Gilmore Girls: the transformation to a bingeable show on Netflix?

(1)

Nienke van Rijn

Master thesis Television and Cross-Media Culture

Universiteit van Amsterdam

Faculty of Humanities

Supervisor: dr.

M.W. Stewart

Second Reader: dr. S.M. Dasgupta

25-06-2017

Words: 19.089

Gilmore Girls: the transformation to

a bingeable show on Netflix?

(2)

Introduction

Just sitting in front of the television and waiting for an interesting television show to come on, is no longer normal for many viewers. According to an article in the Business Insider, the amount of people that watch traditional television, in the sense of watching television according to a predetermined, linear schedule, has decreased (“The number of people”). One of the reasons for the decline in the watching of linear television is the fact that the programming does not match all target

demographics, and therefore people try to find programs that interest them. Netflix, on the other hand, keeps getting more popular and the number of subscribers keeps growing. At the end of 2016, Netflix had 93,8 million subscribers worldwide (USA Today). Netflix, as different to traditional

broadcast channels in the US (such as ABC or The CW), tries to release programs on their platform that interest multiple target groups instead of focusing on a certain target audience. On their

platform, Netflix does not give recommendations to viewers on the basis of their age or background, but Netflix gives recommendations to viewers based on the programs they have watched before (“Demographic Targeting is Irrelevant”).

Furthermore, the interface of Netflix encourages the viewers to binge-watch on television shows (Perks; xxv). The question is whether all television shows are suitable to being binge-watched, or whether there is a certain kind of television show which lends itself for binge-watching. In the case of Netflix Original shows, like House of Cards, the narrative structure of the show is thought to be well suited to the platform. The question is if these shows have been adapted to be suited better on Netflix than ‘normal’ television shows that are broadcast on a traditional television channel such as ABC. One way that the differences between a ‘normal’, linear television show and a Netflix show can be seen is by comparing different seasons of the same show, where some seasons are made for television and other seasons are made specially for Netflix. If television shows are adapted to be well suited to Netflix and therefore are better suited to be binge-watched, that would be visible when the different kind of shows are compared. Up until this point, Netflix revived several shows, among which are Arrested Development (2003-2006, 2013), Fuller House (1987-1995, 2016-), Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life (2000-2007, 2016), Longmire (2012-) and The Killing (2011-2014). These television shows were first broadcast on ‘normal’ linear television, but after those shows were cancelled they were revived on Netflix.

One example of a show that was revived on Netflix, but also “transformed” to fit on Netflix and better fit the platform is, as mentioned before, the television show Arrested Development. The first three seasons of the show were broadcast on Fox, where it was also cancelled after three seasons due to low ratings. Seven years later, Netflix brought it back on their platform, but made some noticeable changes to the structure of the television show. One important thing they did is

(4)

make the narrative structures of the show more complicated, with storylines extending over multiple episodes, which should encourage the users to watch several episodes in a row. For example, in the first seasons there were multiple storylines per episode, and in the Netflix season there was only one storyline of one of the main characters per episode, which was very in depth and that particular episode exploited all possibilities of that particular storyline. This way, some aspects of the whole storyline, the whole storyline being the stories of all main character combined, were not revealed until episodes later, which should encourage the viewer to continue watching as not all questions are answered after a single episode.

For this thesis, I will consider a different television show, that was just revived on Netflix, after it was cancelled on broadcast television years before. Following Arrested Development, the show Gilmore Girls, which is about the lives of mother and daughter in a small town, was revived on Netflix. It originally ran from 2000 until 2007 (2000-2006 on WB and 2006-2007 on the CW) and consisted of seven seasons, with an average of 22 episodes per season. In late 2016, almost ten years after the series originally ended, the show was revived for a four-episode season by Netflix, called Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life. This means that the format of the show was already altered to fit the platform better and make it easier for viewers to watch all the episodes in a row. All eight seasons can be accessed via the service of Netflix.

In this thesis, the goal is to research whether Gilmore Girls has changed between the original broadcast run and the new episodes, in terms of the narrative structures within the new season, to fit the binge-watching culture that is encouraged by Netflix. As binge-watching can now be seen as part of the normal television watching culture, it is evident that Netflix could have changed the narrative structures within the television show Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life, to get more viewers to binge-watch. Therefore, it is likely that the narrative structures within the television show did change, when the show underwent a textual transformation to Netflix.To be able to get an answer to this question some terms, definitions and strategies have to be made clear before the shows Gilmore Girls and Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life can be analyzed. First, the binge-watching strategy of Netflix will be discussed. I will analyze what Netflix does to encourage binge-watching among their users, both in the interface of the website and the app, and in the television shows themselves.

Before the binge-watching strategy of Netflix can be discussed, there has to be decided on a clear definition on what can be seen as binge-watching. The company Netflix itself gives their own simple definition of the term binge-watching, obtained through a survey, namely the “watching between 2-6 episodes of the same TV show in one sitting” (2013). In the next chapter, the definition of binge-watching will be discussed more extensively.

Last, I will look at different categories, such as diegetic memory, narrative complexity and programming constraints, and how this can influence a television show. It is also important to discuss

(5)

whether the narrative structures of a show have changed the extent people can binge-watch a show. After there has been made a distinction in the above mentioned categories and the definition of the categories have been made clear, several moments and storylines within the episodes and seasons will be compared on a textual level. This way, the question whether the narrative structure within the new season has changed, can be answered. Several moments and storylines from different seasons will be chosen to analyze the different structures. This will include examples where particular

storylines progress faster (or slower) than was the case at first. Furthermore, it is expected that there is more engagement by the viewers because of the diegetic memory of the viewers.

It is interesting to take a closer look at the television show Gilmore Girls, because Netflix revived television shows before, namely Arrested Development (as mentioned before) and Full House (the revival is called Fuller House), but the reviews for the new seasons were not that good (though the episodes were watched a lot). The fact that the episodes are watched a lot, can be related to the fact that the shows were revived years after the original run of the shows ended and fans anticipated the return of the show (maybe even for years). Mareike Jenner, in her article “Is this TVIV? Netflix, TVIII and binge-watching”, discusses that the narrative structure was always complicated in Arrested Development, by “relying on complex jokes and storylines that easily extend beyond one episode or even season, season 4 complicated the matter further by developing an even more complicated narrative structures” (10). This means that a complex structure of the new season was probably already expected by the viewers as the previous seasons already had a complicated structure as well. In the case of Gilmore Girls, the subject of this thesis, it is a little different as the original show had less complicated narrative structures, than for example Arrested Development. Gilmore Girls did also already have storylines that extend over most of a season, but these storylines were not as complex as the storylines in Arrested Development. It is interesting to look at the differences between Gilmore Girls and Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life as the narrative structures are made more complicated and storylines are episode transcending. After taking a closer look at the narrative structures of the show, the conclusion could also be drawn that there were no changes made to the narrative structure of the show and that Netflix relies on the “cult” status of the show and let the platform itself (and the fans) encourage binge-watching, instead of the structures of the show itself.

