Quote:
Originally posted by A. J. Raffles+Jul 10 2005, 05:19 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (A. J. Raffles @ Jul 10 2005, 05:19 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Triton
However, before the radio, the printed word was the primary source of entertainment all the way back to 1450 when Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press.
|
Sorry, but that's just plain wrong. The printed word couldn't possibly have been the primary source of entertainment at a time when the great majority of people was unable to read and books were still rather expensive. Reading didn't really become that widespread until about the nineteenth century when a large number of people were actually able to read. Before that, the "primary source of entertainment" as you call it would have been dancing and music - yes, there was music
before the invention of the radio.[/b][/quote]
I wasn't very clear on this. Though the first use of the printing press was to print the Bible, the world was opened up to the ability to spread information of any kind quickly and easily. Music and theater were around, but the music and scripts were not available to all conductors and players before the printing press was available, so culture only spread so far. Besides, the ability to print sheets of music allowed for music to evolve more quickly by allowing the composer more time to write new music and experiment with new ideas instead of copying music by hand and paying amanuenses to help. With the availability of written music and printed scripts, other bands in other parts of Europe could perform music written by different composers or play stories by different playwrights.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by o m g+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (o m g)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>i am finding this topic quite funny really, just an excuse to show others how you are one of the reading class and to mock those who dont like to read as being lower than you all. also the dissing of people who use slang. the thing is on any other site than this i use a lot of slang. not like leet, but i will type a bit more like i talk on sites that are more people who speak english as a primary language. i dont think that makes me inferior to you who study this language. so you all hate people who use slang. well your going to have a lot of fun when you come over here then arnt you ....... people in england do not speak *properly.* for a long time after meeting my wife i would have to switch to using *queens* english so she would understand me. and still 5 years on i have to de slang certain tv shows for her so she understands.[/b]
|
O m g, do you have to troll in EVERY thread? My thread has to do with people of MY language being too stupid to read and not knowing as much grammar as they should, and how it affects the literary arts. Go away if you can't contribute anything reasonable.
<!--QuoteBegin-Sebatianos
There is still a certain procentage of readers (and these represent the core). There probably was a slightly higher procentage of these readers in some periods in the past, but not much higher. As I stated before: No more then 15% (tops) are actually intelectuals (among other things - these are the people who read for the pure enjoyment of reading).
Just one more thing:
An intelectual isn't simply someone who has a job where he would have to work more with a brain then with muscles. An intelectual is someone who cherishes knowledge.
So a lawyer who never read a book (even if he has tones of them on his book shelves), never visited an art galery, never seen an opera... (at least not because he'd feel the urge to do it) can not be seen as an intelectual.
On the other hand a cab driver who reads the classics in his free time (even if all from the library and doesn't own a book of his own) and saves up money so he can go and see that concert of the local philrharmonic orchestra (simply because he enjoys the music) would be an intelectual.[/quote]
I never thought of reading as something only intellectuals do (though it seems that way more and more now). Reading not only provides entertainment (if the book is good), but it also helps the reader improve their knowledge of the language they are reading and improves one's imagination. As one instructor of mine said: reading is writing backwards.