 |
| Neil Postman |
Analysis of Postman’s
“Amusing Ourselves to Death”
Cody L MacCabe
English 201 Section 51
Ms. Thompson
Feb 06, 2013
Abstract
In his paper “Analysis of Postman’s ‘Amusing
Ourselves to Death,’” Cody MacCabe shows the strengths of Neil Postman’s speech at the 1984
Frankfurt Germany Book Fair. Cody introduces the theme of Postman’s talk and
summarizes the author’s arguments, as well as offering examples of the author’s
use of statistics and logic to effectively make his comparison. Also included
in the analysis is a look at the credibility of both Postman himself and
Huxley’s book. After specifically scrutinizing Postman’s comparison of today’s
world to the societal situation portrayed in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, combined with the
sobering feeling that is left with Postman’s target audience, Cody is lead to
believe that Postman makes a phenomenal case for backing up his claims.
Analysis of Postman’s
“Amusing Ourselves to Death”
30 years ago in America,
the average American child spent well over half of a year in front of the
television before ever entering school. That amount had more than tripled by
the end of high school. Neil Postman, founder of the New York University graduate
program in media ecology and Chairman of the Department of Culture and
Communication, uses these facts, as well as others, to make a chilling
comparison of America’s love affair with television to the situation described
in the #5 best English-language novel of the 20th century, Brave
New World.
The
basis of this book is a fictional setting in which people become slaves to
their appetite for entertainment and pleasure. In making this comparison,
Postman effectively communicates his claims as the logic of his argument, his
own credibility and the credibility of his point of reference, as well as the
emotions involved as the implications of his claims resound within the minds of
a reasonable audience.
Summary
Neil Postman, Chairman
of the Department of Culture and Communication, asserts in his speech “Amusing
Ourselves to Death” that America is increasingly fulfilling Huxley’s 1931
prophesy that people will become slaves to their own desire to be entertained. First
and foremost, he helps the reader understand the reason Huxley wrote Brave
New World.
Postman argues that rather than living in an Orwellian government-controlled
society, Huxley feared there would be no need for government control, as the
people could be perfectly controlled through their own appetite for pleasure.
And what, Postman asks, is the source of today’s pleasurable predicament? The Television.
He states startling statistics from the previous year’s Nielsen Report on
Television to expose what he sees as America’s granting of television sovereignty
over all of our institutions. Postman contends that the problem with the
television isn’t that TV presents entertaining subject matter, but that it
presents all subject matter as entertainment. He further explains that today’s
TV news shows aren’t as interested in public information as they are with
visual interest. Politicians clamor at the chance to appear on non-political
shows. Even religion can be entertaining when God Himself takes a backseat to
the image of the preacher. Postman concludes with a sobering statement that
America is the world’s first culture that is in jeopardy of amusing itself to
death, and a question as to an antidote in a matter where our philosophers have
yet to give us guidance.
Logos
Neil Postman writes an
effective narrative of the effects of television in America because he compares
our current situation to Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, where entertainment
and pleasure, rather than compulsion, was used to rule over people. His choice
of reference is key in speaking to this particular audience, as said book is #5
on the list of the 100 best English-language novels of the 20th
century. To someone who understands the effects of Huxley’s hallucinogen soma, it is in no ways
illogical to see television as a modern-day soma. This allows him to make
logical connections with his audience that may have otherwise proved
ineffective. More importantly, the proper audience will know of the potentially
disastrous long-term effects it could have on a society. The use of Brave
New World
is the keystone that holds up the rest of Postman’s argument to scrutiny. However,
there is a single danger to Postman in using Brave New World as reference.
The danger he faces in
using Brave New World as a reference is in convincing his audience that he knows
Huxley’s underlying message in the book. How does he know that Huxley’s fear
was not that truth would be concealed, but that it would be “drowned in a sea
of irrelevance?” He claims that Huxley’s fear was not of banned books, but that
no one would want to read. (Postman 1984/2013, p. 449) The audience has to
logically reason that the American television trend is comparable to Huxley’s Brave
New World’s
pleasure pandemic. But how does he know what Huxley’s intentions were in
writing the book? To anyone looking to disbelieve his reasoning, this would be
the Achilles heel of Postman’s argument. However, to his target audience, a
single line of explanation erases any doubt that Postman does in fact
understand Huxley’s intentions. “As Huxley remarked in Brave New World
Revisited,
freedom lovers who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny have ‘failed to take
into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.’” To the assembly
to which he is speaking, making the connection that TV is a distraction, and
comparable to the Brave New World situation is in no way, shape, or form
illogical. An understanding that we as humans seek to be entertained or
distracted from the pressures of life is quite logical, and those who disagree
would still need to seriously consider his claims before rejecting his
reasoning.
He
does combat other potential criticism of his article quite well, backing up
potentially arguable statements with logic and statistics. For example, he
states that “America is engaged in the world’s most ambitious experiment to
accommodate itself to the technological distractions made possible by the
electric plug,” a rather bold statement in many situations (p. 449). He
supports that claim with statistics from the 1983 Nielsen Report on Television,
a credible source that many people will trust, and the statistics presented
will likely provoke the desired reaction. He makes another statement which,
depending on the audience, could fall perilously close to a slippery slope,
claiming that the danger behind television is that “television is transforming
all serious public business into junk” (p. 449). First, his claim that there is
danger involved in television at all may be unbelievable. And secondly, he must
convince his audience that all serious public business on television is in
fact, junk. However, by citing everything from the “talking hair-dos” that
report our news, the “Las Vegas stage show” formerly known as religion, and the
appearances of politicians on non-political shows that can be presented so
entertainingly on television (p. 450-51), only the harshest of critics can deny
his claims. The audience to which he is speaking already clearly understands
the effect of the society’s wonder weakness in Brave New World. Postman cannot make it
any more plain that television not only can, but actually is doing the exact
same thing to our society. He’s proven his logic to be sound, and his
conclusions to be fair. His case is very strong, assuming the audience is not
glued to the television.
Ethos
Not only does Postman
have strong evidence for his argument, but he carries with him a sense of
strong credibility. He is a well-educated man, having had studied at the State
University of New York and Columbia University. He connects well with his
intended audience, clearly showing throughout his paper that he is
knowledgeable on the subject of television in America, and he uses as a
comparison to his argument a fictional story that has been declared to be one
of the 100 Best English-language Novels of the 20th Century; Aldous
Huxley’s Brave New World. Throughout his paper, though Postman
makes statements that could turn the wrong audience off, his credibility with
the audience allows him to make potentially dicey statements. He references “America’s
consuming love affair with television,” something that would make some simply
snort in disgust (p. 449). However, when he cites statistics from 1983 Nielsen
Report on Television, he not only connects well with the right audience, but perhaps
built a bridge to most reasonable critics or doubters. It is hard to argue
against the fact that the only activity of the age that youth spent more time
engaged in than watching television, was sleeping (p. 449). Though that fact
alone is troubling, the problem is compounded by his further claims.
It
is not a light accusation to say that television is transforming all serious
public business into junk. News stories rarely take more than 45 seconds of our
time, and the “talking hair-dos” chat informally with each other. Religion has
been made as theatrical as any Broadway performance, because television can make
it fun. Philadelphia schools have experimented with rock music as a method of
delivering information to students. Politicians are eager to make appearances
on non-political television shows. Drama in court and even in the operating
room is being broadcast live, to entertainment worshipers everywhere (p.
450-51). To the wrong audience, he would be on shaky ground without some of
these serious examples to back up his claims. The evidence that he lays out
gives him great credibility with his audience. He states that the purpose
behind television is entertainment, to which his target audience, indeed most
people, would agree. Americans love to be entertained. And that is exactly why
he references Brave New World, a futuristic society in which the people are
controlled not through force, but through pleasure.
He gains incredible
credibility by associating his argument with a renowned hypothetical situation
that many people understand and respect. His logical arguments and powerful use
of reference to Brave New World gives Postman an airtight case, as far as ethos
is concerned. This was a very shrewd move on Postman’s part. It is evident that
he knows the material that he is talking about. He makes logic connections that
most reasonable people would accept. And, he uses a well-known and respected
example to explain what he sees as a problem. While doubters and critics may
not agree with the conclusions Postman has drawn, they would be hard pressed to
undermine his ethos. While much of his argument relies on facts and the
credibility with which he can back his claims, the height of his argument comes
because of the sobriety that his message conveys.
Pathos
The gravity of the topic
is something that most people can appreciate. He sets forth in his paper a tone
that to his intended audience, and those familiar with the book, brings a sense
of sobriety, perhaps even a touch of fear. Postman’s argument and the demeanor
he uses instills the reader with a realization of the abuse of pleasure, or
rather, the television, in today’s world. The average American household has
its TV on 7 hours a day, and the average child watches over 5,000 hours of
television before they ever get to school (p. 449). We of our own free will and
choice are allowing this to happen. Even a cynic would likely spend some time
seriously pondering the implications of this claim, and it is this sense of
uncertainty of how far we are on our way to our own brave new world that makes
this piece have such a powerful pull on the emotions of the reader.
The
reader will likely reflect on our societal situation as Postman capably explains
that our serious business here in America is being turned into junk because of
the television. Politics and religion are becoming increasingly promoted by way
of television, meant to entertain. Traditionally serious ministers of religion
are “often driven to adopting a show business style.” It is not odd to see
powerful political figures showing up all over the television grid (p. 451). How
are people to feel when the realization that nothing is still serious when viewed
through the small window of the television? Can they be anything less than
concerned? While they might not agree with the conclusion drawn by Postman,
they would be hard pressed to deny that television has made its way into almost
every nook and cranny in the lives of people around the globe.
Depending
on the audience, Postman may either have a fantastic argument or no case at all.
Postman makes a great use of his reference to Brave New World to instill his audience
with a sense of reflection at the state that we as a society are in, and where
this course will lead us. While he does cite extensively what he sees as
cultural consequences of television, he will have to assume that the audience
draws the same conclusions, or makes the same links in the chain of reason that
he does, and more importantly, that his audience will assume he knows Huxley’s
intentions behind Brave New World. Again, cynics may not agree with his
conclusions, but for his intended audience, the grim note that Postman ends on
only accentuates his logic, and aids his credibility, leaving the audience with
a deafening silence that only the sound of television can fill.
Conclusion
Postman made a brilliant
choice in choosing Brave New World as his comparison to the entertainment epidemic
he saw in 1984 when he wrote “Amusing Ourselves to Death.” His already established
ethos was further elevated as Brave New World is likely to be
well-recognized by the audience to which he was speaking. The implication of
the Brave New World situation occurring right under our noses provokes a
thoughtful reader to consider the situation in which we find ourselves in. Many
sobering emotions will be pondered by someone open to such ideas. And finally,
Postman powerfully uses logos, through facts of our society and statistics
cited to support his claim that America is in danger of its own infinite
appetite for entertainment. While to an audience of doubters, his claims may
not hold water, but Postman effectively used a blend of Pathos, Ethos, and Logos to convince his target
audience that American media is indeed turning us towards a brave new future.
References
Postman, N. (1984/2013). Amusing ourselves to death.
In R. Seamons (Ed.) The way of wisdom (pp. 448-453). Rexburg, ID: BYU–Idaho. Retrieved
from http://ilearn.byui.edu
No comments:
Post a Comment