This is a great read. For a summary, see Malcom Gladwell’s review at Gladwell.com. Johnson argument that the potential revenue of DVD sales creates a market for television shows and movies that consumers can enjoy viewing several times is intrigiuing, and is a great example of how technology and art influence eachother. The discussion of video games is also worthwhile, as are his references to fascinating psychology studies. (Malcom Gladwell’s books are also great for this reason.)

A very interesting book. I’m not qualified to comment on whether the commentary is sound, but it seems to have some merit – games and television shows do seem more complex than they used to be, and even the quality of crap has gone up (when measured against older crap).

I recommend this book highly to anyone who has any interest in popular culture, television, and its effects on your brain.

Then again, maybe I just want someone to justify the hours I put into Zelda, Civilization, Sopranos, The West Wing, and so on…

The premise isn’t too revolutionary, unless you’re Tipper Gore, but the scope of this book is impressive. Any book that challenges the ridiculous premise that we’re all a bunch of media-addled, zombified, bloodthirsty sheep is a good thing.

or is he just telling us what we want to hear?

Page: 124 at the end of the brief section on the Internet.

‘Television and automibile society locked people up in their living rooms, away from the clash and vitality of public space, but the Net has reversed that long-term trend. After a half-century of technological isolation, we’re finally learning new ways to connect.’

shared on allconsuming.net at 12.27 GMT, 16/06/002005.

only connect.

I am halfway through this now and so far I find myself agreeing with the premise. The fact that it is the cognitive processes that are being worked out regardless of the content is what is interesting in this thesis.

I do still feel the urge to play games from my old Commodore 64 days, where things felt more abstract and I felt more immersive but then maybe that was because I could afford to spend hours at a game (Zoids, Shadowfire and The Sentinal) whereas today I have less time to spend playing increasingly complex games.

Also I feel that 24 as a series has become simpler and more linear as each season has progressed. The last one (season 4) has felt rather flat, especially thinking back too season 1, what is interesting is that now we have Dr. Who which is taking on board some of the more complex story stuctures (grander story arcs across a season, with hints etc in indivdual stories).

The book was interesting in places. Still don’t know exactly who Johnson is arguing with; he alludes to various anti-pop culture screeds, but nothing he says seems terribly new, either. He did a good job of putting together trends in different media and of finding catchy names for them (e.g., the Sleeper effect = the discovery that much of what we thought was bad for us is actually good for us).

I’ve been having trouble getting into this book. It seems like the perfect response to a strawman argument (or, as a college text I just saw would put it, a “straw person” argument). My husband started it and found it irritating—he agreed with Johnson that tv is getting better, but insists that movies are getting worse.