Enjoying the Annoying: The Viewer's Affective Relationship with the Reality Show Utopia

(1)

Due to the rise of the reality television genre there is an increased visibility of ordinary people in contemporary television. This demotic turn created a new affective relationship of the viewer with television as the viewer of reality television takes a more critical approach towards the content of reality television. This critical approach, often stimulated by irritations and annoyances, does not hinder the viewer to consume and enjoy the reality television content. This research will show that the new affective relationship of the viewer towards the content of reality television contributes to the viewing pleasure as the viewer experiences a feeling of superiority towards the contestants and a savvy attitude towards the production of the reality show. This argument will be based on the answers given in seven in-‐depth interviews with viewers of the reality show Utopia and will focus on the irritated, voyeuristic and bored view, the process of disidentification, and the professional view of the viewer of Utopia.

INTRODUCTION

I love that, just to be irritated at all these annoying dumb people. (Julie)

I think there are annoying people in the show, but that is why I watch it. (Marloes)

Reality television as we know it today gained its profound status in the early nineties, however the use of ordinary people for television content has its roots earlier in history. Think for example of the real people participating in quiz formats, ordinary people getting pranked in candid camera television, amateur videos on Funniest Home Videos and everyday drama on daytime talk shows. Still it is especially the wave of reality shows that places ordinary people in controlled environments -‐ mostly referred to as reality game shows-‐ that makes it impossible to think of contemporary television without ordinary people

participating in it. The non-‐scripted access to these ordinary people is considered to be reality television’s primary distinction from fictional programming and at the same time its primary selling point (Murray and Ouelette 2004, 4). The increasing visibility of ordinary people in the media is also referred to as the demotic turn (Turner 2010, 2). Although the

(3)

rise of the demotic turn is visible in various media, this research will focus on the demotic turn in television. Because of this demotic turn in television and the increasing popularity of reality television shows on television, ordinary people have become the stars of

contemporary television. With Big Brother as the first worldwide popular reality show starring a selection of ordinary people in a house full of cameras and microphones, the interest for ordinary people in reality programs was born11_{.
Since
then
a
lot
of
similar
shows} were produced. The increasing number of opportunities for ordinary people to participate in television shows and become media content comes along with an increasing attraction of the audience to watch ordinary people in produced settings. This shift in the content of television did not only resulted in widespread opportunities for ordinary people to become media content and the industry’s excessive use of these ordinary people, but also caused chances in the position of the viewer. The presence of ordinary people in contemporary television invited the viewer to take a more critical viewpoint towards the reality shows on television, as watching ordinary people apparently does not come without criticism from the viewer. While a lot has been said about whether the promised mediated activity

accompanied by reality television creates participation of this critical viewer and whether this participation provides the viewer with agency or not, the question remains how the demotic turn in reality television changed the affective relationship of this critical viewer with television. It seems that a lot of the criticism towards reality shows is stimulated by irritations and annoyances towards the contestants and the genre. The striking thing is that these annoyed viewers do not let the irritations and complaints stand in the way of

consuming reality television. Even more some of the criticisms require close readings of the text and seem to contribute to the viewers viewing pleasure. This research will therefore focus on the new affective relation of the critical viewer towards reality television. It will do so by examining the position of the viewer as it creates an irritated, voyeuristic and bored viewpoint, the process of disidentification this critical viewer goes through, and the position of the viewer as a proto professional who sees the production through the text and takes this production logic into their reading of the text. I will argue that the demotic turn in reality television has created a new affective relationship of the viewer with television. This research will show that this new position of the viewer with a critical and irritated view

1_{However
The
Real
World
is
considered
to
be
the
first
reality
show
in
the
genre,
it
is
the} global popularity of Big Brother that made the genre a worldwide phenomenon and success.

(4)

contribute to the viewing pleasure because of a superior and savvy attitude towards the reality show and its contestants.

