What Grade is Your Content Comprehension?
- Thread starter Archon
- Start date
404 here as well.
And now for my actual comment on the piece:
This was a interesting read and it actually comes in handy in a discussion I'm currently having with a friend about the dumbing down of media. Now I have some ammunition for that.
I think I'll have to own up to being a snob, if that is the right word. I much prefer a text to be subtle, intricate and eloquently written compared to easy understandable. For me, it's all about the aesthetics of language. Having studied philology (Greek and Latin in this case) I've grown to love language as both a tool and as an art form.
While I'm not terribly well-spoken myself, even less so in English, I do appreciate when an author writes well.
The piece mentions Edward Gibbons The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, a book that stands within arms reach of the very chair I'm in, though sadly in an abridged form. I love that book, not only for being a seminal work in my field (history) but also for it's elegant prose. The value of the book as a historical account may have diminished over the years as research and thinking moved on, but it still holds as a work of art when language is the focus. At least that's my view of it.
To illustrate I have cherry picked a quite famous passage from the books:
"If a man were called to fix the period in the history of the world, during which the condition of the human race was most happy and prosperous, he would, without hesitation, name that which elapsed from the death of Domitian to the accession of Commodus."
That to my mind, while being rather silly as history, and here I mean history as we tend to write it now, is a very elegant passage. Granted, I could make the same point in fewer words but in the process it would lose some of the poignancy of Gibbons.
I enjoy it a lot more than a more simple text to put it bluntly. That's also the reason I almost never watch TV any more and mostly read a few newspapers with an intellectual bend. If I read the news I might as well enjoy it all the while.
To shift the focus somewhat I want to address the points made about snobs, be they literate, musical or cinematic. I think your explanation goes a long way to explain why some people would call me an elitist. I tend not to want anything but the best possible experience. That's why I read a book like Gibbons, listen to the music I do, get bored by Hollywood and play my games on a PC. Running the risk of insulting a great many people I will submit that a lot of the "anti-elitism" stems from some people simply not wanting to put in the work needed to get those experiences and therefore try their best to make it seem like those that do are not in fact anything but snobs. A sort of defence mechanism.
I should note that I don't care whether people enjoy the same things I do, nor do I consider them in any way inferior. I do mind though, that some people constantly try to drag others "down", as if there was an inherent problem in enjoying different things and considering the ones you enjoy yourself better.
There was a further point I wanted to talk about but it eludes me at the moment. I'll edit it in if I remember what it was.
Aha! Now I remember it. Thank you, later posters for reminding me. I wanted to say that all that being said, I still enjoy a good fart joke as much as the next guy.
I comprehend, but I doubt I'm a snob =/
That said, the English language is not what I grew up with, so a great many words, that I'm sure most find common knowledge, I cannot understand. However, I do enjoy experimental rock... And I do not enjoy American Idol Oo. Hmmmmm...
That said, the English language is not what I grew up with, so a great many words, that I'm sure most find common knowledge, I cannot understand. However, I do enjoy experimental rock... And I do not enjoy American Idol Oo. Hmmmmm...
""Rules, in a tabletop RPG, are ultimately about what philosophers call action, where 'action' means intentional effects caused by an agent. It is the rules that dictate the results of action, and thus define the relationship between a player's choices and the consequence he experiences"!"
I had to read that about four times to understand what the hell you were on about. Essentially all you are saying is that rules dictate how the choices which the players make will effect the game, covered over with several layers of jargon. It just seems like you were using a higher "grade" then necessary to convey your point.
You ask us what level we prefer. I would say that you should use whatever level you need to in order to get your point across in full. Anything more than that is just raising the entry barrier - keeping people out - for no reason.
Also, you're totally right. ZP is funny on many levels.
I had to read that about four times to understand what the hell you were on about. Essentially all you are saying is that rules dictate how the choices which the players make will effect the game, covered over with several layers of jargon. It just seems like you were using a higher "grade" then necessary to convey your point.
