The author Tim Parks (amongst others) suggested people’s short attention spans, as a result of the onslaught of information and messages they are constantly subjected to, is killing the larger ‘literary’ works, we used to see. I think this is arguable when you consider that the Booker prize went to the largest book in its history last year, and many children’s books are published at 200/300 pages. This intrigued me; do I feel my attention span has been prematurely shortened by being one of the internet generation?
I read books, lots of books, as well as eBooks, magazines, short stories and newspapers. If I define what I read by size (something I have never consciously done before) I would say I choose based on when and where I’m reading. Going on holiday? Hand me my eReader, complicated journey with lots of waiting around? Short story compilation it is then, bedtime reading each night? Bring out the mighty tome in the corner…
I do, it seems, discriminate on size, but not in the black and white way the article suggests, rather in a shades of grey where time=size for me, although if a books size puts me off at all it is usually because I don’t want to carry the thing around (sorry Martina Cole and George R R Martin, but if it doesn’t fit in my bag it’s not happening for me)
So how big does a book have to be before you decide not to pick it up? Or alternatively, are short stories too short for you to bother with?
- The Muser
No comments:
Post a Comment