Month: April 2025

Books, powerpoints, tabloids, and tote bags. What do we care about in reading?








Do we really let ourselves be encouraged to present our ideas with flashy powerpoint slides and then wonder why students don’t bother reading books anymore?












Last weekend, I had an inspiring seminar on Hume’s Treatise and so I was just about to write another blogpost about reading philosophy. This time I wanted to try a slightly different angle and focus on what we care about when reading. What is it that matters to us – beyond the issue of what might matter to our instructors in the context of a Hume course? Why do we pick up a book like Hume’s Treatise? What steps might we have gone through in advance of picking up such a brick? What makes us pick up big philosophy books and carry them around? Here are a couple of half-baked thoughts, not on reading philosophy but on some perhaps substantial changes in what figures in our reading practices between different generations.





Signalling readership to others. – The smooth passage from my associations about reading philosophy to ones about why we carry books around eventually transported me to a passage in Deniz Ohde’s autosociobiography Sky Glow (Streulicht) that I recently read: Here, the narrator focuses, among other things, on hopes and fears in her attempts at social climbing. One scene has her getting ready for going to evening school and decidedly picking up a canvas tote bag with the logo of a German weekly newspaper (Die Zeit), hoping she is going to make the impression of belonging to the group of … well, of what precisely? Perhaps the group of serious readers and thinkers. The scene is an acute portrait of how we signal readership to others. Of how we want to be seen as readers. We signal that we read and, even in reading, we signal to others that we read. Reading is a status symbol and indicative of a supposed lifestyle. The creators of adverts on tote bags and elsewhere have known this for a long time. What I find so heart-wrenching about this particular scene is that this person’s signalling happens in a world that doesn’t really care any longer about the status of being a reader. As readers of the novel, we might assume that the narrator, presenting flashbacks of her younger self, has learned this the hard way at some point. But the protagonist clearly doesn’t know this at the time at which the scene is set. She cares about reading and cares about being seen as a reader. But reading is no longer seen as a status symbol, at least not in the same way as it used to be.





Changing signals. – Books used to be indicators of intellectual status, wealth and time, lots of time. Being a reader could be signalled by carrying and hoarding books. I am not sure what exactly has initiated crucial changes in such indicators. (That said, I hope to find out more about changing reading cultures in due course.) But by now even the book-loving scholar in the humanities is more of a distant cliché than a reality. Today’s academics mostly pride themselves on being “busy” or even “stressed”, and many might in fact often be too busy to read or at least to read as much as they list in their bibliographies. ­– Now, I don’t want to complain about decreasing literacy or interest in reading. My point is rather that the indicators of readership may have changed. If this is correct, we’re faced with the the following question: Would we recognize new indicators for what they are? Instead of carrying a dusty book to class your students might prepare a flashy powerpoint presentation. What these students signal to their instructors is still competence (or so I think), but it is not signalling competence in the way I have learned to signal competence in my youth. But even when I grew up in the 1970s and 80s, reading had already become a mass phenomenon. Not only in the sense of many people having the necessary literacy, but also in the sense of the world being a place packed with words. Adverts and signs were populating the streets. Newspapers were everywhere. Children read their comics on the loo. Workers read newspapers for breakfast, pacing through headlines and pictures. (Of course, for most of us this is common, but if you study medieval and early modern philosophy, you’ll find that our common reading culture is markedly different.) Now if reading is happening everywhere, mere (signalling of) reading is no longer a socially distinctive marker.





Reading is not replaced, but happening differently. – This ubiquitousness of reading has simply exploded. Given the recent changes in technology and design allowing for digital reading and bullet-point presentations or summaries of one’s reading, it is plausible to assume that reading is turning into a different thing altogether. Firstly, reading does no longer signal a socially elevated status. Showing off by being a bookish person does make you look old-fashioned at best, but it doesn’t mean you’re wealthy or smart. Secondly, the practice of reading is no longer visible in books or paper alone, but basically baked into every device we see or touch. I can read my phone or in my phone. People send me texts all the time. Every pling sound is a demand to read more. If this is correct, reading doesn’t need to be signalled, simply because it’s everywhere. As my colleague Irmtraud Hnilica pointed out, we “can’t expect [our students] to be just like us.” The difference might just run much deeper than I used to think.





Where do I belong? – If reading neither needs to be signalled nor signals that I’m special, where does that leave me? Me as a member of the group of serious readers? And where does it leave you? We have to accept that reading is nothing special and we have to accept that reading is a practice somewhat different from the olden days. So what? I grew up in a different, somewhat old-fashioned world and now ended up learning to summarize books with bullet-points. Once you’ve learned that and have very little time on your hands, you might want to save time by reducing reading to reading bullet-points even more. And our students don’t do what we tell them. Rather, they imitate what they actually see us doing.





Let me close with two suggestions: Firstly, we need to learn to recognize different practices of reading. The fact that the hallmark of being an avid reader is no longer that you carry a dusty book around doesn’t change that much. Phones do not replace reading, but they affect the way we read, our reading culture. Overall, we read much more than we used to, say, in modern times. Secondly, we need to be cautious in thinking that technological designs of reading are in any way innocent. As Daniel Martin Feige has argued convincingly, especially the digitalized forms and designs of reading and talking about reading are not guided by their aptitude but by the possibilities of monetization: While it might not make a difference to the texts if I read Hegel on a kindle, the increasing transformation of our verbal or written exchanges about such texts into specific formats provided in commercial media (Apple, Microsoft, Google etc.) subscribes to their economic models (see Feige, esp. p. 43 and 55). Put plainly, the fact that our exchanges about books are often happening in the form of showing each other powerpoint presentations (at conferences or in class) might not so much be owing to the advantages of that format, but because some people earn lots of money if that format is demanded everywhere and if further (educational) expectations are driven in line with such a format. I wouldn’t put it past people that they encourage the use of powerpoint and, by extension, other digitally convenient forms of streamlining content for monetary rather than educational reasons. Having our book summaries and discussions done by ChatGPT tightens this transformation. In this sense, the new ways of reading and the new ways of indicating social status aligned with the virtues of reading are still following the money, as much as booksellers might have already done in the past. But the current changes and transformations in our practices might leave us with something of a generational gap. If all of this is correct, we might wonder whether we really have a decline of literacy – or perhaps rather a change in practices.

	


	



			
				


			

			
Are we talking literacy or buffalo wings? Notes on “The average college student today”. Guest post by Irmtraud Hnilica
		
	
	

		

When my dear colleague Martin Lenz sent me a link to Hilarius Bookbinder’s blog post “The average college student today”, I immediately knew this would be a lamentation about how students nowadays couldn’t care less, wouldn’t make the effort, and simply didn’t read. Not that I have psychic abilities about blog posts. But Martin and I have an ongoing discussion about the topic of literacy and the so-called reading crisis. When I clicked the link to read the post, I was slightly concerned. Martin had only commented that “things sounded quite bad”. Well, what sounded very bad to me was – for starters – the title of this blog post. Why would a professor even write about the average college student? The average college student is merely a statistical construct, not to be found in any classroom. In my fifteen years of teaching experience at six German universities spanning institutions such as the FernUniversität in Hagen, LMU München and HU Berlin, I have yet to encounter a single homogenous study group. And labelling those with whom one seeks to engage in meaningful academic work as average seems condescending to me. I find it odd to point out something so obvious, but one simply cannot expect cooperation or trust from people one does not respect. And students must trust their academic teachers that the challenging material they ask them to read really is worthwhile. I, personally, am not sure whether I would take reading suggestions from someone who comes across as condescending and uninterested in what matters to me. Would our average professor (as Martin called Bookbinder in his reply)? I absolutely don’t think so.





Hilarius Bookbinder claims to write as a concerned, even alarmed professor. And if it’s true that students read way less than a decade ago – and it very well might be – then that is a serious matter. But Bookbinder adopts a rather resentful tone and weaves students’ identities into his somewhat unclear reasoning. Suddenly, it’s not about reading skills anymore, but about students’ culinary preferences. They seem to love buffalo wings, while the professor clearly despises them. Just a fun fact? Not at all. Bookbinder repeatedly returns to it. Actually, he completely lost me at his feverish choice of a picture to illustrate his article. It features a young woman reading a menu, seemingly contemplating that the buffalo wings look good. The woman depicted has brown eyes and curly brown hair. I might not have considered her ethnicity, if Bookbinder hadn’t previously published another article, questioning why white men no longer want to go to college. And I think that’s exactly what this is all about. Add a touch of some classism – buffalo wings are often seen as working-class food – and it becomes evident that this is not truly about learners’ reading skills, but rather about the individuals themselves, who might be female, first-generation academics and come from diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds.





