In the light of the imminent publication of three collections of chapters about specific "moments" in TV programmes, this short blog reflects on the status of programmes and extracts from them in TV Studies methodologies. It refers to earlier work on the issues at stake in selection, canonisation, close analysis, evidence and aesthetic criticism in the discipline, especially as I have encountered them in my own work. It argues for the approach taken in the "Moments in Television" book series from Manchester University Press, where TV is regarded as an art form and approached from an aesthetic perspective.

Television aestheticians and cognitivists share an important endeavour. Both groups are driven to explore the compelling emotional, cognitive and aesthetic appeals of contemporary television serials. In other words, whether we take up a broadly aesthetic perspective or cognitive approach towards TV, we are engaged in an ongoing act of appreciative engagement. We share a mutual fascination with the televisual works that captivate us, and an urge to address our sense of their potential significance or moment. Our apparent commonalities, however, lead us not only in diverse directions, but often also into disagreements and mistrust. I write as someone committed to television aesthetics, who embraces the arrival of new perspectives, and recognises the usefulness of much cognitive work, but who nonetheless will admit to some uneasiness about the presumptions underlying cognitive science, and trepidation regarding its deployment within TV studies. This chapter is a preliminary foray into the two approaches side by side. But rather than comparing and contrasting, I aim to uncover something a little more nuanced and elusive: the distinctive sensibility of each perspective and the implicit values which inform it. The chapter proceeds by identifying some of the commonest notes of concord and discord between aesthetic and cognitive television scholars, uncovering differences of purpose, scope and values, in order to better appreciate the points of urgent distinction which separate the approaches, and to illuminate the hazards of speaking at cross purposes. So that I might grasp more positively the specific strengths and merits of each perspective, I briefly consider how a specific moment of television might seize the attention of its practitioners. I have chosen two moments drawn from recent US television series – The Closer (FOX, 2005-12) and Desperate Housewives (ABC, 2004-12) – that I argue are most sensitively and persuasively appreciated via cognitive and aesthetic perspectives respectively. My exploration of these two examples leads me, finally, to revisit this book’s core focus – the television serial – via a consideration of ‘moment’. The ‘sense of moment’ in this chapter’s title consciously denotes two meanings of the word. The first is more commonplace: a moment is a short time, an instant. The second refers to importance, weight, significance. What is the ‘moment’ of a particular fragment within a long-running serial? How do cognitive and aesthetic approaches weigh this moment? As we shall see, cognitivists and aestheticians take up subtly dissimilar stances in relation to seriality and moment(s), and in each approach, the two meanings of ‘moment’ are differently interconnected. Attending to these distinctions helps us uncover something of the sensibility of each perspective. And in keeping with the values and sensibility of a television aesthetician, I ultimately aver that it is television programmes themselves, or the unique particularities of selected moments within them, which will guide us – if we let them – to choose the most appropriate appreciative approach in each case.

This article considers possible futures for television (TV) studies, imagining how the discipline might evolve more productively over the next 10 years and what practical steps are necessary to move towards those outcomes. Conducted as a round-table discussion between leading figures in television history and archives, the debate focuses on the critical issue of archives, considering and responding to questions of access/inaccessibility, texts/ contexts, commercial/symbolic value, impact and relevance. These questions reflect recurrent concerns when selecting case studies for historical TV research projects: how difficult is it to access the material (when it survives)? What obstacles might be faced (copyright, costs, etc.) when disseminating findings to a wider public? The relationship between the roles of 'researcher' and 'archivist' appears closer and more mutually supportive in TV studies than in other academic disciplines, with many people in practice straddling the traditional divide between the two roles, combining specialisms that serve to further scholarship and learning as well as the preservation of, and broad public engagements with, collections. The Research Excellence Framework's imperative for academic researchers to achieve 'impact' in broader society encourages active and creative collaboration with those based in public organizations, such as the British Film Institute (BFI), who have a remit to reach a wider public. The discussion identifies various problems and successes experienced in collaboration between the academic, public and commercial sectors in the course of recent and ongoing research projects in TV studies.

