1 min read

"Real entertainment requires serious attention"

There's a quote in Tracts of the Sun about entertainment. On page 135, the book quotes Ngak'chang Rinpoche:

The problem with 'entertainment' is that it's seen as a leisure pastime—and consequently needs no work. Real entertainment—of whatever kind—requires serious attention.

What about 'entertainment' in this sense is a problem? What is the problem with "needs no work"? What is valuable or important about "work"? What do we even mean by "work" here?

My guess is that "work" would be the work of "remaining present with the experience," whether that's a TV show or a movie or a power fantasy web novel. Remaining alert to what is in experience.

What's valuable about that? From a small-a artistic point of view, you notice more, and that could be helpful in connecting with the piece and the artist. From a meditative point of view, "remaining present" may be "the point" in general, and the extra context that it's 'entertainment' doesn't matter. But those two ideas don't feel sufficient to explain the quote's forcefulness.

What's the problem? I don't see that there is one. If anything it sounds like there is a missed opportunity, which may be sad. But it doesn't imply there is anything metaphysically wrong with taking entertainment as leisure.

This quote sits irritatingly with me. It feels like I'm missing something.

For now I take the bottom line to be that taking entertainment as "a leisure pastime" is a missed opportunity, more than a problem. You get out of entertainment what you put in, and that's fine.