Books

2 dialogs about books, discussion why books are better than movies; as usual we have similar views. Right after the conversation I decided to read a bit. "451 Farenheit" by Bradbury. Another coincidence? That book is not only a story with much of philosophy, but also an answer to very many questions including those about books.

Question: Why read if you can watch a movie?

A: What is a movie? It is the way the director imagined this or that story, that is this or that book. Let's take fantasy. You see that alien and he is red on the screen, but maybe if you read the book you'd imagine him green. Why do you think the imagination of director is better than yours? Or how very many times they change the plot, reduce smth here smth there, add this or that character... What remains in the end? Usually mutilated version of the story which actually has nothing to do with the original. Who decides what is vital what is not? The director. And what if what is vital for him is not vital for you? And vice versa. You won't have the opportunity to judge yourself.

B: what movies do you watch? comedy, action, horror, soap operas, ... What do these give to you? Some fun for a day. And then you forget it because another one comes out with more famous "stars", with better effects, then another, and more. Will you ever forget a book like "To kill a mockingbird" (Harper Lee)? You will read it once, but it will stay with you forever. You may forget separate phrases but you'll keep the general idea in mind.

C: Can anyone ever screen "100 years of solitude" by Marquez, "Homo Faber" by Max Frisch, "Animal farm" by Orwell, ... and so very very many others? Even if they do it will be the worst nonsense ever. Nobody will ever get anything from that movie unless they have read the book. In those books every phrase, every word has something more than it means, you must be able to read between the lines, understand the hidden sense. Maybe you'll read and won't get it at once, you'll turn the page back and reread it. In the movie you won't even notice that idea said by a good-looking star who doesn't understand it at all and worries only about his image.
So those who watch movies will never have the opportunity to know what is inside of those books.

D: "With a heavy cavalry walk, in a blood-red tunic, he entered the room" (from "Master and Margaret". I've seen the movie. A man entered with heavy steps in a red tunic. And? Where from could I know that he was from cavalry or that he had blood-red tunic. Blood-red could not only mean red but also that he had killed very many people during the war and that was what was important, not the tunic's being red. So great, the idea is lost but the decorations are great.

E: The language. What is used in books is not used in the movies and in every-day talk. The nuances are lost. Everything becomes rough and simple. It will never make you think, analyze. The book will train your brain, will enrich your vocabulary.

F: Not only the language but also the phrases are simple. They make movies for wide public so everybody must understand the ideas. Everything is said directly. In the book you'd have to understand yourself what was meant by this or that phrase, and you'll have time for it. The action is not distracting your attention from the idea.

Of course a lot more can be said. This doesn't mean at all that I don't like movies or smth. But movies will never be able to replace books. Book has its smell.