Perhaps you’ve seen the ad campaign for the new search engine, Bing. The basic structure of the ads is formulaic: someone asks a simple question, and the question sets the hearer off on a stream of consciousness, spouting search engine results that have nothing to do with the original question. The campaign is called “Search Overload Syndrome,” and it’s not too far from the reality of what the internet is doing to our brains. Or at least that’s the thesis of Nicholas Carr in his book The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to our Brains (minus the reference to the Bing ad campaign).
Carr is no Luddite: though an English major at Dartmouth, he has been riding the computer wave since before it really took off in the mid-80s, and he readily admits his addiction to Blu-ray, Wi-Fi, Netflix, Pandora, and YouTube. Nevertheless, Carr doesn’t let this addiction blind him to the very real downsides to our growing dependence on multimedia technology, particularly the Internet.
As the dust jacket notes, the book is “part intellectual history, part popular science, and part cultural criticism,” and Carr pulls it off with aplomb. Drawing on such diverse sources as Socrates and Plato, Augustine, Nietzsche, Stanley Kubrick’s 2001, and modern studies on neuroscience, he makes a compelling case that the new technologies have negatively affected our capacity for “deep reading,” and thus for deep thinking. Usually when people debate new technology, be it the radio, the television, or the computer, the point at issue is the content the media provide rather than the medium itself. Carr seeks to redress this deficiency. Carr asks not whether the content available on the internet is good or bad – rather, he asks how the nature of the medium affects the way we think.
The Internet is not the first technology to alter the way we think. Carr points to cartography and clocks as inventions whose effects extended beyond their original purpose. Maps, of course, were originally intended to help people navigate and reach places they had never been before. Once they came into common use, though, they offered human beings a new way to conceptualize the world. A similar change accompanied the invention of the clock, which led society to conceive of time as discrete units and to construct more precise schedules. Examples could be multiplied. Upon abandoning writing by hand for an early version of the typewriter, Nietzsche noted how the device changed his writing style. With each of these changes, there is both loss and gain.
Carr focuses primarily, though not exclusively, on the loss that the Internet has precipitated. In my first post to this blog, I suggested that the Internet generates or reinforces ADD. I made that claim simply based on experience. It would seem that science actually backs this up. According to Carr, studies have shown that the nature of the Net as a multimedia technology actually impedes our ability to memorize and to read carefully. The reason for this is the way our brains work. In a nutshell (and oversimplifying dramatically), Carr describes the Internet as a multimedia “distraction device.” The combination of text, images, video, and audio overstimulates our brains and thus reduces our ability to focus. Moreover, our reliance on technology has impaired our memory, making the act of memorization more rather than less difficult. Unsurprisingly, one of the primary engines driving the explosion in this technology is money. To take the most obvious example, Google has an investment in making us surf the web faster and faster. The more links we click on, the more opportunities Google has to create new ads and thus to make more money.
Again, the book is not an anti-technology screed. Nevertheless, Carr does raise some reasonable cautions about where this technology might lead us, and at what cost the information superhighway comes. He also offers some (to my mind sad) prognostications. Though he doesn’t expect the book to disappear completely, he does see society returning to a more stratified literacy, with only a small elite preserving the ability to read deeply, while society at large continues down the path toward shallow thinking. Whether he is right remains to be seen, of course, but the science would seem to support his hypothesis.
On the whole, The Shallows is a quick and engaging read. Carr has an easygoing style, and he covers a number of fascinating topics: the development of writing and different media, from clay tablets to parchments to the codex; neuroscience; the thoughts of poets and other deep thinkers on the way the brain works. The structure of the book wittily reflects the nature of internet thinking, with digressions periodically disrupting the flow of the argument. More seriously, he cautions us about the reduction of thought to information and data and the potential loss of our capacity for reflection and contemplation. The book helped explain why my students don’t read books (Carr even quotes a Rhodes Scholar from Florida State – a philosophy major, no less – who says that he doesn’t read books!). It also reinforced my decision to keep this book project going and to limit my time on the web. Moral of the story: get off the blog, and go read a book! Your brain will thank you!
Four down, (at least) forty-eight to go.
Ta,
J
I’m putting on my crank hat for a moment: When books first became widely available, I wonder if people lamented the fading ability to remember and recount epic poems, books of the Bible, and tales of mythology. Did they bewail the passing emphasis on oral tradition and aural focus? Did the smarty-pants types (the fore-runners of Rhodes Scholar/philosophy majors?) no longer spend time in the story circle but instead huddled in isolation to … read??
Perhaps we are losing some ability to focus, although I cringe every time someone equates that with ADD. (I can only wear one crank hat at a time, so I’ll save the speech about serious neurological condition, not culturally determined, often misunderstood, etc.) I frankly meet this with a shrug. I acknowledge that there might be some impact on the ability of our brains to process information, but I’m not convinced that this is an unmitigated Very Bad Thing. In fact, I don’t think I’m convinced that we’ve been in some golden age of unstratified literacy, in which the great masses of people spent time reading, processing, and reflecting on books. Might it be that what perplexes Nicholas Carr is not really a return to stratified literacy, but rather that the (relatively few) people who did used to spend more time with books now spend less?
Whoa there, HMo, easy with the crank hat. Remember, this is a blog post, and I can’t exactly squeeze every detail into a few paragraphs. Yes, Carr discusses the phenomenon you mention. Socrates, for example, cautioned against adopting the practice of writing because he believed it would hamper our ability to memorize and retain thoughts. Plato, by contrast, advocated the “upstart” technology of writing, and (obviously) western civilization followed his lead, which led to many advances. Was writing an unmitigated success? Not necessarily – I do think the human ability to memorize slowly but surely deteriorated. Do I think we shouldn’t have taken up writing? Of course not – the benefits certainly have outweighed the losses. It’s possible that this will be true of the Internet, as well, but so far I’m skeptical (even though I’m very grateful for the conveniences the Internet offers).
Regarding your second point, perhaps I’m too loose with the term “ADD.” This is not a major point of Carr’s book. In fact, he uses the term only twice, more or less in passing, though he does note that some studies link ADD with the overloading of working memory (precisely a neurological condition, but one exacerbated by the culturally determined medium of the Internet). I tried to make it clear that Carr doesn’t see the Internet and its effects as an unmitigated Very Bad Thing, and neither do I. He’s a lot more nuanced about literacy than I could convey in a brief blog post. Nevertheless, I think it’s both that fewer people are reading deeply (seriously, just talk to any undergraduate), and that fewer people are reading books.
As for our philosophy major Rhodes Scholar, here’s the quotation: “Sitting down and going through a book from cover to cover doesn’t make sense. It’s not a good use of my time, as I can get all the information I need faster through the Web.” The point is that the Internet encourages people to equate information with knowledge, and to see books as repositories of information rather than as a means to achieve wisdom and understanding. You’re not going to understand Plato or Augustine or Kant or Nietzsche or any of the great thinkers by (effectively) reading the Cliffs Notes.
Thanks for the opportunity to clarify.
-J
Great Post 🙂
I’ve taken my crank hat off, but I’m not quite ready to set it down. I agree with the point that it’s a fallacy to equate information with knowledge, and certainly it shouldn’t be conflated with wisdom. I still wonder if this shift is being overstated, though. How many people were ever careful, thoughtful readers of philosophy or theology or even classic literature? Perhaps Carr posits the lack of reading by undergraduates as an example. I think he’s right about the facts of the matter, but not about the importance — after all, undergraduates used to have to master Greek and Latin (and often French and German or Russian), and few people today think that college graduates who don’t have 2 ancient languages and 3 modern languages are unequipped to go forth and do good in the world or inherently poorly educated. The mere existence of the change doesn’t convince me that it’s bad.
I do have concerns about the negative impacts of technology. I do think it’s probably better for your brain to cozy up the fire with Plato’s Republic than to check Facebook, Skype, and watch TV (all at the same time). And I do think this review is thoughtful and well-written. I’m just not convinced by Carr’s thesis that the changes wrought by technology represent a shift that is either such a departure from the way things were or such a negative prognostication of things to come.
I like how you summarize your thoughts & carefully articulate your point of view, Joseph; great points, great blog.
JB
But it seems the book confuses the causes for the decrease in literacy. The internet is the way it is because that’s what get people attention. In other words, it’s what we want.
The only reason the majority of people in the eighteen hundreds read more than people read today is because that was the only option they had. Television and the internet haven’t changed the way people are. Rather they’ve uncovered the basic truth of human nature that people will generally do as little work as possible.
Lock me in a prison cell, and chances are, I’ll get way more writing done than I do now, but that doesn’t mean that the prison cell is preferable to freedom. Today it means more to be literate than it did in the past, because now it involves a choice between reading and other forms of distraction. Who is willing to say that having more choices is a negative?
As a teacher, I agree wholeheartedly. Short attention spans are making it harder to teach critical thinking about subjects that students should care about deeply. It took me years of reading to develop a perspective on literature that informs my teaching style. If I did not have a clear perspective I don’t think I could engage anyone.
My students can make witty remarks, but they can’t build a 4 sentence paragraph clearly and thoughtfully (and I teach high school). But boy can they text!
Can you say, “rationalization”? The argument that every change is really the same, that people ALWAYS complain about changing technologies minimizes our responsibility to look harder at our actions.
Mr. Marshall — my thoughts exactly. My other thought about this well-constructed review: Isn’t it ironic that there’s so much to read on the Internet about a book that warns us about reading on the Internet?
