Narrative theory and structures in TV talent shows

I am going to be looking at how traditional narrative theory and structures apply to TV talent shows. My hypothesis is that TV talent shows include a lot of the narrative elements that are used to construct the majority of books, films, and fictional TV shows such as dramas. In a lot of ways I feel that the TV talent show very closely resembles the more fictional and script-driven shows that populate the soaps and dramas that airs alongside it, and that these elements are essential to have in a show that must grip viewers from week to week and keep them coming back.

Vladimir Propp- Characters that perform a function

Vladimir Propp was a Russian critic that was prevalent during the 1920's.He was most interested in an noted the similarities between film narrative and traditional folk-tales, and identified a set of characters that provided some form of function within the story context.


The Hero – a character that seeks something
The Villain – who opposes or actively blocks the hero’s quest
The Donor – who provides an object with magical properties
The Dispatcher – who sends the hero on his/her quest via a message
  The False Hero – who disrupts the hero’s success by making false claims
  The Helper – who aids the hero
  The Princess – acts as the reward for the hero and the object of the villain’s plots
  Her Father – who acts to reward the hero for his effort


( http://www.adamranson.plus.com/Propp.htm - Film Communication Media) 


Although in some respects I think that this list is simplistic and now dated, you can potentially see where some of the character archetypes may fit into the TV talent show genre. Take for example the hero- the public vote each week in the millions because they want someone to stay in the show and ultimately win. The contestants most definitely are seeking something- in this case it's fame, money, and a recording contract though it differs from person to person arguably. In this case though it would be hard to label the contestants as "heroes" because that's a very basic definition that in a lot of cases would not be appropriate.  On the one hand the fact that the public votes in the millions to keep contestants in the show because they must like them, and on some levels are wanting them to be the winner and "hero" by winning the competition- some of the contestants are portrayed as unlike-able with the audience turning against them. In this scenario the public and TV audience can be be "The Helper" but arguably they can have the very opposite effect.


"Those who become reality TV “stars” demonstrate similar failure to possess anything remotely resembling heroic character. Take Jon Gosselin, Octomom Nadya Suleman, disgraced former Illinois governor Rod Blogojevich (on this season’s Celebrity Apprentice)"  


 (Samuel Ebersole, Professor at Colorado State University)


What Ebersole is referring to here is the fact that there are so many reality TV stars that become popular but don't necessarily have very admirable traits that would show them as being anything like a role model or hero. The same can be applied to TV talent shows with the frequent tabloid stories of the contestants.


"America’s obsession with reality TV programming has spawned a fascination with reality TV as a path to fame and fortune, at any cost. Problems arise when we, as a society, fail to differentiate between heroism and celebrity. We diminish the value of heroic acts and we place celebrity on a pedestal where it becomes the ultimate goal but has no correlation to achievement."


Again , here he is stating that the public become obsessed over TV stars because of their sudden rise in fame from the exposure of being on TV, despite the fact that they may not have any redeemable qualities or indeed in some cases talent.


TV talent show judges - The Villains?


One character type that almost always seems to be at least purposely constructed by TV producers is that of the "nasty judge" - the judge that maybe out of the three judges present always seems to have the harsh opinions. The most noteworthy and famous of all of course is Simon Cowell with his debut on Pop Idol (2001)  which he has since continued his notorious reputation for being the "bad guy" and being somewhat blunt and sometimes offensive comments to the contestants. "The Talent Show Story" (ITV, 2012) looked at the history of TV talent show judges, and it's interesting to note that this trend of having a "bad" judge has existed in TV talent shows for some time, and has caused controversy. It's interesting to note that when Pop Idol began it was judge Pete Waterman that took the helm for dishing out very harsh comments to contestants, and Simon Cowell was being generally quite reserved in comparison. Cowell was interviewed on The Talent Show Story in which he stated that once he became comfortable in the role and began giving more harsh feedback- the producers sat down and told him they loved it and wanted more of that. You can see there is the foundations of a "villain" set up here- the "heroes" (the contestants) must face against the challenge of the judges who are in a position of great power. The judges power and control is even further emphasised since the inclusion of "buzzer rounds" where they can buzz a contestant if they don't like their act and stop the act whenever they want.


As audience members who side with the contestants (the "heroes") - Simon Cowell's feedback and decisions may make or break their careers. There is a real pantomime feel when the audience members in the studio all boo Cowell because he has said something they think was wrong. It's an angle that I think producers like to go with to cause some controversy and get people talking about the show - which most certainly has worked. Simon Cowell is now considered to be such an asset to the shows he forms and works on that there is perhaps a direct link between the viewing figures dropping on X-Factor and BGT following his absence from the show. [The Talent Show Story 2011]




Of course, to label an honest judge as a villains is a little bit simplistic and I think it's played-up for the show but in reality it's really an obvious construction over what is essentially a basic business attitude that has always existed in the world of music record labels. Simon Cowell and Pete Waterman have both had long careers with signing up artists for their record labels. They know what type of things sell and they realise the harsh realities of the industry they are a part of. Whilst it can be argued that Simon Cowell oversteps some lines and says some borderline offensive things- It is just an opinion though and being honest isn't an evil trait. To be truthful and honest to the thousands of people that apply for the show all trying to enter the super-competitive world of record labels could be a rather positive trait in most respects. Whilst the show may portray him as a almost Disney-style villain it's actually him who in almost all cases offers the recording contract to the winner and is thus in a position of helping the "heroes" wanting to reach their goals.


I think on a basic level Propp's character's that perform a function could apply to very traditional stories present in children's stories or typical fairytales, and is broad enough to apply to some elements of any narrative if you were to try and place it within a framework. But it does appear to now be rather outdated  and arguably restrictive where stories are pushing against those very frameworks to try and be something different other than very traditional.