65% of adults never read another book after graduating high school.

[Swede]

I heard that on the radio this morning on the way to work. Can this be true?

[blogslut]

1. I don't know

But I do know adults that never read books. Ever.

[Lautremont]

2. It's horrific if so.

[GreenPartyVoter]

3. I find that hard to swallow. Unless they mean educational texts and not pleasure reading?

[sinkingfeeling]

4. It's probably true, but it scares me to death! The real 'dumbing down' of America.

[alcibiades_mystery]

25. "Dumbing down" would assume that it was different at some time

in the past? Was it?

It would also assume that what they do instead of reading books is "dumber" than reading. Is that the case? I don't know.

I find the original statistic a bit hard to believe, but I'm guessing that's as a result of social class. Everyone in my social peer group reads books. Some, a lot.

[KansDem]

31. My stepfather, who read constantly and who was a regular at the library, never graduated high school

But he was a product of a different time, so to answer your question, there was a different time when adults read a lot more than they do now. At least in KansDem's house while growing up...

[alcibiades_mystery]

42. Hmmm

An interesting story, but hardly reasonable evidence for your claim. Well qualified, though.

Even if we were to accept it, the second question would then kick in...

[sinkingfeeling]

54. Yes, of course, education was different in the past than now. In the last

50 years, there has been a total dismissal of history, science, and the arts within public schools. With NCLB, the idea to promote independent thought, analysis, and critical thinking has been replaced by standardization and teaching to the test.

What do people do today that is 'dumber' than reading? Just about everything: shopping in malls, playing video games, watching 'reality' TV, having a circle of friends that exist only on the internet, no participation in community activities or social organizations, etc.

[alcibiades_mystery]

55. LOL

Oh, there's a dismissal of history, alright.

:rofl:

[iconoclastic cat]

5. And those people can still become POTUS! nt

[treestar]

9. But they didn't read three Shakespeares!

:hi:

[iconoclastic cat]

17. Maybe Chavez will send him tennis balls. nt

[CrazyOrangeCat]

32. Not to mention a CaMOOs . . .

[treestar]

6. Maybe they aren't including something?

If "a book" can include anything, including cheap paperback novels or romance novels or how-to books, then it would be hard to believe. Do the bookstores sell to only 35%?

[Marie26]

7. No way

Over 60% enroll in college, where you have to read something.

[AnneD]

19. I didn't read a book for pleasure for years after college...

College texts took all of the joy of reading out of me. Of course, I had read most of the classics by the time I had graduated HS. I don't read much now because I have to do so much professional reading. I'll read a magazine first but that could be anything from the Economist to Living Simply.

[InvisibleTouch]

36. I was lucky in that regard.

School, college, and grad school somehow were not able to burn me out on a love of learning. I just found that I wanted to do it on my own schedule, and not have to answer to anyone else about it.

[indie_voter]

8. If so , this would explain a lot of things... n/t

[skooooo]

13. No kidding -- a nation of dummies.

Might as well be illiterate. No wonder we have a hard time thinking critically about what's going on around us.

[wake.up.america]

10. That's not true!!! Or am I reading the wrong books?

65% percent of all Bush supporters have only read 7% of any book. The other 35% of all Bush supporters have read 21 percent of any book. According my math that explains the 28% support for Bush who reads 0 percent of any book.

[acmavm]

11. I don't know about this. Even some of the biggest dip shits I

know read something.

[Warpy]

12. The dumbest people on the planet have baccalaureate degrees

and haven't read anything weightier than People, TV Guide, or the sports pages since they got out of school.

They can point to a degree to prove they are smarter than everybody else, that they don't need any more book learning.

I would imagine they are a majority, too.

The smartest man I ever knew was a janitor in a bank. He had a sixth grade formal education, would get to work an hour early and sit down to read a dozen different newspapers. His grasp of current events and what they meant was absolutely amazing. He was a compulsive reader at home, too, and we used to swap must read titles.

Education is a journey, not a destination. Most folks don't figure that one out.

[iconoclastic cat]

Hell, I know some total twits with PhDs! nt

[Warpy]

51. I know some who are absolutely brilliant in their fields

but once the subject strays from that, they're done.

[treestar]

21. Even college graduates haven't learned to think or learn

Which is not to put down the profs, what I mean is institutionally, as a society, we seem to think of college as meant for some other goal than learning to learn or think.

