WE NEED BETTER GAME SHOWS.

Sometimes one finds oneself stuck in a public place where a television is droning to itself, as it must do even if no one else is in the room, because it is defended by large, unfriendly signs that say DO NOT TOUCH TELEVISION. As a good citizen, of course, one always obeys regulatory signs, so one is forced to sit and think about the television. Among the thoughts one thinks is the question, Would a brick count as “touching” the television if it were heaved from across the room? We didn’t touch the television ourselves; if you want to hold the brick responsible, that’s between you and the brick. But after that thought has entertained us for a while, we begin to think that, if there must be televisions in public places, then we need better game shows.

The premise of almost every game show on American television is that it is infallibly entertaining to watch other people win large amounts of money. To Dr. Boli, nothing could be duller than watching some waitress from Connecticut jump and squeal because a board behind her has a big number with a dollar sign in front of it. Even if the television handed him ten-dollar bills at irregular intervals on condition that he watch the program, Dr. Boli’s attention would wander. Money does not entertain him.

But monetary prizes do not have to be he only attraction of a game show. In fact, why do there have to be prizes at all? Dr. Boli’s first rule for devising an entertaining game show will be that no prizes will be offered. That will force us to think up something genuinely amusing. We cannot hope to create excitement just by adding another zero to the jackpot.

Our next rule will be that our contestants must be clever. They must be people with amusing things to say, not people who exhausted their mental resources picking out the right T-shirt slogan to wear on TV.

We probably need a host or master of ceremonies—someone who can keep the show on track, mostly by making sure that each of our contestants has an equal chance to be clever.

Finally, we need something amusing for our contestants to do. This criterion rules out guessing the price tags of home appliances, to take one example at random.

What amusing tasks could we assign to our guests? Perhaps they could be required to come up with amusingly clever solutions to everyday problems. Back in the heady days of glasnost, there was a game show on Soviet television that asked teams of players to compete in solving problems from everyday life. For example: you are the manager of a hat factory. How can you increase your personal income without getting fired for corruption? One team earned much applause by suggesting that the manager should take the hat off his head, turn it over, and beg. That was an entertaining game show.

One task we might assign to our American contestants: You are in a public place, and there is a television droning with nobody watching it. How can you silence it without attracting a stern lecture from the keen-eyed receptionist?

Word games are also entertaining when the people playing them are amusing. “I Can Give You a Sentence” kept the Algonquin Round Table going and added some immortal wit to our treasury. The key to making word games entertaining for an audience is to make sure they are creative rather than mechanical. We don’t need to watch a crossword ace solve the Tuesday puzzle in the New York Times; we want funny stories and outrageous puns. The game itself should be only the conversation-starter.

Once we have picked clever contestants and given them some excuse for being clever, we have probably done all we need to do. We can let our contestants take it from there, and we have no need of a catchy gimmick. In fact, gimmicks are likely to get in the way. The more time our guests spend guessing the prices of major appliances or spinning giant vertical roulette wheels, the less time they have to be witty.

The final stage in our plan, then, is to get the show on the air. This probably requires a deep-pocketed sponsor. Dr. Boli might suggest that the manufacturers of televisions themselves could sponsor the program. You can imagine the favorable impression it would leave: “This actually entertaining game show is brought to you by DuMont, makers of the televisions too nice to heave a brick through. Wouldn’t you like to have a DuMont at home?”

So there we have our plan for mitigating the evils of televisions in public places. We shall call it Plan B. Plan A is still a brick.

Comments

  1. Occasional Correspondent says:

    There is one show that meets many of your requirements but is on the radio, not the television, the weekly Wait, Wait, Don’t Tell Me.  Its prize is nominal (if you win, you can get your phone greeting recorded by any participant in the show).  In essence, it is a comedy show masquerading as a game show about the week’s news.  The three-comedian panel and the host are consistently good, basically doing improv (if the panelists are scripted, they sure make it sound spontaneous).  To its benefit, it runs an hour, not a half hour.  It’s carried mostly? entirely? by NPR stations (I suspect it is available to commercial stations also because it builds in two commercial breaks).  Of course, you get a typically NPR outlook on the events of the week but the focus is on comedy, not doctrine.  It has a website with a multi-decade backlist of shows.

    It does live shows — maybe they could be persuaded to do a television version?  Maybe it could be titled Wait, Wait, Don’t Brick Us.

  2. tom says:

    All you need is a Groucho impersonator. And a new duck.

  3. Dr. Boli is old enough to remember the BBC radio program “My Word”

    • Dr. Boli says:

      An earlier draft of the article (most readers would never guess it, but Dr. Boli does sometimes revise before publishing) had included a paragraph on My Word!, which was one of the joys of owning a shortwave radio. But the article was already long, and Dr. Boli realized it would have to grow even longer if he had to explain to the young people what a “shortwave radio” used to be. It was a kind of audio Internet, young people—that’s the best explanation we can come up with.

      • Maypo says:

        I can imagine a game show where the prizes would be signed, unedited, first-draft essays by the good Doctor.

      • RepubAnon says:

        I recall hearing My Word! on public radio stations back in the 1980s. Alas, it required the listener to have cognitive abilities – unlike AM radio talk shows.

        As to short wave, isn’t that what we do at the end of video calls? ;-)

  4. Fred says:

    Monetary currency is so outdated these days anyway. People would rather win agricultural stuff like stacks of rutabagas and chickens.

  5. von Hindenburg says:

    While they have their regular game shows too, Britain has the great tradition of panel shows that we just don’t seem have here. Shows such as Taskmaster, Would I Lie to You?, 8 out of 10 Cats, and QI take people who are already known to be clever and humorous and put them into situations that encourage them to be humorous and clever.

    About the closest thing that I can think of on American TV was Whose Line is it Anyway?.

  6. Belfry Bat says:

    They used to do good things now and then…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *