Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Trouble with Reading


The August 9 issue of the Los Angeles Times contains an article called “The Lost Art of Reading” by the paper’s books editor, David L. Ulin. He writes that “Sometime late last year -- I don't remember when, exactly -- I noticed I was having trouble sitting down to read.” He notes that with his particular job this is a problem.
.
After giving some of his own background of being a voracious reader since he was a teenager, he asks “So what happened? It isn't a failure of desire so much as one of will. Or not will, exactly, but focus: the ability to still my mind long enough to inhabit someone else's world, and to let that someone else inhabit mine…. I pick up a book and read a paragraph; then my mind wanders and I check my e-mail, drift onto the Internet, pace the house before returning to the page."

Toward the end of the article Ulin says “How do we pause when we must know everything instantly? How do we ruminate when we are constantly expected to respond? How do we immerse in something (an idea, an emotion, a decision) when we are no longer willing to give ourselves the space to reflect?” The last line of the article sounds both mournful and heroic, “It's harder than it used to be, but still, I read.”

Interestingly, about a year ago Nicholas Carr had an article in The Atlantic called “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” that spoke about the same problem. We may have spotted a trend. I hate to say it, but maybe we need to turn off our computers and sit down with a book.

3 comments:

  1. That's why I try to stay away from computers on 2-day weekends. Anything over that, I do go online. I heard a quote over the weekend from a 30-something advertising exec "Anything I need to know, I just go on my Blackberry". So there.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wow, the thought of 2 days without my friendly computer, I'd probably get the shakes.

    ReplyDelete
  3. An article, "Is the Internet melting our brains?" (http://www.salon.com/books/int/2009/09/19/better_pencil/index.html)

    at least partially rebuts the claims made in the 2 articles noted in the post.

    ReplyDelete