The human brain takes in more information in a second than you can possibly imagine. All the emotion, suffering and the message being portrayed in a photo is taken in in an instant.
Compare that to having to read the same information. Firstly, it will take longer to absorb and there's also the risk that some of what you are trying to express gets missed.
Now, a novel can give a complete description of something whether it's an action, emotion or physical description, but alot of the interpretation is down to the readers imagination.
There is very little room for getting it wrong with an image, though sometimes the photo may be intended to mislead.
2006-10-27 07:02:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by Treat Infamy 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
People have become lazy with language...a lot has to do with the Web and the shortcuts and sidesteps users take to avoid good grammar and correct spelling. TV and radio taught use to speak and listen in sound bites, now the Web is even more terse and perverse. Ironically, over the past 50 years, we've augmented our nationally disctionary as immigrants from around the world added to our culture. That, together with an overabundance of images -- images everywhere -- gives us more to work with. But -- maybe its because we are overwhelmed -- we've gotten away from verbal and written communications. So, a picture can replace hundreds if not thousands of words because we have learned to read images with our eyes just as much, if not more, than words. Billboards, TV ads, product placements in films, signage and posters on buses, benches, milk cartons...you have to read the messages quickly...and images say it much more quickly. The image of poverty or suffering is no less or more powerful than the image of lipstick or cigarettes...the visual has become the medium of message.
2006-10-26 20:03:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by Victor 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I disagree with the premise entirely. Well written literature is far more compelling and visceral - because it leverages the full power of the human imagination. Elements of plot, character development, expression of motive, dramatic tension, irony have all caused good literature (I'm not, for instance, simply talking about a newspaper commentary on poverty or suffering) to capture the minds and hearts of readers in enduring ways that pictures, sadly, simply are not able to.
Pictures, clearly, are more immediately gripping and emotional. As such, they play to a culture that has grown too lazy to invest real time in real literature. But that should allow us to dismiss prose. I think that betrays more about ourselves than it does about the two media as art forms and forms of communication.
Best to you.
2006-10-26 18:36:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by Timothy W 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because with a picture you can actually see that poverty. Hearing someone talk about poverty or suffering can strike an emotion within you but actually seeing the suffering strikes even harder. It's kind of like having proof which makes the situation real.
2006-10-26 18:33:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by mellowemi 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
the old saying "a picture is worth a thousand words" is true in this area...a visual picture of the suffering and poverty real hits home when you can see it for your own eyes. one could read many books about these two problems and still not understand it...where pictures shows the real deal and it affects your perspective and understanding
2006-10-26 18:32:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by walterknowsall 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
unfortunatly weve been overwelmed with images of love and kindness witch we feel comfortable with and familiar with however poverty and death are not disney ideals they have no part in our societies they are aborart to our idiolagy so we give aid and support to those without cinimas and televisions cause that makes us better and more coplicate in the subdecation of those people. pictures do speak a thousand words because there is so much information stored in them . light ,subject ,and situation. perhaps if every televsion show revealed even the poverty in our own comunities it could help to eliviate it . to quote; all my words are secondhand and useless in the face of this ;
2006-10-26 19:00:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by alpha 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
because when reading a person can blank out/ skip words and not get the whole meaning especially if it is a hard topic. With a picture once you see it it is all there holding back nothing. yeh you can close your eyes but once you look you take it all in
2006-10-26 18:36:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by mandg 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
They say that a picture paints a thousand words, but where would we be without words? pictures are just another form of communication just we can target specific emotions faster. From a photographer's perspective anyway.
2006-10-26 18:28:47
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because a lot of stories and experiences come into mind by simply looking at the photo.
2006-10-26 18:53:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by Dave S 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's all to do with personalising the situation.
Facts and figures mean nothing, as we can't really imagine what three million people starving to death really looks like, but if you show us one child picking his way through a rubbish dump just to make a living, it brings it all home.
Our brains just can't comprehend figures as well as images
2006-10-26 18:31:20
·
answer #10
·
answered by Gomduri 2
·
0⤊
0⤋