Literature or Film?

[Buffalo Souljah]

If you had to choose...

[¿Que?]

Mankind should rid itself of the disease of Culture (capital C). I chose the third option...

[Invincible Summer]

Books that get turned into movies

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Film, it is my favourite art form personally.

[Sam_b]

You can't really make a choice - what does it prove anyway? From what i've seen, both platfoms go through 'stages' of importance and influence. An example can be seen in Czech cinema of the past twenty years, of which I would argue is more important than literature at communicating social and political questions of modern Czech society. However, counterbalance this with the important literature that has done the same over the years - Kundera, Kafka, Čapek, so on.

[Morgenstern]

In the modern times the best way to communicate with the masses is through film. Without a doubt films such as Michael Moore's documentaries have impacted more people than Chomsky's books have. Film is the best way to outreach to the common man and honestly I love film when it is a great movie.

[MarxSchmarx]

In the modern times the best way to communicate with the masses is through film. Without a doubt films such as Michael Moore's documentaries have impacted more people than Chomsky's books have. Film is the best way to outreach to the common man and honestly I love film when it is a great movie.

The problem with film is that it costs a good deal of money to make something that is not trivial and requires a major distribution channel. Of course you could always appeal to the crazies like loose change or people talking about their shopping experiences to a webcam, but to get a wide enough distribution and a production of sufficient power, to make a sustained impact you have to have a lot of capital to start.

Unfortunately while people in the developed world no longer read books like they used to, we probably read more than they ever have via the interwebs and texting and such what.

[The Ben G]

I picked both, Because they are both awesome in their own right.

[which doctor]

Its impossible to write a good book and have it published anymore, but its slightly easier to to do this with a film. It's really difficult to even speak of a contemporary literature anymore, but I think a lot of good films are still being made.

I really love books, but I have to vote film.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Uh, both. It's a tie.

[Jimmie Higgins]

What is this horrible Sophie's choice you are forcing me to make:laugh:!

Both have their qualities. Books are more popular than people give them credit for - Harry Potter, Romance books, Sci-fi. Unfortunately there is a profit-driven artificial separation between "lit" and "genre" not unlike the way "popcorn" and "art" films are marketed differently.

As literacy increased, books really became a popular art form - this probably peaked in the mid-20th century and has been in decline since the 1970s. Part of this is that there are no outlets for serious popular writing like there was when every major magazine had short stories and book excepts. 20th centruy writers like Hemingway, Steinbeck to stranger writers like Vonnegut wrote in a direct and accessible way even while dealing with complex stories or social situations. Writers like Hunter Thompson and Truman Capote began as journalists and so there is a popular style to their writing. Even really obtuse writers like James Joyce were popular with regular people.

As good as some modern writers are, I don't think they aim for a wide audience anymore. Dom DeLillo, Pynchon and so on seem to write for professionals more than the masses. It's a shame that there is this artificial divide: Working class readers = Stephen King/Romance (not that there is anything wrong with genre fiction).

[Buffalo Souljah]

Joyce obtuse?:ohmy: Heresy!

[black magick hustla]

books.

[black magick hustla]

i cant say i have watched movies that changed my life.

[Durruti's Ghost]

Both media have their advantages, and both have their disadvantages. If insightful pieces of literature are more numerous than insightful films, this is only because literature has existed as a mature art form for a much larger portion of human history than has film.

[Velkas]

Both. They just have different ways of being awesomely fantastic.