helena/malcs wrote: >I just don't see how anyone who has read Noam Chomsky, >Shakespeare or Krishnamurti can have the time and patience for >the emotional manipulation and enforcement of stereotypes (not to >mention the trance-inducing lull of advertisements) of a medium >that is increasingly mean-spirited and wallows in sarcasm as if it >were an advanced form of wit. I'm not sure why I enjoy tv so much but one thing I can say--there's good stuff on discovery, weather and news that is very accessible (I can listen to cnn or pbs news like a radio), and even prime time offers a slice of america's eyeball that is not without its information value. I've read extensively in many cultures' literatures (thanks sonny for Vivekananda who on page 77 of his book, _Raja Yoga or Conquering the Internal Nature says, "Give up all argumentation and other distractions. Is there anything in dry intellectual jargon? It only throws the mind off its balance and disturbs it. Things of subtler planes have to be realized. Will talking do that? So give up all vain talk. Read only those books which have been wrtitten by persons who have had realisation.") and I'm not ready to ignore an aspect of life so many live in...as a teacher I know the danger of tv replacing "text lives" of tomorrow's thinkers, but I think this interactive screen is one way to "fight" such "mental erosion" though I doubt my ability to perceive whether tv is erosion or progression...ok, ok, what I'm trying to say is that there is some wonder to tv and danger too, like most things, I think. I love traditional texts--my heart beats its literary life every day--but I don't think there's a good reason to ignore newer texts in our culture's production, and I do think we have to use our own predilections to get the most out of the texts we can encounter. I'm sorry for the block like text of this post, but it is rather thick and "blockish" and I think I will think a long time before these thoughts find their real poem...will