i.

cold open

Félix Guattari said:

"[T]here is no univocal subjectivity based on cut, lack or suture, but there are ontologically heterogeneous modes of subjectivity, constellations of incorporeal Universes of reference which take the position of partial enunciators in multiple domains of alterity, or more precisely, domains of alterification." (1995:45)

The generic idea of a television program has been met with both high criticism and high praise. It is a multifaceted, multi-dimensional life form that spans not only within its own medium but has the cultural, penetrative impact that fosters a transcendence into others.

The continuous flow made possible by the serialisation of the television program was originally derided, even stigmatised for its association with an "assembly line aesthetic" (Wilsher in Creeber, 1997:11). The strong, overwhelming power of capitalistic motivations could not have been escaped; it was always seen as something that may have "valued profit more than it did artistic freedom and expression" (Creeber, 2004:2), reducing it to what British television dramatist Dennis Potter dismisses as 'formula ridden' television (Potter in Creeber, 1994:12).

On the other end of the critical spectrum, Vanity Fair has called The Sopranos "perhaps the greatest pop culture masterpiece of its day" (Biskind, 2007). The triumph on a scale which transcends its own medium and into the broad scope of popular culture itself. There is the realisation of a neglected component allowing this to be possible, owing to serialisation.

"In particular, the way some storylines were developed and resolved while other were [not] gave greater sense to realism… By increasing its narrative complexity in this manner, Nelson argues that the ‘flexi-narrative’ form better responds to and reveals the complexity, ambiguity and lack of closure that typifies the contemporary world... [T]he sheer breadth of the television serial frequently allows them room and possibilities that cinema or theatre simply cannot. ” (Creeber, 2004:5-6)

ii.

serial, defined

The serialisation of television is a phenomena that evolved from the remnants of ongoing radio serials. The serialisation of television, in its most basic sense, can be broken up into these genres:

• Soap operas are stories that are continuous and indefinite, usually left open-ended or unresolved in order to sustain and perpetuate its eternal existence. Examples include the primetime Neighbours (Grundy, 1985-) and or the daytime Dallas (CBS, 1978-91). (Creeber, 2004:8)



• Series have a self-contained episodic format, events are usually resolved within the episode. Examples could include most situational comedies, such as Frasier (NBC, 1993-2004) [moment of subjectivity: arguably the greatest show ever created], or a primetime drama series like Law & Order and its countless spinoffs. (Creeber, 2004:8)



• Serials usually have continuing story arcs lasting several episodes which may or may not witness any kind of closure, climax or resolution. Ironically, it tends to lack the on-going nature of soap operas, or the consistently self-resolving, self-contained nature of series, opting for a trajectory towards a conclusion. Examples include The West Wing (NBC, 1999-2006), 24 (FOX, 2001-) and The Sopranos (HBO, 1999-2007). (Creeber, 2004:8)



Later on, I will examine how the boundaries and distinctions between series and serials generally approaching oblivion. Both are beginning to overlap in highly ambiguous ways, adopting elements of one another to form hybrids which become difficult to classify without considering the grey area.

iii.

Guattari, defined

Guattari appears to be an enthusiast for biological metaphors when describing his theoretical frameworks. The most significant extractions I found from the chapter Machinic Heterogenesis, especially in relation to the serial, are the concepts of heterogenesis, ontogenetics, phylogenetics and autopoiesis. Drawing on several references including Guattari himself, here are some definitions to set up a foundation for analysis:

In the definition offered by wordnet, heterogenesis is defined as “the alternation of two or more different forms in the life cycle of a plant or animal”.

Ontogenetics, according to Wikipedia at this point in time, describes "the origin and the development of an organism from the fertilized egg to its mature form".

Phylogenetics, on the contrary, is the "study of evolutionary relatedness among various groups of organisms (e.g., species, populations)... [and] treats each species as a group of lineage-connected individuals".

Hammer example:

“…the most humble instruments, utensils and tools which don’t escape this phylogenesis. One could, for example, dedicate an exhibition to the evolution of the hammer since the Iron Age and conjecture about what it will become in the context of new materials and technologies. The hammer that one buys today at the supermarket is, in a way, “drawn out” on a phylogenetic line of infinite, virtual extension.” (Guattari, 1995:40)

Basing it on the example present by Guattari, here is an example of these biological metaphors applied to a certain 'proto-machine', the hammer.

The present form of a hammer, such as the one above, could just be one of the many alternating forms in which the hammer exists through its lifetime (heterogenesis). The actual "life" of the hammer can be seen from an ontogenetic or phylogenetic perspective, whether it be its ontogenetic existence from the formation and discovery of its raw materials (wood and metal) to its ultimate wear and corrosion from use and time, or whether it be the actual phylogenetic existence of its technology; the notion or idea of the function of a hammer, spanning across variety of 'types' in an evolutionary, generational process.

