JASON MITTELL

Narrative Complexity in Contemporary American Television

longside the host of procedural crimedi'anias, domestic sitcoms, and realit\- com-petitions tbat populate the American televi-sion schedule, a new form of entertainment

television has emerged over tbe past two decades to botbcritical and popular acclaim. This model of televisionstorytelling is distinct for its use of narrative complexityas an alternative to tbe conventional episodic and serialforms that have typified most American television sinceits inception.We can see such innovative narrative formin popular hits of recent decades from Sciitfcld to Lost,West Wif{{^ to The X-Files, as well as in critically belovedbut ratings-challenged sbows like Arrested Dex'clopmcut,Veronica Mars, Boonitowii. and Firefly. H B O bas built its

reputation and subscriber base upon narratively com-plex shows, sucb as Tlie Sopranos, Six Feet Under, CurbYour Enthusiasm, and The Wire. Clearly, tbese shows oileran alternative to conventional television narrative—thepurpose ofthis essay is to chart out the formal attributesof tbis storytelling mode, explore its unique pleasures andpatterns of comprehension, and suggest a range of reasonsfor its emergence in tbe 1990s.

In trying to understand the storytelling practices ofcontemporary American television, we migbt considernarrative complexity as a distinct narrational mode, assuggested by David Bordwell's analysis of film narrative.For Bordwell, a "narrational mode is a historically distinctset of norms of narrational construction and compreben-sion," one that crosses genres, specific creators, and artisticmovements to forge a coherent category of practices.'Bordwell outlines specific cinematic modes such as clas-sical Hollywood, art cinema, and historical materialism,all of wbicb encompass distinct storytelling strategieswhile still referencing one anotber and building on thefoundations ot otber modes. Kristin Tbompson has ex-

tended Bordwell's approacb to television, suggesting thatprograms like Twin Peaks and Tlic Sinj^ii{^ Detective migbtbe usefully thought of as "art television," importing normstrom art cinema onto the small screen.^ Although certainlycinema influences many aspects of television, especiallyconcerning visual style, I am reluctant to map a model ofstorytelling tied to self-contained feature films onto tbeongoing long-form narrative structure of series televi-sion and tbus believe we can more productively developa vocabulary for television narrative in terms of its ownmedium. Television's narrative complexity is predicatedon specific facets of storytelling that seem uniquely suitedto the series structure that sets televisit)n apart from filmand distinguish it from conventional modes of episodicand serial forms.

Narrative complexity is sufficiently widespread andpopular tbat we may consider the 199()s to tbe presentas the era ot television complexity. Complexity bas notovertaken conventional forms witbin tbe majority' oftelevision programming today-—there are still many moreconventional sitcoms and dramas on-air tban complexnarratives. Yet just as 1970s Hollywood is rememberedfar more for the innovative work of Altman, Scorsese,and Coppola than for the more commonplace (and oftenmore popular) conventional disaster films, romances, andcomedy films tbat filled theaters, I believe tbat Americantelevision of the past twenty years will be rememberedas an era of narrative experimentation and innovation,challenging the norms of what the medium can do.Thusfor arguments sake it is useful to explore bow today'stelevision bas redefined narrative norms in a series of waysthat 1 label "complex." Even tbough this mode representsneither tbe majority of television nor its most popularprograms (at least by the flawed standard of Nielsen rat-ings), a sufficiently widespread number of programs work

The Velvet LightTrap. Number 58, Fall 2006 ©2006 by the University ofTexas Press. RO. Box 7819. Austin,TX 7871 3-7819

30 Narrative Complexity

against conventional narrative practices using an innovativecluster of narrational tecbiiiques to justity sucb analysis.-

Obviously, tbe labels "conventional" and "complex" arenot \-alue-free descriptions, just as terms like "primitive"and "classical" signal evaluative standpoints in film stud-ies. While I have argvied elsewhere for the importanceof questions of value in studying television, a tendencythat contemporary critical approacbes dismiss, 1 do notpropose these terms as explicitly evaluative.^ Complexityand value are not mutually gtiaranteed—personally, I muchprefer watching high-cjuality conventional programs likeVIC Dick Urn Dyke Show and Everybody Eoves Raymond totbe narratively complex but conceptually muddled andlogically maddening 24. However, narrative complex-ity otiers a range of creative opportunities and paletteof audience responses that are unique to the televisionmedium and thus should be studied and appreciated asa key development in the history of American narrativeforms.^ Arguably, the pleasures potentially otfered bycomplex narratives are richer and more multifaceted thanconventional programming, but value judgments sbouldbe tied to individual programs ratber than claiming thesuperiority of an entire narrational mode or genre. Tbuswhile we should not shy away from evaluative dimensionsin narrative transformations, the goal of my analysis is notto argue that contemporary television is somehow betterthan it was in the 1970s but rather to explore how andwhy narrative strategies have changed and to consider thebroader cultural implications ot this sbitt.

Television scholars have typically been reluctant tofocus their analyses on the medium's narrative form, astelevision studies emerged trom the twin paradigms otmass communications and cultural studies, both ot whichtend to tbreground social impacts over aesthetic analysis,although using markedly different methodologies. Analy-ses of conventional television narration are surprisinglylimited, with classic work by Horace Newcomb, RobertAllen, Sarah Kozlotf,John Ellis, and Jane Feuer representingthe bulk of tlie field.'' Some early accounts of innovativenarrative strategies by Newcomb, Christopher Anderson,Thomas Schatz, and Marc Dolan suggest the antecedentsof contemporary narrative complexity in Magnum, LiI.,S(.Ehcu'hcrc. And Twin Pcaks.'^ More recently, Steven Johnsonand jetirey Sconce bave oti ered tbeir own accounts ofcontemporary television's narrative torm, offering insightsthat 1 build upon throughout; I take these writings as asign that media critics are turning attention to formal and

aesthetic issues that have typically been downplayed m thedevelopment of television studies as a field." Drawing uponthis range of sources, we can establisb a detailed accountoi the narratological form tbat contemporary' Americantelevision offers as a true aesthetic innovation unique to itsmedium.Tbis new mode, whicb 1 term narrative complex-ity, is not as uniform and convention driven as episodicor serials norms (in tact, its most defining characteristicmigbt be its unconventionality),but it is still useful to grouptogether a growing number of programs that work againstthe conventions of episodic and serial traditions in a rangeof intriguing ways. While some point to tbis emergingform as "novelistic" television, I contend that it is uniqueto tbe television medium despite the clear influences fromother forms such as novels, films, videogames, and comicbooks.''

