Love "choices aren't the same thing as freedom." My mother still reads at 92 and I read every day, on a tablet. Not into paper anymore but reading, yes, I am.
"Now the screens were even smaller, and the whole 'church-like' experience of going to the movies was stripped of meaning." And now the same is true of actual churches, which often look like movie theaters or corporate office buildings. The wonder and awe is gone - all that's left is the ranting of the preachers.
On the plus side, and maybe the only plus side, we never would have had a black president, IMHO, if it weren't for portrayals like Dennis Haysbert and Morgan Freeman that came into our living rooms. LGBTQ rights wouldn't be where they are without Will and Grace creating characters that many people loved and normalized the idea of homosexuality (even if it was totally over the top). The problem is that media is a sword to be wielded and the number of people willing to pick it up and battle for good is decidedly small. And, I would say, shrinking. I can only assume that Mr. Martin has been creatively overwhelmed by the success of the TV version. The TV process moves so much faster than the writerly one that there is no way for him to keep up. Like Stephen King, he's not always a poet, but, like King, he is a fantastic story-teller. The new "prequel" has none of his storytelling in it. It needed the writerly amount of time to develop and in TV land it just doesn't happen. In some ways, what will be our undoing, is that very element of speed. We are soon going to be sitting at a table with nothing on it but under-cooked food. We'll stuff it in, and swallow it whole because there will not be anything of substance to chew and savor. The despots of the world know that they can throw anything they want on the table and we will gobble it up because we're losing our taste and smell.
100% agree, darling friend. Actually quite haunting, what you wrote. "... we're losing our taste and smell" particularly resonates. And on a side note, I was curious to know how Martin's prequel held up. I'm not hearing ANY chatter about it, which kind of tells you everything, and now you have confirmed it.
Really love what you said here. Your wisdom is sorely needed.
Well put together and well written. I fit your profile to a T, by the by. One note: we "retirees" (hah!) are generally boomers. Boomers lived most of their lives, most importantly or early years, completely outside the digital matrix in which we are all now submerged. It's not just time that we have on our hands, we apply a different paradigm - kind of like how I hear and speak Italian, constantly having to translate shit in my head, no real fluency.
Gen X here, and like you, I still have to translate shit in my head. I will never be as fluent as my boyfriend John who speaks Italian so well, he knows verb tenses that Italians don't know.
Yahtzee! Being a constant cynic of the powers that be, humanism has been buried so deep amongst the rubble of shiny objects and a two second orgasm, there’s no foreplay. I love this article and how you’ve conveyed these patterns of idolatry. Ultimately, everyone steers their own ship, and yet, some cannot see the sirens of manipulation coaxing them amongst the rocks with their deception. Reading is important, especially between the lines! 👏👏👏
4/4, though those who know me (or at least skim my incessant replies) understand that I do not (physically) travel any more.
In the late '70's and early '80's I got to see a few films in the Chinese, the Egyptian, and whatever that dome place was in the middle of nowhere on Wilshire. (This was L.A., of course.)
"Click-farms" -- I did not know about these, but I am not surprised. I did feel mildly ill reading that.
By the bye, I no longer have the URL (of course) but there's a fellow who presented an argument about Power Point presentations that follows analogous lines to the discussion of screen size. If you're in the crowd sitting in rapt, religiously intent fervor before a PP on a screen, you are stripped of your power and your ability to critically interrogate the data. This is why, I would argue, that however you read, your reading device (be it traditional dead tree, or something more bit-terly contemporary) it should be no larger nor heavier than a traditional book. I won't waste my time on the computer screen for anything larger than 1500 words (unless I wrote, which is a different matter.) If I want to read anything larger than that, I export it to my eReader, which is small, easily held, and single-purpose.
Your mention of G.R.R. Martin reminded me of another story of the screen biting the book.
John LeCarre had this whole string of George Smiley stories lined up to write. (This is according to LeCarre himself.) But then Alec Guinness' portrayal of Smiley in the BBC "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" came out, and LeCarre was unmade. By his telling, he was just, "Fuck. They just DID George Smiley." He only barely managed to get "Smiley's People" out (also brilliantly played by Guinness) and then he was quit of the whole thing. (I suspect Martin is having the same issue with GoT.)
INTERESTING. Well, you know I agree with the whole "religiously intent fervor before a PP on a screen" theorem. And you must feel a certain affinity with Martin. You write within the same genre and understand intuitively that if someone were to take your work and "screen it," it would lose a lot of its original flavor. Gone with the Wind was one of the few adaptations I've ever enjoyed.
I normally object to being put in a pigeon hole but I'll give this an exception because I liked the holes and I happen to agree with you; however, then, it follows that you are preaching to the choir.
I read somewhere that a gifted writer is first and foremost a voracious reader. And while a good writer writes about what they know, reading expands the circle of what they know. I remember reading "Bitter Lemons" and "Exodus" before I went to live in Cyprus and how much it enriched my experience there. I read a book on the history of New York and another on the building of the Brooklyn Bridge before my first trip to New York City and it made my trip so much richer and more interesting.
I wonder what will happen 50-100 years down the road when attention spans hover roughly around zero and even the ability to maintain focus long enough to read 750-1000 words has faded into the ether. Will writing even have a place? What will it look like? Or will it all look like "Idiocracy?"
Well I can't sing but that's beside the point. Loved your article about the road less traveled. We are coming to Italy in february to take that very road.
Love "choices aren't the same thing as freedom." My mother still reads at 92 and I read every day, on a tablet. Not into paper anymore but reading, yes, I am.
Badassery CLEARLY runs in your family, Kris.
"Now the screens were even smaller, and the whole 'church-like' experience of going to the movies was stripped of meaning." And now the same is true of actual churches, which often look like movie theaters or corporate office buildings. The wonder and awe is gone - all that's left is the ranting of the preachers.
And yes, you know me - you hit 3-1/2 out of 4.
BOOM. Nice addition, John. I couldn't agree with you more.
Some of that "de-church-ification" of churches is a product of the Protestant conquest. Catholics (and hucksters) still go in for the Big Show.
Right you are. A show, I might add, that is also designed to make the faithful feel small, small, small.
Very interesting and enlightening commentary.
I'm a classic overthinker ;-)
On the plus side, and maybe the only plus side, we never would have had a black president, IMHO, if it weren't for portrayals like Dennis Haysbert and Morgan Freeman that came into our living rooms. LGBTQ rights wouldn't be where they are without Will and Grace creating characters that many people loved and normalized the idea of homosexuality (even if it was totally over the top). The problem is that media is a sword to be wielded and the number of people willing to pick it up and battle for good is decidedly small. And, I would say, shrinking. I can only assume that Mr. Martin has been creatively overwhelmed by the success of the TV version. The TV process moves so much faster than the writerly one that there is no way for him to keep up. Like Stephen King, he's not always a poet, but, like King, he is a fantastic story-teller. The new "prequel" has none of his storytelling in it. It needed the writerly amount of time to develop and in TV land it just doesn't happen. In some ways, what will be our undoing, is that very element of speed. We are soon going to be sitting at a table with nothing on it but under-cooked food. We'll stuff it in, and swallow it whole because there will not be anything of substance to chew and savor. The despots of the world know that they can throw anything they want on the table and we will gobble it up because we're losing our taste and smell.
100% agree, darling friend. Actually quite haunting, what you wrote. "... we're losing our taste and smell" particularly resonates. And on a side note, I was curious to know how Martin's prequel held up. I'm not hearing ANY chatter about it, which kind of tells you everything, and now you have confirmed it.
Really love what you said here. Your wisdom is sorely needed.
I started watching the prequel and it’s pretty meh. I switched over to the Lord of the Rings prequel which is fantastic.
