RTV Theory and Practice - Special Issue

both of the message and of the philosophy. This may appear to be bad, but not to the extent that it must be prevented at all costs. If we wished to isolate a speaker from апу object at all and just let his face speak, then even the hairs on his head would become an object which takes away part of the message and gives out its own bodily physical message and philosophy. This object quahty of the TV image is very much in the essence of television as a medium and must always be reckoned with. It certainly cannot be wiped off the screen with words. What is television then as a linguistic battlefield? Unfortunately, we still have no clear deflnitions. A lot of wit has been spent on examining the narcissoidal autonomy of the TV image (the medium is a message). A thirst has been discovered in television for new sudden impulses (serendipity). The tactile nature of its spotted image has been pointed out (we watch TV as we would read ВгаШе, with the skin). Yet all these individual qualities of television do not yield ап explanation of its complexity. So, aware of the unexplained complexity of television, it is possible to draw this conclusion about television and its language. Television as a linguistic polygon is not on!y a point of departure for: в the language of conflict (performed drama) Ф concrete visualised thought (films, mimicry) @ dramatised life (sport) Ф conversational encounters (debates). Television is also an electronic book. And the most abstract language which man has ever evolved has its place on the TV screen. Television is like a female Narcissus. In love with herself she must become a component of that world called the information system. She will not be transformed into a destroyer of language (and books). Instead she will serve the foundation of the information system human speach. For in his throat man carries a secret power to transmit thought through the sounds comming from his mucous membrane, And this power is still unbelievable and unexplained. The magnificence of this power throws every electronic mnovation into the shade. The ancient offspring of-that speech ianguage, gave birth to the book. And the book as D.Bravvn has said is »a геаЛу good machine«. From it information can be quickly seen, and it is through the book that a human being still expresses best his unique self. The book is still that hole for the elder tree into which man still bewails his sufferings. Even here the most powerful language is human, for, as Mihailo Ražnatović says, »when man is

205