People will forget what they memorized for their college exams - they never learned critical thinking even there. The only use for their tuition was the actual degree. Once you have it, it constitutes some sort of "ticket" into the job market, and that's it.

Even in scientific fields, I wonder, if people on the job say 10 years later ever have reason to call their old college professors to discuss something.

[TZ]

28. Too true

Even in scientific fields, I wonder, if people on the job say 10 years later ever have reason to call their old college professors to discuss something.
I recently found a whole lot of phD's at NIH who don't understand critical thinking at ALL. It's not only a ticket, but a mark of "prestige". I quickly learned having alphabet soup after your name didn't necessary mean you were intelligent or rational! The best phD's were always the ones who understood that the degree didn't mean that much, just an ability to work obsessively on something. One of the phD's I respected the most told me once to only get the degree if I wanted to be a desk jockey! She was only partially joking....:crazy:

[Warpy]

50. That baccalaureate degree has been reduced to trade school

for an entry level job in middle management. Too many people with ambition but no love of learning populate the classes. Most of them are just putting in time until they go out into the world to find a job where they can keep their hands clean.

Sad, isn't it?

[Swede]

14. Here's some stats I found by using the google.

1/3 of high school graduates never read another book for the rest of their lives.

42 percent of college graduates never read another book after college.

80 percent of U.S. families did not buy or read a book last year.

70 percent of U.S. adults have not been in a bookstore in the last five years.

57 percent of new books are not read to completion.

70 percent of books published do not earn back their advance.

70 percent of the books published do not make a profit.

(Source: Jerold Jenkins, www.JenkinsGroupInc.com)



53 percent read fiction, 43 percent read nonfiction. The favorite fiction category is mystery and suspence, at 19 percent.

55 percent of fiction is bought by women, 45 percent by men.

(Source: Publishers Weekly)



http://www.humorwriters.org/startlingstats.html

[AnneD]

29. Well....

considering the price of books, I'd say it was a self fulfilling prophesy. If Half Price books weren't nearby (and gave a educator discount) I would not read what I do. I don't read a lot cause there is not much out there that interests me anymore. I guess I read so much in my youth and college that I burned out. I am so busy now, and take so long reading it that I have stopped checking out books at the library. I read the jacket, first 2 pages and last-if it doesn't grab me-I'm gone.

Edited to add...Seriously, would you rather read about how to change the government-or get off your butt and change the government. I am more about doing than reading. I read all the time and sometimes I read books, but these days it is not the same priority.

[kath]

77. I wonder what % of Americans have library cards? The library is such a wonderful, free resource,

and very underutilized, IMO. New books ARE expensive.

[Marie26]

45. That's stunning

"1/3 of high school graduates never read another book for the rest of their lives. 42 percent of college graduates never read another book after college."

:wow: We're a nation of nitwits.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

66. What really got to me was this...

"80 percent of U.S. families did not buy or read a book last year."

This, for me, explains some of the other statistics.

[NotGivingUp]

75. wow....that's sad. n/t

[DuaneBidoux]

15. And they voted for Bush or didn't vote (maybe good they didn't)

[mike_c]

16. I call bullshit....

http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2002-06-05-education-census.htm

Presently, 63% of high school graduates go to college immediately after graduation, the highest rate ever, Hartle says. In 1970, when the military draft was in full swing, 52% of high school graduates went immediately to college.

more@link

I often accuse my students of never opening their books, but only figuratively.

[TZ]

18. I believe it

Most people do read- magazines, newspapers, dare I say it -blogs, most of which are short informative pieces, usually written at 6 grade level of reading. I think they are referring to novels. I am a voracious reader myself but even amoung highly literate people I know I often hear them complain they don't have time to simply sit down and read. Its too much like work, sadly to others. We are really a video orientated society with short attention spans.:-(

[Lil Missy]

20. I think that is a low estimate.

[MANative]

22. It'd be tragic if true - and I don't

think it's too far off the mark. In my family, we're divided about half and half into voracious readers who can't possibly satiate their desire to consume the written word (includes moi ;)) and those who will barely read a newspaper, never mind a book. In the tiniest of microcosms, I read about 3 books a week. My hubby has read exactly one book - The Greatest Generation by Tom Brokaw - in our 25-year marriage. Scary.

[HughBeaumont]

23. I read three in the past two weeks.

After HS, I was an English major, so I didn't really have any choice in the matter.

I don't know if I buy 65%. Probably around 40-45% or so is more like it. If you go to college, you have to read something.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

24. There are around 1 billion books sold each year in the US

If this were true it would mean that the actual number of people consuming all these books would be well under 100 million. I have a difficult time seeing how so few people consuming could account for the actual number of published books.

[goodhue]

26. Doesn't surprise me

[no_hypocrisy]

27. I have been in homes without a single book, save for the Yellow Pages, in them.

[stillcool]

30. I rarely buy a book...

but go to the library religiously and read every day. I would probably be one of the 65%, as I believe most polling is done from an industry point of view. When I do buy books, they are often used. I'm sure that purchase is not included in the survey either.

[soothsayer]

33. i totally buy it. had a grown neighbor who'd only ever read "Heidi"

(he was a plumber)

[InvisibleTouch]

34. A rethug former acquaintance of mine...

...had never in his life been in a public library until he had some minor incentive to make use of the then-available local Freenet. Now granted he did read comic books (and no insult there - I was a comics fan myself for many years), but never anything else. Before I met him, he'd never been outside the borders of his home state (and then only because he rode in my car - he did not drive), and got his "news" from Rush Limbaugh. He didn't even like movies that had a little bit of an educational content. Frightening, to be sure, but not entirely uncommon, I think.

On edit I should also add that this person was not, in and of himself, stupid. In his own way he was actually pretty bright and creative, and he could communicate effectively in speech and writing. He was just overwhelmingly lazy.


Me, I'm constantly reading. Fiction, nonfiction, for pleasure, for education, you name it. Often am part-way through several books at the same time, and I never go anywhere where I might have to sit and wait without a book. I sometimes despair that there's not enough time in the world to get through all the books that look good.

[TZ]

46. Since I was 3 I have never been without a book in easy reach...

"Me, I'm constantly reading. Fiction, nonfiction, for pleasure, for education, you name it. Often am part-way through several books at the same time, and I never go anywhere where I might have to sit and wait without a book. I sometimes despair that there's not enough time in the world to get through all the books that look good."

That fits me to a tee. My house has tons of books, many of which I have read multiple times. Reading fiction (sci-fi fantasy) is a way I can relax because my mind is always going and reading helps me focus.

[InvisibleTouch]

I very seldom re-read...

...because there's so much out there that I haven't read even once.

Sci-fi fan here, too. :)

[deepthought42]

56. I couldn't imagine not reading books...

But then I've always been a bookworm too. ^__^ Especially when it comes to Sci-Fi/Fantasy. Those books can be educational in their own way.

I hate it when I do forget to bring a book with me somewhere! I've got a stack of books I've read/am reading on my office desk. Rarely do I not have a book to read because I'm always working on at least a couple books at a time, re-reading books, buying new ones (doesn't help that I work p/t at a bookstore!)...etc... :silly:

[TZ]

58. curious on favorites

Robert Jordan? (hope he gets well soon) Do you like Terry Goodkind's the Sword of Truth? It was great at first but then he started injecting RW nutjob politics into his stories so I kind of drifted away.

[deepthought42]

62. I must confess...

I do like TG. Yeah some of books get a little too ideological, but the past couple of books haven't been too bad. There's only going to be one more book in the series.

I'm sorry to say I haven't read any Robert Jordan...and looking at all the books he's written it's a bit intimidating, lol.

Some of my other faves or Isaac Asimov, Douglas Adams, Juliet Marillier, Jacqueline Carey, Mindy Klasky, etc, etc, etc...too many to name!

[TZ]

65. I got put off after the book

where he killed off the anti war type folks. I do know he is ending it in a trilogy thats coming soon with the last book. I probably will read them after he publishes the last one good to know that its gotten better. I was so mad really felt like he screwed up a great series.
If you like TG you would love Robert Jordan except he is drawing out these long and complicated lines that are driving his fans nuts...
Douglas Adams is sooo funny. "So long and thanks for all the fish"...one of my favorite lines ever!

[deepthought42]

69. Yes....I'm re-reading that series, lol

That is my screen saver: "So long and thanks for all the fish", Marvin from the movie is my desktop wallpaper, and my username... *whistles*

I am addicted to the characters in the SOT series. I can't help it, lol. :crazy: If he doesn't end this series well, though, I'm gonna be pissed! This series is driving me crazy, and I better get a happy ending! :crazy:

[ecstatic]

35. My reason for cutting back tremendously

I stopped reading for pleasure... I was always an avid book reader--once I started, I couldn't put the book down. It took up too much of my time and I felt guilty for not keeping up with other duties. I've noticed a steady decline in my vocabulary and articulateness as a result... Oh well.

[AnnInLa]

37. Well, I've made up for all of them, so now everything's

OK.

[gollygee]

38. 65%? I find that difficult to believe

35% I might believe, and that's scary enough.

I hope that number isn't accurate. Because it's very very sad.

[Maestro]

39. Well I wouldn't be part of that 65%

And neither would my wife. Yeah for us.

[Solon]

40. Its actually believable...

I mean, in my family, I'm the only one who is a voracious reader, I can read as many as 3 or 4 books a week, easily, it helps me sleep, I know that probably sounds silly, but its true.

[WinkyDink]

41. Why should they start then? Heh.

[Quixote1818]

43. I don't read many books

I do however read the news every day and read tons of political and historical articles. I own about 20 history books and have read through parts of each one but not the whole book cover to cover.

I have maybe read ten books cover to cover since graduating from Collage 14 years ago.

[bikebloke]

44. Have always read

I rarely buy books. After school, I started reading for pleasure and my own learning, but it was too expensive to keep buying books. Not to mention the space for storage. So I began using the library and haven't stopped. My father, who was a teevee junkie, thought there was something wrong with me for giving up the tube (actually it was his own ego feeling insecure that I was becoming more educated than him). He was the vanguard of the dumbed down culture we have today.

[Rob H.]

47. Wow.

I can't imagine not reading--then again, as a former military brat my family sometimes lived in countries where there were no English-speaking TV channels so that probably plays into it. Even now, I watch 5 or 6 hours of TV a week at most.

One of the smartest people I know is my dad's scary-smart stepdad. He dropped out of high school at 15 and lied about his age to join the merchant marine during WWII and until recently, when he developed a keen interest in the history of the railroad, he was reading physics books for fun.(!)

[SheilaT]

48. I do believe that

there are surveys out there that show that only about half of all adults read as much as one book a year. But those who do, are likely to read more, sometimes many more than one book a year. So basically the country is divided approximately in half: readers and non-readers. Non readers really don't read much of anything. Readers tend to read a lot.

[Evoman]

49. Damn...I usually read one or two books a week.

And thats after complaining I don't have enough time to read lol.

I can believe this though...my sister, an accountant, has read 2 books since graduating about 10 years ago. My brother, a damn smart guy, hasn't read a novel since he graduated from high school 9 years ago (although he does skim through non fiction, and he is doing his masters in public policy).

My brother in law has only read 3 novels in his ENTIRE life. He said he never read the novels they assigned him in school, and would read parts of those books..enough to pass tests. Although, this year, I got him to read some novel from Larry Niven...and although he resisted me at first, guess what? In the past year he has read 4 Niven books...i.e. he didn't know that he liked to read.

If you know any of these people, find out what they are interested in and buy them a book!

[Czolgosz]

52. Please insert your own "My Pet Goat" joke here: ___________

[Done]

53. The OP is a bit long for me.

I got as far the word "radio"

[WI_DEM]

57. It certainly would explain a lot!!

[Kelly Rupert]

59. I honestly do not believe that.

I'd need a source.

[kestrel91316]

60. I tend to believe it. Intellectual laziness has reached epidemic proportions.

[DefenseLawyer]

61. Working people don't have a lot of free time

The people so often sleepy, weary, enigmatic,
is a vast huddle with many units saying:
"I earn my living.
I make enough to get by
and it takes all my time.
If I had more time
I could do more for myself
and maybe for others.
I could read and study
and talk things over
and find out about things.
It takes time.
I wish I had the time."


from: Carl Sandburg's "The People, Yes" (1936)

[Marie26]

63. They have enough time

to watch 4+ hours of TV a day - come on now. Americans probably have more free time now than we ever did - it's just a question of how we choose to use that time.

[DefenseLawyer]

67. You need to spend a little more time with working class people

who are working two or three jobs and trying to raise a family. Perhaps if you had a clue you wouldn't be quite so condescending. More free time than ever? It probably seems so to the latte crowd at Starbucks.

