Technological component

Posted on January 6, 2015 by knlistman

BinaryData50Over the past few weeks I’ve been looking a psychological with an eye to creating realistic characters. Frequently I’ve been hearing a lot about how the millennial generation is different from other generations.  I really have not found any creditable research describing exactly what the difference is. Writers on this topic seem to be making it up based on what they think is logical for people who have grown up with computers and the internet.

Of course I have my own logic based on working with millennial age students and my own children who were born in the 90’s. Recently I was reviewing research I used for a literacy program developed as a consultant in 2005. What struck me as ironic was that one of the major points of the research was that this program required “a technological component.” However, the research paper was vague concerning the kind of  actual kind of technology needed or the results it was suppose to achieve. I showed this attempt to be cutting edge without specific information to my millennial age daughter.

Her response “Technological component? It could be a digital clock,  or one of those reading toys with a tiny computer inside.” The millennial generation often look with a jaded eye on the idea that technology by itself is a solution to any problem. They have grown up with instant Internet access and still see a world full of problems. Instead they want to know what specific technology will be used because they feel the pressure to know how to use it.

Of course millennials use electronic technology more than the previous generation, because it is around in greater abundance. But they are no more likely to adopt new technology as they get older than the past generations. In fact I have seen many millennials disgruntled with new versions of electronic products and software programs (or apps as they are now called).  It’s not just a matter of older generation not learning technology, younger people are getting tired of constant change also. They simply are already accustom to a set of technology that was developed later.

So I find the differences in generations is more a matter of environment heightened by superficial appearances  that people adopt because they want to belong to a group.  As a child I watched TV more than my parents did, who listened to radio more than their parents did, who probably read penny novels more than their parents did. Attention spans, persistence and people skills really do not change with generations, rather it is the unwritten rules on what is acceptable that changes.

Despite the major technology emphasis in classes, companies think students coming from college are less prepared for the workplace than in the past – in the sixties any degree was good enough to show you could learn on the job – because change in industry always outstrips change in education. There is a good reason for this; education is supposed to provide problem solving skills which is a far more classic and non-specific skill. If you want to see where education is headed, you can look to the workplace. Computer assisted instruction and learning simulators have were employed in the workplace when Roddenberry was writing the Star Trek scripts (no he didn’t make up the computer based schools on his own). The corporate world threw itself into e-learning because of the reduced expense of not having trainers on the road, only to find that their employees simply were not learning as well from e-learning. The pendulum is swing back to learning face to face.

So maybe the millennial generation will look at their own children and ask “Why do you actually want to be with your friends to talk to them?”

Image by W.Rebel (Own work) CC BY 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

 

 

 

Posted in Education trends, Technology in education | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

What kind of deviant?

Posted on December 30, 2014 by knlistman

DSCN0668c1Authors are well aware that readers favor the rebel who follows a different drummer or stands defiant before the crowd. Social psychologists and sociologists have actually done  a good deal of research on groups’ reaction to this kind of person. The kind of person whom they describe as exhibiting deviant behavior.

Researchers have even categorized these deviants. The first group  are the passive deviants, who differ from the majority group due to forces not in their control. Whether they fail to follow the unwritten rules of society through ignorance, inability or a psychological compulsion. They are excluded socially. Sometimes it is simply the matter of an atypical intelligence, learned behaviors from another social class, or differences in appearance that causes society to exclude these people. In real life, many people tend to avoid passive deviants like the plague, almost as if they could catch whatever unavoidable factor causes these passive deviants to differ from the acceptable norm.

Of course, fiction is different than real life and these passive deviants form the ranks of the underdog heroes found in many stories. In real life the goal is often to help the passive deviant blend into the average population and be accepted by the group. In fiction this simple outcome is almost always unacceptable. Instead the underdog is expected to rise to lead their own group or overthrow and replace the leadership of the original rejecting group  – basically avenging themselves on the “in group.” Ironically in fiction the readers expects the passive deviant to exclude the others in the same manner as they were excluded by taking vengeance on members who found their differences objectionable. This actually gives a bit of insight into most people’s heavy dependence on being part of a group.