The argument will be based on the observations on seven in-‐depth interviews with viewers of Utopia. Utopia is a new reality show broadcasted in the Netherlands since the 6th of January 2014. The show is aired on weekdays between 19:30 and 20:00. Initially the episodes would take 60 minutes, but it changed to 30 minutes because of the competing shows from different channels at 20:00. Utopia is a real life experiment by John de Mol, which challenges fifteen ordinary people to create a new society on a wasteland in ‘t Gooi in the Netherlands. Although the show advertises with the lack of rules within Utopia, the contestants of Utopia have to keep within the laws of the Netherlands, but they can setup their own rules while constructing their new society. The question of the show is: will it become ultimate happiness or complete chaos? The contestants are provided with nothing but a couple of chickens, two cows, one telephone with 25 euro call credit, an empty industrial building and a safe with 10.000 euros. In addition, right after they entered the property of Utopia, they each were given fifteen minutes to go home and fill a box with personal and essential belongings. The participants have given a year to create an ideal society in the presence of approximately 100 cameras. A voting session takes place every month where one of the contestants is excluded from the show. The contestants also have the right to leave Utopia voluntarily. In this case the contestant loses the paid deposit which is calculated by ratio, which could range from 0 till 25.000 euros. For every contestant that is leaving, a new contestant is introduced. This way the group always maintains a total of fifteen people. The fact that the group does not decrease makes it impossible for one person to be the winner of the show. The show will probably last until the end of December, but if the show remains successful it may be expanded. The intention of John de Mol for this format is that the viewers will watch Utopia as if they watch a soap opera.

This brings us to the most important part for this research: the viewers. For this research viewers of Utopia were chosen to be the object of analysis because of the practical fact that the show was aired during the time the interviews were conducted and because the show immediately created a lot of reactions, criticism and controversy. Personally I was intrigued about how most of the reactions about Utopia were negative, but the show still managed to get high viewing ratings and the striking fact that the reactions called for a certain knowledge about the show, which meant that the suppliers of the criticisms were in

(5)

fact viewers of the show or at least put some effort and time to get to know the show and its participants. The motives behind the reactions are very diversified, some criticise the format, some the technology of the livestreams, some were disappointed because the show was nothing like their expectations, but the majority of the, sometimes harsh, criticism was directed towards the contestants of Utopia. Despite the cause of the critique, most of the reactions had in common that they had a negative character and the suppliers of the critiques a critical attitude and they felt the urge to share their thoughts and opinions. For example these were one of the first reactions on Twitter while the first episode was still airing;

Well at least it is a comfortable thought that these people are behind a fence for a year. #Utopia

If my Chihuahua was my most precious belonging, then I would also lock myself up for a year. #Utopia

I feel ashamed when I look at Utopia, and I am only watching it for 10 minutes. #Utopia

The reactions are sarcastic and negative and it seems like the posters of the Tweets feel a mixture of vicarious shame and superiority vis-‐à-‐vis the people in Utopia. While some of the reactions were motivated because of irritations towards the contestants in general, some were specifically towards a particular contestant. This even stimulated some viewers to create Anti-‐ Twitter-‐accounts and Facebookpages to express their dislike towards particular contestants. In addition a lot of expressions of opinions followed on different platforms in the media.

To explore the affective position of this critical viewer towards reality television and Utopia in particular, I conducted seven in-‐dept interviews with viewers of Utopia. The respondents are random viewers of the show, as they were not specifically chosen because of a critical view. Two of the respondents are recruited by a request on Facebook. The two respondents replied themselves on the request and the other five were obtained by the suggestion of others who saw the request on Facebook or who knew I was looking for viewers of Utopia. All the respondents were female, as I did not get any reactions of male viewers. The interviews were conducted face to face and they each took about 30 to 45 minutes. The respondents were not informed about the research towards their critical view,

(6)

they were told that they participated in a research on Utopia and reality television. The interviews consisted 47 questions (see appendix). The interview consisted of questions about the viewer’s viewing habits, feelings towards the show, feelings towards the contestants, their expectations towards the show, whether they would participate

themselves and about memorable moments of the show. Although the interview questions were prepared and structured, the method provides flexibility as the interviews developed in a certain way during the conversation.

