While reading “Why Read?”, I couldn’t help but agree with Edmundsons argument. Well the argument the emphasized the lack of enthusiam that todays students seem to have. Or how it could be deemed socially awkward to have a vibrant passion, to question authority akin to Nirvanas “It smells like teen spirit”. It’s not hard to see the display of the constant charade of cool that many in my generation seem to thrive upon. This I can attest too.
However I cannot agree to the fact that reading should only be done with the purpose of knocking down walls so to speak. I don’t agree that in order to have deep fulfillment that a person should deprive themselves of entertainment. My question is, why is it wrong for a person to pick up a book with the mere intention of enjoying it? Or why can’t I have spirtual or emotional growth while having fun simultaneously? Sure when one looks at if from a philosophical stand point, fulfillment may seem like a serious “chore”. But doesn’t philosophy mean “The Love of Learning”. The last time I checked, when you love something you enjoy doing it.
Edmundson certainly hits some points squarely on the head. However it definitely seemed to be a myriad of unfinished points/questions that he left floating in the air. I truly believe that this book is intended for everyone to practice their critcal thinking skills. If not that, then it has to be nothing more than a stream of consciousness.