Throughout the 19th century, novels were regarded with the same suspicion with which we treat, say, Eli Roth’s ‘torture-porn’ Saw movies today. They were dangerous not simply because of the stories they might contain – the romantic expressions of wish-fulfillment, for example, that led Emma Bovary down the garden path of adultery – but also because reading itself was seen as a kind of possession: an encroachment of the ‘other’ upon the self.
In his condemnatory tract Popular Amusements (1869), the American clergyman Jonathan Townley Crane cautioned his flock against reading novels: ‘novel-readers spend many a precious hour in dreaming out clumsy little romances of their own, in which they themselves are the beautiful ladies and the gallant gentlemen who achieve impossibilities…’ only to find themselves ‘merged in the hero of the story’, losing the sense of who they really are.....
January 9, 2016
"What’s more wholesome than reading? Yet books wield a dangerous power: the best erode self, infecting readers with ideas."
Here's an essay titled "Dark Books" by Tara Isabella Burton.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
9 comments:
Dark books?
Dangerous ideas?
How about the murdering and conquering ordered in the Koran?
"losing the sense of who they really are....." OK, honest question for the fiction aficionados around here: has anyone ever studied those presumed effects of reading, negative or positive, mind-numbing or mind-expanding, preferably in some kind of (quasi-)experimental design? Does reading fiction (any kind, a particular kind, in varying amounts, etc.) have any particular, measurable sort of psychological or philosophical effect, controlling for all relevant variables?
The closure paradox of "common core" identifies the subversion of independent development through secular inculcation. It is similar in nature and outcome to the civilization paradox where enlightened individuals succumb to the simian pleasures of libertinism as a segue to progressive corruption concluding with a dysfunctional convergence and replacement by a less tainted alien population.
"... Throughout the 19th century, novels were regarded with the same suspicion with which we treat, say, Eli Roth’s ‘torture-porn’ Saw movies today...."
Eli Roth did not make the 'Saw' films. His films of the genre were the "Hostel" films.
I'm sure the rest of the article exhibited such comparable accuracy.
I am Laslo.
Does reading fiction (any kind, a particular kind, in varying amounts, etc.) have any particular, measurable sort of psychological or philosophical effect, controlling for all relevant variables?
How the fuck should I know, but I feel like it does, and since it is all going on in my brain, I guess that's all the measurement you are going to get. Currently I am reading Notes from Underground I find it amazing. I tried reading it before when I was younger and frankly, I didn't get it. Yes, a great book changes the way you view life. Then again people feel the same way about pot.
Sometimes you get insights, like Graham Green's The End of the Affair where he says that jealousy is the true mark of love and when the Hebrew God said he was a jealous god, that was his way of proving his love for mankind. But that and $2.89 will get you a cup of coffee.
Sebastian -
Despite the claims, there is virtually no robust evidence (large population, randomly selected, double blind, controlling for independent variables, etc.) regarding the impact of particular forms of reading. Reading as a cognitive function is associated with various positive life outcomes but it is unclear as to the direction of causal flow (do bright successful people read more or do people who read more become bright and successful). The evidence that does exist tends to support the former over the latter but not at a determinative level. Many other factors contribute to positive life outcomes than just reading.
In other words, it doesn't matter what you read, as long as you do read. The projects attempting to link fiction reading with increased empathy and prosocial behaviors are laughably flawed. There is no robust evidence to support that hypothesis.
There has been much research over the years regarding the impact of sex and violence in books (and movies and games) on behaviors. The balance of that research also indicates that there is no impact on behaviors and life outcomes.
My personal supposition, independent of the research data, is that the determining variable in terms of reading is the degree of purposefulness. Books read for leisure and recreation simply flow through. Books read for some purpose such as analysis or knowledge acquisition or as a goad to thought and speculation, likely have some measurable impact. However, the quality of reading research is so poor that it is not possible to validate the supposition.
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance changed the way I think. Not because I agreed with the author's premise, in fact I take the exact opposite side of the argument that he does, but he *did* make me aware of the argument itself about Zen, the Sophists, and the Empiricists (Yes I had a lousy education at a third rate college), and made me think about it, and changed the way I think about many things. I think this question is of the YMMV type, and statistical guidelines never completely inform a single case.
I take it she despises writers of Mystery Detective series too.
What is really dangerous is chain watching Seinfeld re-runs. It will change your outlook on the human race...for the better.
The current kerfuffle over Hugo Awards is a good example that some people still take reading seriously enough to desire that the books available are not all politically correct, LBGTQ-promoting, leftist-authored indoctrination tracts.
Post a Comment