To think being a reader doesn't make you better or smarter?

[OnceaReaderNeveraReader]

Never been a reader. I have tried many times in my life and have enjoyed the odd book here and there but have never managed to actually become a regular reader and don't miss books ever. I was talking about this with some colleagues the other day and one of them made me feel a bit bad about this as if reading is a sign of better intellectual ability and superiority.
I am uni educated and enjoy a variety of other cultural hobbies such as art, theatre and dance but I just cannot understand what is so special about books!
How does one become a reader later in life and is it really that bad if I don't enjoy it?

I think being a reader has broadened my horizons and increased my knowledge and given me a wider vocabulary, however I don't think that it makes me better than non readers.

Some readers like to look down on other readers and think they are superior to them because they think their choice of books is trashy or because they read on an Kindle instead of reading a real book or lots of other reasons.

Don't take any notice of book snobs OP.

I suspect it's the other way around.

Being more intelligent makes people more likely to be readers. But clearly not reading a lot doesn't mean someone can't be intelligent. There are intelligent people who didn't get taught to read after all.

Lots of people on here seem to feel reading makes them better informed, which makes sense. Maybe you get that from other things OP? There could be all sorts of reasons why you're not into reading. And it doesn't make you a better or worse person.

"I suspect it's the other way around.
Being more intelligent makes people more likely to be readers."

Yes, I think it might be this as well.

This is the weight loss 'community' in a nutshell as well 😆

Now I see that you edited your post after my reply, my reply makes no sense. For anyone else reading, the post originally had Jane Austen as the author of Jane Eyre.

Yes, I was saying I was shocked some of them hadn’t even heard of it (or hadn’t remembered hearing of it) and that two of them just thought it was a film.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised or disappointed with the fact they hadn’t read it - it’s quite a thick tome! But not even knowing of it I attribute to a lack of good general knowledge. Which I believe is largely gained by reading widely as well as having curiosity about the wider world of course.

Yes, and also acknowledged their own mistake before your comment.

I think reading helps with imagination. So it's more of a creative intelligence that it aids with. You're creating it within your mind yourself, rather than being shown it.

A lot of people learn better if they've had to think about it for themselves, rather than just having it put in front of them.

I don't think it makes anyone better than anyone else though. Just answering why I think it might make it a better way to learn than a TV show.

"Which I believe is largely gained by reading widely as well as having curiosity about the wider world of course."

I suppose this is where we disagree. Knowledge doesn't only come from reading. Jane Eyre is mentioned on TV quite often, even just certain characters like Rochester or the mad woman in the attic. You don't need to be a reader.
See my point about Dickens.

Thanks comeandhaveteawithme

I realised my mistake as soon as I pressed post - I have read all the Austen/Bronte’s and I do sometimes get them mixed up! I am getting on a bit too 😂

When I wrote my reply it still showed Jane Austen. I've had to report my own reply as it makes no sense now apart from my belief that people will have heard of Pride & Prejudice irrespective of whether they have any interest in reading regency novels.

But the two that knew about it thought it was (just) a film. Not knowing it’s a (very famous!) classical novel is indicative to me of not being “readers” per se. Or at least not of the classics. Seeing reference to things on the tv wouldn’t necessarily let you know it’s a book.

Imagine if someone said they'd heard of Oliver (Twist) but thought it was just a musical and never heard of the book. It'd be a general knowledge problem.

True, I take your point. And as I understand it, AI is blurring the lines between truth and fiction even more?

It’s a bit of a brain workout, you must be firing up neural pathways with all the imagining and comprehension required. It possibly does have links to higher IQ, but I’ve no idea how they’d isolate that to measure it. We do know that children read to daily are exposed to up to a million more words by age 5 than those who aren’t, which must have an impact. It ignites curiosity too in a way that’s totally different to other media. I think it’s such an interesting hobby – casting our eyes over symbols and drawing the scenes in our heads. Incidentally I know someone who has aphantasia who doesn’t read because she can’t picture the scenes/story in her mind. I wonder if that’s At play too – how well you’re able to “see” things in your mind.

There are several studies connecting reading fiction with emotional intelligence. It makes sense that reading gives you an insight into other people's perspectives. Just reading a 1st person narrative immediately puts you in the mental space of another person.

It reminds me of being a teenager and cringing at a girl in my school who was so obvious with her unrequited crush on a boy. She had no caution and was oblivious to how off putting it was for him. Sense and Sensibility felt designed for her to explore all the pros and cons of being discrete and overt with your feelings!

I never mentioned that book to her though. Doubt it would have gone down well!

I've always been an avid reader, but I don't think it makes me any more intelligent or superior to someone who doesn't read!

I think it’s also indicative of not being a big reader.

Anyone who is an adult and a prolific reader would know that Jane Eyre is a book - in my opinion. But we can disagree!

There are loads of studies which show the positive impacts of reading on both children and adults. I love films too, but they do not have the same effect as reading

Reading fiction in particular is linked to better mental health. Reading as a child is a good predictor of future academic success as it supports better cognition

Plus it broadens your world view, beliefs and values

www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/reading-for-pleasure-early-in-childhood-linked-to-better-cognitive-performance-and-mental-wellbeing

Ahhh love this! Any reading is amazing, well done your mum 😊

Take the Salt Path, for example. The publishers obviously didn't see the need to fact check it.

Anyone can write on the internet, but once it's widely read there are also plenty of people to correct things, as works quite well on Wikipedia.

"Anyone who is an adult and a prolific reader would know that Jane Eyre is a book - in my opinion. But we can disagree!"

OMG. Of course they would! That's not my argument!
My argument is that almost everyone, including non-readers know what it is! It's not a matter of not reading, it's very low general knowledge.

Given that there are so many books in existence, maybe someone who says "I'm not much of a reader" just hasn't met the right book yet.

Yes! And I am saying it is also indicative of not being a big reader!!

What on earth??!

And of course “almost everyone” doesn’t know what Jane Eyre is?? Have you asked everyone you’ve ever met if they’ve heard of Jane Eyre??