Is reading overrated nowadays when we have Google?

[tloonya]

Is importance of reading overrated?
Does any of you can prove that people who read are better of that non-readers.
I am talking classic literature. Some serious writings about serious things.

My whole family are readers. I remember me being a little girl and while Mom was waiting for me to go somewhere I was putting on clothes and reading my new book in the dark 'one sleeve at the time' untill Mom yelled really loud that we are late.

I had 2 best girls friends who were kind of total opposite to me in reading. They had never read a thing except school programm stuff.
Growing up I can say that one of the non-readers is best of in life than one reader and another non-reader.
She was always better of financially. She was always more level headed and she had never read one poem except 'rose are red, violets are blue'...

I had wasted so many opportunities in life because reading made me somewhat perfectionist. I was looking at people from classic's point of view and not a lot of people were cut it! So I was strongly dismissing those.
Until I had heard one TV personality who said 'if woman at 20 is still waiting for a prince on a white horse - she needs therapy'...and I was like 'its about me'...

So our DD is a 'black sheep' in family. She is the only one who refused to read extra books (always straight A student though, tested for gifted..etc) and we were WTF How come she is not interested? She told me once after I told her how come you don't want to know about history, princesses, dresses...and she said 'Mom, I wish I cared about past but I don't. What do you want me to do?' and I gave up. Really! Does reading help your life? Does it really making you a better person? Do we have to trust authors just because they were pronounced 'classics' hundreds years ago? Are they still correct on modern issues?

Before DD went back to college she told me she wants to read and asked my suggestions on what to read.
I am happilu and quickly suggested some Danielle Steel work but them were like...what am I doing?
However suggesting serious stuff would be maybe too much for her and she would be turned off.

Can anyone suggest some usefull books for the 19 y/old who expressed interest in reading for the first time at 19?
I think it needs to be modern. Like I said past does not interest her in any shape or form. Thanks

[Rocky Mtn Saver]

I love to read, and I think reading both fiction and non-fiction of sufficient length and depth helps to counteract our distracted, surface-dwelling, poor-attention-span world. 

[cktc]

If she wants to read for fun, maybe point her towards Young Adult Dystopian lit like 'The Hunger Games' and 'Divergent' series.

If she wants something more practical, books on finances, socio-economics, and relationships can be entertaining and informative. "Why men love bitches" or "He's just not that into you" are early dating bibles.

If she wants good, modern literature college bookstores are usually pretty up on relevant authors. Dave Eggers, and Sherman Alexie are pretty entertaining.

[tloonya]

Feb 13, 2014 18:10:16 GMT -5 Rocky Mtn Saver said:

I love to read, and I think reading both fiction and non-fiction of sufficient length and depth helps to counteract our distracted, surface-dwelling, poor-attention-span world. 

At her age being a student and living on her own she doesn't really know about our distracted, surface-dwelling, poor-attention-span world. 
She sees the world like a big party floor!

[tloonya]

Feb 13, 2014 18:29:32 GMT -5 cktc said:

If she wants to read for fun, maybe point her towards Young Adult Dystopian lit like 'The Hunger Games' and 'Divergent' series.

If she wants something more practical, books on finances, socio-economics, and relationships can be entertaining and informative. "Why men love bitches" or "He's just not that into you" are early dating bibles.

If she wants good, modern literature college bookstores are usually pretty up on relevant authors. Dave Eggers, and Sherman Alexie are pretty entertaining.

thanks, I remember buying her My sister's keeper before it was made into a book and she loved it.

[tskeeter]

The thing about reading is that it exposes the reader to ideas that they would probably not be exposed to in their daily life.  I'm not talking about reading tomes on philosophy, although reading Lenin and Trotsky might help the reader understand the fundamentals of communist theory.  And reading their biographies might help the reader distiguish between what they wrote for public consumption and the philosophies their behavior demonstrated in real life.  Recently I was reading some more popular literature.  A series of historical novels by Ken Follett.  I found his descriptions of the political manuverings and perspectives leading up to WWI and WWII interesting.  While they may not be 100% historically accurate, they do cause you to think about what might really be going on when one country attacks, or assumes protection of, another country or group of people within another country.  Most people don't get exposed to this kind of information watching TV.  Smart, thinking people tend to read books to learn about different ideas.  Not so smart people listen to media sound bits, park their critical thinks skills on a shelf, and "relax" with "reality" TV shows populated with TV personalities playing roles.   

[Rocky Mtn Saver]

Feb 13, 2014 18:30:19 GMT -5 tloonya said:

Feb 13, 2014 18:10:16 GMT -5 Rocky Mtn Saver said:

I love to read, and I think reading both fiction and non-fiction of sufficient length and depth helps to counteract our distracted, surface-dwelling, poor-attention-span world. 

At her age being a student and living on her own she doesn't really know about our distracted, surface-dwelling, poor-attention-span world. 
She sees the world like a big party floor!

She may not see it, but she's living it. 

[tloonya]

Feb 13, 2014 18:32:45 GMT -5 tskeeter said:

The thing about reading is that it exposes the reader to ideas that they would probably not be exposed to in their daily life.  I'm not talking about reading tomes on philosophy, although reading Lenin and Trotsky minght help the reader understand the fundamentals of communist theory.  Recently I was reading some more popular literature.  A series of historical novels by Ken Follett.  I found his descriptions of the political manuverings and perspectives leading up to WWI and WWII interesting.  While they may not be 100% historically accurate, they do cause you to think about what might really be going on when one country attacks, or assumes protection of, another country or group of people within another country.  Most people don't get exposed to this kind of information watching TV.  Smart, thinking people tend to read books to learn about different ideas.  Not so smart people listen to media sound bits, park their critical thinks skills on " wia shelf, and "relaxth "reality" TV shows.   

Or remembering my non-reading better of friend maybe it is more smart to not to read some written down 'ideas' that are just an ideas and speculations (because we will never know definitely whats what about wars) and instead watch REALity shows and keep your brain real instead of stuffed with all these by no one proven theories even if it is somewhat interesting?

[midjd]

Tl;dr

[Rocky Mtn Saver]

Feb 13, 2014 18:40:52 GMT -5 tloonya said:

Feb 13, 2014 18:32:45 GMT -5 tskeeter said:

The thing about reading is that it exposes the reader to ideas that they would probably not be exposed to in their daily life.  I'm not talking about reading tomes on philosophy, although reading Lenin and Trotsky minght help the reader understand the fundamentals of communist theory.  Recently I was reading some more popular literature.  A series of historical novels by Ken Follett.  I found his descriptions of the political manuverings and perspectives leading up to WWI and WWII interesting.  While they may not be 100% historically accurate, they do cause you to think about what might really be going on when one country attacks, or assumes protection of, another country or group of people within another country.  Most people don't get exposed to this kind of information watching TV.  Smart, thinking people tend to read books to learn about different ideas.  Not so smart people listen to media sound bits, park their critical thinks skills on " wia shelf, and "relaxth "reality" TV shows.   

Or remembering my non-reading better of friend maybe it is more smart to not to read some written down 'ideas' that are just an ideas and speculations (because we will never know definitely whats what about wars) and instead watch REALity shows and keep your brain real instead of stuffed with all these by no one proven theories even if it is somewhat interesting?

Oy. 

[dannylion]

Has she read Jane Austen?  The books can seem like romantic fluff, but they are actually shrewd appraisals of people and relationships in addition to being very well written.  Thomas Hardy and George Elliott might also appeal to a young person as they are also about life and relationships.  

[midjd]

The Poisonwood Bible is one of my favorites - very well-written, interesting, but not too challenging. (I got my non-reader brother to read and enjoy it).

[tloonya]

Feb 13, 2014 18:42:47 GMT -5 dannylion said:

Has she read Jane Austen?  The books can seem like romantic fluff, but they are actually shrewd appraisals of people and relationships in addition to being very well written.  Thomas Hardy and George Elliott might also appeal to a young person as they are also about life and relationships.  

Check! I will write all of your suggestions down, thanks to all of you who are giving me titles.

[Rocky Mtn Saver]

Feb 13, 2014 18:08:27 GMT -5 tloonya said:

Is importance of reading overrated?
Does any of you can prove that people who read are better of that non-readers.
I am talking classic literature. Some serious writings about serious things.

My whole family are readers. I remember me being a little girl and while Mom was waiting for me to go somewhere I was putting on clothes and reading my new book in the dark 'one sleeve at the time' untill Mom yelled really loud that we are late.

I had 2 best girls friends who were kind of total opposite to me in reading. They had never read a thing except school programm stuff.
Growing up I can say that one of the non-readers is best of in life than one reader and another non-reader.
She was always better of financially. She was always more level headed and she had never read one poem except 'rose are red, violets are blue'...

I had wasted so many opportunities in life because reading made me somewhat perfectionist. I was looking at people from classic's point of view and not a lot of people were cut it! So I was strongly dismissing those.
Until I had heard one TV personality who said 'if woman at 20 is still waiting for a prince on a white horse - she needs therapy'...and I was like 'its about me'...

So our DD is a 'black sheep' in family. She is the only one who refused to read extra books (always straight A student though, tested for gifted..etc) and we were WTF How come she is not interested? She told me once after I told her how come you don't want to know about history, princesses, dresses...and she said 'Mom, I wish I cared about past but I don't. What do you want me to do?' and I gave up. Really! Does reading help your life? Does it really making you a better person? Do we have to trust authors just because they were pronounced 'classics' hundreds years ago? Are they still correct on modern issues?

Before DD went back to college she told me she wants to read and asked my suggestions on what to read.
I am happilu and quickly suggested some Danielle Steel work but them were like...what am I doing?
However suggesting serious stuff would be maybe too much for her and she would be turned off.

