Is reading really better for you than tv?

Greyfox

odyssey06 wrote: »

If I had to choose one, I would choose reading. I think especially for non-fiction \ factual, you can read information a lot more quickly than it can be presented to you in a documentary... for something like Lord of the Rings, your imagination was a much more effective 'world builder' than anything that could be put on screen.

If I had to choose I'd choose tv as tv generally values your time more. In the case of Lord of the rings seeing it all on screen saves you from reading endless dull descriptions.

joe40

Greyfox wrote: »

If I had to choose I'd choose tv as tv generally values your time more. In the case of Lord of the rings seeing it all on screen saves you from reading endless dull descriptions.

I would hate to choose one over the other they're both fantastic when done well.
I started to find the game of thrones books very dull and long wait between books was a pain. TV show was better overall, last season been the exception.

odyssey06

Greyfox wrote: »

If I had to choose I'd choose tv as tv generally values your time more. In the case of Lord of the rings seeing it all on screen saves you from reading endless dull descriptions.

Sometimes yes but then sometimes on TV you have Netflix bloat... a 2 hour story stretched out to 6 just to fill airtime.

Junkyard Tom

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

No its for nerd's why read the book when you could of just watched the film instead lol

Ya, like imagin trying to read love island Lol.

Salthillprom

Why does it have to either or? Can't you watch a bit of telly and then go to bed and read your book?

odyssey06

Salthillprom wrote: »

Why does it have to either or? Can't you watch a bit of telly and then go to bed and read your book?

Exactly.

Plus in bed I prefer audiobooks / radio plays... total focus on the voices.

Salthillprom

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

No its for nerd's why read the book when you could of just watched the film instead lol

Let's do a little grammar and punctuation check for you:

1. Comma needed after 'no'.
2. No apostrophe in 'nerds'.
3. Don't write "could of". Say 'could have' instead.
4. Punctuate between the words 'instead' and 'LOL'. The 'LOL' should really be in capitals as its an abbreviation.
5. You asked a question and I don't see a question mark anywhere.

You'd know all of the above if you had a different mindset and actually read books, which would then improve your grammar and punctuation.

nkl12xtw5goz70

You missed a couple of errors there...

You don't need a TV licence to read books, so it's better for your wallet.

Redneck Reject

I read more than I watch tv, and when I do it's mostly old shows I grew up with. I'm in the library once a week. I think reading stimulates your mind more than watching tv, but that's just my opinion.

touts

CrankyHaus wrote: »

Much more risque stuff can go into books, even widely read ones, without triggering the outrage brigade as it would in film, Tv or music.

This was even more true in the past when film and tv censorship was much more of a thing.

This suggests that the audience for books is both less likely to be outraged by "decadent and immoral" material and perceived as less likely to be influenced by it. This in turn suggests that readers are both more intelligent and perceived as more intelligent.

I sometimes wonder about that level of intelligence. The Game of Thrones TV series was excellent but when I picked up the books and realised some of the characters were as young as 12 or 13 and basically being raped or seducing older men well that put a decidedly paedo feel about some of what I was reading and I gave it up. When I hear all these book fans swearing how much better the books are in comparison to the TV show I wonder have they actually comprehended what they are reading. Yes I know it's set in a medieval world and that these sort of child weddings etc were common back then but does that justify reading in detail about a step warrior raping his new 12 year old bride? Does the fact that the target modern audience has the intelligence to understand the setting and norms of the medieval life justify writing those sort of scenes.

Greyfox

joe40 wrote: »

I would hate to choose one over the other they're both fantastic when done well.
I started to find the game of thrones books very dull and long wait between books was a pain. TV show was better overall, last season been the exception.

Yeah I really liked the GOT books but found the tv series much better. In fairness your right, there are things a book can do better for example getting you into the thoughts and motivations of a character. Choosing both is better than picking one over the other

CrankyHaus

touts wrote: »

I sometimes wonder about that level of intelligence. The Game of Thrones TV series was excellent but when I picked up the books and realised some of the characters were as young as 12 or 13 and basically being raped or seducing older men well that put a decidedly paedo feel about some of what I was reading and I gave it up. When I hear all these book fans swearing how much better the books are in comparison to the TV show I wonder have they actually comprehended what they are reading. Yes I know it's set in a medieval world and that these sort of child weddings etc were common back then but does that justify reading in detail about a step warrior raping his new 12 year old bride? Does the fact that the target modern audience has the intelligence to understand the setting and norms of the medieval life justify writing those sort of scenes.

You're dead right. A lot of very odd stuff makes it into books, and they're not always better for it. However readers generally react by thinking "this is a bit creepy and I don't like it" rather than starting a censorship crusade (or deplatforming/cancelling/whatever they call it nowadays) as would occur with other media with a mass audience. This greater understanding of the value of free expression indicates a greater intelligence among readers. This isn't to say that very intelligent people don't watch TV, rather that they share membership of the audience with many who may be less intelligent.

Similarly most moral crusades base their argument on the impact the objectionable material may have on other, more impressionable, members of society. This happens less with books, indicating an unarticulated but widespread perception that readers are less impressionable to objectionable material.

juneg

I'd advocate a mix. I read a lot and listen to a lot of audiobooks. I also love peaky blinders and game of thrones! I'm listening to the

Salthillprom

Salthillprom wrote: »

Let's do a little grammar and punctuation check for you:

1. Comma needed after 'no'.
2. No apostrophe in 'nerds'.
3. Don't write "could of". Say 'could have' instead.
4. Punctuate between the words 'instead' and 'LOL'. The 'LOL' should really be in capitals as its an abbreviation.
5. You asked a question and I don't see a question mark anywhere.

You'd know all of the above if you had a different mindset and actually read books, which would then improve your grammar and punctuation.

