Reading is analyzing. Viewing is merely processing. Watching is passive while reading is participatory. So I would imagine a culture of pretty much thoughtless. passive people. Sadly, not unlike too much of the culture we have already.

And what about those who listen to books? I find myself more in the story when listening to an audio book than when I read it myself.

Change will happen whether we want it to or not. My children are much more visual than my generation and they notice details and nuance of visuals and things heard that escape me. I hope that people will always read, but if they don't, I hope something else will be gained. What, I don't know. I'm sorry for all those people who don't love and cherish their time ensconced in books. Some of them probably pity me for being a bookworm, I suppose. Amy (visit me at wozabooks)

I find that most viewers and, yes, many readers don't know how to engage their texts critically. I believe that skill should be taught more, not that it's easy to teach. I also believe the long-form of books (fiction & nonfiction) give the mind a workout you don't often get visually.

I discussed with a lit professor recently the idea that many students *cannot* extract images from text. Once someone else points it out, they can begin to discuss, but the question "what do you see in this poem?" means nothing to them. Text is data to be processed, rather than a visual, wholistic experience. I'm sure this isn't true of all (or even most!) students, but the possibility of that type of thinking was shocking to a dedicated reader like me.

It is only publishers that want the masses to read. If you teach them to read, you teach them to think. If we do that then we cannot get them to follow in lock step. When you come right down to it, no one but our appointed leadership needs to think. We can solve all problems. We will raise food prices and send others to war and will cut their health care so only the worthy wealthy fit will survive. It's Call of the Wild. We have decided we know better, as we can read [though we don't read a paper] and speak in public [with a grin when we stumble] because we are edumakated.

PS - Fahrenheit 451.

Thanks for the thoughtful and interesting comments -- I'm still trying to digest them. I'm glad Christine brought up audiobooks, because they're more pervasive than e-readers (with good reason). When you listen to a book (no matter what genre), you can't stop to think, or re-read a passage -- but as Christine points out, you can also feel much more engaged and involved in the story. I can't remember if I blogged about this here, or not, but I was critical of "On Chesil Beach" after reading it -- then I listened to it, and loved it. It was book that improved in audio... I might have to start a new "section" called Page to Disk, or File.

Can we blame the downfall of cursive writing for lack of interest in reading -- maybe the younger generations don't have critical thinking skills because their bodies do not function as critically( and creatively) operational machines. (eh, video games do not "create") I wonder if a world without readers would mean that television and film writers would have more value than they do today. (Go writers guild!) But if you have ever even seen the movie "Idiocracy" (which you should, you should!), it shows both illiteracy and even a visual and storytelling decline in society's film and television entertainment. A highlight is hundreds of people in a theater just watching a movie about an ass. Nothing more. But I love books, passionately and can never get enough of all the stories this world has to tell. What "W" said about education is on target -- knowledge is power, but there are fewer and fewer people who actually want to know, to engage, to make a difference. And without the ability to read and develop critical thinking, leaders can sway the masses with whatever lies they wish to propogate as facts.