So, I was texting with a high school friend of mine and telling him that I set a goal to read 52 books this year, but I hope I’ve blown through that by July 4.
He kept asking me odd questions like how would I remember all of that information. Tried to explain to him that I don’t have exams or a substantial paper and if I forget a few details, no harm no foul. I’m still growing my knowledge if I’m reading non fiction or I can appreciate the plot and character development in a work of fiction.
I sent him a few YouTube videos and Goodreads challenges. He still seems to equate reading with studying.
So, is this something common among those who never res for pleasure? Or is he just making excuses because he’d rather play video games but secretly feels envious?
People can have trouble with reading for a lot of reasons - poor vocabulary, dyslexia, short attention span/ADD, whatever. If you have to work at reading, you’re not likely to develop the habit of reading for pleasure. It’s going to feel more like “having to study” than anything else.
My sister’s first husband was an engineer, and a damned smart one. I was gobsmacked when I walked into their home and discovered they did not have a single book that wasn’t related to engineering. He thought in terms of numbers, not words. My parents started sending my sister books as Christmas and birthday presents.
I think a useful analogy is that reading a lot for pleasure is similar to consuming TV or streaming movies. You enjoy it while it’s happening, and you may remember certain details and aspects, but you don’t intend on recalling ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING written.
I can certainly understand that some people never made that leap, due to difficulties with the physical mechanics of reading.
I would also submit that, strange at it sounds, some people may just lack what we might term “imagination” that gets triggered by reading.
Am I unusual in that I “study” for pleasure? The subject has to interest me, of course, but it’s one of my favorite hobbies. I’ll read multiple books exploring the subject from different perspectives ( usually 6-12 books per subject ) and I’ll also search for shorter articles to fill in gaps or answer questions that come up. Then sometimes I’ll write a paper or two exploring different angles of the subject - no one sees these but me usually, but it’s a good way for me to organize my thoughts. And if the subject ever comes up on the SDMB, I may pull up excerpts and work them into my posts.
If the subject is interesting, I love to to study.
Some people take notes for the church sermon, most just listen, or check their iPhones. Some students diligently record what the professor is staying, others listen some others check their iPhones. People learn in different ways, and some check their iPhones.
I used to teach high school science. When Ted Geisel died, I told my advanced class that Dr. Seuss passed away. They were saddened and started reciting “Green Eggs and Ham” passages. Cut to the next period, a lower-level class of the same age. Their response was “Who was that?” If there are no interesting books for youngsters to read or be read to at home, reading does end up as just a chore to be done at school to them. Trying to convince them at high school age that reading can be fun is extremely difficult when the only things they’ve had to read have been textbooks (which are disappearing fast in public schools).
I rarely ever read books for pleasure even though I do enjoy reading when I get into a good book. However, I always gravitate to things more engaging and stimulating to me personally. I simply choose those things over reading with the spare time that I can actually get. Even when I want to do something more relaxing there are things that do that better for me than reading so I do those instead. So while I don’t equate reading as a chore or like studying, I might treat it that that way if I had to stop doing something I would rather be doing in order to do it.
I’ve encountered non-readers who view reading as an assigned chore. If no one tells you you have to do it, then don’t. The idea of reading for pleasure is completely lost on them. Yeah, many of these were my students.
Ann Hedonia, if I may ask. Do you ever read fiction? Do you ever dive into a trashy romance novel, mystery, or fantasy? If you read 52 books in a year but none of them “taught” you anything new, would you consider that year wasted?
I think it’s a combination of trouble with the actual mechanics of reading for most people- reading and comprehending is literally work for them, and as such, whatever pleasure they may wring from a book is outweighed by the pain of actually reading and comprehending it. If reading individual words and sentences takes concentration, how tough must it be to do that AND keep the plot and characters front and center while you do so. I can totally see how someone who isn’t a strong reader (i.e. the mechanical act of reading isn’t near effortless), wouldn’t derive a lot of pleasure out of reading for its own sake.
I think also that this may have been different in pre-mass media days. In say… 1890, reading was IT, outside of real-world experiences. I’m sure feeble readers still read for pleasure back then, because in some ways, it was the only game in town. But in today’s world, a feeble reader can easily watch TV or movies, play video games or even do stuff like audio-books, if they don’t want to actually read. So the necessity of reading for pleasure is definitely diminished versus pre-mass media days. But our perception is still shaped somewhat by the ideas of that era- being “well-read” is a term that implies reading, but in this day and age, could be accomplished via web and/or TV I suspect.
Maybe; maybe not. We have a lot of friends who are maybe a book at most every couple of years. Almost all of them view reading as some level of work or effort. And while some will admit that novels/fiction can be “fun” most look at my choices (things like the complete papers of General Bouquet or the collected news articles of American newspapers for 1755) as serious tedious work. It doesn’t bother me; different strokes and all that. But its something you can’t explain to them.
I’ve read thousands of books in my life, and the amount I read has only dropped off because I’ve developed other time-consuming hobbies. That said, the stuff you read sounds awful. There’s a difference between considering all reading to be like homework (as is indicated by questions about how you can remember it all) and simply having different enough tastes so that your boring history stuff sounds boring.
This reply is sincere and not a snark – thanks! The less people going after my “want list” the cheaper and faster I may fill it in. . My problem is that my main interest/hobby is colonial history say 1610-1800. Yeah, I read all the latest “popular history” books and all but to get a feel for myself I also read a crapload of primary source material. And most of it is much better reading than it sounds; much like reading a diary or a collection of someone’s letters. Which, in the end, is what a lot of it is. And the rest is basically newspapers/bound volumes and the like. To me the current news is awful; especially the last 4 years. But the news of 1758 just fascinating.
Now the Old Wench; she is more fiction. But you would be surprised how many times I’ve caught her with one of “my” books - especially the extracts from newspapers. A lot of it does read almost like fiction with our world being so different from what they knew.
I wonder about their early reading life. Educational attainment is correlated to the number of books in your home as you grew up. Cite. Worked for my kids. Worked for me and my wife, who both grew up with lots of books. Works from my grandson who is 3 1/2 and goes to sleep with books in his bed.
Starting at high school is probably too late.
OT - sounds fascinating. My daughter teaches marketing, and for Christmas I got her marketing books from 1920 - 1937. Have you looked on Biblio.com. They have tons of interesting old books for reasonable prices. Maybe not as old as you are looking for, but you can never tell.
. My problem is that my main interest/hobby is colonial history say 1610-1800. Yeah, I read all the latest “popular history” books and all but to get a feel for myself I also read a crapload of primary source material. And most of it is much better reading than it sounds; much like reading a diary or a collection of someone’s letters. Which, in the end, is what a lot of it is. And the rest is basically newspapers/bound volumes and the like. To me the current news is awful; especially the last 4 years. But the news of 1758 just fascinating.