21st Century Literature discussion

HOW TO WIN
By Daisy Johnson

Note: Inspired by the reality TV show Love Island.

Reality shows have been around for about 20 years now. I remember when they first started to become popular and take over all of TV that there seemed to be a new one every couple of weeks and the premises for them seemed to become more and more ridiculous. Soon, everyone was either watching them or making fun of them or both. Parodies of them were common, but the real shows were so bizarre that it became hard to differentiate the parody from the real. There were times when people literally thought that genuine advertisements for new shows were comedic parodies of them. In time, pretty much every satire or ridiculing parody of reality shows had been done and the general absurdity of so many of them was so extreme that it really became impossible to make fun of them further.

Johnson seems to not be aware of any of this, as her story seems to present a more-bizarre-than-the-real-type satire of a reality show. As someone who never watches these sorts of shows, I actually find the attempt to satirize them almost as annoying as actually being forced to watch one of them. If the real thing is ridiculous, then these shows are beyond something that can be ridiculed. Maybe people who watch and like and take seriously these sorts of shows might enjoy this story thinking that there is a distinction between the real shows and the satire, but I didn't see the point of it all. This story would have read as a cliche had it been written fifteen years ago.

This story reminds me of Carmen Maria Machado's story, "Especially Heinous: 272 Views of Law & Order SVU". The structure of the story is 272 sections, each one that is a fictional summary of an episode of Law & Order SVU. She retained the actual episode titles and kept them in their actual order, but made up the rest. The 272 episodes represent the first 12 seasons of the show. It's not a great story, but it strikes me as a lot more creative and interesting a riff on television than Johnson's story. You can read Machado's story online for free here: http://theamericanreader.com/especial...

David, GR notifications have been spotty for me the past few weeks, so I didn't see your post until last night.

In this particular instance, it is a British reality show which seems to have taken surveillance and control of contestants (such as requiring them to be in swimwear at all times) to new levels. More here if interested.

Seems like you've read quite a few parodies of these types of shows. Other than Machado's, I had not. Also, given Johnson's age, this show is probably something almost aimed at her demographic. None of this refutes your opinion--just added context. I like the ratcheting up of tension, the way Johnson lets he normal ominous use of nature creep in slowly (the moss, the unrelenting heat, the crows watching and waiting). The short choppy sentences match the kind of quick camera cuts and contrived personalities the editing of such a show forces on the viewer. If felt like Club Med meets Abu Ghraib with the torturers being invisible. The panopticon as skin-baring entertainment! Haven't seen another talented writer take this on myself. Don't get me wrong, I don't think this is going to be read ages from now, but I thought it was fun and I loved the way the ending gives a nod to the kind of Sisyphean surrealness of it all.

Now Machado's story, which I found intriguing but tiresome for its sheer length is an interesting comparison. She took on one of the longest running television series in history (I think its entering season 21 this fall). I was more than halfway through that story before I realized there were 4 characters instead of 2 (two of which are actually from the show, and two of which she made up) and Machado introduces this subtle, paranormal element that never featured in the TV series. The danger in both of these stories is whether your reader can still get much out of it if they're not at least partially familiar with a show (meaning, having at least watching a couple episodes). I don't think anyone who hadn't watched Law & Order SVU would get much from Machado's story, but I think Johnson's does offer a bit as long as one knows a bit about Love Island.

Would it be fair to call Johnson's anti-fan fiction?

Johnson almost seems sympathetic toward the contestants. It's like they've volunteered for torture.

Marc wrote: "Seems like you've read quite a few parodies of these types of shows."

I don't think I have read any other parodies of reality shows. I was referring more to how, especially in the early 2000s, every sketch comedy show did multiple parodies of these shows. Every late night comedy talk show routinely ridiculed them and it seemed every stand-up comic had a routine about them. In the Ricky Gervais / Steve Merchant series Extras there is a pretty savage take-down of the "anything for fame" mentality that drives the main character to join Celebrity Big Brother. I also recall a short-lived scripted TV series that presented a fictional reality show (imagine Survivor meets Blair Witch). So while this might be something writers have not covered a lot, it still has the feel of well trod ground.