In examining narrative complexity as a narrationalmode I follow a paradigm of bistorical poetics tbat situatestormai developments within specific historical contextsof production, circulation, and reception.'" Following ahistorical poetic approach, innovations in media form arenot viewed as creative breakthroughs of visionary artistsbut at the nexus ofa number of historical forces tbat workto transform tbe norms established with any creative prac-tice. Such an analysis examines the formal elements of anymedium alongside the historic^il contexts that helped shapeinnovations and perpetuate particular norms. So what arethe relevant contexts that enabled tbe emergence of nar-rative complexity? A number of key transformations inthe media industries, technologies, and audience behaviorscoincide with the rise of narrative complexity, not func-tioning as straightforward causes of tbis formal evolutionbut certainly enabling the creative strategies to flourish.Although there is much more to examine about thesevarious contextual developments, a brief overview of keychanges in 199()s television practices points to both howthese transformations impact creative practices and bowformal features always expand beyond textual borders.

One key influence on the rise of narrative complexityon contemporary television is the changing perception oftbe mediums legitimacy and its appeal to creators. Manyof the innovative television programs of the past twentyyears bave come from creators who launched their careersin film, a medium witb more traditional cultural cachet:David Lynch {'lirin Pcahs) and IJarry Leviiison {Homicide:Life on the Street and Oz) as directors, Aaron Sorkin {Sports\'iilht and West H /i/i,'). Joss Whedon {Buffy, An^^^cl, and

Jason Mitteli 31

Firefly), Mm Bali {Six Feet (./n^cr), and J. J. Abrams {Aliasand Lost) as screenwriters. Part ofthe appeal is television sreputation as a producer's medium, where writers andcreators retain control of their work more than in film'sdirector-centered model. Additionally, as reality televisionhas emerged as a popular and cost-effective alternativeto scripted programming, television writers seem to beasserting what they can offer that is unique to fictionaltelevision; narrative complexity highlights one limit of real-ity shows, asserting the carefully controlled dramatic andcoiiiedic manipulation of plots and characters that realityproducers find more difficult to generate." Many of thesewriters embrace the broader challenges and possibilitiesfor creativity in long-form series, as extended characterdepth, ongoing plotting, and episodic variations are simplyunavailable options within a two-honr film—note howWhedon s film Scrci'iiry, which extended the narrative ofFirefly., compressed an entire season's plot into two hours,minimizing storytelling variety, character exploration,and ongoing suspense. While innovative film narrationhas emerged as a "boutique" form over the past years inthe guise of puzzle films like Memento and Adaptation, thenorms of Hollywood still favor spectacle and formulassuitable for a peak opening weekend; comparatively, manynarratively complex programs are among the mediumsbiggest hits, suggesting that the market for complexity maybe more valued on television than in film.

Certainly, shifts in the television industry have helpedreinforce strategies of coniplexity.Traditional industry logicdictated that audiences lacked the weekly consistency toallow for serialized narratives, and the pressures of syndi-cation favored interchangeable episodes of conventionalsitcoms and procedural dramas. But as the number ofchannels has grown and tbe size of the audience for anysingle pRigram has shrunk, networks and channels havegrown to recognize that a consistent cult following of asmall but dedicated audience can suffice to make a showeconomically viable.The overall audience size of Buffy andVeronica .\4ars do not make tbese shows hits, but measuredexpectations of newer networks like UPN and WB aswell as the youthful demographics and culdike dedica-tion drawn by such programming encourage networksto allow sucb experimentations to grow an audience.Many complex prc-)grams expressly appeal to a boutiqueaudience ot more upscale educated viewers who typicallyavoid television, save for programs like Tlw West Winji, TheSimpsons, and Tlie Sopnnios—needless to say, an audience

comprised of viewers who watch little other television isparticularly valued by advertisers. For cable channels likeHBO, complex programs like Tlic IVirc, Oz, and Dead-wood may not reach Sopmrws-like status, but the prestigeof these programs flirthers the channel's brand image ofbeing more sophisticated tban traditional television andthus worthy ofa monthly premium (and generating fu-ture DVD sales). While many complex shows like Firefly,Boomtown, Wondcrfalls, and early innovator My So-CalledLife were never granted time to establish a core audience,all of these short-lived programs have emerged on DVD,as their dedicated fandoms embrace the coUectability oftelevision in this new form, a trend tbat the media indus-tries are eager to capitalize upon by creating programs withmaximum "rewatchability."'"

Technological transformations have accelerated this shiftin similar ways. For the first thirty years of the mediumtelevision watching was primarily controlled by networks,offering limited choice of programming on a tightly de-limited schedule with no other options to access content.While reruns proliferated in syndication, typically,programswere shown out of order, encouraging episodic narrativesto accommodate an almost random presentation ofa se-ries. Since the mainstreaming of cable and the VCR in theearly 19H()s, the balanee has shifted more toward viewercontrol—the proliferation of channels has helped routin-ize repeats, so that viewers can catch up on a program inchronologically aired reruns or view missed premium cableshows multiple times throughout the week.Time-shiftingtechnologies likeVC^Rs and digital video recorders enablevievv-ers to choose when they want to watch a program,bnt,more important for narrative construction, viewers canrewatch episodes or segments tt) parse out complex mo-ments.While select series have been sold on videotape foryears, the eompact packaging and visual quahty ot DVDshave led to a boom in a new mode of television viewing,with fans bingiiig on a sbow a season at a time (like thefrequently reported attempts to watch a season oi' 24 tomatch its diegetic time frame), and encouraging multipleviewings of what used to be a mosdy ephemeral form ofentertainment.

Technological transformations away from tbe televi-sion screen have also impacted television narrative. Theinternet's ubiquity has enabled fans to embrace a "col-lective intelligence" for information, interpretations, anddiscussions of complex narratives tbat invite participatoryengagement—and in instances such as Babylon 5 or Vi-ronica

32 Narrative Complexity

Mars, creators join in the discussions and use these forumsas teedbaek mechanisms to test tor comprehension andpleasures.'^ Other digital technologies like videogames,blogs, online role-playing sites, and fin websites have of-fered realms that enable viewers to extend their participa-tion iu these rich storyworlds beyond the one-way flowof traditional television viewing, extending the nietaversesof complex narrative creations like Buffy's Sunnydaleand the Simpsons' Springfield into fully interactive andparticipatory realms.The consumer and creative practicesof fan culture that cultural studies scholars embraced assubcultural phenomena in the 199()s have become morewidely distributed and participated in with the distributionmeans ofthe internet, making active audience behavioreven more ofa mainstream practice. While none of thesenew technologies direcdy caused tlie emergence of nar-rative complexity, the incentives and possibilities theyprovided to both media industries and viewers encouragethe success ot many sueh programs.

