On the occasion of the NYT examining the current controversy over books (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/21/books/review/book-bans-humanities-ai.html) it might be useful to give some thought to reading as an activity. Scott begins: "Everyone loves reading. In principle, anyway. Nobody is against it, right? Surely, in the midst of our many quarrels, we can agree that people should learn to read, should learn to enjoy it and should do a lot of it." This passage reflects the attitude of an educated, literate, urban intelligence, not the opinion of everyone, nor every American. Literacy in America has evolved. Though estimated at 80% of male adults in 1776, this did not include slaves, or women whose rate was not documented. Estimates claim 80% of adults by 1870 (though again women are not included), but only 20% of blacks were deemed literate in that survey. This is reported to reach close to 100% by 1980's though it is unlikely that the estimates are correct. Reading skills were emphasized in basic education during this period, but it is not an inherent human skill.
The evolution of speech is impossible to document precisely, but its presence is pervasive across human societies. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364661300014947) Estimates suggest it developed 50 to 100 thousand years ago, but this does not include reading! The ability to combine auditory signals and visual signals requires brain pathways that are not instinctual and estimates suggest that the ability to write and read languages is roughly 6,000 to 10,000 years old, a relatively new capacity! (Perhaps auditory speech and visual symbols, petroglyphs, etc were combined and selected images linked to concepts (in pictographic languages) or sounds (phonetic ones). Some ancient scripts persist into contemporary forms as in Chinese, Egyptian to greek, etc; others do not have a known correspondence, as in Mayan. The importance of written language is the ability to maintain and record records of actions, and transmit information and history across generations without relying on memory-mimetic skills. The importance of this change is discussed in detail by Abram (THE SPELL OF THE SENSUOUS).
Culture is transmitted orally as well as in written form, but great importance attaches to the written as in religious documents. The "bible" is a canonization of previous manuscripts, as is the "Koran". Once established as definitive, each becomes the basis for the culture of that religion; this decision was made by a group of "experts" around 2000 years ago for "bible", and 1500 years ago for the "Koran". A similar role is assigned to texts in other cultures. These written texts were not universally available to "readers" in these cultures on a personal basis, only as scarce hand written documents, shared by many users. Moveable type printing developed in 1455 with Gutenberg's printing of the bible. Only in the last two centuries has the writing and printing of books of skills, biography, and literature (fantasy) been readily available. So Scott's assumptions about the universality and importance of reading reflect very recent developments in human history.
Coming from an academic, intellectual background, the importance of literacy and reading are paramount. And so recent issues raise serious concerns. The teaching of reading in the US has deteriorated. Students do not read as well as previous generations. This is ascribed variously to poor teaching, teaching non-phonetic methods(in a language that is inconsistently phonetic!), and the expansion of audio-visual sources of information. Each of these may play a role, but their significance is masked by a broader issue. Contemporary culture has a wide range of available sources of auditory-visual information. And students are able to create this information with or without words to share with others. The dominance the physical-object-book generating a visual-verbal experience is diminishing. Almost everywhere in the country, you can overhear a conversation, often among women, about how their grandchildren are not reading enough, and spending too much time on "social media". Many of these same women were in the generation that was transformed by radio, movies, and television; but they do not recognize the impact of those media as clearly. McLuhan did, the cultural prophet who stated that "the medium is the message", or at least influences it.
The paradox of this de-emphasis on reading is the recent focus on restricting what books are retained by libraries and read by young people. Just when the general youth culture is more focused on audio-visual experience, parents and politicians are concerned, obsessed really, about the "danger" of reading this or that book. The typical concern of the 50s-70s was about the child/teen reading books with passages describing sexual activities in explicit language.(as in https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-06-21/huntington-beach-will-seek-to-stop-children-from-accessing-library-books-deemed-obscene-or-pornographic) This is rarely a current concern. Instead, the focus is on normative content. What feelings about oneself and one's gender are appropriate to share with others? What feelings, attitudes, and historical information are appropriate to share which do not conform to traditional cultural norms about the country? Elders and politicians are emphasizing the role of written communication in transmitting history, at the time when youth are ignoring it most of the time. These two aren't a coincidence. It seems that the erosion of emphasis on written communication for a decade or so has weakened the importance of normative history in the society, and now those who viewed that history as their history, are shocked that others now claim a different history for the United States. Which books are allowed becomes the basis for certifying what is the "real history". The goal is "a campaign to win the hearts and minds of America's youth", and the supposed future history of the country. In a time when different news media report "the facts" of an event in incompatible terms, and a candidate and followers claim they did not lose an election despite the calculations, defining which books "tell the true story" and are allowed, and which do not, and are prohibited, takes on a new urgency.
The sad truth is that books or written texts do not have this intrinsic validity. Just as there are many variations of religious texts, and even several variations of the "bible" and its translations, there are many books and papers that claim to document the "truth" of the country, and its origins and current norms. Fighting for a particular version of this "truth" and eliminating the voice of others is a necessary step in political control. And attacking political norms is a basic technique to undermine the establishment. Books have been swept into the political maelstrom because their writing and authors have been. Fighting for your version of the culture and the reality of a society only assures that another person will challenge this and try to oppose your views. This is, of course, not about books, or reading, but power politics at a time when cultural norms are in transition.
Is California different? California doubles down on inclusive education as red states ban books in classrooms Is this the future?
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-06-21/california-doubles-down-on-diverse-lessons-in-schools-as-book-bans-happen-across-u-s
No comments:
Post a Comment