It’s a good point. A large percentage of any media is crap. There is no good excuse for claiming this, that or the other form of media is worthless garbage, just because much of it is.
Books are no exception. Many of them are worthless, mindless entertainment. I’m a very big reader but I’d be lying if I claimed everything I read was “mind improving”.
Personally, I think TV is now better than it ever was as a media. There are more really good shows available than ever before (along with, of course, much garbage). In the old days you had to watch what was on the main networks.
That being said, consuming too much of any media is bad. Watching TV all the time isn’t a good thing, if it obsessively cuts into time for exercise and social interaction.
Talk about needing a hobby. You’ve really written hundreds of thousands of words about an activity you don’t do? That proves the point that there are certain people for whom not watching TV is an important part of their identity.
Still not getting how it’s a lie to say you don’t read because you don’t have time, or because it’s not really your thing. That’s true of a lot of people. I’m not sure why you think everyone who doesn’t read doesn’t because they HATE books or think they are boring. That’s what you think they think, which I guess is why you assumed it was a lie to say they don’t have time or just aren’t into it. Conversely, some people watch little or no television because they don’t really have time. Some people have a lot of commitments in their lives, and don’t have much time for reading, TV, crocheting or whatever. And some folks don’t particularly care for these things (or any other hobby) and doesn’t mean they HATE them or find them dull.
No, I’ve written millions of words about socioeconomic activities and praxis, and television is an unavoidable center to modern discussions about that topic.
There are those who see television from inside its influence and can’t imagine what could be wrong with it. And there are those of us that see it from outside and can’t imagine why people let it control their lives.
I’m sure the cell in the middle of a tumor feels all warm and snuggly, too.
It’s not necessarily a lie, that just seemed implied. As if the others used a polite way to say the same thing. As if he could’ve not been rude by saying he doesn’t have time to read, when in fact, he hates it. But why not just shout it from the rooftops? It’s not rude, it’s not snobbery. It could be rude. If you’re rude about it, sure.
I am not saying everyone who says they don’t have time to read is lying, but if I said that about watching tv I would be lying. Anaamika’s post says that if someone is saying something about tv, I should lie because saying “I don’t watch tv!” is automatically rude. Qualifying it and sugar coating it, like it is some terrible embarrassment, is necessary to protect the feelings of my poor conversational partner. Og forbid they hear of my true, foul habits. I’d better make something up so I don’t seem depraved. Because if say “I don’t watch tv!”… I am a rude snob.
Nonsense, if you talk to me about tv I’ll say out loud that I don’t have one. If my not owning a household item is offensive to my conversational partner I will gladly go away and speak to a normal person.
Obviously, this has never happened. In real life it is pretty easy not to be rude.
In my case, it’s pretty much the culture. My husband comes from a long line of non-readers (he was the first in his family, on either side, to graduate from high school) who really, really like TV. I’m pretty sure that the ONLY reason that Bill will occasionally read for pleasure is because he was stationed in Spain for a couple of years, and he didn’t have much access to English language TV. He had to read or twiddle his thumbs. He started reading Westerns and men’s adventure novels (the Destroyer, the Punisher, you know, stuff with balls overflowing with testosterone in it). Later, when I dragged him into D&D, he’d occasionally pick up a D&D novel. But he grew up in a household with almost no reading material. There was the Bible, and there was the newspaper. And the newspaper was used to get the TV listings. Bill’s choice of me as his wife was regarded as very, very strange. Hell, it’s still regarded as strange. But it mostly works.
My friends don’t talk about TV much…that’s probably why they are my friends. But if I’m chatting with a hairdresser or some other random person, that person is quite likely to try to break the ice by talking about a TV show or the latest football game, especially the Cowboys. When I explain that I just don’t watch that much TV/sports, they get a panicked look, like “Oh no, she’s an ALIEN!” as they try to make sure that there’s a clear path to the nearest exit. Because I’m clearly going to eat their skulls.
