Comments on: Serial Goes Missing

By: Neil Verma

Neil Verma — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:50:49 +0000

Thank you very much for your thoughts, Sean. Several other people have told me the same thing. You have to admire them for taking on something so unfamiliar — there’s so much of the culture of the military and of the Taliban that many listeners (certainly me) have to learn in order to process the show, and that wasn’t the case the last time around. This makes it much more challenging at the informational level. Even if the emotional urgency is less, I feel like I’m learning more.

By: Neil Verma

Neil Verma — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:46:48 +0000

Thank you very much for the link to the article, I hadn’t seen it when I was writing this. I found this piece on the “romance” issue pretty persuasive: http://www.bustle.com/articles/131776-serial-host-sarah-koenig-blasts-people-who-said-she-was-in-love-with-adnan-syed
Thanks for your response!

By: Neil Verma

Neil Verma — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:56:30 +0000

I take your constructive criticism. For the record, I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong or degraded about children’s media or cartoons. Far from it. I didn’t intend to say that, but I see that my language suggests it toward the end of that graph. I do feel that the metaphoric frame of the cartoon is oddly placed, and in this context (and only this context) serves to reduce complexity in a way that the other season might not have elected to do. I regret that the way I went about explaining that was a little bungled and caused irritation.

By: Sean Waldron

Sean Waldron — Mon, 25 Jan 2016 22:31:08 +0000

Thank you for the analysis Neil I really enjoyed your take on Serial Season 2. Like most of the other posters I have struggled with this season. Although I admire the challenging story the team chose I feel some of the disconnect stems from the fact that the story isn’t as relatable. We can all relate to being in high school and dating. The story from season 1 was so familiar to so many that what made it compelling was listening to this typical teenage love story go tragically wrong, and if we’re honest wondering if this is something that could have happened to us. The product is still outstanding and I still plan on listening to all of season 2 but unfortunately not with the same urgency that I felt with the original.

By: Rachel

Rachel — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 03:12:36 +0000

I don’t find it misogynistic to say that Koenig behaved romantically towards Adnan. She actually admitted flirting in an interview (https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/names/2015/03/29/sarah-koenig-talks-serial-boston-university-power-narrative-conference/F9Dy6WeXewONjwW4HvI00K/story.html)

Other than that great article and I totally agree!

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Sun, 17 Jan 2016 18:54:03 +0000

I get your final point about season 2 being just a sketch, but you already made that point far better in the paragraphs leading up to “pointing our ears” at targets Koenig is not herself close to.

For me, it’s an irritating bit of sophistry that doesn’t strengthen your argument for you to end by taking several paragraphs to take potshots at comics and cartoons. The brilliant, pioneering work of Charles Schulz is certainly not just a “sketch,” nor are the works of creators of great children’s media like Zoom. I enjoyed your perspective on Serial, but I think it’s arrogant and false to imply that finished works of children’s media are just sketches and can’t be just as well-crafted and full of meaning as media for adults.

By: Neil Verma

Neil Verma — Thu, 14 Jan 2016 21:59:25 +0000

Thanks, Jason! I’m grateful for your thoughts. Yes I’ve also been thinking about the “nonmystery” of the Bergdahl case, which is so far reading to me as a tragedy in the classical sense, as a series of horrible outcomes cascade out from this one act. There seems to be an effort to employ a “You think you know this story, but you don’t” hook, but I’m not sure that many listeners really do know the story to begin with, so some of the energy of that approach is lost.

I also agree that there’s no question about how superior the journalism is this time around, and I’m not surprised that was intentional. Still, part of me wishes they brought the temperature down in a different way. I keep thinking about another route they might have taken by finding a new way of doing the TAL ethnographies. What would the “Serial” version be of TAL’s Harper High, 24 Hours at the Golden Apple or 129 Cars episodes sound like? I hope that’s something that’s on their agenda too.

By: Jason Mittell

Jason Mittell — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 22:57:20 +0000

Nice piece, Neil! I’ve been slow to read it, because I’ve been slow to listen to SERIAL this season (still not fully caught up yet).

I agree that shifts in Koenig’s character and her relationship to the case is a big part of it. I also think the move in genre from murder mystery to military procedural is important: we know the outcome of Bergdahl’s captivity (if not his prosecution), so it becomes all about “how it happened” rather than “what really happened.” Additionally, this is not an obscure local case nobody has heard of – it’s a politically contentious high-profile case that SERIAL is shining a deeper light upon. Still valuable, but not the same sense of discovery and urgency.

I also think it’s interesting that this shift is seemingly intentional: Koenig has pretty much said that season 1’s popularity was an accident that she’d rather not see repeated. She & her team are steering away from what might duplicate the sensation, highlighting their role of serious journalist providing long-form analysis, and in doing so, moving away from fictional analogues. Great for journalism, but bad for most listeners…

By: Tuesday Links! | Gerry Canavan

Tuesday Links! | Gerry Canavan — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 15:01:42 +0000

[…] Against Serial season two. I think there’s a lot more one could say about what’s seemed to go wrong this time […]

By: Neil

Neil — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 21:47:07 +0000

The sound design is more than good! These producers are amazing. I really mean it when I say that the show is breaking ground when it comes to what podcasts can do, particularly in their pacing, editing, resources and interviews. But everyone I talk to says it “feels” very different this time around (and I agree), and I guess I wasn’t satisfied stopping there, and wrote this in an attempt to articulate why, in as as specific a way as possible. I hope that came across. Thanks for chiming in!