Autopoiesis is another slightly different but vastly significant and relevant analogical term in the world of serial.

(auto=self, poiesis=creation)

It basically describes the ability to create and produce and re-generate and engender itself and its components. As Francisco Varela puts it, in contrast to the opposite allopoiesis, “allopoietic machines produce something other than themselves, (an example from Wikipedia that of an assembly line, where the final product, such as a car, is distinct from the machines doing the producing) while autopoietic machines engender and specify their own organisation and limits” (Varela quoted in Guattari, 1995:39).

Extracted from the current page on Wikipedia:

Autopoiesis literally means "auto (self)-creation" (from the Greek: auto - αυτό for self- and poiesis - ποίησις for creation or production), and expresses a fundamental dialectic between structure and function. The term was originally introduced by Chilean biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela in 1973:

"An autopoietic machine is a machine organized (defined as a unity) as a network of processes of production (transformation and destruction) of components which: (i) through their interactions and transformations continuously regenerate and realize the network of processes (relations) that produced them; and (ii) constitute it (the machine) as a concrete unity in space in which they (the components) exist by specifying the topological domain of its realization as such a network."
(Maturana, Varela, 1980, p. 78)

I will present in later analysis how this highlighted portion is the most fundamental notion in regards to the function of serial, particularly the 'formula-ridden' soap opera.

iv.

Guattari and the serial

Autopoiesis also has a very strong tie to the world of the idea of serial.

“Autopoietic machines undertake an incessant process of the replacement of their components as they must continually compensate for the external perturbations to which they are exposed.” (Guattari, 1995:39)

The soap opera, due to its long-running nature and narrowly targeted audience, is constrained to a strict, formulaic means of sustaining its existence. The characters, settings and interactions all travel through this 'machine' built around a rigid story structure consisting of elements such as relationships, births, marriages and the like, all in ephemeral dosages. At the expiration of any of these components, the 'machine' so to speak regenerates or replenishes itself in the form of new characters, settings and interactions all bound by the same rules and a cycle emerges.

The notion of autopoiesis isn't strictly limited to soap operas. The current longest-running primetime drama series in history, Law & Order, has an actual tabulated character structure: six characters divided into two 'teams', the police and the attorneys. The hierarchical structure of these teams is the single element of the show that has never changed in its 18 season run (to date). The characters, however, change and 're-generate' themselves frequently, barely ever retaining the same line-up for more than a few seasons.

"Structure implies feedback loops, it puts into play a concept of totalisation that it itself masters. It is occupied by inputs and outputs whose purpose is to make the structure function according to a principle of eternal return. It is haunted by a desire for eternity. The machine, on the contrary, is shaped by a desire for abolition. Its emergence is doubled with breakdown, catastrophe - the menace of death. It possess a supplement: a dimension of alterity which it develops in different forms." (Guattari, 1995:37)

The autopoietic nature of this show, in a literal sense, is the reason it is managed to sustain its existence, but we neglect the whole other dimension of viewer interest. This is where the genres begin to blend and infect one another in synergetic ways to sustain the notion of serial. It is a form of evolution.

“Each new mutation either alters the destiny of the assemblage, or it disappears into silence. Each component of the assemblage can only be understood as a part of the whole, or its specific, living intensity is killed.” (Chaffey, April 2008)

Then you have serials like what’s aired on cable networks, which Canby (cited in Creeber, 2004:10) describes as ‘megamovies’. Because they are usually broadcast on cable television, ‘megamovies’ are therefore bound by the conventions of advertiser-sponsored free-to-air television. This allows it to exploit both an uninterrupted, single episode airing, reinforcing the flowing nature of the televisual image (Williams, 1974:86-96), and ability to be liberal with its content and explore more adult themes—opening a whole realm of new possibilities in the idea of serial.

These programs tend to be produced like films, produced on high budgets (such as HBO/BBC’s Rome) experimenting with film and narrative techniques. The Sopranos has on more than one occasion been compared to Scorsese’s contemporary gangster classic, Goodfellas (1990).

One of the many detailed sets recreating Ancient Rome in Rome.

However, there is again a new ambiguity with network television catching up in terms of the quality of program. NBC, FOX and ABC now host a range of serials increasingly epic, cinematic and rich in production value (24, Lost (ABC, 2004- ), The West Wing).

