|
What interests me with the article is the idea that the way we read now is not some art or talent perfected over time, instead it is something we have inherited as a legacy of the language, technological and material constraints of history. Much as many people here now believe that paper books are redundant and wasteful, a historical tradition we no longer need, could it be that even the way we read might (eventually) go the same way?
I understand, and fully agree with, the sentiments about reading for pleasure - it doesn't have to be fast. On the other hand, if it is really possible to read faster with full comprehension and enjoyment then where's the downside?
|