Friday, January 17, 2014

The bad side of Goodreads' Reading Challenge

    Turning literature into a numbers game makes some sense for the book trade, but none for readers

    Stack of books
    Unbalanced idea … holding a heavy stack of books. Photograph: Igor Maltsev/Alamy

    We may be halfway through January already, but the spirit of new year is still in full swing over in San Francisco, where the 2014 Goodreads Reading Challenge goes from strength to strength to strength. More than 240,000 of Goodreads' 25 million members have already committed to reading more than 14m books this year, pledging to get through them at an average of more than a book a week. And many fans of books will say hurrah for that. I reckon I'm pretty much in favour of books and literature, too, but the Goodreads Reading Challenge just sets my teeth on edge.


    It starts right there in the name. Since when was reading any kind of challenge? Isn't it supposed to be fun? Maybe not for children still learning to differentiate their Perfect Peters from their Horrid Henrys, or for the one in six UK adults who still struggle with literacy, but Goodreads is a site for people who are already "readers" . I don't think they have schoolchildren in mind when they suggest you should "raise your reading ambitions" and it certainly doesn't look like a scheme designed to help adult learners "make it to the final chapter". All this talk of pledging, of targets, of tracking your progress, is just another step in the marketisation of the reading experience, another stage in the commodification of literary culture.
    More

    No comments: