Week 4

    In chapter two of ‘Media Studies: Texts, Production, Context’ (Long and Wall, 2012), I believe the key aims to be the in depth look at genre and narrative, as well as identifying the key theorists.

   The root of the word genre resembles others of the English language, as well as translating to mean ‘kind’ in French. However, genre in this case is used as a term for classifying media forms and the content within different and several media groups. For example, Photography would be the media form, and wildlife, landscape and portrait would be the content within that media form.

   However, there can be problems with defining genre. Any media text can be similar of others of its type, and this is how we classify media texts through their similarities. Furthermore, if it was the case that one text after another produced the same codes and conventions then an audience would become easily bored, so genre’s often change their dynamic and hybridity to become different.

  However, change and hybridity are not the only two ways to develop a genre. New genres can appear and form in all areas of the media, to provide something new and different. This means new and exciting things for new audiences. However, sometimes these new genres fail to gain a new audience because they become unpopular, or when they do attract audiences, they then eventually lose their novelty value.

   Film theorists Robert Allen and Douglas Gomery suggest this ‘horizon of expectations’ that an audience are provided by genres (Allen and Gomery, 1993: 84).  A point that applies to many genres, and not just film. For example, if we were to watch a police drama, we would expect a certain amount of actin and mise-en-scene such as; police uniforms, a police station etc. This is what we associate with a genre, and this is why it can be difficult to put a spin on the generic and also make it successful.

   My chosen extended reading of ‘Annie leibovitz at Work’ (Leibovitz, 2008) put this into perspective from a photographers point of view, discussing her genre of photography and how she went on to be different from the conventional but still successful. Her work shows clear elements of genre convention, but her unique style of lighting separates her from others of that genre.

   These two readings have made me think differently about media genres, and how difficult it is to be different yet still recognisable under a ‘category’. In particular, I know how hard it is to be different and stand out in photography as you see a lot of similar stuff.

Bibliography:

1.     Allen, R; Gomery, D (1993) ‘Film History: Theory and Practice’

2.     Leibovitz, A (2008) ‘Annie Leibovitz at Work’

3.     Long, P; Wall, T (2012) ‘Media Studies: Texts, Production, Context’ pg. 78-90