Wiiile claims that programming trends are a direct re-flection of audience tastes and viewing practices are grossoversimplifications, there is no doubt that many of theinnovations comprising narrative complexity have stuckbecause they have been actively embraced by viewers.Using the new technologies oi home recording, DVDs,and online participation, viewers have taken an active rolein consuming narratively complex television and helpingit thrive within die media industries. As suggested below,this programming form demands an active and attentiveprocess of comprehension to decode both the complexstories and modes of storytelling offered by eontemporarytelevision. Audiences tend to embrace complex programsin mueh more passionate and coinmitted terms than mostconventional television, using these shows as the basis torrobust fan cultures and active feedback to the televisionindustry' (especially when their programs are in jeopardy ofcancellation).The rise ot narrative coniplexit\' has also seenthe rise in amateur television criticism, as sites like televi-sionwithoutpity.coiii have emerged to provide thoughthiland humorous commentaries on weekly episodes. '"* StevenJohnson claims that tbis form ot complexity otfered view-ers a "cognitive workout" that increases problem-solvingand observational skills—whether or not this argumentcan be empirically substantiated, tbere is no doubt thattbis brand of television storytelling encourages audiencesto become more actively engaged and offers a broaderrange of rewards and pleasures than most conventional

programming.While it would be hard to claim that any ofthese industrial, creative, technological, and participatorydevelopments explicitly caused the emergence of narrativecomplexity as a narrational mode, togedicr diey set thestage for its development and growing popularity.

So what exactly is narrative complexity'? At its mostbasic level, narrative complexity is a redefinition ot epi-sodic forms under the inffuence of serial narration—notnecessarily a complete merger of episodic and serial formsbut a shifting balance. Rejecting the need for plot closurewithin every episode that typifies conventional episodicform, narrative complexity foregrounds ongoing storiesaeross a range of genres. Additionally, narrative complex-ity moves serial form outside ofthe generic assumptionstied to soap operas—many (although certainly not all)complex programs tell stories serially while rejecting ordownplaying the melodramatic style and primary focuson relationships over plots of soap operas, whieb alsodistances contemporary programs trom the cultural con-notations ofthe denigrated soap genre.'^Wliile certainlysoap opera narration can be quite complex and requiresa high degree of audienee activity to parse out the webof relationships and backstory evoked at every plot turn,narratively complex programming typically foregroundsplot developments far more centrally than soaps, allow-ing relationship and character drama to emerge from plotdevelopment in an emphasis reversed from soap operas.

Historically, this move toward complexity dates to thelate 197()s and early 1980s, as prime-time soap operas hkeDallas and Dynasty (as well as parodic predecessors Soap andMary Hartman, Mary Hariman) were popular innovations,and more critically hailed (though initially ratings-chal-lenged) shows hke Hill St. Blues, St. Elsewhere, and Cheersimported serial storytelling into the generic forms of copshows, medical dramas, and sitcoms, respectively."' Unlikesoap operas, these prime-time serials are not uniformlydedicated to delaying narrative closure, as typically theseshows feature some episodic plotlines alongside multi-episode arcs and ongoing relationship dramas.These earlyprograms tend to allocate episodic and serial stories as tiedto typical generic norms—relationship stories carry overbetween episodes, as in soap operas, but the police andmedical cases are generally bound within one episode orserialized as a two-parter. Thus unlike soap operas, indi-vidual episodes have a distinctive identity as more than justone step in a long narrative journey. Similar divisions be-tween serialized relationships and episodie plots continued

jason Mitteil 33

to late lySOs programs like Mooiili(;^htiin^,tliirtysoinethin\i. and

Star Trek: 'Hic !\'c.xt Gcricration, all of which incorporated

inntivativc narrative devices that would become morecommon in the 199()s.

Tbe programs of the 199()s and beyond build on 1980sinnovations by expanding the role of story arcs acrossepisodes and seasons. Early attempts at this long-form arcstorytelling in tbe mideighties, notably, lVisc^^)iy and CrimeStory, did not catch on with audiences or foster imitatorsuntil the breakthrough of Twin Peaks in the early 1990s.This cult hit, whose influence was far more long-lastingtlian the series itself, triggered a w-ave of programs em-bracing its creative narrative strategies while forgoing itsstylistic excesses and thematic oddities. Effectively a crossbetween a mystery, soap opera, and art film. Twin Peaks of-fered television viewers and executives a glimpse into tbenarrative possibilities that the episodic series would minein the future. While lu'in Peaks was ultimately a ratingsfailure, tbe positive buzz and accolades it received openedthe door to other programs tbat took creative libertieswitb storytelling form in the early I99(ls, most notably,Seinfeld and 'The X-Files, both ot whicb added key facets tothe repertoire of narrative complexity with more ratingssuccess.

'The X-Files exemplifies what may be the hallmark ofnarrative complexity: an interplay between the demandsot episodic and serial stoiytelling. Complex dramas likeThe X-F'iles, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, and The Sopra-

nos often oscillate between long-term arc storytelling andstand-alone episodes. As Sconce discusses, any given X-Filesepisode migbt focus on the long-term "mythology," an on-going, highly elaborate conspiracy plot that endlessly delaysresolution and closure, or offer self-contained "monster-of-the-week" stories that generally exist outside ofthe arcingscope of the mythology; Although 'The X-Files featuresan influential array of narrational innovations, the showseventual creative and critical deeline highlights one ofthekey tensions inherent in narrative eomplexirv" balancingthe competing demands and pleasures ot episodic And se-rial norms. According to many X-Files viewers and critics,the show suffered from too great a disjunction betweenthe overly complex and unsatisfyingly deferred mythologyversus the detached independence of nionster-of-the-weekepisodes that might contradict the aeerued knowledge ofthe conspiracy. For instance, the highly regarded (and quiteparodic) episode "Jose Chung's From Outer Space' mocksthe shows nested conspiracies, wbile the events it presents

seem to undermine some of the revelations of tbe ongoingmythology concerning alien presence on Earth. Despiteviewers" cultish devotion to unraveling the mysteries driv-ing Agent Mulder's endless quest, this episode (as well asmany others) left viewers unsure as to bow to consistendyfit events into the story wo rid. Viewing tastes thus dividedbetween conspiracy buffs, who saw the sometimes reflexiveand tonally divergent monster-of-the-week episodes asdistraetions from tbe serious mythological mysteries, andfans who grew to appreciate the coherence of the stand-alone episodes in light of the increasingly inscrutable andcontradictory arc—personally, I found myself in the lattercamp before abandoning the show entirely.

Buffy and Anj^cl are arguably more adept at juggling thedual demands of serial and episodie pleasures. While bothshows (together and separately) present a rich and ongoingmythology ot a battle between the forces t)f good and evil,plotlines are centered upon season-long arcs featuring aparticular villain, or "big bad," in Bufffs parlance. Withina given season, nearly every episode advances the season sarc wliile still offering episodic coherence and miniresolu-tions. Even highly experimental or ffashy episodes balancebetween episodic and serial demands; for instance, Buffy\"Hush" features literal monsters-of-the-week, known asThe Gendenien, who steal the voices ofthe town of Sun-nydale, leading to an impressively constructed episode toldin near silence. Yet despite the episode's one-off villainsand highly unusual wordless mode of storytelling, "Hush"still advances various narrative arcs, as characters reveal keysecrets and deepen relationships to move the season-longplot forward; many other Buffy and Allied episodes simi-larly offer unique episodic elements witb undercurrents ofarc narration. These shows also interweave melodramaticrelationship dramas and eharacter development with storyarcs—at its most accomplished, Buffy uses torward plotmomentum to generate emotional responses to charactersand allows relationships to help drive plots forward, as ex-emplified by how "Hush" simultaneously offers closure toa monster-of-the-week, furthers the relationship betweenButfy- and Riley, and adds new wrinkles to the season-longarc concerning the Initiative.

