It is no secret that teens’ interest in books is decreasing; contrastingly, the rate of cinema goers has increased dramatically, especially for teens (BFI and National Literacy Trust). Ideas that once were presented in novels and manifestos, are now present in films, reflecting the changing views of a society that is short on time and on attention. Existentialist authors like Sartre and Camus are transposed by philosophical film makers like Paul Thomas Anderson and Mattiou Kassovitz. Both Nausea and La Haine present us with characters disillusioned with the world they live in and its banality and both attempt to induce their viewers into a sense of understanding through experience.
So, what do we gain from reading? Since primary school, reading has been engrained as something vital for us, not only in the classroom but as an extracurricular activity. Yet teachers’ insistence on reading is one of the main reasons why teens in school are not reading, according to Jeffery Wilhelm and Michael Smith (The Power of Pleasure Reading), because the obligation to read makes reading exactly that, an obligation, and not something enjoyable by choice. Therefore, despite perhaps enjoying reading, teens are more likely not to read because they think of it as a chore, creating a vacuum for engagement with some much-needed creativity.
The creativity of film offers such an opportunity as students are not encouraged to watch in the same way. Thus, a mental barrier is created between the world of academia and the world of creativity and enjoyment, allowing students to freely engage with film without the feeling of a teacher looking over their shoulders. This means that teens should be encouraged to become engrossed in a film, noticing the moving parts including the score, cinematography, costume, acting and set, for example.
An important question to ask however, is whether this is a good thing. It might be argued that a move away from reading in developing teens might make university harder, as well as making later life, which might rely on the soft skills that reading helps to develop, even more strenuous. Further, reading has many health benefits both for anxiety and for the prevention of Alzheimer’s in later life, making it beneficial to teens and those of all ages. Having said this, film is an equally calming hobby that teens can enjoy, and profound cinematography by the likes of Kubrick, Villeneuve and Wes Anderson can stimulate the same skills of analysis and empathy that reading can.
For example, Wes Anderson’s “The Grand Budapest Hotel”, is a film adored by many not only because it is soothing and enjoyable to watch, but also because its artistry can be appreciated. Anderson’s symmetric style and pastel colour palettes can be found in almost all of his films, and studying it one can learn and expand during the experience of watching, as you might do reading a book. Furthermore, the characters Zero and Gustave H are complex and demonstrate development which suggests the creative reflection one can have whilst watching a film and inwardly digesting a character’s arc and change.
Overall, I do not believe that literature should overtake film again, but rather that they should work in parallel regardless of how popular they become. Denigrating the enjoyment of film, denies the teens of today an opportunity to engage with creativity and learn in the same way they would whilst reading. Reading is the cornerstone of all knowledge everywhere. Plato, Socrates, Dickens and Shakespeare have given our world an insight into who we are and what the world around us is; thus, I do not believe that film could “overtake” reading for many generations to come, if ever. Having said that, I believe that film should be given more respect. Directors and screenwriters alike have presented intricate and deep philosophies through their work, and to demean this would be to waste the skill and the knowledge we could gain by it, especially for students and teens.
