between the use of sound and image, concluding that the big screen holds our attention more consistently than the small screen. In the cinema the audience have no other choice than to watch what is in front of them, but for television, this is seen to be the total opposite. Ellis said “TV does not encourage the same degree of spectator attention” (1992, pg 128), depicting that at home we use television “casually”, rather than a special event, therefore TV is normally our secondary task.
The first aspect supporting the idea that sound is more important than image is the way sound has changed our consumption of television. Despite the direct mode of address, the image on the screen is stable and almost always restricted. Before sound, to coherently understand what was happening, direct eye contact to the screen was needed. Due to the smaller screen size and the fact that television is normally the secondary task, direct eye contact was not always achieved. Sound has allowed the viewer to move from using their full attention to using television as just a secondary task. This is viable as “sound can be heard where a screen cannot be seen” (John Ellis, 1992, pg 128). Sound can radiate in all directions, when the audience hears something interesting, the sound can drag attention back to the screen, this is described to be the “look and glance effect” (John Ellis, 1992, pg 128). In Quatermass, sound effects are used to catch the viewer’s attention; they are loud and interesting such as the sounds of shouting arguments, a back firing gun and at times even loud music interludes when an evil character appears on scene. When sound effects are heard the audience are likely to look at what is happening – this ensures that the audience will not miss an important/exciting part of the story.
The second way that sound proves to be more important than image, is the way sound saves television when visuals fail. When the image quality is bad, sound can fill in the gaps that the image is missing. A good example of this is Quatermass. The quality of recording image was much poorer in the 70’s, so from the very beginning of Quatermass, sound is used to fill the gaps where visuals fail to tell the story; at first from a male voiceover and later with the use of sound effects. For example in the first ever episode one particular scene opens in a dark alleyway, one that doesn’t give much in the way of detail visually, but the use of a roaring car engine and the heightened dialogue helps to depict what is happening. Also the imitating police sirens depict the dodgy area the character has found himself in and his footprints heighten the fear that he is alone. One can also note use of musical sound effects to shock the audience when he is captured. Similarly these factors are just as important in Doctor Who (1963), the footage shows the importance of sound, but in an entirely different way. This time the show is in black and white and the set lacks the detail we’d be used to today. So instead here we have lots of quick shots, with extreme close ups on the characters’ faces, highlighting their emotions and reactions, which cuts out as much of the set as possible. Also their dialogue seems to be a lot louder than contemporary television shows, to highlight every word they are saying.
The third way that sound proves to be more important than image is the way television has adapted images to almost delete the unnecessary information. Ellis (1992) believes that television shows are aware that the viewer’s attention is short and fragmented. “Being small, low definition, subject to attention that will not be sustained...it is unwilling to waste it on details and inessentials.” (John Ellis, 1992, pg 128). This means that texts have moved away from what you can see in the background and focussed on what is essential to the programme, as texts know the gaps can be filled with sound. Most of television is now shot multi camera, to allow for quick shots between cameras in order to focus on character’s facial emotions. This is much like I discussed earlier in the Doctor Who clip, where there are extreme close ups on the characters faces, instead of the set they are standing in.
Another example of this is the movement towards television “on-the-go”. With media platforms converging, television can now be viewed on smaller devices. Consumers can access their favourite television shows on the move, on their Smartphone and IPod. Because the screens on these devices are tiny compared to most televisions, the use of elaborate, expensive graphics are unnecessary as the audience simply cannot see the detail. Therefore texts would use an approach similar to Quatermass, where they rely on sound effects and music to tell their story. Perhaps the most interesting part of this is the fact that even though technology is advancing and television screens keep getting bigger, the screens on other devices are becoming smaller. Here Ellis’ argument (1992) is becoming more relevant in the contemporary television climate, as we move closer to the small screen.
