We may still eventually get cable tv for the "just in case" times. The 20 months so far has been an experiment. :-)

I don't agree. Good television is as inspirational and worthy as any other artform out there.

As for bad television, well, Sturgeon's Law applies :).

And yet those artistic sparks do sometimes fly through and I'm glad the medium is there to allow for it. Television is probably one of the most accessible of all the arts, with all the pros and cons that go along with that truth. The glass can be half-empty or half-full.

Too much television is, of course, a bad thing. Too much anything is likely a bad thing. A constant diet of bad television is a very bad thing. I can only speak from personal experience, but television hasn't always been passive for me and over time shows and TV events have inspired me to read books, write zines, create crafts, compose songs, meet people I might never have otherwise met if we didn't have that common bond.

The key, of course, is media education, making kids wise to the ways of TV- just the teacher in me coming through :).

Which isn't to say I don't ocassionally watch "American Idol" or "Deal or No Deal". Call it the media equivilent of a chocolate fix. Not good for you, but yummy and not harmful in limited doses.

I definitely feel there's some very good TV shows! Those are the ones I miss sometimes, and we do rent TV shows. :-)

I also feel that there's nothing wrong with having cable TV. My post wasn't a condemnation of tv in general, but a report on our 20 months without cable tv, and why the choice seems to be the right one for US right now.

As a later post says, TV is like anything else...too much can be a bad thing. From what I've found so far is that "too little" can also be a good thing for some. :-)

"ven good TV is junk food for the mind"

The same has been claimed for fiction in any format, newspapers, music, and any of the arts. I know people who will read a book (any book) in preference to doing anything else, even when that means that they are late to work, miss meals, don't clean the house, etc. You know at least one as well, the one typing this. I've been known to 'waste' hours reading the dictionary, having got 'hooked' by looking up one word.

People who get 'hooked' on TV are the sort who would have got 'hooked' on anything. In my family we used the 'off' switch on the TV (but not on books, sometimes we would all miss a meal and not notice because we were each reading something). We used the 'off' switch on the radio as well.

Of course, in the US you have a ridiculous amount of advertising breaks, I certainly wouldn't put up with it, but that's what the TiVo, VCR, etc. are good at doing, skipping the commercials (well, that and recording programmes which are on when I'm at work or doing something else). I watch almost nothing 'live', I record it and skip the commercials. That also brings the watching time down to around 40 minutes for a 'hour' programme, thus freeing a third of the time for reading, doing LJ, and other such more important activities.

For me, TV actually helps. I put it on and watch a programme while I'm eating, which ensures that (a) I eat and (b) that I don't sit there at the computer all the time. Otherwise I'll just sit there doing email, newsgroups, LJ, #filkhaven, etc. for hours on end...

But as others have said there are good TV programmes in spite of the industry, just as there is still good music and fiction coming out in spite of the influences in those industries. Maybe it isn't to your taste, and you don't feel inspired by it, but that's your problem (I don't care much for most visual art, or most poetry, which others find inspiring). I remember as a teenager that we would watch Star Trek (the only series, then) as a family and almost every episode we would find something which sparked a discussion. I remember finding the same with friends about Battlestar Galactica (the original series). And Babylon 5, and Doctor Who. And, recently, with my sister about JAG. I know people who find things which make them think in soap operas and sitcoms.

I don't think it's any worse than books or other art. Most books are written for money and are pretty dire (readers tend to filter out the stuff not in their genre and forget that (for instance) the Harlequin 'romances' swamp SF for number of books published). I don't see anything intrinsically in the TV industry which is worse than in any of the other art industries, apart from the interruptions (but as I said elsewhere they are easy to filter out with technology).

Yes, 90% of it is crap. Probably 90% of the 10% is crap as well to most people. Let's take it two steps more in recursing Sturgeon's Law and say that the ratio is 1:10,000. With 100 TV channels that's still an hour of worthwhile TV every 4 days, almost 2 hours a week...

(Personally, I could do without 99% of what is on radio channels as well, but I'll keep a couple of hours a day of BBC Radio 3 (classical music). But most people would label that 'crap' and prefer the pop music...)

That's what Jeff told me, that Verenus (thanks for spelling that name! I didn't know :-D) and Pullo actually did exist, though I'm sure a fair amount in the tv show was embellished.

And the opening credits are VERY cool! It's pretty much the only tv show for which I'll voluntarily watch the credits each time rather than fast forwarding over them.

Hopefully you won't whimper when you hear my arrangement, too!

:-D

Also, you should be aware that it's not a classical five part arrangement. More like a musical conversation, really.

Good luck with your experiment! Ours seems to be going pretty well so far. I estimate I used to watch at least 15 hours of TV a week. Now I average about 2. It's nice to have that extra 13 hours. :-)

I envy people who can knit. I toyed with the idea of learning, but I don't have the patience. :-(

LOL! I love this. :-D