Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

I just watched a funny segment on Jimmy Kimmel.

They interviewed people on the street and asked "Can you name a book?" "Any book."

I typed the responses here:

/topic/show/...

I love Kimmel. I just went and watched it. Its pretty funny.

My fiancé showed me this! I was a little disappointed in the world, but then I remembered that they probably edited out responses with books. It just makes me want to share more books with the world.

The Moby Dick response though...... *cringe*

At least he knew /something/ though. He was vaguely aware that there was a book out there like that haha. And, yeah, I'm sure they cut a lot of people out bc there were barely any participants and people can generally name books, even if they don't read. It's pretty misleading imo... the "Americans don't read/Americans are dumb" joke has already been beaten to death, it's over, we get it, haha very funny, let's move on.

What makes me more sad is that many not dumb people I know don't read. Almost everyone I know is into podcasts, which is fine, I guess, but for that to be the extent of your development is sad. This is also why I'm very pro-audio book. I don't care that people say "it's not real reading." I can have just as good of conversation with someone who listened to a book. If you wait for time to read a real book, you'll not read at all...which is what many people do.

My daughter and I were once stopped by Jimmy Kimmel’s show when we were walking down Hollywood Blvd. They were asking what the worst present you’ve ever got was. We didn’t do it though.

I’ll always remember one that one of the Australian shows did in America. They were asking people when 9/11 was. As in what month. Not the year or anything hard. The answer is right in front of them. 9/11. They weren’t even from countries that would put it around the proper way (11/9). Most of the people that they asked thought it was in August or October. There weren’t any Novembers which is the 11th month either. The guy doing it said he got hardly any right answers and he couldn’t believe it.

Often the most obvious things are what trips people up. You think you must be wrong because it's such a dumb question!

Bruyere wrote: "Often the most obvious things are what trips people up. You think you must be wrong because it's such a dumb question!"

Yeah, like 'Who is buried in Grant's tomb?"

Americans aren't dumber than other people, they just enjoy documenting it more than others. ;)

Here's a wonderful retort to Jimmy Kimmel's video -


I still haven't watched it, but did they really bully someone into believing Kipling didn't write The Jungle Book?

That article is perfect! It has so many of the complaints i had with it, but written by someone much more articulate. Thanks for sharing!

Ella wrote: "Here's a wonderful retort to Jimmy Kimmel's video -


I still haven't watched it, but did they really bully someone into believ..."

Great article. I was saying to someone that I might blank out briefly just like the librarian did, particularly if there were bright lights in my eyes and a camera in my face. I was once interviewed on TV for a project I was involved with, and I suddenly forgot the key point I wanted to include. I did OK answering his questions, but it was a lost opportunity.

The next question is - do you judge people for what they read? If a person reads, but it's books that you consider not decent books, does it qualify in your mind?

Do I judge people by what they read? No I don’t think I do. As long as people are reading then it doesn’t matter what they’re reading really does it.

I have been judged on my choices though. A friend of mine always puts my love of science fiction down. I’m not a fan of her books and TV shows either but I don’t hassle her about it. I just think to each their own and leave it at that.

I do not judge people by what they read. I think tastes in books should be as varied as anything else. It would be akin to judging someone because they enjoy cheeseburgers. Silly.

There’s a lot of discrimination of cheeseburger lovers too unfortunately.

Maurita wrote: "I do not judge people by what they read. I think tastes in books should be as varied as anything else. It would be akin to judging someone because they enjoy cheeseburgers. Silly."

Yes! I love cheeseburgers - but not every day! I love Apples - every day. And Coq au vin (I made it tonight). And sometimes all I want is a peanut butter sandwich. We need variety in food and in books!

I don't judge people by what they read, but (more importantly imo) I don't judge people by whether or not they read. Reading is a hobby, just because it's one that I happen to like a lot, it doesn't mean that my friend who prefers singing and theater is any less "intelligent". I honestly think that this reading-is-the-best-most-important-thing-in-the-world phenomenon in book circles is pretentious and annoying.

This is a tough one. I'ma be honest: some of the most intelligent people I've ever met rarely read and had no education past like 5th grade. Some of the dumbest people I've ever met had oodles of education and at least knew which books they should say they'd read. (If they did read them, then I doubt they got much from their reads. However, I've had to read many books more than once to even begin to grasp it. but anyway.)

Overall though, I find people - no matter their education - tend to be more flexible thinkers if they read fiction. People who read tend to think in a slightly different way (and it seems to not be the "quality" of what they read but the act of reading fiction.) Perhaps it's simply allowing oneself the freedom to go where a story takes you. I have thoughts on that, but I won't bore you with neuropsych hypotheses that I never have actually gathered enough data or really tried to study.

I've been judged on my reading. I was judged on my reading right here on GR very recently, and I'm often judged when carrying a book. Am I in school? No? Then why am I reading X, are you one of those book snobs? Are you trying to be white? etc. I'm always relieved to ride public transport when I'm reading a spy novel or sci fi or romance.

It's hard not to learn something from reading - even if it's just about different foods or the ways people different to us live. That's why I hope children will read. That's why I pay my sister's kids for every book they read cover to cover by themselves. Yes, I pay them.

As for judging others, I never even knew that was a thing until I was old enough to have read loads of "lowerbrow" stuff myself - and loved it all. Here's my favorite quote by Nick Hornby on the matter:

“Please stop patronizing those who are reading a book - The Da Vinci Code, maybe- because they are enjoying it. For a start, none of us know what kind of an effort this represents for the individual reader. It could be his or her first full-length adult novel; it might be the book that finally reveals the purpose and joy of reading to someone who has hitherto been mystified by the attraction books exert on others. And anyway, reading for enjoyment is what we should all be doing. I don't mean we should all be reading chick lit or thrillers (although if that's what you want to read, it's fine by me, because here's something no one else will tell you: if you don't read the classics, or the novel that won this year's Booker Prize, then nothing bad will happen to you; more importantly,nothing good will happen to you if you do); I simply mean that turning pages should not be like walking through thick mud. The whole purpose of books is that we read them, and if you find you can't, it might not be your inadequacy that's to blame. "Good" books can be pretty awful sometimes.�
� Nick Hornby, Housekeeping vs. the Dirt

I try to be really open to whatever people want to read. However, I think I get judgy about people who only read self-help/inspirational books. I see that they don't seem to be any more productive or better leaders than me so I consider a waste of time. Also, I kinda cringe when people say - Oh, I only read non-fiction. As if that makes them somehow less sullied than the rest of us!

Bruyere wrote: "I try to be really open to whatever people want to read. However, I think I get judgy about people who only read self-help/inspirational books. I see that they don't seem to be any more productive ..."

That last one could be a male/female issue. Women read more fiction than men, so some men think they shouldn't admit to liking fiction.

At least Jimmy Kimmel got people to talk about reading.

I know very few women who read fiction, NancyJ. I wonder what that says about the people I am friends with! Almost the fantasy readers I know are male. Perhaps women with graduate degrees just feel like they must read books to figure out how to get ahead.

NancyJ wrote: "Bruyere wrote: "I try to be really open to whatever people want to read. However, I think I get judgy about people who only read self-help/inspirational books. I see that they don't seem to be any ..."

I have no idea where you're getting this Nancy J.

Bruyere,

I used to be primarily a nonfiction reader but I discovered a few fiction books that captured my imagination and transported me into another world like nothing else I had ever experienced. This is when I realized I was limiting myself. It might take you opening them up to the idea by suggesting a good read. Lol.

Daniel wrote: "I have no idea where you're getting this Nancy J. ."

Probably from the links above or similar ones.

At least back in the first decade of this century, there was a fair amount of data to show that women read more in general than men and also more fiction than men. We bought more and the measures they use to test whether or not we actually read it (which are WOEFULLY unscientific) had women reading more in general and more fiction too.

I just saw another bunch of statistics on this when I looked at the Kimmel thing last week - see if one of my links above has stats.
Ah, here - the link is still the same, but here's the research that article pulled from (all PEW. I think NLA does one of these and others used to, but I've not looked at the numbers seriously in about a decade.)

My guess is that as more and more women have entered the workplace, the numbers will even out more and more, but Pew has a sidebar here that says women had about 10 pts on men back in 2015 (who had read a book in the last year: women 77%, men 67%):


Women and millennials also were more likely to use a library and borrow library books via website.

Men read less books per year - all of this LOOKS like self-report, also it's all from 2015 and all from Pew. Honestly the raw data and methodology needs a look-see, but not from me at nearly 4 AM,

I found another very sketchy looking site on a quick google that told me the gap had closed a bit and said it was based on "a survey" from 2018, but it won't show methods or data and simply gives flat percentages. I TRIED to get to the data in this one, but it really just wants to sell me stuff - always a bad sign. Anyway, that meaningless "survey" says the gap has closed to 75% women/ 73% men and had no fiction/nonfiction break.

NPR did a study way back when too - but that's old data by now.

Other statistics nerds here have a moment?

The gap is closing. A direct correlation in the Men/woman reading numbers is the number of women participating and or watching sports. I


We are entering a time where the gender roles and preferences are changing. The way we read is also changing. The biggest example of that is Newspapers and Magazines. They have gone online or into podcasts.

One theory on the gender preference on reading relates to new papers. Men used to it almost their job to read the papers. This was before radio. Some of the need to know facts has been passed from father to son. Women were encouraged to not worry. As we head to a more equal society these lines are blurring.

A fun fact is that the higher a person's IQ the more likely they are to read Speculative fiction. I have not seen any studies on why.

I

Bruyere wrote: "I know very few women who read fiction, NancyJ. I wonder what that says about the people I am friends with! Almost the fantasy readers I know are male. Perhaps women with graduate degrees just feel..."

Maybe they do feel they need it (leadership doesn't come easily to most people), or maybe they just find it interesting) Don't judge them for it. I've worked with some brilliant people who can understand almost anything, except how to deal with people. They don't realize that when they come up with all the answers themselves, it can be de-energizing to the staff. In many environments women are judged more harshly if they are a little too participative (indecisive), or not enough (arrogant), or if they lenient (weak) or tough (bitchy). Research bears this out.

I love psychology and leadership topics myself, partly because that's my field. I'm in a professional development bookclub, that is a mix of men and women. I don't always read the books anymore (many are just rehashings of old theories), but I love the people.

Ella wrote: "Daniel wrote: "I have no idea where you're getting this Nancy J. ."

Probably from the links above or similar ones.

At least back in the first decade of this century, there was a fair amount of da..."

Thanks Ella. Yes, there have been similar reports as long as I can remember. To be fair though, I was basing the second part of my statement on casual comments I've heard from men over the years, most recently in a book club ("I know men are only supposed to like non-fiction, but I really like...")

I can't believe the percentages would change much in just a few years.

When you have big differences in survey results, you have to look at the research methods. I suspect each survey simply sampled a different population or asked the questions in different ways. A phone study might get a lot of people with landlines, but not cell phones. It's hard to compare generations when we have different communication preferences.

The library note rings true to me. I see more women in libraries than men. My husband doesn't even have a library card. He does read though, because I bring books home for him.

Amazon is so data driven, I suspect they have more data on this than anyone. (Though that could be skewed as well by Prime. In my family, all the amazon shopping is done from my Prime account, regardless of who is selecting the books.)

Nancy, I love your position I this subject. Very introspective!

I haven't had a moment to look at research since last night, but I have been thinking about the library. While at the library, I see women asking "my husband wants X book..." or returning books that seem interesting. When I ask, I get told her husband read it... To be fair, last week, a man told me it was his wife's book. So it works both ways, but it's not a good indicator of who is reading those books. Women seem to be the library runners for the most part though, which was true when I was a kid too.

Kindle is the way most newspapers get "finished book" stats - and it is a horrible way to do that for a variety of long boring reasons.

I agree it's very common for an entire household to have one Prime account (I know this b/c my TV constantly makes me tell it that I'm me - the only person who lives in my house, unless we count the cat.) My sisters both are the Prime account holders in their rather large households.

