According to Hofmann: The issues with the ‘on/in’ debate
There are many unanswerable questions that have plagued mankind for centuries and by 鈥渃enturies,鈥� I mean a few hundred years.
Such questions include: 鈥淲hat鈥檚 the meaning of life?,鈥� 鈥淚f a tree falls in the woods and no one is around, does it make a sound?,鈥� 鈥淲ho put the bomp in the bomp bah bomp bah bomp?鈥� and 鈥淲ho put the ram in the rama lama ding dong?鈥�
But the question that keeps me up at night is, 鈥淲hy do we say an actor is in a movie, but on a television show?鈥�
I know there are other variations of this confusing concept with different mediums like a singer is featured in a song that鈥檚 played on the radio or someone can make a movie based on a book that has a great story in it, which I heard all about on a podcast.
Maybe the issue is the different media options 鈥� since there are roughly 492 ways to access entertainment nowadays.
However, I want to focus on film and television as both things are written, produced and acted while being recorded, then edited and played back.
There is a difference, of course, between movies and television shows and that makes the 鈥渙n/in鈥� debate (even though I鈥檓 not even sure if there is a debate) all the more frustrating.
You see, when you go to a movie, a projector shines the movie on the screen.
When you watch television, all the workings to make the images and sound appear are happening in the television.
Going by that logic, an actor is either in a television show or on a movie.
Now, I can see saying, if you have a DVD or VHS cassette of a movie, the actors are in the movie; however, once you take it home, all the workings are still in the DVD/VHS player and in the television.
Of course, you can now watch a movie on your phone, even though, again, all the magic happens in the phone.
Maybe the issue is the little knowledge the public has of how entertainment is presented to them, much like the willful ignorance of what goes into an average hotdog. I still tell myself it鈥檚 just beef and love.
If you鈥檙e still not grasping the idea, think about it this way: if you say someone is in a house, you know that person is in the interior of the house. If you say someone is on the house in a rainstorm, you know they鈥檙e likely on the roof and wishing they were in the house because of being in a rainstorm; although, technically, they鈥檙e under a rain storm, but that鈥檚 a 鈥渋n/under鈥� debate for another time.
Maybe the issue is the word 鈥渋n鈥� and how 鈥渋n鈥� has been used 鈥渋n鈥� the lexicon 鈥渋n鈥� the past few years.
I know the 鈥渋n/on鈥� thing isn鈥檛 a solid rule because there have been times that people have said something like, 鈥淒ame Judi Dench will appear on the big screen,鈥� which is a reference to a movie, but that whole sentence can also go like, 鈥淒ame Judi Dench will appear on the big screen in the film 鈥楤ikini Carwash Chaingang 2鈥�.鈥�
Okay, on or in, kids 鈥� make up your minds!
That being said, let鈥檚 amp up the confusion because if you ever talked to someone who works in the entertainment industry, unless they鈥檙e an actor, they worked both on a movie and on a television show.
By the way, working in the entertainment industry 鈥� whether its movies, television, music, sports or news 鈥� makes perfect sense. The reason is because the common understanding is that someone鈥檚 work happens inside a place 鈥� whether it鈥檚 in an office building, in a home, in the back of a van or in a bio-dome 鈥� unless you鈥檙e constructing the bio-dome, then you鈥檙e working on a bio-dome as you work in construction industry.
Maybe the subject is so confusing, it鈥檚 best to accept it for what it is and not move on.
It seems the only things that are considered to be in a movie are the people, places and things that actually appear on the movie screen.
So, that being said, if you worked as a production crew member, you worked on the film 鈥淐annibal Carwash Chaingang 4,鈥� but if you also appeared as an extra during the movie鈥檚 filming, then you can say your were both on and in the movie 鈥淐annibal Carwash Chaingang 4.鈥�
When it鈥檚 all said and done, all I鈥檓 asking for is some kind of consistency to pick one or the other because it really gets on my nerves 鈥� or would it be in my nerves? Oh man, I think I just found something new to keep me up at night.
Maybe the issue is me.
According to Hofmann is written by staff reporter Mark Hofmann of Rostraver Township. His books, 鈥淕ood Mourning! A Guide to Biting the Big One 鈥� and Dying, Too鈥� and 鈥淪tupid Brain,鈥� are available on Amazon.com.