Will the Golden Age of Television Ever End?
Written by Andreas Babiolakis
2022 and 2023 are not playing when it comes to their epic conclusions of beloved television series. Better Call Saul took its time unraveling its slow burning plot and sizzled towards an explosive finale that rendered its entire existence an essential watch. Atlanta procrastinated with seasons 3 and 4 and shoved them both into last year, but what game changing television we got (and that finale pulled the rug from under us and shifted the entire landscape of the series). Succession is already underway with three great episodes (the latest of this article’s release, “Connor’s Wedding”, already feels like an instant classic for the ages), and Barry is right around the corner with the start of its climactic season.
The common ground these shows have — outside of being modern examples of exemplary television — is that they have all ended or are in the process of ending. In fact, three of the series have settled with four being the magic number of seasons before calling it quits (Better Call Saul needed its six seasons though, so don’t feel like it went on for too long in comparison). There are still some great shows that are on at the moment, but are any of them Succession? Atlanta? Better Call Saul? Hell, Barry almost feels like a happy accident that miraculously transpired, and it definitely seems like Bill Hader and Alec Berg have not taken this for granted by wrapping up the series precisely when Barry Berkman’s story needed to end.
With this in mind, I feel like we have been blessed with some impeccable television (Barry has yet to drop, but I can only imagine it will be handled right if season 3 is as breathtaking as it is), and it does not elude me how monumental these finales have been so far; expect Better Call Saul and Atlanta on a future list of the greatest finales of all time, and maybe even look out for Barry and Succession if they finish even anywhere near what their potential is. But it is that terminal nature that I’ve been focusing on: the end of things. I have no problem with great series concluding. In fact, I like when television shows stick their landings. it makes rewatching them feel worthwhile and all the more necessary.
That’s not my focus today. Instead, it’s the idea of the Golden Age of Television. It’s the offshoot of the Golden Age of Hollywood: the classic era between the end of the twenties (when talking pictures followed the silent age) and the cusp of New Hollywood (early sixties). With the transition to sound films came the development of story structure and creative ideas in ways film hadn’t seen before, and this spark ushered in successful project after successful project. There was this fountain of innovation and mastery that exuded off of the big screen for decades. There’s a reason why there are fanbases that are so attached to the classics, and it’s because of this untouchable quality and standard that the Golden Age had.
Television has experienced its own versions of the “Golden Age”, and, yes, there are more than one. The first Golden Age of Television actually came when the medium was first taking off from the late forties and until 1960, and it consisted of many early classics that we associate with the blocky TV sets of such a time period (like The Honeymooners and I Love Lucy, for instance). It felt right to have this age right there and then. Television was a new form of entertainment that was taking the world by storm. It could snuggle up right next to the then-established Golden Age of Hollywood as visual mediums would dominate the entertainment sphere.
When people discuss the Golden Age of Television, however, they’re usually referring to a different time period: our own. The Second Golden Age of Television is slated to start in the late nineties with HBO shows like Oz, The Sopranos, and Sex and the City closing out the millennium in unhinged, uncompromising style, but I actually pinpoint earlier shows like The Larry Sanders Show (which started in 1992 and only wrapped up around the time that the aforementioned series were blossoming). The main thing is that we are still in this era. With the rise of cable over network television (and now this new thing that I think is called “streaming”?), we’ve seen the boundaries of the small screen get pushed again and again. HBO helped open the door of possibilities, considering that it made its money via subscriptions and not sponsors and advertising. This meant that episodes could be unfiltered, run as long as they wanted, and not have to worry about what businesses would be offended and threaten to pull from the network.
This may spell “taboo” for many, but I see it a different way. Storytellers could say and do whatever they wanted to, and, sure, early cable shows may have felt rebellious and “edgy”, but that’s the response we see when series were forced to behave for far too long. There’s a reason why there is a New Hollywood movement that preceded the “Golden Age”, and it’s the sour reality of this beloved age of early cinema: much of the Golden Age was sterile because of the Hays Code. There was much to celebrate, but how far could the medium go when there was censorship and stifling going on? It’s the same with television: sure, it was nice to celebrate its breakthroughs, but it was destined to go the distance again.
And it did, and we’re in that period now. We’ve gone well past the limitless nature of the television medium in terms of content and rawness. Shows like Atlanta and Bojack Horseman have embraced how singular some episodes can be. Series like Mr. Robot and Dark have tested the waters for how philosophical, abstract, or thorough television can be (to the point of begging to be rewatched again and again to find new information). Shows don’t have to go on for eternity now, but rather they can conclude at precisely the right time, as their station will have something else lined up (and who cares if the next show bombs when subscribers are why there is money to go around? No longer were stations relying on a show or two to keep them afloat: see exhibits Comedy Central and Fox for what beating dead, network TV horses look like with the tired ways of South Park and the completely, currently anemic ways of The Simpsons and Family Guy).
