A picture is worth a thousand words.

So we have been discussing the downfall of the humanities and that books are in danger of no longer being read because our society demands quick, easy, available material. I agree, physically holding a book and reading it is a great experience but I also believe that photos and even movies can enhance that experience.

Take for example a non-fiction book that is about some historical past event. Its filled with facts, details, graphic descriptions, interviews...its really suspenseful and enjoyable to read. Take that same book, or just the event the book is based on and make it into a documentary. Now we have visuals, voices from people who were involved, other sounds such as gunshots, bombs and so on. It's so dramatic and awe-inspiring that we cannot look away.

So both the book and the documentary are gripping stories of something that has taken place, and both tell relatively the same story. Which would you prefer? I know many will say the book because nothing is like reading a book and how far into detail they can go, but I guess I'm a product of my generation in some ways because I would want to watch the documentary. I would do so for a couple reasons: 1) Visuals, 2)Visuals, 3) I probably don't have time to read the book with all the other work and stress going on in my life.

I admit if I had the time I would read the book eventually, but I still think that the ability to make movies about events (keep in mind I'm talking more about shaky-camera documentaries, not high-profile, major motion picture movies) is great because as many of us have recognized society doesn't want to/have time to read the book version so a larger audience is reached and did I mention all the visuals.


Look around washingtonpost.com under arts, there are lots of great photos and short videos that really speak to viewers if you know what I mean.