But narrative complexity cannot simply be defined asprime-time episodic seriality; within tbe broader modeof complexity, many programs actively work against serialnorms but also embrace narrative strategies to rebel againstepisodic conventionality. Eor instance, Seinfeld has a mixedrelationship with serial plotting—some seasons feature an

34 Narrative Complexity

ongoing situation, like Jerry's NBC^ sitcom pilot, George'simpending wedding, or Elaine's new job.These story areswork primarily to offer backstory tor in-jokes and self-aware references—Cieorge suggests a potential story for anepisode ofhis andjerry s sitcom"about nothing"based onthe night they waited for a table at a Chinese restaurant,the actual plot of an earlier episode. However, these arcsand ongoing plots demand little explicit knowledge fromepisode to episode, as actual actions and events rarely carryacross episodes—arguably because ofthe infrequeiicy ofsignificant actions and events on a show committed tochronichng minutiae and insignificances. While certainlyappreciation ofthe shows storyworld is heightened themore you notice ongoing references like Art Vandelay orBob Sacamano, narrative comprehension does not requirethe engagement in any long-term arcs as with The X-Filesor Buffy YeK >SVnj/cW offers a wealth of narrative complexity,often througii its refusal to conform to episodic norms ofclosure, resolution, and distinct story hues. Many episodesleave characters in an untenable situation—Kramer ar-rested for being a pimp, )erry running into the woodsafter becoming a "wolt-man," George stuck in an airplanerestroom with a serial killer.These unresolved moments donot function as cliff-hangers as in serial dramas but ratheras comedic punclilines not to be referenced again.

Seinfeld and other narratively complex comedies likeThe Si}npsons, .Malcolm in the Middle, Curb Your ISnthusiasm,

and Arrested Development use television's episodic formto undercut conventional assumptions of returning toequilibrium and situational continuity' while embracingconditional seriality—some story lines do in fact continue.\\ hilc others are never referred to again. Arrested Develop-ment, a more explicitly seriahzed comedy, subverts theseconventions even more, as most episodes end with a "nextweek on Arrested Development" teaser, showing scenescontinuing that episode's stories. However, regular viewerssoon learn that future episodes will not show these scenes,nor will they have actually occurred within the ongo-ing storyworld (although in the seeond season the show-varies this norm by allowing some ofthe teaser materialto occur diegetically). Likewise, 'I'hc Simpsons generallyembraces an excessive and even parodic take on episodicform, rejecting continuity- between episodes by returningto an everlasting present equilibrium state of Bart in fourthgrade and general dysfunctional family stasis.''' However,there are exceptions to these norms,such asApu's marriageand parenting of octuplets, that suggest at least two years

have passed in Springfield's life cycle—yet nobody elsebas aged. Often making jokes about the need to return toequilibrium state, Tlie Simpsons offers ambiguous expec-tations over which transformations are "reset" after eachepisode—frequent losses of jobs, destruction of property,and damaging of relationships that wall be restored by nextweek's episode—and that will be carried over serially—^likeApu's family, Skinner and Crabapple's relationship, andMaude Fhuiderss death. Thus these complex comediesselectively engage the norms of serial form, weaving certainevents into their bacLstories while ambigtiously discard-ing other moments into the more conmionplace realm offorgotten episodic histories, a distinction that viewers musteither overlook as inconsistency or embrace as one ofthesophisticated traits of narrative complexity—evidence offan practices online suggest that the latter is more conimononce audiences accept the shifting rules as one ofthe so-phisticated pleasures offered by these complex comedies.

Seinfeld typifies another facet of narrative complexity,offering a more self-conscious mode of sttirytelling than istypic;il w-ithin conventional television narration.'"The showrevels in the mechanics of its plotting, weaving stories foreacb character togedier in a given episode through unlikelycoincidence, parodic media references, and circular structure.In conventional television narratives that feature A and Bplots the two stories may otfer thematic parallels or pRwidecounterpoint to one another, but they rarely interact at thelevel of action. C'omplexity, especially in comedies, worksagainst these norms by altering the reladonship betweenmultiple plodines. creating interweaving stories diat oftencollide and coincide. Seitijehl typically starts out its fourplothnes separately, leaving it to the experienced viewer'simagination as tt> how the stories will collide with unlikelyrepercussions diroughout the diegesis.'*' Such interwovenplotting has been adopted and expanded by CurhYoiir Linlhti-siasm and Arrested Dewlopnicnt, extending the coincidencesand collisions across episodes in a way that transforms serialnarrative into elaborate inside jokes—only by know-ingLarry's encounter with Michael the bhnd man from Curl)\first season does his return in the fourth season make sense.Likewise, Arrested expands the number of coinciding plotsper episode, with often six or more story lines bouncingoff one another, resulting in unlikely coincidences, twists,and ironic repercussions, some of whicb may not becomeevident until subsequent episodes or seasons.

While this mode of comedic narrative is often quiteamusing on its own terms, it does suggest a particular set

jason Mitteli 35

of pleasures for viewers, one that is relatively unavailablein conventional television narrative.The viewers of suchcomplex comedies as Seinfeld and Arrested Development notonly focus on the diegetic world offered by the sitcomsbut also revel in the creative mechanics involved in theproducers' abilities to pull off sucb complex plot structures,a mode of viewing Sconce labels as "metareflexive" but thatwarrants more detailed consideration .This set of pleasuressuggests an inffucntial concept offered by Neil Harris inhis account of P.T Barnum: Harris suggests that Barnum'smechanical stunts and hoaxes invited spectators to embracean "operational aesthetic ' in which tbe pleasure was lessabout "what will happen?" and mc re concerning "howdid be do that?""" In watching Seinfeld we expect thateach character's petty goals will be thwarted in a farcicalunraveling, but we watch to see how tbe writers will pulloff the narrative mechanics required to bring together thefour plodines into a calibrated comedic Rube Goldbergnarrative machine. There is a degree of self-consciousnessm this mode of plotting not only in the explicit reflexivityoffered by these programs (like Schijchh show-within-a-show or Arrested Development^ winking acknowledgmentof television techniques like product placement, stuntcasting, and voice-over narration) but also in the awarenessthat viewers watch complex programs in part to see "howwill they do it?" This operational aesthetic is on displaywithin oiihne fan forum dissections ofthe techniques thatcomplex comedies and dramas use to guide, manipulate.deceive, and misdirect viewers, suggesting the key pleasureof unraveling the operations of narrative mechanics."' Wewatch these shows not just to get swept away in a realisticnarrative world (although that certainly can happen) butalso to watch the gears at work, marveling at the craftrequired to pull off such narrative pyrotechnics.