However, New Hollywood was an answer to the Golden Age, and that era of cinema ended decades ago. Films no longer have to prove anything in such a way. You can make warm and grounded films, or you can go nuts with something twisted and profane. The choice is yours. Haven’t we kind of reached that point with television? Even if we will forever have great shows to watch (and I believe that we will), what innovation is there still to discover? What boundaries will be pushed? We have so many streaming services, cable stations, and even network channels (let’s not count out damn good television like Abbott Elementary) that are continuing to fire on all cylinders while contemporaneously iconic series come to an end. I’m not worried about the caliber of television to come.
When do we decide that the Second Golden Age of Television will end in the same way that the majority of its series already have? Do we continue to ride this wave until there is a wall of mediocre shows on TV with not a good series in sight? Do we accept that we have reached the outer limits of the medium and this is all that the medium has to offer (but what a plentiful well of choice and capability we have reached)? Do we try to keep pushing television even further despite the fact that there may not be much uncovered ground left to discover?
At the end of the day, it also doesn’t matter at all. The Golden Age of Hollywood came and went. Hell, New Hollywood began and died as well. We’ve had great films come out for decades afterwards. It really doesn’t matter. We can try to keep this notion of the Second Golden Age of Television going even well past its expiry date (whatever that definition means to you), because it’s almost for certain that there will always be great TV. It may feel more comforting to say that we’re in TV’s Golden Age still because many have accepted that television is the more groundbreaking of the two mediums in this day and age, and that may actually be fact (as much as I love cinema). Just when you think television has been all figured out, new series come and knock our socks off.
Maybe that will continue. That could always be the case. Perhaps this Second Golden Age, started by cable television, will never end because there will forever be that next show we didn’t see coming; because new voices are still being heard and granted the opportunity to tell tales that have yet to make the small screen; because technology keeps changing and series can be depicted in different ways; because no one wants this age of brilliance to end. I sure don’t, but I know all good things come to an end, be they a strong episode, a terrific season, a perfect series, or the Golden Age of Television.
Even if this age finishes, have no fear: it was a hell of a run for well over twenty years (and counting). The shows I brought up before may be finishing but we still have Hacks, The Rehearsal, Severance, and so many more that we have to put some stock into while they are still great (and hope that they continue being strong). It’s not as if we have completely run out of series to watch, and that will never happen. Maybe they will continue carrying this golden torch. Who knows. I’m just grateful that what felt like a fad for a few years became the norm for entertainment, and that countless storytellers, performers, and artists have made the most of this discovery. The fact that so many of the greatest series of all time came from our time is truly special. Do we keep insisting that the Golden Age is still happening because there continue to be great shows, or do we put a cap on this thing and admit that the medium is going to likely be proliferate and promising for many years to come? Can we admit that the medium itself is endless, and not just this age that we want to be a part of? Either way, I’m content with either outcome.
Or suppose you are a part of the discussion that believes that there will be some new medium that changes things: the cynics that think the short videos of TikTok, the joy in watching others partake in hobbies or even eating over Twitch, or the endlessness of YouTube will take over all entertainment. I personally don’t subscribe to this notion because I think there will always be an audience for film and for television; the scares surrounding the impending death of literature didn’t exactly mark any truth, for instance, as people continue to read once so many forms of entertainment have been created (if video games can’t kill books, nothing will). You may feel differently, but I feel like there will always be fans of something, especially with the growing population rate and the connectivity that the internet brings. Other forms of entertainment shouldn’t make you fear the demise of your own leisures. Besides, we’re still debating the — and I say this for the umpteenth time — Golden Age of Television, so if you’re worried that TV is going to cease to exist around the corner, I’d do my best to stop.
Then there are the concerns surrounding the streaming wars and how content is being spread thin between multiple platforms, rendering TV viewing more expensive than it has been in the last ten-or-so years. Between selectiveness and piracy (the latter, of which, I am not condoning but am merely bringing up), people will have their solutions. Besides, this may slow down what content someone views, but it won’t halt the creation of series themselves unless a streaming giant should go bankrupt (but the point is that there are now countless platforms, so it’s not like they will all tank at the exact same time). Has TV viewing become more annoying in recent years? More challenging? More painful to one’s bank account? Sure. I feel like the solution (in the same way streaming was originally the answer) is there somewhere, and that can even arrive before the death of the Golden Age happens.
If television has taught me anything, sometimes ongoingness can be done right; sometimes it’s better to end things in their prime. Whether we decide that there is no more Golden Age because the medium has been perfected, try to push for new frontiers (which can very well be possible), or just keep going with this era because television isn’t slowing down, there isn’t really a wrong way to look at this strange phenomena: television is so good that we may have to either make the Second Golden Age of Television extremely long or endless, or we have to force the ending to something that may never actually come. As great series conclude this year, I feel assured that the next showstoppers are just around the corner.
Andreas Babiolakis has a Masters degree in Film and Photography Preservation and Collections Management from Toronto Metropolitan University, as well as a Bachelors degree in Cinema Studies from York University. His favourite times of year are the Criterion Collection flash sales and the annual Toronto International Film Festival.