![]() In an interview by Californian Magazine author Katia Savchuk, Skloot agrees with the notion that “The emotional impact of seeing the story brought to life with real people was powerful.” Not only are films quicker at delivering the information, but the visual and auditory aspects aid in learning compared to the confined readings of a book. The author further cements this argument: “Concrete images of film are easier to remember long after their display than the imagined ones required for reading” (Drucker 4). In turn, our busy, modern society pushes films as a more efficient way to consume information. One could watch an hour film that presented the same information as a 300-page book. ![]() are better vectors to reach and inform a vast audience” (4). According to the Harvard Crimson article “Watching, Not Reading,” the author, Jacob Drucker, argues that “as visual, rather than textual, stimulus. This is because films have several methods to reach a wider audience that books lack. At first glance, this seems like a triumph for those trying to raise awareness about Henrietta Lack’s situation and humanize her. ![]() After the success of Rebecca Skloot’s New York Times Best Seller The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, a film adaptation was released by HBO and directed by George C. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |