Your essay seems to imply that reading, text, and books are identical, but they are not. A long time ago I read a reasonable number of books. Then I largely switched to reading articles in scientific journals, listening to books on tape. Now I spend most of my reading time reading essays like yours online, along with other online stuff. So far as I can see, the medium plays a secondary role; what matters is text that is accessible and more or less stable/permanent. Your thoughts?
I have moved in a very similar direction. I have cancelled most of my printed periodicals, but subscribe to the online version of a wide variety of publications. I don't want printed books in most cases; art is one exception. I like online versions from Kindle, Apple's Books, etc. I can take lots of them with me and they don't need trees to make them.
Ditto. I do all recreational reading in audobooks--professional reading, mostly journal articles, on the screen. Whether audiobook 'reading' at the gym is really reading is debatable. But reading text on a screen rather than on paper is surely literally reading.
You can always read older books. There are so many that I guarantee you wouldn’t finish the backlist in your lifetime even if you simply stuck to more conservative male authors.
I think it depends on the book. I’m reading The Magic Mountain and it’s several leaps above my usual reading level. It’s taking me a long time but I think that’s all right. It’s about the quality of your reading time too.
My skepticism is personal: Much of the online content I consume is the WRITTEN WORD.. Like here!
Where my reading HAS sharply declined is purely entertainment reading. Partly because there is so much good content, including movies, good YouTube, and good premium television
Why are books treated as The Real Thing? I don't think they're more real than videos, so if you can replace a serious book with a serious video, I think people will go for it. Similarly, a cheap boom is easy to replace with a cheap video. I agree that people long for the real thing, but "the real thing" is out on the world, not in some paper pages.
Your essay seems to imply that reading, text, and books are identical, but they are not. A long time ago I read a reasonable number of books. Then I largely switched to reading articles in scientific journals, listening to books on tape. Now I spend most of my reading time reading essays like yours online, along with other online stuff. So far as I can see, the medium plays a secondary role; what matters is text that is accessible and more or less stable/permanent. Your thoughts?
I have moved in a very similar direction. I have cancelled most of my printed periodicals, but subscribe to the online version of a wide variety of publications. I don't want printed books in most cases; art is one exception. I like online versions from Kindle, Apple's Books, etc. I can take lots of them with me and they don't need trees to make them.
Ditto. I do all recreational reading in audobooks--professional reading, mostly journal articles, on the screen. Whether audiobook 'reading' at the gym is really reading is debatable. But reading text on a screen rather than on paper is surely literally reading.
I read fewer books these days because the publishing industry has gone woke and dominated by female writers that don't hold my interest.
You can always read older books. There are so many that I guarantee you wouldn’t finish the backlist in your lifetime even if you simply stuck to more conservative male authors.
you can always return to the classics like Mein Kampf or the autobiographies of Franco
Reading more than 11 books a year makes you a "mega-readers"?
I've already read more than that (well, a few were really short and three I began last year)... still, 11 books a year is not even 1 a month....
I think it depends on the book. I’m reading The Magic Mountain and it’s several leaps above my usual reading level. It’s taking me a long time but I think that’s all right. It’s about the quality of your reading time too.
Great point! Do wonder if they factor in length when dubbing those who read 11 books a year mega-readers....
That said, how many books do you think you'll read this year?
I agree. Two a month might be a reasonably heavy or serious reader, but less than one a month can’t be « mega. »
I don’t agree with this article… but I am hopeful that I am wrong.
My skepticism is personal: Much of the online content I consume is the WRITTEN WORD.. Like here!
Where my reading HAS sharply declined is purely entertainment reading. Partly because there is so much good content, including movies, good YouTube, and good premium television
Why are books treated as The Real Thing? I don't think they're more real than videos, so if you can replace a serious book with a serious video, I think people will go for it. Similarly, a cheap boom is easy to replace with a cheap video. I agree that people long for the real thing, but "the real thing" is out on the world, not in some paper pages.