farnovision

There Was No "Light Problem"

Much of the second act of Aaron Sorkin's play The Farnsworth Invention revolves around  Philo Farnsworth's supposed inability to find solutions for the low-light sensitivity of his Image Dissector tube.  This interpretation is very much the "RCA version" of the early pre-history of television -- that Farnsworth's Image Dissector was a fatally flawed device, and that television could only be commercialized after the principal of "light storage" was introduced in Vladimir Zworykin's Iconoscope. 

When I met Aaron in San Diego in the spring of 2007, I showed him an Image Orthicon tube -- the tube that really made television practical in the 1940s and 50s -- and tried to explain to him how much of the art in that device -- art that effectively solved the "light problem" -- was traceable to Farnsworth patents. 

Now comes a letter from another reserarcher / historian with an engineering background, one Eduardo Zeron, who validates what I've been saying about the origins of the Image Orthicon.  He also takes issue with some of the points in my old "Who Invented What and When" essay, which points I am happy to see corrected.

But those corrections don't undermine the important assertion, that Farnsworth had his own solutions to the "light problem," that those solutions found their way into the technologies that made television popular, and that the historical interpretation in The Farnsworth Invention is what is fatally flawed here, not the invention itself (nor the inventor).

Mr. Zeron's letter:

Dear Paul Schatzkin.

I really enjoyed your Farnovision chronicles web page, especially the Part 10 where you point out the historical importance of Farnsworth's U.S. patent 2,087,683, and how Sarnoff needed to buy it (for $1 million) in order to sell his Image Orthicon.

Farnsworth invented both the Orthicon and the "scanning with low speed electrons" in his U.S. patent 2,087,683 (filed on April 26, 1933, and granted on July 20, 1937). The only difference between the Farnsworth Orthicon and the RCA one is the fact Farnsworth projected the optical image and did the scanning in the same side of the target plate, while RCA projected the optical image and did the scanning at the opposite sides of the target.

Yeah, Well, Sorta

From another review of the Houston production:

[Sarnoff] wanted RCA to bring TV to the world, not some nobody like Farnsworth. Eventually, after a complicated, backbiting battle of wills and endless patent wars, RCA emerged triumphant, leaving Farnsworth in the forgotten dustbin of history.

Sorkin remedies the historic injustice with this lively pas de deux that showcases underdog Farnsworth's unwavering perseverance.

I supposed you can argue that any portrayal of this story in a popular medium "remedies the historic injustice."  But when the idea that "RCA emerged triumphant" is ppredicated on a non-existent "light problem" and a historically false verdict, you have to wonder how effective that "remedy" really is.  

"Invention" in Houston

  Houston: The First Fight Over The TV, At The Alley.

Two people arguing over electrons, cathode rays and how much light it takes to transport a moving image across the country may not sound like a riveting evening to most people -- but they'd be pretty much wrong.

For its final show of the 2008-2009 season, the Alley Theatre is putting on The Farnsworth Invention by Aaron Sorkin (A Few Good Men, The West Wing) which is both surprisingly funny and incredibly sad in turns as it tells us the story of the early battles for a workable TV set.

Jeffrey Bean shines as David Sarnoff, the Jewish immigrant from Russia who went on to become the head of NBC during its infancy and for years thereafter. His counterpart is Philo T. Farnswoth, played by Brandon Hearnsberger who, when he was just 15 years old in 1921, drew a picture for his high-school science teacher of a diagram for an electronic television system.

"Incredibly sad"?  Well, yes, particularly when you consider that the play is what many viewers will take away as "history," when so many of the pivotal facts are... well, wrong.  This is the history of television pretty much from as RCA  has been telling it for 80 years.  So much for "setting the record straight."

RIP Analog Broadcast TeeVee

EmilyStyle: Weekend Round-Up: City Lights.

From there, we rode our bike down to North Beach to a memorial service for analog TV (switched off at midnight last Friday). Philo T. Farnsworth invented TV in a workshop on Green Street in 1927. The Green Street Mortuary Band played taps, people made speeches about the history of television, Philo's grandson made an appearance and we listened to 30 seconds of broadcast static for the last time.

Sarnoff Library / Museum is Closing

Do we take any solace knowing that the museum in Rigby, Idaho, lives on?

Sarnoff 'museum' must go - NJ.com.

It was here, at the former RCA headquarters on Route One, where the man RCA employees called "the general" preserved much of his legacy: the first internal computer memory device, Sarnoff's trophies and correspondence, thousands of cubic feet of lab notes detailing innovations from interactive personal computer games to LCD screens.

(Alex)Magoun has spent years working to increase foot traffic in the museum, which occupies a wing of the Sarnoff Corp. laboratories in West Windsor.

Now, he finds himself saddled with a more melancholy task: the David Sarnoff Library, open since 1967, will close before the end of this year, and Magoun must find the artifacts a new home.

And let us not forget, RCA employees called Sarnoff "the general" because that's what he TOLD them to call him, after he finagled a star out of Eisenhower during WWII. 

