From the NYT link:
Quote:
|
“Frankly, I agree with the study,” said Albert Wendland, who directs a master’s program in writing popular fiction at Seton Hill University. “Reading sensitive and lengthy explorations of people’s lives, that kind of fiction is literally putting yourself into another person’s position [...]
|
NO. NO, it's not. This was a writing MFA director? I realise it's hit the dictionaries and all recently, but this is the point where my descriptivism comes to a screeching halt.
Other than that, yeah, this whole thing is a *shrug* for me right now. You can't throw all genre fiction into one bin, and say that it doesn't deal with character and emotion but instead in stereotypes and plot; and throw lit fic into another and say it is all about character and emotion; and then take (no doubt highly selective) excerpts, look at an effect that happens (and for all we know is then over) within minutes in adults, and then generalise it to Reading Literary Fiction Is Good For Our Children. Not that the researchers are doing that particular bit of generalising, but the media sure is.
(I also confess to a giant eyeroll at them choosing Heinlein to represent SF. Things have changed, dudes.)