Television has reached a juncture. No longer are we required to gather around a communal TV set on a daily, or weekly basis to consume our desired programing. With content at our fingertips, televi- sion is being repurposed for the digital age. We can now decide when, where, and how to watch our favourite shows. Viewing practices span from the traditional format—tuning in regularly to watch one episode at a time—to the binge-viewing, or marathoning of seasons on a tablet, or cellphone. In addition, viewers can now interact with their shows via social media outlets, which provide an open plat- form for debate, analysis, contextualization, and fandom. Not only are the consumption methods and the reception of television in flux, but the narrative format itself is becoming increasingly complex. Since the early 2000s, with the onset of television shows such as Sex and The City (1998-2004), The Sopranos (1999-2007), and The Wire (2002-2008), the medium, which has been widely re- garded as subpar to film, seems to have entered its renais- sance. While many past television shows have adhered to the procedural format, which favors stand-alone, or case of the week episodes over character development and multi-episode/season story arcs, modern television dramas such as Mad Men (2007-), Game of Thrones (2011-), Justified (2010- ), and Breaking Bad (2008-2013) find common ground through their complex characters, intricate plotlines, puzzling narrative devices, and oftentimes controversial themes and content. We are now forced to confront the ways the onset of the digital age has altered, and will continue to alter the medium. This issue of Cinephile seeks to reevaluate the current state of modern serialized television shows, specifically calling attention to our present moment in history. Are cinematic traditions altering the ways we as viewers engage with television content? To what point are the boundaries between TV and film being blurred? How does the social media sphere impact the medium? Is there a link between narrative complexity and the prolonged success of a series?To open, Rachel Talalay comments on the current state of modern television production as seen from a director’s point of view. Talalay sheds light on the easily overlooked production process and calls for a new model that gives new talent, and female directors in particular, the opportunity to prove themselves. This is followed by Michael L. Wayne’s discussion of post-racial ideologies as a means of challeng- ing colourblind racism in prime time cable drama. Wayne examines the relationship between moral standing and race, arguing that modern audiences are often forced to identify with overtly prejudice characters. Graeme Stout analyzes the narrative intricacies of the short-lived AMC show Rubicon and reflects on how the form of the show relates to Eco’s theory of the paranoid viewer. Maria San Filippo’s analysis of Louie and In Treatment takes note of television’s current identity crisis in the wake of the post-network era. San Filippo specifically pays attention to the minimalist aesthetic and its relation to on-screen representations of middle-aged masculinity, thus addressing how serial television and mil- lennial manhood are straining to survive. Jason Mittell unearths the serial past of David Lynch’s Mullholland Drive, calling attention to how the film evolved from a failed television series into a feature film haunted by its production history. Lastly, we have included a brief translated piece by the late Mark Harris that fittingly explores the art of film and television translation. The article, originally written by Patricia de Figueirédo, discusses the technical constraints and restrictions that adaptors face when dubbing or subti- tling for film. De Figueirédo has graciously agreed for us to publish her work in this issue. We would like to take this opportunity to thank our devoted Cinephile family for all of their efforts and continuous encouragement with this issue. Firstly, we would like to acknowledge our editorial team: Peter Lester, Chelsea Birks, Dana Keller, Kevin Hatch, and Kelly St-Laurent; The Department of Theatre and Film Studies; and our faculty advisor, Lisa Coulthard. We would also like to extend our gratitude to Babak Tabarraee for his efforts in bringing Mark’s In Memoriam piece to light; Shaun Inouye for his masterful design and layout skills; and Joshua M. Ferguson for his rigorous fundraising efforts. Finally, we would like to thank our featured photographer, Max Hirtz, for all of his time, patience, and talent. Without all of you, this issue would not have made it past the pilot. —Andrea Brooks & Oliver Kroener

In this article I will argue that we need to create new archival models in order to preserve and share knowledge of historical, ‘hidden’ television professions and production cultures. Oral history traditions of recording life stories give us a useful starting point. Engineering ‘encounters’ between skilled television technicians, and the now obsolete equipment they operated in the 1970s and 80s, is challenging for a myriad of reasons, but videoing the interaction of man and machine provides us with a rich insight into how analogue television was produced and broadcast. Social media enables us to disseminate these histories in new and innovative ways.