This guy thought the TV had a bad influence on shaping our attention.
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
This guy thought the TV had a bad influence on shaping our attention.
This guy thought the TV had a bad influence on shaping our attention.
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
And it has. If you think about it, tik tok wouldn't exist without tv - or magazines, for that matter. Zaping on tv is the boomer version of scrolling - although even boomers today use tik tok.
Magazines preceded tv my good fellow
I think what he’s saying is that magazines, like TV, in a way led to the advent of modern things like TikTok, not that TV led to magazines
correct—every year it gets worse and this has been the trend for more than a century. Anyone who refuses to understand this is seriously moronic.
A century back a minority of people could even read, Dylonne.
Reading, music, art, dancing are all bad
No, you.
I've become interested in the screen as a force of nature/civilization. I know of Debord, McLuhan, and Baudrillard, but are there any other philosophical takes on the power of the screen? As an overpowering chimera of the painting, electric light, and consciousness?
Is it even possible to live without screen?
Very good on screens and online culture.
I mean...yes, he's absolutely right. The more technology evolves, the worse attention spans get, and the less need we have for each other as a species. Gen Alpha, the ones that are in the womb to 13 right now are being raised with tablets, phones, streaming services, social media, and 4K video games. Why would they ever pick up a book?
that's an understatement
a man who ended his own life and abused his partner have no rights to critic society
flawed people can critic a flawed world. if not, then no one can
>abused his partner
No such thing as a right to criticize something
He was right. Television is bad for attention spans. And maybe if OP had the attention span to read Wallace more carefully, he'd have realized that it was more about what television represents, i.e., doing the thinking for you, rather than creating fiction on your own.
Anyone who flags this guy or his books as a red flag is a beta male
why did they tackle Hal Incandenza in the first chapter of IJ? weird shit
Boomer TV was so terrible. Its not like today
Star Trek:TNG being the exception.
It did. A massive decrease in the quality of the arts from every sphere occurred because of television. Who would've thought pumping out low-quality, mass-produced shit, and aggrandize a more consumer based society could be a bad idea.
>this guy
Am I supposed to know who he is? Give names.
With nu /lit I have to assume this may not be trolling. It is David foster Wallace, the maestro of infinite jest.
Infinite Jest is good, but I'm going to have to reread the physical book after the audiobook because right now it feels like an AA revolving door of people I don't recognize.
Although a lot of anons disparage audiobooks, I’m not one of them (though I don’t use them), but IJ has to be one book you absolutely must read the physical version of—at least for your first read because the end notes are integral to the novel. I would say even for a second read you should go with the physical book because you miss so much the first time.
Eh, they are not that important for understanding, you mostly loose some of the structural complexity and the experience of flipping back and forth.
Apparently the first draft of IJ had most of the novel in the endnotes with the main text being a fairly traditional and linear story. It was also 500 pages longer. Would love to read that someday.
>Eh, they are not that important for understanding, you mostly loose some of the structural complexity and the experience of flipping back and forth.
Completely wrong. Just off the top of my head JOI’s filmography is absolutely essential.
Not essential but helpful. Mostly it ties a pile of stuff together, Hal gives us everything we need about the films for understanding when he is going over his fathers films and isolating.
Nope. A lot of stuff is there you missed beyond that. And that’s just one wnd note. Try reading it again. Not going to get into a “filtered” and “mr. redditor” back and forth yet again over IJ. But if you think DFW wrote nonessential fluff into IJ then that’s your prerogative.
When did I say it was nonsensical fluff? If you can not discuss things rationally then don't go about telling people they are wrong and insulting them, no point to even post if that is all you are going to do.
I agree, but the audiobook is fun for other reasons. It might be a waste of the text (which I do own a physical copy of and can reread), but being able to do other things while going through it is pretty interesting.
It’s not even about attention spans, it’s how media creates a world view and point of reference
I have IJ digitally but I really want a physical copy, just because
He was a mega TV watcher, worse than any of you would have been. Its like how Tolstoy was far left and wrote about revolution but still abused his servants
He was also a schizo who had no insight into his own illness, his actions or even behaviour.
>who had no insight into his own illness, his actions or even behaviour.
He wasnt able to be honest.