Aaron Sorkin shows inventiveness with Farnsworth | Fine Arts | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Interesting choice of words in this headline to a report on The Farnsworth Invention as it prepares to open in Houston:

Aaron Sorkin shows inventiveness with Farnsworth 

As director, how does Cromer maintain balance between the two adversaries? Does he strive not to throw the audience’s sympathy toward one or other?

“I can’t think about that,” Cromer answers. “All I can do is have each character make his case as hard as he can. Sometimes when they’re having it out, it gets so snarled — as in any legal battle, it becomes so much ‘he said/he said.’ Who’s right or wrong evaporates in the gray areas. That’s part of the genius of the play.”

Like virtually any fact-based play, Farnsworth takes its share of dramatic liberties. Cromer has done no research into the men’s lives beyond the play itself.

“I’m not a historian,” Cromer says. “The play is not meant as a documentary about these guys. It’s an extrapolation on the facts of their lives.”

Sorta reminds of what Victor Moore said about directing Gone With the Wind in 1939.  Somebody asked him if he'd read the novel.  "No," the director said, "I'm shooting the script."

And so it goes with The Farnsworth Invention.  The director is not interested in the actual history behind the story he is is directing, he cares only about the script that the playwright has supplied him.  It's not facts, it's an "extrapolation" of the facts. 

Which is exactly how history gets re-written. 

Ummm.... Houston?  In case anybody is listening... we have a problem. In the court case that climaxes The Farnsworth Invention, a verdict is rendered.  The verdict in the play is the exact opposite of the verdict rendered in the actual litigation.  Extrapolate THAT.

A Play By Any Other Name

Not a whole lot to go here, but there is this:

Director-actor David Cromer is taking a hiatus from the role in his acclaimed another production of Thornton Wilder’s classic to honor a regional directing commitment. He’s staging Aaron Sorkin’s The Farnsworth Disinformation at gangway Theatre in Houston.

Meet Steve Ballmer, the new David Sarnoff

Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO, channels the Darth Vader of Communications History, invoking RCA's domination of television starting in the 1930s as a role model for his company's future research:

But there’s a second part of the R.C.A. story that Mr. Ballmer neglected to mention. The company also owed its television dominance to a huge legal campaign against one of the prime inventors of the medium: Philo T. Farnsworth and his company. R.C.A. eventually paid royalties to Mr. Farnsworth, but the long fight enabled R.C.A. to squelch the competition. Microsoft has an experienced legal team and plenty of rivals. Perhaps Mr. Ballmer has learned more from the R.C.A. example than he’s letting on.

Vintage TV Recalled In 2009 Postage Stamps

It think it was 1982 when the Post Office honored Philo T. Farnsworth with a commemorative stamp.  The series of four also recognized Nikola Tesla, Edwin Armstrong, and Charles Steinmetz as forgotten pioneers of the electronics revolution.  Now the service is going to reawake the Baby Boomers' collective memories with a series of stamps recalling the TeeVee shows of the 1940s and 50s:

WASHINGTON – Lucy and Ethel lose their struggle with a chocolate assembly line. Joe Friday demands "just the facts" with a penetrating gaze. A secret word brings Groucho a visit from a duck.

Folks who grew up as television came of age will delight in a 20-stamp set included in the Postal Service's plans for 2009 recalling early memories of the medium.

The Early TV Memories stamp set is scheduled for release Aug. 11 in Los Angeles.

One recalls the quiz show "You Bet Your Life," on which the unflappable Groucho Marx awarded prizes to contestants who answered questions. If they said a secret word, a toy duck dropped down with a cash reward.

In a memorable scene from "I Love Lucy," Lucille Ball and sidekick Ethel Mertz work at an assembly line that speeds up and they can't wrap the candy quickly enough, causing panic.

Taking on Malcolm Gladwell

Malcolm Gladwell is an author and cultural commentator of increasing influence, witness the success of his books "The Tipping Point," "Blink," and his latest, "Outliers."  Blogger John Kelvie of takes Gladwell to task for some of his pithier observations , most notably his conclusion a a 2002 book review for the New Yorker that Philo Farnsworth should have gone to work for David Sarnoff:

1) His piece on the inventor of the TV, Philo T Farnsworth, and his “failure” to bring the TV to market, something the large corporation RCA later succeeded in. The piece concludes that the individual inventor is often insufficient (as the subtitle of the article asserts: “The Myth of the Lone Inventor”). On it’s face this point is fair enough, though a bit obvious: obviously sometimes individual inventors are behind bringing new technologies to market, sometimes corporations are, and sometimes a sort of long-distance collaboration between the two does it....

Kelvie quotes Gladwell's article at some length, but arrives at his own more enlightened conclusion:

Either way, to suggest that corporations invent better (or at least are the only way to invent) is demonstrably untrue: after all, it’s Farnsworth that invented the Cathode Ray Tube, not RCA. Could RCA have invented it? I guess (Gladwell says they were never “more than a step behind” though apparently a step means approximately two years), but I think the fact that Farnsworth did it on his own is pretty compelling evidence of the efficacy of individual inventors.

I think part of the problem that I had with Aaron Sorkin's play The Farnsworth Invention stems from it's tendency to arrive at pretty much the same conclusion as Gladwell.  I guess there is something that happens once your prosperity becomes dependent on the largesse of a corporation:  you start to think that's the only path to success.