This post neatly explains why I see the need to inform people that you don’t watch TV is more pretentious posing, rather than snobbery. Snobbery implies discernment, but your position is just writing off all of a medium. Not only that, but people who choose to consume an art form that you do not are diseased and you are clearly morally superior. The decision not to watch TV is just that, a decision, but the deep need to show that you are somehow operating on a higher plane because you don’t watch TV is where the defect is. To borrow your imagery, that is the tumor of your insecurity that is so boorish.
WOW! This is wild! I thought I was the only person in the world that didnt watch TV. It happened about 2008. All I watch are movies. And I collect movies. I hate TV. Its mostly annoys me with the commercials. Folks use sex to sell everything from cars to laundry soap.
But they do! I just had to hear complaints this morning about how somebody’s show was interrupted by commercials.
And an hour later a different woman approached another coworker and asked “Did you see that commercial for ____?” (I forgot what it was for.) They both discussed it for a moment and then laughed.
I feel like there’s a certain subset of people that just haven’t gotten it yet. Two of these women are ten+ years older than me, so maybe it’s an age gap? The other one is my age, but she is so far from tech-savvy it’s crazy…I don’t think she’d be able to set up Netflix on a Wii (for the uninitiated, when I did it it required a specially ordered [free] CD. Now I don’t even think it needs that.
Huh? How did you get that from what I said? And how is even relevant? I’m not assuming anything at all about people who don’t read, in a general sense.
Here is the first thing I said:
[QUOTE=me]
When people say they don’t read I always find it very interesting. Why not? Maybe you’re dyslexic, maybe you don’t have time.
[/QUOTE]
In that same post I said that I would have to modify my response (wrt television) into a lie, if saying “I DON’T READ!” is rude. I would, apparently, have to say “I don’t really have time to watch tv”. My point is: saying “I don’t watch tv” or I don’t read" is fine, whatever your reason.
Next I said:
[QUOTE=me]
What if you want to say “I don’t read, because books are so slow and dull and reading sucks! I HATE BOOKS!”
[/QUOTE]
see the “what if”? That means it is a hypothetical example. It’s a situation I imagined. There is no possible way of reading this that makes it come out meaning all people who don’t read hate reading.
I’m using the what-if because in Anaamika’s story, there is no way of having that opinion and being able to express it. If that is your opinion you have to lie. What a dull world that would be.
Again, I am not saying the people in the example were lying. I am saying:
I would have to lie in this situation. I just don’t watch tv. Apparently it is rude to say this. I think that’s ridiculous.
The person who said “I don’t read!” was rude, the implication being he should’ve expressed his opinion in the same way as the others. But this is not what he wanted to say. While I would disagree with the person saying “I don’t read”, I would be interested to know why, rather than offended.
The last part, where I say this:
[QUOTE=me]
As if he could’ve not been rude by saying he doesn’t have time to read, when in fact, he hates it.
[/QUOTE]
is following on from the hypothetical. It is true we don’t know the real-life reason the person doesn’t read. As far as I’m concerned it could be any reason. But if it’s because he hates reading, he should be allowed to say that.
I’ll leave it at that, as you thinking I say things that I don’t is rather irrelevant to the thread.
Indicating that you haven’t really read a word I’ve written here and are so touchy about your love of the idiot box that it overrides any sense of humor.
There are actually three or four discussions going on here, one of which is fairly interesting and the other three of which consist of sulking and namecalling. But that’s what you get when the OP’s query allows for exactly three responses:
[ol]
[li]You can admit you just love TV to bits.[/li][li]You can say that TV watching is a lifestyle and thus immune to outside judgment.[/li][li]Or you can be declared a snob, an elitist, a whatever.[/li][/ol]Since reality doesn’t quite exist in that triad, I’ll take my amusement from all those who are so Damned Deadly Serious about Their Lifestyle. And glory in being called a snob.
Is wine worthless because some people drink too much? Are books worthless because some people compulsively read what you consider junk? Is sex worthless because some people are sex addicts?
Snobbery does not come from saying too much TV is bad, but from saying any is bad.
I don’t understand why you think they have to lie. If they just gave a polite smile and said, “Sorry, I don’t read, it’s not one of my interests,” I wouldn’t have had a problem. I may wonder why, but it’s not any of my business. It’s the peremptory declaration of “I DON’T READ” as though we were rude and presumptous for even asking in the first place.
Do you also consider that a lie? There is a difference between a polite demurral and a loud proclamation.
And I don’t really know what your insistence is about lying. There’s all kinds of white lies we have to use in this world just to get by. I don’t feel the need to be 100% honest about everything. Lies of omission are also lies, but they are the ones I am comfortable with.
But you have to pay for the privilege of skipping commercials by giving money to TiVo and their ilk. (Correct me if I’m wrong, you still have to actually do the skipping yourself, the commercials are not edited out for you). Another example of the marketplace creating a service born out of people’s stupidity (with their inability to program a simple VCR).
Put me down as someone smug and proud about never owning a Tivo. And I never watch mindless network programming either; only movies on channels that do not have commercial interruption, or my own DVD/blu-rays.
To be clear, I am specifically saying you are not being a snob or an elitist but rather that your position is pretentious. This is an important distinction because snobbery and elitism are based in a discerning viewpoint, while pretentiousness is not. Pretentiousness does not come from having arrived at an intellectual conclusion, but rather taking a knee-jerk position based more on the appearance of discernment. Snobbery can be defensible as having standards, while pretentiousness is merely an affectation. Your continued need to belittle people for consuming different art than you do, based entirely on the medium by which it is transmitted, shows that your anti-TV stance is based on the idea that you like to be the kind of person who is anti-TV. If you had said shows x, y, and z are crap, then we would be able to discuss the merits of your position, but you have taken the position that all of TV is garbage and that you are morally superior to those who watch TV.
Last night, I watched on TV The Battle for Marjah (a documentary about, well the battle for Marjah). Your position seems to be that had I seen the documentary in theater, it might have merit, but because I saw it on TV, it is garbage. That is not snobbery; it is an affectation.
I’m actually not particularly insistent, it just keeps coming back to that.
Your description of the situation was somewhat ambiguous. It seemed like the person coming right out and saying they don’t read was rude purely for saying that. As if he should’ve modified what he said to accommodate you. I disagree. I’m not really insistent on the lying thing. It doesn’t matter. I think in your example, you’re actually talking about tone, rather than what someone says. Of course tone is important. You can be perfectly polite saying you don’t read. You just don’t need to turn it into not having time to read, that’s all. Your example only had two options: polite tone + saying you don’t have time/modifying or impolite + boldly stating your position.
It’s perfectly possible to boldly state you don’t read, while maintaining a polite tone. It’s perfectly possible to state my position, or the position of the person in your example, without being rude.
Anyway, none of it is really particularly important, or even relevant to what I think. Your example was just a tiny side note. The point was: I’d much rather hear someone tell me something about themselves. All this carrying on about how people who say they don’t like tv are rude. Blegh. Just take an interest. Being disinterested: now that’s rude.
If someone says they don’t own a car, sure maybe they’re a snob. But maybe they just don’t own a car. And you might pass up the opportunity for an interesting conversation with someone. Maybe they are enviro-fundamentalists, maybe they’re poor, maybe they’re scared of driving, maybe they hate new-car smell.
If someone doesn’t read or drink alcohol or use toilet paper: yes, maybe they are being obnoxious. But hey, maybe, just maybe, the conversation came to that topic, they stated their habit or opinion and you had an opportunity to ask about it.
But no, in this thread, everyone wants these people to shut up about their life, shut up about their opinion. It’s rude snobbery to be different. Well, sounds like a dull life to me.
So I’ll gladly be a snob, and all the other snobs can come and talk to me about their weird and wonderful lives & their freaky habits & their crazy opinions. And you guys can all just carry on talking about what was on Corrie yesterday.
