BS: Americans Reading Less

Subject: RE: BS: Americans In Reading Gaol
From: Severn
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 11:45 AM

Even with books on tape or on CD, I fear some people are reading less. I got hooked on them from getting them out of the library system, where they for the most part carry the books unabridged. But if you go to retail stores, video stores (yes, some carry them, but seldom unabridged or look in the used bins) or used bookstores, the abridgements outnumber the full versions, and have writing sanctioning the abridgement by the author him/herself and on occaision even feature the author reading the shorter version.

That gets me thinking that maybe the author should have written it abridged in the first place, but luckily this is usually not the case. I realize there's a need for authors to be able to milk as much money from their writings as possible as well as the need for people to brag of having actually read half of the NY Times Bestseller List at all times, but you're usually cheated badly by your short cuts.

I only tried it twice and felt burned each time. Once was with a mystery from a writer that a sister had greatly praised and a week later seeing that author praised for her sense of the setting and flavor of her area in an article on regional mysteries. Well that sense of area was what they'd edited out, as I found out by reading whole books later. The other was an instance where I wanted to finish a book lent to me but later repossesed when the visitor left. the library only had the taped abridgenent in rather than the book, so I got to hear how badly they gutted the part I'd previously read.

This is nothing new, of course, as the Reader's Digress hooked a lot of our parents on the same concept. But as anyone who's ever put a condensed book in water and stirred had found out--NOTHING HAPPENS!

There ARE, of course lots of bad writers out there and writers who could USE judicious editing (Where was Reader's Digress for James Fennimore Cooper? Thank God we had Mark Twain instead, but here I, myself, digress.....Feel free to edit this part yourselves....)and there actually HAVE been movies that improved on the books even with their changes. But it seems many Americans are reading less even when they're reading more often.

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Peace
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 10:43 AM

In the above post I was wrong as to how literacy is determined. (It was like that at one point but seems not to be now. Note the following from Wikipedia.)

"The report of a follow-up study by the same group of researchers using a smaller database (19,714 interviewees) was released in 2006 that showed no statistically significant improvement in U.S. adult literacy.[15] These studies prove that a minimum of 46 and a maximum of 51 percent of U.S. adults read so poorly that they earn significantly below the threshold poverty level for an individual. The only reason we do not see that number of families in poverty is that most low-income families have more than one employed adult and almost all low-income families receive financial assistance from the government, family, friends, or charitable organizations.

Many U.S. citizens believe that the U.S. literacy rate is much higher than these reports would indicate. The World Fact Book prepared by the CIA[16] claims that the U.S. literacy rate is 99 percent, but defines literacy as being able to read and write when a person is 15 years old or older. A person who can only read a few hundred--or even a couple of thousand--simple words learned in the first four grades in school, is only marginally literate."

from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_rate

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Peace
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 10:35 AM

Part of the problem associated with literacy is that we've come to believe our own press. Literacy rates that we love to quote are determined by averaging the number of print newspapers that are bought daily in both the US and Canada. Also, generally, Grade 9-level reading is the accepted norm to determine whether or not a person is literate. So, various almanacs (of good repute) say that 99% of the North American population is literate. NOT SO. Maybe 80% (that's a guess), but certainly 99% looks better when governments have to show us all what a good job they're doing. Literacy money? We don't need no steenkin' literacy money . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Rapparee
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 09:01 AM

The more you write the better you get (except for Julia Moore, et al.). The mind, memory, and imagination are like muscles -- exercise them and they get stronger.

Moreover, there is a demonstrated connection between writing and your ability to read. I am a certified adult literacy instructor (betcha didn't know THAT and probably don't believe it, but it's true) and I was taught to teach writing and reading at the same time. One reinforces the other.

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Nov 07 - 02:30 AM

Shocking! ;-)

Well, it's a pity that those students have so little confidence in their own ability to create, isn't it? Not to mention so little joy in the actual process OF creation itself.

Most people can write decently...they just have to believe they can. Reminds me of a conversation that Bob Dylan and Joan Baez had, according to her, back in the mid-60's, over a cup of coffee. He said to her (I paraphrase from memory as best I can from her book), "Why don'tcha write some of your own songs?" She looked at him quite seriously and said, "Bob...because I can't write songs." "That's bullshit," he replied. "Anyone can write songs. Just do it. It doesn't mean you're gonna write great songs right off or nothin', but you can write songs. You just gotta do it. They'll get better after awhile."

He was dead right about that, and she did eventually do just what he had advised, and her songs got darned good after awhile. She's written a few truly great songs.

People need to believe they can do it. I was amazed when I was in University by the students who didn't really believe they could write anything good enough to hand in, and they ran around trying to get someone else to do it for them. That's a sad thing to believe about yourself, and it just is not true as far as I'm concerned.

If a person believes he's brave, he will be. If he believes he can write, he can.

* (Of course, then there's William MacGonagall who DID believe he was a GREAT poet! Ouch!) ;-) Oh, well....he had fun believing it anyway, even if he did write the most dreadful stuff.

