Some interesting stuff around mcluhan and TV being low buy-in, theatre high buy in, books medium, so something like sunk-cost lets theatre be less attention grabbing. Pictures alone cant represent propositions, or make judgements, or logical complexity. Also high supply side costs (up-front or per-unit) tend to produce mass media, which has to aim at lcd to make profits. Also stuff around network effects has an anologous property kinda? Natural monopolies generally in some sense. Well natural monopolies of forums, (eg a facebook group) not their suppirting platforms (facebook). Agora are an example of this natural attention monopoly.
- similar to how much you can direct/control your attention of different media. audio envelops you video doesn’t
Tolstoy on music
Sam Kriss on A24 brain
- watching literalising and explicitly meaningful movies is like trying to eat the menu.
There are the three common characteristics of naive art. These are shared, they are natural. What are the equivalents defining natural differences for naive narrative?
On the effect of scale in visual art, relevant to reproductions/prints vs originals. One is like looking down at a squid in a rockpool, the other is like a squid looking at you with it’s great glassy eye when you’re swimming untethered in the deep ocean. Large art can confront and untether you.