Why is there a loss of interest in reading?

[andave_ya]

I live in California, and I know very few people here who actually enjoy reading, especially if they're high schoolers. Why? And I very rarely consider romance actual reading; mostly they're fluff, excluding classics like Jane Eyre or Austen. It's not that people can't read, it's just that they honestly don't enjoy it. One reason is, I daresay, that they don't think there would be material they like. I know for a fact that this is untrue, because I have a friend who didn't read a lot because she didn't know what to read. Between me and the library, she found a niche. What is behind it all? Is it really because of video games, cell phones, ipods, computers, etc.?

For me, to not like reading is unfathomable. There is sooooo much to be found in books, it is incomprehensible to dislike them, especially considering that there is something for everyone. If I with my notoriously eclectic tastes can find enough material, then so can anyone else. :crash:

[Neo_Sephiroth]

Really? There are very few people that enjoys reading? Are you sure? This is Lit-Net, you know.:D

[andave_ya]

In California, I mean. Excluding you, of course, Neo, and my fellow lit-netters. Incidentally, are there a lot of Californian bookworms around here? I'll say beforehand, I'm proud to be a part of the same community.

[B-Mental]

I think it has to do with all of the distractions out there... reading is probably the least rapid method of entertainment. A

[manolia]

Most people i know consider reading as a boring habit. A reason for this i believe is that they have identified reading with school. Moereover reading is a process which needs some brain effort (and power). Well it's not like watching tv.

[Lyn]

I honestly think that people just can't be bothered to read. Sitting quietly in a room and actually concentrating on something they perhaps don't get straight away is considered boring. A lot people think that if something is a little bit difficult to understand then they can't be bothered to try, unless there is some obvious and visable reward for doing so.

[PeterL]

There never have been all that many people who enjoyed reading. There are many alternatives, and humans are desiged to take in words by hearing more than by seeing, so auditory stimulations is more popular.

[F.Emerald]

Moereover reading is a process which needs some brain effort (and power). Well it's not like watching tv.

It's precisely that. Kids think they get enough from learning at school, they can't be bothered to actually concentrate and learn something of their own accord, it really does take too much effort. Same reason as why the History or Discovery channels aren't as popular as brain-dead American sitcoms or an awful British soap (which I'm far more liable to watch, I'm lazy too...to a certain extent). Learning requires effort, and people are lazy, it's understandable. The benefits of reading are deemed worthless or too difficult to achieve, and for example, even though excercise requires effort, it is still more popular than reading etc. as it offers a superficial benefit.

[JBI]

Television. Also I would add that reading isn't perceived as "cool" now a days. If you look at the popular books, you will realize that the bulk of them really aren't that well written, or that they really don't have much to offer. I can't understand why people would read that stuff, but they do.

[omegaxx]

It's precisely that. Kids think they get enough from learning at school, they can't be bothered to actually concentrate and learn something of their own accord, it really does take too much effort. Same reason as why the History or Discovery channels aren't as popular as brain-dead American sitcoms or an awful British soap (which I'm far more liable to watch, I'm lazy too...to a certain extent). Learning requires effort, and people are lazy, it's understandable. The benefits of reading are deemed worthless or too difficult to achieve, and for example, even though excercise requires effort, it is still more popular than reading etc. as it offers a superficial benefit.

I agree. Reading good books does demand quite a number of brain cells.
Don't diss sitcoms though: I love those:D

[grace86]

I live in California, and I know very few people here who actually enjoy reading


andave I am in your exact position. Fellow Californian here who shares your exact sentiment. I don't know if anyone here reads. I think the reasons everyone has given are good ones. Especially here in CA, people want things faster, and that includes their entertainment. Books take too much time...

I think California (last time I checked) was 49th/50 in education. I don't know if that has anything to do with it, I am just speculating.

Glad to know there is another reader here...I think all of them reside here on LitNet. :D

[Redzeppelin]

I teach high school and it's terrifying how little the kids read. One look at their written expression immediately reveals that they've read very, very little. There's a lot of factors behind the decline in reading, but I think the primary one is that it's "work" - at least in terms of what it requires your brain to do. A good chunk of "screen entertainment" does not require your head to work like reading. In fact, reading is probably one of the most congnitively demanding things you can do. For practiced readers, reading may not seem like that much work - but for amatures? Yeah, it's tough. I'm really concerned because literacy is disappearing from our culture - kids don't have that catalogue of ideas and expressive tools that earlier generations had.

The end is near: repent (or better yet, read).

[metal134]

While I don't like Harry Potter, I think that the series has definitley done some good in getting kids to read. Maybe if there where more books of that ilk, kids would read more and would subsequently continue to read as adults. Is it a pipe dream? Maybe. But it's also a possibilty. The Harry Potter books alone can only do so much in getting kids to read, but it's a start.

[Logos]

While I don't like Harry Potter, I think that the series has definitley done some good in getting kids to read.

I agree. But generally I think reading has never been at the forefront of 'trends' or habits of the 9-20-something age group. Not enough instant gratification :p (If one reads too much they can get labeled 'weird' or anti-social by their parents or peers :rolleyes: )

[Neo_Sephiroth]

Yep, I live in California too. But, honestly, loss of interest in reading isn't just a problem in California, but probably the entire country....It just so happen that California seems to be much more worse than the other states.:p

I remember while I was back in high school...I love reading and still do...But the other folks in school was like, "What? You like to read? What are you? Crazy?"

Then there was the work involved with reading, most students just want to get it over with. While I was analyzing and trying to understand to work of poets, writers, and such, the other students was willing to pass with a "D" or "C" grade.

It was very disappointing to hear my peers say such things as "It's just a stupid poem" and "Aww, man...It's my turn to read?"

Very disappointing...:(

[bazarov]

I agree. But generally I think reading has never been at the forefront of 'trends' or habits of the 9-20-something age group. Not enough instant gratification :p (If one reads too much they can get labeled 'weird' or anti-social by their parents or peers :rolleyes: )
Good point! My friend told me once: Go and ask your imaginary friends! Before 10 years, It could hurt me...

[Demona]

At least LitNet allows people who do enjoy reading communicate. 8) I think the decline in the popularity of reading can be observed not only in California or the States, but all over the world. I tottally agree with the abovementioned ideas that people want to get information fast. Цell, nothing to do really, we can't blame them...can we?

[andave_ya]

You said it, Neo. It's awfully disappointing. You can't even get people to enjoy reading aloud, to pretend vaguely that they are actors. I love it when my mom lets me read something out of a book to her. I'm not an actress, but usually when I read out loud I'm comfortable with the characters; they have a voice of their own, and I try to project that in my reading aloud. Not to mention, there is the joy of sharing something memorable.

Yeah, sometimes reading can be a difficult. My favorite series of books is difficult to read. Whenever I read it, I feel like I have to roll up my sleeves and get to work, but it is seriously gratifying, regardless of work.

Anyway, my "imaginary friends" play a large part in my life still. They aren't Johnny and Susie and Lily anymore though, they're "Lord Peter," "Harriet" "Dorothy L. Sayers" (she's an author, though), the Lord of the Rings characters, etc. Thankfully, I don't need to say anything in their defense. They can stand on their own two feet. :p

[Silvia]

I have always read a lot since I was very young, and this really helped me with the school and relationships at large.Books give ideas to think of, they build your creativity, they teach you how to express yourself while speaking or writing....But all my friends and classmates (well, not all of them, but most of them) didn't like books at all.
I have to admit that now that I'm attending high school I read much less than before, because we are loaded with homework and tests....

