The neighbors on TV
The role of inert objects (weapons, typewriters, houses, beehives and documents) in embellishing a series of July revelations is almost equalled by the contribution of «live» evidence by the neighbors of the suspects, the eyewitnesses. There is nothing attractive in the role of the informer. (Every informer has a lesser or greater craving for disgrace, a malicious introversion corresponding to the particular level of solitude he craves.) Using kind language, informers feel they are not accusing anyone. They do not defame any one person or institution, and so they are protected. The ignorant need not fear libel charges. But what urges them to «testify?» How many people could resist the desire to participate in the unraveling of an incomparable tale which would distinguish them from the masses, even for a few precious seconds? Maybe a sizable crowd. But surely even fewer people can resist the temptation to gain a slice of the limelight, without fear of censure? Such citizens are not just the media public, they are the media stars too. They are trapped in a present (yesterday and tomorrow cease to exist) which appears open and unpredictable but is actually unbelievably constricted. In such a fast-moving present (the television image abstracts and fragments action from the tiring course of real-time events), the viewer/TV-protagonist is quickly swallowed up and lost as the next hot piece of news come along, sweeping up with it a new crop of would-be «stars.»
