Wednesday, May 14, 2025

Male brains, female brains and fictional narrative

  From 2006, originally published in Litkicks:

Male Brains, Female Brains and Fictional Narrative

By Finn Harvor

September 22, 2006


People aren’t buying literary fiction, we are told. Male readers in particular aren’t buying it. The reasons given these days are sometimes based on what academics call “essentialist” explanations; in other words, these activities — or lack thereof — are the result of genes. Women, we are told in recent articles by Ian McEwan, Boris Johnson and others, are hard-wired to empathize and be interested in relationships. Men are more interested in practical issues and, that catch-all word, “facts”. Or, according to this line of thought, they are not interested in reading at all.


An interesting response to this argument was made recently by Lakshmi Chaudhry of In These Times. Chaudhry begins her piece by criticizing David Brooks of the NYT for stating that boys are reading less than girls because schools are teaching “feminized” books.


Chaudhry’s initial point is that Brooks was indulging in neo-conservative thinking. While allowing that there may be a cognitive — that is, genetic — explanation for different reading patterns among men and women, she emphasizes the importance of social conditioning:


“But in a culture infused with polarizing messages about gender, such small differences can be magnified into vast disparities. If the act of reading novels today seems more “girly” — because of female-dominated book clubs or a publishing industry increasingly geared toward its most loyal customers, i.e., women – then men are less likely to do so.”


In short, Chaudhry wants to emphasize the importance social attitudes play, and ends her article by declaring we “we may be headed back to the 19th century, when the novel was considered a low-status, frivolous pastime of ladies of leisure, unfit for real men.”


It needs underlining that this is not an outcome Chaudhry wishes for; in her piece, she suggests that we need to re-engage male readers, especially at the high school level. And this is true. But in her counter-argument to Brooks’ socio-conservative overgeneralizations, Chaudhry misses a crucial point (and also makes an inaccurate overgeneralization of her own: she claims that during the 19th Century, novels were derided as frivolous and the past-time of “ladies of leisure”. In fact, this was clearly untrue during the Victorian period). Before the mid-20th Century, the novel was narrative form. Or rather, it was narrative in its long, stylistically “real” form. As Michael Allen has pointed out, the novel had no competition as a form of narrative from non-print media. And this cultural milieu in which the printed word was paramount was a major factor in the novel’s success as an artistic medium.


The last sentence is key; for if that point at which culture and technology meet were to remain eternally static, it is unlikely the novel would be in danger, as Chaudhry claims, of losing its prestige as a centerpiece of culture if society became more sexist. And that, of course, is because technology does affect culture. Very much so, where the production of narrative is concerned. As a result, when we think of fiction we should not think of novels versus non-fiction books. We should think of novels and movies and TV shows versus non-fiction. For most of the movies and TV shows that are popular are still fictional in nature; they are made up. And their audiences, one presumes, are both male and female.


This is the mistake of the current debate over the fate of the novel: it does not include all fictional narratives in the same large group. It does not recognize that fiction – when defined to include fiction that exists in all media — is having zero trouble retaining its popularity amongst both sexes.


In short, there is no biological drive on the part of men to avoid fiction. Instead, there may (I repeat, may) be a biological drive on the part of men, generally speaking, to prefer image-based media to certain kinds of print-media. In other words, this drive may have no significant depressive effect on men’s overall amount of reading, but may incline them, as a group, to read factual material that can “compete” with the great temptation of images.


More clinical research will need to be done to understand these nuances between how male and female brains process cultural stimuli. (In fact, more research will need to be done in to the question of just what we mean when we use terms such as “male” and “female” brains.)


And, in the meantime, literary commentators attracted to this issue — which, after all, is not unimportant, since the perception that male and female readers buy different sorts of books is having a tremendous influence on the choices publishers are making these days — might do well to think a little more carefully about what we mean when we use terms like “literary fiction”. After all, literature is ultimately another word for good writing. And good writing exists in mediums outside print.

Saturday, May 10, 2025

Gender and reading

 


Male brains, female brains &  fictional narrative #reading #readinghabits #publishingindustry #books
https://youtube.com/shorts/0OhuMZ7RIAM?feature=share

 

Thursday, May 08, 2025

Cats and food

 

Cats! Food! What cats prefer versus what’s good for them #catfood #catnutrition #고양이
https://youtube.com/shorts/90VeamiB2Io?feature=share

Saturday, May 03, 2025

Semi feral cats

 


Semi-feral cats in South Korea 


#feralcats #koreannature #시골생활  #시골고양이 #catfood


Full video at YouTube:

https://youtube.com/shorts/9QPz5T_E0uo?feature=share

Sunday, April 27, 2025

Traditional markets in Seoul

 



The Tongin Shijang is a traditional market in central Seoul. Adapting to changing consumer patterns is its biggest challenge.

Market Alive: Tongin Shijang

https://youtu.be/3sPMafkAPX8

Thursday, April 17, 2025

Mark Carney

 


Who is Mark Carney? (Part one)


#MarkCarney #cdnpoli #canadianelection2025 


YouTube:

https://youtu.be/K5zIoHki1Kc

Tuesday, April 15, 2025

New forms of literature?

 


I recently came across a social media post in which a Canadian author (whose publishing house has a logo emblazoned with the Maple Leaf) was waxing enthusiastically about an American hospital drama on Netflix. Several of her followers — also Canadian, and also patriotically utilizing the Maple Leaf in their IDs — were similarly giddy about the Netflix series. Normally, nothing worth paying attention to about this; it’s common practice in anglophone Canada.