You ask us what level we prefer. I would say that you should use whatever level you need to in order to get your point across in full. Anything more than that is just raising the entry barrier - keeping people out - for no reason.
Also, you're totally right. ZP is funny on many levels.
Huh, interesting to think about. We don't have that system here in Ireland (as far as I know) but I just went over two essays I've done for English, and I got level 16-17, so I might be off
It's weird to think that in order to appeal to the masses, they simplified something that is so important - the news. Why would people not want to know what was happening across the world?
It's weird to think that in order to appeal to the masses, they simplified something that is so important - the news. Why would people not want to know what was happening across the world?
Huh, I've read Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire and I understood it. I also haven't finished college yet, so that index is wrong.
Or I'm reeeaaaalllllyyy smart. One of those two.
And yes, Yahtzee is a big literary fag. And I appreciate that because I am a literary fag too. So of course his ZP bits are entertaining, especially to those who get all his jokes and aren't laughing because the british man is talking funny.
Or I'm reeeaaaalllllyyy smart. One of those two.
And yes, Yahtzee is a big literary fag. And I appreciate that because I am a literary fag too. So of course his ZP bits are entertaining, especially to those who get all his jokes and aren't laughing because the british man is talking funny.
well, my reading level has been tested at around 20.7, so very little goes over my head when it comes to comprehension. doesn't mean i don't enjoy some of the lower-level stuff. sometimes i just don't feel like thinking that hard, which is something i don't think your researchers take into account.
also, ZP owns at smart and dumb humor!
also, ZP owns at smart and dumb humor!
I actually swing the other way at times, despite being a card carrying fan of Stephen Fry and the like.
I have a friend who used to use 'conflagration' when 'fire' would have worked, (lucky he never never got trapped in one, yelling 'conflagration' isn't going to get people running for help) and while he's a smart guy, just didn't seem to have the ability to scale things down to be acessible to 'normal' people. On another occasion, he was having a housewarming get together, and a girl broke into a conversation about music with 'what IS mp3 anyway?', to which he breaks down the acronym, starts talking about lossy codecs and the like, and the history of the format, at which point someone fortunately distracted him and I was able to step in and say 'um, its just music, but stored as a computer file instead of on a cd.'
Sure, he was being more informative, and more factual, but sometimes ya need to read between the lines and realise that sometimes a question is more than a desire for information. It can simply be a 'hi, can I join this group's conversation please?' and a ten minute lecture on digital encoding formats might make her change her mind pretty quickly!
I should state he has vastly improved over the past few years, in case he ever reads this
I think it's a common problem among techy/science types, that they spend a lot of time around their own kind, and forget that most people just don't live in that world, and why I wish more tech support depts would try hiring people who don't just know a lot about hardware, but are capable of talking about 'stuff' to regular people.
I have a friend who used to use 'conflagration' when 'fire' would have worked, (lucky he never never got trapped in one, yelling 'conflagration' isn't going to get people running for help) and while he's a smart guy, just didn't seem to have the ability to scale things down to be acessible to 'normal' people. On another occasion, he was having a housewarming get together, and a girl broke into a conversation about music with 'what IS mp3 anyway?', to which he breaks down the acronym, starts talking about lossy codecs and the like, and the history of the format, at which point someone fortunately distracted him and I was able to step in and say 'um, its just music, but stored as a computer file instead of on a cd.'
Sure, he was being more informative, and more factual, but sometimes ya need to read between the lines and realise that sometimes a question is more than a desire for information. It can simply be a 'hi, can I join this group's conversation please?' and a ten minute lecture on digital encoding formats might make her change her mind pretty quickly!
I should state he has vastly improved over the past few years, in case he ever reads this
I think it's a common problem among techy/science types, that they spend a lot of time around their own kind, and forget that most people just don't live in that world, and why I wish more tech support depts would try hiring people who don't just know a lot about hardware, but are capable of talking about 'stuff' to regular people.