Surveys are a horrible "research" method. They drive me nuts for a variety of reasons - mostly b/c they rely on random people to tell the truth. I'd bet that all of the numbers are inflated or wrong in some way. I try to keep count of the books I read, and I have done it for about 12 months over the course of the 9 years I've been on GR. I have no idea what or how much I read most years. I'm only here b/c I decided to get control of my reading this year (too many books read more than once without meaning to do so.)

Self-report is bad b/c of things like this: I think of myself as a reader and have always been one. So if you'd asked me if I read any books in a year I would have said yes every year of my life, but I'm pretty sure there were years in the 90s when I probably missed reading a book, especially after my husband was killed. I had zero concentration, and I left & donated all of our books when I moved. I didn't have a library card in my new state, there was no kindle & I lived in a place that had no books for well over a year while I figured out what to do. So I'm positive I missed reading "a book" for at least a year if not more than one back then. Since then, when I was very busy at work, there were years when I only read work-related books.

Even a well-meaning person can screw up data without malice. When people ask "what was the last movie you saw in a theatre?" I never can answer that question & make up random timelines. "Oh, at least five years ago." etc. Though this year I took my sister's kidlets to A Wrinkle in Time, so I could answer it this year!

Bruyere wrote: "I know very few women who read fiction, NancyJ. I wonder what that says about the people I am friends with! Almost the fantasy readers I know are male. ..."

What does it say? I don't know, but do you find them interesting and curious about the world? I love to hear about what other people are reading. April's reviews and Ella's reviews always pop up first on my feeds and I always learn something new. I don't think of myself as a non-fiction reader, but when I look at my bookshelves I see more non-fiction and fiction. Go figure. (I get most of my fiction from the library.)

I like what Ella said about fiction building flexible thinking. I think it builds empathy for other people too. I like reading fiction that takes place in other cultures or time periods. You can 'feel' what their life is really like rather than read about the culture in a more removed way.

Maurita wrote: "Nancy, I love your position I this subject. Very introspective!"

Thanks Maurita!

Thanks to those that talked about research! I'll definitely see what I can dig up over the weekend on the topic. I do a fair amount of making surveys for my job and am aware of the limitations. However, I don't have the additional issue of it being random population so I can more safely believe the sample model works for me. I've never understood how researchers can think that randomly calling landlines gives valid data.

I, also, have been a non-reader during periods when I was going through major life stress. I tend to retreat to mindless tv shows in the hopes that it distracts me. My mind wanders when I read books and I'm stressed.

Ella wrote: "I haven't had a moment to look at research since last night, but I have been thinking about the library. While at the library, I see women asking "my husband wants X book..." or returning books tha..."

Well that's funny. I always want to peek at what other people are getting or returning too, but I feel too shy unless the person looks really approachable.

I certainly don't mind being the library runner because he does most of the grocery shopping. I was on my way to the library last night to return some books and I asked my husband if he wanted something. He said sure, one of those first person books you've been getting for me. I'm thinking, the what? I've been picking up books about topics he likes, but it didn't click that they had that in common. I pick them based on reviews and recommendations. I didn't have time to go online so I had to ask the librarian. She was really helpful.

I'm sorry to hear about that awful time in your life. I know how depression can deplete your concentration, and make it hard to do even the things you normally love. I don't think I read (for fun) much at all in the 90's either. I didn't even have time to read magazines or watch movies. For several years I had a very long commute, so that must be when I discovered books on tape.

It's hard to imagine not having access to books. I remember talking to someone from Hawaii the first time I joined goodreads. I must have said something about living in paradise, but she had to correct me. She said there was no bookstore on her island, and the library was inadequate(or maybe inconvenient), so did that sound like paradise? I had to agree it didn't.

I don't mind at all that people read non-fiction but it makes me sad that almost everyone says it in a -because it's good for me - kinda way. I hate to say it - but most of the women I know IRL aren't very interesting. That's why I'm here talking to you all. ;)

I think, working in higher ed, that there's a lot more professional reading going on.

