Communicator (communicator) wrote,

the cold mountain experiment

I mentioned a while ago the 'book to film experiment' - designed to answer the question: which should you do first, read the book or see the film? The book/film chosen was 'Cold Mountain', volunteers agreed to see or read first, and then comment on their experiences. (NB I failed to send off my own results, for boring reasons)

The results of the experiment are reported here. I don't think the findings are gob-smacking. The book is more complex than the film. Both are rather flawed. Seeing the film has the advantage of boosting the visualisation of certain characters, and the disadvantage of imposing the simplistic characterisations of the film onto the text.

I found that reading the book and seeing the film in close succession was a worthwhile experience. Thinking in detail about the contrasts between the two was entertaining. More enriching, in other words, than spoiling. I think avoiding seeing a film of a book one likes (or vice versa) is probably unnecessarily fastidious.

  • Burnt Norton Stanza 2 - Intro

    Stanza 2 of Burnt Norton is in three sections, which concern the physicality of the body, the existence of consciousness in time, and a final section…

  • Burnt Norton first stanza

    I have made 8 posts about the first stanza of Burnt Norton. They are here: Preamble 1-5: Rejected hypothesis about fixed time 6-13: Time as a…

  • Burnt Norton 36-48

    The man and woman in the garden go to the centre of the knot, the heart of the rose, and there is dry emptiness. Dry the pool, dry concrete, brown…

  • Post a new comment


    Comments allowed for friends only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic