<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" 
      xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/a_new_kind_of_l.php" />
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/atom.xml" />
  <id>tag:,2009:/1/tag:72.47.210.69,2004://1.4243-</id>
  <updated>2009-11-23T20:00:37Z</updated>
  <title>Comments for A New Kind of Literacy</title>
  
  <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.23-en</generator>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2004://1.4243</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/a_new_kind_of_l.php" />
    <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=1/entry_id=4243" title="A New Kind of Literacy" />
    <published>2004-07-31T06:52:52Z</published>
    <updated>2007-12-16T23:15:34Z</updated>
    <title>A New Kind of Literacy</title>
    <summary>Note: This post is also available in audio format (.wav file, 2.9MB). &quot;Literary Reading in Dramatic Decline&quot; announced the headline at the National Endowment for the Arts website on 8 July 2004. On that day the NEA published a report entitled &quot;Reading at Risk&quot; (PDF), which outlined the findings of a 2002 survey of the...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Richard MacManus</name>
      <uri>http://www.readwriteweb.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="Multimedia" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.readwriteweb.com/">
      <![CDATA[<p><i>Note: This post is also <b><a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/audio/a_new_kind_of_literacy.wav">available in audio format</a></b> (.wav file, 2.9MB).</i></p>
<p>"Literary Reading in Dramatic Decline" <a
href="http://www.nea.gov/news/news04/ReadingAtRisk.html">announced the headline</a> at
the National Endowment for the Arts website on 8 July 2004. On that day the NEA published
a report entitled <a href="http://www.nea.gov/pub/ReadingAtRisk.pdf">"Reading at
Risk"</a> (PDF), which outlined the findings of a 2002 survey of the reading habits of
17,000 Americans. The survey was also done in 1982 and 1992. The resulting trends?
According to the report, literary reading (i.e. novels, short stories, poetry, plays) has
declined by 10% since 1982, with 18-24 year olds declining the most - 28%! Or as the
preface to the report summarized it:</p>

<p>"...literary reading in America is not only declining rapidly among all groups, but
the rate of decline has accelerated, especially among the young."</p>

<p>I read through the report and although the analysis was a bit too alarmist in tone,
the numbers are indeed sobering. However the analysis of Internet and digital media
trends was very thin - <a
href="http://grandtextauto.gatech.edu/2004/07/09/reading-at-risk-from-library-um-i-mean-internet/#more-379">
Grand Text Auto</a> did a good write-up of this particular aspect.</p>

<p>In this post I want to put the NEA report in a new light. A light that shines from the
21st century. I think the changes in reading habits that were reported are directly
related to digital media and the Internet. But, unlike the NEA, I don't think the
Internet is a "culprit" or that it "competes" with reading (those are both words used on
page 30 of the report). No, what's happening is that reading is changing, metamorphosing.
Reading is no longer just a paper-based, solitary activity that people do for leisure.
Reading in the 21st century is increasingly <b>digital, social and creative.</b></p>

<h2>Literary Types</h2>
<p>Some background about me and where I'm coming from... I'm an English Lit major from
the early 90's, so literacy is one of my core interests (along with web technology). One
thing I've always been uncomfortable with regarding literature is the snobbishness
exhibited by many Literary Types. It may be because there isn't much consumer demand for
Literature and so literary types feel they have to defend their niche by emphasizing its
worth as an intellectual and cultural activity. In other words: sure studying literature
doesn't make money, but it makes you more intelligent and a more rounded
individual.&nbsp;</p>

<p>That's the theory anyway and it's backed up by my own experience as an English Lit
major. Back when I was at University, all my mates were doing Commerce or Computer
Science degrees. I was the only one doing a Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree... and yes I was
the 'artsy-fartsy' one in my crowd. The standing joke amongst my friends was that I was
actually doing a BFA - a 'Bachelor of Fuck All'. And in hindsight unfortunately it's true
that my BA has counted for next to nothing in my career. Nevertheless I'm glad I did it
for the things I learned, plus I think it gave me an excellent grounding for analytical
work.</p>

<h2>Blogs vs Books?</h2>
<p>So yes, Literary Types do have a snobbish and elitist attitude. A recent example of
this is in the comments posted to a popular blog post over at 2blowhards.com. The post was
entitled <a href="http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/000809.html#000809">Tacit Knowledge
-- Writing a Book</a> and it attracted a huuuge number of comments. One of the
interesting sub-threads was 'blogs vs books' and here's a selection of comments about
that:</p>

<p class="quote">1. "When I've been doing mostly surfing, I'll start to miss the
coherence and focus and depth of a good book. On the other hand, lordy it's fun to surf
the web, and it can be mighty nourishing in its own way."</p>

