Has reading become less popular? Or not?

I wonder, /book/.

Has reading become less popular? Are people reading less? Are good writers less successful today then they were 50 years ago and more?

Or maybe not? Movies - that's nothing new and not a "threat," people always had Opera for that, same expensive to produce, in your face, full of shit entertainment with rare, few between good examples. Never stopped writers from writing, readers from reading.

TV? But modern people spend less time at home then they do going to work, doing nothing at work, and going back home. Only THEN they watch TV before they go to sleep, and often people "watch" TV... while reading a book, right?

Graphic novels, any graphic novels, leave alone good ones, are rare compared to normal novels. I think maybe we have a thousand new novels for every new graphic novel. And most of the time they somehow are never good. Never ever good. Somehow. Nobody likes them, they're all fads, people know the characters, but only kids really read the books themselves.

Yet I wonder. I bet I missed quite a bit of stuff. I wonder, if reading has really become less popular. I somehow think that perhaps Shakespeare, too, thought reading has become less popular in his age, and so did Dostoyevskii back in the XIX century, and every author ever. I wonder. Stephen King is successful as hell and earns more money than anyone, and Harry Potter, I think the books earn more than the movies (neer read a single Potter book, don't know if they're any good; probably not). I don't know.

Graphic novels, never good? I beg to differ.

  I really haven't read many graphic novels at all but of those that I have, Preacher, Sandman, Ghost World, Watchmen and 100 Bullets all really impressed me.

 As to the wider question, maybe a little. Certain people who might have read trashy novels in the past now probably watch trashy tv instead. Certain people who might have read better novels in the past maybe now occupy themselves with video games and suchlike. Personally I guess I might read somewhat more if I didn't have readily available music, porn, visual media and computer games on my desktop pc. Then again, maybe I would just find some other hobby.

And most of the time they somehow are never good. Never ever good.

Wat. Concrete, Sandman, Kampung Boy, fucking TRANSMET, Global Frequency, &c., &c.

People are almost certainly reading less and it's very unfortunate.

There are a fair number of people who do still read, but the amount who know what a good book is are definitely the minority. On the other hand, books like Harry Potter and Twilight, while mediocre (well, HP at least, Twilight is utter shit), are still read by at least SOME people. While they certainly aren't nearly as good as many other titles available out there, at least people are reading something.

Also, on the subject of visual media and comics, I'd have to say that comics count as reading. Some of the stuff I've read I would consider to be very high quality which is almost all the stuff previously mentioned (Lucifer's another really good one). Some videogames are practically visual novels and while they take away part of the imaginative ability required to read a book, they are no less thought-provoking (Xenogears/saga). Even some FPS games, possibly one of the most mindless genres of videogames, can have good stories, i.e. Half-Life.

So, yeah, people read less, and many of the sub-cultures today even discourage it, but at least the practice hasn't become completely extinct.

>>3
all of these are terrible, grow some taste faggot

>>5
Go back to your garbage, garbage-lover.

>>4
I don't really see how Half-Life counts as reading. Planescape or System Shock, sure.

>>7

I was really referring more to the second one(s), which, in my opinion, has a good story. I also have yet to play those games, but I've heard good things.

And it isn't necessarily "reading," per se, but more of what I would consider to be an acceptable substitute of sorts. Which isn't to say that one should ever forgo reading entirely in favor of videogames, movies, and graphic novels, no matter how good they are, but on the other hand they aren't as mindless as some might think.

OP here,
oh fuck, I shouldn't have mentioned the comics.

>>9
Got that right. I'm still filled with RAGE.

>>10
sorry dude, but comics books aren't an acceptable artistic form, unless they're japanese of course

>>11
unless they're japanese of course
You're not helping my rage level any.

Reading has not become that much less popular if at all.  The simple fact of the matter is that for vast portions of human history very very few people can read.  Now, at least in the states, hearing about someone being illiterate is rare and usually shocking.  There was a brief time that showed a high spike in reading for pleasure, but even then there were plenty of other things vying for people's attention.

Borders, Barnes and Nobles, Amazon books.  The fact that those three huge businesses are profitable even in the wake of economic troubles shows that reading is HUGE as a past time compared to what it once was.

I think it has more to do with age groups.  When I was little, I'd read nonstop because school only took up seven hours of my day.  I haven't touched a novel since I've been in college because there's just not enough time.  Every old person I know reads all the time though, so it's like a reverse bell curve.

>>16
I haven't touched a novel since I've been in college because there's just not enough time.
You're working too hard.

people do read less. people used to read during their spare time. now they watch movies and tv and only read during vacation. writers today are also getting lazy. bret easton ellis and chuck palahniuk are good examples. they both suck. comparing them to anyone like kafka or even vonnegut is like comparing dog shit to steak.

>>18
You don't think there were shitty writers back in the day?

>>18

i dont know why anybody would read either of those two anyway, even if they could write well

the stories and characters suck