Erica Horton April 2015
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Erica Horton April 2015 “Luxury Items”: Discourses of Cultural Value in Creating Channel 4 Comedy PhD in Film and Television Studies (Research) University of East Anglia School of Art, Media and American Studies This work was supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council (Grant number: AH/I003614/1) This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with the author and that use of any information derived there from must be in accordance with current UK Copyright Law. In addition, any quotation or extract must include full attribution. Word Count: 98422 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 5 Abstract 7 Introduction 8 ‘How Channel 4 is that?’: Channel 4 Creative Identity and Case Study 11 The Specificity of Channel 4 and Leading the Industry in Broadcasting Diversity 16 Researching Discourse in the Creative Industries 20 Macro, Meso and Micro Level Discourses of Comedy at Channel 4: Tiers of Laughter 21 Literature Review 24 Cultural Value and Creative Worth 24 Creativities: Industrial, Institutional and Individual 26 The Creative Individual: Exceptionalism and the Genius Myth 30 Measuring Creative Output 34 “The risk to be different”: Making Space for Creativity and Institutional Management 38 British Broadcasting and Labour in the British Creative Industries 43 The Culture Industry: Comedy and Mass Media 47 Television, Comedy and Cultural Status 50 The New Left on Broadcasting: Channel 4 and the Democratic Communications Model 55 “Television Supplement”: Cultural Studies and British Broadcasting Systems 56 The Authoritarian Model 57 The Paternalistic Model 60 The Commercial Model 64 1 The Democratic Model 66 Methodologies 72 Discourse Analysis and Institutions as Case Study 72 Multi-platform Analysis and Three Sites of Inquiry 75 Interview Ethics, Reflexivity and Provenance 79 Section One: The Industry 83 British Broadcasting Policy and the Establishment of Channel 4 83 The Broadcasting Act of 1980 and 1981 and Channel 4’s First Programme Policy 84 Broadcasting Values in Policy: Why a Fourth Channel? 87 The Annan Report and the Design of the Channel Four Corporation 90 Institutions and Audiences: Debating the Fourth Channel’s Purpose 93 The Regulation of Independent Production 95 The Pilkington Report and Understandings of Diversity and Quality 99 What is ‘Minority’ Content? 103 Reith, Paternalism and British Public Service Broadcasting 107 “Programme Standards”: Taste, Morality and Distinctions of Cultural Value 110 “A Force for Plurality”: Independent Production and Publishing 116 Section Two: The Institution 120 Comedy Commissioning: Art, Luxury and Expense 120 Big ‘C’ and Little ‘c’ Distinctions: Culture, Creativity and Comedy 124 “Fighting the Corner”: Seriousness, Legitimacy and Defending Comedy at Channel 4 128 Scripted Comedy and Authorship 130 Developing New Talent: Learning to Write Comedy 132 2 The Cost of Cultural Value: ‘Every time a comedy’s on the air, it’s sort of losing the channel money’ 135 Distinctiveness and Divisiveness: Authorship and Culture Discount 138 “It’s not for me, so it’s shit”: Misconceptualising Creativity and Comedy at Channel 4 142 Audiences, Social Media and Hostility 144 Internal Strife: Channel 4 Personnel and Doubting Comedy 148 Investing in Innovation: Taking Time and Taking Money 149 Leaving Channel 4 Comedy: The ‘New Regime’ 152 Comedy with a Capital ‘C’: Departmental Categorisation and Cultural Distinction 156 Histories of Channel 4 Comedy and Entertainment 158 Calling Content “Comedy”: Problematising Genre Theory Research on Television Comedy 162 Studying Sitcom: Genre Form as Cultural Value 163 Creating Comedy: Post-structural Television Genre Theory 165 Conventions of Studying Television Comedy and Genre 168 Small ‘c’ Comedy: Entertainment Writing as Contributory 170 Channel 4 Entertainment and Tone: Broadness, Warmth and not being “Mean” 172 “An Odd Beast”: Entertainment and Channel 4’s Public Service Remit 174 Section Three: The Individual 177 Creative Practice and ‘Making Funny Stuff’ 177 “It Just Came Out Funny”: Comedy Writers, Authorship and Immaculate Creativity 181 Writing Partnerships: Collaborative Authorship 189 When a Comedy Doesn’t “Land”: What goes wrong when it goes wrong? 193 The Silent Mechanic: The Role of Script Editor in Comedy 197 Channel Notes: “They have good thoughts but they don’t know how to articulate them” 204 3 Distinctions of Quality in Constructing Comedy and Entertainment 209 Mainstream Television Comedy and the Risk of Prime Time: Safety in Numbers? 214 Conclusions 221 Section One: British Broadcasting Public Service and Comedy as Entertainment Television 224 Section Two: Creating Genre through Discourse and the Meaning of Entertainment 227 Section Three: Creative Work and Cultural Value in Generic Labour Forces 230 Further Research 232 Final Thoughts 234 Webography 238 Bibliography 240 Appendix 250 List of Contributors 250 4 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my parents for their support throughout my studies leading up to and including the completion of my thesis. The unwavering generosity and encouragement you’ve shown me in everything I’ve done has been both amazing and humbling. It has also been the single greatest contributor to the realisation of my dream of becoming a bona-fide and consummate smartarse. Thank you and I love you. I would also like to thank SSC, a group of friends without whom I would have had a far inferior experience of life and for whom I continue to be grateful every day. Thanks for making me feel like I could do things when I didn’t think I could and for making me piss myself laughing for the last 15 odd years. You’re all hilarious and I can say that with authority now that I done a PhD in comedy. To the dear friends who have given me words of encouragement and pints of distraction along the way, thank you and you’re all top end. Many thanks to my supervisor Brett Mills for giving me the opportunity to work on the Make Me Laugh project, who spoke to me like a peer and made me feel like I knew what I was on about. Thank you to Sarah Ralph without whom I wouldn’t know my discourse analysis from my elbow and for also being a great friend and conference companion. And finally I’d like to dedicate this project to my great aunt Peg, who wrote her thesis but for unknown reasons never submitted it. Well done for writing it Dr. Margaret Lyons, everything else is just admin. 5 “Mark Corrigan: Haven't you got work in the morning? Jeremy Usborne: Oh yeah, that's really gonna break his balls if I roll in an hour late. Mark, […] he's a creative, I'm a creative. We don't make steam engines out of pig iron in this country anymore, yeah? We hang out, we fuck around on the Playstation, we have some Ben & Jerry's. That's how everyone makes their money now, yeah?” (Mark and Jez discuss labour and the creative economy Peep Show, Season 4, Ep. 4, 2007) 6 Abstract This thesis examines the discourses around creativity and cultural value that underpin the language used to construct television comedy at Channel 4 within three sites: broadcasting policy documents, interviews with Channel 4 heads of department and commissioners, and creative practitioners that have produced comedies for Channel 4 broadcast. In doing so this thesis uses a post-structural discourse analysis perspective with which to approach how comedy is understood as a genre within television industry policy, how departmental categorisation creates meaning around social purpose through discourses of cultural value and how this is both recreated and manifest among the understanding of what it means to create television comedy under the public service remit with which Channel 4 is charged. Through this multi-platform analysis, this study brings new light to comedy’s position within British broadcasting’s traditions of public service, it highlights the distinction of cultural value enacted by positioning some forms of comedy under the Comedy Department and others elsewhere under Entertainment. I argue that this process of inclusion and exclusion is framed through the justification of value in a way that reconstructs binary cultural hierarchies dependent on the notion of art and creativity as oppositional to the commercial and the popular. As such this thesis concludes that such cultural hierarchies are problematic for access and diversity in the creative labour force of British television comedy at Channel 4, particularly within the context of Channel 4’s specific remit to host a diverse range of talent both on and off screen and in doing so to encourage diversity, as a reflection of a pluralised British audience and society, across all British terrestrial channels. 7 Introduction The key aim of this thesis is to critically examine the ways in which cultural value is bestowed on television comedy, both as a generic text and as an industrial practice, through discourses of creativity. It does so in order to interrogate the prevalent assumptions that underpin existing literature around television comedy, where it is argued that it is the low cultural status of television comedy that has led to its neglect as a cultural category in academic investigation. Through its analysis of how television comedy is discursively constructed within the industry itself, at legislative, institutional and production levels, this thesis sheds new light on the more complex interaction of cultural value discourses around British television comedy than the “small time” (Mills, 2009: 9) or “unworthy” (Attalah, 1984) status of television observed outside of the industry, might suggest. Indeed, a key question that this thesis responds to, is where sitcom and sketch programmes are understood to be more culturally valuable categories of television production and programming when put in the context of the television industry more broadly with particular reference to the cultural and social value placed upon British public service broadcasting and its relation to private, commercial funding.