Unsupported. What the author finds dull is an exhibition of works in a single genre (early nonfiction film). He doesn’t suggest that showing works by the same artist together is ever dull, or that doing so is ever likely to be less interesting than another approach.

Strongly supported as something the author would agree with. He argues that when early nonfiction films are exhibited one after the other without variety, the audience misses out on experiencing the interplay between different kinds of early films. This is a major concern for him. So he must believe that audiences are significantly affected by the interplay of different works of art.

Anti-supported. Film archives and retrospective festivals are ignoring practices that have their roots in the vaudeville tradition.

Unsupported. Early cinemagoers watched different genres of films together, but that doesn’t suggest they thought fiction and nonfiction were the same genre.

Anti-supported. The author suggests that “collecting the similar,” while not authentic, can be helpful to historians and academics.