Can anyone suggest some usefull books for the 19 y/old who expressed interest in reading for the first time at 19?
I think it needs to be modern. Like I said past does not interest her in any shape or form. Thanks

Not all books are Gone with the Wind and Jane Eyre. Find stories that do interest you rather than writing off the whole thing because you don't like one kind of genre or literature?

Personally, I prefer classic scifi like Asimov, Phillip K Dick, a little Jules Verne (although he's pretty long-winded).  Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories are good classics too.  Oh, and I like Dumas' writing style full of action. 


ETA: FWIW, though, I'm not dissing Jane Eyre.  I liked Jane Eyre.  

[tloonya]

Feb 13, 2014 18:45:48 GMT -5 Rocky Mtn Saver said:

Feb 13, 2014 18:08:27 GMT -5 tloonya said:

I had wasted so many opportunities in life because reading made me somewhat perfectionist. I was looking at people from classic's point of view and not a lot of people were cut it! So I was strongly dismissing those.
Until I had heard one TV personality who said 'if woman at 20 is still waiting for a prince on a white horse - she needs therapy'...and I was like 'its about me'...

So our DD is a 'black sheep' in family. She is the only one who refused to read extra books (always straight A student though, tested for gifted..etc) and we were WTF How come she is not interested? She told me once after I told her how come you don't want to know about history, princesses, dresses...and she said 'Mom, I wish I cared about past but I don't.

Not all books are Gone with the Wind and Jane Eyre. Find stories that do interest you rather than writing off the whole thing because you don't like one kind of genre or literature?

Personally, I prefer classic scifi like Asimov, Phillip K Dick, a little Jules Verne (although he's pretty long-winded).  Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories are good classics too.  Oh, and I like Dumas' writing style full of action. 

I am not writing anything off and it is not about me. She doesn;t like mostly anything.
I just want to know if reading really is that important as it was originally anticipated because there are plenty of successful in life people who don't read anything but morning paper.
Maybe their brains is not clogged with 'fantasies' and thay live real so they are ok as is?

[Rocky Mtn Saver]

I think the problem is that my definition of 'reading' and yours are different.  You seem to feel that 'reading' is limited to the romantic classics from Europe 100+ years ago.  Is that particular thing necessary to be a well-rounded person?  Not necessarily.  However, I feel that 'reading' comprises whatever stories interest you in many genres, both fiction and nonfiction, on a myriad of topics.  And yes, I feel that expanding yourself beyond what you read/hear in sound-bites on the internet or tv does make you a more well-rounded person. 

[tskeeter]

Feb 13, 2014 18:40:52 GMT -5 tloonya said:

Feb 13, 2014 18:32:45 GMT -5 tskeeter said:

The thing about reading is that it exposes the reader to ideas that they would probably not be exposed to in their daily life.  I'm not talking about reading tomes on philosophy, although reading Lenin and Trotsky minght help the reader understand the fundamentals of communist theory.  Recently I was reading some more popular literature.  A series of historical novels by Ken Follett.  I found his descriptions of the political manuverings and perspectives leading up to WWI and WWII interesting.  While they may not be 100% historically accurate, they do cause you to think about what might really be going on when one country attacks, or assumes protection of, another country or group of people within another country.  Most people don't get exposed to this kind of information watching TV.  Smart, thinking people tend to read books to learn about different ideas.  Not so smart people listen to media sound bits, park their critical thinks skills on a shelf, and "relax" with "reality" TV shows.   

Or remembering my non-reading better of friend maybe it is more smart to not to read some written down 'ideas' that are just an ideas and speculations (because we will never know definitely whats what about wars) and instead watch REALity shows and keep your brain real instead of stuffed with all these by no one proven theories even if it is somewhat interesting?

Loony, you do understand that "reality" shows aren't real, don't you?  That the activity is scripted and the participants are essentially actors?  So watching reality shows keeps your brain pretend, not real.

As far as reading philosophies and theories goes.  The way people behave and the decisions they make are based on the philosophies they believe and the theories they subscribe to.  If you want to understand others and predict how they will behave in various circumstances, learn about the philosophies and theories they hold dear.  It helps you do things like understand why people will do things like buy certain vegetables, but not others.  Whether they will pay a premium for organic, and about how much of a premium they might pay. 

[sesfw]

I like Nickolas Sparks for fiction. They read easy and he is a decent writer. I like Jane Eyre also and the Hobbit and Rings Trilogy but they are a little deep for a 'beginning' reader.

Maybe some of the children's classics?  Black Beauty?  Little Women?  Andre Norton is good with science fantasy/fiction and it's easy reading.

[milee]

Actually studies have linked reading habits to greater incomes. Reading and income are strongly correlated. So, not every successful person reads, but a higher percent of rich people read than poor people do.  Correlation doesn't equal causation, but it's interesting. 

Here are a few interesting links:

www.entrepreneur.com/article/230918#

money.msn.com/saving-money-tips/post--5-habits-of-the-rich-that-you-can-afford-too