Well put together and well written. I fit your profile to a T, by the by. One note: we "retirees" (hah!) are generally boomers. Boomers lived most of their lives, most importantly or early years, completely outside the digital matrix in which we are all now submerged. It's not just time that we have on our hands, we apply a different paradigm - kind of like how I hear and speak Italian, constantly having to translate shit in my head, no real fluency.
Gen X here, and like you, I still have to translate shit in my head. I will never be as fluent as my boyfriend John who speaks Italian so well, he knows verb tenses that Italians don't know.
Not that I'm bitter or anything. Oh, no.
:)
Yahtzee! Being a constant cynic of the powers that be, humanism has been buried so deep amongst the rubble of shiny objects and a two second orgasm, there’s no foreplay. I love this article and how you’ve conveyed these patterns of idolatry. Ultimately, everyone steers their own ship, and yet, some cannot see the sirens of manipulation coaxing them amongst the rocks with their deception. Reading is important, especially between the lines! 👏👏👏
YOU, my dearest cousin, are a reader and a thinker. I think it's an Eskelin default setting ;-)
4/4, though those who know me (or at least skim my incessant replies) understand that I do not (physically) travel any more.
In the late '70's and early '80's I got to see a few films in the Chinese, the Egyptian, and whatever that dome place was in the middle of nowhere on Wilshire. (This was L.A., of course.)
"Click-farms" -- I did not know about these, but I am not surprised. I did feel mildly ill reading that.
By the bye, I no longer have the URL (of course) but there's a fellow who presented an argument about Power Point presentations that follows analogous lines to the discussion of screen size. If you're in the crowd sitting in rapt, religiously intent fervor before a PP on a screen, you are stripped of your power and your ability to critically interrogate the data. This is why, I would argue, that however you read, your reading device (be it traditional dead tree, or something more bit-terly contemporary) it should be no larger nor heavier than a traditional book. I won't waste my time on the computer screen for anything larger than 1500 words (unless I wrote, which is a different matter.) If I want to read anything larger than that, I export it to my eReader, which is small, easily held, and single-purpose.
Your mention of G.R.R. Martin reminded me of another story of the screen biting the book.
John LeCarre had this whole string of George Smiley stories lined up to write. (This is according to LeCarre himself.) But then Alec Guinness' portrayal of Smiley in the BBC "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" came out, and LeCarre was unmade. By his telling, he was just, "Fuck. They just DID George Smiley." He only barely managed to get "Smiley's People" out (also brilliantly played by Guinness) and then he was quit of the whole thing. (I suspect Martin is having the same issue with GoT.)
INTERESTING. Well, you know I agree with the whole "religiously intent fervor before a PP on a screen" theorem. And you must feel a certain affinity with Martin. You write within the same genre and understand intuitively that if someone were to take your work and "screen it," it would lose a lot of its original flavor. Gone with the Wind was one of the few adaptations I've ever enjoyed.
I normally object to being put in a pigeon hole but I'll give this an exception because I liked the holes and I happen to agree with you; however, then, it follows that you are preaching to the choir.
LOL! No pigeon holes for you! Ever. But it's nice to have you in the choir ;-)
I read somewhere that a gifted writer is first and foremost a voracious reader. And while a good writer writes about what they know, reading expands the circle of what they know. I remember reading "Bitter Lemons" and "Exodus" before I went to live in Cyprus and how much it enriched my experience there. I read a book on the history of New York and another on the building of the Brooklyn Bridge before my first trip to New York City and it made my trip so much richer and more interesting.
I wonder what will happen 50-100 years down the road when attention spans hover roughly around zero and even the ability to maintain focus long enough to read 750-1000 words has faded into the ether. Will writing even have a place? What will it look like? Or will it all look like "Idiocracy?"
Whatever, I'm just glad I won't be here for it.
Thanks for this. It was fascinating.
Well I can't sing but that's beside the point. Loved your article about the road less traveled. We are coming to Italy in february to take that very road.