I spent all day thinking about how to reply to you in order to win the argument, and I've finally got it. It's an argument so beautiful and brilliant you'll have no comeback and you will have to admit that visual art is the superior art form. Prepare yourself for the mental ass-kicking you're about to receive. Here goes…
"Literary art IS RELIANT ON the visual component - the type that visual artists create. Stories are written ABOUT the visual component, and when stories are read, they are done so while IMAGINING the visual component.
In the analogy of the puppet show, the puppet is the visual artist's work, and what the puppet says and does is the literary artist's work. The puppet can stand by itself as a visual artwork with no need for the puppeteer, but the puppeteer without the puppet is nothing."
As a further example: When reading the Harry Potter books, any reader who is aware of Daniel Radcliffe's role as Harry Potter will not be able to imagine Harry Potter in their mind as looking any other way. This is an example of how much stronger the visual component is over the literary component.
Boom, there you have it. That is my argument, in which I have full confidence of my certainty. After you've taken it all in and have recovered from the mental ass-kicking you've just received, you may begin to draft your apology and admission of being wrong.