We could call it "the reading challenge", as electronic reading is apparently having a great success – even though I will always side with paper books. Which one is going to survive? Is paper really going to collapse under the Kindle novelty, or will it eventually prove superior? Here it could be also cosidered and analysed how our brain receives and elaborates readings differently depending on whether we read on paper or from other devices.
Good question! I definitely think electronic books overtaking completely would not only hinder the industry but for people like me, I have a hard time reading off screens for an extended amount of time. I'd like an answer the that question, why? Why can't some people focus while looking at screens but read books quite fine? In PDFs I lose myself and re-read paragraphs all the time but that never happens with paperbacks. Is it something to do with our eyes or our attention spans? – Slaidey9 years ago
This is really interesting. I once saw a quote that said stairs didn't disappear with the invention of the escalator. I wonder if that can be a jumping off point? Perhaps the revolution of "vintage" and "what is old is new again" could help inform an argument for the continuation of paper books. I think this article would draw a lot of attention and comments – DClarke9 years ago
This is a great topic and question to explore! With the rise of digital publishing, the publishing industry is in a state of transition. Many people believe that print is going under; however, I do not believe that this is the case. There are millions of faithful, lifelong readers who refuse to use ebooks and take great joy in reading paper books. – Morgan Muller9 years ago
Definitely think this is a good topic to explore- especially with technology advancing so much every year. You could also talk about the advancements of newspapers and how the use of paper news is quickly becoming obsolete. Also even the use of iPads in classrooms as opposed to text books. – Samantha Brandbergh9 years ago
I think this would be a great topic to explore. The Ebook industry has soared within the past three years and is only continuing to climb. Libraries now are giving the option to rent Ebooks from their online catalogue. Also, Ebooks are easier for travel so that could be something to look at as well.
I still personally believe that nothing can come close to actually holding a book. – Lexzie9 years ago
I think that in the end, many years from now, most things will exist in a digital form. But I wonder if paper will disappear entirely, because we have a good use for tangible things that can't be replaced, such as business cards, pamphlets, tickets, and many others. As humans, we appreciate physical things a lot more than virtual because they seem more real, and therefore more valuable. Although I see kindle versions on the rise, I do not see them overtaking the book form entirely. – kathleensumpton9 years ago
Books are a sacred artform and kan never be replaced by electronic books. Never. Recently I went to Germany where I found a bookstore that sold extremely old books. One of them was offered to me for roughly 80 dollars. That's a lot of money for something that's supposedly going out of style. I find Kindle very useful for garbage erotica and short story magazines. Books as digital stuff just won't work. And don't forget, some don't follow the herd mentality of what's fashionable. Of course on Kindle I've discovered that people kan publish nonpeerreviewed books as information. This is not good at all. This can allow the spread of lies, and misinformation to others. Plus what about artistic books? Books that have pictures. Books that mimic papyrus oder medieval manuscripts? One must take that into consideration. Books will never disappear. Too many people love them for what they are. I think the two mediums will just sit side by side. – Starvix Draxon9 years ago
The flow of information is vital for progress. Paper has been important in that regard by being a practical means for dissemination of ideas. Ebooks may turn out be just a temporary alternative to the standard of paper books. One that may be replaced by another form we have yet to behold. – L:Freire6 years ago
Recently, I read an article revealing that American families have stopped reading books and novels, and that the average American read one book per year. Literature is so crucial to our understanding and growth: it teaches us creativity and imagination, how to understand and relate to people that don't share the same experiences, while making us critical thinkers of the world around us. As our technology becomes faster and even more hi-tech, I can't help but think that the fears of Ray Bradbury in "Fahrenheit 451" have come true. Does literature still have a role in our post-modern society and is it an issue that so few Americans read more than a book a year?
