by Sylvia Warnecke
When searching
sites such as amazon, it is
surprising to see the number of recent publications that express anxieties
about the ‘loss of reading’. We come across titles such as David Ulin’s The Lost Art of Reading: Why Books Matter in a Distracted Time, Sven
Birkerts’ The Gutenberg Elegies: The Fate of Readingin an Electronic Age, or Jeff
Gomez’ Print Is Dead: Books in our Digital Age. Such titles
alone convey a pessimistic rhetoric using terminology of ‘fate’, ‘death’ or ‘loss’.
But what are these books really mourning? What are we losing in these
‘distracted times’?
To find answers, one just has to
look for the readers’ comments on these books, which confirm that authors as
well as readers seem to find it difficult to pinpoint this sense of loss when they
amalgamate the written word, print, reading, time, silence, distraction and many
‘feelings’ in one equation. S Riaz, one of Ulin’s readers, asks: “With so many things competing for our time, is
there still a place for books in our life?” and gives an interesting answer: “[Ulin] is not overly negative, but he is quick to point out the
delights of 'real' books over ereaders and to say he dislikes the 'grey'
uniformity of the kindle screen. […]I have to disagree with him. I find reading
my kindle as engaging as reading a book and a useful tool for having many books
with me when I travel." Las
cosas’ comment adds to the impression that Ulin’s argument might have
missed rather than hit the nail on the head: “I also found his argument for
reading too meandering, too filled with personal stories. One problem with the
internet is that it is too easy to wander off subject, to flit on the surface
of endless topics. It is thus ironic that this book suffers from the same
problem.” Andrew
Stauffer reveals another contradiction in our anxieties about reading when
commenting on Birkerts’ text: “[He] doesn't approve of what you're doing right
now. Reading (or writing) an on-line review of his recent book, is like
discussing an exercise program over hot fudge sundaes: we are participating in
the burgeoning electronic culture that Birkerts urges his readers to resist.”
And Stephen
Bishop highlights that Gomez: “gets seriously confused between whether it
is books as printed objects which are dead, or the habit of reading books which
is in decline - and would still be so if all books were on e-readers.”
Many recent studies of children’s reading
habits focus on similar anxieties and their findings reveal similar confusions.
Scholastic’s The Kids &
Family Reading Report is one such example exposing apparently conflicting
messages: “Half of children
age 9-17 say they would read more books for fun if they had greater access to
ebooks – a 50% increase since 2010. […] Eighty percent of kids who read ebooks
still read books for fun primarily in print [and] fifty-eight percent of kids
age 9-17 say they will always want to read books printed on paper even though
there are ebooks available (a slight decline from 66% in 2010).” Yet, even
these slight changes “reveal the digital shift in children’s reading that has
begun.” This discovery is clearly mirrored in the results of a National Literacy Trust survey published in May 2013, which
found that for the first time children read more on digital devices than using
print media. The development is coupled with parents’ worries about a decline
in their children’s reading skills and enjoyment in reading. The NLT study findings
contradict those made by Scholastic that reading on screens has a positive
impact on the young readers’ enjoyment, although it appears that there is yet
another area of blurred boundaries. This is the distinction between reading as
a skill and reading as a way of engaging with stories.
Uncertainty
among adults about the implications of this ‘digital shift in reading’ causes apprehensions
that go hand in hand with a strong sense of loss when
it comes to print books. The BBC 2 broadcast Books: the Last Chapter in late 2011 sparked much
debate and was labelled over-nostalgic when lamenting the disappearance of the print book. Many claimed this approach misses the ‘real issue’, the fact that the media we use
for communication of our ideas define and shape our society. Theartdesk
review states: “Obviously, the object that is the book has a diminished future but the words,
the content, will always survive whatever the medium of delivery. […] It’s easy
to disagree with McLuhan’s maxim that society is shaped more “by the nature of
the media by which men communicate than the content of the communication”. But
seeing a row of tablet readers being stared at on an underground train causes a
jolt.”
So what many are
lamenting appears to be the loss of an artefact they knew well and all the
values and emotions attached to it. Yet reading itself has probably never been
as wide-spread and manifold as it is today. However, the nature of reading is
changing. One of these transformations is the link between the image and the
written word that has opened up scope for a multitude of new literary forms.
Another is the emergence of the ‘wreader’ who switches between reading and a
writing fiction. And a third is highlighted by the immense increase in the
number of book clubs, reading circles, literary societies, (fan) communities
on- and offline revolving around stories in the widest sense. Writing and
reading have become more immediate, and what Gertrude
Stein said on the nature of print journalism in 1934 holds true for our
communication of stories today: “The reader […]
craves the “feelings” associated with experiencing “happenings,” without
which the reader would feel disjointed, out of time; “it is like the sun
standing still…. [Y]ou cannot call a day a day if it is not a day if nothing
that had been happening has happened on that day.” Therefore, the fact that
reading is changing and becoming a more instantaneous, social and sociable
experience through the affordances of digital media, it is creating the
potential to enhance the impact of stories and their creators in our culture.