The operational aesthetic is heightened in spectacularmoments within narratively complex programs, specific se-quences or episodes that we might consider akin to specialetfects. Accounts of cinematic special effects highlight howthese moments of awe and amazement pull us out ofthediegesis, inviting us to marvel at the technique requiredto achieve visions of interplanetary travel, realistic dino-saurs, or elaborate figbts upon treetops. These spectaclesare often held in opposition to narration, harking back totbe cinema of attractions that predated narrative fihn anddeemphasizing classical narradve form in the contemporaryblockbuster cinema."" Wbile such special effects do appearon television (although arguably television's dominant

mode of visual spectacle highlights the excessive beautynorms of beer commercials and Baywatch more than thepyrotechnics of the large screen), narratively complexprograms offer another mode of attractions: the narra-tive special effect. These moments push the operationalaesthetic to the foreground, calling attention to tbe con-structed nature ofthe narration and asking us to marvel athow the writers pulled it off; often these instances forgorealism in exchange for a formally aware baroque qualityin which we watch the process ot narration as a machinerather than engaging in its diegesis.

As programs become established in their own complexconventions we also marvel at how far creators can pushthe boundaries of complexity, offering barcjque variationson themes and norms; these narrative special effects canbe the climaxes of shows, as when all the divergent Seinfeldor Arrested Development plots collide or when a plot twiston Lost or 24 forces us to reconsider all that we've viewedbefore in the episode. Or narrative spectacles can be varia-tions on a theme—Six Feet Under begins every episodewith a "death ofthe week," but by the second season thecreators vary- the presentation of these deaths to otfer mis-directions and elaborations to keep viewers engaged oncethey understand the show's intrinsic norms. A particularlytelling moment of narrative spectacle comes fi om the Lostepisode "Orientation": after discovering what is hiddenbeneath the mysterious hatch, tw-o characters watch a train-ing film that details the origins ofthe facility as part ofaresearch institute. Once finished with tlie enigmatic filmcontaining many obscure details that recast events oftheshows first season in a new light, Locke gleefully exclaims,"We're going to have to watch that again!" mirroring thereaction of millions of viewers prepared to parse the filmfor clues to the diegetic and formal mysteries otfered by theshow.This is not the reffexive self-awareness ofTex Averycartoons acknowledging their own construction or thetechnique of some modernist art films asking us to viewtheir constructedness from an emotional distance; opera-tional reffexivity invites us to care about the storyworldwhile simultaneously appreciating its construction.

Another level of narrative spectacle centers on entireepisodes. Buff]' is probably the most accomplished showfor narratively spectacular episodes, with individual epi-sodes predicated on narrative devices like starkly limitingstorytelling parameters (the silence of "Hush"), genremixing (the musical episode "Once More with FeeUng"),shifts in perspective (telling an adventure from the vantage

36 Narrative Complexity

point of habitual bystander Xander in "The Zeppo"),or toregroiinding an unusual narrator (Andrew's pseii-dodocunientary in "Storyteller"). While each ot theseepisodes and others like them in StarTrck:'Ilic Next Gen-eration ("Frame of Mind,""The Inner Light"), 'Hic X-Files("Monday," "Triangle"), An^e! ("Snnle Time," "Spin theBottle"). SeiiiJ'-'^d ("The Betrayal," "The Parking Lot"),Scrubs ("His Story," "My Screw Up"), and '/'//(• Simpsons("Trilogy of Error," "22 Short Films about Springheld")may offer diegetic thrills and laughs, the more distinctivepleasure in these programs is marveling at the narrationalbravado on display by violating storytelling conventionsin a spectacular tashion.Through the operational aestheticthese complex narratives invite viewers to engage at thelevel ot tormai analyst, dissecting the techniques used toconvey spectacular displays of storytelling cratt; this modeof formally aware viewing is highly encouraged by theseprograms, as their pleasures are embedded in a level ofawareness that transcends the traditional tocus on diegeticaction typical of most viewers.

Not only can individual episodes manifest the op-erational aesthetic through narrative spectacle, but wholeprograms can be predicated upon such storytelling pyro-technics, either through their ongoing stories or inherentstructure. For an example ofthe [ormer, Alias has otTereda strong example ot narrative complexity, juggling bothongoing and episodic stories ot espionage witb arcs ofrelationship dramas mapped onto both family and spy poli-tics. But its boldest moments of narrative spectacle occurwben the plot makes untoreseen sharp t\vists that causethe entire scenario to "reboot," changing the protessionaland interpersonal dynamics of nearly every character.Thetirst. and arguably most effective, of these reboots occurredmidway dirough the second seasc n in the post-Super Bowlepisode "Phase One"; over the course ot this episode, theentire espionage scenario was reconfigured, with the maincharacters status as a double agent shifting to becomingan outright CIA agent, chasing down the same main vil-lain but with ditterent alliances and motives. Additionally,the relationships between characters transformed, withSydney's innocent-bystander friend Francie being replacedby a nefarious agent and her long-simmering crush onVaughn finally coming to truition—all within one hour!While mucb ot the etifectiveness ot this shifi: was in breath-ing lite into a premise tbat may have been on the verge ofbecoming too repetitive, an important pleasure was to betound in tbe impressive way in which the producers were

able to reconfigure the scenario in a way that was diegeti-cally consistent (at least with the shows own outrageousnorms of espionage technology and mythology), narra-tively engaging, and emotionally honest to the charactersand relationships. Similar series revisions were pulled otfin subsequent seasons of Alias as well as Bnjjy (through theintroduction ofBuffys sister Dawn) and Ai^cl (with theheroes taking over their archenemy's law firm). In all ofthese cases audiences take pleasure not only in the diegetictwists but also in the exceptional storytelling techniquesneeded to pull otf such machinations—we thrill both atthe stories being told and at the way in whicb their tellingbreaks television conventions."'^

Narrative spectacle can be built into the core scenariosof programs as well—24 is often heralded for its real-timenarrative structure, which in narratological parlance equatesstory time and discourse time (excepting eoinmercialbreaks). Even more interesting here is that it may be theonly television series ever named tor its storytelling tech-nique, not in reference to its diegetic world (tbe number24 refers to nothing notable in the storyworld) but ratherto the nnniber of hours (and episodes) needed to conveythe story. Other programs are similarly notable for theirstorytelling discourse (how the story is told) more than thestory itself—Boomtouni offers fairly typical police stories,but when told through changing multiple limited perspec-tives among an ensemble of characters, tbe cases are morenuanced and eomplex tban tbey first appear, jaih and Bohbytells a typical tale ot teen brotbers, but, through the conceitot frequent flash-torward interviews in the 2()40s,a tiituretale emerges of one ot them becoming U.S. president, withfuture events and relationships resonating with adolescentfamily drama. Reunion highlights a group of high schooltriends, with eaeh weekly episode charting one year intheir lives over a twenty-year span.""' In all of these sht)wswhat is arguably most compelling and distinctive is notthe stories that they tell but tbe narrative strategies usediu tbe telling.

