Slashdot Mirror


Neil Gaiman On Why Libraries Are the Gates to the Future

Neil Gaiman spoke Monday for the Reading Agency's annual lecture series. His talk centered on the importance of libraries and of reading for pleasure. His talk was transcribed and posted by The Guardian. Quoting: "Fiction has two uses. Firstly, it's a gateway drug to reading. The drive to know what happens next, to want to turn the page, the need to keep going, even if it's hard, because someone's in trouble and you have to know how it's all going to end that's a very real drive. And it forces you to learn new words, to think new thoughts, to keep going. To discover that reading per se is pleasurable. Once you learn that, you're on the road to reading everything. And reading is key. ... The simplest way to make sure that we raise literate children is to teach them to read, and to show them that reading is a pleasurable activity. And that means, at its simplest, finding books that they enjoy, giving them access to those books, and letting them read them. I don't think there is such a thing as a bad book for children. Every now and again it becomes fashionable among some adults to point at a subset of children's books, a genre, perhaps, or an author, and to declare them bad books, books that children should be stopped from reading. ... It's tosh. It's snobbery and it's foolishness. There are no bad authors for children, that children like and want to read and seek out, because every child is different. They can find the stories they need to, and they bring themselves to stories. A hackneyed, worn-out idea isn't hackneyed and worn out to them. This is the first time the child has encountered it. Do not discourage children from reading because you feel they are reading the wrong thing. Fiction you do not like is a route to other books you may prefer. And not everyone has the same taste as you."

9 of 149 comments (clear)

  1. Books perhaps... by Karmashock · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Traditional libraries are not the future. The dead tree archives will here after be a curiosity.

    That said, repositories of books and stories etc will remain very important. They will however be increasingly a digital experience.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:Books perhaps... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      The average life span of a hard drive is 5 years. This is not even to mention format incompatibilities. A paper book on acid-free paper has a life span in the hundreds of years. Paper is clearly the superior archival instrument.

    2. Re:Books perhaps... by Gr8Apes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While digital formats certainly beat books for a whole host of reasons, pleasure reading is not among them. There's something about sitting down with a book that just doesn't work as well with a digital device, at least not yet. Same with a newspaper - I get more info in 10s with a newspaper than I do on a news website. I can scan the much larger format much faster and focus on what interests me vs having to click multiple links on news websites. I've actually considered going back to getting a paper, it's still up in the air.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  2. i H8 article by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Funny

    I Lrn 2 Read good thru technology

  3. Re:books are on computers now by Instantlemming · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You go to a library to look for books.
    You go onto the internet to look for .... Oooh shiny thing

    A dead tree book beats a text on a monitor, and even e-ink readers. A book you can take with you and doesn't need power (although you do need a light source).
    An e-reader is great (use it myself a lot), but for quickly flipping back to a certain bit to check/read it again, a paper book wins hands down.

    I found more interesting books/authors by browsing the books on the bookshelves in a library than online.

  4. Re:books are on computers now by Gryle · · Score: 4, Funny

    You go onto the internet to look for .... Oooh shiny thing

    I just logged on to check the weather. That was twelve years ago...

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  5. Dead tree copyright loophole by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Computers are in essence information copying machines. This means you'll end up having to pay for anything written after 1922 because of a law called copyright. Dead tree libraries use a loophole that avoids problems with copyright by allowing patrons to read a single book one after the other without requiring the making of new copies made.

  6. The internet didn't kill the library. by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The internet didn't kill the library. Library patronage was declining long before the internet. Libraries, sprang into existence because books were expensive and most people struggled to provide shelter and food for their families. Post WWII, at least in the US, things began to change and people had more disposable income. As people climbed the economic ladder, they were in a better position to purchase their own books, particularly paperbacks, trading money for convenience (as is the case with most consumer goods). This trend continued through the 1960s and 70s and really accelerated in the 1980s and 1990s as book clubs took off all over the place. It was fashionable to be reading the latest best seller and the serial model of the library couldn't support that.

    All the internet did was change the purchase mode from paper to electronic versions of the media. It didn't impact the use of the library because that change had already manifested itself based on the economic wherewithal of the patrons. Interestingly enough, both the Philadelphia and New York public libraries reported significant increases in usage during the last two recessions. It would seem that even with the plethora of electronic devices to read e-books, when money is tight and one has to watch expenses, one gives up the convenience and goes back to the library.

    In short, it's not technology that is causing the demise of the library, but increased disposable income.

  7. Elitism and Reading by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have to say, I do get a little fed up with pedestal upon which we place books. Don't get me wrong: it's a worthwhile pastime, but people develop such elitists attitudes towards reading. People judge others, and judge themselves, by the quality and quantity of their reading material. They lament how people are reading less, and how this will destroy intelligence in the average person. If you don't read, or worse, don't enjoy reading, then it means that there's something wrong. Your imagination is underdeveloped or malformed; a product of all the worst bits of society.

    The fact is, while reading is indeed an intellectual activity, it's an intellectual activity that appeals to people to varying degrees. Some people simply do not find intellectual nourishment from books. Now, perhaps it's because they are stunted in their intellect or imagination, but often, there are other ways they stimulate their brain. Indeed, social situations can be very mentally stimulating, requiring complex thought processes to navigate successfully. I myself have found that mathematics holds far greater mental stimulation than reading (and I used to read all the time). Juggling apparently is a very good way to improve your brain, and caters for the more kinaesthetic learners.

    I'm glad you enjoy books Neil, but please don't make the mistake of thinking they're for everyone.

    --
    You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.