Also, thank heavens “Carr has an easygoing style” and The Shallows “is a quick and engaging read.” Otherwise, the drained and leaky Internet readers would never get through his book.
I fell into the Internet Mind Warp a few years ago. As an avid reader, I realized I was turning to Facebook, e-mail, and popculture websites for entertainment. Just in the last year and a half I’ve put an intentional focus on shutting the computer off and picking up a book. I find that I am a little less wired by the end of the day and a lot more balanced. Great post & congrats on being Freshly Pressed!
-Tori@TheRamblings
Yeah, I’d been noticing the same thing in myself for a few years now. It was my friend and co-blogger Cecilia that inspired me to jump back into books (hence, ironically, the blog). Thanks for stopping by!
-J
This really seems like a fascinating read — I’m excited to pick it up! 🙂
It is fascinating, and on the whole a fun one, too. Carr is perhaps more balanced than I make him out to be. Hope you enjoy it!
-J
Wow! I usually love books about cognitive psychology, and this book seems like it’d be right up my alley. Thanks for posting about this!
My pleasure – hope you enjoy the book!
-J
Having taught college composition classes, I’ve noticed students’ diminishing abilities to read deeply, to read well. Sounds like a book I should read. Thanks for sharing and congrats on Freshly Pressed!
Best wishes from Haiti,
Kathy
I think it’s well worth a read (obviously). Hope you find it useful!
-J
I am an English teacher who goes back and forth on this issue. On the one hand, I witness the many problems my students have in reading in a focused way for periods longer than five minutes. The technology they use to read not only offers more shallow content, but appeals to their desire for instant gratification (finding exactly what they need when they need it, rather than poring over material).
On the other hand, I am also skeptical of the slippery slop ideas of generations becoming more and more ignorant. We do need to help students read on a deeper level, but I don’t see literacy being thrown to they wayside anytime soon.
Thanks for the post! Interesting stuff.
Yeah, I guess I have a tendency toward the apocalyptic. I hope it’s something that can be corrected. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Thank you for writing about this and using a book as reference. I am now eager to get my own mittens on a copy and read it cover to cover. Daily I am astounded at the ignorance, narcassism and expectancy of “generation me” sadly I see more of the ill effects of technology than the good (advances in health, science aside). Like you and a few others on here i am beginning to reject it and embrace a good book and an “in person” conversation than online chatting.
Keep the words and reads comin’! pretty please of course 😉
Thanks for stopping by and for your kind words. 🙂 The words and the reads will keep a comin’. BTW, love the title of your blog.
-J
As a teacher, I’ve noticed great resistance to reading the assinged material, but when a book has gotten their interest they do read it cover to cover and with a deep reading. My problem was the students had such narrow interests that finding a novel for them that they would like to read that wasn’t just a “booty book” became nearly impossible.
I’m glad to hear that with the right material your students do read entire books, but I still worry, in light of some of the studies Carr describes, about retention. At least some studies suggest that the hypertext media weakens our ability to concentrate and retain what we read. If you find a solution, let me know! 🙂
-J
They can’t read books cuz they’re st00pid. Duh.
I really liked this tongue-in-cheek review of the book on Amazon:
i mean wtf, how culd u say something like this? teh internet is a wonderful tecnological advancement and it has connected every1 and made stuff easier. for instence u dont have to go out 2 shop nemore, u could do it from home. plus other stuff 2, like finding out info about stuff. any1 who says the internet makes us dumb is a moron and doesnt like tecnology. i mean, be4, u had 2 go to teh movies and sit for like 2 hours watching a movie but with utube u culd watch a 2-min movie and be just as entertained. and u had 2 go 2 the library and read books i mean, wtf? wikipedia is soooo much easier! neway this books suuuuuucks.
Most of society makes the fallacy that reading books is for the same purpose as getting facts from the internet- for information. However, the process of reading is vastly different, there is an engagment with the words on the page that is missing. I am in no way against audio books, but even listening to a story is a very different (and I think less satisfying) experience than reading the exact same story. Even just reading a text for information is a different experience. The brain functions in different ways, and makes less connections.
Absolutely – that’s part of Carr’s point, that *every* medium affects the way we take in and interpret information – as well as how we generate it.
Interestingly enough, I’ve found my vocabulary aided by audio books. I was die hard against them for a long time. I love to write as well as read – particularly rich fiction or something which stimulates me to think.
However, I have this vast vocabulary and half the time I don’t know how to pronounce the words rattling around in my head. Unabridged audio books have opened up some of those words I could see in my mind, knew the meaning and usage but couldn’t have used them in a conversation. Assuming who I was speaking to would have even had an inkling what I was talking about.
I could have looked them up in the dictionary and puzzled out the phonetic spelling but they tend to stick better when I hear them in aloud.
That aside, this was a great post. It’s definitely something I find interesting, myself, and will check the local library for a copy to read.
Congrats on the freshly pressed!
Thanks for the comment and for stopping by!
-J
I wrote about this very topic on my blog yesterday — although inadvertently. I was talking about all technology making us ruder because it makes us want instant gratification in every aspect of our lives — even from people. I’d love to know what you think about that idea. Especially in light of the information you gained from reading The Shallows.
Crystal
http://www.crystalspins.com
Interesting thought. I had never considered the instant gratification angle on this, and it’s not something Carr directly touches on directly, other than Google’s incentive to get us to surf faster and faster. This might be the case. (BTW, if you haven’t seen it, look up Louis CK’s appearance on Conan O’Brien – it really captures what you’re talking about quite well.) I also think the anonymity of the Internet (even I’m using a pseudonym) emboldens people to be less civil on blogs, forums, etc. Maybe that spills over into other parts of our lives. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
hey, thanks for writing a very good review.
Carr has an interesting assertion and it’ll be more interesting to get a copy of and read The Shallows.
maybe, internet era kids will also need new and different methods of teaching and coaching? just a thought… 🙂
It could be that different teaching methods will help. It also could be, as my friend HMo notes above, that this really isn’t changing things all that much, though I do worry when a Rhodes Scholar in the humanities can’t be bothered to read a whole book.
-J
a scholar in the humanities? not a good sign. has it gone that bad?
i agree with ancaparema. we have a problem but hopefully, it’s not a down and out situation.
i read a lot myself and find it hard to accept that the younger generations no longer do. after years of coaxing my nephews and nieces to read, to no avail, i made my blog. i said i’d follow and teach them online. they rarely visit the site on account of it being informative, educational and therefore, unentertaining. :-
short attention span is a concern both on personal and public [worldwide] grounds.
btw, congrats on being freshly pressed. :]
Funnily, I decided to work on my blog before reading a few chapters from a good book, and found your featured post telling me to “get off the blog, and go read a book!”
Consider it the voice of God. 😉
-J
I, too, have heard that our ability to memorize information has been reduced because we no longer have the need to memorize things. It’s a bit Darwinian, but in reverse: evolution is supposed to improve upon a species, whereas our collective reduced capacity to remember (if that is so) seems to be a step backward. I am certainly not immune, although I chalk it up more to personal laziness than anything else.
Meanwhile, I love books, but I often hold back actually reading them because I know it’s going to require that I devote time and brainpower in order to enjoy the experience. In the meantime, I’ll be missing out on all the cool stuff on the Internet – can’t have that!
And I fully admit to pandering to my short attention span by having created a blog, Short Attention Span Fiction, in which I post original short stories, typically less than 1800 words. Anything longer would require devoting more time to one idea than I’d like. In the spirit of the Internet, I like to keep moving along.
Thank you for the post and congratulations on being Freshly Pressed.
-Jen http://sasfiction.wordpress.com
Sounds like a cool idea for a blog – I’ll have to check it out. I had stopped reading so much because of the distractions of the Net, and I joined this blog to get back into the habit. I’m sure I’ll miss a ton of interesting stuff on the web, but I’m happy with the trade-off. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Actually, SAS Fiction Girl, the theory of biological evolution doesn’t speak to the idea of objective improvement or regression- such things are, even by the voice of the most extreme naturalistic reductionists, coincidental. What biological evolution is thought to improve is the ability to survive in a local context; “negative” evolutionary steps can be, from the perspective of natural selection, improvements. By this evolutionary theory, a shrinking attention span, a lessened ability to memorize, and even a smaller capacity for deep thought would only arise if they are, in some way a good thing- not for society, or for personal meaning, or for morality, but for the affected individuals’ ability to pass on their respective genes. Thanks for bringing the topic up, though; interaction between major world views is a personal favorite topic, whether on blogs, other internet posts, or books written by long-dead authors.
– Other J
Actually it was Bill Gates who first proposed the concept that the world would be be off if we had a sea of infotainment constantly pumped into to our ear-pods, eyeballs, and consciousness.
MTV paved the way for what these days we consider enriching material, which translates into sensory stimulation rather then relaxation and contemplation.
We are paying a big price for that without a doubt.
Amen on MTV as one of the sources, though Carr doesn’t mention this. Thanks for stopping by.
-J
Carr’s book is worth reading if for nothing more than provoking this kind of discussion! Did you see the review by Douglas Coupland in last Sunday’s NYT Review of Books? Marshall McLuhan had more insights into the internet and he died before it was born!
I haven’t read Coupland’s review, but I’ll have to check it out. I had no idea a little blog post like this would generate this much discussion, but I’m heartened that others are at least thinking about these issues, wherever they come down on them. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
I am a Gen Y-er and only recently have I started realizing how short my attention span is. I didn’t even read your blog post in one sitting; I clicked a few different internet tabs, checked my email, changed songs on my itunes etc before I hit the last sentence. Recently, I picked up a book to read and only got through 5 pages before getting antsy (though, it might be because the book is boring and not because I have ADD). At this point, multi-tasking is second nature for me, and it happens subconsciously. Being a multi-tasker is rewarded in our society today, every job description I read all want ‘multi-taskers’ that can work in ‘fast-changing’ environments. So it’s not a surprise that the majority of kids are turning to the internet and not books.
I don’t know if the internet is affecting my ability to memorize but I can safely say it has not impacted my ability for deep cognitive thinking on a variety of subjects. The amount of information and blogs like yours help stimulate my thinking and encourages discussion. Like you said, there will be gains and losses with any change that we encounter. Guess we have to wait a few more decades before we see the results of how the internet really changed us.
Interesting blog post! I hope I can pick up Carr’s book and read it (and finish it)
Ha! I’m a Gen X-er, and I did the same thing with your post – noticed a new email on gmail and flipped over before finishing your comment. 🙂 It’s true that most jobs want multi-taskers – I think it’s all about efficiency. I guess we’ll have to wait and see what the consequences are.
I hope you do pick up Carr’s book and read it – it’s a fun read.
-J
I’m a senior in high school, and I actually managed to finish this in one sitting (amazing!) mostly because I am a horrific multitasker. (Of course, I did so while distracted from my college applications.) I’m probably the only person in my high school so adamant about doing things one at a time! I’m actually far, far more efficient that way. However, I’m guilty as everyone else is of getting lost in labyrinths of links, losing hours and hours of my time, even sleep, because I have to look at one more interesting thing. And I find it hard to write essays that remain on-topic, with cogent theses. I’m too used to tangents. I’ve even noted that I read far more articles and short stories than novels these days, although I have retained my ability to read deeply — a primary source for a class, or a few scenes of Shakespeare, or a 20-page article — often in one sitting. I know many others in my school who aren’t this way. I agree that this is cause for concern, especially considering how easily surface-level thinking can be manipulated. But hasn’t most of history, perhaps even all of history, featured a stratified literacy? If we could somehow manage to equalize literacy, this would be quite a novel feat. It’s only that the particular obstacles to deep literacy have changed. Perhaps they have even intensified. But they were always there.
Allie-
I’m glad to hear that you’ve managed to resist the trend in your generation, and that you continue to do more serious reading. A couple of other folks have raised the same point that you do about stratified literacy, and it’s a point well taken. I guess what bothered me most in the book was the people who are *supposed* to be intellectuals who aren’t reading books – to wit, a Rhodes Scholar and philosophy major who said, “Sitting down and going through a book from cover to cover doesn’t make sense. It’s not a good use of my time, as I can get all the information I need faster through the Web.” Now obviously the problem is deeper than the internet – the guy doesn’t know the difference between information and wisdom and understanding. But I think the medium reinforces this misunderstanding, and the fact that some of the (supposedly) brightest students in America are thinking this way does not bode well. At any rate, thanks for stopping by, and keep reading!
-J
Sounds intriguing…can’t wait to read it. Great post!
Thanks! Hope you enjoy it! (I should get a cut from Carr for all his new readers 😉
-J
I am a Gen Y-er and only recently have I started realizing how short my attention span is. I didn’t even read your blog post in one sitting; I clicked a few different internet tabs, checked my email, changed songs on my itunes etc before I hit the last sentence. Recently, I picked up a book to read and only got through 5 pages before getting antsy (though, it might be because the book is boring and not because I have ADD). At this point, multi-tasking is second nature for me, and it happens subconsciously. Being a multi-tasker is rewarded in our society today, every job description I read all want ‘multi-taskers’ that can work in ‘fast-changing’ environments. So it’s not a surprise that the majority of kids are reading less books.
I don’t know if the internet is affecting my ability to memorize but I can safely say it has not impacted my ability for deep cognitive thinking on a variety of subjects. The amount of information and blogs like yours help stimulate my thinking and encourages discussion. Like you said, there will be gains and losses with any change that we encounter. Guess we have to wait a few more decades before we see the results of how the internet really changed us.
Interesting blog post! I hope I can pick up Carr’s book and read it (and finish it)
Excellent post! I think the attention span for almost anything keeps shortening, we seem to want everything NOW…I’m off to read a book! :o)
Thanks for stopping by and for the comment – hope you enjoy the book. 🙂
-J
I found this “Freshly Pressed” posting interesting, but I disagree with the conclusions. My wife and I have a State Farm Insurance Agency of twenty-seven years in McKinney, Texas; without a doubt the internet has proved out to be a valuable resource for us. Our ability to keep in contact with our customers and share info of similar tastes has lead to much success in our business lifes.
Thanks for stopping by and for the comment. I didn’t at all intend to suggest that the Internet is a bad thing, and neither does Carr. The point is that with every technology there are trade-offs. The Net has been great for keeping in touch with folks – I use Skype and Facebook regularly. The question is, what are we losing in the process of adopting this technology?
-J
I like the fact that you find the gloomier predictions sad – as a writer who reads a lot of opinion pieces regarding the publishing industry, I’ve heard a lot about the death of the book in the last decade, but I still prefer reading a real book last thing at night, rather than using a tablet computer or netbook. I still read between three and five books a week, and some of them give me pause for some serious thought. The last one I finished was “Ender in Exile”, by Orson Scott Card, which had some great points to raise about parenting and the guilt reaction.
I’d also say that people don’t need an excuse to not read books. I’ve met people who don’t read books because they say they’re too busy, or because the set texts in school or college put them off, or because (in the case of my Father in Law) nothing decent has been written in the last fifty years. Real writing will survive, I think, though the delivery medium may change in form. I would argue that the phenomenal change in computing technology of the last twenty years is only the beginning, and that technology in twenty years time will be far beyond what we anticipate now.
I think (and hope) the death of the book is an overstatement – Carr points out the various technologies the book has outlasted. But I do wonder about how well people will read in the future. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
You’re touching very well here on what I thought while reading this article. The findings about how we think are interesting, but there have always been people who avoided reading books, and if that number is growing, I believe that it probably has more to do with the way we view knowledge as a culture at the moment, especially the humanities.
A college education is seen by many people as simply a step to obtaining better employment. That’s the reason most people go to college, and many employers don’t actually care if the degree is in a relevant field. They simply see that you’ve gone through an ordeal that proves you’re willing to work hard. Same with the k-12 system. It’s not important how much of the information you retain, we’re often told that “you’re never going to need this in real life.” It’s just important that you demonstrated your abilities and got certain ranks and a certificate of completion. So school reading, for a lot of people, is something you do with a goal in mind: get the answers, and satisfy the instructor that you did the assignment, take the test, and forget about it.
This is especially true because of the larger class sizes and the way grading often works: In my last college course, which was to teach public speaking, our grades were in no way based on the quality of the speech to entertain or how well the person in question gave the speech.
They were based on certain “signposts” the teacher gave us that she could pick out to grade us on, such as the length of the speech, the formatting of our index cards compared to the ones in our book, use a certain number of visual aids, etc.
Those who come up with curricula are being pressed from every direction at once, and the pressure to meet certain standards on tests and things and to be able to show results on a piece of paper, as well as being told they must do more work with fewer materials and less respect is definitely part of the reason many people never learn to think and read as deeply as they did in previous generations where knowledge was seen as an end unto itself.
I find that I notice this in myself as well. I can tell when looking up some information that if I know I can just look it up again, I don’t put any effort into remembering it, and then I forget.
I can kind of tell when I’m going to remember something, and it’s always something that I can’t look up easily on the internet.
Me, too. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Remember the craze for book clubs? Most of those devolved into living room picnics and lighter reads, despite the heft of some of Oprah’s picks.
Deeply engaging with anything — books, work, conversations — requires a commitment of time and energy, two things many people already feel overdrawn on. That commitment only happens when the perceived reward justifies the effort. When the level of thinking behind information increases, the audience rises to that new level. This excellent blog post is a case in point: look how thoughtful the comments have been.
Technologies are simply the delivery format. Video diaries, at their heart, are strikingly similar to cave paintings. They are a record of the human experience and thus have the capacity to spark discussions among their viewers. Many, many blog posts, You Tube videos, tweets, movies (etc.) are shallow, but that is equally true of books. It isn’t wrong for people to create or consume fluff, but it would be wrong of publishers (teachers / bloggers / film makers / etc.) to assume fluff should become the new deep.
Instead, we distributors of art and information should aim to raise the bar more often by creating content that consumers consider worth the effort. First reactions aren’t necessarily final reactions, but they are the ones recorded in the of-the-moment experiences on the internet. Assuming this immediacy of response trains people to avoid thinking is probably an oversimplification and certainly a disservice…although a new approach for marketing “deep” wouldn’t hurt.
Thanks, Joseph, for adding another title to my library list!
Thanks for stopping by and for the comment. I agree that there can be shallow books, just as any technology can convey shallow information. However, I was pretty convinced by Carr’s argument that the nature of the *medium* of the Net fosters shallower thinking. This isn’t to say that we can’t use it well to think deeply, but I do think it takes more effort, and not in a good way. At any rate, I hope you enjoy the book.