Anyway, I think the loss of interest in reading depends a lot on the kind of person you are. I myself remember I started reading with Paperino(Donald Duck), because I wanted to. And then I started asking my parents for books to read, because I felt like it.
While my best friend, who has been attending my same schools since we were 3 years old, couldn't even finish the first book of Harry Potter (which I like and find quite entertaining).....that's because she has a lot of interests but she doesn't like reading!
So,I guess this is the point.

[lavendar1]

I teach high school and it's terrifying how little the kids read. One look at their written expression immediately reveals that they've read very, very little. There's a lot of factors behind the decline in reading, but I think the primary one is that it's "work" - at least in terms of what it requires your brain to do. A good chunk of "screen entertainment" does not require your head to work like reading. In fact, reading is probably one of the most congnitively demanding things you can do. For practiced readers, reading may not seem like that much work - but for amatures? Yeah, it's tough. I'm really concerned because literacy is disappearing from our culture - kids don't have that catalogue of ideas and expressive tools that earlier generations had.

The end is near: repent (or better yet, read).

I teach high school English, too, and I'm pretty new at it; still, I can't believe how poorly some of the students read. And their comprehension? That's another horror story. There have been alot of viable reasons put forth here about why it's so (I think it has alot to do with our society's insatiable need for immediate gratification -- and reading is something that has to be stewed over a little bit, so it just doesn't fit), but anyway, the bigger question is: What are we going to do about it?

Forget just reading literature -- many of these students CAN'T and DON'T read anything. In my opinion, it's a national crisis. How can anyone hope to live a 'normal' (perhaps that's a poor word choice) life if they can't even read?

We read aloud often in my classes, I offer strategies for different types of/reasons for reading, and I check comprehension as much as is possible - with all the other things I'm required to do. Somehow, though, it's just not enough. I get so concerned about this...

[Cherubino]

I think that the love for reading has to start at an early age. I've always loved reading, and other people I know who have also read since infancy, seemingly, either still read a lot or would like to do so. If kids found good literature and enjoyed it, there'd probably be a lot more readers today.

Agreeing with most of the folks here, it really is discouraging to have already read most of the books I'll be reading in my senior year of high school (I'm currently a junior), while all my classmates read Sparknotes while muttering about how stupid a book is.

[Adudaewen]

I think a lot of it has to do with Americans especially being so damned addicted to sound bytes, cell phones, texting (cant even be bothered to spell out the words or use proper grammar), magazines, and trashy romance novels. I mean, we want it, and we want it now, and we don't want to have to think too hard about it. It's depressing. I think a lot of it goes back to the "No Child Left Behind" movement. I mean we have dummied down our curriculum to the point that if you have a workable brain, you never get challenged. My friends used to think I was crazy. I mean how can a person read for pleasure, ugh! Unthinkable. Television and I hate to say the Internet have made our attention spans less and less. People don't want to have to work for intelligence anymore. They want it at the end of a search engine or in "easily digestible" forms like talk shows and dramadies. It's scary. Also I think that we have let our minds turn to mush, because we cannot retain information anymore. One of my former co-workers, a girl of 16 years couldn't even tell me who the president of the United States was, or who gave the classic "Four score and twenty years ago" speech. It's embarassing what our school system has done to American kids.

[Bebbin]

This problem upsets me as well. I'm in high school, and I know almost no one who enjoys reading books or even anything anymore (aside from the teachers). There isn't even a Lit Club or a Book Club in my high school, and that should say a lot.

For the most part, I think that the loss of interest in reading nowadays, especially in my generation, could be attributed to the fact that we're basically living at a technological age. People want to obtain and do things faster without having to work much, and the faster the better. It seems as if if time and effort and brain cells are needed to accomplish a task (as in reading), people either abandon it or search for a faster alternative. Take sparknotes.com for example. The site provides all you need to know summaries and analysis on certain books, and frankly, it's the easy way out for my fellow classmates who are too lazy to read in English class.

If the decline in reading continues, the future of my generation is going to rot. http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/sad/sad0020.gif

[Adudaewen]

As my philosophy teacher once told me "If you want to be a rebel, forget the drugs, just read"

[ClaesGefvenberg]

Very interesting discussion.:thumbs_up


Most people i know consider reading as a boring habit. A reason for this i believe is that they have identified reading with school.I think you hit the nail on the head there. Schools all over the world often make that same mistake: They try to force feed the students with literature (as well as many other things), instead of sparking interest and enthusiasm... I can remember a school mate of mine saying: "Oh no, here comes another book. It's not that I mind reading the thing, but why can't they just let us read it for the sake of reading, without all those tests to prove that we understood it right when we're done?". In spite of being a keen reader myself I have no problem understanding what he meant: Force feeding is not likely to spurn an apetite, is it?
Also I would add that reading isn't perceived as "cool" now a days. I don't think it ever was... How many of you have been sneered at as "bookworms"? I certainly have. Doubtless, you also know that readers are boring, have no friends (which is why we have to resort to reading), and generally no life. :rolleyes:

My friends used to think I was crazy. I mean how can a person read for pleasure, ugh! Unthinkable. You got it. I once told a person about how much I read and how much I like it. She just looked at me and said "God, your life must be boring"... She actually felt pity! But look at it this way: If you are not a reader - How could you possibly fathom what those of us who do read experience? It's like describing colour to someone who was born blind! :brickwall
As my philosophy teacher once told me "If you want to be a rebel, forget the drugs, just read"What a thoroughly insightful comment... I can only agree.

/Claes

[ennison]

Schools are probably in an invidious situation. They have to produce literate people so I guess they over test understanding. However if the breakthrough to literacy comes early in a child's life then there is no reason why even the 'drudgery' of school literature cannot be enjoyed. For then it is no longer drudgery but ever expanding enlightenment.
Parents should read to their children. We were brought up in a Sabbatarian household and between church services consumed literature like little piranhas - all of us and that has stayed with us no matter what walk of life we found ourselves in.

[melissapurcell]

It really is sad that more people do not enjoy reading. What is even sadder to me is when adults pass on their aversion to reading to the younger generation. Several people have told my children that they hate reading and that they see no reason to do it. This doesn't help me in my quest to get my children to enjoy reading...not to mention that they have to do it for school. It's really hard to get them to read just for enjoyment

[Adudaewen]

Parents should read to their children.

I totally agree. My mom used to read to us every night, from books like Black Beauty, Grimm's Fairy Tales, The Hobbit, and scores of others. She also made it a really big deal to go to the library. We went twice a month, and I remember looking forward to it so much that I was literally shaking with anticipation when we pulled up in front of the library. I hope to pass that love on to my kids.

[Jean-Baptiste]

I have just a couple of things to add; there are some very good points in this discussion. I wonder what effect the misconception that we are living in "the information age" has on the reading of good books. I say misconception because I've heard countless times that everything a person could possibly want to know can be found online, or on tv, or in some other easily digestible form of media, and this is simply not true. There are myriads of books that are not to be found online, whether for the reason that they are under copyright, or that they simply have not yet been transcribed, and these all contain incredibly valuable information, not to mention entertainment, that is just not available anywhere else. Yes, I agree with the point made in several posts that we demand information fast, but I think this idea that everything is indeed at our fingertips also contributes to the view that discounts the value of reading.
I'd also like to say that I was totally appalled, when I started college, at the number of entering students who actually could not read. I've taken a number of English type courses, and they all require some bit of reading out loud, and it's just amazing to me when a college student stumbles over every other word, sounding out countless words, and mispronouncing a majority of them, or simply gives up half way through a large word. I don't understand it. I know I'm attending a back-water college, but come on! This definitely is a problem.

[Virgil]

There never have been all that many people who enjoyed reading. There are many alternatives, and humans are desiged to take in words by hearing more than by seeing, so auditory stimulations is more popular.


I agree. But generally I think reading has never been at the forefront of 'trends' or habits of the 9-20-something age group. Not enough instant gratification :p (If one reads too much they can get labeled 'weird' or anti-social by their parents or peers :rolleyes: )

I agree with Peter and Logos. What makes people think there has been a decline in reading? Is there some statistic out there that says this? When I was growing up, I was the odd ball that read. Most others didn't except for school.

[ClaesGefvenberg]

However if the breakthrough to literacy comes early in a child's life then there is no reason why even the 'drudgery' of school literature cannot be enjoyed. For then it is no longer drudgery but ever expanding enlightenment. Parents should read to their children. Well said. For as long as I can remember, I have had this craving for reading. I also know where it came from: My parents read to me... ...and I started reading to my daughter while she was still in the crib, before she could even say a single word. She is now a bookworm (not to mention writer: she keeps writing ever longer stories) of the first order, and it makes me very proud. She has in fact asked me to help her write her first posts here at LitNet: Her english is not so hot yet, but she has seen me posting here... :thumbs_up
What is even sadder to me is when adults pass on their aversion to reading to the younger generation.Yes, that is so true, and not only when it comes to writing.
She also made it a really big deal to go to the library. We went twice a month, and I remember looking forward to it so much that I was literally shaking with anticipation when we pulled up in front of the library.Yes! :thumbs_up I hear you. My parents did that to me, and I passed it on to my daughter. Every other week we go there, and then come back home with a couple of bags worth of reading matter. :lol:

I was the odd ball that read. Most others didn't except for school.You too, eh? I recognize that, but then I never tried to follow the flow anyway... :lol:

/Claes

[B-Mental]

Its funny, but I taught myself to read at the age of four with the help of the 'Electric Company' show. I had a father that was an english teacher and a mother that was passionate about reading and patient with my questions...I attribute my love for reading to them both, and my heart goes out to those that don't read. Bless my parents.

[Idril]

I've always read to my boys and have always gone by the motto that you can never have too many books but the process of going from me picking out what to read and they picking out books for themselves was a hard transition for my oldest. He would just be overwhelmed at the choices at bookstores or the library so I would go through and pick out a handful I thought he might be interested in and he would make the choice from there. Eventually, he found authors and series that he really liked and was able to pick out his own books but it does show that while reading to your kids when they're babies and toddlers is great, parents need to continue to nurture and sometimes guide them throughout their formative years.

Now all they read are mangas. I realize it does still technically count as reading but I really do wish they would read more classic fiction now and again. :rolleyes:

[ClaesGefvenberg]

Now all they read are mangas. I realize it does still technically count as reading but I really do wish they would read more classic fiction now and again.Don't worry: I'm sure they'll widen their views again. Perhaps the manga is here to stay, but manga, cartoons and more "traditional" kinds of literature are not mutually exclusive... There is room for all of it.

/Claes

[SaGe]

TV is easier :(

[litlearner]

A lot of people are asking this same question. As a secondary school English teacher and a recent graduate, I know that this is a big concern. In some circles it is the teachers who are blamed for the problem. As some of you mentioned, the tumble in literacy is not limited to California.
You have already touched on many of the reasons commonly given: too much else to do, boring school reading assignments that turn people off to reading as children, laziness (I don't necessarily agree with this one), etc.
I'm in my 50's and when I was a kid there were many fewer entertainment options. We had less money, one TV in a household and I watched what my parents wanted to watch. Reading, I think, had a higher status back then. Mom and Dad pushed it because they believed it made one "educated", higher class and cultured--unlike many of them, but something they valued for our sakes. A poor a kid like me could travel via reading to many places he or she could never dream of going in real life, I know I did and it was one of reading's biggest attractions for me.
Some people blame the "Canon" for the problem--(boring?) books written by white men--long ago--no longer relevant and not originally intended for children in the first place. At school we learned about alternatives, adolescent lit., well written books that today's kids can relate to. We also learned about graphic novels (like Comics) and Manga, which are very popular--think Heros. When I began teaching in New York, I found these books were already commonly in use, and the kids seem to enjoy them for the most part. We also have many new ways of engaging students in reading that take some of the drudgery out of reading by returning to the aesthetic qualities, the love of a good story, beautiful prose, imaginative and thought provoking ideas, reasons that atracted most of us to reading in the first place. Since the visual arts are predominant today, we can tie reading to film, TV, and other Media.
I hope this is a good direction. By the way, some people are also asking if reading is dead or dying because of today's technology. We have audio books now. Why read if a book can be read to us?
Whatever--I will always love a good book, one with pages I can turn and passages I can return to and savor again and again. We will always love stories however we access them.

[me_07]

loss of INTERST IN readind..oh boy..i gotta long list thn..
firstly
TV
Myspace
Facebook
hangin' out with frnds
Mall
g.f or b/f
lack of interst
understandin power
bouring book/novel
buddies
weekend fun:)
other work
job
n
also wal-Mart shopping
heh heh last but not least
SLEEPING

THIS R ALL DE REASON OF LOSS OF INTEREST IN READING..

[*Classic*Charm*]

Don't forget Youtube.

Though NONE of those are a valid reason for neglecting literature.

[lavendar1]

My mom always read to me and I always read to my children -- and as a teacher now, I can almost tell which of my students didn't have that pleasure ever. So, I sneak in 'choice' every chance I can (around the required curriculum); I just let the students choose a fiction or non-fiction book to report on (including contemporary young adult literature - which I really promoted... some of it is quite good). Still, for some it went over like a lead balloon. I won't give up, though. I think of myself as one of the last people they'll encounter who will promote reading and, at the very least, attempt to ensure literacy for these students. And I often read to them, too. And sometimes, I bring a few of them in that way.

[JBI]

Strangely my parents were among the sort that never read to me. Growing up, I don't think I can recall one time that they had. Perhaps my interest in reading grew from my idea that higher class people are well read in literature. I attribute this to my societal conflicts with the current teen-age culture, and it's pathetic image. My interest in history led me to the realization that teenagers really aren't as different as modern day people perceive, and the fact that it is the media, and the way society has matured that has lead to what I understand to be "the decline in proper culture".

Towards my teen years I pursued this idea, and determined to digest as much famous literature as possible. This led to an obsession which brings me to where I am now. When looking back I have no regrets. Watching movies just doesn't compare to the enjoyment of reading an excellent piece of literature.

Perhaps now one reason people, younger people in particular, aren't reading is because of the stuff that hits the best seller lists. My interpretation of this fad of mediocre novels hitting the big time, is that now people are led to believe that this is what reading is really about. My interpretation of those authors, who may perhaps have excellent stories, is that they really don't cut it in terms of language, style, and the overall eloquence of the craft. When choosing to watch the movie adaptation of a crummy book, or read the book, I personally would choose the movie; whereas a book may take hours to read, the movie takes only a couple to a few hours. Better off watching a movie of rubbish than dedicating time to reading it when you can be enjoying something of a more intellectual nature.

[Shannanigan]

I think that the love for reading has to start at an early age. I've always loved reading, and other people I know who have also read since infancy, seemingly, either still read a lot or would like to do so.

Boy is this fact constantly nibbling at my rear end. I'm studying to be a high school English teacher and I have all these memories of my honors literature classes and all the wonderful discussions we had...little did I realize that most students are not honors students and that unless students developed a love for reading during early childhood, they probably never would.

I should have signed up for elementary education. But even then, half the effort has to be on the parents' side. If the parents don't see the value in reading, their children never will. Most of us who love reading are good students because our parents instilled that love and value of learning in us at an early age. Not all parents go this far, and I may be so bold as to say that most parents don't, either for lack of time or lack of realizing how valuable the simple act could be.

My friend is due in a month. I'm so glad that she's studying to be an elementary teacher and knows the value of reading to her baby. I also try to give good books to all the children in my life (cousins and whatnot), but some have already gotten to that age where "books are for school, and school is not cool" stage. You can only do so much after that...

[Idril]

...little did I realize ... that unless students developed a love for reading during early childhood, they probably never would.



That's not always necessarily so. I didn't read much as a kid, in fact my mother said she was really worried about me because I pretty much never read anything I wasn't required to and she thought it was so odd coming from such a book loving family. But I actually read the books I was required to and enjoyed them. I was the one my classmates went to when the test was coming up and they hadn't read the book because I always knew what was going on but yet I never picked up a book outside of class. It wasn't until I was out of college and no longer had any reading requirements that I realized how much I missed it. I didn't really get into reading until I was in my early 20's, a bit of a late bloomer but it just goes to show, it can happen.

[andave_ya]

Yes, seriously, aren't books lovely?

I don't recall my parents reading to me, but my Mom is a voracious bookworm. My Dad and sister not so much, but all of my family does deal in books, and that has affected me tremendously, in the best way possible. As soon as I learned to be a proficient reader, I found many classics and learned much from them. In the past couple of years, though, I have been finding my own specialized niche in the world of books. I do understand that reading can require effort -I feel like I have to roll up my sleeves and prepare to concentrate whenever I read my favorite book- but it's so worth it! :D :idea:

[Shannanigan]

That's not always necessarily so. I didn't read much as a kid, in fact my mother said she was really worried about me because I pretty much never read anything I wasn't required to and she thought it was so odd coming from such a book loving family. But I actually read the books I was required to and enjoyed them. I was the one my classmates went to when the test was coming up and they hadn't read the book because I always knew what was going on but yet I never picked up a book outside of class. It wasn't until I was out of college and no longer had any reading requirements that I realized how much I missed it. I didn't really get into reading until I was in my early 20's, a bit of a late bloomer but it just goes to show, it can happen.

I said probably, because of course there will be exceptions. With the culture here dictating that most parents don't see the value in reading and therefore won't be instilling that value in their children, I'm hoping that I can create some more exceptions to the general rule when I start teaching high school. I would love to see more students like yourself who realize later that reading can be fun :)

[Idril]

With the culture here dictating that most parents don't see the value in reading and therefore won't be instilling that value in their children...

That is true and I guess it is important to note that while I wasn't a great reader when I was young, I do come from a family of readers, my siblings and parents were always reading something so I did grow up in an environment where books were valued and that no doubt had something to do with my later interest in them.

[McGrain]

Nice post everyone. When I was a kid, reading was all about total immersion in another world. Independant of things being "good" or "bad" I loved visiting other places/times/reality so a love of fiction developed into a love of history and then a love of words.

Video games are better for total immersion in another reality. I love to read, but i'm not sure, in all honesty, if that would be the case had i been brought into it ten years later than i was, slap bang in the middle of the video games revolution (second gen where the graphics begin to compete with the type of computer animation you see in Finding Nemo).

There will always be a place for books, and for reading. I am quite convinced that the "well" of creativity begins with the written word (see Lovecraft, who didn't even believe in writing, or religious texts from way back when - they can't all have been written by devine intervention people that would mean everyone was wrong as well as right!) but i think we're just going to have to accept that it's on the wane.

[Manchegan]

This may have already been said, as I only read the first page and a half of posts (I can't be bothered to work for my information unless I'm immediately rewarded ;) ), but I wonder if this trend really real or imagined...

For most of history, very few people have been literate. Those who were were the sophisticated intellectuals, capable of appreciating art as well as science and news.

Then litaracy exploded and everyone was able to learn about general science and keep abreast of current events and enjoy some entertaining stories. Print was the only medium for spreading these ideas, so laymen read. Society advanced a great deal thanks to literacy.

But now, General information can be gleamed from TV, radio, the internet - so the lay men has no real use for books. I could be wrong, but I'd wagr that the percentage of folks who enjoy reading classic fiction has probably stayed the same or risen over the last hundred years.

[kelby_lake]

Loads of people read. They just read dross.

Everything is commercial trash these days.

[fb0252]

ah. that's it for me. I read constantly these days, but on the computer. books just further the eye strain, which is regrettable.

may we surmise that substantive analytic reading is confined to certain IQ ranges. I'd doubt those "above the level" read any less than they ever have, although what they are reading probably has changed. gone are the days when literature was the sole entertainment. the canterbury tales are great, but, who would bother that now, and if they did, who would read it?

[wat??]

I live in California, and I know very few people here who actually enjoy reading, especially if they're high schoolers. Why? And I very rarely consider romance actual reading; mostly they're fluff, excluding classics like Jane Eyre or Austen. It's not that people can't read, it's just that they honestly don't enjoy it. One reason is, I daresay, that they don't think there would be material they like. I know for a fact that this is untrue, because I have a friend who didn't read a lot because she didn't know what to read. Between me and the library, she found a niche. What is behind it all? Is it really because of video games, cell phones, ipods, computers, etc.?

For me, to not like reading is unfathomable. There is sooooo much to be found in books, it is incomprehensible to dislike them, especially considering that there is something for everyone. If I with my notoriously eclectic tastes can find enough material, then so can anyone else. :crash:

Hmmm well... I think that your attitude might be to blame for the "loss of interest in reading".

read·ing (rdng)
n.
1. The act or activity of one that reads.

Alright so!

read (rd)
v. read (rd), read·ing, reads
v.tr.
1. To examine and grasp the meaning of (written or printed characters, words, or sentences).
2. To utter or render aloud (written or printed material):

!!!

book (bk)
n.
1. A set of written, printed, or blank pages fastened along one side and encased between protective covers.

Riveting!

So it seems that in fact looking at the letters on a page of a romance novel, or other "fluff" is by definition "reading". Who'da thunk huh? As for your bolded text; "there's something for everyone", but if that something is too low brow for 'YOU' then it's not actually reading?

I'll never understand you intellectual types.

[Zee.]

I personally think that blaming the loss of interest in "reading" on technology, is a little wrong. I personally think it has a lot to do with how you were raised, and your environment when you were younger. I'm a technology nut. Ipods, phones, computers, i love them all - but that doesn't get in the way of my reading. I personally think that you can't just "lose an interest" in reading. You may run out of time to read, not be able to find a book you'd be interested in reading, but lose interest in reading as a whole? no, i don't think that's possible. Therefore, i think the "problem" if you want to call it that, is that it's not so much a "loss of interest" in reading people are experiencing, but the new generation just hasn't been condition as much, to have an interest in reading.

I grew up with books - I was introduced to them from a very early age, and that stuck with me ( i'm 18 now ) in comparison, my younger brother ( 11 ) was raised .. pretty much, drowning in technology. I mean, he has a damn facebook. He has absolutely no interest in reading.

[mal4mac]

Video games are better for total immersion in another reality.

Can you point me to a video game that can place me into Shakespeare's reality?



Some people blame the "Canon" for the problem--(boring?) books written by white men--long ago--no longer relevant and not originally intended for children in the first place. At school we learned about alternatives, adolescent lit., well written books that today's kids can relate to. We also learned about graphic novels (like Comics) and Manga, which are very popular--think Heros. When I began teaching in New York, I found these books were already commonly in use, and the kids seem to enjoy them for the most part.

Of course they enjoy them! Like popcorn... But can't they, don't they, read them at home anyway?

Fortunately my English teachers stuck to the canon, and picked well from it. A close reading of Macbeth turned me on to literature for life.

[Ines Amri]

yes , it's quite true ! without reading "canon" literature, one can never be aquainted with English literature! Actually, I'm a F.l.S student and now I'm specialised in English literature, I admit that Macbeth (for me too) was the first book that made me fall in love with literature and Shakespeare ! Although it seems difficult and fathomable sometimes, canonical writings are the basics !

[African_Love]

I live in California, and I know very few people here who actually enjoy reading, especially if they're high schoolers. Why? And I very rarely consider romance actual reading; mostly they're fluff, excluding classics like Jane Eyre or Austen. It's not that people can't read, it's just that they honestly don't enjoy it. One reason is, I daresay, that they don't think there would be material they like. I know for a fact that this is untrue, because I have a friend who didn't read a lot because she didn't know what to read. Between me and the library, she found a niche. What is behind it all? Is it really because of video games, cell phones, ipods, computers, etc.?

For me, to not like reading is unfathomable. There is sooooo much to be found in books, it is incomprehensible to dislike them, especially considering that there is something for everyone. If I with my notoriously eclectic tastes can find enough material, then so can anyone else. :crash:

I don't understand how anyone can not like to read either. For some people, I think they don't mind reading but it never really occurred to them to go out of their way to read books for their own pleasure rather than for school, they have so much other stuff to do. Maybe it just never occurs to them to think of reading as entertainment. I wouldn't mind having a playstation or an X-box but if I had one, I wouldn't know which games to buy and I already have something that keeps me entertained so I don't really see the need to go out of my way to get one. I hope that made sense.

For people who just don't enjoy reading, I don't know what went wrong with them, lol.


A reason for this i believe is that they have identified reading with school.

Good point! I always hated learning about a topic I enjoyed for school. Reading (fiction) is not "educational" for me, I do it for fun.




There never have been all that many people who enjoyed reading. There are many alternatives, and humans are desiged to take in words by hearing more than by seeing, so auditory stimulations is more popular.

I think reading is on the same level as oral story telling. In both cases, unlike visual stimulation, one has to imagine the scenario described rather than view an already presented image. The love for story is in our blood, myths and legends are universal to all cultures.

[Homers_child]

I don't think the decline of interest in reading can be blamed on technology per se. I'm on the computer most of my days, and I'd marry my iPod if I could. But that doesn't stop me from reading. If I had to choose between the three, I'd probably choose books.

I think there are a couple factors that contribute to kids not wanting to read. One of those is of course school. The literature they make you read in school is not bad. Like others have said, Macbeth is actually what sparked my interest in Shakespeare! I remember sitting there and just smiling to myself saying it was absolutely genius. But while I was entranced, everyone else groaned as they opened their textbooks every day. I think it was difference in mindset. I looked at it as I was exploring a famous play and it must have held some magic within it to be so great, and I found that magic. Others went into it thinking it was 'work', it was 'forced'. It was hard language that didn't offer immediate understanding.

That leads me to my next point. In our society we like to have things 'immediately'. We need our entertainment fast and easy to comprehend. Books take patience. It might take a few days to a few weeks to make your way through a book and discover the end. Kids nowadays are used to seeing the end and climax throughout a 2 hour movie.

And also.. kids just really can't read nowadays. In high school, before I moved up into the higher ranked English classes, I was appalled that my fellow students didn't know how to read. When we had to read aloud, they seriously had trouble recognizing even the most simple words. It really got me worried. :brickwall

[Eryk]

People are reading, but thanks to the internet few people are reading anything longer than a few hundred words. The internet is changing the way we read and think.

Is Google Making Us Stupid? (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google)

[African_Love]

People are reading, but thanks to the internet few people are reading anything longer than a few hundred words. The internet is changing the way we read and think.

Is Google Making Us Stupid? (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google)

I'm thankful for the internet. There's a lot you can research that you couldn't otherwise. Besides, you can read e-books on here as well.

[Kafka's Crow]

Reading is the only one 'old habit' that is successfully [sp?] withstanding all technological, social and educational onslaughts. Bookstores are still thriving though big high street chains have replaced the small shops, number of books churned out by the 'publishing industry' was never higher. It is a misconception that reading is in decline. What we are witnessing is the result of democtisation of society in general and education in particular. The classes (if I am still allowed this word) that had no representation in the past, nor any voice, are not only most visible, they are rubbing shoulders with the so-called 'better' or intellectual classes, over-shadowing them and putting them in awe with their, how should I put it mildy, eh, difference. Their "difference" is rubbed off onto the so-called thoughtful people of yesteryears, resulting in 'dumbing-down' of the society, but on the other hand, more and more people are learning good habits, reading in particular, from the once cloistered intellectuals, resulting in a hike in book sales and production. Reading is thriving alongside poker, baseball, WWE, Nascar, Premiership Football, East Enders, Friends, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Facebook, Youtube, Lit.net, Pirate Bay, Ebay, iPods, iPhones, Nintendo Wii and even PS3 and PSP! This is the amazing complexity of our postmodern situation and I love it this way. People are reading books, online books, ebooks, audiobooks. Figures from the publishing industry are proof of this. Only time will tell whether the huge amounts of books churned out these days and available online were worth the dead trees or bandwidth or not but they do exist and this should not be a bad thing from our point of view.

[Dinkleberry2010]

I think there are more people reading now than ever before. I think there are more books being read than ever before. There are definitely more books being published than ever before. The quality of the reading and the books is another matter entirely.

[Katy North]

Hello all! I'm really excited to find a bunch of read-aholics like me!

First of all, I must say that I think there are more readers out there than one might think... but that since reading is considered uncool and because many readers are so shy they might not make great conversationalists (I know that in real life I tend to speak quietly in monotone. It would be so much more easier to write to communicate with people!)

Something else I should say is that it's important to realize that

a) probably there are no more and no less people reading the classics than there were before throughout history. Just, before, people had less education and motive to read. I know I'm young, so maybe before the advent of the TV there was a brief golden age of reading, but if you consider how many people were illiterate before all kids went to school regularly, I doubt there's been a serious decline in readers in the US of A.

b) remember, once the great authors were popular literature too! Charles Dickens was the JK Rowling of his time. I might get burned for this on this forum, but consider... 100 years from now so many movies and even some video games might be considered "classic" literature. That's why there are now film professors in some colleges.

c) I am hoping to go back to school for my masters and Ph.d. in English. It is my goal to make literature "marketable" for young people. While English and writing is not a dying discipline, literature is slowly becoming unnecessary for people attending college. There has got to be a way to make people interested in literature again, and I believe that the key to it lies in teaching students that literature can teach them so many things about themselves and modern society as a whole. I firmly believe that I have better character because I read the books I did growing up... starting with C.S. Lewis and Brian Jaques and advancing to Dickesn, Dostoevsky, and Austen.

And now my two year old son is continuing the tradition to... I read him "Harold and the Purple Crayon" and "Madeline" and he "reads" the books back to me... I'm already hard at work teaching the next generation of readers :D

[WingedWolf]

There never have been all that many people who enjoyed reading. There are many alternatives, and humans are desiged to take in words by hearing more than by seeing, so auditory stimulations is more popular.

Well said. There are as many kind of interests as there are people. Some people would rather play sports than read, some would rather watch tv, some would rather paint a picture, and then there's us :p Look how many people are reading this thread! Just one tiny fraction of the web dedicated to readers!

[thetinkris]

I think it is slightly just a matter of slowpaced vs fastpaced media that discourages people. The other day, my dental hygienist was complaining to me about how she had to read 2 ENTIRE novels per semester for a class she was taking, noting how long reading took and how many other things she could've done with that time. She also went on to talk about spending hours on facebook. It is just all relative.

[muhsin]

I lost mine recently; and do nothing more than watching films these days.

[Drkshadow03]

Well said. There are as many kind of interests as there are people. Some people would rather play sports than read, some would rather watch tv, some would rather paint a picture, and then there's us :p Look how many people are reading this thread! Just one tiny fraction of the web dedicated to readers!

Some days I'd rather play sports. Some days I'd rather watch TV. Some days I'd rather read. What ever happened to being well-rounded?

[JCamilo]

Hello all! I'm really excited to find a bunch of read-aholics like me!

a) probably there are no more and no less people reading the classics than there were before throughout history. Just, before, people had less education and motive to read. I know I'm young, so maybe before the advent of the TV there was a brief golden age of reading, but if you consider how many people were illiterate before all kids went to school regularly, I doubt there's been a serious decline in readers in the US of A.

This only motivated the change of the reading material and thus the production. It is no surprise that epic poetry (or poetry overall) lost his spot for romance and novels, and no surprise that short stories are also more relevant those days. Overall, Jornalism is probally the most commun form of reading.



b) remember, once the great authors were popular literature too! Charles Dickens was the JK Rowling of his time. I might get burned for this on this forum, but consider... 100 years from now so many movies and even some video games might be considered "classic" literature. That's why there are now film professors in some colleges.

Dickens was the Dickens of his time, he have no relation watsoever with Rowling. Several authors are also popular during the XIX and we barelly remember him. The matter of fact is that we do not know (or there is no) Dickens of this time.
And many movies or videogames are coing to be considered classic literature, how so if they are not even literature? Obviously, a few will be considered classic movies or videogames, but not literature, just like a classic music is a classic music. And few, unless you use classic like they do to promote a new movie (which means that a movie is called classic even before released) will be classic, because the nature of what is classic makes it not to be measure in quantidy and it is a rare event.




c) I am hoping to go back to school for my masters and Ph.d. in English. It is my goal to make literature "marketable" for young people. While English and writing is not a dying discipline, literature is slowly becoming unnecessary for people attending college. There has got to be a way to make people interested in literature again, and I believe that the key to it lies in teaching students that literature can teach them so many things about themselves and modern society as a whole. I firmly believe that I have better character because I read the books I did growing up... starting with C.S. Lewis and Brian Jaques and advancing to Dickesn, Dostoevsky, and Austen.

That is a very noble ideal, but if JKRowling is the more popular writer in the world right now, Literature is already marketable for young people. Plus, market is not a concern of academics, you can not control it and should not.


And now my two year old son is continuing the tradition to... I read him "Harold and the Purple Crayon" and "Madeline" and he "reads" the books back to me... I'm already hard at work teaching the next generation of readers :D

That is the best part of making someone be a reader. A co-work between family and school. Since most of educational system in western world have a conflict between both part, we must solve it all first.

[wlz]

"b) remember, once the great authors were popular literature too! Charles Dickens was the JK Rowling of his time. I might get burned for this on this forum, but consider... 100 years from now so many movies and even some video games might be considered "classic" literature. That's why there are now film professors in some colleges.":flare:

In Trinity in Dublin three of the most popular subjects of study are Law, Literature and Psychology, and such has been the case for many years now.

Well... I guess it is not so unreasonable to consider screenplays and video games as classic lierature given a hundred years time. Take a look at the poetry forum. There are many in an argument over whether lyrics can stand alone as poetry.

(I wonder if the Spice Girls have joined up to this forum...?)

[WingedWolf]

I had a "special topics" course on Irish cinema at Trinity :) Almost all of the films we watched were based on books, ex: Angela's Ashes.

Many popular movies are based on books. I think people are still interested in literature, it's just taking a new form that adapts to a new generation.

Even if books are "phased out" there will always be writers, because there will always be stories regardless of the form they take.

[Katy North]

JCamilo, perhaps market wasn't the best word I could have used. Of course, it is not the goal of academics to advertise a book for a publishing company. However, it is the goal of academics to inspire a love of their subject in their students. If, as I have read on this forum, one of the things that turns students OFF to reading a book is being taught it in school, I believe it is the teachers job to find a not so boring way to teach the book in class.

And Wlz, Literature, certain movies, certain video games, and possibly certain music lyrics could all potentially have a place under the broader term "media studies. I'm not saying that there have been any films or video games that could go toe to toe with Dickens yet... the art form of film is only a little over a century old, and video games have only been around for 30ish years, while literature has been developing for thousands of years. However, think about not only 100 years from now, but a thousand years from now. If humanity manages not to kill itself before then, it is entirely feasible that some form of video game or interactive media will become a classic in it's own right.

And before you try to separate books, film, and video games into their different fields of study, remember... they all have one thing in common. They tell stories. Homer didn't write the Iliad, he sang it and told it verbally, passing it down through generations. That was their way of telling stories, because they didn't have access to pen and paper. Yet we teach Homer in literature class. Is teaching a more technologically advanced form of media such a stretch?

[soundofmusic]

I find that in a fast moving society, I have gotten into the habit of getting the breakdown of ideas and not fooling around to hear the fluff. I often find myself bored with movies unless there is something blown up every now and again. I have to sometimes take a xanax to read a book...particularly Austen; though, I enjoy it once I've dived in:p

[Drkshadow03]

JCamilo, perhaps market wasn't the best word I could have used. Of course, it is not the goal of academics to advertise a book for a publishing company. However, it is the goal of academics to inspire a love of their subject in their students. If, as I have read on this forum, one of the things that turns students OFF to reading a book is being taught it in school, I believe it is the teachers job to find a not so boring way to teach the book in class.

And Wlz, Literature, certain movies, certain video games, and possibly certain music lyrics could all potentially have a place under the broader term "media studies. I'm not saying that there have been any films or video games that could go toe to toe with Dickens yet... the art form of film is only a little over a century old, and video games have only been around for 30ish years, while literature has been developing for thousands of years. However, think about not only 100 years from now, but a thousand years from now. If humanity manages not to kill itself before then, it is entirely feasible that some form of video game or interactive media will become a classic in it's own right.

And before you try to separate books, film, and video games into their different fields of study, remember... they all have one thing in common. They tell stories. Homer didn't write the Iliad, he sang it and told it verbally, passing it down through generations. That was their way of telling stories, because they didn't have access to pen and paper. Yet we teach Homer in literature class. Is teaching a more technologically advanced form of media such a stretch?

Exactly. Jcamillo is also ignoring the practical reality of studying literature in academia. I can think of at least three fellow students when I was in grad school studying English that were researching video game narratives.

[blazeofglory]

I always prefer reading even there are things that disturb me: TV, Game, Cinemas etc. The loss of interest is one has not studied deeply in fact. Once one is deeply into books one gets hooked always

[Three Sparrows]

Hum, well, its all about dividing one's day, like this: morning, stuff that needs to be done; noon, absolutely nothing; afternoon, reading; seven o' clock onwards, watching TCM. :D Occasionally art sneaks in there too.

[JCamilo]

Exactly. Jcamillo is also ignoring the practical reality of studying literature in academia. I can think of at least three fellow students when I was in grad school studying English that were researching video game narratives.

Ignoring is something I am not. Videogames are not literature, wont be. Just like cinema is not. The notion that Videogames are a form of narrative does not means anything for literature, since narratives is not something that happens only within literature. They are a arte-visual form of narrative and that is enough on their own.


Katy:

Of course, you are not wrong to think you must teach the love for literature foremost if your intention to create readers. But exactly because that the repertory is not on your own mind, but in what you will find.

Now, I do not believe some movies are among the greatest art achivements we have, so they are toe to toe with Dickens, maybe some videogames will be too, as I know some impressive videogames. You people seems to think that the status of Literature is such that other artforms must be acclaimed as literature or seems to be inferior. Literature is just one of the forms of expressions, Music another, videogames another, movies another, etc. And yes, a few of XX century products will be labeled as classic, as some books are.

And there is a reason why Homer is taught in literature classes: he is literature. What you study mostly is his texts, which are already no longer orality. Even the oral studies of epic that showed that Homer (or however was him) was first an oral storyteller, does not mean he was not also a writer, and are focused to show how the oral formulas have influence on the writing style. They are different (music have narrative, visual arts have narratives, etc) but they can be studied as the influence between each other. But nobody can say they are literature, which would be denying the very difference that make those fields happen.

[spookymulder93]

The video game God of War is influenced by all of the great greek myths, but I tell you as much as I enjoy Greek mythology, playing GOW is a heck of a lot more interesting and involving. I actually started watching the History channels "Clash of the Gods" series because of it.

[Delarge]

@ Spookymulder: imo greek mythology is nothing spectacular in its own form. Instead try reading the tragedies by Sofokles or Euripides - they are amazing.


I live in Scandinavia and here more people than ever are picking up reading. The sad thing is that 80% of everything being read are either Dan Brown, The Twilight series or The Millenium Trilogy by a swedish writer named Stieg Larsson. So even though more people are reading here, the quality of what they read is declining. It seems that for a book to be popular it has to make no demands of the reader and grant instant entertainment.

[spookymulder93]

I'm going to give those tragedies you suggested a try.

What's wrong with "instant entertainment"? Sometimes a book won't get good until the halfway point and depending on your reading speed that might take a few hours. The most interesting book I read last year was The Zombie Survival Guide. It's been a long time since I had that much fun reading a book.

[Drkshadow03]

Ignoring is something I am not. Videogames are not literature, wont be. Just like cinema is not. The notion that Videogames are a form of narrative does not means anything for literature, since narratives is not something that happens only within literature. They are a arte-visual form of narrative and that is enough on their own.



My point wasn't that video games are or aren't literature. My point is that the ones doing the study of video games as an artistic narrative and film are the English departments, at least at the school I attended.

[JCamilo]

Unless the departaments there are strange, this is absolutely natural, as the study of languages is bigger than literature itself (in the sense the language is not just found in books), and this of course would not qualify a video-game or movies as literature, but as their own medium.

[myrna22]

While I don't like Harry Potter, I think that the series has definitley done some good in getting kids to read. Maybe if there where more books of that ilk, kids would read more and would subsequently continue to read as adults. Is it a pipe dream? Maybe. But it's also a possibilty. The Harry Potter books alone can only do so much in getting kids to read, but it's a start.

I agree. I also don't like Harry Potter, don't consider it good literature. But for kids, it's okay and it does get them reading. It also blows the idea that it is other media that keeps them from reading--computers, movies, DVD's, etc. Obviously, they will read if it is something they find compelling. I have talked to kids who read a Harry Potter book in 2 or 3 days. Kids who balk at having to read a novel for school. The problem is the lack of what is to them compelling reading material and also how literature is presented to them in school. It's too much about it being good for you and not enough about enjoying it.

[aquarium444]

I live in California, and I know very few people here who actually enjoy reading, especially if they're high schoolers. Why? And I very rarely consider romance actual reading; mostly they're fluff, excluding classics like Jane Eyre or Austen. It's not that people can't read, it's just that they honestly don't enjoy it. One reason is, I daresay, that they don't think there would be material they like. I know for a fact that this is untrue, because I have a friend who didn't read a lot because she didn't know what to read. Between me and the library, she found a niche. What is behind it all? Is it really because of video games, cell phones, ipods, computers, etc.?

For me, to not like reading is unfathomable. There is sooooo much to be found in books, it is incomprehensible to dislike them, especially considering that there is something for everyone. If I with my notoriously eclectic tastes can find enough material, then so can anyone else. :crash:

Well the answer to that be that whens they git their book, they be put fast asleep after the first page and a half.

[dfloyd]

Why is there such a loss of interest in reading? When I went to high school in the early 50s, I certainly thought that reading was a lost enterprise. And we didn't have video games or much television to other wise occupy our time. None of my contemporaries read much of anything. I remember in my senior year, one semester we studied Macbeth and the final semester Hamlet. I was in an accelerated literature class for the best students, but everyone hated reading these plays. And so it goes. Reading has never been a popular pastime, but as kids grow older, some discover reading and the pleasure it brings.

Just look at the bookstores of today. There is such a plethora of literature available. When I was young, if the library didn't have the book you couldn't get it. I remember that about 1951 the movie of Scaramouche was made starring Stewart Granger. I saw the movie and wanted to read the book, but it just wasn't available. I don't think there is any worry about reading being a lost activity. Kids will go on hating the classics, but many will mature into avid readers. I absolutely detested Eliot's Silas Marner, but a few years out of school, I wodered how this book became so good in such a short space of time.

[Katy North]

I agree, especially with the advent of amazon and the gutenburg project, people don't even need to leave their home to get books.

The classics probably will only ever appeal to a minority of people as something enjoyable to read, but reading as a past time is, if not spreading, at least becoming more accessible.

This is the information age, after all :D.

[Kafka's Crow]

Sit on the London Underground some day and you will find people reading all around you, all ordinary people reading some very exrtra-ordinary books! You will find more people reading than listening to music (I listen to audio books while travelling so don't know how many of those with earphones actually 'read' instead of enjoy music.)

[sammyuk]

Sit on the London Underground some day and you will find people reading all around you, all ordinary people reading some very exrtra-ordinary books! You will find more people reading than listening to music (I listen to audio books while travelling so don't know how many of those with earphones actually 'read' instead of enjoy music.)
I have to disagree with you there. Yeah, a lot of people read on the underground, but the majority of the time they're reading the paper. I once spoke to a woman who was reading Moby Dick but I've never ever seen anyone reading any particularly 'serious' books. Also, pretty much everyone listens to music, all the time now. I think I'm the only person that doesn't but that's only because I have such big ears that headphones always fall out. That and my iPod being broken. But I'd say that far less people read than listen to music on the underground.

[PSRemeshChandra]

Books will survive and reading will not die as long as there are writers who can captivate and mesmerise readers. But it indeed is a fact that the number of writers who can make readers spell-bound and who can hold readers eager till the last page are dwindling. Those writers who know how to take-off do not know how to land and those who know how to land take-off awkwardly. Before going through one or two pages we learns that this writer has nothing to say and does not know how to say things. As one comes across more and more such books, his interest in reading dies, especially if he is young. If reading books seems to be rarer among people, it is due to bad authorship. It is true that more and more books are being printed nowadays. And it is equally true that lesser and lesser books are being read though being purchased. Though books are not for decoration, nothing more decorates a home than books. Because a writer is contemporary, his books needn't necessarily mean liked and popular. Books written by Robert Ludlum, Robin Cook, Frederich Forsyth, Alistaire Mac Lean, Arthur Hailey, Sidney Sheldon, Jeffrey Archer, Michael Chrichton and Mario Puzo are sold in hundred thousands, because they have a thrilling story to tell. But many famous and fast selling authors are just boosted up who are the responsible for so many loathing reading. People like to think that if it is a printed book, it would be good and interesting to read. But when disappointed a number of times, the flame of his interest in reading dies out. Television, Video and Internet are not at all responsible for the dying out of reading, because they cannot be carried with some one like a book, opened anytime one pleases and read lying anywhere, even under a shaded tree. Paperbacks were what revolutionised the habit of reading, and the invension of India Paper by the Oxford University Press Manager. Not because they became cheap, but because they became easy and light to be carried. Hard cover editions have the risk of slipping from our hands and dilapidating our chest cavity if we try to read them lying somewhere. Change in book sizes to the larger also affected reading habits adversely. The universally liked and appreciated Demi 1/8 is disappearing, which suits the economy of the printers and publishers alone, not the taste and flavour of the universal reading public. To retain and rekindle the interest in reading, it is good to seek books by the time-tested old authors. Since their books stood the severe test of time, they would be good anyway. And they are many fortunately.

[Sionn Harrow]

I personally have noticed that the kids around me don't read because they are only looking for entertainment. Why spend an hour reading a chapter of a book, when you can spend that time at the theater? Reading definitely requires more concentration and energy from the individual, while something like a movie or a video game does that for you. The kids who do read aren't interested in literature, because it's too long. So I guess my point is, kids just don't have the attention span required to read a book. They've been trained that way. I think that if children are read to by their parents, starting at a young age, and the time the spend playing video games and watching movies is limited, they'll start reading again...

[TheChilly]

Video killed the radio star.


True story.

[Jawellnofine]

I am considered a weirdo because I take literature so seriously.
I absolutely love the diction of Spenser, Chaucer and Shakespeare .
The use of "-th" instead of an "-s" in "doth" , "hath" etc is just so lovely to the ear.
I love the use of archaisms to add humour.

[tonywalt]

I go out alot and people are much more interested in Jersey Shore and Charlie Sheen Tweets or what David Beckham has to say about global warming.

We cannot sweep under the rug that we have had a cultural dumming down of massive scale-not just reading.

The news itself it just a lot of shouting, sound bites, and sensational for the "sheeple".

There is hope though, I just do not know where to find it. I think our technology has far exceeded our humanity, perhaps it's a case of just too much information.

[Paulclem]

When was this literate and superior society that we are dumbed down from? In the UK at least, people were educated as factory fodder in the post war period, and this was hardly an education equivalent to today's. Literacy rates have gone up, not down, though they are by no means perfect.

Perhaps you are referring to what people choose to read and respond to at the moment, but this is a short term view. Not all, and probably most of those tweeters you mention won't be doing that in a few years time. Things move on, and perhaps on to better literature. In the long run, how interesting is celebrity culture? I don't think it can sustain a normal person for too long.

[Big Dante]

At my school I have actually been surprised by how many people do read. You walk through the locker room and pass over 5 people sitting down with books.

[IceM]

The quick answer: Society has evolved. There weren't computers and social networks and video games and accessible opportunities for travel as early as fifty years ago. As humanity's ability to create evolves, so to does his ability to create alterior forms of entertainment. The theorized "lack of interest in reading" in fact has little to do with the quality of literature produced as it does the amount of competition it faces for one's attention. I doubt Dickens would have been as popular had television and internet existed during his time.

Literature is a slow-blooming experience that requires an attentive mind and deep contemplation. This thick experience often competes against more instant forms of entertainment, and unless you have an acquired taste for literature, the reasons for choosing the latter over the former seem reasonable.

The long answer: there isn't a lack of interest. More people are reading today than ever. If your question is really "Why is there a loss of interest in [critical] reading?" perhaps we may have a different answer. But literature is no longer the apex of one's experience as it was for the many centuries before. And there are no shortage of people reading and analyzing classical literature. The internet has provided us means to connect with people throughout the world. Only through such a communicative process are we able to gauge the literary interests of those worldwide. In relation to the world, the proportion of those analyzing classical literature is perhaps low, but the mass itself, especially in comparison to prior eras, is staggeringly large. It is the sense of proportion--that we are a small group amongst a large body--that distorts our comprehension of literature's contemporary audience.

[Emmy Castrol]

I have to say that I am part of the camp of the people who believe this trend, of decline in reading, is imaginary. There will always be people who like to read and the proportion of them will always be less to the proportion of the population who don’t like to read. Also, until about half a century ago, a large percentage of the population were illiterate. In fact, I live in a developed nation so perhaps they still are illiterate.

I actually think that because of improved literacy in developed countries, more people are found to be reading. About 10% of each carriage I am in, whilst commuting to work, are found with a book in their hands – reading. Rubbish perhaps but still reading. I disagree with the first poster on their taste of books – I would prefer a senseless romance to Jane Austen.

I’ve found reading also to be a very introvert activity. People who prefer video games and television would have preferred it over reading in the first place. Growing up, I was about the only person out of all of my friends who read (for enjoyment – there were many who read for pretentious reasons) and I never thought there was anything unusual about it.

I also have to add, living in Australia, that I am actually very happy with the demise of Borders. I feel that the presence of Borders in Australia contributed much to the decline of titles in its smaller competitors and to a gradual decline over time (after they chased away the competition) in titles in Borders stores.

[ralfyman]

Commercial mass entertainment, which in turn requires an abundance of resources, including oil, to maintain industrialization and consumer spending. But given fears of a resource crunch, including a drop in global oil production....

[goatlips]

The best and most enjoyable reading is literary fiction. Other types merely convey information which can be gotten in other formats (which may be more convenient). Unfortunately, when in school we associate literary classics with exams and thus cannot enjoy them. Some lucky people discover when they graduate that reading is fun but school does little to prepare for this.

[stlukesguild]

The best and most enjoyable reading is literary fiction.

Is it? I quite like a good deal of non-fiction: Goethe's Italian Journey, Plato's Republic, Emerson's Essays, Montaigne's Essays, J.L. Borges' Essays, Boswell's Life of Johnson, Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Rousseau's Confessions, etc...

To this I would add the genre of poetry which is every bit as great (if not greater) than that of literary fiction.

[stlukesguild]

*duplicate*