I would like to say first and foremost that was the most annoying reading I have had to do because I do not print it out. Instead I had to flip my laptop sideways and reap the entire article like that. Kinda funny actually. However reading the article was pretty interesting. Especially talking about sound registering faster than sight. I never really thought about that but thinking about it it very true. Eyes have a lot more to do that ears. Eyes have to look at distance of an object, size, movement , what it is, etc. etc. and process it all. Ears and sound just have to focus on that. I guess that is why I would much rather lose my hearing than lose my sight. I know I could deal with that much better. It would such not to be able to hear music, but not seeing would put me at a much much greater disadvantage. Another thing about the article that made me think was the use of sound in cinema and if you took away the sound what would you have. It is kinda different watching a video without any sound at all. It loses so much. When watching Stan Brackhge films it is different because there is no sound to it at all. No dialogue, no music, nothing. I personally do not like it. I enjoy music during films, especially short experimental ones. It gives something extra to the film. Sometimes sound helps to just get through it. When I do not have sound on a film I can easily drift off out of the world the film should bring me into. Music and sound give emotion and propell thought and feelings. How often it happens to me that I hear a song that reminds me of a time that something good or bad happened to me. Or someone says a line from a film and I immediately laugh or am brought back to what I was doing when that film came out or who I was with. Sound is so important and I believe incredible detail and immense thought should be put into putting the sound into film even if the sound or music in obscure. Even then it may stand out in a good way.