You mean like a humorous anecdote of an incedent involving fecal matter or excrements?Hurr Durr Derp said:
OT:
I guess the way the article tells about the language of newspapers of the old days is why, i can't help but think of people wearing an old school shirt and vest, with a top-hat and monocle to booth, when people (usually on internet forums) starts using higher level writing (or just replacing words with rarely used synonyms) to sound smarter when they lack a point or a counter-argument.
Just repeat what you just said in fancy old school smartsounding language, cause that'll surely make your point more clear, like the intelelgence version of a brute flexing his muscles while trying to sound intimmidating to make his previously stupid point bear more weight by pointign out, that his bigegr and stronger than you.
As for games, i guess it really depends on how much i like the game, for most single player games, i don't really acre to understand how every mechanic works, especially in RPG's where theres a whole lot of math-craft and web-browsing to do, if you want do truly understand how each stat affects you, when they cap etc.
In compettitive games i'll go way furtehr than i'd ever do in a single-player game to figure out how stuff works, if theres a reason for it.
This may of course be due to the fact, that i rarely play single player games through more than once, while multiplayer games gets hundreds of hours of play-time.
As for movies and books, i usually prefer the non-snobbish ones, i got too sick of over-analizing and intepretating books in high school, and i've always been more intrigued with impressive world and stories that can depict those worlds through their tale than the underlying subliminal messages which may or may not be something the writer intended.
For insatnce, thats why i really liked avatar, while teh story itself may not have been teh greatest ever, teh movie managed to depict a world which goes beyond the movie... that and me beeing a 3d digital artist in training, i am a sucker for CGI.
I like content that appeals to a variety of people, because I think our hobby appeals to a variety of people.
For example: My sister and I watch ZP together. She is a casual gamer with six years of college education under her belt, while I am more of a hardcore gamer, with a high school education. Sure she understands more of the higher level jokes than I do, but we both find it just as funny. She explains the words I don't understand, and I give her a brief overview of the game before we watch it. It has also sparked her interest in my hobby. She was absolutely absorbed by Mass Effect, and has recently expressed her wish to play Bioshock.
Of course, ZP first drew me in with the potty humor, I won't lie about that. I would enjoy it without the intellectual bits, but I don't think I would be gleefully anticipating it every Wednesday, as I do now. The 14th level comprehension is what makes Yatzhee stand out, and I think it shows that gaming can be intelligent too. At least it did for my sister.
For example: My sister and I watch ZP together. She is a casual gamer with six years of college education under her belt, while I am more of a hardcore gamer, with a high school education. Sure she understands more of the higher level jokes than I do, but we both find it just as funny. She explains the words I don't understand, and I give her a brief overview of the game before we watch it. It has also sparked her interest in my hobby. She was absolutely absorbed by Mass Effect, and has recently expressed her wish to play Bioshock.
Of course, ZP first drew me in with the potty humor, I won't lie about that. I would enjoy it without the intellectual bits, but I don't think I would be gleefully anticipating it every Wednesday, as I do now. The 14th level comprehension is what makes Yatzhee stand out, and I think it shows that gaming can be intelligent too. At least it did for my sister.
heh, considering Fry's innuendo packed style of humour, I can't believe I didn't spot myself writing that!Cousin_IT said:
Really tho, when it comes to entertainment, most people don't want to WORK at it, so you'll drop down a few ranks on that scale. Which explains Hole in the Wall, Total Wipeout and Britains Got Talent, even retarded chimps are finding those shows 'a bit dumb but enjoyable enough'.
EDIT Reading this, it sounds a bit anti 'dumb fun', I'm not, I'm all for it, so long as it's not the only thing you're enjoying, just like a man can not live on rockstar and cheetos alone, even if it is the big raid tonight
Personally I can find enjoyment in Serious Sam and Deus Ex, despite them being very different in terms of what I get from them, sometimes just plain blowing stuff up is fun.
I'm a bit of a music snob. Literary, not so much. I'd rather read a good vampire story than read the story of the War of 1812 in 1000 pages.