The second kind of deviants are intentional in their action. There are some that are considered harmless nuisances or eccentric. These defy convention for originalities’ sake or purposely flaunt group rules to promote themselves.  Others are considered criminals because of the harmful intent and result of their deviant actions.  However the lines between these types of deviations from society is not always clear. The intentional deviant that we cheer on in stories we read is the principled deviant, the person who speaks up against wrong doing, who rebels against the group when it treats others unfairly. However, as we look into this in more detail we find that in real life our relation to this principled kind of rebel is not related to their actual moral stance much as it is to our own behavior.

 Monin, B.and and O’Connor, K. (2011) Reactions to Defiant Deviants-Deliverance or Defensiveness? In J. Jetten, and M.J. Hornsey,(eds) Rebels in Groups: Dissent, Deviance, Difference, and Defiance. 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

 

 

 

Posted in Group psychology, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

When characters will not conform

Posted on December 23, 2014 by knlistman

Jeff 2007The social psychologist Solomon Asch  is famous for his experiments on  how peer pressure affects our perceptions in 1950s.  According to Asch if all those answering before the research participant selected the same incorrect answer approximately 76% of the people would choose that same obviously incorrect answer. [1] So if most people are in a group of ten or twelve people and all of the others say the sky is normally red, the average person will agree and somehow rationalize agreeing with a statement that they know to be false. Perhaps the question is about Mars, and not Earth. The sky is normally red on Mars, isn’t it?  This really has not changed since this 1950s, if anything differs it is the fact that less than 24% of the people tend to disagree when they know that the others are wrong.

But there is something else about conformity that Asch did not delve into. It is our cultural liking for rebels and mavericks. These people are often not in our immediate circle, which make them easier to tolerate because they are not directly disagreeing with us. However, this counter-cultural preference for the non-conformist shows that s perceptions really do not change based on peer pressure. People still know the sky is normally blue; they are just going along with everyone else in order to avoid ruffling feathers.  They buckle under knowing full well the right answer because they are reluctant to face possible negative reactions from the group.[2]

The majority of people admire the person who has the guts to do what they do not – challenge group norms.  That’s right. Conformist don’t seem to be as empathetic or as interesting a character in fiction as well as real life.  Apparently loyalty to a group at the price of individuality is the basis of fictional dystopia for most people.  Nemeth and Goncalo, psychologists from Berkeley and Cornell use the word “Orwellian” to describe a group with extreme emphasis on loyalty.  “These types of groups are more likely to be found in horror or science fiction movies than matching any kind of reality.”[3]

However, a problem arises with creating the non-conformist hero that most readers admire. Authors are not immune to the tendency to exclude maverick acquaintances who do not conform to their own “norms.” The source of people to draw from when modeling the non-conformist is often limited.  If this character is based on authors’ own desire to dissent, they will simply  write the same “unique” character repeatedly until this literary personality becomes predictable.

As much as any other group, those that record stories for the generations need to see the value of dissent in real life.  Sociologist Erikson saw deviants as part of a healthy society,  and curiously enough he quotes Aldous Huxley (author of Brave New World) to support this view.

 Now tidiness is undeniably good – but a good of which it is easily possible to have too much and at too high a price… The good life can only be lived in a society in which tidiness is preached and practised, but not too fanatically, and where efficiency is always haloed, as it were, by a tolerated margin of mess– even nourishing this society.[5]

Just as this quote notes that tidiness can be an unbearable burden when taken too far, the writer must balance the disagreeable traits of the non-conforming hero with value that they bring. A person who almost never imitates the actions of others is probably just too obnoxious to be likable. This balance has to be woven through out the story creating a type of inconsistent non-conformist. One who sometimes says the sky is normally red when they  know perfectly well that’s not true. However, being honest enough to admit faults is what keeps the character from losing the empathy of the reader. That is the very strength of the non-conforming hero.