Bruyere wrote: "I don't mind at all that people read non-fiction but it makes me sad that almost everyone says it in a -because it's good for me - kinda way. I hate to say it - but most of the women I know IRL are..."

Well I'm glad you're here then! When I worked in higher ed, there were times when there were no women in my group at all. The few other women nearby had very different interests. I don't think we ever even discussed books. It sounds trivial, but one thing I missed was not having girl talk, or someone to give me advice on haircuts and stuff like that. I was so busy at work and at home, I didn't make enough time to hang out with girlfriends.

Yes, no females consistently in my work book club even with me including books that should have appealed more widely (YA dystopia/ cozy myseries). It's curious! I do hang out with other girls but very few read similar books or books at all.

I'm lucky that I'm married to a big reader (literature/sci-fi/fantasy). We read about 50% of the same books and I joke that it's the only thing we argue over.

I found a really excellent huge used bookstore on Big Island. I wonder which island that person lived on!

Bruyere wrote: "I found a really excellent huge used bookstore on Big Island. I wonder which island that person lived on!"

I don't remember. Do you live there? My husband really wants to go back to see the volcano.

Bruyere wrote: "Yes, no females consistently in my work book club even with me including books that should have appealed more widely (YA dystopia/ cozy myseries). It's curious! I do hang out with other girls but v..."

Arguing about books is better than arguing about politics! I love it when my husband and I read the same book. The only book we "argued" about recently was 1984, and it was a fun discussion. After 37 years it's hard to surprise one another with our opinions on anything.

No, I live in SoCal, but I go to Hawaii fairly often.

Yes it is! I would say most arguments involve my intolerance for Heinlein and any cyberpunk.

I liked one Heinlein but I am still trying to find a single cyberpunk I enjoy. Steam punk is pretty was cute for a bit but then it got overdone.

The best steampunk I have read is Senlin Ascends. If you like some romance/girl power/ alt history, I loved Cold Magic too.

That Jimmy Kimmel video annoyed me too. First of all, I am good friends with two people who are dyslexic and have a very hard time reading. Why should they be made to feel dumb?

Two, I'd argue that other media (like tv, and I guess movies and podcasts too though I don't really have the attention span for them) can be just as good as books in an empathy way which people mentioned here.

There are plenty of dumb books and there are plenty of smart tv shows and movies. There are a lot of things I've learned from tv. And, honestly, sometimes the weirdest, seemingly dumbest, things can make you think.

Well said Meira. Reading is wonderful, But is it better than other mediums?

As time passes I wonder if TV, movies and podcasts well equal the quality you get from reading. Who knows some may even surpass.

I am team reading but I will not deny that as time passes tv and movies quality gets better.. Who know what is in the future
Meira (readingbooksinisrael) wrote: "That Jimmy Kimmel video annoyed me too. First of all, I am good friends with two people who are dyslexic and have a very hard time reading. Why should they be made to feel dumb?

Two, I'd argue tha..."

Renee wrote: "Well said Meira...I am team reading but I will not deny that as time passes tv and movies quality gets better.. Who know what is in the future"

Funny you should say this. I've been having to sit still w/ my legs in this very strange position inthe last week or so & it's been tough to do much beyond my handheld GR chatter (that I'm getting worried is taking over my life) So today, I just looked at the Great Courses, found my library has not only the books but also the audio & for some things - the videos too. So I watched two 30 minute nonfiction videos. These would only have been in book form just a few years ago. I wouldn't have taken the time to read them. I now know way more than I did this morning on utopian everything! (I am planning to roll all the way through to current day YA dystopia in this series, though I can only get 4 a month.) Thinking about the Handmaid's Tale TV show - just as good as the book and look what it's done for Atwood's fiction!

It used t o be almost a rule that books were better than the movies made from them, but after reading several books and seeing their movies in recent years (on TV or screen, made my a TV channel or movie company) they're just as good in many cases. I do wonder, sometimes, if it's necessary to read the book if I already know the plot from a TV or movie or opera or whatever. Anyway, TV is getting really good and it's also not as mindless as it used to be <-- my point.

I'm glad Jimmy Kimmel hasn't stopped me on the street and asked me to name a TV Show.