overkillâweâve already internalized the rules of the slasher genre enough to know that nubile-babysitter-in-suburban-house inevitably leads to unwanted visitors. Heist movies traditionally deliver a full walk-through of the future crime scene, complete with architectural diagrams, so youâll know whatâs happening when the criminals actually go in for the goods.
These hints serve as a kind of narrative handholding. Implicitly, they say to the audience, âWe realize you have no idea what a particle accelerator is, but hereâs the deal: all you need to know is that itâs a big fancy thing that explodes when wet.â They focus the mind on relevant details: âDonât worry about whether the babysitter is going to break up with her boyfriend. Worry about that guy lurking in the bushes.â They reduce the amount of analytic work you need to make sense of a story. All you have to do is follow the arrows.
By this standard, popular television has never been harder to follow. If narrative threads have experienced a population explosion over the past twenty years, flashing arrows have grown correspondingly scarce. Watching our pinnacle of early eighties TV drama, Hill Street Blues, thereâs an informational wholeness to each scene that differs markedly from what you see on shows like The West Wing or The Sopranos or Alias or ER. Hill Street gives you multiple stories to follow, as weâve seen, but each event in those stories has a clarity to it that is often lacking in the later shows.
This is a subtle distinction, but an important one, a facet of the storytellerâs art that we sometimes only soak up unconsciously. Hill Street has ambiguities about future events: Will the convicted serial killer be executed? Will Furillo marry Joyce Davenport? Will Renko catch the health inspector who has been taking bribes? But the present tense of each scene explains itself to the viewer with little ambiguity. You may not know the coming fate of the health inspector, but you know why Renko is dressing up as a busboy in the current scene, or why heâs eavesdropping on a kitchen conversation in the next. Thereâs an open question or a mystery driving each of these storiesâhow will it all turn out?âbut thereâs no mystery about the immediate activity on the screen.
A contemporary drama like The West Wing, on the other hand, constantly embeds mysteries into the present-tense events: you see characters performing actions or discussing events about which crucial information has been deliberately withheld. Appropriately enough, the extended opening sequence of the West Wing pilot revolved around precisely this technique: youâre introduced to all the major characters (Toby, Josh, CJ) away from the office, as they each receive the enigmatic message that âPOTUS has fallen from a bicycle.â West Wing creator Aaron Sorkinâwho amazingly managed to write every single episode through season fourâdeliberately withholds the information that all these people work at the White House, and that POTUS stands for âPresident of the United States,â until the very last second before the opening credits run. Granted, a viewer tuning in to a show called The West Wing probably suspected that there was going to be some kind of White House connection, and a few political aficionados might have already been familiar with the acronym POTUS. But that opening sequence established a structure that Sorkin used in every subsequent episode, usually decorated with deliberately opaque information. The open question posed by these sequences is not: How will this turn out in the end? The question is: Whatâs happening right now?
In practice, the viewers of shows like Hill Street Blues in the eighties no doubt had moments of confusion where the sheer number of simultaneous plots created present-tense mystery: weâd forget why Renko was wearing that busboy outfit because