That was a well done show for kids. LeVar Burton can read a book better than me, and I am not ashamed to admit it. He made learning accessible, fun, and cool.
As a child in the late 80s/early 90s, I remember watching Star Trek TNG as new episodes were coming out, and also watching Reading Rainbow (I loved both shows).
Adults, too. I might not know what an inverse-tachyon pulse is, but thanks to his convincing demeanor I understand that it could cause a localized spatial distortion.
He’s a compelling speaker and onscreen talent, I agree. He’s using his superpowers for good, whatever they are. Being able to connect through a screen wasn’t normalized back then. Educational content needed that personal touch. I think it makes all the difference.
Whatever works, I guess. It made a difference, although it was corny somewhere between `Punky Brewster` and `Captain Planet`. Vintage `Sesame Street` is legit cool.
He makes the hard thing look easy. This wasn’t a backhanded compliment but a genuine one. He isn’t acting per se, but he does voice act the stories. It was audiobooks and ASMR sorta before those things were cool. He does a fantastic job with the words on the page and also goes on-site to film IRL things from the books. It’s a simple premise and it works. It doesn’t have to be surprising to be enjoyable and engaging.
Why are you looking for a hyper stimulus? Man didn’t evolve in an environment where stories were told by people who’d won a massive intertribe tournament of story telling ability. Stories were told by family.
If child requires hyper stimulus to be engaged in this area, suspect other hyper stimulus present.
> Man didn’t evolve in an environment where stories were told by people who’d won a massive intertribe tournament of story telling ability. Stories were told by family.
The stories we grew up to were indeed those which won "a massive intertribe tournament of story telling ability". Only interesting stories got retold. Stories travelled further when made into songs. They became artworks when tranformed into plays. They became myths and legends in the luggage of those travelling the planet. And the art of telling stories also became a way of making a living much before our contemporary society produced the first pop star.
> Why are you looking for a hyper stimulus? Man didn’t evolve in an environment where stories were told by people who’d won a massive intertribe tournament of story telling ability. Stories were told by family.
> If child requires hyper stimulus to be engaged in this area, suspect other hyper stimulus present.
Reading Rainbow is the opposite of a hyperstimulus compared to most tv programs, let alone “educational” tv programming.
I wasn’t seeking a hyperstimulus. You don’t even know me. I could read and write before kindergarten, which was my first schooling outside the home.
Modern media is so replete with hyper stimuli that it is often hard to see where the line is between what is evolutionarily congruent and what is greater.
I don’t see how knowing you is relevant. This is my position on what most people do. Either you have a different viewpoint on this than the mainstream and yet arrived at the very same conclusions, or I essentially am familiar with your viewpoint in this area. What have I gotten wrong?
I was bored to tears and I read more than the average kid. I liked the aesthetic though and I wanted to like it because it seemed wholesome. I’ve always suspected RR is one of those shows that everyone knows they should like so they all talk it up as if they did like it. Kinda like Rust.
Or maybe many did genuinely enjoy RR but you just weren’t the target audience? If it was created to combat the summer reading slump, it likely wasn’t targeting already avid readers.
FWIW, though, my experience was similar to yours: I read a ton and loved the feel of the show, but the actual content was a little slow.
I agree that it’s the feel of the show. I grew up with 3 free to air channels, and one of them was a PBS station. The content was better than the competition or the VHS tape collection, or replaying one of the video games.
I genuinely liked it even though I could read fine. It was an excuse to use the tv when I might not have a good reason to use it instead of someone else otherwise and I enjoyed the content well enough even if I was a couple years older than the intended audience. The public broadcasting shows of that era were weirdly good imo, with Mr Rogers and Shirley Lewis doing puppets, but wholesome too.
Ghost Writer was ahead of its time and deserves a post of its own.
> The series revolves around a multiethnic group of friends from Brooklyn who solve neighborhood crimes and mysteries as a team of youth detectives with the help of a ghost named Ghostwriter. Ghostwriter can communicate with children only by manipulating whatever text and letters he can find and using them to form words and sentences.
> Ghostwriter producer and writer Kermit Frazier revealed in a 2010 interview that Ghostwriter was a runaway slave during the American Civil War. He taught other slaves how to read and write and was killed by slave catchers and their dogs. His spirit was kept in the book that Jamal discovers and opens in the pilot episode, freeing the ghost.
Wishbone has costumes and a dog for your dramatic re-enactments of books with a dog actor in the lead role. This is crazy town, and I’m here for it.
The entire PBS slate of shows was elite. Very little did I know at the time how initiative-driven it was (a great thing). To me where in the world was Carmen Sandiego was a fun trivia game. To the creators, they were trying to address the issue of americans not knowing where the country was on a map.
"To the creators, they were trying to address the issue of americans not knowing where the country was on a map."
This is a very glib take. The origin of the series was a 1985 educational computer game from Broderbund. The target age group wasn't expected to know all this information, which is why the game shipped with an almanac.
Not sure if it was on purpose but your take is the glib one.
“The show was created partially in response to the results of a National Geographic survey indicating little knowledge of geography among some of the American populace, with one in four being unable to locate the Soviet Union or the Pacific Ocean.”
Now of course the tv show is an offspring from the video game but it’s well documented that the specific format was to combat geography. So it’s a fine statement to state that is the purpose of the show creators as that was the mission from PBS at the time.
> To me where in the world was Carmen Sandiego was a fun trivia game. To the creators, they were trying to address the issue of americans not knowing where the country was on a map.
Was there a show? To me Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego was a reoccurring segment on a show called Square One. I liked it, but it didn't feel like it was the source of Carmen Sandiego mythology; it felt more like a minor epiphenomenon.
There was also a computer game, which I didn't play much of because it was a lot of work. It felt a lot more fully developed than the TV segments, though.
Yes, there was half-hour game show for kids that aired on PBS in the early 90s. For anyone who's ever seen it, chances are the theme song is permanently burned into their brain: Do it, Rockapella! [1]
The game came first, and the TV shows were spun off from it, which is probably why the game feels more fully developed. It grew into a whole media franchise -- there were Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? and Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego? game shows on PBS, as well as a Where on Earth is Carmen Sandiego? Saturday morning cartoon, and more recently, an animated series on Netflix. I don't remember there being Carmen Sandiego segments on Square One but I also don't remember Square One all that well in the first place.