[Marie26]

70. Nice try

I come from a working-class family, and both my parents read to us regularly. Yes, people are busy, but Americans DO have more free time now than they did 100 years ago, along with more education. And what do we choose to do w/that time, education and freedom? Watch TV. You can't argue w/that statistic - the average American watches over 4 hours of TV a day! I don't buy the excuse that people are too busy; if that was the only reason, people wouldn't have time to watch so many hours of TV. It's not a question of time, but inclination. We'd rather watch American Idol than read a book, and that's the truth of it.

[DefenseLawyer]

76. I'm not sure where your statistics come from

and you may be right about 100 years ago, but anyone who has been around in the last 30 years knows that people are working more hours than ever, often at two and three jobs. I found this bit of info which tends to spell that out. http://www.salary.com/personal/layoutscripts/psnl_articles.asp?tab=psn&cat=cat011&ser=ser031&part=par089 :


"Forty years ago, economists predicted that the U.S. workforce was heading into a crisis of leisure - that people would soon have so much free time they wouldn't know what to do with it. As the impact of technology made more and more human labor redundant, it was widely assumed that a four-hour workday, or a three-day week, or even a six-month year would eventually be the norm.

Those forecasts couldn't have been more wrong. The amount of time Americans spend at work has increased relentlessly over the last two or three decades. Harvard economist Juliet B. Schor, in her book The Overworked American, writes that "The average employed person is now on the job an additional 163 hours, or the equivalent of one month a year," compared to figures for 1969. Schor estimated that U.S. manufacturing employees alone work 320 hours more than their French or German counterparts. That's two whole months per year."

Look you are right to say that people could make reading more of a priority. I'm just saying that after working 8 hours , waiting tables for another 4 and getting your kids fed and put to bed, some people are tired. Don't be so quick to assume that poor people are just lazy slobs.

[Marie26]

91. Statistics

Television Statistics

According to the A.C. Nielsen Co., the average American watches more than 4 hours of TV each day (or 28 hours/week, or 2 months of nonstop TV-watching per year). In a 65-year life, that person will have spent 9 years glued to the tube.

I. FAMILY LIFE

Percentage of households that possess at least one television: 99
Number of TV sets in the average U.S. household: 2.24
Percentage of U.S. homes with three or more TV sets: 66
Number of hours per day that TV is on in an average U.S. home: 6 hours, 47 minutes
Percentage of Americans that regularly watch television while eating dinner: 66
Number of hours of TV watched annually by Americans: 250 billion
Value of that time assuming an average wage of S5/hour: S1.25 trillion
Percentage of Americans who pay for cable TV: 56
Percentage of Americans who say they watch too much TV: 49

II CHILDREN

Approximate number of studies examining TV's effects on children: 4,000
Number of minutes per week that parents spend in meaningful
conversation with their children: 30.5
Number of minutes per week that the average child watches television: 1,680
Percentage of day care centers that use TV during a typical day: 70
Percentage of parents who would like to limit their children's TV watching: 73
Percentage of 4-6 year-olds who, when asked to choose between watching TV
and spending time with their fathers, preferred television: 54
Hours per year the average American youth spends in school: 900 hours
Hours per year the average American youth watches television: 1500

http://www.csun.edu/science/health/docs/tv&health.html

Nielsen Media Research Reports Television's Popularity Is Still Growing

New York, September 21, 2006 – Nielsen Media Research reported today that average American television viewing continues to increase in spite of growing competition from new media platforms and devices, such as video iPods, cell phones and streaming video. During the 2005- 2006 television year, which ended on September 17, 2006, traditional in-home television viewing continued to hold its own with audiences, and even gained among technology-savvy teenagers.