Another illustration of sound’s dominance of image can be found in television advertising and the use of jingles (where broadcasters use music to advertise to a huge audience). Television adverts are part of most television consumption, with adverts on almost every channel, up to every ten minutes. For instance, the Go Compare (gocompare.com, December 2009, various channels) adverts are written so they get stuck in the audience’s heads and cause discussion. Normally the adverts volume are set much higher internally (which means this is out of the viewer’s control), shocking the audience, whose attention is then drawn to the screen by the “look and glance effect” causing very successful advertising campaigns. However, recently the difference between the volume of the show and the advertisements were becoming so vast that America banned the changing the volume of in advertisements (BBC, 2009). This technique is also used throughout television drama, for example the sound effects and dialogue in shows such as Quatermass and Doctor Who is placed at a much higher volume than we are used to.
The opposing view to this argument is that the image is the more prevalent part of watching television. Whilst the image is consistently put down and graded to be unimportant by Ellis (1992), this makes no sense if you look at the arrival of new technologies. The publics’ new fascination in High Definition and 3D, as well as larger television screens is evident by the increasing amount of television set advertising that appears on television. Therefore if it’s true that we favour sound over image why is this market so huge? This is also relevant when discussing the sets used in television production. Producers spend millions on sets and special effects to make their show look realistic. An example of this is Lost (ABC, SKY1, 2004 – 2010) rumoured to have cost between $10 and $14 million just for the opening two hour pilot episode (Sky 2010). Which is interesting when the consumers of television know that all that we see has been reinvented or remade; it is evident that what is seen is fake, nevertheless the use of impressive visuals are still used to help astonish the audience. Knowing this it is just impossible to say that visuals have now become secondary in our viewing experiences.
In the new series of Doctor Who (2005 – present, BBC) the story is told in a completely different way to the old story discussed earlier. In an episode named The Doctor’s Daughter, we open with a birds-eye view of the “Tardis”. This time the series is shot in colour and the set seems to be carefully designed for every specific detail. The show has not stopped using close ups on the actors faces to see the expressions and emotions, instead they are paired with close ups of the set and lots of special effects (within three seconds flames and sparks are flying all over the set). However it becomes apparent that this is just a small special effect, when within three minutes a much larger explosion is visible. With programmes like this being made, how can anyone say that image is being overridden for sound?
However the use of sound effects is also not forgotten, still being prevalently used in the new series; from background music, to the Tardis’ unique sounds, to the sounds of guns loading. Also the use of the dialogue is still very important, no sound effects override what a character is saying, the dialogue is set at a high volume and there is also differentiation in accent between the characters (one that seems amplified to some extent). Here we have a programme which is combining the best of both worlds; sound and image. For example, when Martha escapes to discover a derelict land, there is a strong emphasis on the visuals –yet Martha’s screams and sighs are amplified for the audience; here neither sound nor image are being favoured.
The forerunner for this argument is Klinger, in her text Beyond the multiplex (2006) she empathises the significance of high quality visuals in home cinema opposing Ellis’ argument on sound. One of Ellis’ biggest arguments is the fact visuals are secondary due to the small screen, whereas cinema has a large screen. However home cinema systems have made small screen in the home almost non-existent, the invention of home cinema is bringing a big screen into a small screen environment. If the consumer is interested in how big their screens is, high definition and how all this is going to impact their viewing experience, it’s incredibly unjust to then say that the visuals are secondary to sound as “HDTV alone powerfully aligns television with quality image-making” (Klinger, 2006, pg 27).
Another aspect that supports the high quality visual experience is the introduction of recording television shows on film. This was introduced in 1955, with the first to be shot on 35mm film in front of a studio audience being I Love Lucy (1951-1957, CBS). The use of film allows the shows to be filmed and played back at a much higher quality and therefore enhances the consumers’ visual experience. This is also important as it meant that programmes such as Quatermass and Doctor Who are now here in 2010 on DVD for the audiences to relive. The home cinema system, as discussed, provides for a visual experience in the home, this is one that Doctor Who successfully provides for due to its high quality image, this is where Quatermass falls short of impressing the audience. Even though the sound skills used in Quatermass are still important factors in creating traditional television and on devices such as the IPod, the low quality images made in its time do not work as well in the home cinema.
