By Teresa Jusino
No one’s ever said you should read more books to get into college.
- Nadia, 15, author of “Dieing Isn’t Always Bad”
(and yes, that’s how she spelled ‘dying’)
A recent New York Times article, Literacy Debate: Online, R U Really Reading?, discusses the ongoing debate as to whether or not reading things online is actually reading.
I’ve always been a staunch defender of the web as a source of both entertainment and information, and challenged those who are quick to pooh-pooh the internet as intrinsically inferior. As I began the Times piece, I was preparing a rebuttal against the internet naysayers. Then I came to this:
Nadia said she preferred reading stories online because “you could add your own character and twist it the way you want it to be.
“So like in the book somebody could die,” she continued, “but you could make it so that person doesn’t die or make it so like somebody else dies who you don’t like.”
Nadia also writes her own stories. She posted “Dieing Isn’t Always Bad,” about a girl who comes back to life as half cat, half human, on both fanfiction.net and quizilla.com.
Nadia said she wanted to major in English at college and someday hopes to be published. She does not see a problem with reading few books. “No one’s ever said you should read more books to get into college,” she said.”
Suddenly, I was pooh-poohing the internet along with its critics. She wants to be an English major, be a writer, and get published?! She can’t even spell dying, or be bothered to use spell-check! She can’t even be bothered to read other books to see what her competition is up to! Never mind that as an English major in college she’ll be required to do much more reading than she ever had to do in high school, and for which she will be unprepared without practice. Whoever’s not telling her that she “should read more books to get into college” is doing her a grave disservice.
This article got me thinking about why the naysayers are naysaying. It also got me thinking about why I, an avid internet user, love to read and don’t see the internet as a threat to literature.
I realized that mine is the last generation to know what life was like before the internet. The internet was only a baby when I began junior high in the early nineties, and I didn’t have my first e-mail address until I was about 15 or 16 when I heard about this new thing called Hotmail, where you didn’t have to have AOL in your home to have e-mail! You could have an e-mail address for FREE that you could check from anywhere! Hotmail was dope!
But what was I doing all those years before the internet? I was reading – anything and everything I could get my hands on. When I was little, trips to the library (you know, that place where you could borrow books before you could sit in Barnes & Noble and read them for free, or buy them used on Amazon.com?) were a treat, and I always came home with a stack of books almost as tall as I. Reading was highly encouraged in my house, and we never had to be forced to read. And while television tried to compete for our attention, and my older brother and sister bemoaned the fact that I was growing up at a time when VCRs could record TV shows so I could watch them whenever I wanted, we didn’t have as much to distract us from our reading as children do today. The internet was a luxury, not a necessity, and it was rare to have a friend who had a home computer, let alone the internet. Times being what they are, I suppose kids today can’t be blamed for not being as interested in the printed word. Today’s high schoolers have never known life without the internet, and have myriad media sources pulling them in all directions. How can they be expected to sit still and read when they are under constant assault by things flashing, flipping, and scrolling on screens?
Yet, even back before the internet there were debates about what constituted reading. I remember teachers making the distinction between reading books (the preferred option) and magazines (fluff) or comics (not reading at all). Medium, it seems, has always been an issue in the ongoing debate about literacy.
The thing is, at least to me, what you read is more important than how you read. Whether you’re reading on a screen or on the printed page doesn’t matter. If it did, books on tape (gulp! CD! I’m only 29 and I’m technologically SO OLD!) wouldn’t be considered reading either.
It’s a matter of quality, and this is where I think the internet naysayers have it right. Just as there’s a difference between reading The Brothers Karamazov and The Devil Wears Prada, there’s a difference between reading The New York Times online and reading fan fiction. There’s a difference between reading your favorite author’s serialized short stories on their website, and reading Joe Schmoe’s ranting and raving about his personal life on his blog.
It’s a matter of quality, and this is the internet’s biggest flaw…it’s all chiefs and no Indians. It’s all writers and no editors. It’s made up of people who have a great deal to say, but don’t put much thought into how they want to say it. There’s no one out there calling the shots, sending these people back home until they learn how to spell, or at least learn to proofread and utilize their spell-check function. There’s no one critiquing them on their inability to write a coherent sentence. For every blog or website that has an editorial staff ensuring some kind of quality (thank you Lisa and Julianna!), there are a million others set up by people who may or may not care about silly things like that. I found it amusing that 15-year-old Nadia thinks that because she writes stories online without reading anything else that that alone puts her on the road toward becoming a writer and getting published. If she somehow manages to coast through college and catch a literary agent on a very good day, there’s still the matter of dealing with the editor of a publishing house who will go through every word she writes with a fine-toothed comb, providing a rude awakening.
And this is the greatest strength of The Book. The Book has passed before many pairs of eyes before being published and in your hands. The Book has been written, rewritten, and edited so the reader receives it in the best possible version. When you read a book, you are guaranteed a certain level of quality. Say what you might about “beach reads” like The Devil Wears Prada. I promise you it’s written a million times better than Jane Doe’s Whine-A-Long Blog.
