Reading Well, Screens, and Literature
My post for the day is a reference to an interesting article from CT on literature and reading.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/january-february/karen-swallow-prior-good-books-make-better-people-reading.html
I agree with Dr. Prior and have written similar things elsewhere on this blog (please check my archives to see the many directions this blog has gone over 12.5 years). As a sometimes literature instructor myself I agree, and as a student of media I agree, although her references to "researchers" saying that screens are hurting us needs some, well, interrogation.
This last week many items on the news have been arguing for the harms of "screen time" on children's developing brains; of course, tech advocates basically "pooh-pooh" that and say that 1. my generation watched a lot of television, 2. the research is not complete, and 3. lots of things affect the child's developing brain. Common sense says to be wary. At my age I see how the screen life has affected my ability to concentrate, and how much I need to purposefully read and stop skimming. In fact, last night I tried to skim her article; I did much better this morning, in the light of a new day, to read it slowly.
Some points of disagreement, although I don't think she would really argue on it. I recently read two novels: Brideshead Revisited, and On Beauty. The first was written in the 1940s, and the second in the 2000s. These are more complicated books that do not relay virtue messages in the way she says older literature, like The Brothers Karamazov, do. But I don't think the older books were written to convey clear virtue messages, either. And as a novelist, I don't like the idea that ultimately a novel is about a virtue message. It is about a story of real people (even if the setting is outer space). If I go in with a message, I've missing the point. She uses the example of Ethan Fromm "teaching" a message about lust. Edith Wharton was an adulteress herself. She might be saying something about the pointlessness of lust more than the personal sin of it.
Reading literature does a number of good things, but if I go into a novel looking for a secular affirmation of Biblical teaching, I'm missing the point. And all literature is not created equal.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/january-february/karen-swallow-prior-good-books-make-better-people-reading.html
I agree with Dr. Prior and have written similar things elsewhere on this blog (please check my archives to see the many directions this blog has gone over 12.5 years). As a sometimes literature instructor myself I agree, and as a student of media I agree, although her references to "researchers" saying that screens are hurting us needs some, well, interrogation.
This last week many items on the news have been arguing for the harms of "screen time" on children's developing brains; of course, tech advocates basically "pooh-pooh" that and say that 1. my generation watched a lot of television, 2. the research is not complete, and 3. lots of things affect the child's developing brain. Common sense says to be wary. At my age I see how the screen life has affected my ability to concentrate, and how much I need to purposefully read and stop skimming. In fact, last night I tried to skim her article; I did much better this morning, in the light of a new day, to read it slowly.
Some points of disagreement, although I don't think she would really argue on it. I recently read two novels: Brideshead Revisited, and On Beauty. The first was written in the 1940s, and the second in the 2000s. These are more complicated books that do not relay virtue messages in the way she says older literature, like The Brothers Karamazov, do. But I don't think the older books were written to convey clear virtue messages, either. And as a novelist, I don't like the idea that ultimately a novel is about a virtue message. It is about a story of real people (even if the setting is outer space). If I go in with a message, I've missing the point. She uses the example of Ethan Fromm "teaching" a message about lust. Edith Wharton was an adulteress herself. She might be saying something about the pointlessness of lust more than the personal sin of it.
Reading literature does a number of good things, but if I go into a novel looking for a secular affirmation of Biblical teaching, I'm missing the point. And all literature is not created equal.
Comments