A FUCKING GAME OF THRONES

[Disco Pickle]

Yeah, but your subjective opinion doesn't determine what makes a TV show intellectually valuable or not.

here's a hint: the answer is always "not".

I never once mentioned intellectual value.  In fact, it was pretty clear I was talking about entertainment and yes the same applies, I realize that.

The same goes for books though, really.

[East Coast Hustle]

If you're NOT trying to ascribe some notion of intellectual value to certain TV shows, then what exactly IS the difference between, say, Game of Thrones and American Idol?

[Doktor Howl]

Yeah, but your subjective opinion doesn't determine what makes a TV show intellectually valuable or not.

here's a hint: the answer is always "not".

I never once mentioned intellectual value.  In fact, it was pretty clear I was talking about entertainment and yes the same applies, I realize that.

The same goes for books though, really.

If sitting and passively looking at a box is entertainment, okay.

But don't come crying to me when your brain falls into your neck.

[Disco Pickle]

If you're NOT trying to ascribe some notion of intellectual value to certain TV shows, then what exactly IS the difference between, say, Game of Thrones and American Idol?

Production value, scope, depth of narrative, watchability.

All very subjective, granted.  Can't get around that.

But applying all of those things to books (rightly so) makes it hard to put forth a case that books are somehow "better" or "more intellectual"  than TV, regardless of the subject.  I see that a lot, that the medium superscedes the media before judgement is made on worth.  Always sounded like snobby, pretentious bullshit to me.  I give two fucks if you enjoy watching Survivor, it's just not for me.  Doesn't make you an idiot but certainly is one less thing we can have a conversation sharing our own perspective on.

[East Coast Hustle]

I think the prevailing argument is that books are more intellectual than TV because books force you to engage your own imagination to flesh out the story.

[Disco Pickle]

Yeah, but your subjective opinion doesn't determine what makes a TV show intellectually valuable or not.

here's a hint: the answer is always "not".

I never once mentioned intellectual value.  In fact, it was pretty clear I was talking about entertainment and yes the same applies, I realize that.

The same goes for books though, really.

If sitting and passively looking at a box is entertainment, okay.

But don't come crying to me when your brain falls into your neck.

The only thing more interactive about a book is that you get to turn the pages and the story unfolds to you at your own pace.

God damnit, have you fuckers actually gotten me DEFENDING television?

I hate you so fucking much.  Myself too for doing it, but special hate is reserved for you.

[Doktor Howl]

Yeah, but your subjective opinion doesn't determine what makes a TV show intellectually valuable or not.

here's a hint: the answer is always "not".

I never once mentioned intellectual value.  In fact, it was pretty clear I was talking about entertainment and yes the same applies, I realize that.

The same goes for books though, really.

If sitting and passively looking at a box is entertainment, okay.

But don't come crying to me when your brain falls into your neck.

The only thing more interactive about a book is that you get to turn the pages and the story unfolds to you at your own pace.

God damnit, have you fuckers actually gotten me DEFENDING television?

I hate you so fucking much.  Myself too for doing it, but special hate is reserved for you.

1.  Well, that, and the fact that you have to imagine the scenery.

2.  Welcome to the club, son.   

[East Coast Hustle]

Well, that and the fact that (with some exceptions) books force you to visualize all of the details of the story for yourself. Before the Lord of the Rings movies came along, none of us would have thought Frodo Baggins looked like Elijah Wood, and we likely would have all had very different mental visualizations of him.

[Disco Pickle]

I think the prevailing argument is that books are more intellectual than TV because books force you to engage your own imagination to flesh out the story.

Ah, yes.  I also believe that.  I had similar thoughts about music videos replacing our imaginations about what a song means with someone else's, often not even the song writers.

I get the feeling we're just going to end up arguing semantics on this.  I obviously (should be obvious) hold books in much higher regard than television.  

[Adios]

Well, that and the fact that (with some exceptions) books force you to visualize all of the details of the story for yourself. Before the Lord of the Rings movies came along, none of us would have thought Frodo Baggins looked like Elijah Wood, and we likely would have all had very different mental visualizations of him.

Also as a rule the detail in books has greater depth. They can't reproduce every detail in a movie and much is missed.

[Triple Zero]

According to that reasoning, if it's about visualisation, comics and TV are equally "valuable" (for the particular type of "value" that is being discussed ITT).

And reading Marmaduke is exactly as intellectually stimulating as reading Transmetropolitan.

Got it!

Actually, I don't really believe that is the case. But I'm just following things to their logical conclusions here

[Disco Pickle]

According to that reasoning, if it's about visualisation, comics and TV are equally "valuable" (for the particular type of "value" that is being discussed ITT).

And reading Marmaduke is exactly as intellectually stimulating as reading Transmetropolitan.

Got it!

Actually, I don't really believe that is the case. But I'm just following things to their logical conclusions here

A vein pulses in my head when I hear someone say that comics or graphic novels have no or less literary value as other books. 

Alright, going back to my book cause GRRM is dropping fucking bombs in it and I'm hooked.

[East Coast Hustle]

According to that reasoning, if it's about visualisation, comics and TV are equally "valuable" (for the particular type of "value" that is being discussed ITT).

And reading Marmaduke is exactly as intellectually stimulating as reading Transmetropolitan.

Got it!

Actually, I don't really believe that is the case. But I'm just following things to their logical conclusions here

I think a more apt comparison would be reading the original Dracula by Bram Stoker vs. reading an abridged comic-book version vs. watching the worst movie Gary Oldman was ever in.

And I would agree with the part about TV and comics having equivalent baseline intellectual value.

[Disco Pickle]

According to that reasoning, if it's about visualisation, comics and TV are equally "valuable" (for the particular type of "value" that is being discussed ITT).

And reading Marmaduke is exactly as intellectually stimulating as reading Transmetropolitan.

Got it!

Actually, I don't really believe that is the case. But I'm just following things to their logical conclusions here

I think a more apt comparison would be reading the original Dracula by Bram Stoker vs. reading an abridged comic-book version vs. watching the worst movie Gary Oldman was ever in.

And I would agree with the part about TV and comics having equivalent baseline intellectual value.

snobby cunt, aren't you?    

[East Coast Hustle]

Absolutely.

However, I'm perfectly willing to take my entertainment in whatever form it comes in as long as it's entertaining.

I mean, in general I think that the average comic and the average TV show share a similar baseline intellectual potential, but I'd still rather read The Watchmen a hundred times than watch the Ellen DeGeneres show once.

The real problem with TV is that I've finished all five seasons of The Wire, and now everything else is a disappointment.

It's like if you lost your virginity to Scarlett Johannson. Where do you go from there?