The answers of the interviews are examined by focussing on the affective position of the viewer towards reality television, and in this study particularly the reality show Utopia. Television, and especially popular television always provoked reactions with its viewer. The industry has always been keen to evoke reactions with the viewer in order to find new markets. As stated by Beverly Skeggs and Helen Wood this is the industry’s raison d’être (2012, 3). Reality television shows with ordinary people instead of actors seem to invite the viewer even more to react on the content of television, as it has shown that one of reality television’s most notorious achievements has been to stimulate strong reactions with the audience (Skeggs and Wood 2012, 2). These strong reactions are often fuelled by annoyed feelings towards the contestants of reality shows. Although strong irritations towards a media text can lead to anti-‐fandom as described by Jonathan Gray, it seems like the viewers of Utopia, in contrary to the repulsed anti-‐fan, do continue to consume and enjoy the show despite their irritated and sometimes bored position. Therefore the affective position of the viewer will be examined in the first chapter. This chapter will explain were the irritated, voyeuristic and bored feelings of the viewer come from and especially how they make the viewer keep watching the show. In other words, the first chapter will discuss how the irritated, voyeuristic and bored feelings contribute to the viewing pleasure of the viewer. The second chapter will take a closer look on how the voyeuristic and judgemental needs of the viewer construct a disidentified position of the viewer towards the show and its

contestants. Although viewing pleasure is often associated with the recognition and identification with media characters (for example by Bourdieu, Ang, Fiske), the viewer of Utopia experiences viewing pleasure while they experience disidentification with the characters on the show. The viewer of Utopia projects classified, moralistic and negative characteristics on the contestants, which induces the feeling of superiority and makes the viewer experience disidentification with the contestants rather than identification. This

(7)

disidentification is further activated because of the viewer’s disbelief of participation, the performance of the so-‐called ordinary people, and shame about watching the show. The process of disidentification again touches upon the feeling of superiority of the viewer towards the contestants, as the viewer feels superior to the contestants while disidentifying with them. Where the first two chapters were particularly about the viewer’s position towards the contestants of the show, the last chapter will focus on the professional view of the viewer towards the production of the show as it makes critical remarks about the production Utopia. Whereas the television industry today is explicitly self-‐reflective and makes a lot of effort to distribute this industrial self-‐analysis to the audience (Caldwell 2008, 1), the audience becomes more and more aware of the production and academic discourses behind the television industry. This makes the viewer more television literate while making judgements on the production of the show. This critical view towards the show creates a savvy and superior attitude while the viewer sees the production through the text and takes this production logic into the reading of the text.

(8)

1. ENJOYING THE ANNOYING

Reality television and irritation are inextricably linked to each other. The advent of a new reality show always comes along with a wave of criticism, irritations and complaints. When the show is actively and vocally hated or disliked by a viewer, we could even talk about, what Jonathan Gray calls, an anti-‐fan (2005, 840). The anti-‐fan is the fans’ apparent opposite, who refuse to let their family watch a particular show, who campaigns against a certain text, or who spend considerable time discussing why a given text makes them angry (Gray 2005, 841). Whereas the anti-‐fan is repulsed by the text and anti-‐fandom can consist in an act of distancing, with the anti-‐fan refusing to watch or achieves close knowledge of the text without the pleasures (Gray 2005, 842) the viewer in this research does experience and even construct viewing pleasure, despite or even because of the irritations and

annoyances he or she experiences. This chapter will analyze how this viewing pleasure is constructed by the irritated, voyeuristic and bored position of the viewer towards the reality show Utopia.

1.1 Irritated

As mentioned in the introduction and as the interviews will show, the viewer of reality television experiences a lot of irritations and annoyances towards reality television and feels the urge to share these irritations and annoyances by complaining about the content of the reality show. In this case study about the reality show Utopia the irritations and annoyances were about Utopia in particular. The striking thing about the complaints towards the show is that the respondents of the interviews, as well as a lot of complainers of the show

elsewhere, know the content of the show. It can be assumed that this irritated viewer still watch the show despite the irritations he or she feels towards the show. Furthermore the answers will show that the irritations can be part of the viewing pleasure or even the reason for watching the show. This was expressed in direct as well as indirect ways when the viewer was asked about their viewing motivations or feelings towards the show. Some of the

viewers admitted straight away that irritations are a great part of the viewing pleasure while watching Utopia. This was the case with respondent Julie when she was asked the question; What do you like about Utopia? Why do you watch it?

