British Social Realism in the Arts since 1940
British Social Realism in the Arts since 1940
复制标题
1940年以来英国艺术中的社会现实主义
DOI：
10.1057/9780230306387_7
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Dave R
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dave R
尽管电视上的社会现实主义从戏剧、电影和文学中吸引了一些实践和辩论，但它也特别存在于电视参照系中。事实上，电视的社会现实主义实践和理论阐述的发展与电视试图定义自己的特定电视话语存在着一种平行的、有时是共生的关系。在处理这些相互交织的关系时，本章在其体制和关键背景下，在广泛的年表中审查了几种方案类型。如果根据雷蒙德·威廉姆斯的观点，现实主义创新涉及一场“走向社会延伸的运动”(Williams 1977，p.63)，而斯蒂芬·莱西(Stephen Lacey)所说的社会现实主义“揭示了工人阶级在其文化和日常实践层面上的状况”(Lacey 2007，p.5)，那么电视一直是一个关键的社会现实主义舞台，这是可以理解的，因为它有能力满足家庭领域的大众受众。正如Madeleine MacMurraugh-Kavanagh所说，“社会电视剧”之所以成为“一种最紧迫的社会工具”，是因为“它有办法以一种方式浸透国民的意识，在其相对有限的观众和受公众接受的限制条件下，戏剧和电影永远无法实现”(MacMurraugh-Kavanagh2002，第151-2页)。这不仅仅是数字上的问题，尽管哈罗德·品特估计《看门人》需要30年的时间才能获得他在1960年出演的《夜游》(A Night Out)中的观众(Shubik 2000，P.77)。相反，根据艾琳·舒别克的说法，电视能够以独特的方式“拓宽观众的观看体验”(同上)。
Although social realism on television has drawn some practices and debates from theatre, cinema and literature, it also exists within specifically televisual frames of reference. Indeed, developments in television’s social realist practices and theoretical elaboration have existed in a parallel and sometimes symbiotic relationship with television’s attempts to define its own specifically televisual discourses. In attending to these interweaving relationships, this chapter examines several programme types across a broad chronology, within their institutional and critical contexts. If realist innovations involve, according to Raymond Williams, a ‘movement towards social extension’(Williams 1977, p. 63), and social realism in Stephen Lacey’s phrase ‘reveals the situation of the workingclass at the level of its culture and everyday practices’(Lacey 2007, p. 5), it is understandable that television has been a key social realist arena, given its ability to address mass audiences in the domestic sphere. As Madeleine MacMurraugh-Kavanagh argued,‘social television drama’became ‘a most urgent social tool’because ‘it had the means to saturate the nation’s consciousness in a way that, with their relatively limited audiences and inhibiting conditions of public reception, theatre and cinema could never achieve’(MacMurraugh-Kavanagh 2002, pp. 151–2). The point is not only one of numbers, although Harold Pinter ‘estimated it would take a thirty-year run of The Caretaker’to get the audience he got for A Night Out (1960)(Shubik 2000, p. 77). Rather it is that television, according to Irene Shubik, could ‘broaden the audience’s viewing experience’in distinctive ways (ibid.).