DH and reading for pleasure

[jalexander]

AIBU to not understand DH's opinion and TOTALLY disagree with it?

He hates reading. He can't take it in. Doesn't enjoy it. Never reads for pleasure.

Fair enough.

We were just discussing reading for pleasure as I love it and think it's actually really important.

It came to light that DP never encouraged his children to read. He would read their compulsory school set books with them and that was it. Neither him or his ExW encouraged reading for pleasure and none of his children ever read. I find this really sad.

DH doesn't understand why I think it's sad. He said he'd never force them to read for pleasure. He hates it and doesn't see the point.

He says he's a realist and far more grounded than me, stuck in my little fantasy worlds with a romanticised idea of the world. Ugh. He's being totally flippant and dismissive.

What do you think?

Ok so my DS has a good vocabulary and plenty to say.

There seems to be an awful lot of black and white on this thread. I don't see it as being either all reading is pleasurable, or all reading is actively disliked as some people have implied. Some people don't use reading as a source of entertainment, but don't have an actual dislike of reading e.g. some people like driving, some dislike it, and some just do it & don't really care as long as it gets them from A to B.

I'm a reader, my sister, my nephews, my brother and his wife are, my mother was. I read for many different reasons; fiction for pleasure, factual for pleasure, and some factual because I need the knowledge rather than for actual enjoyment. I also watch TV for all these reasons, and browse the internet as well.

There will be people whose preferred method of entertainment and/or information gathering is reading hard copy, some who prefer on line/electronic, some who prefer TV. I think it would be wise of parents to encourage use of ALL these methods to their children, so hopefully they can find the method best suited and preferred (may be different methods for different reasons). As long as they encourage gathering, absorption and understanding of knowledge mixed with a bit of entertainment.

What I detest is anyone who denigrates reading, its a sort of inverse snobbery possibly going back to the days when reading books was considered more a middle class thing as was owning lots of books.

Are you from a more middle class background than DH?

I’m obsessed with books. As are my children. There are many great pleasures in life from gardening, a cuddle with a dog, and getting lost in a good book. I’ve always thought I don’t mind what my children do in life as long as they read, swim and are kind to people and animals. Boys in particular are brought up that’s it’s nerdy or pathetic to read a book. Yet all of mine read - daily for pleasure. As do I. I don’t mind what they read. Reading open minds and doors. It develops a different part of the brain, it stimulates and relaxes it can cause you to cry with laughter or shudder with horror. Reading is beautiful. If someone doesn’t like reading - they shouldn’t be forced or look down on those that do. But .... the written world is so powerful to ignore it, you do so at your own peril. Words can start and end wars.

Not everyone gets it. Many of us experience the absolute joy of losing ourselves for a few hours in someone else's world, others don't. I feel bewildered that this source of delight is not felt by all but there it is. To some, reading is an ordeal, necessary at times, but never enjoyable. I feel much the same about American films, not keen but occasionally surprised.

So now love of reading makes you middle-class? I grew up poor. Reading was massive in our house.

So if you don’t like reading, what class are you?

I am from a very disordered, poor background. Reading was a solace. Dh is wealthy upper middle class. Barely reads.

I used to teach English...have gone off reading!
It is a lovely pastime but not for all.

My dp doesn't read for pleasure. He finds it hard to read, and he has no imagination.

But he reads books with 4 year old dd every day.

Good grief, this has blown up since last night! I'm surprised by the extreme defensiveness of those who don't like reading. Yes, some posters have been belittling but the op wasn't. Nor did I mean to be with my 'pity him and move on' comment. I just meant, you know reading is a joy government, pity him that he can't have that, then drop the discussion. Because no one's in the wrong. But surely there's nothing wrong with hoping a partner shares your interests and being disappointed sometimes that they don't?

My DH gets sad/exasperated sometimes that I don't share his love of music, and stargazing. I do like music to an extent so we can engage a bit, but it's at a shallow level for him. Stargazing, I try to fake an interest occasionally for his sake but there's no enthusiasm. I don't get cross with him for being disappointed although I suppose I would if it was all the time.

Massive lol at BlueberryPud's "kids these days" post. I think you hit pretty much every possible cliche there, well done.

TotHappy People get defensive about not liking reading because many readers make value judgements about non-readers that music lovers and stargazers and trainspotters and old car enthusiasts don't generally make about people who don't share their interests.

It's all right here in this thread: poorer vocabulary, less imagination, less educated, classism, and even ludicrous arguments about it leading to them wearing the wrong kind of trousers.

When you use words like pity you are being patronizing and belittling no matter how you dress it up.

His view is not unusual amongst boys and men, and thankfully this is recognised by some schools. Whatever you think of Harry Potter, it has the merit of getting more boys to read.

What is wrong is the OP's DH being dismissive instead of just accepting it is an interest he does not have. I hate opera but do not belittle those who do.

I was never interested in reading for fun until I discovered Audible. I started to listen to a few books and realised how much I enjoy the stories.

I started to read books after that for fun. I always struggled to get into books when I was younger, my family never encouraged it further from school reading.

I would recommend Audible, it enabled me to get into books when I had no time to otherwise.

ThisIsTheFirstStep I think text is a regular verb but people use text text text because it sounds easier. As some element of English is based on common usage only time will tell what ends up being seen as right.

english.stackexchange.com/questions/30166/how-to-use-text-as-a-verb

AuntBeastie excellent post on the youth of today.

It's important to remember we have raised them (mostly) so criticism of then can st least in part be directed at us! But they are caring and inclusive and ecologically aware in a way previous generations have not been.

italian well that's my point, as it's a new word, we don't really have a standard as yet

I read scientific journals for a living. When I get a spare minute at home (which is not often) I prefer to watch television or a film these days. I read a lot growing up, and got through most of the "classics" as a young adult, but I don't think that makes me any more educated or knowledgeable than someone who doesn't read, except in very specific topics.

Maybe it equipped me to be able to discuss whether Prince Myshkin was merely a simpleton or a Christ-like figure, but is there inherently greater intellectual merit in that than the ability to discuss whether Walter White was a sociopath or just a desperate father with nothing to lose?

In the ability to discuss no, in the respective works of the Idiot vs Breaking Bad the former has inherently greater intellectual merit. The Idiot isn't the optimal example as I don't think it was his best book.

Film and TV are inherently superficial mediums, I love watching TV but there is not the same depth and complexity as in books.

I've never seen an adaptation of a great novel that had anything like the complexity, depth, detail and nuance of the original work, nor a documentary series based on a factual work either. But, being visual mediums they can bring the past or distant lands alive to people who can't imagine them, and introduce people to books they may never have considered reading.

I've seen some amazing films that were never, and could never be, novels. Bladerunner didn't have the depth of the original story but Bladerunner 2049 was so beautiful to look at I got just as much pleasure from it

Shambu

You raise a good point: Breaking Bad was certainly more entertaining than The Idiot!

I've had great pleasure from films but comparative to great novels that you inhabit and go back and re-read and re-live - films are a slightly shallow, fleeting pleasure.

You don't get visual pyrotechnics in a novel, there what people go to the cinema for. For my money 2049 was slow, overlong, pretentious, no character development and bascially quite boring. But I know some people loved it.

Better good TV than a bad book.

that's not there ^

I prefer television to films for that reason, Shambu. You get much more immersed in the story and more involved with the characters across multiple 12-hour seasons than in one 2.5-hour film.