Long TV, affect, and mortality

Some thoughts on long TV from another old Harpers article, this time Adam Wilson’s “Good Bad Bad Good: What was the Golden Age of TV?” (vol. 339, no. 2033 [October 2019]:43–53):

One reason that TV shows develop cult followings is that to watch one from beginning to end—NBC’s The Office, say, which ran for nine seasons and over two hundred episodes across eight years—is to spend a significant portion of your life among its characters. You could read To the Lighthouse or watch The Big Lebowski half a dozen times and not come close to approaching those numbers.

In other words, the sheer time spent on a long show leads to a sense of ownership, defensive self-justification: it must have been worth it, if I spent so much time on it!

Similarly, on watching the same actor over an extended period of time:

When we first meet Tony Soprano, in 1999, he is robust and handsome, if not exactly svelte. By the Season 4 finale, some five human years and forty-three TV hours later, Tony looks significantly worse for wear. His marriage is ending, and we watch its death knell. The time we’ve spent with this couple increases our investment. And by the end of the series—by this point we’re eight years and more than seventy hours in—we’ve witnessed Tony and Carmela reconcile, resigned to their chosen lot. Tony—and, by extension, James Gandolfini—is obese now, breathing heavily. (Gandolfini would die of a heart attack six years later, imbuing his performance with the retrospective feel of cinéma vérité.) The series ends with the screen going black on this family unit, waiting for death. It’s been said that the theme of The Sopranos is that people don’t change. What makes it a powerful show is that we feel them not change across those cumulative hours. The felt passage of time runs hauntingly perpendicular to this emotional stasis.

There is a relation, in other words, between duration and affect, both in the sense that temporal investment both comes from and leads to a particular affinity, and because we are made aware of physicality and even mortality: that of the actors and even our own.

The Book as Prison: Edoardo Albinati’s The Catholic School

Tim Parks’s review for Harpers (vol. 339, no. 2032 [September 2019]: 84–88) of Edoardo Albinati’s The Catholic School refers frequently to the book’s length. After all, even though it managed to scale “the bestseller lists and [win Italy’s] most prestigious literary prize, the Strega,” it is still a “mammoth twelve-hundred-page novel” (85) that is clearly a bit of a slog. 

It is also clear that the novel uses its length to construct suspense and keep the reader waiting. The book is based on a true story, of the so-called “Circeo Rape/Murder”: the 1975 rape and torture of two women, one of whom ended up murdered, at the hands of three young men, two of whom were recent graduates of the “expensive, highly respectable boys-only Catholic school” (84) to which the novel’s title alludes. Most Italian readers would already be aware of this case, and so this “terrible crime [. . .] hangs over the book. And Albinati lets it hang. Not until page 153 does it get a first, brief mention” (85). Everything is laid out very slowly, gradually: “We are at page four hundred,” Parks later reports, “and still no sign of the [Circeo Rape/Murder]. Expectation is winding up.” Frequent digressions further postpone advances in the plot: “Just when you thought he couldn’t delay the arrival of the CR/M any further, the author launches into a long analysis of the transformation of the Italian bourgeoisie in the 1970s. IN this book long means long” (86). Every page, it seems, is an exercise in putting off till later what we know is inevitable.

“Finally,” Parks informs us, “a third of the way into the book, the crime is suddenly center stage. It is told in fourteen terse pages” (86). The brevity and concision of the telling contrast with the extrapolation and length of everything around it. “What now then,” Parks asks, with eight hundred pages still to go? One expects more and more about the CR/M. Intermittently it arrives [. . .]. But the main thrust of the book is now to establish the crime as emblematic of its era” (86–87). It is as though the crime around which the whole book is spun were no longer the main event, but mere symptom of something larger (and lengthier) still.

Parks likens the excessiveness of Albinati’s exposition of Italy’s many ills to an obsession: “Skip if it’s too much, we’re told again. Many will be tempted to do so. [. . .] For pages at a time, the reader longs to get back to the story, any story” (87). It is as though there is something unbearable about being forced to share in and spend time with the author’s (and perhaps also the country’s) anxiety and trauma, crystallized in this one crime and what it says about class, Catholicism, and gendered violence.

Parks finishes his review with the thought that, in part with such a long novel, Albinati is playing with his readers: “I can think of no author who has prompted in me such frequent shifts from admiration to irritation and back; who has aroused so much pleasure with his stories and reflections, and so much annoyance with his emphatic, exaggerated, paradoxical claims, not to mention the sheer length of this interminable book.” But perhaps, Parks continues, he is also alternately educating and punishing us: “it’s hard to feel, as the pages roll by, that this is not absolutely willed on the author’s part. The book itself becomes the reader’s Catholic school, at times a kind of prison where the same concepts are repeated ad infinitum, at times a kind of violence” (88). This is another take on the notion of a book that you “can’t put down.” Here, you are condemned to keep going, as if to serve a sentence (pun intended) for a crime for which you are forced to realize your own complicity.