-J
As with everything else, there are various sides to all this. I’ve always been an avid reader, and pride myself on having a good memory, i.e. the ability to memorize easily…no longer. While I’d like to attribute that–the difficulty of memorizing as compared to my previous ability–to advancing age, I don’t think that is entirely the reason. I don’t read as much as I used to, and not for lack of time either. I think both things have a lot to do with the internet. I enjoy trivia, learning about obscure facts, what my son calls “being a depository of totally useless information”. In that sense, search engines are a God-send. Do a search on any subject, and the page you find will lead you on an endless quest through a gazillion links! Talk about “useless information”! And here, the thing is, I learn a lot about a lot of things, but…can I remember it? Can I even remember where I found it? Previously I could remember whether I read something in a book, a magazine, a newspaper, perhaps even remember which one exactly. But webpages are all the same to me.
On a different note–and perhaps dragging this into a rabbit hole–what is your thinking with regard to audiobooks? I know several people who “love to read”. according to them, but they don’t actually “read”; they listen to audiobooks. I have never been able to get into them, maybe because I find it difficult to understand the reader over the noise of a car engine.
The point I took away from Carr’s book is that *any* medium affects the way we read and think, so yes, listening to an audiobook is different than reading, and reading on a physical page is different than reading on a hypertext web page. How audiobooks are different, I’m not sure. I suppose they would work different parts of the brain and affect attention span, concentration, etc. in different ways. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Speaking as an avid reader, I often put on audio books while doing tasks that take both hands – cooking dinner washing up, painting etc. Trouble is, there is a much lower level of concentration. I’ve even found myself picking up a book and starting to read while the audio book is still playing. Listening to a book doesn’t command the same degree of involvement as reading. (All written from my layperson standpoint – no actual scientific experimentation was undertaken!)
I am prompted to ask if you are familiar with Clay Shirky’s Cognitive Surplus? In it he makes an interesting point that we look at the internet and Web 2.0 as something that is supplanting our culture’s most indulged-in pastime, television-watching. His argument (although I am being reductive here) explores the nature of the sparking of creativity using internet tools, and it offers a more positive approach to the possibilities of the net. I am not referring to Shirky as a means of refuting your points, but it is a less depressing way to look at the role the internet is playing in our lives.
As an rhet-comp-lit teacher I must admit that I have noticed that my students are not as literate as I would like, nor do they understand the importance of critical reading as well as they should. However, I would also point out that I find this to be more a failure of our culture’s approach to education that mirrors shallow reading techniques – more emphasis is placed on accumulating and memorizing information than on studying and analyzing input.
I’m not familiar with Shirky’s book, but it’s worth checking out. Carr does note that television-watching has not diminished with the rise of the internet, but reading books has. Still, it would certainly be worth seeing a more positive take on the Net. I’d be curious to see what kinds of studies Shirky relies on.
I think you’re right that culture has something to do with it, as well. As with all problems, the question is complicated, and I certainly don’t want to suggest that the Internet is the source of all evils – it would be pretty hypocritical of me to blog if I thought that. 🙂 Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Well THAT’S depressing, the information about television. I wish I had the Shirky book at hand – he has some really interesting statistics about college graduates who emerge from college without being able to read critically or relate what they read to their own lives or to the culture at large. I’m using this (which bears out my own teaching experience) as the basis of a study I’m conducting with my class this semester.
I think that the incorporation of internet platforms in the learning process is really valuable, but I strongly oppose the supplanting of current methods with purely web-based ones. For example, a fully digital library removes the three-dimensional aspect of research – I have absolutely no research to support this theory, but I think that combining kinesthetic and mental energy makes the experience more meaningful and thus more concrete (and more effective).
I think I need to do more research myself….
I think when that when the printing press made written text a reality for everyone, the Luddites complained about the loss of creative, independent thought, and the memory conveyed collectively through oral tradition. Suddenly, the “authority” of the printed word became unquestionable, no matter how incorrect it was: any other version of any particular story simply got lost. That’s a lot of valuable knowledge that creates a greater depth of understanding of any topic in particular. So I’m not quick to judge Luddites as “ignorant”, I value them because they turned out to be right, in the long run. But we got literacy as a payoff–or at least, more people can read and write now than they could back then. Everything costs something.
For me, the internet has actually made knowledge and text and thought much more accessible. Yes, text is immediate and often available free of charge, but even better than that is the existence of online communities who gather around the same kinds of interests–people studying the same things as you do, for example. Dialog happens there, specifically around texts: and that dialog is far more essential to deep thought than you’d think. People don’t all use the internet just for facebook and mp3 downloads and bitorrent and porn. Some people also use it to contact colleagues who work/practice/study/teach all over the world, making learning connections that were never possible before and enhancing the caliber of education in a way that simply didn’t exist before. I was certainly able to do this–and I cannot be the only one.
Thanks for stopping by and for the comment. Carr talks about the reactions to the printing press and compares it with the internet – the explosion of new information and more readily available texts. Nevertheless, the main point of the book is not content, but the medium. Again, I agree that the Net offers many positive and useful things. Carr’s question is how the technology itself affects the way we think.
-J
Well, to go back to my original example, the printing press didn’t give us “a lot more information”, it simply gave us a different kind of information–and created a hierarchy of information according to what was officially valued (and what was officially no longer valued). The argument can be made that a great deal of information and broad perspective was lost when the printed word became considered more “truthful” than the spoken word, and the “official”, printed story became the only story. When I think of how much information was lost because it wasn’t written down, it boggles my mind. Consider how many people knew the Iliad by memory, because they could recite it, embellish it, add to it, make it their own (as Homer intended it to be used). Now we get one printed Iliad text, with slight differences depending on who translates the poem. That’s about as clear an example of “superficial” learning as I can think of.
It’s the same with the internet, and the opportunity to suddenly access perspectives, experiences, learning strategies, texts, and realities from sources all over the world that would never have been accessible before, except to the few with the means and abilities. It changes the way we think in that we’re required to be more broadly knowledgeable now, we are confronted with the experiences of people whose cultures and backgrounds are completely different from ours–even if we have an interest in common. The greater depth this adds to the study of any topic was completely out of reach before the internet, so I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that we all experience a superficial kind of learning because the internet and computers have become such an important part of our lives.
I’ve seen this in music as well. Now freed of even the constraints of a CD, I find people more willing to shuffle through partial tracks, rather than hearing a full album, or even the parts of the song they don’t like.
But instead of fearing it, a good composer has to feed into that — and like an author’s fascination with blog posts, which are short, low-depth retreads of information other places, the composer has to do similar things: shorten their pieces, rapid-fire themes, similar ideas. … And then you realize that miniatures, for piano or even full orchestra far predate the Internet. There are even bands and composers who still write pieces that last an hour (or more).
I spoke with a sped teacher once who was developing a new way to teach, involving looking at how people learn and working backwards to a teaching pattern. Maybe authors and other artists need to look at how people are digesting their information — not to create a dumbing-down of the media, but to better provide that depth to eyes, ears, and minds that are somewhat different than 50 years ago…
Very interesting point about the miniatures. I don’t think the Internet is going to abolish all deep reading and thinking, but I do think it will change the proportion of people who do these activities on a regular basis. Perhaps new ways to teach can be found to adapt to new learning styles. Time will tell. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
I question the proportion who ever did. Compare pulp novels to Ulysses, or even epic poetry, which was hardly spat verbatim for 1000 “pages,” but broken down into digestible vignettes. The move from opera to musicals? From No to Kabuki?
Surely, the internet’s vernacular isn’t the highest quality, but neither was what was spoken on the Via Appia. The more interesting thing is that you have traditional “hard” light reading like The Economist, which flourishes on the internet, especially as it has switched to a blog format…
Nice blog, well written, informative, creative….oh, sorry I would keep heaping on praise but I gotta get off the blog and go read a blog.
Blessings,
Ava
xox
Thanks! And, yes, go read a book! 😉
-J
The internet has the potential to overwhelm us however this tendency to “pathologize” everything annoys me. First, no one ever said too much stimulation is bad for ADD. This is the biggest myth out there and I would really like to see the research that backs this up. If that were true, stimulants would not be the first line of treatment. In fact, studies have shown that teenagers today are able to focus better when the information comes from different sources of stimulation. Second, the internet is not the reason we don’t read books. I would argue, The Nook is to blame 🙂 But seriously, today’s teenagers/young people learn differently, relate to the world differently and yes they are open to learning and reading, just in a different way, which many times involves technology. I believe that we are reading. We are learning. We are just doing it in a different way. And no way is better than the other.
I already returned the book to the library, but Carr cites a study or two regarding ADD, though that’s not his main point. Knowing nothing about psychology or meds, I would ask – are medical stimulants the same as the sensory overload that the Internet, or a place like Bourbon Street offers? I think the question is more complex. At any rate, thanks for stopping by.
-J
My daughter has Twain and Doyle placed within my arms reach. I believe she was saying something similar.
Glad to hear it. 🙂 Thanks for stopping by!
-J
I love books like this…I’m going to check it out. Thanks for the review!
(Another great book about the mental state of our younger generations was Generation Me by Jean M. Twenge. A lot of well-researched information about how the vast majority of Americans under 35 have been brought up.
You’re welcome! And thanks for the book recommendation – I’ll have to check it out.
