Description
Covers over six thousand shows, with information on each program's broadcasting history, cast, and plot, and includes daily program schedules.
Publication
Ballantine Books (1994), Edition: 55687th
Collections
Similar in this library
Alternate Channels: The Uncensored Story of Gay and Lesbian Images on Radio and Television, 1930s to the Present by Steven Capsuto
Live From New York: An Uncensored History of Saturday Night Live, as Told By Its Stars, Writers and Guests by James A. Miller
The Star Trek Concordance: The A-To-Z Guide to the Classic Original Television Series and Films by Kensington
Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies: A Complete Illustrated Guide to the Warner Bros. Cartoons by Jerry Beck
User reviews
LibraryThing member therebelprince
(This review is for the ninth edition)
In many ways, this book automatically deserves five stars. Herein you will find a listing for every American television series which aired since that very first TV season in 1946. The listings contain cast and airdate information, as well as a synopsis, which
Without sounding too negative about their great work, however, there are a few things that I found frustrating:
1) Obviously they had to make a distinction between what qualifies as a "TV series". There has to be an arbitrary line, of course, and so various syndicated series miss out, which is fine. However, sometimes it gets a bit silly: for instance, the sequel miniseries "North and South II" is included but not the original one, due to the number of weeks each aired. Again, I understand that without drawing a line, the guys would never be able to finish the book, but there are certain situations such as this one, where the reader feels as if a little leeway would've been helpful.
2) Sometimes there are errors in plot details, or lazy descriptions. Again, I don't think is really a flaw: undoubtedly there are some shows which the authors don't watch, or didn't watch closely, and details get missed when reading guides to programs. But perhaps now that the book is in its ninth edition, they could branch out and incorporate further proof-readers with knowledge of additional programs?
3) The plot summaries vary greatly in size, but by no measurable standard. Obviously no one among us can say which shows are more "important" or "better". However, there are instances where I am gobsmacked by the half-page synopsis for a fascinating show, and then further awed when I read the two-page detailed summary of a show that is largely forgotten. For instance, David E. Kelley's "Boston Legal" is considerably less examined than "Boston Public", a series I'm sure most critics would call inferior, and which undeniably had a less public persona throughout its run. (Even if you hate both of them, no one can deny that the casting woes, meta-referential intricacies and gradual change in tone toward passionate liberal discourse on a weekly basis, must merit some further consideration of "Legal"?) Again, I am aware that the authors have subjective tastes themselves, but as experts in the field, they must be aware of the impact individual shows had on the television landscape.
4) And finally, the big one for me: the authors don't seem certain about whether they're including behind-the-scenes information or not, which is to the book's great detriment. With some shows of course - "It's About Time", for instance - it's inevitable that you include discussion, since the series' entire format changed midway through the run. But occasional entries will spend half the discussion on audience response or behind-the-scenes info, while other series won't so much as waste a sentence on critical reaction. If the authors were aiming to write an encyclopedia of television plots, that's all well and good, yet they do often wander into behind-the-scenes discussion, so clearly they're not against the idea. Any TV fan will be able to pick out many shows where the entry could've spent less time discussing a minor romantic subplot and devoted that space to information about changing viewer tastes/casting dilemmas/series legacy, etc.
So, in spite of that laundry list, I advocate this book very strongly. With the exception of the final point, the others are all minor stylistic details which don't get in the way of the marvel that is this work. In this day and age, that a book can still hold so much more information than any website is impressive. Many is a night when, in researching one show, I have stumbled upon three or four others on the same page which I've never heard of. This is a treasure trove, and I sincerely hope it continues to be updated in the future. Only true TV fans could create such a work. (Guys? If you're thinking of retiring, give me a call!)
In many ways, this book automatically deserves five stars. Herein you will find a listing for every American television series which aired since that very first TV season in 1946. The listings contain cast and airdate information, as well as a synopsis, which
Show More
varies in size, and sometimes notes on the production. Clearly, this is a labour of love for these two very devoted authors, and it shows in their dedication. Without sounding too negative about their great work, however, there are a few things that I found frustrating:
1) Obviously they had to make a distinction between what qualifies as a "TV series". There has to be an arbitrary line, of course, and so various syndicated series miss out, which is fine. However, sometimes it gets a bit silly: for instance, the sequel miniseries "North and South II" is included but not the original one, due to the number of weeks each aired. Again, I understand that without drawing a line, the guys would never be able to finish the book, but there are certain situations such as this one, where the reader feels as if a little leeway would've been helpful.
2) Sometimes there are errors in plot details, or lazy descriptions. Again, I don't think is really a flaw: undoubtedly there are some shows which the authors don't watch, or didn't watch closely, and details get missed when reading guides to programs. But perhaps now that the book is in its ninth edition, they could branch out and incorporate further proof-readers with knowledge of additional programs?
3) The plot summaries vary greatly in size, but by no measurable standard. Obviously no one among us can say which shows are more "important" or "better". However, there are instances where I am gobsmacked by the half-page synopsis for a fascinating show, and then further awed when I read the two-page detailed summary of a show that is largely forgotten. For instance, David E. Kelley's "Boston Legal" is considerably less examined than "Boston Public", a series I'm sure most critics would call inferior, and which undeniably had a less public persona throughout its run. (Even if you hate both of them, no one can deny that the casting woes, meta-referential intricacies and gradual change in tone toward passionate liberal discourse on a weekly basis, must merit some further consideration of "Legal"?) Again, I am aware that the authors have subjective tastes themselves, but as experts in the field, they must be aware of the impact individual shows had on the television landscape.
4) And finally, the big one for me: the authors don't seem certain about whether they're including behind-the-scenes information or not, which is to the book's great detriment. With some shows of course - "It's About Time", for instance - it's inevitable that you include discussion, since the series' entire format changed midway through the run. But occasional entries will spend half the discussion on audience response or behind-the-scenes info, while other series won't so much as waste a sentence on critical reaction. If the authors were aiming to write an encyclopedia of television plots, that's all well and good, yet they do often wander into behind-the-scenes discussion, so clearly they're not against the idea. Any TV fan will be able to pick out many shows where the entry could've spent less time discussing a minor romantic subplot and devoted that space to information about changing viewer tastes/casting dilemmas/series legacy, etc.
So, in spite of that laundry list, I advocate this book very strongly. With the exception of the final point, the others are all minor stylistic details which don't get in the way of the marvel that is this work. In this day and age, that a book can still hold so much more information than any website is impressive. Many is a night when, in researching one show, I have stumbled upon three or four others on the same page which I've never heard of. This is a treasure trove, and I sincerely hope it continues to be updated in the future. Only true TV fans could create such a work. (Guys? If you're thinking of retiring, give me a call!)
Show Less