Another Reason Why Reading is Cool

A few months ago, my friend, Charissa, remarked upon the beeping, flashing educational toys on the market for toddlers. You know, the ones that light up and sing songs after you push 1, 2, 3, or A,B,C.
“So, how exactly are those going to teach my son to sit still and read a book?” she wondered aloud.

Compared to all the glitz of TV and high-paced internet, reading can seem kind of… well, boring. Just black and white. No movement. No music. Nothing fancy.

Charissa’s comment got me thinking. If kids are implicitly trained to think that all learning must always be entertaining, then they probably won’t find reading or critical thinking all that appealing. Let’s face it: reading takes work and it’s easier to watch a movie.

The very fact that you are visiting this blog implies that you think reading is somewhat valuable. And there are many educators, scientists, and psychologists who would agree with you. Few people ever argue against the merits of reading. (And even fewer take their criticisms seriously).

Unlike watching a movie, old-fashioned reading taps into two innate human needs: the need for both community AND individuality. When an audience sits in a movie theatre, everyone sees the same film. People may have their different opinions, but everyone experiences the same stimulus. Unless you’re an active film critic, the experience is largely passive. You sit. You watch. You get entertained.

It’s true that people will always interpret the film differently. One will say that so and so is a great actor while another will disagree. But everything from the setting to the characters has been presented on a platter. The major work has already been accomplished according to the director’s interpretation of the story. This is why it is possible for Hollywood to make oodles of money in remaking old films. A new director re-interprets a script, slaps on some younger faces to the characters, and we have another new movie.

But books are different. Each person becomes the director by imagining the setting and characters. You have to have a longer relationship with a book than with a movie in order to enjoy. There’s more connection and personal investment. In general, reading provides a more personalized, engaging experience. DISCLAIMER: I am NOT suggesting that people should disregard the original author’s intent and meaning. I am merely saying that people will visualize and apply the text descriptions individually.

And when you meet someone who’s read the same book, there’s a mutual sense of communal nostalgia as people recall their old mental haunts and relationships with the characters. Few movies elicit such personal enthusiasm to the same degree. A person who’s spent ten hours with a book will naturally have a deeper appreciation for the story than the person who’s only spent two hours with a movie. You can’t cram ten hours’ worth of description, details, and inner-monologues into a two hour film. This is probably why I have NEVER heard anyone say, “Wow. That movie was sure better than the book!”

The point? While I certainly enjoy my share of movies like every other middle-class American, I think we all (myself included) could better understand and appreciate stories/information if we actually read these and thought about them rather than letting some director (whose worldview may be questionable) interpret reality for us. Active reading is a more humane process than passive observing. Even if the observing is more physically colorful.

No wonder it’s so hard to read the Bible these days.