Both Ellis (1992) and Klinger (2006) have interesting arguments for the sound over image debate. Ellis believes that television within the home could never compare to the quality of the image in the cinemas, but his model of thought can be seen as outdated. As Klinger (2006) discusses, with the introduction of HD and 3D, the technology we have in 2010 can easily compare to what we see the cinema, we can even go as far as creating our own cinema. Ellis (1992) says that sound is much more distinct than image, saying that we pay much more attention to what we see rather than what we hear, but Klinger disagrees: how can the image still be unimportant? Combined the two arguments can create a coherent explanation of the advantages of sound and television, but I do not feel that one reigns more powerful. In conclusion, I feel that the use of new technologies is allowing the viewer to have the best of “both worlds” (as discussed with the latest Doctor Who series), meaning that in 2010, the viewer need not pick between the sounds or image.
Essay Bibliography
Altman, Rick (1986), 'Television/Sound' in ed. Modleski, Tania Studies in Entertainment: critical approaches to mass culture, Bloomington: Indiana UP
BBC, 2009. US moves to ban 'excessively noisy' TV advertisements The BBC, [online] (Last updated at 22:57, Tuesday, 15 December 2009) Available at: <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8415214.stm> [Accessed on 3rd December 2010].
The BBC, 1963. An Unearthly Child, Doctor Who, [Online] 23 November 1963. Available at: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgF38tICV-w&feature=related> [Accessed on 4th December 2010].
The BBC, 2008. The Doctor's Daughter, Doctor Who [Online] 10 May 2008 Available at: <http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00bbpsb/Doctor_Who_Series_4_The_Doctors_Daughter/> [Accessed on 4th December 2010]
Ellis, John (1982), Visible Fictions: Cinema, Television, Video, London: Routledge.
Gocompare, (December 2009). Man sings in restaurant (40 seconds). Television advertisement, many cable channels. Available at: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycnwMbpVcoo> [Accessed: 3rd December 2010]
I Love Lucy, (1951 – 1957). [Television show] CBS, USA, 15 October 1951.
Klinger, B (2006). Beyond the multiplex cinema, new technologies, and the home. Univeristy of California Press.
Sky, 2010. [Online] Available at: <http://sky1.sky.com/lost> [Accessed on 3rd December 2010]
Thames Television, (1979). Ringstone Round, Quatermass [online] 24 October 1979. Available at: < http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43EZbisZvqc&feature=related> [Accessed: 4th December 2010] <br><br>
BBC, 2009. US moves to ban 'excessively noisy' TV advertisements The BBC, [online] (Last updated at 22:57, Tuesday, 15 December 2009) Available at: <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8415214.stm> [Accessed on 3rd December 2010].
The BBC, 1963. An Unearthly Child, Doctor Who, [Online] 23 November 1963. Available at: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgF38tICV-w&feature=related> [Accessed on 4th December 2010].
The BBC, 2008. The Doctor's Daughter, Doctor Who [Online] 10 May 2008 Available at: <http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00bbpsb/Doctor_Who_Series_4_The_Doctors_Daughter/> [Accessed on 4th December 2010]
Ellis, John (1982), Visible Fictions: Cinema, Television, Video, London: Routledge.
Gocompare, (December 2009). Man sings in restaurant (40 seconds). Television advertisement, many cable channels. Available at: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycnwMbpVcoo> [Accessed: 3rd December 2010]
I Love Lucy, (1951 – 1957). [Television show] CBS, USA, 15 October 1951.
Klinger, B (2006). Beyond the multiplex cinema, new technologies, and the home. Univeristy of California Press.
Sky, 2010. [Online] Available at: <http://sky1.sky.com/lost> [Accessed on 3rd December 2010]
Thames Television, (1979). Ringstone Round, Quatermass [online] 24 October 1979. Available at: < http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43EZbisZvqc&feature=related> [Accessed: 4th December 2010] <br><br>