These results come at a time when Nielsen is able to provide more granular information on diverse television viewing through its larger national television sample and other investments in research and technology. The total average time a household watched television during the 2005-2006 television year was 8 hours and 14 minutes per day, a 3-minute increase from the 2004-2005 season and a record high. The average amount of television watched by an individual viewer increased 3 minutes per day to 4 hours and 35 minutes, also a record.

http://www.nielsenmedia.com/nc/portal/site/Public/menuitem.55dc65b4a7d5adff3f65936147a062a0/?vgnextoid=4156527aacccd010VgnVCM100000ac0a260aRCRD

I agree that employers have begun to expect workers to work longer hours in the last 20 years or so. But modern Americans still do have a large amount of free time. And they spend it watching TV. According to Nielsen, the amount of time Americans spent watching TV actually rose in 2006. I know that people work hard, and have stressful, busy lives. But the truth is, most Americans would rather watch TV then read in their leisure time. That's pretty clear. There might not even be anything wrong w/that; not everyone likes to read. Of course I'm not saying that working class people are lazy - I'm saying that all Americans, of all classes, watch a whole lot of TV. If people had one more hour of free time everyday, I don't think it'd be spent reading books; it'd be spent like the rest of our leisure time - in front of the TV.

[Initech]

64. Wouldn't surprise me in the least if it were true.

[Dorian Gray]

68. Absolutely not

in my circle of friends.

I only know two people who don't read regularly, and both of them have read a handful of books in the last five years.

[ScreamingMeemie]

71. Well, 50% of my household hasn't read a book since high school.

And I just finished "Destined For Destiny".

My parents never read either. I can believe this very easily.

[bullwinkle428]

72. Pathetic but believeable. I've always figured that everytime

I'm in a Border's, Barnes & Noble, etc., it happens to be the same relatively small segment of the population that's there everytime I'm there.

[NotGivingUp]

73. sad to say that i know a lot of people that never read any books.

[dogday]

74. I love to read

I love to imagine a place and time in my mind..

[earth mom]

78. I believe it.

I'm a voracious reader, which is probably why I'm on DU so much. My MIL is in her 80s and only started reading books the past 3 or 4 years since my FIL died. She told me that she never understood why people like me liked to read so much! It took her long enough, but now she finally gets it and has found reading to be an enjoyable and rewarding experience.

I, on the other hand, have never been able understand how people can not love to read! :wtf:

[MountainLaurel]

79. That 'splains a whole helluva lot, now don't it?

:scared:

[redqueen]

80. *sigh*

I hope it's not true. Sadly, I find it all too plausible.

:(

[uppityperson]

81. I've been to someone's house that didn't have books.

No bookshelves, no books to be seen. They told me "we don't read books". Amazing.

[SemperEadem]

82. considering bush got elected twice, I would say it's plausible.

[Sequoia]

83. Horrors.

But I can't tell you the number of times I've heard snide remarks about my reading. I've even had ex-bosses get upset when I'm reading. Boyfriends too. Pay attention to me, not that book. Watch TV with me, stop reading. Or, another boss....Why do you read the book when you can watch the movie.

People who don't read are dim nit wits.

[Deja Q]

84. It helps explain offshoring...

:cry:

Maybe Oprah had a point after all...

Though I wish more celebs and other folks would encourage kids to learn.

Though thanks to offshoring, it's also true it's going to be a harder sell.

Never mind an essay I'm writing, which nobody would want to read. (It's about global warming and what we can do to really fix things... I already know it's not going to be popular. And Al Gore has nothing to do with it either.)

[Marr]

85. On the bright side, I'm sure many future high school sports teams will be named after us.

Our media plays a big role in dumbing down the population, but there is an undeniable anti-intellecual streak in American culture anyway.

[yurbud]

86. I grew up with a lot of kids who never read a book BEFORE graduating either

[Jonathan50]

87. I used to be a voracious reader of books...

But I haven't read a book in probably a few years now..

I'm still a voracious reader, but now I do my reading online..

I really like the two way communication, to be able to share my thoughts and ideas with others.

I think the reason that a lot of people don't read is that they aren't very good readers and actually doing the reading takes so much effort they have little to no capacity left to actually understand what they are reading.

[MedleyMisty]

88. Umm...

The more I find out about other people, the more I realize I'm way way over on the bell curve of life. Sigh.

[ComerPerro]

89. and among those who have, wonder how many were RW hit piece books?

[Subdivisions]

90. Considering the fact that approximately 99.94% of the

idiots around me have prolly not only never read another book since school but prolly also never graduated or attained a GED, I may be able to buy that.


Disclaimer: My friends are the majority. They are the average American.

[Cleita]

92. I'm afraid so.

I found when I was working, that I was almost a freak because of what I read and how much I read both fiction and non-fiction. Most of my fellow workers who read at all usually read fluff magazines.