What is Veeky Forums's stance on this image?

What is Veeky Forums's stance on this image?

p dumb, you can engage with anything critically

the guy on the left should have got an e reader. it's much more practical

Works at a very shallow level. Imagine the books he's climbing to be Harry Potter or The Song of Ice and Fire. He wouldn't be getting to the top or moving forward at any significant pace, he would be walking in circles while feeling superior to the disabled.

What if i watch K I N O on this tv?

Eh. It depends on how you look at it. If you're talking from the point of view of more brain activation, then reading obviously will do more for you than TV almost all of the time.

However, as another user stated, anything can be engaged critically. However, let's be honest, many people who watch TV are likely watching stuff like Jersey Shore or Honey Boo Boo. Stuff that doesn't require a semblance of complex though to appreciate. I mean, even the children's cartoons nowadays are basically utter garbage. I grew up mostly on PBS, so there was a lot of engagement on the part of the children.

I enjoy me some literature and quality programming. There is good and bad stuff in every field of art.

It's still shit, kino is meant to be viewed in a theater.

The staircase shouldn't end, and it shouldn't be a linear path. There's so much literature and so much knowledge to be learned in the world that you can't possibly learn all of it. There's no end, and you won't come out the other side. You just swim in its ocean until you die.

>Eh. It depends on how you look at it. If you're talking from the point of view of more brain activation, then reading obviously will do more for you than TV almost all of the time.
I would argue that there are many books that almost don't engage you at all, if you have an easy time reading, while almost any video game will by nature force you to engage in it. does brain activity by itself really amount to much if it isn't applied to growth?

Movies and books are different, and one isn't really a "replacement" for the other, and a poorly written book can be a decent movie (though often times it's "poorly written book makes worse movie"). Most of the time when people say "the book is better" 70% of the complaints can be boiled down to the fact that characters are different than envisioned or superfluous chapters were removed to make the narrative flow better. (The other complaint, that movies do not address plot holes the books do, makes up a smaller portion).

ITT : fatties get triggered

Pretty deep if you think about it

Watching TV probably burns more calories than reading.

Elitist. Depends on what you read and what you watch. Film and tv just needs time to accumulate great artists, like all other artforms have had time to do. And i will acknowledge that film has had an particularly long dry run so far and the financial aspect will always be an limiting factor. But there has been a few good ones so far like Tarkovsky.

I mean the only point it has is that a fatty is more likely to watch TV because it requires absolutely no effort on their part. Even with the worst book you at least have to understand and process the words.

Why don't you engage with my asshole critically then

Fat-shaming and ableist shit.
Having read over 300 books in my life, I really can't say what makes me so much superior to the people who don't read. Where do those steps on the left lead?

Tarkovsky is among my favourites but he's pretty entry level, so I doubt you're that familiar with the medium that you can estimate the number of great artists.

corny as shit and about as deep as those "muh teenagers and their iphones" comics

Why the fuck are you guys being such faggots? Anyone that watches good TV would also read good books. Books are the superior art form by far, and they clearly engage the mind more. Reading requires imagination, memory, analysis, and a slew of other bullshit that gets the brain going. What the fuck does TV do? TV gives it all to you with no goddamn work. It’s great fun, and yes it can be very good, but how would it ever touch reading something by Melville or Shakespeare? Jesus Christ. What the fuck is wrong with you people. Literally go back to /tv/.

Notice how there's nothing on top of the books.

>if it's more difficult it's better
verily maketh thou ponder

Ok. Please name a few directors that are past the entry level.

pretentious, pseduointellectual

...

banksy tier "woke" kitsch

Sure, bend over.

a lame image that attempts to be symbolically deep yet is completely shallow, like a tonne of other images around these days.

>reading is a burden
What a fucking cuck

Swim in an ocean of sweet superiority.