-J
Wonderfully insightful post, and I am definitely inclined to agree! My mom teaches English to high schoolers, and more and more she finds herself changing her teaching methods simply because exactly what you describe seems to be affecting her students, and they basically refuse to read anything. This is definitely a phenomenon we need to be wary of.
Thanks, and thanks for stopping by!
-J
I have medically-diagnosed ADD. I read books. LOTS of books, all the way through. I’ve also recently started blogging. Sonething •like• blogging, anyway. I can read for hours, but I can only write a paragraph at a time.
I’m not certain th
Not sure if this is a joke or not, but I actually know several people who do have ADD and yet can read tons of books. There seem to be lots of different kinds of ADD with many different symptoms. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
No joke. The last fragment of a new paragraph was a bit much, but I do have real ADD (I’m a pretty strong empiricist and I don’t engage in baseless self-diagnosis). I am a voracious reader and I have an interest for expressing myself in writing, but I am seldom able to concentrate very hard on producing anything with the meaning or depth I desire, and I attribute that deficiency at least in part to my ADD. Diagnosed by medical professionals. Some of this attribution for my lack of perseverance is probably just an excuse, however;-). •Some• of it.
Congratulations on Freshly Pressed and congratulations on taking the step to post-a-week-2011! Seems like you’ll have no trouble writing your weekly posts.
As a sophomore in college, I definitely feel (first-hand) the issues that you are addressing in your post. We are often the target of insults from older generations claiming that we don’t know a “damn thing.” It’s true, as I grow older, I notice that me and my peers probably depend on the “world wide web” much more than we should. I, like others who have commented, am working on finding a balance, but unfortunately I feel like a minority in my age group because media and technology DOMINATE our young culture.
That being said, I feel like the Internet can be a wonderful resource when it’s used IN ADDITION TO, not as A SUBSTITUTE to our books. It can be excellent as a probe for further, deeper research, as the Internet often cannot provide all the answers that books can. Unfortunately though, similar to the Philosophy major, many people in our modern-day society feel like the Internet can literally be the only resource used for anything, because it provides all the answers.
One last comment in the direction of a counter-argument:
In an age where generations before us grew up with television, I would argue that the deterioration of our attention span started way before I was born. Therefore, the Internet, with all of its colors, pictures, videos, and animations can finally grab the attention of kids/adults whose attention span was already conditioned to be low by years and years of television. Is it bad that kids are growing up already pre-conditioned to dislike books because all they see growing up is their parents spending hours upon hours in front of the action-packed TV? Yes, very bad. So might there actually be a benefit to a source of information that can keep up with their attention span while being able to teach them something? Hmm… I think so
Thanks for stopping by and for the comment! I absolutely agree that the key is BALANCE, and I’m heartened to hear that there are still college students who recognize the value of reading. I’ve had the occasional student who is a voracious reader of books, but it seems less and less common. Anyway, keep up the good fight!
-J
Great review. I think it is very well written.
However, in regards to the topic of the book…what about the student that doesn’t like to read? What about the student who is literally not “biologically wired” to complete the task of reading easily and efficiently? One hundred or so years ago, being “literate” meant that you could sign your name. It’s what you had to be able to do in order to be a land owner. Now? We have so much language that has to be deciphered before we even get to hooking up a modem, a router, having access to an internet service, and plugging in the computer~let alone finding the research there. One hundred years ago~these students would have been the blacksmiths, the farmers, the architects, the inventors, etc. They are the doers.
Some students read about the great authors of our time. Some students go out and give them something to write about.
A fair point. I don’t at all intend to denigrate professions that don’t require reading, or that everyone has to be an intellectual. My concern is that people who are *supposed* to be the intellectuals – you don’t get much more intellectual than a philosophy major Rhodes Scholar – don’t realize what they’re losing by abandoning books. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
tl;dr.
Just kidding! It’s interesting that you conclude “The Shallows is a quick and engaging read.” Even short books can provoke deep thought!
LOL! 😉 Thanks for stopping by!
-J
I think it’s not just our ability to read deeply, but also to live deeply that has been affected by technology. The conspiracy theory of a friend of mine is that the masses are being kept stupid through addiction to technology and junk food.
I’m not into conspiracy theories (or at least I try not to be 🙂 ), but I don’t think you have to be to see the effects, whatever the causes. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
What is the difference between watching a movie made from a novel i.e. Harry Potter, and reading the book itself?How does our brains work what’s the difference? It is not just merely because the book is more profound and the movie is not, but I guess the point is watching a movie doesn’t require much effort from the brain, unlike when you read deeply, it stirs imagination and pushes the brain to work. Do you guys think there is some relevance to the topic here or to the internet whatsoever?
Exactly. Reading and watching movies activate different neurological functions in the brain. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
The easiest way to get ANYONE to read is by helping them pick out the kind of books they like. I disagree that people cant read anymore because of the Internet. Look at what they made us read in school! Horrible, depressing stuff about wars, slavery, Anne Frank, etc. If my mother hadnt had me reading long before school, I might have felt the same way about books, not because of the Internet, but because of my experience with books.
I have tested my theory on friends and boyfriends. I ask a series of questions to figure out what they like, then go to the library and get them a book. Dont give up on the youngins yet!
LOL yeah, some of the stuff that they used to make us read was not the most fascinating material
Of course, there are more factors involved than the internet. Nevertheless, I do think the medium really dampens our ability to concentrate – I’ve even noticed it in myself today as I’ve responded to various comments. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
I’m very much on the side of the Luddites… I wrote a critique of New York Times criticism of Carr’s book on my blog, Irresponsibility. My argument boils down to this:
“Our brains are big sponges, lo, they can hold a lot of water! But what is the value of merely having information? We can follow all the trails we like but ultimately, in order to act, we need a rationale, a raison d’etre, a guiding principle. Nothing in Johnson’s beloved stream of information will help us determine what do do with it. Data is meaningless without the capacity to process it.”
Thanks for stopping by, and for the link – I’ll have to check out the review and your critique.
-J
I teach English (essay writing and such) at a Toronto college. I spend hours on the Internet, and hours reading books. I believe we focus too much on what, to me, is the effect rather than the cause when it comes to the horrifying inability of our students to read. While the Internet certainly makes it easier to indulge in immediate self-gratification and such, the real culprit is that we long ago stopped teaching and encouraging students to actually think in the first place. Most of my students have been learning the Five Paragraph Essay since grade four, and if ever a more devious and destructive methodology was devised to inhibit any kind of thought process I don’t know what it would be aside from sever brain injury.
With the training to think and analyse, students would not automatically chose the more peripheral and shallow elements of the Internet. That they do says more about the catastrophic collapse of the entire education system than the Internet itself.
I don’t think it needs to be an either/or. I think both the poor state of education and the seeming “knowledge” available on the internet reinforce one another. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
I haven’t read the book, nor have I read the previous comments so maybe already wrote what I am about to.
There has always been, and will continue to be, more morons than smart people in this planet. Before the Internet, my parents blamed the TV for kids/young people not reading as much. My dad is a computer scientist and I have a PhD in Chemistry, so I think that media, or multimedia, is not to blame for any kind illiteracy, but the parents. I wonder how many of your students have parents with strong reading habits and how many of them have parents who read “who stole my grilled cheese”; “Men are from Jupiter” or “Five habits to have a perfect life”; and even worse, how many of your students don’t even have books lying around in their houses!
A philosophy major who doesn’t read books? He will never amount to anything, just like those old dear colleagues who went through chemistry school and still can’t figure the difference between filtration and distillation (they are the ones selling lab equipment; not the ones doing real science at a university).
“Though he doesn’t expect the book to disappear completely, he does see society returning to a more stratified literacy, with only a small elite preserving the ability to read deeply, while society at large continuing down the path toward shallow thinking.” Hasn’t this always been the case?
So I guess my conclusion is we should not be worried about the Internet permeating our lives, we should use it as an integral PART of a whole life experience!
Just my 2cents
PS I like your writing style!
Sounds reasonable. As I mentioned to another commenter, I do think the key is balance, and the problem is that many use the internet as their only source. But perhaps you’re right that these are the morons that we’ve always had with us. 🙂 At any rate, thanks for stopping by!
-J
This is wonderful. I couldn’t agree more. I recently started a Facebook group called Readers Against E-Books. Feel free to join and preserve the sacred written text on actual paper. http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_147311211984688 I also agree with Sarahtherebel. Children need to have more liberty to pick out their own books. “Required reading” just sounds awful, doesn’t it?
Thanks! I’m still on the fence regarding e-readers, but I’m definitely more wary having read Carr’s book. While I do think children need to find their favorite genre, I’m not in favor of absolute autonomy – they also need to be taught to discriminating in their choices.
-J
Great article.
I’m worried that nobody reads my blog because my articles tend to be quite long, and nobody has the attention span to bother reading an entire post!
http://tomcatintheredroom.wordpress.com/
Thanks. Yeah, I find myself skipping or skimming posts that are two long. Again, I think part of that is the nature of the medium. At any rate, thanks for stopping by!
-J
You are dead right. Everyone seems to have a knack of browsing. Try using photos and people seem to stay longer
Commuting to work on buses and trains I’ve noticed a surge in the number of book-reading (as opposed to e-book reading) passengers in the last two years. Some of them keep their heads down and eyes down even as they walk to the car park.
This change might be connected to my shift in jobs – on the route to the previous job, the buses were packed tight both ways. Still, I think it’s an encouraging sign that the LCD screen isn’t all-dominant.
