Remember

in "Ghostbusters" when the scretary says to Egan "I bet you read all the time,"?
"Print is dead," Egan snaps.

That's not what I am getting at here, but this thread brought that to mind, and made me laugh.

I love all variety of media as well, and read more than I watch television, to be honest. But I would suggest that it is the very nature of the cognitive processes involved in reading that actually limit the scope of the artistic potential. Reading inherently utilizes the rational, linear processes of the brain, filtering all information through these paths. Other forms of art affect other processes in the human brain, some more primal, others simply non-reasoning, and perhaps even non-rational. One can still make sense and come to understand and even to reason about and analyse other media, but as their access into the brain is less mediated by the cognitive logos their influence is inherently different.

But I agree, no one medium is inherently superior to another- the concept makes no sense out of context.