So, I was reading my texts for my English Method's learning community and I was thinking about something that we discussed in my Children's Lit class last year.
We were reading a book about the importance of reading aloud to children and the author mentioned the benifits of reading. Out of the
many benifits that he described, one was a "social aspect" of reading. The author didn't really explain it--he must have thought it was common knowledge or easy to understand--but it was something that I had not conciously thought about and in class many of the students did not understand and then later out right dissagreed with it.
Many of these students who disagreed with the argument were not education majors and most likely did not enjoy reading (in fact that was probably why they signed up for "Children's" Literature as they figured reading picturebooks would be easy). They argued that the author's argument did not make sense because it would imply that people who read a lot would have more of an understanding of social norms and the social aspect of life in general. Furthermore, that would imply that the heavy readers would be more socially competent since they would know more about interacting with others. From their experience, those who read a lot before college were the misfits and were the ones that were socially incompetant. These students continued their arguement by explaining that instead of learning about social interaction through practical experience, these people lost themselves in their books. A choice that only exacerbated their incompetance.
Not even the professor agreed with the author. This was frustrating, because at the time, I was unable to voice my disagreement with this argument. I tried, but in typical Kristina fashion, I could not find the words to convey the concept that had suddenly and urgently formed itself in my mind. All I knew was that I had felt that the author's ideas were groundbreaking and seriously spoke to me and my experiences and that I wanted to express
my point of view so that the rest of the class might just understand what the author might have truely meant by it. As I tried to grace the class with this wonderful, amazing, empowering concept, I floundered, sputtered and everyone stared at me, confused at why I was even arguing the topic in the first place. This happens a lot for me as I tend to have trouble expressing my thoughts when they are at their most important.
Anyway, as I was reading my new set of Language Arts Methods texts, this idea came back to me and I finally came up with what I had wanted to say in the first place. Granted the students who always had their noses in books may not have had the most practical knowledge of social interaction. Granted they may have used reading as a way to cope with that fact and escape from the social skills that escape them. However, that does not mean that they do not gain understanding about human interaction through their reading.
In fact, I'd argue that, in some ways, readers often know more than non readers about social interactions. In my experience, people who read often have more of a grip on reality. They understand that people have multiple perspectives as they have spent time reading about ideas that conflict with their own or stories with multiple points of view. They also have had more time to explore the different perspectives, personally think about others' ideas and finally come to their own conclusion about the topic.
I could go on and on about this, but I doubt that anyone really wants to hear any more of my rant from over a year ago :)
-K