Narratively complex programs also use a number ofstorytelling devices that, while not unique to this mode, areused with such frequency and regularity as to become morethe norm than the exception. Analepses, or alterations inchronology', are not uncommon in conventional television,with flashbacks serving either to recount crucial narrativebackstory (as a detective narrates the solution to a crime) orto frame an entire episode's action in the past tense (like thedramatization of Rob and Laura meetinii on The Dich Ian

jason Mitteil 37

Dyke Show). Similarly, conventional programs have oftenused dream or fantasy sequences to explore possibilities ofother scenarios (like Roscdnnc's retelling as a 1950s sitcom)or to probe a character's inner life (the experimental St.Bhni'hcrc episode"Sweet Dreams").Another device.foundm episodes of conventional programs hke All in the I'am-ily and Different Strokes, is retelling the same story frommultiple perspectives, often called the ''Rashonion effect"after the landmark Kurosawa film,Voice-over narration isat\'pical in most television,but conventional programs likeDmsinct and Tlie Wonder Years use it to set the emotionaltone and provide expository transitions. Yet all of thesedevices, which vary from the "exceedingly obvious" modeot conventional television stor>'telling, typically maximizetheir obviousness by explicitly signaling them as differentia-tions from a norm, predicated by expository narration ("Iremember it well") or contrived scenarios (like bypnosis,courtroom testimonies, or recollections over a photo al-bum) to highlight how the show is using unconventionalconventions.

In contemporary narratively complex shows such varia-tions in storytelling strategies are more connnonplace andsignaled with much more subdety or delay; tbese showsare constructed without fear of temporary' conRision forviewers. Fantasy sequences abound witbout clear demarca-tions or signals, as Northern Expo.^ure, Six Feet Under, TlwSopranos, And Biijjy all present visions of cvenLs that oscillatebetween character subjectivity and diegetic reahty, playingwith the ambiguous boundary' to otfer character depth,suspense, and comedic efiect. C .omplex narration ottenbreaks the fourth wall, whether it be visually representeddirect address {Malcolm in the Middle, The Bernie Mac Shou)or more ambiguous voice-over tbat blurs the line betweendiegetic and nondiegetic {Scnd^s. Arrested Dcx'elopment).C3^~ing attention to its own breaking of convention. Programslike Lost,Jack and Bobby., and Boomtoum otfer analepses inevery episode with few orienting signals, while Alias andTlie West Win<i^ frequently begin episodes with a teaser at theclnnax of the story, then turn back tbe clock to explain theconfusing situation with which the episode began. In allof these programs tbe lack of explicit storytelling cues andsignposts creates mt)ment.s otdisorientatioii, asking viewersto engage more actively to comprehend the story and re-warding regular viewers who have mastered each program'sinternal conventions of complex narration.These strategiesmay be similar to formal dimensions of art cinema, butthey manitest themselves in expressly popular contexts

for mass audiences—-we may be temporarily confused bymoments of Lost or Alias, but these sliows ask us to trustin the payoff that we will eventual arrive at a moment ofcomplex but coherent comprehension, not the ambiguityand questioned causality t^'pical of many art films."^

The "Noel" episode of West Win^^ typifies the complexuse ot such discursive strategies: the episode is framed byJosh Lynian's therapy session to process his posttraumaticstress reactions to being shot, which allows for the conven-tions of repeated flashbacks via Josh's narration. However,the flashbacks are rampant and not always signaled as fallingwithin a clear order, with sound bridges between the pres-ent-tense therapy and past-teiise events adding to a senseoi disorientation that the show uses to increase tensionand anxiety. Additionally, we see frequent dramatizationsof Josh cutting his hand on a glass, an accident he claimsto have happened but that his therapist correctly suspectsis a he masking a more violent act; these lying flashbackslack a clear difterentiation from other past events until theend oi the episode, leaving the audience to decode thecontradictions and confusing chronology.The episode cli-niaxes with a five-minute sequence interweaving disjoinedsound and image from five ditferent time frames (includingone that never actually happened), rhythmically edited toconvey a robust emotional arc—a presentational modemore common to European art cinema than Americantelevision but ultimately in service ofa coherent ongoingnarrative. While much of the episode s pleasure is serial,as the more we know Josh the more we can engage withhis breakdown, the episode stands alone as a dramaticallycompelling character portrait (which won actor BradleyWhitford an Eiiiniy), but only if we accept its distinctstorytelling conventions, a competency that regular view-ers learii over time. Narratively complex programs invitetemporary disorientation and confusion, allowing viewersto build up their comprehension skills through long-termviewing and active engagement."''

This need for gaining competencies in decoding storiesand diegetic worlds is particularly salient across a number ofmedia at the moment."^ Certainly, videogames are predi-cated on this ability to learn how to understand and interactwith a range of story worlds and interfaces—nearly everygame contains its own diegetic training module, as playerslearii to master tbe controls and expectations for this par-ticular virtual world. Cinema has also seen the emergence ofa popular cycle of*"puzzle films" that require the audienceto learn the particular rules of a film to comprehend its

38 Narrative Complexity

narrative; movies like Tlie Sixth Seme, Pulp Fiction, Memoito,

llie Usual Suspects, Adaptation, Eternal Sunshine oj the Spot-

less Mind, and Run Lola Run have all embraced a gameaesthetic, inviting audiences to play along with the creatorsto crack the interpretive codes to make sense of tbeir com-plex narrative strategies."^^ But crucially, the goal ot thesepuzzle films is not to solve the mysteries ahead of time;rather, we want to be competent enough to follow theirnarrative strategies but still relish in the pleasures of beingmanipulated successtully. I doubt anyone who predictsthe twists of these films could say that they enjoyed themmore than the wiUing (but still active) spectator who getspulled along for the ride. Puzzle films invite us to observethe gears ofthe narrative niechaiiisms, even flaunting themin a show of storytelling spectacle—think ofthe climaxoi Sixth Sense, as the twist is revealed through flashbacksdemonstrating how the film masterfully fooled its view-ers. Although few television programs have followed thepuzzle film model fully (individual episodes of Seinfeld,The Simpsons, Scrubs, and Lost have mimicked these films,which themselves are influenced by the seminal anthologytelevision program TlieTwilij^ht Zone), what seems to be akey goal across videogames, puzzle films, and narrativelycomplex television series is the desire to be both activelyengaged in the story and successfully surprised throughstorytelling manipulations.This is the operational aestheticat work-—we want to enjoy the machine's results whilealso inarvehng at how it works.