[1] Asch, S. E. (1952). Effects of group pressure on the modification and distortion of judgments. In G. E. Swanson, T. M. Newcomb & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology. New York: NY Holt.
[2] Aronson, T. D.; Wilson, R. M.; Akert, E. (2010). Social Psychology (7 ed.). Pearson
[4] Nemeth, C. J. & Jack A. Goncalo, J.A. (2011) Rogues and Heroes: Finding Value in Dissent.  In J. Jetten, and M.J. Hornsey,(eds) Rebels in Groups: Dissent, Deviance, Difference, and Defiance. 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
[5] Erikson, K.T. (1966). Wayward Puritans: A Study in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

 

 

 

Posted in Group psychology, Literature, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Writing like you talk

Posted on December 16, 2014 by knlistman

aside2When reading a professional author’s discussion thread, I noted that more than one person assumed the trick to creating a unique writer’s voice was “writing like you talk.”  There is some truth to this if you are a good verbal storyteller. But many good writers are do not excel at public speaking.

Recently I was discussing a book written by a prominent newscaster, mimicking his unique conversational mannerisms. One of the people made an interesting observation. He said, “You can really hear him speaking as you read it, and that really slows you down.” Now, I prefer reading to listening for the very reason that I can read about three times faster than I can listen. This led me to consider the complications of writing like you speak.

Most people tend to be more dramatic and less accurate when speaking. This allows them to be heard over competing voices. Frequent repetition is used … frequently. People also fill their speech with meaningless phrases, such as “when you think about things,” because they are actually thinking about things, such as what to say next. One of the biggest drawbacks to writing this way is increased word count for the amount of content. This may be at the root of my friend’s perception “that really slows you down” when reading a book written in this manner.

Use of  current catch phrases and regional interjections set the tone for the text, but often contribute little or nothing to the meaning. Don’t get me wrong; tone is necessary in writing. Much of how we interpret what people say is by listening to their tone of voice. Because there is no audible tone in writing it requires some unique phrases to achieve the same impact as vocal inflections.

A good verbal storyteller using lots of “colorful language” may be able to appeal to people in their region. Appealing to a larger crowd requires more. Write like you speak, with smatterings of colloquialisms, and you may be understood by your neighbor today. But remove the reader a few years, a few hundred miles, or a few rungs on the socioeconomic ladder, and suddenly it becomes hard work to read what you have written. If the content is not worth the effort, people stop reading.

Occasionally, I enjoy books by authors who write in the vernacular… in small doses. Mark Twain actually got his start as a lecturer, who made his living by talking. His novels were published as serial installments in magazines for a reason. Short passages in folksy language are interesting. However, I witnessed too many students dread the time they spent slogging through his imitation of Old English speech in The Prince and the Pauper. Even I eventually had to give up on his unabridged version of A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court.

So when you decide to write like you speak, recall when you sat in a conversation as the other person chattered on assuming word choice made them sound interesting. Remember all the meandering thoughts, unfinished sentences and repetition. Now, edit your work ruthlessly until it flows. The content should be what drives it. People pay attention when you speak because that is polite. But you’ll never know when they simply stopped reading.

 

 

Posted in Style and voice, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Characters and cohorts

Posted on December 8, 2014 by knlistman

group 2011 (1)In fiction most protagonists like most people are not complete loners. Interactions with their cohorts make up a good portion of novels, so creating these peers takes a bit of thought. What enables a real-life group to be innovative in business also makes for interesting interplay between the main character and their group.  A peek inside of what helps real work groups to collaborate and solve problems maybe the key to creating the cohort that complements the unforgettable protagonist.

With all the current emphasis on collaborative thinking and collective knowledge in the workplace, you might assume assembling a large group of properly motivated people could solve almost any problem. You don’t really believe this do you? The larger the group is, the less each person is inclined to contribute. According to Fortune Magazine 4 to 5 is the magic number. [1] Wharton School of Business  uses 5 to 6. Get beyond this and you will have social loafing, members who fail to contribute much or are kept from contributions due to the self-enforced conformity of large groups [2]. Most people will then tend to follow the loudest voice that supports the status quo. Of course maintaining status quo not only limits creativity. It also makes a boring plot line.

