When I was little, I read books with large chapters, quite large compared to my age, but I would also like to watch television. Yet my mother warned me that the television was no good, and now that I am an adult college student on my own, she continues to maintain that television is nothing but harmful garbage. I feel like I don't agree with what my mother has to say. Lorenzo Carceterra, the author of one of my favorite books Apaches, uses this technique where he introduces a character in one chapter, then the next chapter would be a completely different character and towards the last chapters of the book he combines all the characters and their stories for the finish line. I see similarities in this book to a TV show I watched called Prison Break. The television series Prison Break is based on the struggle of two brothers behind bars and their escape plan. The mastermind of this hit, Michael Scofield, manages to associate himself with numerous people as the series progresses. Can a television show enlighten the viewer just as a book would the reader? Michael Scofield's relationships with other characters are vital to developing the viewer's ability to blend material from multiple plots because these intricate relationships push the viewer to examine how each plot is integrated into the plot. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayIn this television show, Paul Scheuring, the producer of this television series, creates this character like a gravitational force, bringing together all the minor characters and maintaining a relationship and creating his own plot with each of them. In episode one of season one of Prison Break, Michael Scofield's first hours in prison, he is taken on a tour by his cellmate Sucre. They are seen in the open prison yard and are surrounded by other prisoners as Sucre points out who is who among the criminals and who owns what when it comes to resources. Show interest in particular prisoners, for example take a look at this excerpt from the episode, where Sucre and Scofield are still in the courtyard, and Scofield approaches Sucre, Michael: I'm looking for someone. Lincoln Burrows.[Shot of Lincoln crouching on the other side of chain-linked fence. Michael and Sucre lean on the fence.]Sucre: A man killed the Vice President's brother. In a month he will have the professorship, which means that no one on this river is more dangerous than him because now he has nothing to lose. What will they do? Kill him twice? Michael: Is there a way to get there? Sucre: The only time those guys go out is for the chapel and the prison industry. Anyway, why do you want to see Burrows so badly? Michael: Because he's my brother. [Sucre gives him a second look as Michael walks away from the fence.] Scheuring is quick to introduce Scofield in this first episode and the show is just getting started. Scofield, however, was a very successful structural engineer with a clean criminal record until he committed an attempted robbery and was gunned down for money he didn't need, only to end up in prison behind the walls of Fox River Penitentiary. Now you can see the particular prisoners that Scofield was interested in, and it turns out that they were none other but his brother. Not only does Scofiled's relationship with Lincoln Burrows already complicate the plot, but also what I'm wondering here as a viewer, which is what was the reason why Burrows killed the vice president's brother and didn't end up there, but also the reason why which Scofield plans to escape with his brother Burrows, who has committed a crime that heput on death row. Since Scofield proposes these relationships between characters, as a viewer it is crucial to examine these relationships to keep up with the plot as a whole. The question is: why do Scofield's relationships invite us as viewers to examine them and how they individually relate to the plot? Here I address this question in the words of Steven Johnson in his essay “Watching TV Makes You Smarter,” as follows: “Think about the cognitive benefits conventionally attributed to reading: attention, patience, retention, analysis of narrative threads. Over the past half century, television programming has increased the demands it places on precisely these mental faculties” (Johnson 280). Johnson compares reading and television programming and how both provide “cognitive benefits” for the viewer and reader. Examining these relationships in this television series improves the mental abilities of the viewer just as you would improve your mental abilities while reading. Referring to my book example at the beginning of this article, as well as the script provided above, Lorenzo Carceterra and Michael Scofield both place their plots at a point where it becomes complicated and distracting, which stimulates the brain to work for a long time . a little harder to process what's going on and let the viewer be invested in how each plot connects to another. Michael Scofield is seen just as Lorenzo Carceterra is, because they're both creating these storylines, weaving them together, having them meet at one point, or fade into another episode, or even create a whole new storyline. Once again I bring into play the words of Johnson, in his essay “Watching TV Makes You Smarter”, in which he refers to another television series, Hill Street Blues, “The number of main characters – and not just small parts – increases significantly. And the episode has blurred boundaries: picking up a thread or two from previous episodes at the beginning and leaving a thread or two open at the end” (Johnson 281). In this episode of Hill Street Blues, Johnson implies that the episode is made up of distinct plots and multiple minor characters who do exactly what I proposed of what Scofield does in Prison Break. With this technique, viewers could easily go from examining distinctive strands or plots, to putting them all together, blending them together creating the plot, and finally motivating why Scofield's intricate relationships were crucial to this connection of each respective plot. Therefore, as Scofield's relationships cause the viewer to examine how each plot is integrated into the plot, and as the viewer examines these storylines and their contribution to the plot, Scofield's intricate relationships are indeed vital to building the viewer's ability to blend material from multiple textures. However, it may seem that, as Dana Stevens argues in her essay “Thinking Outside The Idiot Box,” there is disagreement on this topic. Stevens doubts what Johnson had to say and references 24, a TV show that Johnson also once referenced, “It's really good at teaching you to think…about future episodes of 24” (Stevens 296). Stevens continues to doubt that television is something that helps the viewer with his thinking skills outside of the real world, but rather is a source of ignorance for the viewer and only helps him in future incidents only within the television show . Here I feel that Stevens and my mother agree on this matter. I maintain that Stevens' statements (and my mother's beliefs) are both true and false. I agree that TV shows like 24 or Prison Break help the audience think about future episodes, but.