Chain-reading e-books? You could be an e-book addict

I know that people love attributing things to "addictive personalities" and "electronic devices", but the reality is that there have always been people like this. Some people dig deeply into books (print or electronics), some into sports (spectators or athletes), plus the many other facets of life.

While this woman's experiences would be considered excessive by most people and for obsessions, if it was even slightly time consuming less it could be looked at differently. If it was print books she would have been called a bookwork, with all of it's good and bad connotations. If she was an athlete or an entrepreneur, she would have been called driven and praised heavily (especially at her age). If it was video games it would be an addict.

Funny how our notion of addiction is based upon perceived value, ain't it?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Funny how our notion of addiction is based upon perceived value, ain't it?

I'm afraid I must disagree. An enjoyment becomes an addiction when it's taken to extremes - no matter what that activity might be. Reading, playing video games, watching TV - all are harmless in moderation. They become problematic when engaged in at times that the person should be doing other things, whether it be school, work, looking after the children, or whatever. A person whose life is out of control in that way probably does need help.

[issybird]

The word addiction is applied to all sorts of conditions and compulsive behaviors where the clinical definition of addiction doesn't apply. No change to chemical receptors in the brain cells, no physical symptons of withdrawal.

This doesn't mean that the compulsive don't need help, but I think it does a disservice both to the truly addicted and those who are emotionally compelled to a behavior. It gets a little too easy for the latter case to claim they can't help it because it's an addiction, ie, a problem with a physcial component.

[Joykins]

Page after page, chapter after chapter, when Lucy started reading she simply couldn't stop. She wouldn't sleep, eat or speak to anyone until she had completed the story.

I can see not sleeping or speaking to anyone, but eating and reading at the same time is totally possible.

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm afraid I must disagree. An enjoyment becomes an addiction when it's taken to extremes - no matter what that activity might be. Reading, playing video games, watching TV - all are harmless in moderation. They become problematic when engaged in at times that the person should be doing other things, whether it be school, work, looking after the children, or whatever. A person whose life is out of control in that way probably does need help.

In the cases like this woman, you are probably right. Yet there is a definite value statement when we say that someone is addicted to something. For example: a person watching TV or playing video games for 4 hours a night will probably be labelled as addicted. A person who reads for pleasure for 4 hours a night would probably be labelled as an introvert, at worse. If someone spends their holidays watching TV or playing video games, it is a problem. If they spend their holidays reading books on a beach, it is called relaxing.

Or take a look at work-lives. Some people let work take over their lives, even when there is no financial need to do so. If they are single and without children, it is virtually never discussed as an addiction even if it is having a negative impact upon their life (e.g. socialization). It is only discussed as an addiction when it interferes with their family.

There is always a value judgement when we are talking about addictions.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

In the cases like this woman, you are probably right. Yet there is a definite value statement when we say that someone is addicted to something. For example: a person watching TV or playing video games for 4 hours a night will probably be labelled as addicted. A person who reads for pleasure for 4 hours a night would probably be labelled as an introvert, at worse. If someone spends their holidays watching TV or playing video games, it is a problem. If they spend their holidays reading books on a beach, it is called relaxing.

Or take a look at work-lives. Some people let work take over their lives, even when there is no financial need to do so. If they are single and without children, it is virtually never discussed as an addiction even if it is having a negative impact upon their life (e.g. socialization). It is only discussed as an addiction when it interferes with their family.

There is always a value judgement when we are talking about addictions.

Many people read or watch TV for 4 or more hours a day without being addicted I think. It is what they do to pass the time in an enjoyable way. My sister often appears glued to the set and has been since her first TV. But if someone suggest something more interesting it goes off instantly. I have known quite a few people like that. Then there are those who must watch one more play of a football game even if they have already watched it or can't leave the set while 'Their show' is on. A mild, but pretty common addiction. Maybe they only watch TV for one hour a day, but try to interfere with that is not a pretty picture. If you do convince them the house is burning down they are more twitchy about missing the show.

Time spent in a certain way is not IMO a valid measure of addiction. It is, as you said, the interference with other of life's aspects and the degree of discomfort, if any, that occurs when the addictive behavior is interrupted or prevented.