(9)

Well, mainly a lot of irritations. I love that. That’s why I for example also watch Goede Tijden Slechte Tijden2_{,
just
to
be
irritated
at
all
these
annoying
dumb
people.
I
also} watched all these other realityprograms like Big Brother and I just love it, because these people are always so simple and most of the time they have to do something and 9 out of 10 times it won’t work […] So I think mainly because it is so simple, it’s bad. And because I can get really annoyed. (Julie)

This respondent immediately admitted she watches the show mainly for the irritations she has about the show, without mentioning anything about irritations or annoyances in the question that was asked. The reason this viewer watches the reality show Utopia is because she gets her viewing pleasure out of being irritated and annoyed. Being ‘irritated at all these annoying dumb people’ makes her feel good about herself since she is not one of them. Instead of being repulsed by these irritations, this viewer is attracted by these irritations and indicates it as her main reason for watching the show. Although this respondent was really straightforward about the irritations being her main reason for watching the show, some of the respondents expressed the contribution of the irritation to the viewing pleasure in a more indirect way;

[...] What also really irritates me is that people are really sneeky in getting their way in what they want to achieve, but behind other people’s backs. For example Emiel, you see through the cameras that he wants to take over with his little army of friends consisting of Ruud and Giorgio, when Paul left. I think that is sad. But that is what the show is about, that’s fun to watch. (Jennifer)

Jennifer was not asked to explain what she liked about the show, but when she was

expressing her opinion on some contestants she shared some of her annoyances about the contestants. The annoyances were based on moral decisions of the contestants, she would never make the same moral decisions, that is why it irritates her. This makes her feel morally superior towards the contestants who do make these immoral decisions. She ended her commentary with the clarification that annoying situations are the reason she likes the show.

An explanation for the pleasure because of the irritations could be the feeling of domination. According to Michel Foucault commentary is a type of discourse that has the intent of dominating the object. A superior relation to the object occurs when the viewer

(10)

provides commentary to something (Ang 1985, 97). This commentary could create a distance between the viewer and the show or the participants as bad objects. This is how Julie created a distance between her and the ‘annoying dumb people’ on the show and Jennifer between her and some of the contestants who – according to her– make immoral decisions. A feeling of superiority occurs. This way the viewing attitude (annoyed and irritated) can become a condition for experiencing pleasure and therefore enjoying and liking the show (Ang 1985, 99).

When looking at the irritations of the viewers it is striking that most of the irritations were caused by the contestants of the show. Although the viewers had remarks and a critical view towards the production and technology that is being used, these remarks were caused by the proto professional position the viewer takes, which is a phenomenon that will be discussed and analyzed in the third chapter. The feelings of irritation and annoyance were for a great part caused by the behavior of the contestants. Where in everyday life people tend to avoid other people that are experienced as irritating or annoying, in reality television such people are part of the dramatic form and the accompanied viewing pleasure. The disliked characters in reality shows tend to cause an increased involvement of the viewer (Rose and Wood 2005, 292). This becomes clear in the answers of the respondents about Utopia. Here the question; What do you not like about the show?, was asked;

[..] And I think there are stupid people in the show. Haha now you wonder why I watch it, but I think these people are a little annoying. And when they have to eliminate someone, now Jimmy is eliminated. And when you hear that, I think; he was one of the only normal ones. The rest are mainly freaks. Andrea is just crazy. (Marloes)

So you think the selection of people in the show is annoying?

Yes, if you don’t have Billy and Ruud in the show that have sex with each other and Nicoline and Rienk who turn around each other and people fighting with each other. Then there is.. no. Then nothing happens. If they are only busy with working in their garden and set up Utopia, then it wouldn’t be entertaining. (Marloes)

So the annoying people make it entertaining?