Method

As mentioned above, the subject of this thesis is the television show Gilmore Girls and the revival Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life. These two shows are used to analyze their different narrative structures, compare those structures and show that the narrative structures within A Year in the Life

(6)

have changed. As Netflix encourages a binge-watching culture on their platform, the show could have underwent the change to better fit that culture.

Gilmore Girls originally consisted of seven seasons and 153 episodes in total, which were broadcasted on WB and CW. The show was broadcast from 2000 until 2007. The new season, which was released under the name of Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life, consists of one seasons of four episodes, which were all released on Netflix at the same time in 2016. This means that the show was revived after having been of air for almost ten years. These new episodes were longer than the broadcast episodes, at 90 minutes long. All the episodes were made available through the video-on-demand service Netflix. Furthermore, to research viewer engagement and the diegetic memory, as explained below, recap videos of the first seven seasons are used. These videos were released one at a time by the Facebook page of Gilmore Girls and can also be accessed via Facebook. The recap videos are used to show how Gilmore Girls tries to engage the viewers that watched the original show by refreshing their memory on events that happened almost ten years ago in the original show.

Both shows overall will be discussed, but moments from multiple episodes will be

highlighted. Several moments from throughout the different seasons and episodes will be chosen that best explain the possible differences between how the concepts are used, are noticeable in those particular moments. Then, moments from the original seven seasons will be compared with similar moments from A Year in the Life. The moments will be analyzed using a textual analysis. This means that the show is discussed quite detailed, making interpretations about the text, and

discussing the chosen concepts in combination with the text. In the case of this thesis, the textual analysis will consist of looking at the form, the narrative structure and content of the television shows.

The episodes that are used from A Year in the Life are: “Winter”, “Spring”, “Summer”, and “Fall”. The episodes that are highlighted from the original show Gilmore Girls are: “The Lorelai’s First Day at Chilton” (season 1, episode 2), “The Breakup Part 2” (season 1, episode 17), “Tisket, A-Tasket” (season 2, episode 13), “Haunted Leg” (season 3, episode 2), “They Shoot Gilmores, Don’t They” (season 3, episode 7) and “Bon Voyage” (season 7, episode 22). There has been made a choice to include these ten episodes into the analysis. First all episodes from A Year in the Life are chosen, because for this thesis, it was the most important to have a clear overview of the narrative structures within the revival. All four episodes included different aspects that were of importance to describe different elements, storylines and/or other notable key points. The six episodes of the original show are chosen, because they are representative for the whole show. (“They Shoot Gilmores, Don’t They” (season 3, episode 7), “The Lorelai’s First Day at Chilton” (season 1, episode 2), “Bon Voyage” (season 7, episode 22), “Haunted Leg” (season 3, episode 2)), they show a clear connection to Gilmore Girls:

(7)

A Year in the Life (“A-Tisket, A-Tasket” (season 2, episode 13)), they feature a notable narrative structure (“The Breakup Part 2” (season 1, episode 17))

Furthermore, some concepts will not be explained using particular moments from episodes, but will use the overview of the show and factors surrounding the broadcasting or release of the episodes. At the end, the question whether Gilmore Girls has changed, regarding the narrative structures within the new season, when the show underwent a textual transformation from

television to Netflix to fit the binge-watching culture that is encouraged by Netflix, will be answered. In the next chapter, the different terms and concepts that are important to answer the research question will be discussed. The third chapter will describe the results that are found after analyzing the television show Gilmore Girls using the concepts that are discussed in the literature review. Last, a conclusion will be drawn regarding the question whether Gilmore Girls has changed, regarding the narrative structures within the new season and the four new episodes in comparison with the seven previous seasons, when the show underwent a textual transformation from a network channel on television to Netflix to fit the binge-watching culture that is encouraged by Netflix.

(8)

Theoretical framework

Binge-watching

The platform Netflix seems to encourage binge-watching (Perks, xxv) but what exactly is the definition of binge-watching? In the Oxford Dictionary, binge-watching is described as to “watch multiple episodes of (a television program) in rapid succession, typically by means of DVDs or digital streaming” (“Binge-watch”). Before other definitions of binge-watching can be looked at, the

meaning of the word “binge” has to be discussed. Binge has a negative meaning attached to it. This is the reason that Lisa Glebatis Perks, in her book Media Marathoning: Immersions in Morality, uses another term instead of binge-watching, because of the negative connotations around the word ‘binge’. Instead, she uses the term “marathon viewing” (ix). “Rather than viewing these media experiences as mindless indulgences, “media marathoning” connotes a conjoined triumph of commitment and stamina. This phrase also captures viewers’ and readers’ engrossment, effort, and sense of accomplishment surrounding their media interaction” (Perks, ix). By using “media

marathoning” instead of binge-watching, it is just about the fact that viewers have the stamina to watch several episodes in a row and that the viewers are engaged enough with the show to continue watching. Perks argues that watching multiple episodes of a show in a row should not have a negative connotation to it, but is a ‘normal’ positive activity. Matthew Pittman and Kim Sheehan, in the article “Sprinting a media marathon: uses and gratifications on binge-watching television through Netflix”, agree with Perks and therefore the term media marathoning, as he says that “calling it media

“marathon” simultaneously harkens back to a time of networks broadcasting marathons of television shows while also eschewing binge’s language of unhealthy excess” (2). This means that both authors agree that the negative connotations that come with the word binge have to be avoided, and the watching of multiple episodes of a show should be seen as normal.

Matrix also agrees with Perks that the term binge implies something negative; “the negative connotations of television binge consumption are connected to moral panics about youth an popular media and to the negative impact of young people ingesting a steady diet of fictional melodrama, banality, and televisual representations of sex and violence” (125). With this quote, Matrix means that the negative part of binge-watching is more the content that (young) viewers ingest in a large amount than the fact that viewers watch a lot of television. Brunsdon’s definition of the word binge goes in another direction, as she also agrees that there is a negative side to the term binge, but she describes it as “bad television watching (‘piggy pleasures’) as opposed to the watching of bad television, and has been imported into descriptions of television viewing from the now extensive

(9)

vocabulary of bad eating and drinking” (65, 66). She does not link the ‘negative connotations’ to the images that are seen on television, but more to the way that viewers actually watch television.

Of these four authors, Lisa Glebatis Perks and Pittman are the only ones that makes binge-watching, or as she calls it “media marathoning”, into something positive, as Perks says that it shows the stamina and engagement of the viewers with the show. Perks describes it as an action that the viewers have to think about, so it is not “mindless” or as Brunsdon describes it, “bad television watching” (65, 66), but it is more like a deliberate choice, according to Perks. This seems like a good start, but what is this deliberate choice of the viewers based on, and how can this be encouraged by companies like Netflix? To continue, there has to be taken a look at what binge-watching entails, not only what the negative connotations of “binge” are.

Mareike Jenner, in her article ‘Binge-watching: Video-on-demand, quality TV and

mainstreaming fandom’, does not give an exact definition of what binge-watching should entail, but gives a somewhat abstract description of the concept. According to her, binge-watching is not the same for every viewer. Jenner says that “a binge rewards attentive viewing, suggesting not only the viewing of an excessive amount of episodes but also a somehow excessive audience-text relation. In this, maybe it is less the amount of hours spent watching, but rather the intensity of the experience that is a deciding factor” (11). Therefore, according to Jenner, if something can be called binge-watching, it does not only rely on the number of episodes a viewer watches, but also on the

engagement of the viewer with the television show. She continues to say that it depends on what the normal number of episodes is that a viewer watches to be able to know what qualifies as a binge. “As such, the ‘norm’ and ‘excess’ are difficult to pin down, but what can be established is that the excess of a binge exceeds the ‘ration’ scheduled television offers by far” (14). So, binge-watching has to deviate from the normal television watching behavior from the viewer. This notion of excess that Jenner uses in her definition of binge-watching can be linked to what Charlotte Brunsdon called “bad television watching”. Jenner does not mention a downside to watching television shows to an excess, but she does mention that the intensity of the viewing experience is important; this means that there has to be engagement between the viewer and the show to be counted as binge-watching. In this context, it could also be that a viewer plays an episode in the background, without focusing on the episode playing, but, according to Jenner, this does not mean that the viewer is actually binge-watching at that time.

There are several different definitions that give a clearer explanation of what can be seen as binge-watching. These definitions do not discuss the norm and an excess, but describe the number of episodes a viewer has to watch, or the timespan in which something can be called binge-watching.

(10)

Pittman offers a very clear, simple definition of the term binge-watching, namely “the experience of watching multiple episodes of a program in a single sitting” (2). This definition is very clear, as it indicates a certain timespan in which something counts as binge-watching, namely one single sitting. Another straightforward definition of binge-watching is given by Charlotte Brunsdon as she describes it as “the domestic viewing of multiple episodes sequentially” (65); this can be interpret as watching at least two episodes. Therefore, Brunsdon implies that the episodes have to be watched in one sitting as she uses the word “sequentially” (65). Lisa Glebatis Perks’ definition of media marathoning is similar to Pittman’s, as it also indicates a timespan, but Perks includes television shows, books and films in her definition instead of only television shows: “any television series consumed within one week counts as a marathon, and books and film have to be in a series of three or more related texts to have their reader qualify as marathoners” (xxxi). Perks frames binge-watching in a different way by using the term media marathoning, and also by expanding the timeframe in which something can be called binge-watching. This way, films and books can definitely can be included as texts that can be binged.

Developments in watching television

There have been a lot of developments in the media world in recent years. Amanda Lotz, in her book Portals: A Treatise on Internet-Distributed Television, discusses that there indeed have been

developments in media, but that this does not mean that the “old media” will disappear. “The revolutionary impact of new media upon television has not been as a replacement medium, but as a new mechanism of distribution that allows evolution of legacy companies and the creation of a sector —maybe sectors—of internet-distributed television” (Lotz, Introduction). An example of this might be the traditional television next to video-on-demand services. The VOD services offer a lot of new possibilities, but this does not mean that the traditional television will disappear, though it can become less important.

Perks adds to this by saying that “collectively, these transformations in media technologies and content have met the needs of readers who not only want to consume the media they want, when they want, but also want to get the whole story when they want” (xv). Perks does not focus on old versus new media, but she focusses on the needs of the viewers. As there are a lot of

developments in media, viewers have come to expect more, especially in relation to when and where they can access their television shows. Viewers are no longer satisfied waiting on a show to be broadcast, but the viewers want to create their own schedule. Mittell agrees that there lies more power with the viewer, but he adds the important notion that “time-shifting technologies like VCR and digital video recorders enable viewers to choose when they want to watch a program, but more

(11)

important for narrative construction, viewers can rewatch episodes or segments to parse out complex moments” (Narrative Complexity; 31). The fact that viewers can rewind (part of) an episode to re-watch a complex moment is an advantage for both the viewer and the developer of the show. First, by rewinding moments from an episode, viewers can understand the storyline better, by taking a closer look at complex moments. This also means that the developers of a show have more

possibilities to make a show more complex as there is more certainty that a viewer will understand the complexity, especially if moments can be re-watched (several times). Second, the re-watching of moments can encourage the viewer engagements of the viewers with the show, as the viewers could get more engaged with a show after having an understanding of complex moments in the storyline.

Furthermore, Mittell says that “technological transformations away from the television screen have also impacted television narrative. The internet’s ubiquity has enabled fans to embrace a “collective intelligence” for information, interpretations, and discussions of complex narratives that invite participatory engagement […]” (Narrative Complexity; 31). There are a lot of fan sites on the internet that discuss multiple theories about complex moments in television shows. This means that those viewers can work together to get the best understanding of the moments. Therefore, the developers of the television show can think of even more complex moments to put in the show as those fans try to unravel them together.

As mentioned above, the VCR was one of the first time-shifting technologies that allowed viewers to watch television shows and films at the time of their choosing; this was in the 1980s (Perks, xv). Though the VCR allowed for more affordances, there also were constraints. As Perks described it: “the VCR afforded television fans greater agency, but it was clearly a cumbersome television technology. Using a VCR to capture a television series took commitment, know-how, effort, and preparation” (xvi). That was the case, because the VCR was not easy to operate since the

recording had to start at the right time and record for the right amount of time. Though this was the case, it made it easier for viewers to watch series at their chosen moment, and it was the first step for what Perks calls the possibility of media marathoning and “the practice of viewing television content at more convenient times than an original air date and time” (xxix).

