How much do they reveal about the personality and character of the contemporary Uhmerican woman? Is reality TV an accurate portrait? Watching Hell's Kitchen could be an eye-opener for some, especially if they are living overseas and not used to women acting poorly.
Even if you ignore the fact that those who are drawn to such shows are probably more shameless and narcissistic than the average Uhmerican... that supposed motivation reveals only one part of their character. There may not be a big distinction in how they behave and talk when compared to their non-celebrity peers. Such shows feature drama, interpersonal conflict, and arguing, most likely in the belief that this will keep the interest of viewers, who are, of course, needed for ratings. Surely, the antagonism can't be wholly faked? There is some honesty in what the contestants say, how aggressive they are, and what profanity they use. I would think that there would be some measure of audience outrage if viewers found out that the ghetto behavior was not genuine. "Racism" or something.
Reality TV can make some things up and some shows are more scripted than others, but given the lack of acting talent of "pretty" and not-so-pretty faces and their format, some shows can only fake so much. It would be very amusing, though, if someone were able to adopt a new persona, with a different accent and mannerisms, in order to be on some show. Shows that are centered on a competition with the drama being secondary (Amazing Race, Top Chef) or dating shows that are more like game shows (the junk currently on Fox) are probably more real than those that are centered primarily on interpersonal drama (e.g. The Bachelor, Big Brother). Survivor seems to be somewhere between the two. Are there egregious examples of fake reality TV?
In the competitions, no one deliberately makes themselves look bad? Though they may have the excuse that they were pretending and showing off their acting skills. "I was just playing a role of the villain, I'm not really like that." Some may even express regret at their poor behavior. It may be that the desire to be a minor celebrity overrules any consideration of shame or maintaining appearances, especially when one has to deal with other people whom one does not like. In the language frequently used on the internet they are just attention wh*res. Unfortunately bad behavior hasn't yet caused viewers to tune out, at least not those who were interested enough to start watching these shows when they started.
The women in competitions come off as being mannish, coarse, and unrefined, while those on the dating shows are narcissistic, frivolous, and feeling entitled. No one pretends to be a lady; no one knows how. On the dating shows, they may be able to dress themselves up (according to contemporary standards, which are usually immodest) or make themselves pretty, but what they say and how they say it betray what they are really like. Who wouldn't want the 50s in comparison with that?
One can compare the contestants on Hell's Kitchen, many of whom are "career" women, professional cooks or chefs who want to make it big in the culinary world, with the amateurs on MasterChef. There is more of a mixture with respect to their backgrounds on MasterChef (and more younger women). Is coarse behavior related more to the fact that many of the competitors on Hell's Kitchen are "professional" women trying to break into a "man's world" or to their socioeconomic background/upbringing?
As for MasterChef... Felix may be an ambitious, overconfidence cook but her personality isn't completely disagreeable. Christina, who is notable for the show because of her blindness, is even more demure?
One with Christine...
'MasterChef,' 'Hell's Kitchen' recaps: Not following orders
No comments:
Post a Comment