I'm reading an excellent book at a friend's recommendation: Flickering Pixels by Shane Hipps.
So far, I haven't agreed with everything in it. But his basic message could be summed up: we are what we behold. And this generation "beholds" lots and lots of blinking lights. Computers and television, cellphones and smart-phones. We're exposed to endless amounts of information, but most of us don't know what to do with all of it...
In the chapter I just finished, Hipps states his belief that movies are never as good as the book--a fact which most avid readers repeat every time a "based-on-the book" film is released. He attributes this phenomenon to the sharp contrast between written media and the concrete images provided for us in movies. For a reader, there is an endless number of ways to interpret the written word and experiencing a story personally. Even authors who use great detail in describing their scenes can't possibly open up your brain and deposit an exact picture. Imagination is freed through reading.
But a movie leaves no room for imagination. All questions are answered for the audience according to the director's interpretation of the story. Sometimes the director has an interesting take on a concept, and movies certainly have the power to generate thought. But eventually, constantly tuning in to another person's image causes audiences to lose the ability to form a picture on their own.
"In a very real way, image culture is eroding and undermining imaginative creativity...this goes way beyond the creation of good art or entertainment--our imaginations are what help us change the world."
This makes a lot of sense to me. I posted an article recently that said college students aren't able to think as critically as past generations, and I have a feeling the pixel-media has something to do with it. (Students were given problem scenarios, but most were unable to choose objective solutions when confronted with emotional visuals...) Since all of us are being confronted with images ALL DAY LONG, we're losing the ability to think creatively.
It may also explain why people post silly quotes to Facebook (or state their bra-size) thinking it advances a cause. Or, why college kids complain to the Dean of Students and try rewriting the Code of Ethics as soon as somebody offends them. (Or, why their parents demand a law change at the national level for the same reasons.) It seems very few people are coming up with innovative ways to illicit change. Instead all of us want to update our Twitter or pay someone else to do it (preferably through PayPal, so we don't have to leave our office). There is no imagination there.
But, just before I became cocky, Hipps tied his statement to the spiritual world, and I realize I'm just as guilty of concrete, uncreative thinking as the next person.
"This malaise even affects what we might call spiritual imagination. This is the kind of daring imagination that helps us expand our experience and understanding of God, the kind of imagination that allows us to enact God's compassion in a broken world."
How many times have I asked, "What am I supposed to do now, God?" How often do I think, "My, how broken this world is!" but never really brainstorm a great solution? Oh, and what's worse: I become skeptical of the BIG IDEAS being tossed around by fellow believers. I caution the dreamers not to get too excited, and I talk about the dangers of letting emotions control us when a logical, rational approach to life is much better. Though I'm reading the words of great thinkers, it's the equivelent of flipping through hundreds of images--adopting the thoughts of others. Sure, I amass facts as a result. But I'm still stuck in front of this computer, adding little originality to the world. And I wonder, has all this screen time resulted in the loss of my imagination?
Over and over, I feel the nudge of the Holy Spirit saying "You have a purpose greater than this...do something BIG!" only to respond in a very underwhelming, unimaginative way...
Perhaps doing nothing at all. Or, to give the illusion of accomplishment, I may sit and write about my thoughts...right here in front of my flickering pixels.
So far, I haven't agreed with everything in it. But his basic message could be summed up: we are what we behold. And this generation "beholds" lots and lots of blinking lights. Computers and television, cellphones and smart-phones. We're exposed to endless amounts of information, but most of us don't know what to do with all of it...
In the chapter I just finished, Hipps states his belief that movies are never as good as the book--a fact which most avid readers repeat every time a "based-on-the book" film is released. He attributes this phenomenon to the sharp contrast between written media and the concrete images provided for us in movies. For a reader, there is an endless number of ways to interpret the written word and experiencing a story personally. Even authors who use great detail in describing their scenes can't possibly open up your brain and deposit an exact picture. Imagination is freed through reading.
