Dyslexia is a term applied to those who don't naviagate the printed page and the symbols thereon in the same way as the majority of readers. It's only considered a problem because those who process information differently are in the minority of total readers.

I remember what I hear and I remember what I read, but I read slowly so it seems I hear more efficiently because it covers more material. I have adapted my other senses, as it were, to take in the information. I am good at public speaking and worked for years giving talks and tours as a National Park Service ranger in both natural and historic settings. Extemporaneous speaking is something I can do easily; I rarely speak from prepared notes (using them only for the topic sentences to keep me on track).

It's like learning the words to a song and singing it from the knowlege of the song and subject instead of reading the words from the Blue Book or other printed matter. Once you've internalized the information you can draw from it in any number of ways.

When you think about it, reading literacy is a relatively new thing in human populations world-wide. Prior to this, it was the spoken word that was important, and the memory for stories and the ability to pass them along. Storytellers and singers were privileged as having important teaching and entertaining roles in society.

Perhaps with this diagnosis we're simply seeing a reversal of the skills society considers desirable. And there is quite a long list of famous and talented individuals who are dyslexic. Many performers, humorists, and writers deal with varying degrees of the condition. It isn't an affliction unless you are led to believe that you're a victim, and behave accordingly. I'd hazard a guess that it is these skills that bring a lot of members to Mudcat, and I wouldn't be surprised if there is a high percentage of dyslexic members of the group.

SRS