We've a number of those people where I work. They've never solved anyone's problem.SenseOfTumour said:
There's a secondary issue here: People want simplification/abstraction, while failing to understand that it often muddles the issue.
If I tell you that there's a fire "over on that street with the good restaurant," that's just about worthless. In order to resolve the issue, the fire, you need a much more precise location. Same goes for technical problems: Telling me that your printer doesn't work is worthless. I need to know exactly what it isn't doing.
I'm a snob in many ways. I'm always looking for something new and different and the mainstream music, games, and everything else just don't cut it.
I find Zero Punctuation works on many levels. At its base, it is base humor: childish, sexual, and made to get laughs (not gay). But at a higher level, Yahtzee is able to weave a larger narrative, describing his experiences and critically reviewing the material within the games in the greater context of gaming. What makes it truly masterful is that he is able to distract you with sexual jokes long enough to trick you into honestly considering the ridiculousness of some of the things we experience in games. As an example, driving around town having to find a dozen locations where a specific marker stood is deplorable, but not funny. However, when it's Satan's willy that you're searching for, standing erect in the middle of a park, that shit is bangin'.
Another great example of works that can be enjoyed at multiple levels are the Disney/Pixar films like Shrek. Kids will think the potty humor is funny and will enjoy seeing the animals dancing and singing, but parents can easily understand the not-so-subtle references to sex and relationships that go right over the youngster's heads. The beautiful part is, they can make adult jokes without the kids going, "Mommy, what's a cock?"
I think this is an important point to consider in the continual argument over games as kids' toys. Just like movies can have adult versions, and even adult content within a film intended for children, video games should also be able to leave something for the adults to enjoy.
It also makes a great argument against those incessant, forced "Move the stick to look around" intro tutorials. If you have never played a video game before, or were too lazy to read the manual (do they even make those any more), it would be understandable, but most adults (and even most kids) playing GTA IV for the first time have likely played another first-person shooter / RPG / gore porn that they would know how to control it. By relegating all of the content to the 4th grade level, they are alienating their larger, more age-appropriate audience.
I find Zero Punctuation works on many levels. At its base, it is base humor: childish, sexual, and made to get laughs (not gay). But at a higher level, Yahtzee is able to weave a larger narrative, describing his experiences and critically reviewing the material within the games in the greater context of gaming. What makes it truly masterful is that he is able to distract you with sexual jokes long enough to trick you into honestly considering the ridiculousness of some of the things we experience in games. As an example, driving around town having to find a dozen locations where a specific marker stood is deplorable, but not funny. However, when it's Satan's willy that you're searching for, standing erect in the middle of a park, that shit is bangin'.
Another great example of works that can be enjoyed at multiple levels are the Disney/Pixar films like Shrek. Kids will think the potty humor is funny and will enjoy seeing the animals dancing and singing, but parents can easily understand the not-so-subtle references to sex and relationships that go right over the youngster's heads. The beautiful part is, they can make adult jokes without the kids going, "Mommy, what's a cock?"
I think this is an important point to consider in the continual argument over games as kids' toys. Just like movies can have adult versions, and even adult content within a film intended for children, video games should also be able to leave something for the adults to enjoy.
It also makes a great argument against those incessant, forced "Move the stick to look around" intro tutorials. If you have never played a video game before, or were too lazy to read the manual (do they even make those any more), it would be understandable, but most adults (and even most kids) playing GTA IV for the first time have likely played another first-person shooter / RPG / gore porn that they would know how to control it. By relegating all of the content to the 4th grade level, they are alienating their larger, more age-appropriate audience.
Exellent that music was mentioned, good music makes me feel like you know as if I'm in a mills and boons novel.
and and and!
and and and!
I'm so glad for that, so there is a scientific way of me telling people that Kotaku have a shit writing style.
And then he stuck it in her, and it was totally hot and then "take me" she said and he got on a Harley and rode into the sunset.