After the VCR, the DVD player was introduced, which was easier to use than the previous mentioned device, the VCR (xvi). Though this device had more affordances, it still also had

constraints, as people still had to change the DVDs in between episodes. The act of changing DVD’s disturbs the media marathoning flow that a viewers is in, and therefore can end that media

marathoning session. As Perks describes it, “[…] even the brief physical effort of putting in a DVD can delay gratification and make a marathon less likely. […] Marathons can thus be seen as a product of convenience and convergence ---or of convenient convergence” (xvii). This means that viewers want to watch episodes in a row, but it should not cost them any effort to continue watching by, for

(12)

example, having to change a DVD. Lotz discusses the role of the DVR and VOD and says that the development of the DVR and VOD meant that people had more possibilities because the devices were an “expansion of the capability to self-schedule and time shift” (Introduction), but the “use of these devices was too limited to meaningfully disrupt dominant industrial practices. A schedule remained necessary and central because broadcast signals could only transmit one message at a time and cable maintained the norms of the broadcast paradigm despite technological advancement” (Lotz, Introduction). Though there were still constraints with the use of the DVR and VOD, Perks does mention that “watching films in the home enabled a greater sense of control over the film availability and experience, also paving the way for ownership and re-watching that integrated the text more firmly in one’s identity (Perks, xvi). The new technologies ensured that viewers had more control to choose what to watch and when they could watch it. Especially DVDs allowed the viewers to choose the movies or television shows that the viewers enjoyed, instead of being dependent of the televised schedule (xvi).

Netflix and the internet

According to Amanda Lotz, “internet distribution advances what VCR and DVR recording and DVD access began to allow so that viewers can select television viewing just as they might select a book from a library” (ch.1). Though the development of the “internet distribution” helped people access and use television in another, new, way, “multiple technologies and distribution mechanisms developed in the early 2000s, so it is not internet distribution alone that changes the use of television” (Lotz, Introduction). Trouleau, in his article “Just One More: Modeling Binge Watching Behavior”, adds to this that “in recent years, with the advent of video on-demand (VOD) services, consumers now have the ability to access full seasons of television episodes at once. This has led to the rise of binge watching, where multiple TV episodes, and potentially entire seasons, are consumed in a single viewing session” (1). VOD services and therefore better internet distribution seem to be encouraging the fact that a lot of viewers binge-watch shows as it is fairly easy to access all episodes of a certain show online. Before this degree of internet distribution of television shows (or DVDs) viewers had to wait a week until the next episode aired, but now, when the episodes are all online, the possibility to watch them all in a row is always there.

Lotz continues on this note by discussing the way internet distribution differs from earlier developments, as it “enables personalized delivery of content independent of a schedule […]” (Introduction). This means that the viewers can watch television shows (and films) at their own chosen time. Furthermore, “when exercising temporal control, television viewers skip commercials through many of the most common means of marathoning (streaming, downloads, or DVDs) and they

(13)

evade programming constraints” (Perks, 7). This can be described as “convenient convergence” (xvii), as there are less and less reasons for the viewers to stop watching the television show. Programming constraints are reasons surrounding the different episodes, or within episodes that will disturb the viewers flow of watching the show and might cause the fact that the viewers stop watching. Examples of programming constraints are commercials, but could also be the switching of DVD’s.

Netflix is one of the main internet distribution companies for television shows and films. Lotz calls these services such as Netflix, “portals”. A portal in contrast to a broadcasting channel, does not schedule television shows, but manages the shows that are available on the platform (Introduction). “Portals’ primary task might be better regarded as that of curation—of curating a library of content based on the identity, vision, and strategy that drive its business model” (Introduction). This is, according to Perks, also encouraging marathon viewing as “streaming services or downloads provide a better opportunity for viewers to find marathonable texts because the content is already available (without viewers needing to anticipate their interests and record the content)” (xxix).

In the case of Netflix, their vision/strategy could be seen as trying to encourage as much viewers as possible to watch multiple episodes in a row. Pittman describes this in his article by saying that “Netflix is not only aware of the increase in binge-watching but seems to be encouraging (or at least facilitating) it as a viable consumptive activity” (2). Several authors draw the conclusion that Netflix, one way or another tries to encourage viewers to watch multiple episodes of television shows in a row. The conclusion that Mareike Jenner draws, is that “binge-watching serves the interests of the emerging VOD industry” (2). Though this definitely seems the case for Netflix, not all VOD-companies seem to have a binge-watching strategy embedded in their shows, but also not in the software or interface of the website. Matrix gives a clear view on the subject of Netflix and the way they identify themselves, as “with its long-tail inventory of TV shows and movies, commercial-free viewing experience, and “post play” seamless episode delivery, Netflix is changing viewers’

expectations concerning what, how, and when they watch TV.” (121). This can be seen as part of the Netflix identity as the company encourage binge-watching, but by getting rid of program constraints, such as commercials, viewers are less inclined to stop watching. What can be seen as the identity of Netflix, except for the fact that the company encourages binge-watching, can differ per viewer as “Netflix takes advantage of what might be considered as the positive properties of filter bubbles so that people with different tastes have very different experiences of the content available in a way that affirms their sense of the Netflix brand” (Lotz, ch.1). This means that Netflix tries to cater the needs of all the different viewers that use their site and that Netflix does not focusses on a certain group of viewers. “It does not license or develop a series with the expectation that all Netflix viewers will value it, but develops offerings with distinct segments of subscribers in mind” (ch.1).

(14)

There is also a difference between different portals as “some other features distinguishing portals as products include the strategy used to organize content, whether the last viewed content automatically plays, and the particular sophistication of the search and recommendation functions” (Lotz, Introduction). This means that different portals have other features on their interface that should make that portal easy to use for the user but also get them to continue watching television shows via that portal, at least in the case of Netflix. Lisa Glebatis Perks continues on this notion by describing both the interfaces of Amazon and Netflix. She concludes that marathoning by viewers takes more effort on Amazon: “the site offers “a tiny “advance” arrow button at the bottom right of the screen that invites “next up”. Still, it takes viewer work ---clicking on the inconspicuous button---to keep the marathon afloat, access that next episode, and maintain the insulated flow” (xxv). This means that the viewer have to undertake an action, actually clicking on the next button, to continue watching. This could interrupt the flow of the viewer watching, which leads to the fact that viewers will not watch multiple episodes in a row. On the other hand, the interface of Netflix encourages binge-watching. “Netflix’s interface (although for a commercial service) follows marathon logic, attempting to coax readers into further episode viewing rather than driving them to make a purchase through the site” (xxv). This is the opposite of Amazon, but that is also one of the advantages of Netflix. Netflix has no goal of letting the viewer making another purchase on the site, as their only product is the subscription to Netflix itself. This means that their ultimate goal is just to keep the viewer engaged enough to want to keep the subscription. Mareike Jenner describes this in her article as viewers “not being able or willing to end the experience” (11), as the viewers are being

encouraged by Netflix to continue watching.

Matrix adds to this that “with its long-tail inventory of TV shows and movies, commercial-free viewing experience and “post play” seamless episode delivery, Netflix is changing viewers’

expectations concerning what, how, and when they watch TV. As a result, viewers not surprisingly are watching more television, including in larger doses at a time” (120). As mentioned above, Netflix only product is their subscription to their site, and therefore it is in their best interest to have a big, extensive library to keep the viewers with a subscription satisfied. The other advantage of Netflix is that they do not have any commercials on their site, and after a while viewers will get used to seeing no commercials in the middle of a television show or a film. If the same viewers will watch a

traditional broadcast channel, there is a chance that that viewer will get annoyed faster or distracted faster after having to sit through several commercials.

Netflix “seems to also ‘teach’ its audiences how to watch Netflix” (Jenner, 8). This means that some shows are even changed to fit the identity of the platform (8). One example is Arrested

Development, where “the narrative structure is different from the first three seasons, seemingly responding more to the needs of self-scheduled, rather than scheduled, television” (7). Jenner adds

(15)

to this that Netflix, by changing the show to fit the ‘identity’ of the platform, “seems to also ‘teach’ its audiences how to watch Netflix (8). This means that, according to Jenner, Netflix is trying to get the viewers to binge-watch shows on Netflix. Lotz adds to this notion that viewers have to be taught to watch “new television” as she says that “the technological affordances of internet-distributed television and the varied protocols they allow encourage an industrial operation and viewer experience that is quite different from norms developed for previous mechanisms of television distribution and extend beyond nonlinearity” (Introduction). This means that binge-watching is also encouraged because the technology allows it and therefore the viewers have to ‘learn’ how to handle the affordances of that technology.

Narrative Structures in Television Shows

Perks discusses that “content delivery technologies offer such convenience for anywhere, anytime, almost-any-text media engagement that they enable a stronger connection between reader and story world: readers can engage with their chosen stories both at will and in-depth, fundamentally altering textual forms and the reader/text relationship. More specifically, marathoning blurs traditional media demarcations: reader/character, reader/text, reader/programmer, and reader/author” (xi). Rosemary Huisman describes this as the fact that “current developments in digital technology are increasingly empowering viewers to select when and how they watch programs” (160). Innocenti continues to expand on this by saying that “depending whether they adopt traditional modes of access or more experimental ones, viewers can decide whether to accept the consumption time imposed by the medium, or redefine and modify it either slightly […] or drastically” (8).

In his article, Mittell explains the term narrative complexity. “At its most basic level, narrative complexity is a redefinition of episodic forms under the influence of serial narration” (Narrative Complexity, 32). This can be explained as the fact that it is not necessary for every episode to have an ending, and that the storylines can surpass single episodes (Narrative Complexity, 32). Mittell, in his article Complex TV, continues on this note by saying that “complex television employs serial

techniques with the underlying assumption that a series is a cumulative narrative that builds over time, rather than resetting back to a steady-state equilibrium at the end of every episode” (Complex TV, 18). The goal of a narratively complex television show is to tell an in-depth story that does not conform to conventional standards of an episodic form.

As a complex narrative show is a new form in between an episodic form and a serial form (Narrative Complexity, 32) the distinction has to be made between an episodical- and serial plot. Veronica Innocenti explains this distinction by mentioning both an anthology plot and a running plot. “Within this typology of products, single segments maintain a high degree of autonomy and thus

(16)

episodes will include a central storyline that is concluded in the episode (called an anthology plot); however, there will also be a background context that pans episodes (the so called running plot)” (2). In narratively complex shows, the plot can be explained as the fact that there is both an anthology plot and a running plot, but the running plot is most of the time the central plot and expands over several episodes. This does not mean that all storylines have to be visible from the start. Mittell makes a point that not all storylines are revealed in a single episode, but could even surpass several seasons: “Likewise, Arrested expands the number of coinciding plots per episode, with often six or more story lines bouncing off one another, resulting in unlikely coincidences, twists, and ironic repercussions, some of which may not become evident until subsequent episodes or seasons” (Narrative Complexity, 33).

Anne Dunn, in her article “The Genres of Television”, adds to this that in non-complex narrative shows, the episodes have to end the same way they started, because there has to be a continuity for the viewers at the start of the next episode (132). This can be explained as that a viewer who did not see the previous episode, has to understand the next episode. This can be seen as exactly the opposite of narratively complex shows, according to Mittell in the article “Complex TV”, as those shows “use television’s episodic form to undercut conventional assumptions of returning to equilibrium and situational continuity, while embracing conditional storylines” (21). This means that complex shows want to keep the viewers engaged, letting them think about the show and analyzing the events in the episodes, instead of returning to that same starting point every time. Kristin

Thompson, in her article “Storytelling in Film and Television”, adds to this by saying that “in television particularly, the complexity fades into the tenuous connections across a series. Similarly, the virtues of the individual episode—compact exposition, swift progression from cause to effect, establishment of material for future entries in the series—make little impression unless one pays keen attention or undertakes actual analysis, either of the episode or across the season” (x). In a narratively complex television storylines can extend over a whole seasons, therefore it is necessary for the viewer to understand and remember moments from different episodes. Information that can seem

unimportant at the moment, can become important later in the show. It is also important for the viewers to pay close attention to the events in the show and analyze complex moments. This way the viewers will understand all aspects of a narratively complex television show.

As mentioned before, Netflix encourages viewers to watch multiple episodes in a row. Perks mentions a couple advantages for viewers (and Netflix) to be able to binge-watch a certain show. “By controlling the pace of the narrative journey and focusing on one story world, marathoners can maximize the emotional and cognitive rewards of their media experience. Marathoners’ focused engagement with the text promotes stronger diegetic memories that enhance emotional and cognitive connectivity to the story world” (xi). This means that the viewers can be more aware of the

(17)

different (underlying) components of the text. The viewer can stay engaged in this story world by watching several episodes in a row, as the viewer does not need to think about something else, but can continue to analyze the events in the episodes. Thompson describes this as “we watch television via single episodes, and those episodes may be unremarkable. Yet television is structured in ways that become apparent only if we take the long view. Multiple-episode programs structure narratives within episodes, across seasons, and across a potentially lengthy succession of seasons” (x). This is similar to what Perks says about being engaged in the story world, only does Perks mention that the engagement of the viewer with the text is very important to understand complex moments and that just watching multiple episodes in a row is not enough. It does means that if viewers watch multiple episodes in a row, the story is ‘fresh’ in the viewers memory, which means that the viewer can focus on the underlying story, and the narratives that transcends single episodes. That way, it is easier to analyze the complex moments and understand the meaning.

