Can the internet be a worthy substitute for the novel?

[teuchter]

I was just watching a thing on the tellybox about the importance of reading, and in particular reading novels. The main thing they were looking at is the way in which reading good fictional literature can help to foster empathy and let people see into the minds and lives of others (as in, characters in books) in a way that might not be possible in real life. They were talking about how much was to be gained from recognising your own personal traits or problems in a character whose life might be played out in a completely different context to your own. Which is fair enough and certainly it's one of the things that can be gained from reading good novels.

I'm sure I'm not alone in finding that since I've had regular access to the internet, (and places like U75 in particular) the amount of time I've spent reading books in the old-fashioned way has decreased somewhat ... and I sometimes wonder if that's something I ought to make more effort to counter - spend more time reading good literature and less time reading stuff on here.

But it strikes me that all of the benefits of reading fiction mentioned above can also be gained from reading stuff on the internet - whether it's blogs or forums like this one, or whatever. The difference being that you're actually seeing into real people's lives and thoughts, rather than those as imagined by some writer, and not only that but you have the opportunity if you so wish to interact with those people in some way. And perhaps theres some justification in mentioning the old truth-is-stranger-than-fiction cliche too.

In the programme I was watching they touched on video games and television and whether they might be using up time that people would be better using to read, but they didn't really talk about discussion forums and other, mainly written-word based internet things.

So I am wondering if it's as worthwhile reading urban75 as it is reading Wuthering Heights or The Grapes of Wrath.

What does urban75 think?

 

[El Jefe]

I don't think it's a valid comparison

Is listening to Start The Week as worthwhile as watching a Hitchcock movie?

 

[Badger Kitten]

The internet is research for a lot of unwritten novels.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

I know what you mean about reading less since the net came along though...I rarely read fiction anymore (mainly Pratchett's latest stuff) and only tend to bother with non fiction.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I don't see that there's anything special about the novel. The world managed quite happily without novels for a long time. Not that novels can't be terrific creative pieces of course but the form isn't magic.

 

[ramjamclub]

A novel takes you on a journey. Chatting on the net is reacting to another person who is reacting to, or provoking you. Empathy is a luxury commodity on some of the threads I've read on U75. Reading a novel immerses you in the world of the author.

 

[teuchter]

I don't think it's a valid comparison

Why not?

 

[El Jefe]

Why not?

they're just not comparable activities. Why does every new thing have to be a replacement, or an analogue, for something else.

Reading a novel isn't a worthy substitute for reading a newspaper, or vice versa. They're distinct activities with distinct benefits.

 

[quimcunx]

Well they are different. No one is willing to read a novel-length OP and you can't interact with the characters in a book.

On the points you say the programme on the tellybox was making then in a novel the writer takes time to present and develop a character that the reader can empathise with and the reader will take the time to 'listen' to that character's story unfold. Because the information is more complete and the reader isn't interjecting the reader might gain more empathy and sympathy for a character's predicament and reaction in a novel. On boards like these a shorter version is offered up and there is the risk that people will wade in more often with sometimes less empathetic reactions.

Both do offer an insight into others' lives that we perhaps wouldn't get otherwise. People often use the anonymity of boards to say things they perhaps wouldn't even to their closest friends and fiction allows the author to broach subjects we don't often open up about either.

One advantage novels have is that they are usually well enough written to be published so may communicate more effectively. On the other hand one advantage boards like these have are the 'writer' is like us, not a literary artist so less likely to hide intent behind metaphor.

 

[Badger Kitten]

Novels are thoughtfully and laboriously edited. Posts aren't. Or shouldn't be.

 

[Brainaddict]

I don't see that there's anything special about the novel. The world managed quite happily without novels for a long time. Not that novels can't be terrific creative pieces of course but the form isn't magic.

Depends what you mean by special. I think novels occupy a particular place in our culture and not just as pieces of art to be admired. I think they are not replaceable, or rather, that any replacement will fail to provide everything that such a specialised and well-developed form can.

For instance novels are a very immersive experience. A bulletin board, say, can be immersive sometimes too, but you are involved as yourself. A novel is different in that you are utterly immersed in it but not as yourself. A film can do that too to a certain extent, but being a visual form is less dependent on visual imagination.

So I think there is something special about novels, as I guess there are special things about other artforms. I don't think the experience of a novel can really be replaced by anything else, and while the world wouldn't fall apart if people stopped reading novels, they'd be denying themselves an experience that is impossible to obtain in any other way.

 

[quimcunx]

I don't see that there's anything special about the novel. The world managed quite happily without novels for a long time. Not that novels can't be terrific creative pieces of course but the form isn't magic.

Before novels there were storytellers. Storytelling in some form has been around for as long as speech.

Boards can only be considered a book of short stories, maybe then, not a novel.

 

[teuchter]

they're just not comparable activities. Why does every new thing have to be a replacement, or an analogue, for something else.

Reading a novel isn't a worthy substitute for reading a newspaper, or vice versa. They're distinct activities with distinct benefits.

Well, I'm asking the question mainly with regard to the benefits that I described in the OP that were being ascribed to reading novels - namely the opportunity to see into the thoughts and lives of those in different situations to your own.

And as I said, I have found that I have read less in the way of novels since I've spent more time looking at the internet ... and have wondered if that means I'm losing out on certain things, but I'm not sure if I am, really.

 

[teuchter]

On the points you say the programme on the tellybox was making then in a novel the writer takes time to present and develop a character that the reader can empathise with and the reader will take the time to 'listen' to that character's story unfold. Because the information is more complete and the reader isn't interjecting the reader might gain more empathy and sympathy for a character's predicament and reaction in a novel. On boards like these a shorter version is offered up and there is the risk that people will wade in more often with sometimes less empathetic reactions.