I'm going to contest this. By your very own definition I would seemingly be a snob. I'm easily able to read and interpret everything you wrote, and in fact regularly read scientific articles for college. I love Bach, Pachelbel, Mozart, Carl Maria von Weber, and many more themed "classical" artists. Yet I'm not entirely restricted to those things.Archon said:
Yes, I prefer listening to a good interpretation of Der Freischütz [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUAdEKq6h_M], or Steve Vai's brilliant "For the love of god" [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IrWyZ0KZuk] more than most pop, yet my music folder also holds some Lady Gaga [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrO4YZeyl0I] or Eminem [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkDYhMqEVxo]. I enjoy a psychological and cinematographic masterpieces like 12 Angry Men or Revolver (absurdly underrated gem), yet I also have room in my heart for some stupid-as-plywood balls-out action killfests like Ninja Assassin. I absolutely adored Portal's story, level design, characterization... And everything really... But I spent more than a few hours of my life on "stupid" games like Tekken or Dead or Alive. Several volumes of Kohta Hirano's Hellsing line up on my shelf next to a Kafka, and right before Watchmen, V for Vendetta and The Killing Joke.
At the risk of sounding like a snob (or a prick), I'll admit I seem to have higher standards than most people, but I don't subscribe to the idea that just because I like what you'd consider "higher comprehension level" media, that I'm limited to it.
Partially because I don't believe something requires a high comprehension level to be good, in fact I wildly praise Alan Moore for his capacity to deliver deep and brilliantly pungent messages and ideas through what you described as "7th grade comprehension level", while many artists try to hide the shallowness of their content through inflation of their "comprehension level". Partially, because I think a good and well though out message should be appreciated by everyone. I shudder to think people would consider themselves educated while being unable to appreciate simple things unless they're cloaked under a pretentious veil.
That said, I loved the article, particularly as someone who studies psychology (and have touched some of those subjects a few times). That said, I'm saddened by the fact that the majority of people (everywhere, not just Americans) have a very low comprehension level, usually due to under-stimulation, which, consequently, dumbs down media in general.
The most atrocious example of such case to me is I Am Legend. Ending-related Spoilers necessary to explain:
In the book, the whole story is a critic to our society's ethnocentric self-righteous attitude. We're always the good guys and the others are always the ones threatening our values... The end of the book hits the reader like a brick to the face, when you, alone with Dr. Robert Neville, the main character portrayed by Will Smith in the movie, understands that he's the real monster to them. He's the one killing them and plotting their destruction for no reason. Thus the name: "I am Legend". He realizes he's the legend in their stories. He's the monster. The book ends, as far as I remember, with Dr. Neville handing over what he now understands as a kid he brutally kidnapped, and the "monsters" going away, as all they wanted was to save one of their own.
That is the book. The book is brilliant.
The movie was originally done like that as well. It was going to be brilliant as well. But, alas, it reached test screening and, predictably, it turns out most people could not understand the morale... If launched like so, the movie would have been brilliant, but very likely a box office flop. So they ditched that ending in favor of the idiotic ending we see in the video, where Robert Neville hands the woman and the child the "cure", then sacrifices himself with a grenade to save them, in typical "American hero" style.
Obviously this ruins the movie as absolutely everything to that point was built up to the original ending. The patriotic gush that replaced it doesn't make any sense, and, ironically, subverts the original message into the very thing it meant to warn you about. It's tragic.
That is the book. The book is brilliant.
The movie was originally done like that as well. It was going to be brilliant as well. But, alas, it reached test screening and, predictably, it turns out most people could not understand the morale... If launched like so, the movie would have been brilliant, but very likely a box office flop. So they ditched that ending in favor of the idiotic ending we see in the video, where Robert Neville hands the woman and the child the "cure", then sacrifices himself with a grenade to save them, in typical "American hero" style.
Obviously this ruins the movie as absolutely everything to that point was built up to the original ending. The patriotic gush that replaced it doesn't make any sense, and, ironically, subverts the original message into the very thing it meant to warn you about. It's tragic.
...Anyways. Essay, I know... Great article.