The ideal size of the team depends on its goal, but teams larger than eight people fail to function efficiently.  [2] In the same manner, a large number of well drawn auxiliary characters dilute attention to the struggles and triumphs of the main character. And they will confuse the readers to boot. Students studying literature keep lists of characters when reading epic novels to make enjoyment easier; not all readers are willing to do that.

In real situations, diverse groups are smarter and better at problem solving. This is particularly noticeable in the case of gender and ethnic diversity. Add females to a formerly all male group (and vice versa) and the collaborative IQ rises.[3] Ethnic differences make viewpoint differences more acceptable because, oddly enough, people become more upset when a view that conflicts with theirs is proposed by someone that looks and acts like them, rather than someone obviously different.[2]

This kind of attitude occurs in the fictional world also. Consider the difference between a foil and a doppelganger. Cervantes’ Don Quixote is tall, thin, and an impractical idealist, while his Sancho Panza, is short, fat and a realist. These differences in temperaments and appearance not only play the main character off of his side kick, but provide a range of resources so that they can assisting in helping each other get out of trouble.

However, the when the main character has an unnatural twin, a person who appears the same physically but is on the other side of the behavioral spectrum, the outcome is virtually bound to be tragic. It doesn’t matter whether the twin is an actual human, as in the Charles Dicken’s “Tale of Two Cities, a mythical doppelganger, as in Edgar Allen Poe’s “William Wilson,” or simply an illusion as in Fyodor Dotoevsky’s “The Double.” One (or sometimes both) of the identical appearing people are almost always doomed.

When you think about it perhaps it would help people doing research on successful work group successful to take a peek into successful main characters and their cohorts.

[1] Useem, Jerry.  “How to Build a Great Team” Fortune  Magazine, June 1, 2006 
[2] “Is Your Team Too Big? Too Small? What’s the Right Number?”Knowledge@Wharton. Jun 14, 2006
[3] Woolley, Anita. and Malone, Thomas. Defend Your Research: What Makes a Team Smarter? More Women, Harvard Business Review Magazine June, 2011.

 

 

 

Posted in Creativity, Group psychology, Literature, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

When characters confuse

Posted on December 2, 2014 by knlistman

IMAGE0043a copyWhen Edgar Allen Poe published “Murders in the Rue Morgue” in 1841 the murder mystery was a relatively new genre. He wrote a few more of these increasingly popular detective stories before leaving behind his own mystery. In 1849 he was found wandering injured and delirious through the streets of Baltimore. The brilliant writer never regained his wits enough to explain what had happen to him. He died a few days later leaving behind a real unsolved mystery.

Current detectives have more techniques for identifying possible suspect but still lean heavily on the use of a psychological profile. You are probably familiar with a few of the terms they throw around, such as calling card, MO, and motive.  These are not just reserved for suspects in murder mysteries.  Fictional characters take on their own personalities when you remember to consider each of these features. Paying attention to these aspects  doesn’t make characters predictable (otherwise criminals would be easier to catch) but does make them less confusing.

The calling card is a quirky behavior, an eccentric ritual that goes beyond what is needed.  This  is also called the signature aspect in criminology because it comparatively unique. It provides an insight into motive and is derived from a deep seated psychological need.  (Major characters should also have unfulfilled psychological needs unless they are robots.) For example, a woman who had to grow up too fast in a distressing family situation may show a propensity for collecting stuffed teddy bears in an attempt to regain a lost childhood. Another from a similar background  may compensate by calling her own children on the phone, every day. Signature behavior develops uniquely for each person based on personality, motive and MO. It may increase or decrease but doesn’t really change.