....woah...........really.....makes......you.....think..........

too cliche

plus you dont see anything better on top than what you get on the floor

is it supposed to be against obesity and for exercise?

half literates are worse than illeterates

really activates my almonds

pseud faggotry

>Not thinking you're Christ

everyone knows tv as an artistic medium has killed literature, the arrow should point left
anyone knows the best writers are working for TV, all Veeky Forums has left are some old or dead guys, and the general literature public is far worse since they don't read these old/dead guys, and read stuff far worse than what we have on TV

It seems to work really, really, well as trigger bait.

i will take a complete agreement with this image

my fat roommate just sits in front of the tv all day, he listens to rush limbaugh and has no original thoughts of his own

Whoever made that doesn't understand Nietzsche either if they think a few hand pick quotes determine his whole philosophy.

*tips fedora*
use computer you redditor

/r/iamverysmart

most literature bachellors dont hve thought of theirselves anways. Literature is for faggots, AKA empty books.

Whatever fatty.

Look the guy had a stance on women and those particular quotes do not greatly mischaracterize it. It's actually solid.

It's pretty gay.

It's trite as fuck, but I think there's truth to it. The sort of concentration reading requires is probably more conducive to critical thinking

Sometimes I have a bit of a stance on women myself if you know what I mean

How's Myrna doing these days?

ew who the fuck likes looking at screens. Like........ Ew
What happens when the power goes out for months and your e-reader is fucked and im sitting in my room killin zombies reading BOOKS.

kek

I hope my sarcasm was obvious enough and that you're just shitposting back. Who's Myrna?

Fellini is already noticeably less popular (entry level) than Tarkovsky. Then there are brothers Taviani, Švankmajer, Bunuel, Kim Ki Duk, Marker, Sokurov... And these are just the ones I'm familiar with, I don't watch stuff very systematically at all.

buñuel is pretty damn entry level, tho

damn.... three HUNDRED???

e-readers don't use LCD screens. They use pigment and look like real paper

>Fellini is already noticeably less popular (entry level) than Tarkovsky
t. ameripleb

You're like a little baby, this is how the big boys roll.

You gotta walk up a lot of stairs to jump off and die

What's the SWTG of film?

The second-to-last guy looking at a dystopic world should only be standing on 1984 and BNW tbqh desu, unless the rest of that stack is Hitchens

Can't eat chips as efficiently when reading.

Would you pick him over a nu-male watching TYT?

Checkmate.

>tfw to intelligent for TV
It really symbolizes the lowest common denominator of pseudo intellectuals and lack of critical approach to things in life. I mean this basically has the value of a boomer fuck's cartoon about Pokémon Go.

If I don't watch TV but all I read is trash, I'm not more intelligent than people who watch a lot of TV. Come to think of it, I'm not strictly more intelligent even if I read more elaborate or thought out works, because if I can't appreciate the nuance and intricacies of something really well written I'm hardly understanding it.
I swear there's people who'll read James Joyce and act like they're smart despite not fucking understanding Infinite Jest even on the surface.

>willingly blinding yourself

swim in an ocean of pride accumulated from the reactions of people who you have told you read books,when you actuallu sped through wiki articles and thug notes

>well-behaved obviously productive members of society catch the latest news on TV while waiting in line to disabled' toilet
>some self-important ponce in a suit deliberately soils books with his dirty feet for no good reason other than "to see what's up there"
Pretty scathing critique of pseudo/lit/ellectuals.

As an autist the disabled sign offends me.

pretty much true. being is a linguistic phenomenon: our distinctness in the cosmos is exactly because of our ability to use symbols.

Language is most vast in writing (where it simultaneously involves intricate motions of the hand, observations of the eyes, mouth mechanics, grammatical rationality, abstract reasoning about ideas and visual imagination).

I'm being completely serious when I say writing is a more deeply human activity than anything else.

Your soul wilts without it.

A life without reading and writing is like a life lived entirely alone: it is a human life indeed, but something good and rich is missing from it.

This is exactly what a plebe would say. Plebes are more afraid of heavy lifting than anything else. They will go far out of their way to discover, inhabit and advocate for a world in which no hard work is required.

They will be offended every time someone raises the shadow of their incompleteness because deep in their hearts they know its truth.

You cannot engage ideas without reading huge amounts of text, and you cannot navigate the modern world without a serious familiarity with the ideas that have created it. Otherwise you will be its slave, beckoned by its carrot and goaded by its stick.

>implying there's non-shitposting on this board