readers reading

I found Ross' article much more enjoyable to read than Pawley's, which surprised me since I really enjoyed "Unequal Legacies".  I certainly understood Ross' article more readily than "Beyond Market Models and Resistance".  "In the Company of Readers" encompasses many aspects of reading:  who reads, what they read, how, and why.

First, Ross' comments about reading for pleasure engaged me.  It made me aware of my own hang-ups about recreational reading.  For example, in a young adult literature class last year I was assigned "The Hunger Games"...and loved it.  It was not a love without reservations, however.  I felt that I had to make excuses for taking pleasure in the sci-fi/action/romance novel, that it was, as Ross mentioned, "too easy" or "too fun".  In contrast, I proudly toted around my thick Carl Sagan book this summer.  Clearly I am holding myself (and probably others) to the (maybe not so) old-fashioned ideal of "good" and "bad" reading.  I can admit that I deal with the same issues in movie taste.  It seems that I need to make sure I can maintain a distinct taste while not rendering value judgments in the workplace.  But again the question comes to mind, how much discernment is appropriate--or required--as a librarian (especially a school librarian) when it comes to selecting books for the library?

Fear of impending change came up in Ross' article and is a theme of many library-related articles I have recently read.  While I understand the apprehension some may feel in the face of digitization or some other new reading trend, I believe that society and humanity are always moving, however slowly, forward toward progress.  The author points out that even Socrates bemoaned the advent of writing, fearing it would be the end of oral culture.  While it may be true that we no longer rely on speech alone to transmit and retain information, the shift to the written word made way for much more (and more accurate) information to be stored and retrieved easily.  In the same way, librarians should view changing technologies as opportunities, not that the newest gadget should necessarily be adopted with haste, but with an open mind toward new possibilities.  In other words, I do not believe that reading is in danger of extinction, rather it will simply look different.  Libraries will need to continue to change with the shifting nature of reading and needs of readers.

It is interesting to read about the historical shift from reading out loud to reading silently.  In my first grade classroom, we expect students to transition from "whisper reading" to silent reading over the course of the year.  I am not sure that this expectation is entirely reasonable.  As I have been reading difficult journal articles recently, I've found that whispering (or at least mouthing) the words and gesturing have bolstered my comprehension.  I have recently sought to make more space for my students to "talk to learn".

Oh, and, by the way, I'm changing format--no more article titles at the top of my posts.  I'm so over that.

 
I've been obsessed with wordle.net since I heard about it last week!

Beyond Market Models and Resistance: Organization as a Middle Layer in the History of Reading
by Christine Pawley

I'm writing my reactions as I read through the article, so bear with me as I work through the questions that arose in the first part of the article.  I am interested in how poaching could be perceived as subversive and exciting, but it also retains the impression of illegality, dishonesty, and villainy.  The latter seem like strange descriptors for readers, exactly those for whom the texts are created and marketed.  Digesting books, projecting oneself onto the author's creation, and interacting meaningfully with the text seem like the intended purpose of the books, not some sort of resistance.  I can understand that the resistance theory itself is a reaction to the authoritative market models, but I don't see how reading itself is a resistance since producers of books--authors, editors, publishers--rely on reader consumption and trends to guide their work, as Pawley quotes, "'Cultural consumption, whether popular or not,'...' is at the same time a form of production, which creates ways of using that cannot be limited to the intentions of those who produce" (78).  It seems she's saying that there is power inherent in consumer choice.  I think my issue is that while Pawley criticizes the two models she does not distinguish who the authority figure is in each model.  Is she implying that readers resist or revolt against the powers of publishers and writers?  My perception was that market models are about readers and producers while resistance models address the clash between readers and greater societal power structures.  However, as I read further, I began to see that since producers are in the position to either perpetuate or terminate racist or sexist ideals, readers can exert their power of selection to positively influence publishing choices while also educating themselves.  I also saw that I came to the same conclusion that Pawley did: "the concept of reader resistance only makes sense if applied selectively" (90).  Yesss!  I'm not going crazy!

When reading about earlier ideas about "high" and "low" reading, especially concerning comics, I was reminded of how the debate about the value of comics as reading material is still being played out.  It appears that cultural acceptance of comics has evolved out of several institutions and individuals at once, illustrating the interplay involved in the consumption and production of reading materials.  As libraries and schools let go of their disapproval of comics, children would have had more comics at their disposal.  As the demand for comics increased, so would the production of new comics in additional genres and markets.