Even if the story is no longer fresh in the memory of the viewers, the show will give clues to the viewers to bring the memory that is necessary to understand the moment to the surface. One way of doing that is through diegetic retelling, where one of the characters will mention something that happened in an earlier episode and will become of importance again (Complex TV, 182). This way, the memory of the viewer for that specific events will be triggered and therefore the viewer will be able to analyze the specific moment in the episode with the information that is needed. Another form of diegetic retelling, or refreshing the viewers’ memories of certain events, are recap videos. As Mittell discusses in “Complex TV”, “recaps can trigger long dormant memories which might work to foreshadow upcoming narrative events” (198). This can be a recap video at the beginning of an episode or at the beginning of a new season. Especially if a couple of months have gone by in between two different seasons it can be of importance to recall the important events of last season through a recap video. In a recap video the moments are chosen to “trigger long dormant memories” (198) of events, but these events are specifically chosen because those moments are linked to events that will become of importance again in the new season. This way, the writers try to give the viewers all the information they need to be able to analyze the (complex) events in the upcoming season.

Mittell continues on this note by saying that:

This programming form demands an active and attentive process of comprehension to decode both the complex stories and modes of storytelling offered by contemporary television. Audiences tend to embrace complex programs in much more passionate and committed terms than most conventional television, using these shows as the basis for robust fan cultures and active feedback to the television industry. (Narrative Complexity, 32)

(18)

Perks continues by explaining what this enhanced engagement means for the viewers. “Reader affective investments transform the characters into pseudo-avatars, blurring the line between reader and character in their coordinated journey. Enhanced diegetic memories (from not having to work to recall what happened on a show that aired a week ago, or a book one read months ago) free up marathoners’ cognitive space to further plumb narrative depths” (Perks, xi). As Perks explains, the fact that the story is still ‘fresh’ in the memory of the viewer, means that the viewer can focus on the narratives that transcend single episodes and ‘explore’ the show more in-depth. Therefore, viewers with a good, fresh, diegetic memory will be able to analyze complex moment in television shows.

Arrested Development is, as mentioned above, a show with a complex narrative. Mittell even mentions that viewers cannot watch Arrested Development without noticing parts of the narrative complexity of the show (Narrative Complexity, 38). In the case of Arrested Development, according to Mittell, the show tends to confuse the diegetic memories of the viewers, even if the episodes are binge-watched in one sitting, “as most episodes end with a “next week on Arrested Development” teaser, showing scenes continuing that episode’s stories. However, regular viewers soon learn that future episodes will not show these scenes, nor will they have actually occurred within the ongoing story world” (Narrative Complexity, 34). In this case, the viewers still have to recall what happened over the course of the last episode, but the viewers have to forget (or just not recall) what they have seen in the ‘next week on Arrested Development’. This way, Arrested Development keeps the viewers on their toes as the viewers try to recall if something that was projected by the show actually

happened or was just put into the episode to confuse the viewers.

Another interesting aspect of a narratively complex program is the concept of a narrative special effect. Acccording to Mittell, moments that are part of a narrative special effect “push the operational aesthetic to the foreground, calling attention to the constructed nature of the narration and asking us to marvel at how the writers pulled it off” (Narrative Complexity, 35).

Innocenti expands on this by saying that complex television shows are very in-depth and reveal storylines and details over the run of a television show. “They have the potential to impose entirely new worlds that relate little to the precedent dominant narrative thread, or moreover introduce entirely new characters, while other will disappear, or undergo continued reconfigurations in their relationships” (8). Innocenti means that during the run of a narratively complex show, the plot can develop in a whole other way than was expected or the relationship between characters can go a whole other way than was the case when the show started.

Mittell says that: “narratively complex programs invite temporary disorientation and confusion, allowing viewers to build up their comprehension skills through long-term viewing and active engagement” (Narrative Complexity, 37). The narratively complex show is put together in such a way that the viewer has to rewind scenes to actually understand all underlying components of the

(19)

episodes (Complex TV, 38). Huisman agrees with Mittell on the fact that viewers can learn certain comprehension skills to better understand complexity in television shows (170). This way, it seems like binge-watching a show should help viewers develop comprehension skills, as the viewers are less focused on the overall story of the television show, but through the diegetic memory can focus more on the in-depth narratives of the show.

Perks discusses a twist on this by explaining that “even in a familiar narrative, the interaction of reader/traveler, imagination, and vast narrative will never play out the same. Just as you can’t step in the same river twice, or play the same game of monopoly twice, this ludic experience is ever changing” (7). This leads back to the point that according to Huisman and Mittell viewers can learn the skills to analyze narratives. This would mean that after a while, the viewers would be able to comprehend different scenarios, even if all narratives are different.

Mittell continues on this note by explaining some features of narrative complexity; “but its boldest moments of narrative spectacle occur when the plot makes unforeseen sharp twists that cause the entire scenario to “reboot”, changing the professional and interpersonal dynamics of nearly every character” (Narrative Complexity, 36). “But crucially the goal of these puzzle films is not to solve the mysteries ahead of time; rather, we want to be competent enough to follow their narrative strategies but still relish in the pleasures of being manipulated successfully” (Narrative Complexity, 38). It is important for the viewers to have some comprehension skills, so that they can analyze parts of the show, but the viewers also still have to be surprised about the events in those episodes. If that is not the case, after a while it can become less interesting for the viewers to watch a show that they can predict at every turn.

Furthermore, “narratively complex programming invites audiences to engage actively at the level of form a well, highlighting the conventionality of traditional television and exploring the possibilities of both innovative long-term storytelling and creative intraepisode discursive strategies” (38). Some television shows, such as Arrested Development, need and depend on the close attention of the viewers to be able to bring the complex story across to the viewers. “[…], narratively complex television demands you pay attention to the window frames, asking you to reflect on how it provides partial access to the diegesis and how the panes of glass distort your vision of the unfolding action” (Narrative Complexity, 38). Innocenti adds to this that “in the era of convergence, spectators are invited less to simply watch a TV series than to live an experience that transcends the limits of a predetermined consumption” (8). Mittell continues on this point by giving a twist on complex narration: “Complex narration often breaks the fourth wall, whether it be visually represented direct address […] or more ambiguous voice-over that blurs the line between diegetic and nondiegetic […], calling attention to its own breaking convention”(Narrative Complexity, 37).