But … but … the threat to Canada’s sovereignty has not magically disappeared, even though the aggression of the threats has moderated somewhat. So what does the future hold? Where Canada’s sovereignty is concerned, nothing pleasant if Canadians don’t change — and in a very radical way — their habits of cultural consumption. English speaking Canada is a highly colonized zone. This leads to the bizarre spectacle of Canadians (like the author mentioned above) spending a lot of time online denouncing American neo-imperialism while simultaneously binge watching US pop culture. And there’s no point in going online oneself and pointing out to these people what they’re doing; emotionally, they’re like teenagers who want “freedom” while demanding an allowance.


So, since people don’t like being told they SHOULD watch or read or listen to certain cultural works (for example, Canadian), this means that the producers of Canadian culture need to think in new ways.


A few years ago, I established a micro press called BridgeText. One of its ideas is that we need more novels that are experienced as movie scripts are.


More here: Toward a New Literature

https://youtu.be/TTux0NcjCHc


And here: https://youtu.be/NALcaQ3QCYs?si=76rj7dAePOZRsZZT


*


Je suis récemment tombé sur une publication sur les réseaux sociaux dans laquelle une auteure canadienne (dont la maison d'édition arbore un logo arborant la feuille d'érable) s'extasiait sur une série américaine sur Netflix, mettant en scène un hôpital. Plusieurs de ses abonnés, eux aussi canadiens et utilisant la feuille d'érable par patriotisme, étaient tout aussi enthousiastes à propos de la série Netflix. Normalement, rien d'intéressant à ce sujet ; c'est une pratique courante au Canada anglophone.


Mais… mais… la menace à la souveraineté du Canada n'a pas disparu comme par magie, même si son agressivité s'est quelque peu atténuée. Alors, que nous réserve l'avenir ? En ce qui concerne la souveraineté du Canada, rien de réjouissant si les Canadiens ne changent pas – et de manière très radicale – leurs habitudes de consommation culturelle. Le Canada anglophone est une zone fortement colonisée. Cela donne lieu à l'étrange spectacle de Canadiens (comme l'auteure mentionnée plus haut) passant beaucoup de temps en ligne à dénoncer le néo-impérialisme américain tout en regardant des séries de culture populaire américaine. Et il est inutile d'aller soi-même en ligne et de montrer à ces gens ce qu'ils font ; Émotionnellement, ils sont comme des adolescents qui aspirent à la « liberté » tout en exigeant une allocation.


Ainsi, comme les gens n'aiment pas qu'on leur dise qu'ils DEVRAIENT regarder, lire ou écouter certaines œuvres culturelles (par exemple, canadiennes), cela signifie que les producteurs de culture canadienne doivent réfléchir différemment.


Il y a quelques années, j'ai fondé une micro-édition appelée BridgeText. L'une de ses idées est que nous avons besoin de plus de romans qui se vivent comme des scénarios de films.


Plus ici : Nouveau futur littéraire?

https://youtu.be/9muSm6LScHE

Sunday, April 13, 2025

Does Canadian culture have a future?

 



 All these people — each and every one — are self perceived Canadian nationalists. And all of them are giddy over an American Netflix series. Normally, nothing worth paying attention to about this; it’s common practice in anglophone Canada.


But … but … the threat to Canada’s sovereignty has not magically disappeared, even though the aggression of the threats has moderated somewhat. So what does the future hold? Where Canada’s sovereignty is concerned, nothing pleasant if Canadians don’t change — and in a very radical way — their habits of cultural consumption.


However, people don’t like being told they SHOULD watch or read or listen to certain cultural works. It rankles, and seems scolding. That means that the producers of Canadian culture need to think in new ways.


A few years ago, I established a micro press called BridgeText. One of its ideas is that we need more novels that are experienced as movie scripts are.


More here: https://youtu.be/NALcaQ3QCYs?si=76rj7dAePOZRsZZT


And here: https://youtu.be/g40XxM8phDI?si=U690nbROcWeqZHth


Tous ces gens – chacun sans exception – se perçoivent comme des nationalistes canadiens. Et tous sont enthousiasmés par une série américaine sur Netflix. Normalement, rien d'intéressant à ce sujet ; c'est une pratique courante au Canada anglophone.


Mais… mais… la menace à la souveraineté du Canada n'a pas disparu comme par magie, même si son agressivité s'est quelque peu atténuée. Alors, que nous réserve l'avenir ? En ce qui concerne la souveraineté du Canada, rien de réjouissant si les Canadiens ne changent pas – et de manière très radicale – leurs habitudes de consommation culturelle.


Cependant, les gens n'aiment pas qu'on leur dise qu'ils DEVRAIENT regarder, lire ou écouter certaines œuvres culturelles. C'est critiquable et semble réprimandant. Cela signifie que les producteurs de culture canadienne doivent repenser leurs façons de penser.


Il y a quelques années, j'ai fondé une micro-édition appelée BridgeText. L'une de ses idées est que nous avons besoin de plus de romans qui se vivent comme des scénarios de films.


Plus ici : Nouveau futur littéraire?

https://youtu.be/9muSm6LScHE

Friday, April 11, 2025

Spring flowers and micro geographies

 


How the patterns of blooming flowers are affected by micro geographies #ecology #springflowers #진달래

https://youtube.com/shorts/94_akRRuGOM?feature=share

Saturday, April 05, 2025

Who is Mark Carney?

 


Who is Mark Carney? (Part one)

https://youtu.be/K5zIoHki1Kc

Saturday, March 29, 2025

Job cuts two

 


What will be the effect of massive job cuts in the US federal govt? What will be the repercussions of making large numbers of employees jobless? 


Full video at YouTube: What will be the effect of massive job cuts in the US  govt? Good employees jobless. 

https://youtube.com/shorts/AXHiObm9gZs?feature=share