The internet isn’t going away, nor should it, and I believe that eventually what we consider “literature” will come to include the internet in a big way. Battles have always raged between high-brow and low-brow forms of art, and that won’t go away either. However, for the sake of children like Nadia, the debate right now shouldn’t be about whether reading on the internet is “actually reading,” but about how to ensure a certain level of quality. The only way this can happen is if we include the internet in our discussions about literature. By including it, we can develop standards for it. We can encourage more of our good authors to include more of their work online. We can begin to differentiate between the “beach reads” and the “serious literature” to be found there. Most importantly, we can go online with our children and help them make those distinctions in the current internet climate. Fiction from The New Yorker is just as readily available as the latest webcomic, and while I don’t think teenagers will necessarily be flocking to read New Yorker fiction, I do believe they can be encouraged to surf toward challenging content. I believe teenagers want to be challenged just as much as they want to challenge, but we have to believe in them. Criticizing their medium of choice doesn’t help. What I think will is helping them navigate it and teaching them not to accept mediocrity, no matter what its form.
Never miss an update. Subscribe to Pink Raygun by Email or subscribe via RSS
TERESA JUSINO was born on the same day that Skylab fell. Coincidence? She doesn’t think so. As a writer, her work has appeared in Elmont Life newspaper, and on the sadly defunct website, CentralBooking.com. She is currently at work on a collection of short stories. As a geek, Teresa loves Star Trek, Lost, comics, and anything Joss Whedon ever touched. Also, she has a fangirl *squee-ing* crush on Brian K. Vaughan, which is now being rivaled by her burgeoning crush on Robert Downey Jr. in his Iron Man suit.


You’ve got points about the ‘ah hah’ moments. The person one is at 13 is not the person they are at 15, even, let alone 18 or 25 or, heaven forbid, 30…
However, I really don’t want to see netspeak spelling become ‘standard.’ R and 2 and 4 and a lot of the common things are just… well, lazy, and kind of make me cringe I hate to think this is what people are reading from our English Speakers.
I just gave a full-read (as opposed to skim) of the NY Times article, and yeah, that Nadia could find empathy for the holocaust victims and read their stories is encouraging. Watch me stereotype now… Teens (and especially anime fangirl teens [from experience? Maybe.]) relate to torture and angst (have you read the number of rape-torture fantasies out there, oy vey, that’s another series of articles entirely). However, to go back on the complimentary subject… it is good that she doesn’t feel she doesn’t have to relate solely through the internet.
On another subject, I agree with the boy who disagreed with the earlier statement that the shared culture comes more strongly from books. I feel like the sharing is at least as strong and more immediate online. However, what we have saved (on hard disk, on paper, or on some sort of recording) is what we have of those who came before us, and it’s good to remember them.
I’ll get off my old (sexy) British Guy rocker and go back in, and let the kids play on the yard… and probably play, too, soon as I’ve taken off my tweeds for the afternoon… but you won’t catch me using the for=4 or their=there=they’re or ur=you are, I’ll stick to being a grammar nazi on the inside.
As to the link-maze, if the internet didn’t distract me with shiny links then I’d have to resort to research and delayed gratification like in the old days… which seriously limited my intake. Damn you, meatspace!
Working in a bookstore, I see a lot of people dismiss what I consider to be legitimate genres of ‘literature’. Comic books, graphics novels, and manga being a large amount of things cast out by parents and grandparents after they’ve sent their children to ‘go find a book’. Then they themselves walk up with Nora Roberts or her non-nom de plume, J.D. Robb.
Of course, I am biased as I read comic books, graphic novels, and manga. Not Nora Roberts.
@April Dawn Lots of people completely ‘judge a book by its cover’ by writing off stuff they haven’t tried, like the comics. A lot of those are just as good as the latest Grisham or whomever. Of course, taste is very subjective.
Really, if you break most things down objectively, story-wise your ‘classics’ aren’t that spiffy. Sure, you can go and dig out the analogies– which are great when they’re actually there– and symbolism… but unless you’re studying it academically that’s not what sticks with the reader overtly. Well, not me, anyway. Who’s to say X comic or popular novel wasn’t written with a higher message in mind, anyway?
I’m 100% behind people finding a story they love and reading/watching/getting involved in it, whatever it is. If I have kids I won’t stop them from reading anything (that’s more or less age-appropriate… no porn until you’re 18, LOL! No Danielle Steele until we have a long talk! Yadda yadda.). I will make sure they know proper grammar, math skills, history, and generally try to pick up the slack (if any *crosses fingers hopefully*) that their teachers leave.
The one thing I want to clarify is that, though I was hard on her in my post, I don’t blame Nadia at all.
1) She clearly enjoys difficult non-fiction. It’s certainly not a requirement for everyone to love classic fiction.
2) @Robyn – I’ve definitely thought of your point re: teenagers thinking the world was created for them, and yes, it’s something that passes. Teenagers don’t have a historical context for anything. Lord knows I didn’t. But as they get older they see how what they like fits into the continuum of what came before…
My point in writing this was not to tear kids like Nadia down. It was to point out that:
1) Medium doesn’t matter, and
2) We need to be involved in what our children our doing, not just dismiss it as something that’s not up to our standards. Because our standards will eventually give way to new standards, and if we don’t take an active role in how our children learn now, we’ll find that they’ve evolved without us, and we would’ve had no say in the standards of the future.
Teresa,
very good piece. I riffed on it today and at the same time gave you and your site my first ever C.O.F. Award.
The only thing I’d stress beyond what you said is that a sub-text tan through the entire NYT article was ‘make things easier for the kids and maybe more of them will get it’; some folks these days just don’t understand that most things that are worthwile are things that need to be worked at.