<p class="quote">2. "Books are the meat, pototoes and vegetables of my internal
intellectual life. Reading blogs on the web is like coffee and dessert--ok for a treat
but not something I expect to nurture or sustain me."</p>

<p class="quote">3. "I find blogs definitely dessert! But am an avid reader of almost any
mystery fiction."</p>

<p class="quote">4. "There is a certain sense of satisfaction I get from reading a book
that I don't get from keeping up with my favourite blogg, or even Salon.com for that
matter."</p>

<p class="quote">5. "I prefer reading novels over reading blogs because I like dropping
into other worlds that have been crafted to make a whole, coherant sense. I do like
reading blogs, too. Mostly in the morning, before I write. They're like the morning paper
or something."</p>

<p class="quote">6. "With regard to the book versus blog debate. I found myself
analogising it with Beethoven's Ninth Symphony as opposed to the three-minute pop song.
Pop songs are great - entertaining and mood settling - but they'll never go anywhere near
the spiritual depths, the intellectual and emotional fulfilment, and sheer power, of
Beethoven."</p>

<p class="quote">7. "Blogs are fine, a nice cup of coffee, but for sustained thought,
phrased in sentences that you'd read by choice, developed, extended, subjected to intense
self-scrutiny, wrought with a consciousness of what has preceded them in the culture -
for that you need a book. And for a book you need a mind. Life without books is just
televison upstairs." <i>(RM: that's the pretentious pick of the bunch - and it was
written by a New Zealander no less!)</i></p>

<p class="quote">8. "I would agree that surfing the web and Blogging are very
entertaining. I would also agree blogging will never replace a well written book, though
Chat rooms can be very deep and help someone put concepts into words."</p>

<p class="quote">9. "Re blogs vs books - One thing I've always noticed when working with
computers and children, is that children (especially young children) will nine times out
of ten respond far far better to a book than to a screen full of writing."</p>

<p>Now... I'll give you a moment to digest that, as frankly it is a bit rich! (ho ho,
another food pun!) The gist of it is that those people think of blogs - and text on a
computer screen in general, it seems - as fun and entertaining, but shallow and not
filling or nourishing. A 3-minute pop song, as opposed to a symphany. Whereas reading
proper <i>paper</i> books - according to these pundits - is an activity that is deep,
profound, spiritual, nourishing.</p>

<h2>Two-Way Literacy</h2>
<p>What all those people are missing is that books aren't necessarily an object you
consume. Electronic text - including blogs and ebooks - enables a true two-way reading
experience. Ebooks for example often have exactly the same words as a paper book - but
you can do so much more with them. Note that in the previous sentence I used the word
"you" (as in the reader) and "do" (as in produce something). With a paper book you can
scribble in the margins and make some notes of your own, I suppose. But there's not a
whole lot else you can actively contribute to the reading process, because a paper book
is an object that is pretty much static. An Ebook, on the other hand, is <i>dynamic</i> -
you can cut and paste text, add notations, re-format it, search it, electronically send
it to your mate on the other side of the world, converse with other people reading the
same text, contribute to the story, and many many other creative acts that we haven't
even discovered yet.&nbsp;</p>

<p>A word on the last comment I quoted from 2blowhards - about children responding better to books than
"to a screen full of writing". I agree that books are very important for children - my
own daughter (who is going on 3) loves it when we read books together. But she's just as
keen on multimedia on the computer, because she can interact with it, make choices,
create things. I'd suggest that this future generation will want to have their cake and
eat it too - they'll want books, but in a format more suited to creativity and 2-way
communication.</p>
<h2>New Generation of Readers</h2>
<p>To return to the NEA 'Reading at Risk' report. While it is disturbing that reading is
apparently declining, there is <b>a new kind of literacy</b> that I believe is rising to
take its place. It's like <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/001823.php">media
literacy</a>, but there's more to it as well... The new generation of readers aren't content
to be passive consumers of books. They want to be able to interact and communicate with
words and other media. The NEA report actually has a little clue that helps confirm this
trend: it states that creative writing has <i>increased</i> over the last 20 years
(almost the only thing that did increase!).</p>

<p>I've <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/001990.php">noted before</a> on
this blog that Generation Y is very community-oriented. They use media to form social
bonds and reading books doesn't necessarily meet those needs. Maybe that explains the 28%
drop in readership among 18-24 year olds.</p>