It's definitely an issue that people don't read enough, like you mentioned it helps us problem solve and empathize. It's no wonder the world has become so dumbed down and self absorbed. If there is any research into people's ability to sympathize and the amount they read I'd like to read that, there would probably be a correlation. – Slaidey9 years ago
I totally agree with you in the importance of literature to understanding and growth. I think that literature definitely still plays a role in our post-modern society, but in a very different way than it did previously. With the rise of digital publishing, more and more people are getting their content and books digitally (but they are still reading). – Morgan Muller9 years ago
This is a big issue not only for development and for society and educational purposes, but also for us writers where the competition and the field is already extremely competitive, now the audience is shrinking as well. I think there is a possibility though, that it might come back around. – Nof9 years ago
I think that the diminshed role of reading in people's lives is tied to the increased prevalene of technology and social media in recent years. With so many sources of entertainment competing for people's attention, the pressure to compress information into bite-size snippets has conditioned us, increasingly, to lack the patience required for the more in-depth, time-consuming concentration required to interact with books. – Julia9 years ago
I think that the statement that American families are not reading is only half true. If someone doesn't read, I've come to the conclusion that it might be because they just don't have time and watching T.V is far more relaxing on tired eyes. One kan not read during college because they have so much stuff to work on it's ridiculous, so when they finally relax they read a news article or a t.V show that's fast and short. Reading may not be valued because some maybe fear it for being to liberal,(this is a hypothesis), some may not read because it is considered by some to be feminine and not manly like sports (again, hypothesis). Maybe some view reading as a waste because it's fun and entertaining and does not fit into the work ethic of the American puritan. This last one was theorized by Ursula K. Le Guin. When the mass actually reads, it is usually books that are "popular." Rather than reading something like Beowulf, Gilgamesh, or the Egyptian Book of the Dead, people read what's a bestseller or a popular fantasy novel, or a popular comic superhero series. Why? Because it will give them social status among friends because that's what their friends are talking about. It's all about social mobility. Individuals however, read what they are interested in. Movies, T.V, and Videogames are oft blamed for the lack of reading. However I argue that that's not a bad thing. I blame not these artistic forms, rather I would argue that these are other mediums at telling stories much like books. So therefore our energies as humans are spread out because we have more themes of entertainment. This is a great thing. We have more ways of telling stories, and like shoddy, schlekht, kitsch trashy books that oft get published, these forms also produce shoddy, schlekht, kitsch trashy films, t.v, videogames, etc. All mediums kan produce kitsch. That doesn't mean that either medium is schlekht. So what then? Well, all we kan asken for is more writers that want to strive to the pynacle of great outstanding erstaunlicking prose and poetry, drama, film, and t.v, graphic novels and videogames. We must fokus on playing with language and stories. One person is in the process of doen it right now. So in conclusion we must encourage reading books for the sake of reading. We should not treat literature as a means to and end but rather a pleasure center of learning and thinking and above all, having fun with it. If we kan convince more people that reading is just as fun as films, I'm sure we shall succeed. Plus if the above statement were true, one person wouldn't have completed 10 books this summer. – Starvix Draxon9 years ago
Maybe you should not believe everything you read on articles. Also, statistics can fluctuate over time (assuming they are not biased). – T. Palomino2 years ago
After the success of the Harry Potter series, the YA market exploded. The books released by publishers under the YA category today are not as "dumbed-down" or childish as was the trend for a long time — offerings for the last decade have tackled many social issues and provided bleak scenarios of the future. As with HP, the success of the Hunger Games series has also inspired a number books and series, except the HG wave is filled with post-apocalyptic or near-apocalyptic settings.
My initial reaction to the premise of the Hunger Games series was sadness — I was not interested in reading about children fighting to the death for food. Recently at a convention I asked the group about whether or not they believed the dystopia trend signals a despondency amongst the young people reading them — a lack of hope for the future of the world. A junior high teacher spoke up to say no, that she hears that a lot but she believes the trend is a hopeful one, because even though the main characters of these novels are struggling to stay alive in ruined worlds, the fact is that within the story, humanity has survived whatever collapse has been portrayed, and the young people in the story are re-building a better society.
