I think this is a must-read for most people here: A History of Reading, by Alberto Manguel. It's amazing - goes through the actual way people read, like how it physically happens, although that's not completely understood... and the history of reading - out loud -> silently, etc, as well as pictures to be 'read'... and that's as far as I've got, so far. But it's a very engaging read in itself, and I think it's great because it [will probably] makes you think about how you yourself go about the act of reading. It's also interesting to me because one of my subjects last semester spent ages going on about the four ways people can 'read'...
Dear Alexis: I'd be interested to hear your views on the use of computers to help kids learn to read.
Do others feel that the book as a physical object, the heft and feel, is part of the enjoyment of reading? or is this a rare and unusual psychosis?
I love the feel of a good book. and it doesn't necessarily have to be a hard cover, either. there are some good, solid paperbacks. there is an esthetic and balance to the size and heft of a book which can make a difference.
I love holding books - and I think covers and binding are important too. I can remember a lecturer telling us offhandedly one day that a previous student had found our text book too unwieldy (it was The Riverside Chaucer...), and so had torn it in half! I was mortified!
As for computers and learning to read - I'm not sure - in some ways, it should be fine, since you're just teaching to recognise a symbol and its relation to a sound and/or concept. However, later in school... and I'm just now writing an essay on whether it is imperative for me as an English teacher to use ICT in the class... there are apparently some studies that show 'reading' differs between page and screen. Whether this is bad or not, I'm not sure - I'm sure there were changes in how people read with the change from scroll to codex, too...
Yes, books are something special, (and i was tempted in college to rip some of my text books in to chapters to make them easier to read, but never could quite bring myself to do it!)
i know i read faster on paper than i do with text on a monitor, (most people read about 30% slower one study showed, but the younger you start to read electronic media, the better you are at it...
i don't know exactly which font, and formates i like best, (partly i think because it varies on what i am reading!) but i do recognize some fonts are easier to read, and others are more pleasurable.. (not always the same thing!)
I read a long time ago that computers would be valuable in teaching kids to read is that as soon as the kid learns to used the keyboard, the computer could give individual attention to each child. Repetition where needed, as long as needed. Or rapid advance for bright kids.
Has this materialized?
In very narrow areas. For example, there are training programs that look at your answers to questions and take you to a more or less difficult section, or possibly back to the beginning with a simpler explanation.
Examples of this are the training programs for SAT/GRE. (Also the tests themselves are like this.)
I know the national guard is doing stuff in this area. It seems clear enough that the NEA and other teacher orgs are vehemently opposed to a lot of this stuff. They've funded studies, for example, that show that distance education has very limited utility. Of course this is all very clinical and they started their "studies" with open minds, and it's simple coincidence that they've produced the results their leadership expected.
k
a rare and unusual psychosis
I'm sure there were plenty of people who felt that turning pages just wasn't the right way to do things; rolling the scroll was an essential part of the reading experience. And let's not forget those who were of the firm opinion that one couldn't get the true value of a story unless it was being told by a trained bard. Looking at all those silly squiggles on a piece of parchment couldn't possibly recreate the experience properly.
So, no, it's a very common and unusual psychosis.
Call it an illusion. Psychosis means a serious mental disorder.
I like books. Call me a Luddite; call me backwards; I have a difficult time enjoying reading on a monitor. I'll do it when I must - I wouldn't miss reading the posts here just because they are on a screen - but this (board) type of reading isn't technical, nor is it long term pleasure reading (the sort I do for hours on any given evening, eschewing TV but reading while chewing my dinner).
Magazines, too. NO, not for dinner - for reading...
couldn't get the true value of a story (without) a trained bard.
Actually I'll agree with that too. Go to a story telling competition sometime or even try books on tape if they are done well, often by professional actors such as Tony Robinson reading Terry Pratchett (a perfect combination). It adds a whole new dimention of enjoyment. I love them for long drives.
Never tried a scroll but I have some books dating back to the mid 1800's and they feel wonderful, definitely not for speedreading or skimming.
I'd much prefer to read books the way I did for many years.
But now I have macular degeneration, and now have difficulty reading books or magazines with the six inch magnifying glass that was OK until a couple months ago.
Now I am totally dependent on reading on my monitor, where I can increase the font. Netscape used to let me
increase font four times. When Yahoo took over PadBell's DSL, they forced me to use Internet Explorer, which gives only half as much increase in font size. So I have to use
magnifying glass with it. I am very grateful that there is so much to choose from. Take my advice, and don't get old.
re:Take my advice, and don't get old.
What's the alternative?
the alternative
Dr. A addressed this very question in his landmark book, Sex and the Dirty Old Man. He had decided early on that he didn't want to get old, but then he considered the alternative and decided that getting old was the better choice.
I thought about turning Muslim, and becoming a martyr. But I read article by a Muslim who writes for Newsweek, and he
spoild things by saying the seventy two vigin enticement was based on an erroneous interpretation of the Koran. And since none of the religions guarantee that your odometer will be set back to 21 in Paradise, martydom is no bargain.
Try the Heinlein version of heaven where you can go visit the Muslim Paradise on your day off!!
...Take my advice, and don't get old.
What's the alternative?
Actually, there is one. It's fine to get old; just don't be old.
My father never grew up so I don't see why I should have to.
My father never grew up so I don't see why I should have to.
Well, that's the whole point. It's hereditary. Like having children. (Just think for a minute: if your father didn't have any children, and his father before him didn't have any children...chances are, you won't either.) [straight-face-emoticon]
Celibacy is not hereditary!
Although the chances of my fathering children are pretty darned slim. Bein a doctor and all i'd a thot you'dda knowed that.
chances of my fathering children are pretty darned slim...
Well, actually, I'm not sure anything in my post precludes that. [back-and-fill emoticon]
And besides, I'm not even sure I can agree that celibacy isn't hereditary too, and for the same reason: if your parents were celibate, and the previous generation was celibate too, I do think you would find it rather difficult to indulge in much hanky-panky yourself...
punchline: (wailing)"...it's CELEBRATE" !!
if my parents were celibate
and the previous generation were too!?!?!?!
And BTW I said that
I couldn't be a father. A great deal precludes that[looking distinctly female e]
I wasn't casting aspersions.
And BTW I said that I couldn't be a father. A great deal precludes that
...but what I was trying to describe was your chances of having children, not of being a father... :) My argument may not be valid, but for a different reason!
How did we get from a discussion on reading to a discussion on, er fathering?
"How did we get from a discussion on reading to a discussion on, er fathering?" That seems to be the trademark here, don't you think?
One that indubitably represents the evolution of our thoughts and responses... Makes the thread infinitely unpredictable and interesting in the process, of course!
I think the discussion over whether the celoibacy of ones parents and grandparents precludes an individual from becoming, themselves, a parent is extremely apposite to the discussion of reading.
In this case, there is certainly an appearance that words have been read and taken at a face value which is, on deeper inspection, false (unless Zed is pulling a leg in an equal and opposite direction.)
This discussion is very similar to ones that we have had over the legality of marrying one's widow's sister. (except by proxy, of course
, eh, Faldage?)
marrying one's widow's sister
Then there's the possibility of one's having been declared legally dead for lack of evidence to the contrary.