*Whoosh*

The poster was being facetious.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Unless its something really good on Netflix I never watch TV and anyone who followed the 'what book are you reading' thread will know that my ideal Saturday night is sitting at the bar of my local with a pint, my Kindle and a bowl of chicken wings.
poetry.

I love reading, I'd be lost without my Kindle but I've been recently gifted with a book of Francis Ledwidge poetry and Leonard Cohen's poetry book 'Book of Longing'.

Greyfox

Israel Whispering Cemetery wrote: »

Unless its something really good on Netflix I never watch TV and anyone who followed the 'what book are you reading' thread will know that my ideal Saturday night is sitting at the bar of my local with a pint, my Kindle and a bowl of chicken wings.
poetry.

I love reading, I'd be lost without my Kindle but I've been recently gifted with a book of Francis Ledwidge poetry and Leonard Cohen's poetry book 'Book of Longing'.

Reading a book using a kindle is wonderful but 95% of poetry is garbage

Earthhorse

touts wrote: »

Yes I know it's set in a medieval world and that these sort of child weddings etc were common back then but does that justify reading in detail about a step warrior raping his new 12 year old bride?

What’s a step warrior?

Greyfox wrote: »

Reading a book using a kindle is wonderful but 95% of poetry is garbage

95% of everything is garbage.

Yeah, I would say books are better for you than TV or rather TV is worse for you than books. Due to its passive nature it’s easier to get sucked into wasting time with it than reading, which takes effort.

Sardonicat

Earthhorse wrote: »

What’s a step warrior?



.

He's only related by marriage.

ILoveYourVibes

Well we're reading right now....so no

Ficheall

Salthillprom wrote: »

Let's do a little grammar and punctuation check for you:

1. Comma needed after 'no'.
2. No apostrophe in 'nerds'.
3. Don't write "could of". Say 'could have' instead.
4. Punctuate between the words 'instead' and 'LOL'. The 'LOL' should really be in capitals as its an abbreviation.
5. You asked a question and I don't see a question mark anywhere.

You'd know all of the above if you had a different mindset and actually read books, which would then improve your grammar and punctuation.

Salthillprom wrote: »

Why does it have to either or? Can't you watch a bit of telly and then go to bed and read your book?

You've missed a "be", an apostrophe, and the fucking point.

Graces7

I ditched TV 30 years ago. Never regretted it. YouTube is enough and more than enough and I can choose when and where

Reading is my first love but getting hold of books these days is a real problem . So I watch what I seek , then close down, and read quietly in bed . Reading carefully. Enjoying a variety and not for any education, just sheer pleasure. I have read everything in the house at least twice and online reading is too bright for me. Has to be a real book, and I knit as I read.
A peaceful ending to the day

Someone mentioned Game of Thrones! I keep seeing bits in ads on youtube and it is sheer nasty junk!

Earthhorse

Sardonicat wrote: »

He's only related by marriage.

To war?

nkl12xtw5goz70

Redneck Reject wrote: »

I think reading stimulates your mind more than watching tv, but that's just my opinion.

It all depends. Watching intelligent series, films, or documentaries is likely to provide more mental stimulation than reading Mills & Boon novels. It all depends on what you read and what you watch.

Greyfox

Graces7 wrote: »

Someone mentioned Game of Thrones! I keep seeing bits in ads on youtube and it is sheer nasty junk!

How can you have an opinion on something you havent even tried to watch? its like me saying everything Shakesphere wrote is sh*** without actually reading his work. The first few seasons are some of the best writing that's out there

Israel Whispering Cemetery

Israel Whispering Cemetery wrote: »

Unless its something really good on Netflix I never watch TV and anyone who followed the 'what book are you reading' thread will know that my ideal Saturday night is sitting at the bar of my local with a pint, my Kindle and a bowl of chicken wings.
poetry.

I love reading, I'd be lost without my Kindle but I've been recently gifted with a book of Francis Ledwidge poetry and Leonard Cohen's poetry book 'Book of Longing'.

Love reading but a kindle does nothing for me, dose eating the chicken wings and reading the kindle at the same time not make the kindle messy.

odyssey06

Graces7 wrote: »

Someone mentioned Game of Thrones! I keep seeing bits in ads on youtube and it is sheer nasty junk!

I don't think there's anything nastier in Game of Thrones than what happened in the ancient world through to the middle ages...

A few months back I read "By Sword and Fire : Cruelty and Atrocity in Medieval Warfare" by Sean McGlynn and it's a toss up which had more atrocities...

There is also redemption, love, honour, hope and heroes to match the villains, the atrocities, and the eh, nasty junk.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Greyfox wrote: »

How can you have an opinion on something you havent even tried to watch? its like me saying everything Shakesphere wrote is sh*** without actually reading his work. The first few seasons are some of the best writing that's out there

I've seen quite a few people have a knee-jerk negative reaction to Game of Thrones because of the violence, nudity, etc. But if they choose not to watch it for those reasons, they're missing out on one of the best TV series ever made.

Woke Hogan

mariaalice wrote: »

Love reading but a kindle does nothing for me, dose eating the chicken wings and reading the kindle at the same time not make the kindle messy.

If it was a real book the pages would be see-through after a few minutes after all of that disgusting grease rubbing off them.

Another advantage of reading is that it contextualised, say someone is very taken by some political philosophy, or some therapy, or religion. Reading philosophy or sociology, reading around the history of ideas, the development of western thought and so on makes it easier to make an informed decision.

Yer Da sells Avon

Salthillprom wrote: »

4. Punctuate between the words 'instead' and 'LOL'. The 'LOL' should really be in capitals as its an abbreviation.

Hmmm theirs something missing from you're post but I can't put my finger on it lol

Proof, if proof be need be, that reading books does you no good at all.