I'd be interested in seeing a well-researched article from a psychological perspective that compares several different popular YA series, and discusses the issue of hopefulness within those series.
I'm putting this in Literature, but it could also be an article for the Writing category, depending on approach.
I wrote an article about classic dystopian novels a while back that takes The Hunger Games as a starting point, seeming as it is a popular series :) it has been an interest of mine, thinking about how 'Dystopia' as a genre has changed over time, and how it has become such a YA genre when it wasn't always. I know this isn't exactly to the topic, but thought it might be useful! :) – Camille Brouard9 years ago
I mean this topic can even spread to the Film category due to the mad grab for film adaptations of Hunger Games, Maze Runner, and Divergent. I do agree with the junior high teacher that these series in the end are hopeful. Typically they end with the main character destroying the world that they grew up in (which was corrupt to begin with) and creating a new and hopefully better one. Similarly the generation that has grown up with Harry Potter and Hunger Games and the like have to face a world that is drastically different than the world that the Baby Boomers lived in. One that is rife with problems that previous generations ignored. At the same time, this current generation has managed to look at the stark reality and embrace the notion that change can occur by challenging the current societal norms to create a new world for themselves. – ajames9 years ago
Is there any way that writing in literature can fall back into the writing styles of classical books. So much of writing has changed and evolved but are there any current books or any possibility of an audience that would enjoy modern authors writing in the style of classical going from Tolstoy, Austen, Hemingway, Steinbeck, Orwell. With Harper Lee's "new" book coming out onto shelves this next week, it'd be interesting to see others following in her path and falling back towards those times, settings, and styles of writing.
I wish such a thing could come true but I think publishers would make it too hard on writers to divert back to old ways (if they're not already famous and can get away with whatever they want). We're always told to be as clear and concise as possible, people don't have the attention spans to sit through intense abstract imagery descriptions. If people don't have the patience to read it, it doesn't sell, they don't get published. To be successful in mainstream anyways (and not to us academics) it must be hard to be successful sticking to classic writing. – Slaidey9 years ago
What exactly do yo consider "classic" writing? What traits and characteristics must be present in order to be considered classic? Is it merely a question of time period or is it the writing style, genre, or effect on society? The authors you named come from different eras, genres, and have very distinct voices. Can you really call an author who just published a book this month "classic?' – RyanLee9 years ago
What is classic. In my definition, a classic is something that was written in either Old English, Old Norse, Akkadian, or Egyptian. It may also be heroic. So it depends then on what definition. If Dostoyevsky's writing is "classic" than by the gods Hemmingway is not due to his tiny sentences. A classic also requires then a certain kind of vocabulary level, one that it appears many people lack due to a schoisslickh education system. And then as one of you mentioned above, publishers don't want long expository prose, because supposedly, "It doesn't sell." Thankfully we don't have to take publishers seriously because we kan then laugh at them for publishing Ursula K. Le Guin, and David Mitchell. This is a very interesting topic and I really hope someone picks this up. The trick will be figuring out whose linguistic patter is quote "classical". – Starvix Draxon9 years ago
When Samuel Beckett was asked what "Waiting for Godot" really meant, he waved a hand and said it was merely a play about two men waiting. But it is clearly so much more. Or is it? Do we over-analyze authors' simple ideas or do they purposefully sneak in symbols and themes for readers to uncover?
