Quote:
Originally posted by Neb:
I would do both, which is what books do. That way you'd have both my viewpoints and your own experiences to use when deciding your opinion on Denmark. And music, books and films are not made for the communicator in any way except to earn money, so I SHOULD be looking at it from the reciever's viewpoint. THEY are the one that it's supposed to affect somehow.
And what's easiest is not always what is best.
|
Eh? Books cannot convey what a film does. Everything happens in your minds eye. This is RELIANT ON WHAT YOU HAVE SEEN. How do you explain a tree to a Tibetan who has never seen a tree? The desert to an Eskimo who's never left Greenland?
I'm using the communicators perspective because that is a more adequate gauge! That's what you have to do to assess the strength of a medium, because you know the picture you wish to convey. Why do you think people get upset or let down by the character in a book translated to film?
Because it differs from the minds eye. The film conveys more. Less is left to the IMAGINATION.
I disagree about your view that art is not made for the communicator. I and many others often create for purley OURSELVES, for the creative release, the satisfaction of expressing.
That is a huge reason for doing it!