MO or Modus operandi is Latin for method of operation. This is a character’s preferred way of interacting with others.  Consider two different teenage boys in their attempts to attract teenage girls. One may decide a show of physical strength, such as pelting a rival with a football, is the way to gain attention from the fairer sex. The other, who uses his wit may  point out the disproportional number of felons in the NFL after the pelting incident. Modus operandi is the preferred method that people use to reach a goal. It is not fixed, but based on learned behavior and changes over time as the character gains confidence through experience or descends into neurosis due to stress.  However, there has to be a reason, a point in time or an event that you can put your finger on, that causes the shift in MO.

Finally we come to motive. We may never understand why real people do what they do, but we expect to be able to detect motives in fiction. The reasons that drive characters to act may be initially hidden but should be revealed as the story progresses. A character’s motives can be transformed but this calls for an event with much more earth-shaking than that needed for developing a new MO. Just like the calling card, internal motivation tends to remain constant, unless the character goes through trauma or brain surgery.   The calling card can provide a window into the character’s motivation if you are subtle about connecting the two. Readers often enjoy uncovering this on their own. After all a major point of creating the story is for the reader’s enjoyment.

Posted in Creativity, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

When characters collide

Posted on November 25, 2014 by knlistman


Face_Off copyConsider the possible basic conflicts in fiction:  man against environment, man against man, man against society, and man against self.  In most plots the conflicts are between people.  Even in Robinson Caruso and Castaway, tales of man surviving in isolation, other people are part of the conflict. The fact that the protagonist  learned to survive  on his own didn’t bring either story to an end. When people arrived on Robinson’s Caruso’s island, they weren’t friendly. The enemy had to be defeated. In Castaway the  biggest conflict occurred when the main character returned to civilization only to realize that the love of his life had married someone else. Contact with people only brought new conflicts.

What causes the conflict between fictional characters is often over simplified. Typically, character A and character B want the same thing, but they don’t want to share. This love triangle plot is played over and over again with competition not necessarily for the affection of a person but for a coveted prize, a position of power, or a piece of land handed down by the family. However, there needs to be another conflict, one of personality which keeps the two characters from doing the smart thing and compromising to work out this difficulty.

Personality conflicts are played out in real life frequently.  One person is emotional, but sensitive and the other logical, but cold. One person is quick to take offense when another offers criticism, but the critique is really meant to help.  A subtle war starts because one person perceives that another is getting the special privileges, which very well may be true because people who treat others equitably are very rare. So, a collision of characters can often be drawn from simply watching people around you.

In fiction authors often play heavy favorites with characters, creating heroes with admirable qualities and villains that are evil simply because they are.  However, intriguing antagonists have real personalities that cause them to want to block the hero from reaching the goal.

Creating memorable conflict between characters requires an understanding of modus operandi or MO.  MOs don’t just belong to criminals. They belong to everyone. These are the methods characters use to get what they want.  If two clashing characters want the same thing, how they go about obtaining it separates them.  This gives clues into internal motivations so authors do not have to blatantly describe characters as “good” or “bad.” Modeling characters on real personality conflicts results in heroes and villains whose life like immediacy draws the reader’s interest. The conflict in which neither one is the shining knight or the dragon is much more compelling.

Posted in Creativity, Literary devices, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

What makes a character, a character?

Posted on November 18, 2014 by knlistman

Recently I was following a thread of writers discussing how to find names that make characters memorable.  Honestly, I believe that writers should be looking at the reverse situation.  It is the skillful creation of a character whose strengths and weaknesses  strike a chord of truth in the reader that make the character’s name memorable. Names like Scarlet, Sherlock, Romeo and Ulysses invoke images of their fictional counterparts.

People seek out empathetic protagonists when they read. These characters are constructed so that people can relate to them and even feel an emotional connection with them. One critical thing to remember is not everybody will identify with the same kind of character, which is fortunate because I would hate to be reading about the same person over and over again. It’s fairly clear that the ideal fictional character is a mix of strengths and weakness–neither perfect or perfectly rotten–but it’s not as clear how to create a mix that enables people to empathize with a character.