Thus narratively complex television encourages, andeven at times necessitates, a new mode of viewer engage-ment.While fan cultures have long demonstrated intenseengagement in storyworlds, policing backstoiy consistency,character unity, and internal logic in programs hke StarTrekand Dr. W^io, contemporary programs focus this detaileddissection onto complex questions of plot and events inaddition to storyworld and characters. We watch Ldj-f, Alias.Veronica Mars, The X-Eiles, Desperate Housewives, and Twin

Peaks at least in part to try to crack each program's centralenigmas—-look at any online tan forum to see evidenceof such sleuths at work. But as in any mystery-driven fic-tion, viewers want to be surprised and thwarted as well assatisfied with the internal logic ofthe story. In processingsuch programs viewers find tlieniselves both drawn intoa compelling diegesis (as with all effective stories) andfocused on the discursive processes of storytelling neededto achieve each show's complexity and mystery.Thus theseprograms convert many viewers to amateur narratologists.

noting usage and violations of convention, chroniclingchronologies, and highlighting both inconsistencies andcontinuities across episodes and even series.While certainlyaudiences have always been active, most scholarly accountsof these processes tocus on negotiations with televisioncontent, reconciling with the politics of Madonna videosor Tiie Cosby Show. Narratively complex programminginvites audiences to engage actively at the level oiform aswell, highlighting tbe conventionality of traditional tele-vision and exploring the possibilities of botb innovativelong-term storytelling and creative intraepisode discursivestrategies.

Many t)f these programs outright demand such level ofengagement—it is hard to iniagine how someone mightwatch Lost or Arrested Development without noting theirtormai innovations and considering how the use of flash-backs or reflexive narration changes their perspectives onthe narrative action.You cannot simply watch these pro-grams as an umiiediated window to a realistic storyworldinto which you might escape; rather, narratively complextelevision demands you pay attention to the windowframes, asking you to reflect on how it provides partial ac-cess to the diegesis and how the panes of glass distort yourvision ofthe unfolding action. Interestingly, these programscan be quite popular with a ma.ss audience {Lost, ScinjchtTlie X-files) or have narrow appeals to cult viewers will-ing to invest tbe effort into the decoding process {ArrestedDevelopment, Veronica Mars, firefty)~whi\e certainly manyof these cult shows have demanding narratives that mayseem inaccessible to a mass audience, the striking popularityof some complex programs suggests tbat a mass audiencecan engage with and enjoy quite challenging and intricatestorytelling. This is not to downplay the importance oftraditional pleasures of character depth, neat resolution otplots, storyworld consistency, action-oriented excitement,and humor—-narrative complexity at its most robust em-ploys all of these elements while adding the operationalpleasures of formal engagement. Certainly, chief amongLosf's pleasures is the shows ability to create sincere emo-tional connections to characters who are immersed in anoutlandish situation that, as ofthis writing, is unclassifiableas science fiction, paranormal mystery.or religious allegory,all constructed by an elaborate narrational structure tarmore complex than anything seen before in Americantelevision.

Tbis account of narrative complexity suggests that anew paradigm of television storytelling has emerged over

jasor) Mitteil 39

the past two decades, with a reconceptualization of theboundary between episodic and serial tbrms, a heighteneddegree of self-consciousness in storytelling mechanics,and demands tor intensified viewer engagement focusedon botb diegetic pleasures and formal awareness. By ex-ploring the formal structure ofthis mode ot storytellingwe can appreciate connections with broader concerns ofmedia industries and technologies, creative techniques,and practices of everyday hfe, all of which resonate deeplywith contemporary cultural transtormations tied to theemergence of digital media and more interactive forms ofcommunication and entertainment. A common underly-ing trend that manifests itself both in television narrativesand many digital forms like videogames and web pages isa need for procedural literacy, a recognition on the partof consumers that any mode of expression follows par-ticular protocols and that to fully engage with that formwe must master its underlying procedures,This manifestsItself explicitly in videogames, where procedural masteryis a requirement for success, and web use, as we have come111 a very short period of time to accept linking, searching,and bookmarking as naturalized behaviors. For television,contemporary complex narratives are foregrounding theskills of narrative comprehension and media literacy thatmost viewers have developed but rarely put to use beyondrudimentary means. To understand this phenomenon wemust use formal narratology to chart its structure andboundaries while incorporating other methods to explorehow tbis narrative mode intersects with dimensions otcreative industries, technological innovations, participatorypractices,and viewer conipreheiision.Tliis mode of analysis,adapted from the paradigm of historical poetics, deservesa place within the multiple methodologies of media stud-ies—exploring the ties between tormai developments andcultural contexts highlights tbat ail facets of media, tromproduction to reception, are embedded within the complexmeans by which television teUs complex stories.

Notes

]. BordweW, Narration 1.S5.2.Thompson, Slorytclliiij!^.

3,This essay considers entertaiiinicnt, scripted series programmingwith recurring situations and/or characters exclusively; thus made-for-TV-movics, miniseries, sketch comedy, anthology, variety, news,documentary, and reality programming, while certainly interestingand potentially incorporating facets of these narrative modes, all falloutsuie my analytic scope,

4, fViittell."The Loss of Value."

ii. Arguably, many ofthe tijijeiiurks of narrativf complexity aremore conunonpbco in other national television forms, and certainlythe influence of British television upon American programmingL-aniiot be understated.Yet there is still value in understanding howAmerican programming, which of course saturates the global mediamarket, has evolved on its own terms.

(), Newcomb, I'l': Feuer; Allen; Kozlort; Ellis,

7. Newcomb, "A/iit'iimo"; Anderson; Schatz; DoUn.8. Sconce; Johnson,y. See McCJrath for an influential characterization of novelistic

television.

10, See Bordwell, "Historical Poetics of Cinema";Jenkiiis,"His-torical Poetics," Mitteli, Genre and Telemsion, applies historical poeticsto television via l)raj;;iict and the police genre,

11, Not to suggest thar reality television lacks Lomplexit\', but itseems that typically the arcing dimensions of most reality shows stemmore from characters and rehitionships (as in traditional soap operas)than events and plots.

12,Johnson tnakes this point about the shift from Least Objection-able I'mgraniining to Most l^epeatable Programniing.

13. See Jenkins,'"Do You Enjoy'" for an early example ot stichtechnological practice;Jenkins tellingly quotes one online fjn,"C'jtiyou imagine 'Hi'iii Pcai^s coming out before VCRs or without thenet? It would have been Hell!" (54).

l4.This website recaps both reality programs and scripted dramas(not sitcoms), but among the dramas, the majority couid be callednarratively complex, and the bulk ot programs they elect not to recapare more conventional,

lii. See Allen. The gendered pleasures tied to soap operas andnarrative complexity are a tompHc.ited issue beyond the scope ofthis essay. Briefly, Warhol outhnes traditionally effeminate narrativepleasures, which I believe are incorporated into more niasciilitie genresand narrative structures in complex programming and thus offer morecross-over pleasures for viewers than do conventional soap operas orprocedural dramas.

1 (I.Thompson, Teli'visioii 's Stronil Golden Ai;c offers an account ofthis era's programming innovations,

17, See Mittell, Genre JthiTelevisioii for an account oi'Tlic .S/')H;W».('Sparody of sitcom form.

18. For the best account of Sdiifeld's narrative techniques seeSmith.

19. Johnson discusses multithreaded plotting in depth,20, See Harris; see also Ciunning and Trahair tor work exploring

the operational aesthetic in film comedy,

2 i, Such discussions can be found on numerous dramas like Alias,24, and Lost on televisionwithoutpity.com, Tlie Smpsoiis on snpp.com,and Arrested Developmenl on the-op,com, although there are certainlydozens of other online discussions about these programs.

