“Films are for everyone, collective, generous, with children

>>7821559

>>What did he mean by this?

>Literature is too much of a chore but I don't want to part with my elitism so I've convinced myself that I'm above it and it "frightens" me.

You can enjoy a film alone just as much as you can enjoy reading with other people.

Sounds like he's butthurt some girl likes reading more than him.

Cinema sucks,TV is for proles. If you want to be propagandized to just listen to NPR and read sociological journals.

>>7821559
Who said this?

File: kaspar.png (153KB, 400x271px)

153KB, 400x271px

>But your books are selfish. Solitary...A person who's interested only in books doesn't need other people

I can watch movies alone, too. Which is even better than watching them with other people because I don't have to listen to their retarded comments and noises.

Also, who said that?

File: image.jpg (35KB, 452x601px)

35KB, 452x601px

The Cognitive Value of Videogames - By Piero Scaruffi

>Playing is widespread in the animal kingdom
>Games, whether played in a courtyard or in the house, are a form of education.
>Card games and board games teach strategy, social skills, even math, i.e. interaction and algorithms
>Playing games is practice for higher-order cognitive tasks
>Watching television and films is not as educational. If the program/film is intellectual, it might provide some other form of education (of the literary/historical kind) but not the same skills that one acquires through games.
>Watching is passive (it dumbs you down), playing a game is active (it refines your intelligence).
>In this sense, videogames might be the ideal mix of passive and active: partly related to playing card/board games and partly related to watching shows/films.
>Or it could be the opposite, that the videogame player acquires insufficient amounts of both skills

It sounds like an ironic statement.

I'm literally as shallow as a Brave New World character. But take me seriously! I'm an artist!

>>7821627
>>7821911
If Google is to be trusted, Arturo Pérez-Reverte.

Judging by his other quotes, he's a pseudo-intellectual who doesn't really know what he's saying.

>>7821977
Yup.