I consider it part of our duty as academic teachers to stay open and curious about our learners. We can’t expect them to be just like us. Of course they have their own unique cultural references. They even listen to, god forbid, Taylor Swift! There’s by the way a chance that they actually do read a lot. And there is statistical evidence that women read more than men. Let’s stay curious about today’s students and start a new conversation about literacy, rather than becoming bitter about a generation that might not share our preferences. If we create a non-judgmental space for students’ diverse cultural references and interests, they could eventually come around for some shared reading practice and open up for the books we want to introduce them to.





Irmtraud Hnilica

	


	



			
				


			

			
Leseszenen (3): Wortsalat – oder mein erster Roman nach Jahren
		
	
	

		

„Die Luft verändert sich – fein Säure – Luft – mein Gesicht – Ausdruck – Konsistenz“ – Was war das? Zugegeben, ich war etwas müde, aber meine Augen schienen wie haltlose Flummis über die Buchseite zu hüpfen, hier und da ein Wort treffend, hin und her, vor und zurück, und lieferten diesen Wortsalat, aus dem ich keinen Sinn entnehmen konnte. Etwas beunruhigt versuchte ich, meinen Blick auf der Seite zu fixieren. Wo ist das Verb? Haben diese Sätze keine Verben? Der erste Satz hatte doch eins: „verändert sich“, aber danach? Und wie hing das zusammen? Ich richtete mich etwas auf und las den Abschnitt noch mal. Jetzt ergaben die Sätze Sinn, aber sie sagten mir nichts: Die Rede von der Luft und der feinen Säure – woran knüpfte das denn an? Na gut, es handelte sich um den Anfang des Romans. Da dürfen die ersten Sätze schon mal kryptisch sein, aber das Unbehagen wollte sich nicht ganz auflösen. “Eine ängstliche Teilnahmslosigkeit“ – das gehört nicht nur in den Roman, das gab mein Gefühl wieder, das mich beschlich, als ich merkte, dass ich mich nicht in den Text hineinfinden konnte. Meine Augen sprangen weiter hin und her. Abermals wies ich mich zurecht und zwang mich, aufmerksam, ja: aufmerksam, weiterzulesen. Nach ein paar Minuten und einige Absätze weiter rastete es ein, mein gewohnter Lesefluss kam zurück und ich tauchte ein in die Welt, die der Text mir suggerierte.





Nach vielen Jahren las ich endlich mal wieder einen Roman, jedenfalls hatte ich es mir fest vorgenommen. Deniz Ohde: Streulicht, erschienen 2020. Nach dieser anfänglichen Verunsicherung, dem Wortsalat, vergewisserte ich mich nochmal durch einen Blick auf den Klappentext:










Konsistenz ist ein Kraftakt, schoss es mir durch den Kopf. Es ist nicht so leicht, die Wörter zu sinnvollen Einheiten zu verbinden. Linearität und Interpunktion helfen natürlich. Aber dazu dürfen die Augen nicht wandern, und auch die Gedanken müssen beim Geschriebenen bleiben, oder? Oder müssen die Gedanken umherirren, um das Verständnis durch die Verknüpfung mit Gefühlen und eigenen Erfahrungen zu konturieren? Das Lesen war mir entglitten, zwar nur für ein paar müde Augenblicke, aber hinreichend verunsichernd. Ich wälzte mich hin und her. Erinnerte mich ans Gitarre-Üben: Wenn etwas nicht klappt oder blöd klingt, Metronom langsam stellen und ganz ruhig von vorn beginnen; das Tempo erst steigern, wenn es gut klingt. Beim Lesen war es jetzt genauso.





Aber die Verunsicherung war jetzt latent geblieben. War das neu? Könnte es an COVID liegen? Viele Leute hatten von kognitiven Einschränkungen erzählt. Oder lag es doch daran, dass ich seit vielen Jahren keinen Roman mehr gelesen hatte? Nur noch Fachbücher, und das meist am Schreibtisch, oft sogar nur in digitaler Form. Es mir hingegen bequem machen, ein Buch aufschlagen und für viele Stunden so verharren und lesen, das hatte ich ewig nicht getan. Warum eigentlich? An Lust mangelte es eigentlich nicht, an Lesestoff auch nicht. Natürlich hatte ich wenig Zeit, aber seien wir ehrlich: Wer hat die schon?! So recht erklären konnte ich mir das also nicht. Aber wenn der Habitus erstmal gebrochen ist, ist es schwer, neu zu beginnen. Zu Beginn dieses langen Lese-Hiatus war allerdings etwas viel einfacheres geschehen. Meine Sehkraft hatte nachgelassen. Wenn ich nicht ausreichend Licht oder Abstand zum Text hatte, war es eine große Anstrengung. Irgendwie war das leicht beängstigend und mir war gleich der Linguistikdozent aus Bochum wieder eingefallen, der seine letzte Vorlesung damit begonnen hatte, von seinem schwindenden Augenlicht zu sprechen. Das Lesen am Bildschirm brachte diese Probleme nicht mit sich. Aber erst, als ich mir nach einigen Jahren eine Lesebrille gekauft hatte, konnte ich mich zum Lesen wieder betten. Und erst vor drei Tagen war Streulicht eingetroffen, das ich dann geradezu rauschhaft verschlungen hatte.





Es fällt mir noch immer schwer zu sagen, was diesen Text so fesselnd und besonders macht. Sicher, es ist ein moderner Bildungsroman, der auch als Autosoziobiografie gehandelt wird. Doch das Poetische scheint mir das Soziologische zu übertreffen. Vor allem ist der Text voller Ambivalenzen, die für die Protagonistin ebenso offen zu bleiben scheinen wie für die Leserschaft, also zumindest für mich:










Die Rede vom „Gesicht“ ist geradezu leitmotivisch. Das Kapitel hebt an mit: „Mein Gesicht war etwas, das ich verstecken wollte.“ Was für ein Satz! Was für eine Selbstbeobachtung! Hören wir hier die spätere Reflexion der Erzählerin oder die Formulierung der beschriebenen Protagonistin? Eine Formulierung, die zwar mit dem Wunsch harmoniert, „[e]ine unverfängliche, alltägliche Geschichte“ zu erzählen, doch nicht mit der verletzlichen Exponiertheit, die die Erzählerin mit dieser biografischen Verallgemeinerung präsentiert. Und geht es denn für die Protagonistin wirklich um Unverfänglichkeit oder nicht doch oder zumindest ebenso sehr um das im Sturz beinahe verletzte Auge? Zumal auf letzteres in der Schilderung einer Narbe unterm Auge zum Ende des Romans nochmals rekurriert wird („Das schwindende Kollagen führte auch dazu, dass langsam eine Narbe sichtbar wurde unter meinem linken Auge“, heißt es 155 Seiten später). Oder war die Narbe doch von dem Hundebiss, der bereits zu Beginn erwähnt wird? (Aber der Arzt hatte doch versichert, dass „nichts zurückbleiben“ werde.) So legen sich die Möglichkeiten der verschiedenen Lesarten und auch der Selbstinterpretationen der Protagonistin und Erzählerin fortschreitend wie Schichten übereinander, ohne dass sie zwingend auf eine bestimmte Schicht reduziert würden. Von der “Sauberkeit und Sorgfalt” will ich gar nicht erst anfangen.





Wie nach Filmen bin ich immer auch bei Romanen gespannt, nachher Besprechungen zu lesen, um den inneren Dialog auszuweiten. Eine habe ich bisher gelesen. Und das barsche und meines Erachtens irrige Urteil am Ende ärgert mich so sehr, dass ich mich innerlich an eine Replik mache.





Aber während ich dies schreibe, bin ich mir sicher, dass ich dem Reichtum dieses Romans nie gerecht werden könnte. Nicht mal mit geübten Augen. Aber weiterlesen will ich. Den nächsten Roman.