22, See Ndaiianis,

23, Such narrative reboots have precedents in art cinema, such asthe works of Luis Bunuel and David Lynch; however, the effect hasa far different impact in an ongoing series with a narrative spanningmultiple years versus a single feature film,

24, Reunion''^ plan was to focus each season upon a ditferent groupof friends, jettisoning the situational and character stability' typical otseries TV altogether and embracing a more flexible season model likethat of realit^'TV, as new contestants and locations come and go. butthe underlying mode of presentation remains consistent.The show did

40 Narrative Complexity

riciit nitiiigs,lo:niiig the iinLicrlymg mystery unsolvedviii .1 inkiscasoii aintelLition,

25. Bordweli, NarriUioii otfcrs an infliR'iiti.il .ifconnt of jrt L-moni.!narration along these lines.

26. Interestingly, when I scR-fni-d this fpisocit' for a class, one

stndcnt who hnd never watched the show mistook it for a "recapepisode." assuming that LII) the Hashhacks referred to events already

witnessed in previous shows.The only previously seen tootage usedis ;i few sea)nds ofjoshs shooting,

27. Seejolmson tor more on tills cross-media trend,28,These puzzle hlms clearly drew many techniques from earlier

narrative experiments m the art cinema.but aside from a few"paranoiatilms" ot the iy70s like llie Coin'cnatiofi. such techniques and formwere rarely used.

Works Cited

Allen, Rohert C. Spfiikiiii; of Soap Opcnis. Chapel Hill; U of NorthCarolina H ]9S5.

Anderson, Christopher.'"KeHeLtion on .Mai^iiiiiii, RI." Tdi-vifioii.ThcCritical View. Ed. Horace Newcomti, 4th ed. New York: OxtbidUH 1987. 112-25,

Bordwell, David. "Historical Poetics of Cinema," The CiiienuiliiTi'.xi:Xtctbods and Approaches. Ed. R, Barton Palmer, New York: AMSH19Hy.369-98.

. Niirnitioii ill the rhiioii l-itiii. Madison: LJ ofWisconsin 1' I91S5.

Dobn, Marc,"The Peaks and Valleys of Serial C'reativicy: What Hap-pened to/on Tiriii Pcaki'' Full of Sirrcis: Critical Approaches to't'wiuPeaks. Ed, David Lavery. Detroit: Wayne State UK 1995, 311-511.

Ellis,John, Visible Ficfiouji; C/i(riiJi(,7(7i'i'j,s-ii'ii, I Vi/a'.London: Routledge& Kegan Paul, 19H2,

Feuer,Jane."Narrative Form in American Network Television." Hi^^UTlieory/Ltni' Culture. Ed, C'olin MacCabe. Manchester: ManchesterUP 19M6, 1(11-14.

CJunniiig, Tom, "Oazy Machines m the Clardcn of Forking Paths:Mischief Gags and the Origins of American Film Coniedy," Classi-cal Hollywood Comedy. Ed. Kristine tiruiiovska Karnick .iiid HenryJenkins, New York: Rondedge, 199.S. S7-I(l5,

Harris, Neil, !-liiiiihiiiy:'!'lie Art ofP.T. Btiriiuiii. CMiicago: U of (ChicagoP, 1981.

Jenkins, Henry.'"Do You Enjoy Makini^ the Rest of Us Feel Stupid?"Alt.TvTwinpeaks, theTrickster Autiior. andViewer Mastery," Full

of Secrets: Critical Approiiclws to "'liriii /Viit^, " Ed, David Lavery.IX-troit:Wayne State UH 1995, 51-69.

. "Historical Poetics and the Popular Cinem3," Approaches

to the Popular Cinema. Ed, Joanne Hollows and Mark Jancovich.Manchester: Manchester UP, 1995,

Johnson, Steven. hj'eryihir{^ Bad !s Good forYoii: lloif 'today's Popu-

lar Culture Is Actually Makiiiii Us Smarter. New York: Riverhead

Books, 2005.KozlofT, Sarah, "NarrativeTheory andTeievision,"C/w)jii('/.'>(>/"/X'>f('i(r (',

Reassetiihled. Ed, Kobert t:, Allen. 2nd ed. Chape! Hill: U of NorthCarolina H 1992.61-1(10,

McCrath, Charles,"TheTriuniph ofthe Prime-Time Novel." lekvi-

sioirTlie Critical View. Ed. Horace Newcomb. 6th ed. New York:

Oxford UH 2(10(1,242-52.Mittell. Jason, Genre aud 'li-lerisioii: hroin i-op Shows to (^arioous iu

American Culture. New York: l*..iiurledj;e. 2ll(l4,, -The Loss ofValue (or tiie Valtie of L.b7)." Flow 2,5 (2005):

available at h t tp : / / idg .communica t ion .u texas ,edu/now/

Ndalianis, Angela, .\'eo-Baroque Aesthetics aud Coiiteiiiporary Lnlertain-ment. Cambridge, MA: MIT R 2(K)4.

Newcomb, Horace, ".\/iii,'n/;Hi, Champagne ot Television?" Chaniiehof (Aimiiuinicatiotis (1985): 23—26,

, Tl'.-The Mo.<t Popular Art. Garden City, NY: Anchnr i'1974,

Schatz, Thomas. ",S7, F^lseu-fiere and the F.volution ( t the EnsembleSeries," Telei'isioirlhe Critical I 'iew. Ed, Horace Newcomb, 4tli ed.New York: O.\tbrd UP l'>87. H5-l(l(l.

Sconce.Jertrey."What If? Chartin^Television s NewTextual Boundar-ies," lelei'isioti afterTV: Essay.s on a Medium in 'Irafisition. Ed. LynnSpigel and Jan Olssoii. Durham, NC: Duke UP, 2004. 93-112.

Sniith. Greg M."Plotting aTV Show about Nothing: Patterns of Nar-ration in Sciufetdy Creative Screeiiwritiii}> 2.3 (1995): 82-90,

Thotnpson, Kristin. 5riir)'fc///ii(; /;/ Film iiwi/Ti'/cr'i kui, Cambridge,MA:Harvard UP. 2003.

Thompson, Robert J, li-lerisioii's Second Golden .^[je: From "Hill St.Bhies" to "HR." New York: Coiituiuum. l'*9(j.

Trahair, Lisa. "The Narrative-Machine: Buster Keaton s CinematicConiedy, Delenzo's IJ^ecnrsion Function and the OperationalAesthetic," Senses of Cinetna 33 (Oct.-Dec, 2(104). http://www,sensesofcinenia.coni/contents/04/33/conicnts.html

Warhol, Robyn R, Hai'inj^ a Good Cry: Effeminate Feelings and Pop-Cullure Forms, ("lolimibus: (")hio State UH 2(1(13.