If your characters care about no one else, readers probably will not care about them. In a recent study done at Princeton University loyalty and dependability were high on the positive characteristics that both men and women should exhibit.  But not surprisingly most of the desirable traits for males and females differed. When I compared those listed for females and males I found the following items high on both the studies done with the general population and college student:

Desirable female traits                                Desirable male traits 
friendly                                                                       high self-esteem
cheerful                                                                      strong personality
attention to appearance (attractive)                  athletic
warm & kind                                                            self reliant
sensitive                                                                    ambitious
 

Most people studied were fairly tolerant of people showing a trait associated with the opposite gender as long as it was positive. But the male traits that were less acceptable were seen as downright objectionable in a female, and vice versa. So, be careful with the faults that round out your hero and/or heroine to make them more real. Readers are more likely to reject a male character that has negative traits connected with females and more likely to condemn a female exhibiting typically male faults. So what did the researchers find as the most undesirable traits?

Most undesirable female traits          Most undesirable male traits                    
stubborn                                                               shy
controlling                                                           moody
cynical                                                                  naive
promiscuous                                                       melodramatic
self-righteous                                                      gullible
arrogant                                                              weak
 

Now, flip these around and apply them to the other gender. When we read about a shy, naïve, melodramatic, gullible or weak female we often don’t even think of these as faults. You will find many male protagonists in the annals of literature that are stubborn, controlling, cynical and arrogant. Sometimes this is falsely attributed as evidence of strength. There are also a quantity of men romantic leads with a checkered background of promiscuity, but only a sprinkling female protagonists with that trait.

The challenge remains of making characters with these faults appeal to a wider audience. The key is to have the protagonist become aware of the fault and willing change, unless you want a tragic ending (like that of the moody Heathcliff) or intend to show satire (as with the naïve Candide). So, be very careful when assigning the faults listed above, because you are inviting your readers to judge your characters harshly.

Prentice, D.A, and Carranza, E. (2002) What Women and Men Should Be, Shouldn’t Be, Are Allowed to Be and Don’t Have to Be: The Contents of Prescriptive Gender Stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 269-281. Blackwell Publishing, USA
Posted in Creativity, Fiction in education, Literary devices, Writer's resource | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

What makes a classic, a classic?

Posted on November 11, 2014 by knlistman

When a person refers to classic art, you automatically assume it is the style derived from classic Greek art. This style is associated with city-states on a small Greek peninsula beginning about 500 B.C. and ending 323 B.C., at the death of Alexander the Great. There are other civilizations with other classic periods, blooms in culture led to the height of artistic expression. Why do we assume that the culture is automatically Greek when it is not identified?  One clue is the ending date, the death of the Alexander the Great. Alexander was actually a Macedonian, but military empires often do not come up with their own “culture.” Rather he adopted one of a conquered region and spread it where ever his armies traveled. Having a similar language and culture makes it much easier to rule a huge empire. When the Romans took over they were too busy building roads and outposts to maintain a huge empire. They adopted Greek ways, too.

Fast forward several hundred years and you have Europeans during the Renaissance rediscovering this “classic” style spread by the Roman emperors. However, the Renaissance wasn’t just about architecture and sculpture. It was also about literature. So what makes classic literature a classic? Largely it’s acceptance by professors at major universities.  One of these, Harold Bloom of Yale University, is known for his book about books, The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages . This discussion of classic books has  become surprisingly popular, even though it is obviously biased towards English literature. Bloom credits William Shakespeare’s plays and poetry with giving rise to the style of writing that continued to inspire the great works of European literature.

Most students do not realize that Shakespeare was not an “academic,” a person who wrote for other highly educated people, but rather a producer of popular entertainment. Common people paid a small amount to go stand for hours and watch his plays just like teenagers crowd to the theater today. Also many students also do not realize that Shakespeare’s plays contain quite a bit of suggestive language. As one perceptive student said, If you don’t understand a particular phrase in a Shakespearean play, it is probably R-rated. However, the fact that his work has lasted so long is an indication of its general appeal and quality. It also an indication of how much the actors wanted to take part in his popular plays. Shakespeare remained famous when other playwrights faded from history because these actors paid to get his work published.