(20)

According to Perks, there are similarities between shows that are commonly marathoned, namely that “commonly marathoned texts are collectively proposing, questioning, and exploring moral ways of being” (xiii, xiv). Netflix’s Original shows could fit in this category as those shows are produced to fit the platform and therefore should be well suited to be binge-watched. Furthermore, shows that fit this category could be narratively complex television shows, as those shows can be seen as “exploring moral ways of being” (xii, xiv), where the viewer has to analyze and decide what the viewer actually understand of the events in the show. Jenner agrees on the point that some television shows are more suited to being binge-watched than other television shows (8). “Theoretically, any text can be binge-watched, but these lists do specify serialised content, often explicitly mentioning Netflix as a means to watch it” (2). Jenner only specifies a bingeable text as often being serialised content. This could be fitting with a lot of television shows, but she does bring the point across that some shows can be better suited to be binge-watched than others. Jenner does mention Netflix explicitly as a means to binge-watch a show. This is an obvious choice as the interface of Netflix lends itself quite well for watching multiple episodes in a row. An example of this is the fact that the next episode starts automatically, twenty seconds after the previous episode ended.

Perks continues on this note by saying that the new technology developments facilitate binge-watching by the viewers and therefore binge-watching seems to become more normal (185). The viewers have easier access to the television shows they want and therefore their watching habits adapt to these possibilities. As the viewers have easier access, the narrative structure of a television show can also be made more difficult. This will lead to the fact that “more readers seek engaged, holistic experiences in story worlds” (185). This means that the viewers have easier access to multiple seasons and episodes, therefore the narrative structures become more complex and therefore the viewers can engage themselves better in the story world of the show. An example of this is the show Arrested Development, which got a revival on Netflix, where it first was broadcast on traditional television. The new season had even more complex storylines than the previous seasons and all episodes could be accessed at the same time. Last, Mittell concludes to say that there is now a more narratively complex form of storytelling in television shows that “demands for intensified viewer engagement focused on both diegetic pleasures and formal awareness” (Narrative Complexity, 38-39). This adds to what Perks and Jenner say as well, with the fact that the viewers need to analyze the content of an episode to understand the complexity of the moment. The viewer engagement is necessary to unravel the complex moments, but the availability of all the episodes at the same time is also important. If that is the case, the viewer can use the diegetic memory to recall certain moments and therefore have enough information to analyze complex moments and come to an understanding.

(21)

(22)

Analysis

Synopsis

The show Gilmore Girls is about the lives of mother Lorelai (Lauren Graham) and daughter Rory (Alexis Bledel) who live in the small town of Stars Hollow. Lorelai left home when she was 16 and pregnant. Rory is a clever child and at the beginning of the first episode “Pilot”, she gets accepted into a private school, named Chilton. From that point, Lorelai had to mend ways with her parents to get the tuition for Rory’s private school. In A Year in the Life, ten years have passed since the last episode of Gilmore Girls and the episodes tell the viewers about the new lives of Lorelai and Rory. A main character has also been added to A Year in the Life, Emily (Kelly Bishop), who is the mother of Lorelai. She already played a role in Gilmore Girls, but she is now playing a bigger role in the show.

Operationalization of the concepts

The show will be analyzed based on three main concepts. These concepts are programming constraints, narrative complexity and diegetic memory. Within these three concepts, several sub-concepts will be discussed to be able to analyze Gilmore Girls in the best way.

Programming constraints are reasons surrounding the different episodes, or within episodes

that will disturb the viewers flow of watching the show and might cause the fact that the viewers stop watching. There can be several reasons that viewers stop watching episodes; it can be a technological reason, for example if a viewer has to stand up to switch out an DVD. It could also be a structural reason, for example the commercials in the middle of an episode. Another reason could also be textual, which means that the text might have become less interesting to the viewer. All of the reasons that were mentioned could be the reason viewers stop watching a certain show (at least at that exact moment) and do not continue watching several episodes in a row.

In a television show with narrative complexity, the episodes are a new form of a serial, which means that the storyline can stretch out over several episodes or even seasons. The advantage of a serial form is “that a series is a cumulative narrative that builds over time, rather than resetting back to a steady-state equilibrium at the end of every episode” (Complex TV, 18). This means that

storylines can be more complex and in-depth as there is more time to explain and expand them and the characters can also be more complex. Furthermore, this form ensures the fact that there is delayed gratification for the viewers, as the story is not done after a single episode, and the viewers should want to continue watching to get to that gratification. An anthology plot is a certain storyline that starts and ends in the same episode. Most of the time, it is the central storyline. The running plot is the secondary storyline in an episode and this storyline can surpass multiple episodes. Episodes

(23)

that are in a serial form can be seen as a series of episodes that have both an anthology plot and a running plot. It is different from an episodic form, in the way that the episodes in a serial are linked, forming a longer storyline, which is not the case with the episodic form.

The diegetic memory of viewers refers to what viewers can remember from earlier episodes that is relevant for the episode the viewers are watching at that time. As Perks mentioned, the diegetic memory is about “having a fresh memory of the story, familiarity with its world and its inhabitants” (74), which “helps encourage involvement and encouragement with the text” (74). A fresh, diegetic memory will help the viewers understand more references that are made in episodes and also will help to remember storylines that might not have been mentioned in a couple of episodes. One way of refreshing the diegetic memory is by diegetic retelling, where one of the characters mentions the past events in a dialogue, which should remind the viewer of what has happened. The diegetic memory is of importance for the viewers to be able to fully engage in the story world (Complex TV, 52) and catch all the ‘hidden’ moments in the episodes. Therefore, the writers of a show try to engage the diegetic memory of the viewer and make sure that the viewers understand the complexity of the moment.

Viewer engagement is about how shows keep the viewer interested and engaged with the television show, and how to encourage them to keep watching. It also has to do with the fact that to fully understand the underlying components of an episode, the viewer has to be fully engaged in the storyworld (52). Therefore, the writers try to keep viewers engaged with the show, as they would not get all context within the episodes otherwise. As Mittell discussed in “Complex TV”, viewers do not just have to watch narratively complex television shows once, but they have “to rewatch for noticing depth of references, to marvel at displays of craft and continuities, and to appreciate details that require the liberal use of pause and rewind” (38). It is important that the viewers are engaged with a complex show, because otherwise they would not re-watch several moments of a show to get all references that are made. Therefore, if the viewer is engaged with the show, the viewer will pick up more of the narrative complexity and have a better diegetic memory of events that have happened before in the television show.

The concept of a cult status is also used in this analysis. In this case, cult status can be described as the fact that some shows, such as Gilmore Girls, have a very passionate following that discusses and analyzes everything that is happening in the show. The concept of cult status will be discussed within the concept of diegetic memory, as the passionate followers need to understand the underlying, complex moments in the show to analyze the show, which can be revealed by a good diegetic memory of those viewers.

