(no title)
davesmylie | 1 month ago
That's a hard disagree from me - I'm not a heavy reader but I'll still easily get through a couple of fiction books every month. TV/Movies are far less information dense (ie interesting) that even a light fiction book.
I'll happily watch a show or movie on TV with the family - there's a lot to be said for shared entertainment, but there's a reason for the trope "the book was better than the movie".
fasterik|1 month ago
It's sad to me that people think like this. It's a very limited and superficial way to experience the world.
borroka|1 month ago
Giving a certain number of hours dedicated to passive entertainment, many more people prefer to watch a terrible tv show on Netflix than to read a masterpiece of literature.
It could be because the tv show is more "entertaining" (which is tautological), a desire for social conformity (people can discuss more easily with others the latest tv show than Anna Karenina), or escaping the cognitive effort required when reading literature, which is almost always greater than the one asked for when watching a movie or tv show, or a tiktok.
shinycode|1 month ago
lukan|1 month ago
"The only people who still read books for entertainment are women who prefer their porn to have DIY visuals. The stats back me up on this. If you’re tempted to disagree, go walk the aisles of Barnes & Noble"
And does not make me want to engage with the article neither for entertainment, nor information.
Either way, no. Reading a book stimulates one own fantasy and imagination in a way no movie can - you have to create the pictures, sounds and sensations of the story by yourself.
Text -> 3D picture
All in the mind, I find that entertaining in a way no movie can, if the text is good.