Yes I think so haha. (Marloes)

Later in the interview when the question was asked; What do you think about the contestants of the show? She answered;

(11)

I think there are annoying people in the show, but that is why I watch it. If Andrea, who is incredibly annoying, but if she would leave, it would be less fun to watch. Because everybody circles around her and everybody gossips about her and talks about her and she starts a lot of fights that don’t really matter so… That is why it is interesting. (Marloes)

Is there a contestant you like the least?

Yes, Vanessa, I think she is really annoying. Even her accent. She nags all the time. She nags all day long, from the moment she wakes up until the moment she goes to sleep. (Marloes)

Would you like to see her go because she is so annoying?

No haha. Not that. (Marloes)

So it helps your viewing pleasure?

Yes haha. (Marloes)

Marloes clearly has irritated feelings towards the contestants of Utopia. In her different answers about the contestants they are referred to as; ‘stupid’, ‘annoying’, ‘freaks’, ‘crazy’ and ‘irritating’. Although this irritated position creates a distance between the viewer and the contestants, it certainly induces an increased involvement of the viewer with the show as it is experienced as entertaining and thus contributes to the viewing pleasure.

Besides contributing to the viewing pleasure, complaining about the show could also have a social value. Complaining and expressing negative feelings about the content of mass media has a social value. Disliking the content of a television show can perform an important function in society because of the pleasure people get out of complaining and exchanging their negative feelings. Which could provide the viewers with a social bond (Heuvelman, Peeters, van Dijk 2005, 328). This way sharing complaints about the same content could provide the viewers with a social bond which increases the pleasure they get out of the show but could also be seen as part of the explanation on why the viewers of Utopia, and reality television in general, tend to complain as much about the content of the show. The numerous reactions on Twitter, Utopia even became ‘trending topic’ during the first

episode, along with many complaints about the show on different other social media, show the urge of the viewers to share their complaints with others. Although the respondents of

(12)

the interviews did not participate in any online discussion about Utopia, they did sometimes share their disbeliefs about the content of Utopia with friends or other viewers;

Do you share your opinions about Utopia with other viewers?

Yes, I did that. Because I have a friend who sometimes watches it. And then there was the moment when a couple had sex in Utopia, and I wasn’t perplexed about them having sex, but about the fact that the two have sex and that there is a guy on the bed next to it watching it, and three other people walking in, wondering what is happening. So we talked about that like; oh my god, this is not possible, they are having sex and everybody is watching it. That was funny. But we don’t talk about it very often. But when something happens and we think; this can not be true.. Then I turn on Whatsapp. But that is not on a daily basis.

Sharing of these disbeliefs and negative feelings towards the content of the show could therefore have a social value and a positive effect on the viewing pleasure of the viewer.

1.2 Voyeuristic

Voyeurism is an undeniable aspect of the appeal of reality television (Andrejevic 2004, 87). The appeal of reality television is partly ascribed to the audience desire to observe real people. And according to the answers given by the respondents this is also an aspect of the appeal of Utopia. The following answer was given by one of the respondents to the

question; Why do you watch Utopia?

Because it is reality and you are able to look at people. Just secretly watching the lives of other people. I think that is what makes it fun. (Marloes)

Here the respondent enjoys the show because she is able to watch the contestants from a distance. She enjoys ‘watching along with the lives of other people’ from her television set. In this case, because it is about voyeurism towards a television show, it can be referred to as mediated voyeurism. Calvert gives the following definition for mediated voyeurism;

Mediated voyeurism refers to the consumption of revealing images of and

information about others’ apparently real and unguarded lives, often yet not always for purposes of entertainment but frequently at the expense of privacy and

discourse, through the means of mass media and Internet. (2000, 2-‐3)

(13)

This is applicable to the voyeurism the viewers of Utopia experience. They consume the images and information about the lives of other people for entertainment purposes through the television. This mediated voyeurism develops when the value of privacy is decreased and spectating becomes more important than interaction and discussion (Calvert 2000, 3). The viewer is voyeuristic because there is no need for interaction between the observer and the people who are observed. They are simply ‘others’ out there. Watching the others is

something is mentioned in different answers;

Just people, it doesn’t matter what they do, just people who you can watch. (Marloes)

I also watched de Gouden Kooi and Big Brother. I loved that. Just watching those people. (Melanie)

These viewers are driven by their urge to watch the lives of others. Just to watch them, whatever they do, just following their lives. How they handle ‘daily life’. Sometimes this urge is forced by the power of knowing. The voyeur holds the power over the participant,

because the voyeur is the taker of the information, not the giver (Calvert 2000, 69).

