This is a compilation of all the comments that you have left. Go to Comments to see the original post and links to author profiles.
Now that we are entering the final week of "The Big Read: Fahrenheit 451" programs, discussions and events, is there anything else you want to say about literature, reading, or the failure to recognize the value of a "right" or "thing" until it is gone? Anonymous said.. That question really opens up a can of worms! So many ways to go in answering this one. I must say that I really ended up missing my hair, once it was all gone! Never thought about it much while I had a full head of it! Also, I think some things I once saw as a "right" (like smoking in public) are better off thought of as a "privilege" best done where it doesn't interfere with someone else's health. Things change when perceptions change (and vice versa)! Anonymous said... I have enjoyed following this blog and will miss it when it's gone! Perhaps it can be left up for a while, after The Big Read: Fahrenheit 451 is over?It was awesome to see that so many young people participated in the art and essay contests!
February 25, 2008 4:38 PM
February 26, 2008 12:09 PM
"Are we reading less? What do we stand to lose if this is true?"
Likes2Laugh said... I don't think we are reading less, but that the mediums that can be read are changing or different from what they were before the Internet. We are reading things all the time in print, on TV, on the Internet. We even "read" signs and wonders in nature and in each other that don't come in print. Reading is diversifying, not dying! Charlie said... I think this is brilliant. I submitted my paper from school to the Big Read contest, I want to read other people's thoughts on this book as well. February 20, 2008 9:20 AM P said... Yes we are reading fewer books, but commisseratly our consumption of news and opinion-based literature (usually through the internet) has been on the rise. The loss of some amount of fictional literature is more than compensated by the shift in focus to real stories of people and evens which pervade the internet. With the new ability of anyone to present their concepts and ideas to the global consciousness (usually through outlets such as Blogspot) our consciousness is actually expanding beyond the limiting scope of publishers and traditional news companies. February 20, 2008 9:22 AM Anonymous said... I agree that reading is diversifying, but I also know that todays youth don't read nearly as much as people have in the past. We live in/ outside of the nations most literate city, Seattle. Even we are noticing a decline in reading books. However I'm not exactly sure whether that is a good thing or a bad thing. It is just a change. February 20, 2008 9:26 AM Anonymous said... Anonymous said... i don't really know if reading in america is declining. it is a hard question for me to answer. living on bainbridge everyone reads. my sister is constintly reading book after book. Seattle is considered one of the nations most literate cities, so when asked this question i would have to disagree. i disagree partially due to the fact that i have not been exposed to other schools and communities in america. i know that in other parts of the us reading is not as strong. February 20, 2008 9:30 AM Anonymous said... This study stated that we are reading less books. This may be true. I know nothing about the reliability of the study, so I won't comment on it. However, if you actually read the book "Fahrenheit 451," you should realize that it isn't really the books that matter, but rather the ideas in them. Faber did say that the people could get the same thing from the "parlors," but the right things weren't being shown. As long as we are all being exposed to a variety of new ideas and are educated enough to decide for ourselves which one is right, then society is fine. February 20, 2008 9:30 AM Anonymous said... Although reading purely for pleasure is certainly less popular than it was a few decades ago, the aspects of reading which society needs I.E. education, the sharing of ideas, and any sort of political dissent are still brought to us by the internet. Despite the numerous pointless distractions on the internet there is quite a deal of wisdom and intelligent thought to be found. February 20, 2008 9:30 AM Sugar bomb daddy said... I believe that we are reading less, but I don’t think that that will necessarily become a problem. In general, I feel that many books are portrayed as more artistic and intellectual then films, when this is not necessarily the case. If reading declines, the population will simply get intellectual stimulation from some other medium. We will simply get dumber because we are reading less. February 20, 2008 9:31 AM Anonymous said... I don't necessarily think that we're reading less; it's just that we're drawing our reading material from different source. Is reading news online any different from reading the sunday paper? Is reading an email that different from reading a letter? With blogs, forums, and other online communities, sharing inforation is less of a hassle than ever--even if you don't necessarily want to read the information others share. And thanks to the wonders of illegal peer-to-peer file sharing, even the largest and heaviest tome can be transfered into a weightless format able to be stored conveniently on your computer. So no, I don't think it matters that much that we're reading more online than we are in books. Don't get me wrong--I'm an avid book-reader, with a huge collection of literature. If nothing else, it's much easier to curl up in bed with a nice book than it is with a laptop. But still, I see no real problem with using a screen rather than a musty book to do your reading. February 20, 2008 9:32 AM Anonymous said... personally i tink that poeple and mostly kids are reading much less then the generations before us. back then poeple didnt have much to entertain themselves so they read books, but now we have music TV computers and video games that keep us from reading books. February 20, 2008 9:34 AM "Surfing the net. watching TV. Joining