Reading is useless
World Book Fair ended on Sunday. I went to the Book Fair. I bought something. I think I bought something only because I thought it would be strange to attend a book fair and not buy anything. There was also a PC fair. There were more people at the PC fair. I think there were more people at the PC fair because PCs and their peripherals are more useful than books. Serious.A lady wrote in to the Zaobao forum. She lamented that Singaporeans do not read enough and lack cultural refinement. Community centres should set up book clubs, she urged. Not long ago Chua Beng Huat suggested in an ST article that Singapore is not a reading nation. Indranee Rajah then wrote in to the ST Forum lambasting him for discrediting his countrymen. Lucky now not election period.
Indranee Rajah had pointed out in her letter that public response to NLB reading campaigns have generally been favourable. If I'm not mistaken, we're in the midst of one right now. Or else why suddenly got newspaper article about hairdressers reading short stories? One of the hairdressers said that reading fiction gives him an insight into the human condition. Okay, I kinda paraphrased that but rest assured that this was pretty close to what he said. Cynical me suspects that someone coached him to say that. Not because hairdressers are incapable of pronouncing such statements, just that it sounded all-too familiar. Personally if I wanted to gain a fresh perspective into human motivations and interactions I would watch more drama serials. But that's just me.
Some smart guy had this to say about book clubs in his blog:
"Joining a book club... is the mediocre mind's way of circumventing the essential loneliness and inactivity of reading. By sharing one's opinions with others, reading becomes reified as social activity, but a feeble and debased activity. Nothing new is created, no value beyond social gratification and mutual congratulation. This is reading not for it's own sake, but as a lifestyle accessory stemming from the desire to be known as the sort of person who reads serious books."
Of course he sounds just like the sort of person who wants to be known for reading serious books. Lots of them. Liddat a bit of a no-win situation leh: don't read or read trashy material people say you ignorant, read simple-simple books people say you no standard, read serious books people say you hao lian.
Another also very clever person had this to say:
"Typically, reading has been encouraged by means of myths like the following:
1. Reading makes one a better person, more intelligent, more human, less prejudiced, etc.
2. Those that don't read are ignorants or brutes.
3. Reading per se is good, ergo, reading more and more is even better. There is no bad book.
4. There is a repertoire of works that everyone should read.
In reality, people that read a lot are not necessarily any better than those that do not read much or at all. There are many intelligent and sensible non-readers as there are many conceited readers with few virtues that furthermore despise those less literate. They have fallen into a disease of "eruditis"."
So what's the conclusion? As usual, there isn't one. But I would just like to say that if people don't want to read, or read the type of books you want them to, then no need to hard-hard come. You can lead the horse to water but you can't make it drink. You can tell the horse that drinking water is good, but don't say until like by drinking a lot it can cover a thousand li a day. Afterall, some horses drink a lot but only end up accumulating a bladder full of piss. Okay, I think I've flogged this analogy to death.
posted by KynTheMan @ 11:56 PM
<< Home