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: astro
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 11:36 PM

There is a site called Turn-it-in.com...it will do that search for profs...usually appalls students...they actually do have to think, for themselves....

astro

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: artbrooks
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 10:47 PM

Yeah...and one of my profs. surprised a few of his students when he googled a sentence out of their papers and found the exact sites from which they lifted them. He wrote the URLs on their papers...along with a big red F.

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 10:15 PM

My friend Mary is Associate Dean of Law and Director of the Law Library. As such, she teaches students legal research.

Golly, are they ever surprised to find out that they actually have to USE PAPER DOCUMENTS! That not everything is on the World Wide Web! In fact, her first assignment to them can only be answered by recourse to...books!

And they have to write briefs using a specified form and format! One young man who decided to use his own form and format as well as getting all of his data from the WWW left, involuntarily, after the first semester...something about grades....

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: astro
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 09:27 PM

I was walking behind two of my college students (they didn't know I was there). One said to the other, don't worry you don't need the text, you don't need to read the material, it's easy. They both flunked the first exam and dropped....had to find that class that required breathing...only.

Astro of Tucson and LA

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 09:13 PM

Besides...if you can't read, how can you use a computer?

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 08:50 PM

Yup, Art. That's what happens at my place. There are time when the Library Director goes out to get a sandwich for lunch and has no parking place when he returns. He HAS given fleeting consideration to reserving a space for himself but decided against it as being too...something. Elitistic (if that's a word) or something.

I'll park away and walk if it gets people to use the library.

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: artbrooks
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 07:31 PM

Well, I never argue with statistics (snicker), but I do wonder about this a little. While it is a purely subjective measurement, our local public library branch is packed whenever I go in there, and that generally isn't when the free movies are on. The same is true of the two Barnes & Noble stores I frequent.

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 07:00 PM

More TV and other video devices...more computers...less book reading. It's been happening ever since the 1950's, and it keeps accelerating. I have always been a reader by nature, but I definitely read fewer books now because I spend more time online...mostly reading! ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 06:50 PM

Alright, so it was 'Sesame Street' and not 'The Muppet Show' - at least I got the genre and major performer right!

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: wysiwyg
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 06:45 PM

Projectile pooping, of course.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Bert
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 06:27 PM

You're right Susan. I missed that one.

Which raises an important point. How do bats do it without pooping on themselves?

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 05:19 PM

the batroom

The BATroom?

Holy Booklights Bert, is there something you feel you should share with us?

As an observer of the US, I can only snigger when I recall Barbara Bush appearing on 'The Muppet Show' as 'First Lady' to encourage youngsters to read... then seeing a picture of her boy, the President, in a kindergarten looking at a book which is upside-down.

Hope she did a better job with Elmo than she did on her own son.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Lorne's wife
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 04:33 PM

They could just look at the pictures I suppose?

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: katlaughing
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 04:29 PM

I wonder if they factored in used book sales? Also, what about books online?

I am thankful all of my kids love to read, but my youngest grandson is allowed to play too many video games, imo. (I wouldn't let any kids play them until they are much older.) The saving grace is he gets plenty of outside activity, music, AND a book read to him at night, every night, plus he sees his mom and the rest of us with books all of the time AND, at 4, he wants to read, so we're working on that, too.

From what I've heard recently about schools, graduates and their skills, etc. in the UK, I don't think it is just America which may have a problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 04:24 PM

I think that the report is only partially correct. As has been pointed out, it doesn't take into account anything except tomes. I can't read a book while motoring to Salt Lake City, but I can listen to one. And MP3 downloadable books have been a big hit with, for instance, joggers.

Now, if the report had said "Americans Using Information Sources Less" I'd have been worried, maybe.

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: wysiwyg
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 03:54 PM

I would also point out that as my segment of the population ages-- the Climate Change of our aging baby boomers-- I miss being able to SEE a book I can hold in my hand and the feel of nice paper, the appreciation of lovely, classic fonts, and the portability of a book that can go anywhere without being re-charged; the audiobooks and the web reading work around those practicalities nicely.

Bert, yer not sposed to read in a batroom, yer sposed to hang upside down.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 03:47 PM

LOL, KB in Iowa

The research seems slightly flawed in that 'reading' is narrowly defined in terms of reading books.

As WYSIWYG points out, there's an awful lot of reading done on the web. There is no mention of this in the article.

Bert,
If I don't take a book to the batroom I'll read the shampoo bottle

You and me both!

Ed

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 03:37 PM

That was kind of a long article, could you summarize it?

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: wysiwyg
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 03:00 PM

Audiobook, every night at beddytime. Magazines every AM in the sunlight.

And of course Mudcat is 99.99999% TEXT, LOL!

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Bert
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 02:59 PM

Oh gawd! I read all the bloody time. If I don't take a book to the batroom I'll read the shampoo bottle *GRIN*

Subject: BS: Americans Reading Less
From: Goose Gander
Date: 19 Nov 07 - 02:43 PM

Americans reading less