Glad to hear it! Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Pretty interesting idea… did you see Amber Case’s TED Talk about how we’ve become cyborgs because of the way we use technology? Here’s a post about it if you haven’t: http://evologynow.wordpress.com/2011/01/13/human-cyborgs/
I haven’t seen it – thanks for the link and thanks for stopping by!
-J
And we wouldn’t want kids to have to read about any of that yucky stuff like slaves and wars and Anne Frank, now would we? Booooor-ringggg!! Imagine if they actually learned something about history and the lives of real people before their time? Holy crap, they may actually be able to put things into perspective and context. And then what…wisdom? Insight? Compassion? Egad, the thought just gives one the chills. *sigh*
There will – and should – always be books for entertainment and books for learning, and plenty of blending of the two exists. It’s the job of schools to focus on the learning part, and it’s the job of parents to get kids to like reading in the first place or else the schools will be fighting – ARE fighting – an uphill battle every day. Good teachers can make learning fun and relevant, but not if they have to spend time focusing on the basic ACT of reading! I didn’t like all the books that I had to read in school either, but I read them because my grade was affected. Is that no longer the case?
I haven’t read the book, but it sounds as if I would agree with much of what Carr says.
This is also the reason why I’m frustrated with bringing SmartBoards and the like into the classroom. I’ve noticed that I don’t, when being taught, pay nearly as much attention to a large computer screen as I do to a chalkboard.
I can’t wait to read this book – thanks for the post!
I agree. I’ve even had students of this generation say that their eyes glaze over with PowerPoint and prefer chalk and talk. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Thanks to your post, I’ve put this book on my to-read list. I can see it has stirred up a lot of discussion… books like that are worth the read!
It’s definitely worth a read – hope you enjoy it, and thanks for stopping by!
-J
I saw this book recommended somewhere else the other day and thought I wanted to read it; but now, after this great review I WILL definitely read it.
Thank you!
Glad I piqued your curiosity. 🙂 Hope you enjoy it, and thanks for stopping by!
-J
This post was a great read. I had not heard of that book but will be grabbing it now. I like that you said it’s not just an “internet is evil” piece. I teach college students and can definitely relate to how their minds have changed just in the past few years. I’m also an internet junkie but am thankful at time I grew up sans WWW. Take care.
Thanks! I, too, am glad that I grew up pre-WWW, and I’m working on the junkie thing, though getting a post fresh pressed makes it hard to stay off the blog. 🙂 Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Did not you mean students that do not read books? Because I have two boys who are now past their teens that as far as I knew have never opened or read a single book other than their school books that students were obliged to be looking into.
They do not read. And I bet it is the same with all their peers. And it must be universal of all modern day children.
They watch TV. They play VCDs. Read books they do not. They are totally different from my [our] generation!
I suppose I meant *both* “can’t” and “don’t.” Of course, it’s hyperbole. I teach college undergraduates, and when they have to, they manage to struggle their way through an entire book. But Carr’s point is that the medium actually hampers our ability to read well. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
I would read it, but because of the internet, my cell phone and my iPad I no longer have the attention span to get through it!
As an adult and a gadget freak, I will be the first to admit that the overload of digital bits in my brain over the year has diminished my ability to read a book and absorb information from it. A decade ago I could easily get through 30 books a year, but now that has shrunk to around 12. It could be other factors like my busier lifestyle that account for this drop or it may be information overload.
Who knows?
There’s probably no one single factor that explains it (same for me – I used to read a ton, but in recent years have been much slower/less inclined to read). Still, I’m pretty convinced that the interwebs have a lot to do with it. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
“The Shallows is a quick and engaging read” ~ I love the irony : )
ps. I’m embarrassed to admit I scrolled down to check the length of you post before commiting to reading it. Touché…
Ha! I often do the same thing. Carr explains why – and in a quick and engaging way. 😉 Thanks for stopping by!
-J
… and thank YOU for taking the time to respond to all of us! You do the blogosphere proud : )
My pleasure – but if this traffic keeps up, I certainly won’t do it in future posts. 🙂
I love to read. I will subscribe!
Great! Hope you enjoy the ride! My selections will be pretty eclectic (have moved on to Shusaku Endo’s Silence, a novel about Christianity under persecution in Japan). Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Nice post.
Actually I think I read a lot more with Internet than without it. Just looks at how we communicate here, how I’ve just read a post from your blog…
With the internet you can access a big volume of information fast, just go to google and search what you need to know… but then you’ll read it. Quite unlike the previous “TV-exclusive” generation where information was just heard/visualized.
From what I know, there’s more brain activity reading in the internet than while watching TV. I agree with you that we should read more “Books” instead of Youtube infinite i’m-more-right-than-you discussions but at least we’re reading :).
Thanks. I agree that people tend to do more reading on the internet than w/TV, but the question is what kind of reading. Carr makes an interesting case that it’s (usually) a lower level than reading print.
-J
Interesting read. I brought it up with my (massively technophile, highly literate, inherently skeptical) favorite internet group and we had a good hour of debate on the subject. I’m going to have to find a copy of the book and pick it up.
I also find the specific skills we are supposed to be losing interesting: memory, attention, and “reading carefully.” I’ve actually been concerned with the same subjects for a while now, on a personal level, how to overcome my deficiencies and get an edge on the competition.
Having long ago noticed that I am an easily-distracted, absent-minded professor, I resolved this year to improve my cognitive abilities. I put together a syllabus of mnemonics systems, observation skills practice, a mental multitasking course, and mindfulness meditation. I’m hoping it will improve my abilities to focus on one thing at a time, many things at once, to remember and to notice details and subtleties. I’ve been keeping notes over at my blog, and I will definitely be discussing this.
I wonder what Carr would make of my Learning to Think plan?
By the way, congrats on getting Fresh Pressed. 🙂
Thanks! Your learning to think plan sounds intriguing – I’ll be sure to check it out, but only after I’ve done my daily book reading. 😉
-J
Great post – I have the book laying here in my family room but have yet to read it. Admittedly, the reason I have not read it yet is mostly due to things that I have been doing on the internet.
Without having read the book, but having read your review, I tend to think Carr is right in his assertions. However, it is interesting to me that there is no research to support these views…yet. Have you found any? But like others have commented, I see the changes in myself and others.
I write a parenting blog and blogged about a book called Generation Text that discusses the issue of raising kids in this new age. And I realized that the key to managing internet use is just that – we have to manage it – not it manage us. And that’s what children need to be taught, in my opinion. That is what will keep them reading books as well. As it always is…it is all about balance.
Miss Bits
Parenting literature distilled to a few words of wisdom
http://parentingbits.wordpress.com
I agree that balance is key. I can’t say that I’ve done any research on the issue, I just picked up Carr’s book because it looked interesting and resonated with my experience. Carr does point to some studies, but I don’t have the time or the energy to look into them – gotta move on to the next book. 🙂 Thanks for stopping by!
-J
I probably was undiagnosed with ADD as a child because my attention span was horrible in reading books. I did read a lot of magazines but had to teach myself how to hold attention with reading. The internet is probably a large contributor to that now vs. 30 years ago during my formative years. And writing is enhanced by reading. It took me until graduate school to be a confident writer and discover this. Thanks for your review.
Thanks for stopping by and for your comment! ADD is not a huge element of Carr’s book, but he does mention at least one or two studies that suggest multimedia technology contributes to it. It seems intuitive, but it’d be good to see the data.
-J
The striking and historical trend of learning is that humans use tools and techniques in vogue, and seek the quickest and most interesting (to each person) method of obtaining and using information to advance their interests or to get ahead in school or a job.
Are we significantly smarter or dumber as a race than 100 years ago? I don’t think I’m any smarter than I would have been without the Internet and technology. I only have so much smarts and no matter how much I’ve tried over the past 60 years I run into the same research, reading and writing barriers I always have. I now know a lot more pretty much useless information since being online so much and can talk about a lot of cool stuff I see and read about via the Internet but am I a better reader, faster learner and have better retention. I don’t think so.
It’s an interesting question, whether technology can make us dumber or smarter. Carr suggests that cartography helped us conceptualize things (not just terrain) in different ways, but I don’t know if it increased our natural intelligence. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
The huge question that’s next after whether technology makes us dumber or smarter is how do we measure “dumber” and “smarter” and what are the assumptions behind that. I’m not saying that there are no answers (there are), but that these are very tricky and complex questions.
I recently moved from France to Canada and one way and another didn’t get round to buying a tv. We do live across the road from the library though and I have been reading more and more ambitious books to my two small daughters – the last one was Anne of Green Gables. They loved it despite being only 5 and 3. We then watched the series on the internet and took a few virtual visits to Prince Edward Island. I think books and internet can work well together and have more in common than books and tv. You are choosing what to read on the internet although it is easy to get sidetracked. I agree with you though that it is an “Approach with Caution” situation. Great post. Thanks.
Thanks for stopping by and for the comment. I agree, we shouldn’t foreswear the internet (I am blogging, after all). But, as several people have noted, balance is the key. Keep up the reading with the 3- and 5-year-olds! 🙂
-J
All along I thought that it’s just me and my proclivities until I read your review of that book and I couldn’t agree more on that. The real challenge then is to balance, balance, balance.
Great article! More power!
Thanks! And AMEN to balance!
-J
Good post and looks like good book, too. I think there’s a good, a bad, and an ugly side to the web.
The good: blogs like yours, being able to blog, catching up with people on Facebook, access to news, and of course Youtube and Pandora 🙂
The bad: games on Facebook and elsewhere (ADD anyone?), porn, etc.
The ugly: no matter how its used, it’s an attention hog!
Off to post your blog on Facebook. Thanks!
Clearly you’re a woman of discriminating tastes and good judgment. 😉 Thanks for stopping by – glad you appreciated the post.
-J
That’s what time does to people, why pick up a book when you can learn more from the internet. The information from the book is limited, the internet is an infinite book that goes on forever. I’m sure that if the internet was as popular back when you were younger as it is now, you wouldn’t be complaining about people not reading books now days.
Personally I enjoy reading books, but I prefer buying virtual books, or doing online research, it not only saves paper, but it saves a lot of time.
Your comment presupposes that the point of reading books is to get information, but there’s a huge difference between information and understanding/wisdom. On the whole, the medium of the internet encourages surface level thinking rather than deep thinking, and it perpetuates this misunderstanding that the primary point of reading is to get information. Often this is one purpose of reading, but there are other goals that the medium obscures.
You’re probably right that if I’d grown up with the web I’d be less critical, but that doesn’t mean that Carr’s argument doesn’t hold. It’s at least worth considering, whether in hard copy or as an eBook. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
I’d write an intelligent and thoughtful comment, but your post is too long and oooh… a cat on a skateboard!
Well-played. 🙂
-J
Very well written blog. Not just the blog, but the discussions also made an interesting read. Keep up the good work J.
Thank you, and thanks for stopping by!
-J
I offer this thought as a possibility, perhaps by abandoning what we have known as rudimentary memorization we are actually enabling our minds to function at a higher level. This occurred to me while reflecting on some of the theory regarding “speed reading” which suggests that our minds retain information at a far greater speed than we give it credit for. Maybe we are just beginning to catch up with our minds innate ability to absorb information rapidly?
If my students are any indication, then I doubt it. 😉 Seriously, it would be an interesting idea to study. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
I totally agree with you, but fortunately or unfortunately internet is becoming part and parcel of our life….. can’t live without it.
Just curious. Would we lead a less fulfilling life if there was no Internet?
I find it serves me best as an information finding tool when I want to build, plant or dig deeper on a subject close to my or family needs and interests. But, I don’t retain 90% of what I read unless I use it. Then I understand it and built upon it. Otherwise, like reading a newspaper, in the brain and out it goes…that surface reading that Joseph mentioned above.
I agree, we (pretty much) can’t live without it in our culture, and I’m not in favor of abandoning it (obviously). Still, I think there are gains and losses, as there are with any technology, and Carr’s book has spurred me to try to minimize the losses as much as possible. Some of that will involve less time on the net (including responding to comments 😉 ). Anyway, thanks for stopping by!
-J
As a graduate student I find that one of my biggest challenges in connecting with other students has been their lack of desire to read anything that might be challenging. I am not an incredibly well read person, but I am a fairly well read person. Hearing fellow students complain about having to read or struggling to think critically has always puzzled and annoyed me. This book may be on to something. Based on your review, I may have to give it a chance. Thanks for sharing!
My pleasure – I hope you’ll pick it up. It’s definitely worth a read.
-J
Great review! Personally, I’d rather plunge myself in books to learn some new stuffs rather than the internet (though, the latter offers information instantly). I totally agree with your idea of how the Net is slowly diminishing the focus levels of people often delved into it. If I find some very useful resources on the Net, I’d just print them and read it in another medium (not to mention that I have a fear of “radiation over-exposure”.)
Thanks! I’ve printed stuff off the internet out in the past, but it gets to be pretty costly. My plan is (obviously) to jump back into books and to scale back on the surfing. Most of the stuff on the web, though interesting, is ephemeral compared to some of the great books that have been written (not that I’m reading only great books). Anyway, thanks for stopping by!
-J
interesting article, is the first entered in this site and will not be the last
Greetings
Thanks!
-J
Nicely done post and you’ve certainly piqued my interest in this book. I’m fascinated by the whole internet is rotting our brains debate and do believe (sorry crank hat guy!) that our overuse of it (and all the other instant access tech-stimulants of our time) is impoverishing us intellectually.
I’m reading Marcuse’s “One-Dimensional Man” at the moment and his ideas about the “closure of the universe of discourse” and “technological rationality” are rather prophetic. It’s not an easy read, certainly by today’s standards, but I recommend it for anyone interested in this topic.
Anyhoos, bit of blatant self-promotion: I wrote I big long thing on ADHD, the internet and the 21st Century Brain which also might be of interest – http://bit.ly/agS0I8
Anyhoos again, many thanks for this post. I’m going to put “The Shallows” next on my reading list.
Thanks for the tip on Marcuse – may have to check it out.
-J
No need to respond. Just wanted to say thanks for a great post. But I’ve already seen your entry about getting too many responses. And I can see what you mean.
Good luck and again, thanks.
– Quidmont
A well written review, thoroughly enjoyed, congrats on the fresh press, etc. etc. praise in abundance.
I love how many comments have talked about ‘Balance’, for years it has been a key to living! But then there is ‘Focus’. I think that is as much a problem as well.
I read a BBC article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12172367) about Wiki-chaining. It detailed the information that the journalist learnt in one hours worth of Wiki-surfing. Ultimately the article completely missed the point, that the links ‘encourage’ the reader to jump from one topic to another out of pure curiosity. I believe this is true of the internet as a whole. It could be, like so many comments have noted, compared to TV and the nature of channel flicking. Could you imagine taking all your 52 books and shifting your time between them throughout the year? You might well finish them all, but due to the lack of focus, your experience of the text and your ability to develop a deeper understanding of the words, the information and the ideas presented to you would be greatly diminished.
The internet can have a detrimental influence to the attention span of people. But I do believe that the individual is as much to blame. Balance is of great importance, but so is the ability to dedicate and devote enough time to fully focus in on what it is your reading. And, to bring things back on topic, yes, the internet rarely helps!
P.S. Congrats on reading and responding to all the comments that are being left. That’s dedicated devotion, right there!
Thanks! Yeah, I’m definitely going to have to scale back the responses on future posts. When I started responding, I didn’t expect to get so many comments, but I felt it would be rude just to stop responding. But in the future, far fewer responses from me!
-J
It sounds as though Carr owes a great deal to Neil Postman, whose book Technopoly covered much of the same ground. The examples you cite in Carr (the clock, the map) appeared in Postman’s work almost twenty years ago. To me, the problem isn’t the problem–because society’s intellectual diet, like its food diet, has been slipping for a while now. The problem is knowing what we lose and gain by every technology and just rushing into technological “progress” anyway, believing that, this time, we’ve found something universally good for us. We don’t think ahead or consider implications. Of course the web is shallow… no duh. Why don’t more people care?
Great thoughts, and thanks for the tip on Postman – may have to check it out. For all I know, Carr cites Postman (I didn’t read the endnotes – endnotes are of the devil – and I already returned it to the library).
-J
Interesting post! And I agree with all of it. Not only do I read books but I read them in English, which is not my first language, it requires more attention and concentration from me. And I think my brain is indeed thanking me for that :-]
Greetings from Argentina,
Patrick
Thanks, and thanks for stopping by! Keep up the book reading! 🙂
-J
Hi Joseph,
I do feel I’m a slower book reader than before and I get headaches if I spend more than one hour surfing the internet. I hate that it happens so often: I’ll start setting an alarm next time.
Thanks for sharing!
My pleasure! Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Great blog. I liked the way u described your blog.
stumbled across your blog and thought i’d follow you too. been an avid reader all my life (soon to be 62) and BOOKs saved me during my lonely teenage years. Just discovered Edward De Bono………I know i’m a late bloomer, but if you don’t know him, you should. peace, Zig
Oh dear, I have a follower. 🙂 Thanks for stopping by – hope you’ll enjoy the ride.
-J
Thanks for this thoughtful post about The Shallows. I haven’t heard of this book, so it was interesting to read your take on it. I’ve been curious about my own changes since using the Internet — and, having two daughters, have been curious about how they would approach reading as they grow up in the Internet Age. I have to agree with the author’s point of the Internet over-stimulating my brain. The Web has an astounding amount of information that can quickly be found, but I find myself too easily jumping from link to link rather than take my time reading and absorbing information. I’m thankful for bookstores and libraries having tons of books for when I step away from my computer and sit with a good book. But I have noticed that I get distracted more easily these days. Again, thanks for your post. Good food for thought.
Yes, the link to link jumping is easy to fall into, and Google wants you to do it – they make more money that way. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
What else would you expect from a generation that grew up with a remote in one hand, and a mouse in the other?
DS
I don’t think it’s just a generational thing, though obviously those who grow up with the technology are more affected by it.
-J
I’m inclined to agree, its not generational. One of your other readers mentioned feeling “wired” with too much Internet. I have the same reaction when I write a piece, do research or surf for a long period of time. You almost have to force yourself to function at a slower pace, if that makes sense.
This is some brilliant analysis. Thanks for the post and congrats on being Freshly Pressed! I actually agree with you about periodically distancing oneself from the web while reading actual books. Actually, I still discussed it with a friend last yesterday!
http://gbengaawomodu.wordpress.com
Thanks! Yes, time away from the web is definitely a good thing.