"Also, given Johnson's age, this show is probably something almost aimed at her demographic."

I doubt this. I wonder how large the population is of people who both are reality show fans and literary fiction readers. It also seems unlikely that she would aim her writing at any narrow audience if she hopes to be published and gain a following of readers.


"I think Johnson's does offer a bit as long as one knows a bit about Love Island."

I don't know anything about this show and, frankly, don't have the heart to find out, but I do remember one of the early reality shows that seemed like a parody of the genre despite being real called Temptation Island. The premise was some people came on the show as couples and others came on as single and the single people had to try to tempt the members of the couples into being unfaithful. There was another show called Paradise Hotel where single people had to find someone to pair up with and share a room otherwise face elimination. So these kinds of shows are not new and the idea that people would debase themselves by going on them is not new either. The real is so extreme it is hard to imagine how one really could satirize them well. It also makes the attempt to satirize them more an exercise in going after the lowest hanging fruit. We already know they are ridiculous and absurd. It's not really a clever or new observation to show that.

Interesting perspective, David. Totally fine to disagree with you on this one, and understandably so as I don't think I've seen a single comedy sketch about these competition type reality shows (simply because I haven't watched them, not because I wasn't aware they existed). I like when different mediums take on similar issues as it often highlights the strengths and weaknesses of different art forms.

The "contestant" that is actually a robot that they disassemble and plant in different locations would have been a funny enough construct for me to enjoy this story, especially because her head still functions and talks after being separated from her body. After reading the NY Times article, I am utterly fascinated by the degree of surveillance and control/manipulation in this particular show. In general, I loathe reality television (I do believe I watched the first few seasons MTV's The Real World), but I have actually enjoyed a few of them from time to time (e.g., Life Below Zero).

Not new and cliché aren't always the same, but I take your point that Johnson adds nothing in your opinion to this conversation.

These shows tend to blur the line between documentary and drama given the manipulative ways they handle "reality."

"The real is so extreme it is hard to imagine how one really could satirize them well." This statement is kind of a beautiful twist on Baudrillard's take on hyperreality (where the real world is trying to catch up with an unreachable "ideal" created by technology; e.g., people trying to achieve a physical look that is only possible via special effects or photoshopped efforts). Your statement is like the impossibility of writing reaching the farcical levels of current reality television. Things that are unsatirizable!

Marc wrote: "Things that are unsatirizable! "

Speaking of which, I remember hearing a discussion with one of the writer/producers of Veep where he said that since Trump came to power they found it much harder to come up with ideas that could satirize the absurdity of politics given how far things had gone. They also worried that things they might present as absurd could well become reality between the time they wrote it and the time it aired.

But getting back to this story, I think one of the reasons I was particularly disappointed by the story was because I first read it while reading Fen. That collection is so much better than this story that the contrast probably heightened my disappointment. As I mentioned before, I did not think the Machado story was great, but when I read it I had little of her work to compare it to so it did not have that same degree of letdown that "How To Win" did. The good news is it didn't dampen my enthusiasm for reading more of Johnson's work. I still have high expectations for Everything Under, which I have yet to read.

Hah! Yeah when there's a range from absurd to normal and the needle is so close to absurd, so much of the time, it's hard to know what to do. Reminds me of a supervisory co-worker I once had who simply would pretend they didn't hear your question if they didn't like it. This person would just stare at you as if you hadn't said a single thing. It was almost paralyzing because it was so absurd.

I do think Johnson treats the contestants almost like victims in this story, which I haven't really heard or seen done before. But in comparison to the Fen stories, this does not feel of the same calibre. Some experiments work, other not as much (I like Atwood quite a bit, but her foray into comic books was simply awful).

I hope you enjoy Everything Under. I just read it last month for the first time.