Question
What would get Americans to read more books?
Answer
Better books.
Authors and publishers believe in the self-serving myth that the low-brow don't work hard enough.
It's the authors/publishers who don't work hard enough and/or insult them with fluff that's much worse than even mediocre TV.
An entire generation of children devoured 7 fat volumes of Harry Potter, so it can be done.
90% of published books, IMO are either so bad they deserve their unread fate, or not good enough to claim any significant advantage over comparable pieces of TV or Web entertainment/infotainment/education.
Heck, even good writing rarely meets that standard. I find the David Suchet Hercule Poirot to be nearly as good as the books, and the Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes to be better. It typically takes a Dickens level for the book to be significantly better, and a Dickens does not come along every day.
If you can't write a book that simply delivers more value in book form than any reasonable substitute in another medium, don't complain or blame the reader.
Authors and publishers believe in the self-serving myth that the low-brow don't work hard enough.
It's the authors/publishers who don't work hard enough and/or insult them with fluff that's much worse than even mediocre TV.
An entire generation of children devoured 7 fat volumes of Harry Potter, so it can be done.
90% of published books, IMO are either so bad they deserve their unread fate, or not good enough to claim any significant advantage over comparable pieces of TV or Web entertainment/infotainment/education.
Heck, even good writing rarely meets that standard. I find the David Suchet Hercule Poirot to be nearly as good as the books, and the Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes to be better. It typically takes a Dickens level for the book to be significantly better, and a Dickens does not come along every day.
If you can't write a book that simply delivers more value in book form than any reasonable substitute in another medium, don't complain or blame the reader.