I'm trying to understand people who don't read for pleasure.

@manored,

I agree with you on video games. I'm not a gamer but my son is and I've seen some real benefits from gaming, especially on line gaming since it involves so much communication and cooperation.

I remember when he was first interested and he was always saying "It won't let me do X (to achieve Y). I'd always tell him he needed to think about it in a different way and try something else and if that didn't work he needed to rethink and retry. Eventually he'd get it or he'd give up and Google around until he found the answer on how to do it. I think it's great mental exercise.

I disagree that books don't engage the senses. I think osso's points about the music of language is very true.

By saying "I don't think you could get away with it" I didn't mean that I thought he'd be kidnapped or molested or anything, I meant that the library would never allow a parent to just leave their kid to browse around. They'd call the cops about an unattended child.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I sent you a PM

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Without, if possible.

0 Replies

@boomerang,

We were without power for 21 hours from Tuesday night through last night and without internet or tv until about an hour ago. I couldn't work (my business is internet dependent), couldn't watch tv and couldn't surf the net. So I read. A lot. All day yesterday and much of last night/this morning once the power came back on. I usually have a number of books laying around and I picked up a massive volume on the life on Mary, Queen of Scots that I'd started ages ago. It's very well written and I got about half-way through it. I'm far enough into it now that I'll probably finish it - maybe even by the end of summer, but probably not.

We canceled our subscription to the daily newspaper a few years back because we get so much of our information online now. We found ourselves isolated. We have a portable radio so we were able to get news updates on the storm, etc., but it really did drive home how little I usually read and how much of my time I spend online.

That's one reason I don't read for pleasure - I'd guess I'd rather surf numerous sources at once than sit an read a book. I've usually got 5 or more tabs open at a time and I'm bouncing around all over the place.

When I do read for pleasure it's usually classic literature, historical fiction, or non-fiction. It's almost never contemporary fiction. Speaking of historical fiction, I first discovered Herman Wouk's Winds of War and War and Remembrance in high school. I then read everything he wrote. I also read a lot of Leon Uris's books with Trinity being one of my favorites. Again, once I discovered his books I read everything he wrote. Michener's Shogun and others were also good and I became a Michener fan, although I haven't read all of his books.

I also read cook books, diet and nutrition books, religious studies and histories - particularly those pertaining to Tudor/Stuart England of the mid 16th century.

So, I guess I do sometimes read for pleasure, but not as an escape and not when I have anything else to do.

0 Replies

@boomerang,

boomerang wrote:

I sent you a PM

Yes, I got it, thank u.

David

0 Replies

@boomerang,

boomerang wrote:

I agree with you on video games. I'm not a gamer but my son is and I've seen some real benefits from gaming, especially on line gaming since it involves so much communication and cooperation.

I remember when he was first interested and he was always saying "It won't let me do X (to achieve Y). I'd always tell him he needed to think about it in a different way and try something else and if that didn't work he needed to rethink and retry. Eventually he'd get it or he'd give up and Google around until he found the answer on how to do it. I think it's great mental exercise.

I disagree that books don't engage the senses. I think osso's points about the music of language is very true.

By saying "I don't think you could get away with it" I didn't mean that I thought he'd be kidnapped or molested or anything, I meant that the library would never allow a parent to just leave their kid to browse around.

They'd call the cops about an unattended child.

In my childhood, when I wanted to go to the public library,
I had to take a cab or a bus, both in Arizona and NY.
Indeed, my school DEMANDED that we go to the library
for a variety of reasons. It was not likely that a parent
woud be interested in accompanying us.

David

0 Replies

@boomerang,

boomerang wrote:

I understand people not liking or very much liking hunting/cooking/hang gliding/whatever but to not enjoy reading is something I have a hard time understanding.

I cant understand people who dont like gaming =)

Externally, it seens other humans see and think in manners very similar to our own, but I suspect that, internally, invisibly, there are more differences than we can imagine. That would be why we can never reach full understanding of others.

boomerang wrote:

I disagree that books don't engage the senses. I think osso's points about the music of language is very true.

Well, its true that they engage the senses, but they dont contain any sensorial input themselves. Its all generated inside the reader's mind. The books does not show how the words should be pronunciated, but the mind uses the pronunciation patterns it already has in store.

boomerang wrote:

By saying "I don't think you could get away with it" I didn't mean that I thought he'd be kidnapped or molested or anything, I meant that the library would never allow a parent to just leave their kid to browse around. They'd call the cops about an unattended child.

Its because society has grown more fearful, or perhaps more careful. In either case, I dont think the actual risk has increased. If anything, it has decreased. I mean, in the past it would be more difficult to return a lost child to its parents, without cell phones and everything. So why did libraries left children to their devices in the past, and dont today?

2 Replies

@manored,

manored wrote:

I mean, in the past it would be more difficult to return a lost child to its [ ?? ] parents, without cell phones and everything.

If the child is a mammal, then it is a biological impossibility for "it" to be a correct pronoun.
All mammals must be either males or females in their chromosomes.

David

1 Reply

@boomerang,

If I use the hunting to reading analogy, I can see two linkages. The first is competency. If I can't hit anything, I probably won't enjoy hunting. Likewise if I have trouble reading then reading for pleasure isn't going to happen. The second is the circumstances surrounding the event. I'm not going to hunt in 99 degrees, 100 humidity. I'm not going to hunt in 40 degrees either. The expected enjoyment is not worth the hassle. Maybe this is true in reading as well. In many stories you have to go through a fair amount of exposition to get to the juicy parts. Could be that just doesn't work for some people. Just tell them Harry is a good wizard, Tom is a bad one and then let them go at it.