Therefore the feeling can occur that the viewer knows more about the situation happening at the television screen than (some of) the participants do. This gives the power of knowing more. The viewer gets the feeling of being the all-‐knowing viewer. As is showed in the next answer;

So the reason you watch the show is to watch other people?

Yes and how they squirm around each other and how everybody takes that. And you do see it and they don’t know it from each other. That’s is fun for the viewer, that you see how a group treats each other without them knowing. (Marloes)

Here the viewer enjoys having the power of knowing. The viewer even knows more than the contestants in the show. Here the viewer refers to the fact that the property of Utopia is surrounded with over a hundred cameras, and with the switching of the cameras the viewer can follow the occurrences from different angles. The contestants on the show do not have the privilege to see the occurrences from different angles, which gives the viewer the power of knowing more than the contestant. The viewer has an omniscient point of view because of all the cameras and microphones. The knowledge provided because of this omniscient

(14)

point of view is amplified with the presence of an omniscient voice over. The feeling of this power of this all-‐knowing voyeur creates a superior feeling and contributes to the viewing pleasure.

There is also the pleasure of the voyeur in reading the participants and their

personality. Jan Teurlings refers to this process as ‘the hermeneutics of the participant’ as an ‘identity game’ where the viewer tries to figure out the person on the screen (2004, 228). This is a process the viewer of Utopia also goes through, as this respondent describes when she was asked why she watched Utopia;

Watching other people, that is it. Just how they live and how they are and how they think about things and how they talk about things, how someone talks a lot about their children and the other never talks about their children. And then I think; well, she never talks about the children, does she have children? And then she has. I always talk about my children. That kind of weird stuff. Watching their lives. (Melanie)

The viewer gets pleasure out of reading the participants. The pleasure comes out of figuring out the participants. The viewer learns about the lifestyles and decisions of other people through the television show. This knowledge may give the viewer the power and confidence to either adopt or reject those lifestyles (Calvert 2000, 70). If the viewer experiences a rejection of the lifestyle seen on the show, it may create a sense of power with the viewer who thinks the lives of the people that they see on the screen is beneath them. This causes a feeling of superiority because the show appeals on the viewer’s sense of classism. This sense of classism is stimulated by the presence of contestants that the viewer experience as low-‐ class, which makes the viewer feel better and above the contestant. The viewer sees the participant as a social misfit or outsider which may create the feeling of superiority and power by believing that there is a difference in class and position with the contestants. (Calvert 2000, 70). The viewer experiences power from seeing themselves as ‘normal’, whereas the participants are seen as ‘abnormal’. This division between normal and

abnormal and the feeling of superiority is something which becomes clear when looking at how the viewers refer to the participants during the interviews;

All these annoying dumb people. (Julie)

They are all a bit of these ‘jobless’ types. (Marloes)

(15)

This social comparison may help the viewer to understand their own place in society and to feel superior to others (Calvert 2000, 71). This could even lead to disidentification, which would be extensively discussed in the second chapter.

Another explanation on why the viewer turns to mediated voyeurism is the search for truth and reality. Although this truth and reality is not necessarily the end result of watching reality television, the naked truth may be one of the motives to attract the viewer to voyeuristic media content like Utopia (Calvert 2000, 63).

1.3 Bored

After recognizing irritations and voyeurism as being part of the construction of the viewing pleasure caused by the position of the viewer towards reality television it is striking that the viewers of Utopia often labelled the show as ‘boring’ during the interviews.

