I know a family who have been very dear friends for many years and I have watched their kids grow up with almost zero interest in casual reading. Every one of the kids has finished college and, except for the youngest one, who just started looking, they all have good-paying jobs in fine career fields. They will do just fine. But it is awful hard for me to converse with them, as much as we mutually enjoy it, because their interests are confined to work, family, sports, vacations and little else. My interests are much broader. But then, I was the “uncle” they all turned to when their school and college projects needed a little “stick and rudder” to get going; I knew where to direct them to do their research, etc.
So IMO, being a voracious reader does not make you better than non-readers, or even smarter in any valid sense, but perhaps just a bit better prepared to know where to find answers for thorny questions that life tends to throw at you.
I’ve posted this before. I am a voracious reader and my husband of 36 years never read anything. Not even one book a year. My kids read all the time and it kind of drove me crazy that my SO never read anything. So we got a Kindle and he picked it up and read all the time. Turns out he has to have the print hugely enlarged for him to read comfortably, who knew?
Unfortunately I’ve had a falling out with Amazon. :(
I am getting us books from other places and looking for a new e-book reader. Suggestions are welcome.
I am a reader and I am also a daydreamer. I agree with you. Sometimes I find myself in various waiting rooms, and I am sure someone is noticing me staring off into space, not gluing my eyes to the Highlights on the coffee table. Just like most daydreams involve mundane matters, so is a lot of reading material. Which one a person decides to occupy their mind with is not an indicator of their intelligence.
Joey P sounds exactly like my husband, including having ADD. He doesn’t read books (he will read magazines), but can spend hours online researching topics in depth. He reads, just not the same things I read. There’s nothing wrong with that.
I had/have severe ADD and I have about 3 books going at any given time. Been that way since I learned to read. Text books, though? No way. Couldn’t get through them at all. I needed medication to study longer than 5 minutes at a time.
I devoured novels as a kid and still do as an adult. I read a lot more nonfiction these days than I did in my younger years.
I love my Nook reader - the simple, basic one. There is a new one out that is backlit and I’d love to have that myself, but I’ll make do with what I have until it wears out. I’ve almost stopped buying regular books, it is that good and that handy. Now I only buy reference books, and that, rarely.
My dad never reads books, but he’s always reading newspapers and magazines, and sometimes cookbooks.
Same here. I’m always reading at LEAST three books at a time, often four. And sometimes I read while I’m on the computer as well. (I mean, I have a book in my hand)
There are sometimes though, when I go out to do stuff, I just don’t feel like bringing a book. Or I forgot one, or I just have other things on my mind, and I’m sitting there daydreaming. Or on the bus, I don’t read, because I get carsick when I do that.
This is true in our home. The two frequent readers claim that reading a novel is like watching a movie or actually being in the movie. The two who seldom read say that they prefer to read things like instruction manuals that list how to do things in a linear fashion but that following a story line takes some effort for them.
Neither have been diagnosed with a learning disorder, but I have my guesses. At least in how learning disorders are currently classified.
That’s not a judgemental statement from my perspective. Nor, in their case, does it indicate a lack of ability. I think that people truly do process things in either a gestalt or linear way and that sometimes, depending the task, others think of them as disadvantaged when their brains just put information together differently.
Both of our less frequent readers are more interested in seeing what they can do with what they read. The frequent readers are more interested in the ideas involved with what they read.
Do you remember whether the article said anything about (or would anyone care to speculate) whether the first kind of readers are born or made—whether the ability to vicariously experience what you read about is just something you have naturally or not, or whether it’s a skill that a person can learn and develop?
My mother rarely read but my stepfather had a lot of books and stacks of newspapers and magazines in the “library,” (the bathroom) where I perused Organic Gardening, the Readers’ Digest and Popular Mechanics. I just added up the number of books I think I’ve read over the past 50 +, + and + years (averaging three a week) and it comes to over 8,000. This has been while surviving childhood and then college, working full-time jobs, raising two kids, nursing dying family members and keeping the house running, so I don’t think I’ve slacked off in “reality time.”
I wish I could say I retain most of what I read and have a really high IQ, but I don’t. What I do do (heh heh. heh heh.) is spread out all my books after going to the library and look at a snippit of each one (again) while trying to decide which one to start first. Every “library day” is Christmas morning.
It doesn’t bother me if other people don’t read. However, to me it’s kind of like not liking bacon—they don’t know what they’re missing. But everybody has their own thing that they enjoy. As for me, you can mug me all you want if you have to. Just please don’t take my library card.
I personally don’t like the mental tiredness I get after reading a whole book. It’s always been there, but it’s worse now that I seem to be having intestinal malabsorption. Small chunks of reading, where you don’t get lost in another world, are a lot better.
Before this was the big issue, it was mostly that there were other forms of entertainment that gave me the same experience, and I never really had time to read. Especially since most of the books available weren’t about stuff I’d like: that didn’t change until recently.
I absolutely agree that everyone has different interests, but in my home growing up as soon as one of expressed interest in a new area we got books about it. Books about photography, and the wives of Henry VIII, and raising hamsters, in addition to piles and piles of fiction. Everyone in the household was a voracious reader.
It’s different for my son. He enjoys reading that hasn’t been assigned, but when we go to the library he comes away with just one book. He doesn’t always have two or three going. If he wants to learn how to do something new his first stop is the internet. If there’s a video,so much the better.
Years ago, long before we could suspect they must just use an ereader of some sort, my sister would regularly house/pet sit for someone she worked with. A family with kids. At some point she was talking to me from there and said that she’d finally figured out why the house seemed odd to her. There was nothing to read. (she’d brought her own, that wasn’t the issue). Not a Dr. Seuss book, not a Time magazine. Nothing anywhere. She said it made it seem like a house staged to sell, as though nobody actually lived there.
My ex would not call himself a reader the same way my first set of family members would, but he reads news. He reads news sites while he watches the news. I imagine he still takes a daily paper and reads the whole thing, including the Macys ads. He reads the free town weekly cover to cover. But he told me on more than one occasion that he cannot understand what appeals to me about all these books I keep around.