But a movie leaves no room for imagination. All questions are answered for the audience according to the director's interpretation of the story. Sometimes the director has an interesting take on a concept, and movies certainly have the power to generate thought. But eventually, constantly tuning in to another person's image causes audiences to lose the ability to form a picture on their own.
"In a very real way, image culture is eroding and undermining imaginative creativity...this goes way beyond the creation of good art or entertainment--our imaginations are what help us change the world."
This makes a lot of sense to me. I posted an article recently that said college students aren't able to think as critically as past generations, and I have a feeling the pixel-media has something to do with it. (Students were given problem scenarios, but most were unable to choose objective solutions when confronted with emotional visuals...) Since all of us are being confronted with images ALL DAY LONG, we're losing the ability to think creatively.
It may also explain why people post silly quotes to Facebook (or state their bra-size) thinking it advances a cause. Or, why college kids complain to the Dean of Students and try rewriting the Code of Ethics as soon as somebody offends them. (Or, why their parents demand a law change at the national level for the same reasons.) It seems very few people are coming up with innovative ways to illicit change. Instead all of us want to update our Twitter or pay someone else to do it (preferably through PayPal, so we don't have to leave our office). There is no imagination there.
But, just before I became cocky, Hipps tied his statement to the spiritual world, and I realize I'm just as guilty of concrete, uncreative thinking as the next person.
"This malaise even affects what we might call spiritual imagination. This is the kind of daring imagination that helps us expand our experience and understanding of God, the kind of imagination that allows us to enact God's compassion in a broken world."
How many times have I asked, "What am I supposed to do now, God?" How often do I think, "My, how broken this world is!" but never really brainstorm a great solution? Oh, and what's worse: I become skeptical of the BIG IDEAS being tossed around by fellow believers. I caution the dreamers not to get too excited, and I talk about the dangers of letting emotions control us when a logical, rational approach to life is much better. Though I'm reading the words of great thinkers, it's the equivelent of flipping through hundreds of images--adopting the thoughts of others. Sure, I amass facts as a result. But I'm still stuck in front of this computer, adding little originality to the world. And I wonder, has all this screen time resulted in the loss of my imagination?
Over and over, I feel the nudge of the Holy Spirit saying "You have a purpose greater than this...do something BIG!" only to respond in a very underwhelming, unimaginative way...
Perhaps doing nothing at all. Or, to give the illusion of accomplishment, I may sit and write about my thoughts...right here in front of my flickering pixels.
This is interesting to me because it relates back to our discussion of truth and subjectivity.
ReplyDeletePeople interpret film in very different ways. I see a movie and noticed symbolism for women's rights (definitely observed that in Lord of the Rings) where other people do not. People have epic debates over interpretation of film. Also, there are very creative films out there that make us think.
That said, I agree books leave more to the imagination and I think we should all read more (myself included!). I get very sad when I hear from students that they have fully read ONE book in all of high school.(Teachers just teach passages because it's what's on standardized testing.... YIKES!!! This is especially true of students who do not perform well on the standardized tests, because their teachers want them to pass. No WONDER these students hate learning! What a self-fulfilling prophecy!)
Oh, don't even get me started on the illiteracy problem. Many highschoolers are PROUD of the fact they've never picked up a book or-- No, really, I'm not going to get started. :)
ReplyDeleteYou're right, movies spark debate all the time, and this is one of the reasons I don't agree with everything the author says so far. Actually, he's a little scattered and sometimes seems to contradict himself. So maybe I don't agree because I don't totally understand his point yet...?
Anyway, I agree movies don't ALWAYS give all the answers. When I read that chapter, I immediately thought of the Blair Witch Project, and other movies which experiment with giving sparse amounts of information while still telling a story. Some use clever angles, stream-of-consciousness techniques, or leave the plot dangling at the end. And it seems those things would SPARK the imagination the way books do, rather than hinder it...
I may share more of Hipps' opinions as I wade through this book. But from what I gather for now, he's challenging this straight-forward, concrete thinker to move outside the box a bit.