How We Read

Whenever I’m at the grocery store I do something that’s kind of old fashioned:  I buy magazines.  Yep. Magazines printed on glossy paper that have titles like Time, Bloomberg Businessweek, and The New Yorker.  Sure I can get the same thing online for free, but there’s something about reading the physical copy of a magazine that I really like. Maybe it’s like people who like reading books printed on paper rather than a Nook or Kindle.  Me?  I’m pretty open to both when it comes to books, but for some reason, I like leafing through a magazine. Sure, the iPad and the new color Nook both have the ability to render text and images in a stunning way, but it all seems so… transient.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I like reading things on devices (i.e., computer, iPhone, and the Nook), but there’s something about reading an article, book review, or even a book that feels more permanent.  Maybe it’s because works printed on paper don’t come with access to email, the Internet, Twitter and Facebook.  Maybe it’s because the printed word on paper demands your attention.  Or maybe it’s because when you read something printed on paper, you’re in a different head space; one that disciplines your mind to be less A.D.D. and more focused.

How about you?  Do you feel that reading on a computer (that’s connected to the Internet) gives rise to a shorter attention span?  I’ve found that my ability to focus on a book for a long period of time has diminished — and I used to be a guy who could  really tear through a book in short order.  Not that speed has any special virtue, but my retention of what I read was much higher.  Now, it seems, I’m taking in a lot of information, but very little of it gets stored in my long term memory.

Speaking of readers, Julie is pretty voracious.  You can read reviews of some of the books she’s read here, here, and here.


About Ted

administrator

4 thoughts on “How We Read

  1. Those magazines at the checkout area are very tantalizing to the eyes. I can see how they catch your attention and your pocket book.

    1. I usually buy the ones that are in the magazine rack, but yeah, the ones at the check out line are fun to glance at, too.

  2. Is there a word for "the sense of loss that comes from finishing an engaging novel"? If not, there ought to be. I don't find that I'm no longer willing to sit down with a book or magazine. Full stop. Re-read the Aeneid over the summer. Over Christmas I tore through a book about the Great Depression. Earlier tonight I polished off Doctorow's For the Win– a great novel about labor and video games. (seriously, check it out! http://craphound.com/ftw/download/).

    I do notice that my ability to suffer through mediocre writing is greatly diminished. There's too much good writing to wade patiently through authorial intentions that are merely serviceable. I also notice that my attention span is scalable to the format I'm reading in. 140 characters on my phone. 750 words of PC space. But I can plow through a book or magazine in a sitting or two if I want.

    Interestingly: my Kindle occupies the same mental space as a paper book. Also interestingly: an article on my computer will command a lot less attention than the same article in a magazine. This, I suspect, owes to the shear number of online distractions that you mention.

    1. I used to tear through books on my Nook, but lately I find the paper edition to be more compelling. But, yes, it depends on the topic. I'm having a hard time with Obama's Wars, and I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that this book is current, so as things change (or don't) in Afghanistan, it's has an effect on how I'm reading the book. I did finish a book on U2 in short order, though. Sure it wasn't too difficult to wade through, but it wasn't all that short, either.

Comments are closed.

Previous post A few words on U2
Next post Out of the Mouths of Babes