This is a simply a response to the ever-evolving and mutating nature of the serial itself. Very much analogous to the complications that exist within the universe of a serial, these complications can be seen as the chaos and mutations that give the machinic assemblage of the phylogenetic notion of a television series or serial momentum to flow and exist.

capital

We can see the highly heterogeneous nature of the serial. This can be compared to serials in that the universe of a serial can in fact take on multiple forms throughout its life. For example, Buffy began as a film, peaked as a television series, and is now proliferation in other forms of fiction as well as forever existing in the medium of home video. This is not to mention the countless forms of merchandise in which it exists.

And so, we have the so-called Buffyverse.

“How does this machinic heterogenesis, which differentiates being… end up being reduced to the capitalistic homogenesis of generalised equivalence, which leads to all values being valued by the same thing, all appropriate territories being related to the same economic instrument of power, and all existential riches succumbing to the clutches of exchange value?” (Guattari, 1995:55)

The motivation for the existence of the multiple dimensions of a television serial, such as the Buffyverse, can be reduced to one word: capital. Capitalism is something that you can "never overthrow" (Chaffey, April 2008).

Free-to-air television is based on keeping the viewer engaged and they will keep watching, and passively see the advertisements which again goes back to the idea of capitalism. Timeslots with most viewership (primetime, as opposed to daytime or late night) are exchanged for higher values.

“And exactly because they are expected, indeed conceived to collect these high ratings, there is always the pressure on them to opt for the safe, the predictably popular, the tried-and-tested.” (Gardner and Wyver, 1983:118)

The framework of the serial is also a machine in itself, able to transform or translate this universe into hour-long morsels. Whereas a film is only ephemeral, the perpetuity of television and its place in the household turns it into something we live with, and forms part of our lives whether it be on a daily or weekly basis.

The capitalistic machine is somewhat determinant of this manipulation of time, as shown in the chronology of Rome, where despite being based on real events, each hour-long episode varies dramatically in its time frame of the episode’s events, focusing on events that involve conflict and tragedy. The finale of the first season employs the whole “cliffhanger” cliché (the assassination of Caesar), by structuring the events of the season in a way as to end on a climax, segueing into the next season.

Why is it then that cable networks, funded largely by subscriptions rather than advertisements, are still susceptible to clichéd serial plot devices, "the safe, the predictably popular, the tried-and-tested" in order to keep the audience engaged?

"Capitalistic value... generally subsumes the ensemble of these machinic surplus values, proceeds with a reterritorialising attack, based on the primacy of economic and monetary semiotics, and corresponds to a sort of general implosions of all existential Territories." (Guattari, 1995:55)

It is ultimately the overwhelming power of capitalism.

v.

end

The televisual experience, unlike cinema, is ever-lasting.* You can leave a cinema and that will be the end of the film. You can leave a theatrical performance or come to the end of a televisual “single play” and that will be the end of that performance. But a television show, especially the long running, never quite 'end', as the conclusion of each episode is never quite 'concluded' but simply awaits the arrival of a new installment.

The mechanisms by which this machine is able to compress and manipulate time and space through editing, much akin to cinema again, has the added component of a prolonging, providing the possibility of greater depth, evolution, complexity, and a repetition and prevalence that creates stronger attachments with its audience and instills more life.

Whether it be the ontogenetic (the universe of the particular serial) or the phylogenetic (the macro evolution of the idea of a serial), we can shape this into the notion of becomings (Guattari, cited from week 3 lecture), the transfer of energy in the encounter between these universes, and the affects of emotional attachment, engagement and commitment (to view a show “religiously”). This flow of energy between the self-contained universe and the external universe is a flux sustained by the “domains of alterification”.

* I will acknowledge that cinema too is being infected by the idea of serialisation, Creeber citing examples such as Star Wars (Lucas, 1977-), Kill Bill (Tarantino, 2003-4), Lord of the Rings (Jackson, 2000-3) and Harry Potter (Columbus, 2000-).

vi.

references

Guattari, F. (1995) ‘Machinic Heterogenesis’, Chaosmosis: an ethico-aesthetic paradigm, P. Bains and J. Pefanis (trans.). Sydney: Power Publications, pp. 33-59
Creeber, G. (2004) ‘Introduction: From Small to Big Drama’, Serial Television: Big Drama on the Small Screen, London: BFI Publishing, pp. 1-18
Gardner, C. and J. Wyver (1983) `The Single Play: From Reithian Reverence to Censorship and Cost-Accounting', Screen, 24(4-5): 114-29
Maturana, H. and F. Varela (1973) "Autopoiesis and Cognition: the Realization of the Living" R. S. Cohen and M. W. Wartofsky (eds.), Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Dordecht:D. Reidel
Williams (1974) see Creeber for full reference
Wilsher (1997) see Creeber for full reference
Potter, D. (1994) see Creeber for full reference
Canby, V. (2000) The New York Times, see Creeber for full reference