(24)

Programming Constraints

The first key point is that there seem to be less programming constraints surrounding the episodes of A Year in the Life. This is partly the case because the new season is released on Netflix and that there are no commercials on this platform, but on the other hand there are fewer episodes in the new season. The four new episodes are more than twice as long as the older ones: 1,5 hour versus 40 minutes. This means that there are even fewer opportunities to lose interest and stop watching in between different episodes, as there are less moments where technological programming constraints have to be taken into account. In this case, the technological programming constraint can be seen as the moment right after the episode ended and the viewer has to wait twenty seconds until the new episode begins. With the old episodes, which were 40 minutes long each, the episodes were finished more often, and therefore there were more opportunities to stop watching lose the engagement with the story world in between separate episodes. With A Year in the Life, as the episodes are almost 2,5 times as long, the viewers can stay engaged in the story world of the show longer before the

interruption by the break between episodes, which means that there seem to be less programming constraints.

Binge-watching is defined by Netflix via a survey as “watching between 2-6 episodes of the same TV show in one sitting” (2013). Therefore, watching one new episode of A Year in the Life could be seen as binge-watching a show by itself, as the new episode consists of the time of almost 2,5 old episodes. Furthermore, there is no longer the need to wait a week until the next episode is released, as all the episodes of a season are released in one go. This ensures that there are even fewer

programming constraints for the viewers, because the possibility to continue watching is always there. The availability of the episodes therefore encourages the binge-watching of the show as it takes away several programming constraints, which allows the viewers to stay engaged in the story world of Gilmore Girls and also stay in the ‘flow’ of watching several episodes in a row without any ‘real’ interruptions.

Netflix interface

As mentioned before, the interface of Netflix itself also ensures that there are less programming constraints that could cause the viewer to stop watching, than was the case with traditional

broadcasting channels such as ABC. On the Netflix platform, if the viewer is watching an episode and that episode has come to an end, the next episode starts automatically after a maximum of twenty seconds after the previous one has ended. This means that the viewer has to take an extra, quick action, within twenty seconds to stop the next episode from starting. If the viewer does not react in time, the new episode starts, which could lead to the fact that the viewers could continue to be

(25)

engaged in the story world of the show again and therefore continues watching. This is different than with linear television, because in the case of linear television a different television show would begin. The viewer is not already engaged in this particular story world, which makes the step to stop

watching television easier for the viewer. If the auto play after twenty seconds takes too long in the eyes of the viewer, or that the twenty seconds would get the viewer out of the ‘flow’ of watching, there is also a “Continue Watching” button, which immediately starts the next episode. Therefore, the viewer even has the possibility to speed up the time between the episodes to continue the narrative journey of the television show. Furthermore, if the viewer clicks on a certain show while on the homepage and takes too long reading the synopsis of the television show or film, it automatically starts playing. Therefore Netflix seems to be limiting the choices that a viewer has to take, but if the viewer does not react fast enough, Netflix takes this choice for them.

Recently there has been an addition to Netflix that is similar to the “Continue Watching” button. At the moment, Netflix is testing a “Skip Intro” button, which should allow the viewers to skip the introduction video at the beginning of an episode (“Nieuwe knop Netflix”). This could be a solution for a structural programming constraint, namely that the viewers no longer have to watch the same introduction scene every time a new episode starts. This means that the viewers stay ‘in the flow’ of watching the show and being emerged in the story world, instead of getting distracted by events that the viewers has just watched moments ago and that they still have fresh in their memory. Last, Netflix also recently added another interesting function to their interface that enables the fact that viewers can download episodes and watch those episodes without internet. This means that a connection to the internet is no longer required at all time to being able to binge-watch a certain show via Netflix. That way, watching series via Netflix is no longer restricted to the home, or any other place with a working internet connection, but the viewers can watch episodes wherever and

whenever they have time. This enables the viewers to try out new places and moments to watch television shows via Netflix. If Netflix adds a new function to their platform, the users also have to ‘learn’ how to use this function, and this is similar to what Jenner mentioned in her article; the fact that Netflix “seems to also ‘teach’ its audiences how to watch Netflix (8). It was mentioned earlier that some television shows might be more suited to be binge-watched than other shows, but Netflix can also play a large role in the shows that are binge-watched by viewers. On normal time-shifting devices, for example a DVD player, viewers might only binge-watch shows that are actually categorized are bingeable, which are mostly narratively complex television shows. Netflix, on the other hand, tries to navigate the viewers through the use of their interface, and send the viewer into the next episode, and therefore tries to encourage binge-watching. One example is the “continue watching button, or the above mentioned “Skip Intro” button. This way, Netflix ‘teaches’ its viewers to watch the television shows they offer in their library in a certain way. This could mean that the

(26)

bingeable-ness of a television show is not only depended on the form of the show, but is also partly depended on the broadcaster.

There seem to be more programming constraints surrounding the episodes of Gilmore Girls, than there are surrounding the episodes of A Year in the Life. In Gilmore Girls, there were normally cliffhangers at the end of an episode as well as right before a commercial began. The cliffhangers should encourage the viewers to continue watching, but the commercials might decrease the chance that viewers continue watching a particular episode after those commercials have ended. As the viewer had to wait several minutes until the commercial break was over, the viewer could also decide to watch another show for a couple of minutes. The result of this could be that the viewer would forget to go back to the other show and therefore stop watching. This could also be described as an example of convenient convergence (Perks; xvii), which is the fact that viewers want to watch several episodes in a row, but it should not cost them any effort to continue watching. The commercials could disturb the viewers flow of watching the show, by having to wait several minutes, and therefore the viewers might be inclined to stop watching.

Narrative Complexity

A Year in the Life seems to be more complex than the original seven season and the storylines seem to be more in-depth as well. This can partly be explained as the fact that the episodes are longer than the original episodes of Gilmore Girls and therefore there is more time to explain certain events. Furthermore, it is clear throughout the season of A Year in the Life that there are almost no long sidesteps to subplots, but the story only goes more in-depth into the three main plots of Lorelai, Rory and Emily. In the original seven seasons of Gilmore Girls, Lorelai and Rory were the only main

characters as the show mostly followed their lives, their plots were the most in-depth and their plot was the most important for the overall storyline of the show.

The main characters are the characters whose plots go the most in-depth, their plot is the most important for the overall storyline of the show and the viewers see the storylines through the eyes of the main characters, therefore experiencing the story through them. Emily was a part of the overall storyline of the show and was part of several subplots, but she could never be categorized as a main character. The viewers never got an insight on what she was feeling, but they just saw her storyline unfold. This was different than with Lorelai and Rory, where the viewers were engaged with the events and had more insight in their choices. Even though Rory and Lorelai are the main

characters, several times throughout the seasons of Gilmore Girls, there were subplots of characters other than the main characters, which at times were quite extensively depicted in the episodes. This was part of the fact that the storylines of the two main characters were not very in-depth as there