Sometimes with Utopia that is a little boring. (Jennifer)

When the program just started, during the first week I thought; nice, let’s watch.. And soon I thought it was really boring already. (Jennifer)

At this moment I think it is a little boring. (Melanie)

My annoyance is that I sometimes just think it is a little bit boring. (Lindsay)

Actually from the start I said; I don’t think this is really interesting and it is a little boring, and I still feel that way. (Lindsay)

Here the same paradox occurs as with the viewers with irritations who keep on consuming the show; the viewer experiences boredom but keeps on consuming the content. Why do these viewers keep on watching the show if they think it is boring? When the viewers were asked about their feelings towards Utopia, most of the respondents answered they

experienced periods in which they felt the show was boring. Also when the show was compared with other reality shows Utopia was seen as more boring;

What makes Utopia different from other reality programs?

It is more boring (Marloes)

(16)

Regardless of the lack of excitement the viewers experience with Utopia, they still watch the show and get pleasure out of watching the show. A possible explanation for this

contradictory phenomenon is the hope and expectation for something to happen. Even though sometimes the viewer is aware of the fact that it rarely happens;

..waiting for something exciting to happen. Which almost never happens. (Marloes)

According to Anna McCarthy, in her essay on waiting room television, watching always means waiting in some way or another as it is central to the everyday structure of the flow of television. The waiting viewer experiences pleasure with the anticipation of something to happen, like with a cliffhanging serial drama (2004, 201). It is the hope for excitement that keeps the viewer to cope with the waiting and boredom of Utopia;

I look forward to it, because there are also moments when I think; this could have been deleted while editing… (Julie)

And when the excitement does occur, it is worth the wait because for some viewers these excited parts are the parts what Utopia, or even reality television in general, is about;

There have to be tensions and conflicts, and gossip.. that is what reality shows are about. (Jennifer)

So without those fights is it less fun to watch?

Yes, because when it just started it wasn’t as fun as it is now. They also said that if the viewing rates decrease, they don’t put new people in. So that everybody will drive each other mad. (Jennifer)

So the longer they are there together with each other the more conflicts are encouraged?

Yes and that makes it more fun. Yes, it maybe sounds stupid, but that is what it is about. And that is what I like. (Jennifer)

The waiting of the viewer is rewarded with excitement, which makes up for the boring moments. This reward in the form of conflicts, tensions, fights, gossips contribute to the viewing pleasure of the viewer. Nevertheless the waiting for this reward should not be left out in the construction of the viewing pleasure. The feeling of suspense occurs when the viewer calculates, expects, and evaluates a coming event on the show. The viewer

(17)

experiences a feeling of anticipation. The feeling of suspense is constructed as the viewer looks upon the information given by the show as a starting point of a development in the (near) future. The viewer combines the knowledge of the given information with the knowledge the viewer has outside of the text to anticipate about the possible outcomes

(Vorderer 2013, 19). The feeling of suspense is therefore partly possible because of the

earlier mentioned omniscient viewing point of the viewer. This omniscient viewing point provides the viewer with the information to create the anticipation for the feeling of

suspense. This way the viewer experiences pleasure because of the feeling of suspense while the viewer is waiting for the excitement to happen.

The lack of excitement in Utopia is both blamed to the participants as to the production of the show. Some respondents blame the ‘boring participants’ for the lack of excitement in the show;

Do you have annoyances towards the program?

Yes, Yes. I think that, for example Laura, could just as easily leave. Or for example Jimmy, but he happened to just have left. But I don’t really understand what these people do there. There are 15 people in that house, but there are just a few who really make the show. (Jennifer)

And why do these other people add less value?

Because they are completely low profile, I don’t even see them on the screen. It is like a shadow. It may sound harsh, but they don’t add value. You need to have fun people otherwise it won’t succeed. And I think that some people could leave to bring some new life into the show and that can really annoy me. Then I think; why is that person in the show? I really talk about this with my sister like; that person is always on the background and thus never gets eliminated, nothing happens, because that person is not even on the screen. And that bothers me. (Jennifer)

For this viewer the participants who don’t cause any excitement in the show are bothering her. They are referred to as; ‘low profile’, ‘like a shadow’, ‘on the background’ and add no value to the show or the viewing pleasure of the viewer. This is for a part to blame on the participants, but also to blame on the decisions made by the producers, because the viewer does not understand ‘what these people do there’ and wonders ‘why is that person in the show’. Here the viewer indirectly questions decisions that are made by the producers. In some answers the blame is put directly to the decisions of the producers;

(18)

Is this really the most interesting thing they can edit? (Lindsay)

There are also moments when I think; this could have been deleted while editing. (Julie)

The viewers complain about the decisions of the production and choice of participants because it causes boring periods and aspects in the show. Nevertheless these complaints do not discourage the viewer to watch the show. It is again the possibility that something exciting could happen that keeps the viewer involved with the show.

