How does /tv/ feel about partaking the consumption of the superior art form?
books:
>written in solitude by anguished lonely nerds
>only needs a piece of paper and le imagination, any child with downs syndrome and a pencil can do it
>not a shared experience
>cold and long, goes on for hours of reading, for people who want to escape or pass the time
>too focused on information, for pseudo intellectuals who think thousands of words will make them smart
Kìnemae:
>made by dozens to thousands of people, the director sitting in his throne with total control over the whole team, the last acceptable dictatorship
>director needs to be a natural leader with a strong will
>requires budget and technical apparatus and knowledge, filtering the incompetent
>phisically brings people together
>requires only the main sense of humans, vision, anyone from a megalopolis to a tiny village in asia can share the experience
>undermines excessive information in favor of emotion, reaching into people's very spirits
How will books ever recover
Your image is more interesting than your post.
Ya goofed, OP.
believe it or not being an arthur was quite the status symbol before the braindead days of television and movies
>>87231165
SHALOM AUTHOR
what does it feel like having those huge tits in your mouth?
>>87231397
like bags of coins and salty sand
>the virgin author
>the chad auteur
>>87230210
Unironically agree with you, I also like your image
Literature has its place for in-depth analysis of complex subjects or just more complicated stories than you can feasibly tell in cinematic form but there's no question of which medium I find more interesting and powerful