RTV Theory and Practice - Special Issue

message. This is a new type of hidden meaning which a television work has. Although imphcit messages are in question, they can in some cases, thanks to their context, decidedly influence the meaning of the main message. This can be defmed as the meaning of the audio-visual structure in the context of the given work. Not depending on the message and its penetration, whether it can be rationally understood in the given context, it is always present and affects the main message, changing it tn one way ог other. The efficiency of the main message depends directly on the penetrability and coordination of the two messages, on the main message and the message from the structure. On the contrary, a partial and total losts of control over the television message can be talked about, as in the case which had been analysed. There can be doubts that the previous analysis was aesthetic and not communicative, that the concrete television event was experienced by the developed aesthetic sense and therefore it is irrelevant for the field of communications. However, the reaction of a 65-years-old viewer with incomplete secondary education leads to the opposite conclusion: it is still the authentic language of television. He was one of those present who read and loudly expressed the stated global massage, not hiding his surprise. He did not know that there was »over lapping«. A new question can be put on the basis of the above; why is the analysed TV event not understood as a bad and clumsy application of over-lapping. Why is it understood in a quite different way? The reply points to the essence of a TV communication: it could not be realized as a bad apphcation of a figure of speech, as there аге no figures of speech in TV language, even the premise is not a language convention according to it. TV language is analogous to the language of a- reality. TV communication is reached by the intervention of life as a whole and not only by a narrow, canonized language mechanism. It đoes not receive but rejects as an unknown bođy, every stylization, longing for total, omm-meaningful language which will be equal the practice, reahty. It is important to underline that TV speaks identically and at the same time not only in words and pictures but by the structure of the words and pictures as well. That is the reality which television dramaturgy faces. YI Биттагу and themes for a study of the problems ofT\ dramaturgy a) Television is a specific, autochthonous medium whose inferred task is to deal with this moment of reality for this moment of reality. Its function lasts only for one day. It occurs again every day. That means that the communicative ехрепепсе from the previous days is buht into today’s communication, and today’s communication is the basis for future communication. There is no television-tomorrow, no television-yesterday. There is only a television-today. In the short

122