| | Comments (0)
Last night on NewsHour someone from the NEA (the Arts one) discussed a report that shows literary book reading in the U.S. is down. But they define literary book reading as novels, short stories, plays, or poetry.

They did ask about people who read books of any kind, but didn't use that much in their analysis. They did not ask about people who read non-books, such as magazines and online. The even included Internet use in their analysis, astonishingly, as a non-reading activity.

Why is this interesting, you ask? Well, it isn't. And that's my point. I know people who read only romance novels, which is included in literary reading. I read political and historical books, which are not included. And somehow their romance novels is good whereas my reading is not? It's ridiculous.

Look, people are reading fewer novels because people care less about them. They are reading more online and reading more non-fiction because it is more accessible and more interesting. This trend is positive IMO, not negative. Most novels/plays/short stories/poetry are inane and a waste of time.

Leave a comment

<pudge/*> (pronounced "PudgeGlob") is thousands of posts over many years by Pudge.

"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by pudge published on August 25, 2004 8:30 AM.

Desperation was the previous entry in this site.

Customer "Service" is the next entry in this site.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.