Depth vs. Complexity. I am not good at finding the right words like this (for this reason I was SO happy to see the juxtaposition in the second article; now I know what I mean!), but these are the concepts that I consider when thinking about characters and stories in movie and books. I do think complexity is probably too dignified a term for what I mean (chaotic is probably better) and breadth might be a better one for the article. And I don't want simplistic (for stories) or narrow (for knowledge).
Comprehension vs. Trivia or Depth vs. Breadth. Mindfulness is important in choosing books, in reading the books, and in processing the books. That is why I'm pretty happy with my low number of books, but why I have room for improvement. I think this issue of depth vs. breadth is part of the issue I have with constantly having to "be in the know" with the news . . . you could pick up a book (by a scholar who has studied the subject not someone who has experienced or seen the issues, not all nonfiction by professionals is scholarly!) on the issues at hand, how else do can you understand the world? What is the good of knowing without comprehending (and again, some books are about knowing not comprehending)?
Interested vs. Interesting. I think the issue with many people is one of motivation. Being a homebody can be a lovely thing . . . if it is done from love rather than fear and if the homebody does and can venture out from time to time. Many people are interesting because they are interested and therefore, knowledgeable and confident.
Labels: Bookish, Morals & Moralizing & all that Jazz, Responsibility