site banner

Why Read?

Deleted
-15
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I do think that perhaps there's so much emphasis on reading as being something laudable, when I'm not quite certain all, or even much of it is. Most of my friends read a lot of books, but it's not like they're reading scientific studies, thought-provoking essays, anything that might teach new skills, or even great classic literature. They're reading fantasy and sci-fi novels, and sometimes romance novels. I fail to see why reading such novels should be considered to be such a good use of one's time, and I feel like you can get just as much in terms of thought provoking content out of certain TV programs. Books can be just as much of "junk food for the brain" as TV can be.

There is flimsy, fun content and weightier, more-rewarding content in every medium. The golden age of opera and the dark age of opera are two terms for the same period (mid-to-late 1800s) when opera experienced a massive commercial boom in Italy and to some extent Germany. A whole mass of operas were created, most of them have rightly been forgotten as they were uninspired, formulaic cash-grabs. But some, still considered classics, emerged from that mass that was produced. Plenty of Verdi being performed, today.

A lot of the same criticisms about kids rotting their brains have been rolled out with the proliferation of each new medium — the serial novel in the wake of the movable-type printing press, films, radio programs, television programs, video games, social media…

But mediums shape content and technology shapes content. The particular advantage of books is that they’re an information-dense medium everyone can consume at their own pace. People naturally slow down, stop, dwell, ponder, resume, speed up, slow back down, etc. while reading. This can be approximated in other mediums, but doing so is comparatively clumsy. Video games get closest, given how interactive they are. But, they don’t tend to lend themselves to exploring the same content, given how costly they are to produce. As an example, faithful non-fiction like a realistic WWI game depicting the misery and tedium of life in the trenches, as opposed to just using period weapons, clothing, terrain and equipment, is going to face a taller commercial hurdle (and require books and other written materials to research). And a documentary or audiobook cannot cover as much material in the same amount of time.

Whether that advantage appeals to someone is their prerogative. In practice, I’ve not encountered the same depth in other mediums and this is surely downstream from how different mediums shape content.

And, I’m not banging the “make you a better person” drum, here. I find the Thirty Years War and WWI interesting, and enjoyed reading about them. But learning more about them gave me no advantage in my professional career, etc.

Looping back to O.P., I think formal schooling sours some people on reading because you’re getting assignments issued to you. If you had to play video games and watch movies you regularly found tedious, similar feelings might emerge.