I understand that with your twisted way of thinking you keep repeating the same thing ... so we probably can't get past that. Then believe what you will, I've already said like five times that all this is entirely your assumption but you keep repeating the whole thin again and again so I'll just leave it at that.You could not possibly be more wrong.
First of all, you were the one who brought up not being able to enjoy things that were too intellectually challenging. You used "War and Peace" as an example. Your friends (and the rest of the world) consider it intellectually challenging literature, you can't read past the beginning. It was your point, don't blame me for jumping on it . Also, you said (I paraphrase) that an angle beyond one's comprehension in a plot shouldn't -have- to be explained. You implied that if something was too subtle, nuanced or complex for you to grasp, it was obviously 'weak'.
I INVITE information, explanation or a different perspective... I can't tell you how many times in my life that learning about something (through discussion or research) allowed me to see things in a completely different perspective, which drastically altered my interest and enjoyment.
I don't know what you're going on about. You said you don't like things that are too cerebral, and I said perhaps you would change your mind if you saw them from a different perspective, and that it's possible to enjoy them more once you do. You argue this vehemently, instead of considering it. It seems to me that your nature is to be rigid in your thinking.