“What are the consequences if America becomes ‘a nation in which reading is a minority activity?‘” National Endowment for the Arts Chair Dana Gioia asks this question out of a concern that our country is discouraging reader among teenagers and young adults. He says,
We are doing a better job of teaching kids to read in elementary school. But once they enter adolescence, they fall victim to a general culture which does not encourage or reinforce reading. Because these people then read less, they read less well. Because they read less well, they do more poorly in school, in the job market and in civic life.
The Hartford Courant reports: “‘Is this a cultural apocalypse? No,’ Gioia said, but noted a paradox — while the number of books published is increasing annually, reading for pleasure is declining.”
The report appears to be weak on data for online reading, and some publishers are critical of it for that reason. If people are reading a good bit online, it may offset the study’s results. I’m interested in hearing how much we all read online too, but I don’t think that point of data would change the answer to the survey question asking how much time you spend reading anything for fun. The report claims “15-to-24-year-olds spent just 7 to 10 minutes a day voluntarily reading anything at all” in 2006, according to the Washington Post. That ain’t too good. How much texting did they do?
James Lileks has grave doubts about this report: http://www.buzz.mn/?q=node/2961
That’s certainly a point. Lileks says, “There are new media alternatives that are better than bad books. A book has no inherent moral authority; an idea isn’t superior simply because it appears between covers. Would you rather your child read ‘The Bratz Go Shopping!’ book or watch a documentary on Roman aqueducts?”
I hope Gioia is not advocating a kind of moral authority. He has a good head on his shoulders. Still the report may be flawed.