-J
This is some brilliant analysis. Thanks for the post and congrats on being Freshly Pressed! I actually agree with you about periodically distancing oneself from the web while reading actual books. Actually, I still discussed it with a friend yesterday!
http://gbengaawomodu.wordpress.com
Could be a very good book.
Certainly sounds relevant to the times that we are in
Definitely relevant – it really helped explain a lot about my students (and myself).
-J
Now that definitely sounds like a book I’d be interested in, I think I’ll be shopping at the weekend. Thank you 🙂
You’re welcome – hope you enjoy it!
-J
We are a homeschooling family and this blog post hits on many of the reasons why we chose to homeschool using classical methods. Reading good quality books is very important to our family. (and we believe that quality is better than quantity…..many books that are geared to young readers are the equivalent of saturday morning cartoons) We don’t shun modern technology….in fact most of our reading is done on a Kindle.
My 8 yo son loves to read. His mind will wonder with the characters, explore ancient ruins, meander down the Missississippi, get ship wrecked on a deserted island…..oh, the places we have been between the pages of our books!
However, he also loves the internet and modern technology. The internet has certainly made homeschooling easier.
As someone already stated, there needs to be balance. We have chosen to limit our own media time (yes, that includes mom & dad) and find that as a family, we are happier and get along much better within these limits.
I’m with you 100 percent. I wish I had had a classical education growing up, and I’m not at all opposed to the internet. It’s a question of not getting sucked into it. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Great post… seems I will have read this book!
Thanks! Yes, you should read the book!
-J
I think its interesting and that you should be commended for spending the time to answer almost all of these countless comments. Also as an Adjunct teacher in my profession, I am constantly frustrated with finding ways to get my students to engage in the information that really counts. I can get their attention through dynamic teaching. But core principles and information application often seems beyond them and the text, a collection of notes, is beyond the average student.
Thanks! Yes, in the future, I’ll have to scale back on the responses, but I didn’t expect to get this many, and when I started, I kind of felt obliged to keep responding.
-J
tl;dr.
Just kidding! I’ve noticed how I have a shorter attention span and at least a few of my friends have the exact same problem. Our brains are becoming completely rewired because of this digital age. I really want to try and improve my focus, so I’ll have to kind of retrain my brain to focus better. I can still read books for hours at a time, but I find myself jumping around a lot while online (although I did read your whole post at once). Good post!
http://tehcatspajamas.wordpress.com/
Thanks! Yes, I’m as guilty as the next guy of skimming/jumping around on posts. I think some of that is inevitable unless you’re really disciplined. I hope that digging back into books will help me recapture that concentration.
-J
Interesting blog. I’m subscribing. 🙂
I do agree with the “internet as distraction” theory (“oh, look, there’s a cat on a skateboard,” indeed). When I’m writing, I do it on a computer that’s not on the internet, or (most often) on paper with a pen. Makes a huge difference in being able to focus. That’s related to why I’m here at wordpress.com looking for interesting blogs, in fact. I’m reallly getting sick of Facebook, and I’m looking for writing with more depth and thought (and, yes, length).
I’m not sure about the “young people don’t read books” theory though. All my friends in the book business (both writers and publishers) tell me that Young Adult is the only fiction genre where sales are going up. And certainly young people did read and are reading Harry Potter and Twilight and Hunger Games and so on.
Well, every generation bemoans the state of the next. It’s one of the privileges of getting older, and every generation in my lifetime has done it (and my mother reports that it goes back much earlier than that). When MTV started, people complained that young people would lose interest in words and would only respond to pictures. Now young people are texting (with words) thousands of times a day.
In Japan they even write novels on cell phones.
Thanks – I hope you enjoy the blog. 🙂
I didn’t mean to characterize the question as a generational one – I don’t think it’s just young people who are affected by this. Carr talks about the neuroplasticity of the brain and how it can change quickly in response to stimuli. He also talks about the Japanese cell phone novels, which I find horrifying. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
BTW, I’ve often thought about going back to pen and paper for writing – maybe I’ll have to give it a try. Nietzsche said he could tell the difference in his style when he went from writing by hand to an early version of the typewriter.
Two quick anecdotes about that subject.
1) For his final three novels, Henry James hired a secretary (who he referred to as his “typewriter”) and dictated to her. The change in style compared to his earlier books is noticeable. On one hand, it is amazing that he could dictate those incredible sentences (some more than a page long, impeccably constructed), but I actually prefer the style in the earlier books.
2) Hemingway wrote dialogue on a typewriter and description by hand, because he found he wrote differently with the two methods. (Once you know this, you can see that some of his stuff does flip back and forth: dialoguedialoguedialoguedialogue, descriptiondescriptiondescriptiondescription, dialoguedialoguedialoguedialogue.)
This sounds like an interesting book. Whenever I read something like this, I go back to my first exposure to this type of thinking: Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death (and, later, with Technopoly).
If you’re curious, check out this speech: 5 Things We Need to Know About Technological Change. (http://www.mat.upm.es/~jcm/neil-postman–five-things.html)
The Internet comes with definite biases that we may not necessarily be aware of at first blush, including patience (enough patience to read more than a twitter post) and the belief that the user is the center of the universe. This explains why students feel it’s perfectly acceptable to text during a lecture.
Just a thought. But check out the speech and see if it doesn’t go hand-in-hand with the book.
Thanks for the link – it’s a great speech. I checked, and Carr does cite Postman a couple of times in the book. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Hi, I just remembered something I do that may help you too.
Each time I’m on the internet I open each new link in a new tab and only close them all when I’m completely done with it. That way, I have an idea of how much I am moving away from my goal, or how long have I been spending time browsing, what have I been reading for the past hour, etc.
That’s a really interesting idea, but I’m not sure how my browser can sustain that many tabs. 😉 Might be a good way to limit things, though.
-J
Hello! Irecentlyfound your page via Google. What a great blog you have! I appreciate it very much! Thank you for providing such valuable comment to the entire internet world!
In this digital age maybe we should try some digitalsilence to help our attention span to grow. Replace a mobile with a book for the day? or meet up with friends without the thought of checking yiour emails/social updates…check it out here:
http://digitalsilence.wordpress.com/
3 days without technology – time to reconnect with reality.
leave your comments if yiou have been brave enought to try!
Love the idea – maybe one of these days, during a break, I’ll give it a try. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
Cheers Joseph. Its just getting off the ground, hoping it raises awareness.
At digitalsilence I have gone for days without telecommunication. Read http://gotojamesonblog.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/the-wilderness/ and http://gotojamesonblog.wordpress.com/2010/12/08/back-to-nature/
What a great vacation! Thanks for the links, and for stopping by.
-J
Thanks Joseph
intresting fella. I need help promoting the idea that taking time out from our digital world is worth while. Please share!
I am in for the idea. What should we do. We need to email each other off stage so as to plan what to include. It is an exciting experience though especially for children. It is healthy too.
Thank you for this post, I really enjoyed reading it!
I would love to hear your opinion about the topic books vs eReades. I just wrote a post about it “Nothings feel like a book in my hands” http://wp.me/pXsUB-CP.
Hope to get your comment soon!
Thanks
elenasc.wordpress.com
Thank you! I enjoyed your post, as well, and I’m with you on the superiority of books. Carr even suggests that eReaders can contribute to the short attention span phenomenon because of all hypertext and links. If/when I get one, I’ll have to figure out how to turn that feature off. Thanks for stopping by!
-J
I have a KIndle, and it has no more links than a regular book. 🙂
(Actually, some books are set up so that the table of contents is linked to the chapters, but that’s about it.)
It’s not like reading on the web. However, I think it could still have attention span implications, since you can have so many books with you at all times and jump between them (difficult to do with paper books, unless you bring one of those wheeled suitcases with you everywhere).
(As one review put it, the Kindle includes a web browser, but fortunately it’s really lousy so you can concentrate on your book without being distracted.)
It also has some other weaknesses, which I wrote about here:
http://u-town.com/collins/?p=1876
There has been so much comment here that I haven’t had time to read it all…so may repeat another poster’s idea. It was a few years ago that I began to find I was craving the view of a bright computer screen more and more. I searched the internet for “Computer addiction” and could find absolutely nothing. I seemed to be alone with the problem. Now it is becoming a hot topic.
My own idea is that there is a strong visual element to the addiction. The illuminated text and back lit pictures are very attractive and easily enjoyed. As an artist I have spent decades studying pictures and reading books about art. After ten years of increasing internet use I find returning to print on paper as less satisfying and reading off a paper page takes a conscious effort – I would much prefer to see it back lit and scrolling. I look sadly at the many books in my library and
intend to return to them but I fear my eyesight is not improving with age and the screen will serve me even better in the future.
I do think there is a trend away from ‘joined up thinking’. Couldn’t it be that we know there is so much new to discover and see everywhere that we are in a sort of panic to try and capture it as it flies around in cyberspace. Even TV with its sequential nature of programmes is beginning to seem ponderous and time consuming – Oh dear – I’m off to look at something else now ….
เที่ยวจีน ทัวร์ฮ่องกง มาเก๊า เที่ยวเกาหลี
of today’s Fresh Pressed is the intriguingly-titled “Short Attention Span Theater or Why My Students Can’t Read Books.” It’s a review of a book called The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains, by
ทัวร์จีน ทัวร์สิงคโปร์ ทัวร์ฮ่องกง ดิสนีย์แลนด์
Thank you! I enjoyed your post, as wel