However, what contributed the most to Shakespeare’s work becoming “classics” was his popularity in a growing political power. It helped that Shakespeare was writing in the Elizabethan period, the dawn of  the British empire. It seems as if the power of a nation is as important to becoming a classic as the actual artistic worth of the work.

Posted in Creativity, Education trends, Literature, Poetry | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Let students read what they want?

Posted on November 4, 2014 by knlistman

04242012semana_de_la_cultura086Reading literature in education may be on the way out. It is one of the many previous foundational skills that have been thrown aside to find a place for all the additional science, math and technology that a “competitive” county needs in this world’s economy. In a recent discussion with English teachers I found many who thought there was no problem with exposing secondary students to works written only in the last fifty years or less. Some preferred an even more recent time frame and choose nonfiction or new popular novels to give students books that they found easier to read. They were willing to give students assignments that didn’t require analysis because the author basically told the story.

What do we have to lose when we no longer require students to read works that are not easily read but have withstood the test of time? Perhaps we will be robbing students of a chance to increase empathy and social skills. Being able to grasp the mental state of other people is valuable for functioning in society. Researchers and scientists do not know a lot about what contributes to this skill. However, two recent studies show that reading fiction, and in particular literary fiction, increases it.

A study by Mar and Oatley (2010)  from York University found that individual who choose to read fiction often were more able to empathize with others and understand the world from their perspective. They made no division between literature and popular fiction.[1] A more recent study by Kidd and Castano (2013) indicates that reading literary fiction at least temporarily increase people’s ability to understand that others have differing beliefs, values, goals and desires.[2]

Kidd and Castano , researchers from the New School for Social Research, conducted experiments to test participant’s accuracy in identifying the emotions of others after they had been reading popular fiction, non-fiction, literary texts or nothing at all. They found those that had read literary texts were able to accurately identify the emotions than those who had been reading popular fiction or non-fiction.

So what exactly is the difference between popular fiction and literature?

According to the literary theory put forward by Roland Barthe fictional text is divided into two types. He describes “readerly” text as those in which the reader is mostly passive, and does not have to make much effort to receiving the text. This type of text is largely entertaining and the author tells you what you are experiencing. On the other hand “writerly” text require that the reader engage with the writer. This text requires greater effort to read and comprehend the codes of meaning.[3]

You open a book of what we call popular fiction and you know from the get-go who is going to be the good guy and the bad guy.[4]

Emanuele Castano

We tend to see ‘readerly’ more in genre fiction like adventure, romance and thrillers, where the author dictates your experience as a reader. Literary [writerly] fiction lets you go into a new environment and you have to find your own way.[5]

David Comer Kidd

Of course there is not a rigid line of demarcation between the two. However, literature is usually marked by an in depth focus on characters inner feelings and thoughts. Also, characters tend not to remain static so the reader has to make a effort, and construct their own frame of reference to understand the character. This is work that the students may not want to do, but it does have its benefit.

[1] Paul, A. M. “Reading Literature Makes Us Smarter and Nicer” Time. June 03, 2013
[2] Kidd, D.C. and Emanuele C., “Reading Literary Fiction Improves Theory of Mind” Science 18 October 2013 Vol. 342 no. 6156 pp. 377-380, Published Online October 3 2013
[3] Barthe, R. The Pleasure of the Text. Straus and Giroux, Inc. Originally published in French as Le Plaisir du texte 1973 by Editions du Seuil, Paris
[4] Greenfieldboyce, N. “Want To Read Others’ Thoughts? Try Reading Literary Fiction” NPR. October 04, 2013 4:24 PM ET
[5] Bury, L.  “Reading literary fiction improves empathy, study finds”  The Guardian. Tuesday 8 October 2013 03.00 EDT

 

 

 

 

Posted in Education trends, Literature, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , , , , | 4 Comments