Okay, I’ll be honest: I feel like being a bit dramatic today. So I thought I’d do some complaining for you. Nerd-like complaining involving difficult words, sure, but still, complaining. You know, just in case your day hadn’t been annoying already, I thought I’d happily share two of my own frustrations, both concerning matters of the media.
(1) I have to admit I’m a sucker for bad TV. I liked Big Brother until it grew old (halfway the second season), I liked Idol and I still like Survivor (called Expeditie Robinson in Belgium), so yesterday I thought I’d give another show a try. This one has been around for quite a while, but I never watched it from beginning to end, and since yesterday was the first episode, now was my chance. The show is called Farmers Looking for a Wife, and recently they added or a Man to that, because they’ve had female farmers on. The show’s premise is actually not that bad: it’s a dating show for farmers, who understandably haven’t got much time for a social life. Which leads to toe-cringingly awkward situations of course… All fun and games so far, until somewhere in the latter part of the show. After a short speed date with the various candidates the farmers had to pick three and send the rest home. After each selection the camera then showed the losers’ walk of shame. Five or six women or men - understandbly not the best in either the looks or the brains department - walking back to their cars, heavily upset for being rejected and all of a sudden even more aware of the camera in their faces. Now I’m not so naive to suppose the producers of this show have the farmers’ or the suitors’ best interests at heart. I know it’s TV and I know TV doesn’t show people’s real stories, it uses people to show scripted stories. But this was TV kicking people when they’re down, and even I could taste the dirt of its boot. Is it really true that most people will only feel pity for the contenders in this scene and not hostility towards the makers of the show? Because that’s the only way a shot like that can ever work. That’s cynical.
(2) I’ve been hearing this radio ad for some Brussels university lately and it’s driving me up the walls. If I remember well, it starts off with some sounds from nature and a documentaryesque voice whispering: “We find ourselves in the habitat of the studentus Brusellus…” The rest of the ad I don’t remember because I get so f*ing worked up about studentus Brusellus! It’s pig-Latin, or, for the Flemish among you, Jommeke-Latin. Just take any word and put -us at the end and it’ll be Latin! But for crying out loud, in an ad for a school? Really? You couldn’t be bothered to ask someone with an inkling of Latin to come up with studens Bruxellensis, which isn’t quite correct, but acceptable and still recognizable? Of course, the ad is supposed to be funny, but clearly the joke is in the grotesque circularity of the scene, a scientist describes a scientist (the student) in a scientific way. A bit like when Charlie Chaplin participated in a Charlie Chaplin-lookalike contest. So for the scene to work the scientific element is crucial and has to be believable. It doesn’t have to be correct, but believable. Like when you know the starship in Star Wars doesn’t actually work, but it looks like it works. The thing is, for many people, studentus Brusellus is not believable. In comparison, none of the Latin in the Harry Potter spells is correct, but for those who do notice, they also notice it is consistent (in its errors), which makes it a kind of code. And codes appeal to our sense for secrets and mystery, which not only preserves the dramatic illusion in a movie about a wizard, but even strengthens it! So, all things considered, why be sloppy, use bad Latin and risk losing the attention of anyone who knows a little of Rome’s language? It kills the dramatic illusion of the joke… unless, of course, correct vocabulary itself is a joke to the Brussels university in question. Which I suppose it is.
I told you I was going to be a bit of a drama queen today. Primarily a Latin drama queen, it turned out. Yes, go back to the title, enjoy your Aha-Erlebnis and be amazed by my powers. Always the drama... Sigh.
(1) I have to admit I’m a sucker for bad TV. I liked Big Brother until it grew old (halfway the second season), I liked Idol and I still like Survivor (called Expeditie Robinson in Belgium), so yesterday I thought I’d give another show a try. This one has been around for quite a while, but I never watched it from beginning to end, and since yesterday was the first episode, now was my chance. The show is called Farmers Looking for a Wife, and recently they added or a Man to that, because they’ve had female farmers on. The show’s premise is actually not that bad: it’s a dating show for farmers, who understandably haven’t got much time for a social life. Which leads to toe-cringingly awkward situations of course… All fun and games so far, until somewhere in the latter part of the show. After a short speed date with the various candidates the farmers had to pick three and send the rest home. After each selection the camera then showed the losers’ walk of shame. Five or six women or men - understandbly not the best in either the looks or the brains department - walking back to their cars, heavily upset for being rejected and all of a sudden even more aware of the camera in their faces. Now I’m not so naive to suppose the producers of this show have the farmers’ or the suitors’ best interests at heart. I know it’s TV and I know TV doesn’t show people’s real stories, it uses people to show scripted stories. But this was TV kicking people when they’re down, and even I could taste the dirt of its boot. Is it really true that most people will only feel pity for the contenders in this scene and not hostility towards the makers of the show? Because that’s the only way a shot like that can ever work. That’s cynical.
(2) I’ve been hearing this radio ad for some Brussels university lately and it’s driving me up the walls. If I remember well, it starts off with some sounds from nature and a documentaryesque voice whispering: “We find ourselves in the habitat of the studentus Brusellus…” The rest of the ad I don’t remember because I get so f*ing worked up about studentus Brusellus! It’s pig-Latin, or, for the Flemish among you, Jommeke-Latin. Just take any word and put -us at the end and it’ll be Latin! But for crying out loud, in an ad for a school? Really? You couldn’t be bothered to ask someone with an inkling of Latin to come up with studens Bruxellensis, which isn’t quite correct, but acceptable and still recognizable? Of course, the ad is supposed to be funny, but clearly the joke is in the grotesque circularity of the scene, a scientist describes a scientist (the student) in a scientific way. A bit like when Charlie Chaplin participated in a Charlie Chaplin-lookalike contest. So for the scene to work the scientific element is crucial and has to be believable. It doesn’t have to be correct, but believable. Like when you know the starship in Star Wars doesn’t actually work, but it looks like it works. The thing is, for many people, studentus Brusellus is not believable. In comparison, none of the Latin in the Harry Potter spells is correct, but for those who do notice, they also notice it is consistent (in its errors), which makes it a kind of code. And codes appeal to our sense for secrets and mystery, which not only preserves the dramatic illusion in a movie about a wizard, but even strengthens it! So, all things considered, why be sloppy, use bad Latin and risk losing the attention of anyone who knows a little of Rome’s language? It kills the dramatic illusion of the joke… unless, of course, correct vocabulary itself is a joke to the Brussels university in question. Which I suppose it is.
I told you I was going to be a bit of a drama queen today. Primarily a Latin drama queen, it turned out. Yes, go back to the title, enjoy your Aha-Erlebnis and be amazed by my powers. Always the drama... Sigh.
No comments:
Post a Comment