Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
Speaking for only myself: I always cringe a little at the prefacing of the word "reader" with any kind of adjective used to convey the level of avidity or "seriousness" with which the individual approaches their reading. There are readers, and then there are non-readers. A reader's conviction, seriousness, addiction, avidity, love, etc... cannot be determined by the volume (or speed) one reads. There are those who read all the time, but slowly; and those that read half the time, but very quickly--and everything in between. The adjectives that typically get applied are unnecessary, in my opinion. Even if no offense is intended, the words chosen are still alienating in nature. If "serious/avid/hardcore" readers do X, then naturally anyone who espouses such notions must think that a reader who doesn't do X, isn't a serious/avid/hardcore reader. It tends to be offensive and/or confrontational for no conversational gain (or clarification) whatsoever.
Readers are people who can't imagine a life without books being a part of it. Everyone else is a non-reader. Speed, hours-per-day, books-per-year, are irrelevant. As are devices/media used by such a person. In short: "reader" and "serious reader" are the same thing. One is merely a bit redundant, is all.  |
BTW--I know a lot of people who read casually and may only read a book a month, or even less. Sorry, but to me, reader and "serious reader" are not the same thing. You guys want to argue that it's tautological, great, but if you
only know voracious readers, I'm happy for you. I know a good number of people that read
very sparingly. I wouldn't call them "non-readers," but nor do they go through hundreds of books/annum.
I wasn't judging the "goodness" of a reader by their volume--but the VOLUME, vis-a-vis print versus eBooks. I find that people who read a LOT, in terms of books/annum,
tend to have eBook readers. (Or they haunt the library, take your pick.) People who want to read 20 books on vacation tend to have ebook readers. It's a practical matter. You guys want to assume that I was judging someone, in terms of "serious," fine.
But I was
really talking about how people fall into eBook readers, especially early adopters--it was usually desperation, in terms of storage space. I know it was for me. I'd bought a house, literally twice the square footage of my prior house, because I'd been overrun with books, and
still didn't have enough wall space for my paperbacks and hardcovers (I think I lost count around 2600 books or so, just in fiction, not counting non-fiction volumes here)--and thus, ended up with a Kindle. I've heard that story any number of times from other people--without the new house part, of course. I can't bring myself to part with books, so electronic devices were my salvation.
(FWIW, I know an "author" that doesn't read--
at all. Yeah, knocked me for a loop the first time he told me that, too. Of course, his books
suck. Nonetheless, he exists. I've mentioned him here in other contexts, previously.)
Hitch