Riff: i can't stop thinking about goodreads' top 100
I want to riff1 on a post from woolgathering and try to propose three possible explanations - goes without saying, you will understand better my take If you read the original post first.
Becoming cultured in movies is easier
The medium and the catalogue dictate it: average movie runtime is what, 2hr?, and depth of catalogue is still manageable on an individual basis, it’s also more inclusive and easier to master.
It follows that becoming an expert and acquiring taste2 is much easier in cinematography than literature.
Quantity as a mean to quality
Seems obvious, if you can get through ten movies in the time it takes you to read one book, you will gain knowledge of the whole genre 10x faster, but that’s not all, because the catalogues are vastly different in size too, the exact numbers are impossible to know, but estimates say 150 million books vs less that 1 million movies, and the rate of growth differs too, with 2 millions book created each year vs 10 thousand movies!3
If you can get better at a 10x rate, for a catalogue that is 1/150, you are actually getting better at a 1500x rate! This is clue numero uno.
It’s easier to master
If I stare at a 1960 Japanese B/W horror starting couple of women, samurais and a gruesome mask4 without dubbing or subtitles I will still get a sense of the story and overall message.
If I stare at a Japanese novel, written in Japanese I will get an headache and not much else.
The admission price to a great movie is having some working vision and hearing plus 2 hours of attention span (barely), while for a great book, a longer attention span, a good working memory and a high reading proficiency in the language of the author or the translator. Clue numeros dos.
The elephant in the (online) library
Should we say that literature has lost its spot as a noble art long time ago and is now, commercially, an escapist
tool for single young adult women as much as the other well established stereotypical buyers?
Should we say also that single young adult women are disproportionally represented in online book reviews sites like goodreads?
If we say all of that, are we surprised that a large part of books on that list is fiction fantasy romance?
All I’m saying is the sample might not be as representative as we assume… and oh boy, yes I’m not unaware of the mid-life forever boy type that has propped up a decade of comic books movie dysentery in the mainstream subconscious, I’m just saying these list are not picked in a vacuum.
The sum
It’s faster and easier to become versed in movie history and to start appreciate the best it can offer, it also easier to find the best as the catalogue is still relatively small.
These lists are very opinionated and I don’t think I care for something that is so narrowly focused to be used as standard.
P.S. I haven’t spoke of music because: I know relatively nothing of it (apart that I enjoy it, all of it) and it’s the closest thing we ever got to hear the voice of God.
So much better concept than a plain sterile reply (re:), I reply to my accountant request for information on a lost invoice, not a interesting set of ideas, or fun conversation. That’s me though↩
Whatever that means these days, whatever it ever meant frankly↩
Numbers from slopAI, might be wrong, will be wrong, but you get the concept I’m going for↩
Onibaba (1969) it’s good, even without subtitles↩