The recent National Endowment for the Arts study, To Read or Not To Read, has reared its disturbing head again. When it was first announced, I chose not to comment. No need, Alfie Kohn, delivered my knee jerk reaction much more eloquently than I could have, in Do Kids Read Less for Fun? Blame Standardized Tests. Of course, blaming it on NCLB is too easy for such a complex issue. That said, I’m glad he did.
This morning, the study was cited in an article on the front page of the Arts & Entertainment section of my state’s capital news paper, the Raleigh News & Observer. The article, A New Frame of Mind, starts by helping us return to that scene in the 1986 comedy, “Back to School,” where the English professor asks Rodney Dangerfield about the books he had read during his long climb to the top, and the look of dismay, when the comedic actor says that he watches the movie.
Then the article pushes the point by including statements from interviews with local university English instructors from Duke and UNC about their use of films in their classes. Said Jane Thrailkill at UNC-Chapel Hill,
“After my students have read the book — “The Last of the Mohicans” or “The Scarlet Letter” — seeing film versions really helps them think about and understand those works,” she said.
Now here’s where the author envokes NEA report and quotes journalist William Allen White’s 1936 statement…
“The best books … are written frankly for the discerning and the wise.” Not so movies. “There, no artists, no directors, no writers, no theaters and no producers are set apart to please people of understanding.”
Even as the notion that motion pictures are a threat to reading continues to resonate among many, the author suggest that something else might actually be happening. “White’s highbrow/lowbrow distinction seems laughable now — the best films are great art.” In coming months and years, English teachers may well be asking students to watch Love in the Time of Cholera and Beowulf, as part of their literary expectations.
I agree, that although much of the media that is out there seems geared for the lowest common denominator of consumer, literature has become richer with the rise of motion pictures. And as video games become increasingly sophisticated, they too, may become a new literature. Have you seen Assassin’s Creed? Spectacular graphics and world-play (View this YouTube video). Might youngsters, on day, pretend sleep in the great hall waiting to do battle with Grendel.
I guess that the question that nags at me is what kind of information experience with these millennials demand when they are adults? What kind of literature will it take? What can we do today to help them make the most of it?
Zane, J. Peder. A New Frame of Mind.” The News & Observer [Raleigh, NC]9 Dec 2007: C1.
As an aside, both of my children have taken film courses in college. Surprised the heck out of me.
I don’t believe they even existed when I was in school, at least in the universities I attended.
— dave —
I wonder if paying ten bucks to see the Beowulf film will provide me with any understanding of why I, and generations of children, have been forced to read the book?
I wrote a longer response to this blog atThem! The Technology that Killed Reading!
http://www.stager.org/blog/2007/12/them-technology-that-killed-reading.html or http://tinyurl.com/ytnrwt
My comment is here: http://www.needleworkspictures.com/ocr/blog/?p=204
I agree with Mathew’s comment (recommending Everything Bad is Good for You) and I would add the work of James Paul Gee (Video Games are Good for Your Soul).
That said, I think it’s worth noting that the study says nothing about causes of these trends. Further, the executive summary says that they found a correlation between reading and theater/concert attendance and also between reading and increased exercise. I wonder, however, if the correlation hasn’t more to do with socioeconomic status and/or demands upon time than just reading less or more. The technical note at the bottom of the executive summary explicitly says that they did not consider income.
Persuading an increasingly harried American public (who doesn’t even get or use much vacation time) to read more when they have enough demands on their time as is would be quite a challenge indeed.
“If you read more, your life will improve!” say the enlightened, only to hear in response, “When would you like me to read between my two jobs and my family life? I can’t get enough sleep and there are always dirty dishes in the sink and we can’t mow our lawn regularly. Oh, and one of the cars is overdue for an oil change, too.”
Further, high school and college students are working more to fund their educations. See here for an article about my alma mater that pretty much says it all.
As per usual, people (and “journalists”) are taking these raw numbers and reading into them whatever they like.
I just wanted to say that I feel taking in a great literary work whether classic or modern requires thought and imagination that those with brains inundated with television and video games may find hard to achieve. All of the imagination required in these venues was taken by the creators, writers, directors, etc. Nothing is left for the viewer but to be present. I think that this lack of creative thought can lead to a great disconnection from our environment. It takes more time to read a novel then to watch a portrayal of it, but the end result is far more gratifying. In today’s society, I feel it is more important than ever to stop and smell the roses, or in this case, read the book.