- 11 Jul 2014 03:47
#14435665
Well, is literature really a drive for knowledge in an academic sense, or is it a drive to experience a story whose themes you may or may not be familiar with in some way? I think it's actually more about experiencing a story than getting knowledge, and that a failure to realise this is why people don't understand why so many people don't read.
The people who stopped reading anything at an abnormally early age (these actually seem to be the majority of the population, but no-one who is on PoFo), are probably also the same people who also only watch TV 'to be entertained' in a kind of only-an-onlooker sense rather than letting the TV get inside their heads.
The difference in approach is psychological and covers more than just books. There are people who discuss fiction as though it was not fiction (fictional x is like real y), and there are people who don't get immersed to that level. The ones that don't get immersed are also likely to be the ones who read less as children and who have bland habits in terms of TV watching as well.
Obviously more immersion is better, but I don't know how anyone would go about encouraging other people to do that.
The people who stopped reading anything at an abnormally early age (these actually seem to be the majority of the population, but no-one who is on PoFo), are probably also the same people who also only watch TV 'to be entertained' in a kind of only-an-onlooker sense rather than letting the TV get inside their heads.
The difference in approach is psychological and covers more than just books. There are people who discuss fiction as though it was not fiction (fictional x is like real y), and there are people who don't get immersed to that level. The ones that don't get immersed are also likely to be the ones who read less as children and who have bland habits in terms of TV watching as well.
Obviously more immersion is better, but I don't know how anyone would go about encouraging other people to do that.