Mixed Feelings

I think that I liked it so much because I am more of a visual person. Once I start reading a story or play I automatically think of how it would look on screen. I mean isn't that the point? Writers try so hard to convey what the characters look like, or the scene, or the time of it all. They tell you what happens and try to "paint a picture" for the reader. Well with the play being acted out or the book being made into film isn't it just coming to life? Isn't that what the reader wants-well when it comes to certain characters- they want them to be real? I'm not saying movies are better than books, everyone knows the books are always better, but still they seem to add something to the book. And why not use the media and technology of today to explain literature? They are great tools to be used. I'm also not saying we should use them every time. I think it should be a treat when its used.
At BYU we have the perfect example. As I was sitting in RS I thought of how nice it was to have a power point presentation and how sometimes we use Mormon Messages to add to the topic. Then I thought of the last time I was in a regular ward and was taught with the traditional printed out quotes or the thirty year old pictures from the library that all hang from the chalkboard. It's an entirely different feel altogether. Although one style is new and the other old they both teach the message we are supposed to be learning. I can appreciate the old style and that's how I grew up, but its definitely refreshing to have a new style.

Of course the ultimate answer is between the extremes of Purves and Bloom I would want the happy medium of Croft! :) You have to know the old to appreciate the new. The new is based off the old. Put a little Beethoven with your Frank Sinatra, add it to the Beatles and together they'll be partying it with Michael Jackson and Owl City. Or in other words, The Bible+Shakespeare + Austin+Lewis=J.K. Rowling. You can't go wrong with the classics but don't snub the modern.