2 Replies

In NYC's public libraries, in those neighborhoods with an Asian population, it appears to me the Asian children visit the library more often than other children might go to a playground? They take out a load of books, and actually look elated with the books they trudge off with.

Anyway, many of these Asian kids, according to current popular belief, will excel at school, and go to college, regardless of the education of their families. So, in a society that does not have as many blue-collar jobs available, as in the past, those that get a higher education, for tomorrow's available jobs, might have an advantage if they learn to enjoy reading at an early age?

Boys/men tend to like non-fiction, I believe, and women tend to like fiction, again I believe. That might be because fiction reflects the emotional aspects of the characters, and women enjoy more, I think, the emotional aspect of the world. Men, I think, like facts.

Anyway, I sort of think that regardless of all the criteria for our identities, the world is basically divided into readers and non-readers (I do not mean illiterate). I believe I can tell a non-reader in the first few minutes of observing him/her.

And, in some situations, I believe readers go into the proverbial "closet," since they do not want to antagonize the non-readers they may find themselves amongst. That might be because readers believe that non-readers might resent the reader for his/her persona?

1 Reply

@Foofie,

Readers know that KNOWLEDGE IS POWER.

Readers know that ignorance is weakness.

David

0 Replies

@engineer,

That doesn't really hold up though IMO in two big ways. The competency one is a problem because there is such a huge range of available reading materials. Once you are able to read at all, you can find something to suit your reading level. My 10-year-old has friends who love to read books that are geared towards much younger readers. Then there are also books geared towards her age range that are purposely very easy to read (the subject matter is older but the actual writing is extremely simple).

It's not just kids, either -- I belong to a deaf book club, and many of those people have serious problems with English. But they still enjoy reading at their level (and there are plenty of books for adults that are very easy to read).

The other big problem I see is that you can read about any topic under the sun, while hunting requires that you have a cluster of specific interests/ affinities -- being outdoors, actually killing something, tolerance for blood, etc., etc. If you don't like killing things, you won't like hunting. If you don't like reading about killing things, there are a million-bazillion other things you can read about.

1 Reply

@engineer,

A lot of people who are perfectly competent in reading don't enjoy reading. I doubt that a voracious reader is any more competent than JPB, or Mr. B for that matter. I don't think competency has anything to do with it.

Mo is now reading at grade level (he was booted from the SpEd reading group for the third trimester of school since he didn't need it anymore) so the school considers him competent. Meanwhile, he'd rather do anything than read.

1 Reply

@manored,

Quote:

Externally, it seens other humans see and think in manners very similar to our own, but I suspect that, internally, invisibly, there are more differences than we can imagine

Having just finished reading "The Psychopath Test" I can surely agree!

Quote:

So why did libraries left children to their devices in the past, and dont today?

I'm baffled. Seriously, I'm completely baffled. Lawsuits are probably the culprit.

1 Reply

@sozobe,

Well said!

0 Replies

@boomerang,

I know my local library has a sign in the children's library - that children under 12 are not to be left without an adult.

I wouldn't even dream of leaving even a teenager in the adult area of my local library. Unfortunately my library is full of homeless and drunks. The library is a couple of blocks from a homeless shelter and all sorts of characters are hanging around there. A shame as it is a beautiful old library with lots of old nooks and cool spots to hang out in.

0 Replies

@boomerang,

boomerang wrote:

A lot of people who are perfectly competent in reading don't enjoy reading. I doubt that a voracious reader is any more competent than JPB, or Mr. B for that matter. I don't think competency has anything to do with it.

Mo is now reading at grade level (he was booted from the SpEd reading group for the third trimester of school since he didn't need it anymore) so the school considers him competent.

Meanwhile, he'd rather do anything than read.

In my opinion, it woud be a GOOD thing,
if u find something that he WANTS to read;
that his eagerness for that information exceeds
any discomfort that he feels for reading; maybe a hobby-- something that is FUN.

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

manored wrote:
I mean, in the past it would be more difficult to return a lost child to its [ ?? ] parents, without cell phones and everything.
If the child is a mammal, then it is a biological impossibility for "it" to be a correct pronoun.
All mammals must be either males or females in their chromosomes.

David

I prefer to not specify a genre then its not relevant.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Readers know that KNOWLEDGE IS POWER.

Readers know that ignorance is weakness.

David

But thats not why they are readers =)

1 Reply

@manored,

manored wrote:

I mean, in the past it would be more difficult to return a lost child to its [ ?? ] parents, without cell phones and everything.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

If the child is a mammal, then it is a biological impossibility for "it" to be a correct pronoun.
All mammals must be either males or females in their chromosomes.

David

manored wrote:

I prefer to not specify a genre then its not relevant.

Truth & accuracy mean nothing to u, Manored ?

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Readers know that KNOWLEDGE IS POWER.

Readers know that ignorance is weakness.

David

manored wrote:

But thats not why they are readers =)

Y r thay readers, Manored ?

David

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Truth & accuracy mean nothing to u, Manored ?

I dont understand how this question relates.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

r thay readers, Manored ?

Because they like it.

0 Replies

I'm trying to understand people who don't read for pleasure.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know