There are a few stories on here that "unfold" in the same way, though. Maybe not all within the space of one thread, but seen through posts made here and there over time that add up to make a kind of ongoing story.

And even if some of the interjections aren't exactly empathetic, that doesn't mean that the larger number of silent readers can't empathise - perhaps even more when they read the reactions to those interjections.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Before novels there were storytellers. Storytelling in some form has been around for as long as speech.

Boards can only be considered a book of short stories, maybe then, not a novel.

So what is special about novels?

 

[Brainaddict]

There are a few stories on here that "unfold" in the same way, though. Maybe not all within the space of one thread, but seen through posts made here and there over time that add up to make a kind of ongoing story.

But because there is a 'reply' button under every post you may feel compelled to take a position with regard to that story. This doesn't necessarily help with the development of empathy. In a well-written novel you almost suspend your own personality (and with it judgement) in order to submit to the flow of the story. Instead of mouthing off your own opinion you willingly agree to STFU and go where the author leads you. That's a big difference I reckon.

 

[Brainaddict]

So what is special about novels?

Depends what you mean by special. I think novels occupy a particular place in our culture and not just as pieces of art to be admired. I think they are not replaceable, or rather, that any replacement will fail to provide everything that such a specialised and well-developed form can.

For instance novels are a very immersive experience. A bulletin board, say, can be immersive sometimes too, but you are involved as yourself. A novel is different in that you are utterly immersed in it but not as yourself. A film can do that too to a certain extent, but being a visual form is less dependent on visual imagination.

So I think there is something special about novels, as I guess there are special things about other artforms. I don't think the experience of a novel can really be replaced by anything else, and while the world wouldn't fall apart if people stopped reading novels, they'd be denying themselves an experience that is impossible to obtain in any other way.

But because there is a 'reply' button under every post you may feel compelled to take a position with regard to that story. This doesn't necessarily help with the development of empathy. In a well-written novel you almost suspend your own personality (and with it judgement) in order to submit to the flow of the story. Instead of mouthing off your own opinion you willingly agree to STFU and go where the author leads you. That's a big difference I reckon.

 

[quimcunx]

There are a few stories on here that "unfold" in the same way, though. Maybe not all within the space of one thread, but seen through posts made here and there over time that add up to make a kind of ongoing story.

I was going to say that as well as short stories you could view the whole board as an epic with a large cast of characters. It would have to be heavily edited before publication. I don't have nearly enough drama, thankfully, to make it to the final cut.

Or perhaps it is more similar to a soap opera. I don't watch any of them any longer. Characters come and go and their stories move in and out of the spotlight.

That's what the programme should have been about.

 

[strung out]

 

[FridgeMagnet]

No, not "what is different about novels to board posts", there are a million things there.

 

[ajk]

So what is special about novels?

The spelling is usually better.

 

[quimcunx]

So what is special about novels?

Dunno, just saying the story as artform precedes them.

It's true to say that novels have given me insight into lives very different to my own, in a way that I wouldn't have access to normally.

Then again so has urban.

 

[teuchter]

But because there is a 'reply' button under every post you may feel compelled to take a position with regard to that story. This doesn't necessarily help with the development of empathy. In a well-written novel you almost suspend your own personality (and with it judgement) in order to submit to the flow of the story. Instead of mouthing off your own opinion you willingly agree to STFU and go where the author leads you. That's a big difference I reckon.

The ratio of responders to lurking readers is usually about 1:10 though. So for most people, 90% of their reading on messageboards is done passively, without getting involved themselves.

 

[Brainaddict]

No, you've missed the point. Not "what is different about novels to board posts", there are a million things there.

I used the comparison because the OP was about the internet. I also compared to films in the other post. Asking what is special about novels is to me the same as asking how is it different from other things. That's what special means, no? I think novels are in that sense both special and unique. I wouldn't argue that they deserve special protection because of that or anything - people will decide what they want to read themselves. But I reckon anyone thinking they are getting the same things from the internet or from any other artform would be wrong.

 

[teuchter]

I was going to say that as well as short stories you could view the whole board as an epic with a large cast of characters. It would have to be heavily edited before publication. I don't have nearly enough drama, thankfully, to make it to the final cut.

Or perhaps it is more similar to a soap opera. I don't watch any of them any longer. Characters come and go and their stories move in and out of the spotlight.

That's what the programme should have been about.

Yes, the soap opera is a good comparison.


I note you managed to edit out an errant apostrophe before I hit the quote button.

 

[Brainaddict]

The ratio of responders to lurking readers is usually about 1:10 though. So for most people, 90% of their reading on messageboards is done passively, without getting involved themselves.

Sure, but I reckon the mere possibility that you can respond would also change the way you react to a story. How many of those lurkers sometimes form answers in their own head and don't post them?

Lurkers? Hello? Help me out here!

 

[quimcunx]

Yes, the soap opera is a good comparison.


I note you managed to edit out an errant apostrophe before I hit the quote button.

Phew. Made it.

Maybe I can get a tv channel to commission me to make that programme. Sounds like a piece of piss.

Sure, but I reckon the mere possibility that you can respond would also change the way you react to a story. How many of those lurkers sometimes form answers in their own head and don't post them?

Lurkers? Hello? Help me out here!

Although they can't click the button readers can and do still form responses in their own heads. As can soap fans. Sometimes you can hear them shouting at the telly.

 

[teuchter]

Sure, but I reckon the mere possibility that you can respond would also change the way you react to a story. How many of those lurkers sometimes form answers in their own head and don't post them?

Well, you might do that whilst reading a novel too.

Although I can see that the mere possibility of being able to express them does make a difference.

Sometimes I'll start reading a thread that's become so long there's obviously no point responding to anything in the first ten pages. But if it's interesting I'll still read it.