Another driving force for the viewer to keep on watching the show even though the viewer does experience boredom is related to the feeling of suspense. It is the feeling of curiosity of the viewer. Somehow the viewer is involved with the participants of the show and experiences a feeling of curiosity of what will happen next. This could be ‘the exciting thing’ mentioned earlier, but it could also be curiosity about the development of the

‘narrative’ of the show. The viewer is curious about how things will progress and is therefore encouraged to keep on watching;

I am curious about where this is going (Lindsay)

Do you expect that you still watch the show in a year?

Yes! That is what we are waiting for. Now they are still building and later on a certain moment they are close to the end. I want to experience that as well. How will that go? What will happen? It is really my curiosity. (Melanie)

I am curious about how they develop because of the show. (Jennifer)

Here the viewer is not so much curious about what will happen in the coming moments, as with the feeling of suspense, but curious about how the program and the people will develop in the distant future, which causes the feeling of curiosity.

1.4 Conclusion

Although the notions of irritation and boredom are not necessarily likely to cause pleasure, it seems to do so with the viewers of Utopia. As the answers of the interviews show the viewer experiences irritations, annoyances and boredom while watching Utopia. Surprisingly these feelings do not hold back on the viewing pleasure the viewers get out of the show. Above all

(19)

the irritated and bored position of the viewer do, along with the voyeuristic position, contribute to the viewing pleasure of the viewer. This is caused for a great part because of the feeling of power, the power of knowing (more) and the power of superiority. The distance that is created by the superior position of the viewer induces the involvement and thus the viewing pleasure of the viewer. Alongside with the feeling of knowing and the feeling of suspense and curiosity, this feeling of superiority creates the viewing pleasure of the viewer with an irritated, voyeuristic and bored position.

(20)

2. DISIDENTIFICATION

As mentioned in the previous chapter part of the pleasure of reality television is watching ‘other people’. The viewer gets voyeuristic pleasures out of watching, judging and reading the other people, and in particular, ordinary people, on the screen. Since the rise of reality television it is impossible to think of television without ‘ordinary’ people participating in television programs. Ordinary people participating in reality television shows is part of what Graeme Turner calls ‘the demotic turn’, which indicates the increased appearance of

ordinary people in the media (2010, 2). With the rise of reality television there is a shift within the content of television as through the formats of reality television, ordinary people have gained an exceptional access to representation in the media (Turner 2010, 33). The access of these ordinary people in the media did not only result in a change in the content of reality television but also changed the viewing position of the viewer. The presence of the ordinary people in the media has an influence on the processes through which the viewers construct their everyday lives. While the viewer makes sense of the text it does so, according to Turner ‘with more confidence in their own authority, and in the moral, ethical and social judgements that this involves’ (Turner 2010, 42). It does so because the judgements and reactions provoked by the format contribute to the meaning and pleasure of the show (Turner 2010, 42). In reading and judging the ordinary people in reality shows the viewer does not need to experience the feeling of empathy or identification with the contestant to get pleasure out of judging or reading them (Teurlings 2004, 230). Although the feeling of identification and recognition is mostly associated with popular pleasure (Ang 1985, 20), the viewers of Utopia primarily experience a feeling of disidentification while getting pleasure out of the show.

2.1. Identification in context

Ien Ang uses Pierre Bourdieu’s statement that ‘popular pleasure is characterized by an immediate emotional or sensual involvement in the object of pleasure’ (1985, 20) to argue that ‘popular pleasure is first and foremost pleasure of recognition’ (Ang 1985, 20).

Enjoying the Annoying: The Viewer's Affective Relationship with the Reality Show Utopia

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

1. ENJOYING THE ANNOYING

2. DISIDENTIFICATION