a virtual game. Reading a book. Where do you find community?" Finding community... Re: the comment by anonymous - P said... A lot of what I've seen talked about with this whole "Big Read" is total BS. What Book Would You Save? Likes2Laugh said... What book would I save? I've been thinking about this question all night long! If people were burning books and I could save only ONE, I think it would be a book of quotations like "Phillips' Book of Great Thoughts & Funny Sayings: A Stupendous Collection of Quotes, Quips, Epigrams, Witticisms, and Humorous Comments. For Personal Enjoyment and Ready Reference". There are other, more profound books worth saving, but I think I would need to be reminded of the intelligence, wit and wisdom of others, throughout history, during what would be a very dark time (book burning)? Book burning is NOT funny, so remembering "hope" through humor, wisdom, etc., would be most useful. kd said... Great Blog! Truly a thing of beauty! How could I choose? If it's come down to where I could only save one book, we are in dire straits, and I would have to save whatever I could, hoping it was something wonderful. That said, I would want to save The Epic of Gilgamesh. It is our oldest surviving work of its kind, and I would save it to remind people that the urge to write down stories has been with humankind for millenia. The Epic of Gilgamesh is over four thousand years old, and it has already survived the burning of one library in 612 BCE. Think about how amazing that is. Goody said... What book to save?? Would there be other books saved by other people, or would my book be the only one. If, like in Farenheit 451 there were other books, I would go for a childrens book, "Tootles the Taxi". Though possibly not the most intellectual book, it is important to me and I think it is important to have good children's books to encourage reading. I can still remember the rhyme for which the book was named, the one I read to my sister no more than half an hour after she was born. A world famous printmaker said... I would save Samuel Beckett's: The Unnameable. Both for its virtuostic poetry of despair and death and because we live in a society that looks askance at the suffering, absurdity, and futility of so many human lives. prhoades said... As Lifelong Reader,the book I would save would be ‘The secret garden’ by Frances Hodgson Burnett. The secret garden was a favorite of mine as a child and remains one to this day. I still remember the first time I read this wonderful book, I wanted more. This book was the spark that lead to my lifelong love of reading. I wouldn't accept the premise that only one book could be saved for the simple reason I don't think I could narrow down the choice or live with it if I could. I'd try to find a way to save a library for starters. February 2, 2008 8:32 PM Anonymous said... i love the bannerhead - logo for the read red is the color of passion , paper fires like love relationships burn hot and fast the book i would save is " one fish ,two fish ,red fish blue fish" anything 'cat in the hat" love to read !!!!!!!!!! LOVE RAT IN A HAT I'd probably try for the thickest Norton Lit. Anthology I can get my hands on, if I could only save one. But I'd be totally in for starting a conspiracy group to save a whole library. Likes2Laugh said... I really like the idea of trying to save the whole library, not just one book! Karen J. said... I would save the book that hasn't been written yet. They can destroy the physical book, but not take sway the thoughts that are left in our hearts and minds. I believe in encouraging the story telling, to "fire the imagination". No pun intended!! Hannahgrams: You mention wondering about the lack of mention of the great spiritual works. I chose visionary poets because of their density. Had difficulty narrowing it down but settled in the end for the Collected works of Rabindrinath Tagore specifically because he is a mystic and visionary. This Bengali Nobel laureate's works can be read on so many levels. They inspire, they provoke the unwritten masterpiece (as KarenJ mentioned) they comfort, they are sensual pieces feeding on all levels yet they are not limited or tied to any one doctrine narrowly. I would, of course have a great deal of difficulty leaving behind William Blake, WB Yeats and TS Eliot and would probably be scorched by the flames dithering trying to bundle all four of these great visionaries in my arms. Quite likely I would be burned along with all the works I was trying to save just because the decision would be tooooo hard and i would dally too close to the flames. As usual. Is that burning hair I smell??? mikeybee said... I really think that censorship is a ridiculous notion, first of all. What's the point of being allowed freedom of speech and freedom of thought, and yet having those very rights taken from us by an oppressing government, by people who simply don't agree with what is being written? If it's not something you approve of, then don't read it, quite simply. But don't keep knowledge and the wealth of free thought that books bring us, out of reach of others. That's oppression, plain and simple, and is not to be tolerated if we are indeed a 'free country'. Jonathan Evison said... . . . as for what book i'd save, maybe don quixote, or david copperfield, or the brothers karamazov, or, or, or, or, . . . loving the big read, and lovin' this page-- very striking . . . If I could truly only save one book I think I would find myself being selfish and save my favorite book of all time and not an anthology or philosophical work. Therefore I would save Jane Austen's Pride & Prejudice. Wait! No, maybe it would be Austen's Persuasion! Wait! Ok, I would save a Complete Works of Jane Austen! Interesting notion, what would our world be like now if the library at Alexandria hadn't been burned? This book will likely be part of the discussion at the Tuesday Feb 19 Field's End Roundtable discussion headed by Paul Hanson of Eagle Harbor Books. His subject, "Speculative Fiction," should be of interest not only to writers but to readers and thinkers as well.
