NEA survey: Adults are still reading, but look less to literature

A NEA 2012 survey found that the number of adults who read at least one book in 2012 was about the same as 2008, but fewer were picking up literature.

Brian Snyder/Reuters
A Cambridge commuter uses an e-reader.

A new study by the National Endowment for the Arts found that about as many adults are reading as in 2008 but that their perusal of literature has slightly declined.

The NEA compared data to the last survey conducted by the organization in 2008. That year, the NEA found that 54.3 percent of American adults read at least one book, and the number stayed mostly the same for 2012, with 54.5 percent of American adults having read at least one book.

However, the number of adults who read at least one literary title (defined as a novel, play, short story, or poetry) in 2012 declined slightly, with 46.9 percent of adults having done so in 2012 compared to 50.2 in 2008.

As noted by Publishers Weekly, surveys found that 54 percent of adults had read at least one work of literature in 1992 but that the number had fallen to 46.7 of adults by 2002. The NEA responded by creating various programs that encouraged adults to pick up a work of literature, and numbers rose to that 50.2 percent in 2008. However, numbers have now declined again.

According to the NEA, adults who are 65 and older read more than any other age range of adults.

Surprised by the literature numbers? While blockbuster series like the E.L. James “Fifty Shades of Grey” trilogy and the “Hunger Games” trilogy by Suzanne Collins are fiction, chart-toppers such as “Wild” by Cheryl Strayed, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” by Rebecca Skloot, “Lean In” by Sheryl Sandberg all fall into the nonfiction category.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.