ABSTRACT
Because this is a book about appreciating the art of television, there had better be something out in the world identifiable as “television” which is distinctive in a way that demands a particular kind of appreciation. But here is a paradox that might immediately raise an obstacle: On the one hand, it is common to find in popular criticism claims to the effect that we are in the midst of a new Golden Age of television. This is not my claim, but, like mine, its plausibility depends on the existence of something identifiable and appreciable as “television.” On the other hand, however, it is common to encounter in academic discourse claims regarding the end of television or, at least, the disappearance of television as it converges with a variety of other media in the digital age. What accounts for the currency of these apparently mutually exclusive claims, and what should we make of the paradox?