We are reading less books, but i do not consider this to be all bad. unless the flow of information and free speech is tampered with a situation like in Fahrenheit 451 could never happen February 20, 2008 9:26 AM
I feel closer to people I meet online than I do with people in my neighborhood or at work. I guess it's because we have something in common. If I talk about politics with someone online, everything is cool. If I talk about politics at work, some people decide I'm their new best enemy.
February 13, 2008 4:47 PM
people i meet from other parts of the world have a hard time figuring us out here in the U.S. For many of them, the most common topics of conversation - around the dinner table, over coffee or a glass of wine - are politics, religion and sex - things that are pretty central to most of our lives. Here, they are almost taboo in casual conversation for exactly the reason you mention.
It's OK here to talk about sexual exploits, but not intimacy; to identify our denomination, but not our beliefs, faith and passion; and by all means, keep our politics under wrap because they have become polarizing battle lines, not grounds for respectful and reasoned debate - increasingly so during the past 8 years.
As much as anything I long for in our culture, it is to re-discover the art of conversation, of dialogue, listening and appreciative inquiry.
Online spaces do help provide a place for dialogue - I hope we can try it face-to-face as well.
bc
Technology is not evil, the picture here is designed with a provocative statement trying to force people to believe that things were better in a simpler time, and somehow books and social interaction are inextricably linked.
Reading a book often restricts your interaction with someone else. If you spend your time buried in a book, all you do is absorb the message of the writer, without any discourse or sharing of ideas. You may have a conversation with someone else who has read the book, but often the ideas are not your own.
People can talk just as well about issues without books. How often do you get meaningful [political news from a book. News media might pretend to offer an unbiased view, but without opposing viewpoints, the message amounts to little more than propaganda. The Internet on the otherhand, offers as many different viewpoints as there are people, and anyone can post something somewhere about their thoughts of a topic.
Printed media has a purpose, but it should no longer be shoehorned into a role it is not suited for. The Internet offers more interactivity, and well as the knowledge which can be taken back into the real world and used there.
Bah, no time to finish the post, I'll be back later.
February 20, 2008 9:34 AM
Book to save:
Collected Poems and plays of Rabindranath Tagore
Collected works of William Blake
Collected works of WB Yeats.
I'm tootles the taxi,
I'll give you a ride,
Just put up your hand
And jump inside
Just watch the meter,
you'll see the fare.
Distance no object,
I go anywhere.
I could choose any of Many of the nobel prize winning author's works, from poetry, plays, novels, or short stories.
Beckett, who had a blessed and priviledged childhood, and young~adult life, with the best schooling and athletics and a bourgoise life style, was asked why with such an apparently happy life, was his work so uncomprimisingly dark and despairing. And he replied: Just look out the window.
Stacy said...
HannahGrams said...
February 4, 2008 7:46 PM
As for which book I would save.... that's an incredibly tough choice. I think that it wouldn't really matter which book we saved, because as a collective whole, everyone in the world has read every book ever written. And if we remember those books, we can pass them on the future generations. They won't be the same as before, true, but the art of oral storytelling always requires fabrications, which in turn leads to new stories being told. Stories live on inside us, not just in paper and ink.
However... if I really had to choose, I would save Neil Gaiman's 'Coraline' or 'Mirrormask'. Genius in all forms. :)
February 4, 2008 10:58 PM
February 5, 2008 9:46 AM
Tee hee!
By the way, love the look of the blog main page! It's quite powerful!
February 5, 2008 10:05 AM
I think we would be more evolved beings intellectually and spiritually for sure, and most likely our technology would be well beyond our current comprehension.
Yokel (TKS) said...
Fahrenheit 451 seems like the obvious choice to save, oddly. I just reread it and appreciated the way Bradbury so keenly captured not only our movement away from books and literature, but from critical thinking and freethinking as well. When I first read this book, I was in my late teens and a local activist against book burnings, so at that time, I was more focused on the physical act of censorship. But our culture does a fine job even now in self-censoring, and the pulling and banning of books from library shelves continues into the 21st century.
As a writing coach and editor, I often suggest writers read Fahrenheit 451 because it's a book about the shape of the future, if we don't do more to protect our current literary landscape AND our rights to think, speak and express ourselves freely. The book should be quite motivational for anyone who values any of these greater goods, as well as eye-opening for people who don't think free speech rights and censorship exist inside our political and cultural landscape.
Tamara Kaye Sellman
Writer's Rainbow Literary Services
www.writersrainbow.com
Bainbridge Island, WA
Incredible. The photo shows young people in community [sitting next to one another] but interfacing with technology, not each other. So, is community now just being in the same room, otherwise engaged?
February 9, 2008 2:25 PM