Dato Johan Jaafar comes across as a very intelligent, articulate and resourceful moderator. His quality does not mitigate the very real notion that Malaysian TV is bad, and dangerous as an intellectual diet for growing up children and adults alike.
Most of the programs seem to be designed for juvenile viewers judging from the simplistic and unidimensional approach in their formats and the utter lack of skills of the presenters (including news readers).
We have too many pretty faces. It used to be the norm to present beautiful faces on the screen presumably to hold the attention of viewers. But the rest of the world has moved ahead; they have found the ultimate truth - smart is beautiful.
We also have very young and I dare say, green, presenters who are not shy to give advice to all and sundry, on subjects they have no proper knowledge of.
TV shows are showcases for the world to see our best. Sadly that is not the case. You see famous leaders who cannot pronounce properly many words of their own mother tounge, except Rais Yatim who was born articulate, I suspect. The best still ( to me at least ) in articulating the Malay language is my old history professor, Encik Shahrom Ahmat, late of USM.
I like the sports channels best of all, for sports appear to us, excepting those irritating dives done by some footballers, as honest and truly true to life. The coverage of EPL games are especially interesting, and may I add, captivating, not least because of our affinity with the English language. Strangely you find here excellent examples of how English should be spoken. Regular commentators like Andy Gray and Martin Tyler come to mind. They have voices with excellent tonal qualities, and with rich timbre, and otherwise would be considered as adding romance to it all; something we will never find with Malay commentators, no not Karam Singh with his peribahasa.
Their commentaries bring to the game a richness, with all those little incidental details and tangential remarks, about the players and the sport in general. The game in itself is rich with human drama played out every week of the season; it is a culture unto itself, nay, a community with its internal logic and philosophy, with myriad characters who colour our imaginations.
Then there are the channels on natural history, which can make us feel humble to know that we are privy to the deep and subtle secrets of nature.
In short, there is depth, and there is breadth of these tv presentations - by others. Now I would like to advance the notion, and I hope someone agrees, that the source of the wonderous feelings when we view these wonderful programs is the presenter himself, who with his agile artistry in using the language wins over the attention of the viewers. There is an ease to which he has put heart and soul in his presentation. He is the artist.
I will stretch the notion further by saying that the ultimate cause of all this is that we do not have a reading culture. We are a nation who shuns the printed word.
Reading, writing and contemplation are the instruments by which the mind plumb the depths of our existence; of knowledge itself.
Do we wonder then as to why we cannot dish up a decent tv program?
No comments:
Post a Comment