Helen

[meeera]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

Many people read or watch TV for 4 or more hours a day without being addicted I think.

The Ashes are on, so yes, there is definitely >four hours going on around here at the moment! But in general - sure, an hour of news, a couple of primetime shows, and one late-night/talk show, and you're there. That's easily within the realm of "normal" for a lot of people on weeknights with no other activities planned. On the weekend, it's just one footy game and two other shows (or one long one). What activity a person is doing can also be difficult to define clearly: are we "watching TV" while the cricket's on and we're also having a beer together and idly chatting about our days and making plans for the weekend? Am I only "reading" when I'm also parenting?

"Addiction" has a very specific definition, and applying to behavioural compulsions in the first place (as noted above) is very very dodgy. Trying to then go a large stretch further and apply to it normal levels of activity that plenty of people engage in without any sense of compulsion or anxiety on withdrawal is just incorrect.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by meeera

The Ashes are on, so yes, there is definitely >four hours going on around here at the moment! But in general - sure, an hour of news, a couple of primetime shows, and one late-night/talk show, and you're there. That's easily within the realm of "normal" for a lot of people on weeknights with no other activities planned. On the weekend, it's just one footy game and two other shows (or one long one). What activity a person is doing can also be difficult to define clearly: are we "watching TV" while the cricket's on and we're also having a beer together and idly chatting about our days and making plans for the weekend? Am I only "reading" when I'm also parenting?

"Addiction" has a very specific definition, and applying to behavioural compulsions in the first place (as noted above) is very very dodgy. Trying to then go a large stretch further and apply to it normal levels of activity that plenty of people engage in without any sense of compulsion or anxiety on withdrawal is just incorrect.

I agree and I worded my last paragraph badly, possibly the rest as well. In my mind addiction is to substances and compulsion is an inability to stop. The boundaries are blurred.

My mother in law was a compulsive cleaner. She wanted to clean. She could stop cleaning, but it made her uncomfortable stopping for long periods of time. She didn't hate dirt, she welcomed it. In the context of the article she was perhaps an addict as it did affect her relations with others. My sister in law took it personally and would not let her visit or see her grandchildren often. Me I thought it was fine if she wanted to clean and bought her presents Maybe it is in the eye of the beholders.

My point though was if you chose to watch TV or play video games for long periods it is not necessarily an addiction or a compulsion. It could be an option you have chosen. Like skydiving or rock climbing or drinking beer. Some people can stop when something different and interesting comes along and often do, and some people can't.

Helen

[crich70]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I admit to always being in the middle of reading one book or another. And the occasional book does keep me up to 2 or 3am. But I'm not really addicted as such.

The last couple of sentences of the article sum things up, I think:

Some people do have to be careful of such tendencies.

Yep. Some people just seem not to be able to handle things that are addictive very well. You see it a lot in families where there are alcohol problems.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Joykins

I can see not sleeping or speaking to anyone, but eating and reading at the same time is totally possible.

I understand that visitors to Stephen Hawking's family home when he was a kid could expect people to be reading at the dinner table. Presumably they had a book in one hand and their fork in the other.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by crich70

I understand that visitors to Stephen Hawking's family home when he was a kid could expect people to be reading at the dinner table. Presumably they had a book in one hand and their fork in the other.

That is the obvious way to do and I do it all the time but with the phone in one hand and the fork in the other hand.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by tompe

That is the obvious way to do and I do it all the time but with the phone in one hand and the fork in the other hand.

Must make for a frustrating soup course.

[QuantumIguana]

People can be just as 'addicted' to reading paper books as they can with e-books. If someone spends all their time reading paper books, it's not considered a big things, but when it's e-books, then somehow it is something awful.

[Joykins]

The nice thing about the ereader is that you can just place it on the table and just use one finger now and then to turn the pages. You can do that and eat with a knife and fork!

[SteveEisenberg]

There is a character, in one of my favorite books of all time, who has such a problem with excessive reading of paper books.

The novel is the 1951 Pulitzer Prize winner for fiction, The Town.

No eBook is available, illustrating the thesis of the How Copyright Made Mid-Century Books Vanish thread.