An interesting idea, and the argument could be made that we tend to over-analyze an author's ideas. As Nick Carraway said in "The Great Gatsby," the billboard of T.J. Eckleburg is just a billboard, not the eyes of God. – jgwilson9 years ago
As an English student going into the world of teaching literature, this is an incredibly relevant question that touches on many aspects of literary and textual criticism. Another question could be who or what holds the authority and authoritative power in a work--is it the author, such as Beckett? Does he know definitively whether his work is symbolic or not? Or it is a question of the individual reader and their unique experiences that color the way that the work is read and perceived? Or is the perception of symbolism and hidden themes indicative of the time period in which the work was written? For example, if a writer writing during World War I composes a poem about something that has nothing to do with war, should we read the imagery in that poem as relating to war? It might be interesting to take a selection of authors or works as a case study for this fascinating debate. – Rachel Watson9 years ago
This article potentially touches on some points which would be relevant to this article, for whoever wishes to pick this up: https://the-artifice.com/relevance-of-fan-theories/ – Matthew Sims9 years ago
Some authors put in symbols intentionally, especially when it comes to religious imagery (J.K. Rowling) but honestly I find that the most powerful symbols are that which authors write without knowing. As a writer when I put something in on purpose it feels forced because too much attention is drawn to it, but sometimes when someone else reads your story they'll ask "what did this object really mean?" and you find yourself already knowing the answer unconsciously. This article could go multiple ways to explore instances of people over analyzing/under analyzing symbols in literature, even whether a symbol like the colour red has an inherent cross-cultural value or if as Rachel Watson says, the work is a cultural product of certain time and red means many things to many people depending when and where they read it. – Slaidey9 years ago
I find myself constantly searching for themes and symbols relevant to my own experience when I read. Perhaps this is part of my own biased judgment deficiency. However, I don't necessarily believe the authors' intentions are tailored to my need to relate on a personal level. Personally, I write what I am inspired to write in the moment. There is, no doubt, someone who will analyze what I've written - to death - but if that is the case, I am beyond satisfied. It means I got to someone, and for a novice writer like myself, that's more than I can ever ask for. Interpretation is up to the reader himself, not what the author believes the reader will interpret. – PaulieWawg9 years ago
An extremely large, over-explored, unoriginal and ambitious topic that cannot be addressed properly in a single article, considering that there is already an incredibly huge amount of research on narratology about this idea. – T. Palomino10 months ago
A look back on the writing of Stephen King, and a discussion on why his stories have been as successful as they are. This article would analyze common themes in King's writing, whether there is a recurring format to his stories in terms of plot progression and character development, and the subjects he's chosen to write about.
It would be important to discuss the tropes in his books, like how almost every story is set in Maine, or how a lot of his characters are alcoholics. This should not demonstrate why he is a bad writer, but instead it should shows how many writers have recurring themes in there books. In a way it gives King distance style. – Aaron Hatch9 years ago
I think it would also be interesting to perhaps include what he says of his own writing or writing in general. I've read some of his writing on writing and he has some pretty distinct ideas about what a writer should do or have. This might be a slight tangent but an exclusive look into his writing nonetheless. – Nof9 years ago
Aaron and Nof make really good points -- King definitely has a style and a set of favorite tropes. I'd love to see an analysis of how his own "rules of writing" and advice play out in his own work, and how the tropes stay fresh. Assuming one believes they do; personally I quit reading King b/c I felt I'd see the "writer trapped in a physical space goes crazy" story in every version I needed to -- that might be worth addressing as part of the analysis. – Monique9 years ago
This is an interesting idea. What type of psychological analysis were you thinking of? For instance, a psychoanalysis of the main character could be rather in-depth, or perhaps even a psychoanalysis of the secondary characters could add another dimension to the classic story. But there are several other approaches that could be explored if you are referring to psychology in general. Maybe the characters' actions could be examined from a behavioural psychology perspective, that is why they continue to act the way they do. Just a couple of ideas. – SStevens9 years ago
I read at least four articles about this idea in the last 20 years. – T. Palomino2 years ago
Discuss Chimamanda Ngozi Adiche's work and the topics she explores.
Yes, I would like to learn more about this author. I see she has written so many books. Perhaps, add some biographical information in addition to exploring who her audience is and what platforms are used to reach these readers. – Venus Echos9 years ago