<p>Two-way media such as blogs and ebooks are the future of reading, because literacy is
no longer a one-way consumer culture of 'we write, you read'. Creativity is half the
equation now and the new generation want reading books to be a social and productive
activity. Digital media and the Internet are the enablers of this new kind of read/write
literacy.</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2004://1.4243-comment:35483</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:72.47.210.69,2004://1.4243" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/a_new_kind_of_l.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/a_new_kind_of_l.php#c35483" />
    <title>Comment from Andrew on 2004-07-31</title>
    <author>
        <name>Andrew</name>
        <uri>http://www.andrewsw.com/news/</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.andrewsw.com/news/">
        <![CDATA[<p>What is literacy?</p>

<p>Literacy is the ability to read.</p>

<p>Do we have a word for "oratoracy" (ability to speak)?</p>

<p>No.</p>

<p>Speaking/"chit-chat" has been devalued compared with the permanence and solidness of writing (a book).</p>

<p><br />
Now, the speaking/"chit-chat" can have the same permanence as a book via a blog. The same potential audience size. And for well-written ones, the same solidness.</p>

<p>What set reading apart is disappearing.<br />
What made literary literacy important is disappearing due to a technological change.</p>

<p>What is really dying is the willingness of people to read well written, but very long and very boring, works or writing, because there are things that compete just as well but are not as long or boring. Unfortunately, many of the "classics" (Augustine, for example, IMHO) fall into that category.</p>

<p>But maybe that's just the signaling of a new kind of "classic".</p>

<p>Good post you have there - thought provoking.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2004-07-31T16:00:15Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2004://1.4243-comment:35484</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:72.47.210.69,2004://1.4243" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/a_new_kind_of_l.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/a_new_kind_of_l.php#c35484" />
    <title>Comment from liam on 2004-08-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>liam</name>
        <uri>http://www.liamodonnell.com/feed/</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.liamodonnell.com/feed/">
        <![CDATA[<p>One thing that I think some people forget is that language (and therefore literature) is always evolving. The way we speak, write and read change with each new technology and generation. The traditional 'classics' studied by teenagers at school are to them written in a foreign language, the way Shakespeare's plays seem like a foreign language. It's English but it's not the English they speak. So, when studies come out bemoaning the decline in 'literature', I'm not always ready to start crying - yet. </p>

<p>It's true that litercy scores in young people, especially boys age 10-17 years, are in decline but that isn't telling the whole story and may not be such a bad thing. </p>

<p>Two educators from Canada recently produced a study [link: <a href="http://www.education.ualberta.ca/boysandliteracy/" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://www.education.ualberta.ca/boysandliteracy/" rel="nofollow">http://www.education.ualberta.ca/boysandliteracy/</a></a> ]<br />
that argues that boys aren't becoming illiterate, they're 'morphing' literacy and redefining it. They say that the text in Collectable Card Games (Yu-Gi-Oh, etc), the sports stats they devour and the writing in video games are teaching boys multi-modal, multi-tasking literacy skills that will serve them better in the workplaces of the future than the ability to write a written report about Treasure Island. </p>

<p>15 years ago e-mail and the internet didn't even exist, but today they are expected literacy skills for just about any job. What will be the required digital literacy skills in 10 years when today's adolescents are looking for jobs? </p>

<p>In his great book, "What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy", Prof. James Paul Gee also argues that video games can be fertile placing of learning how to read and write. It's worth reading for anyone involved in education. </p>

<p>As literacy evolves from long form narritive to short bursts, I don't think we'll lose our ability to think critically about what's being presented. I agree that a two-way communication will be opened up. This, in my opinion, will open the doors to more critical debate - just as blogs are doing with regards to mainstream media. </p>

<p>Great post, Richard and timely too. Next month, I've got an article coming out in a Canadian parenting magazine, [http://www.todaysparent.com] that talks about the changing face of literacy (hence the handy reference points.) I wish I could post about it now, but my contract won't allow it. <br />
I'll let you know when the online version is posted. Until then, we'll just have to wait until the 'old literacy' of print catches up with the two-way web.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2004-08-01T13:31:18Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2004://1.4243-comment:35485</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:72.47.210.69,2004://1.4243" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/a_new_kind_of_l.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/a_new_kind_of_l.php#c35485" />
    <title>Comment from Richard MacManus on 2004-08-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>Richard MacManus</name>
        <uri>http://www.readwriteweb.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.readwriteweb.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Great replies Andrew and Liam. Thanks for those links Liam, I must read up on those. I look forward to reading your article when it comes out!</p>

<p>To others that scroll this far down the page, please do leave a comment especially if you have any feedback on the audio post. I'm very keen to get some feedback on that (any feedback). Don't be shy...</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2004-08-01T19:14:37Z</published>
  </entry>

</feed>