Skip to main content

Full text of "Who reads literature? : the future of the United States as a nation of readers"

See other formats


-  -JT-. J->  -:-.=i<s«t;-.,»t-,..,i3¥- 


1 

JPIB!^^^i:'?;,T^'?v^"i*  ^ "  ■'->■ ' "' 

Wm 


iNicholas  Zill  and  Marianne  Winglee 
n     Foreword  by  Jonathan  Yardley 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2012  with  funding  from 

LYRASIS  Members  and  Sloan  Foundation 


http://archive.org/details/whoreadsliteratuOOzill 


WHO  READS  1 1 1 1 R  VI I  Rl  ' 


WHO  READS  LITERATURE? 

The  Future  of  the  United  States 
as  a  Nation  of  Readers 

Nicholas  Zill 

and 

Marianne  Winglce 

Foreword  by 
Jonathan  Yardley 


SEVEN  LOCKS  PRESS 

Cabin  John,  Md  /  Washington,  DC 


Who  Reads  Literature?  is  Report  *22  in  a  series  on  matters  of  interest  to  the  arts 
community  commissioned  by  the  Research  Division  of  the  National  Endowment 
for  the  Arts. 

Foreword  ©  by  The  Washington  Post.  It  originally  appeared  in  The  Washington 
Post  on  August  28,  1989.  It  is  reprinted  here  with  permission  of  the  author  and 
The  Washington  Post. 


Library  of  Congress  Cataloging-in-Publication  Data 

Zill,  Nicholas. 

Who  reads  literature?  :  the  future  of  the  United  States  as  a  nation  of  readers  / 
Nicholas  Zill  and  Marianne  Winglee  :  foreword  by  Jonathan  Yardley. 

p.  cm.  —  (Research  Division  report  /  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  ;  22) 

ISBN  0-932020-86-0 :  $9.95 

1.  Books  and  reading — United  States— Forecasting.    2.  Literature- 
Appreciation — United  States — Forecasting.    I.  Winglee,  Marianne.    II.  Title. 
III.  Series:  Research  Division  report  (National  Endowment  for  the  Arts.  Research 
Division) :  22. 

Z1003.2.Z54     1990  90-33699 

028.9093— dc20  CIP 


Manufactured  in  the  United  States  of  America 

Designed  by  Giles  Bayley 

Cover  design  by  Betsy  Bayley 

Typeset  by  Bets,  LTD,  Ithaca,  NY 

Printed  by  McNaughton  &  Gunn,  Saline,  MI 


Seven  Locks  Press  is  a  Washington-based  book  publisher  of  non fiction  works  on 
social,  political  and  cultural  issues.  It  takes  its  name  from  a  series  of  lift  locks 
on  the  Chesapeake  and  Ohio  Canal. 

For  more  information  or  a  catalog: 

Seven  I/)cks  Press 

P.O.  Box  27 

Cabin  John,  MD  20818 

(301)320-2130 


Contents 


Foreword  vii 

Introduction  1 

Chapter  1:  7 

Readers  of  Fiction,  Poetry  and  Drama: 
How  Many  and  Who  Are  They? 


Chapter  2: 
What  the  Readers  Are  Reading 

23 

Chapter  3: 
Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation 

35 

Chapter  4: 
Expanding  the  Audience: 
What  Can  Be  Done? 

73 

Technical  Appendix 

87 

Notes 

99 

Foreword 


Several  years  ago  Walker  Percy  wondered  aloud,  in  the  pages  of 
a  national  magazine,  about  the  number  of  Americans  who  actual- 
ly buy,  read,  and  discuss  serious  contemporary  literature.  It  was, 
he  thought,  a  pathetically  small  number,  perhaps  one  percent  of 
the  adult  population  or  even  less:  a  serious  literary  community, 
that  is,  of  somewhere  between  one  and  two  million  Americans, 
scarcely  a  consequential  quantity  in  a  culture  where  audiences  in 
the  tens  of  millions  are  routinely  tuned  into  television  sitcoms  and 
sporting  events. 

This  gloomy  assessment  caused  a  flurry  of  controversy  among 
the  lit'ry  folk;  they  had  assumed  themselves  to  be  a  far  larger  crowd, 
if  not  indeed  a  horde,  so  not  merely  to  be  disabused  of  this  notion 
but  to  have  the  message  brought  by  one  of  their  own  was  anything 
except  pleasant.  But  the  stir  came  and  went  quickly,  in  the  main 
because  no  one  had  any  hard  evidence  to  refute  Percy's  complaint 
and  also  because,  let's  face  it,  not  many  outside  the  literary  com- 
munity were  interested. 


iiii       Who  Reads  Literature? 

Still,  the  questions  won't  go  away:  Who  reads  serious  litera- 
ture in  the  United  States,  and  how  many  of  them  are  there?  These 
are  matters  of  continuing  interest  to  authors,  scholars,  and  others 
whose  careers  are  predicated  on  the  existence  of  a  viable  literary 
community,  and  they  are  of  interest  as  well  to  those  whose  invest- 
ment is  more  overtly  commercial:  publishers,  booksellers  and 
wholesalers,  journalists,  and  other  media  folk.  Like  any  other  group 
in  our  economy,  the  literary  community  is  a  market  to  be  identi- 
fied and  exploited  by  those  with  something  to  sell  to  it;  thus  its 
size  and  character  are  matters  of  more  than  passing  interest  to  some 
persons  and  institutions  that  are  not,  themselves,  necessarily  mem- 
bers of  it. 

In  these  circumstances  it  is  useful  to  have  a  Who  Reads  Liter- 
ature: The  Future  of  the  United  States  as  a  Nation  of  Readers.  As 
one  can  quickly  surmise,  it  is  the  work  of  people  who  specialize 
in  the  jargon  of  the  social  sciences:  Nicholas  Zill,  a  social  psy- 
chologist, and  Marianne  Winglee,  a  statistical  analyst.  They  have 
assembled  a  good  deal  of  valuable  information  and  they  have 
managed  to  make  a  degree  of  sense  out  of  it. 

As  so  often  happens  when  the  voodoo  priests  of  sociology,  psy- 
chology and  statistics  work  their  solemn  magic  on  human  behavior, 
what  this  survey  does  is  tell  us,  in  statistics  and  analysis,  what  we 
know  already  through  empirical  observation:  that  Walker  Percy  was 
right.  Zill  and  Winglee  have  their  hearts  in  the  right  place  and  ear- 
nestly wish  the  evidence  told  them  otherwise,  but  what  their  num- 
bers add  up  to  is  that  (a)  "the  proportion  [of  Americans]  who  read 
serious  literature  of  all  forms  in  the  course  of  a  year  seems  to  be 
about  7  to  12  percent  of  the  adult  population"  and  that  (b)  "litera- 
ture reading"  is  "stagnant  or  even  declining,  when  various  demo- 
graphic factors  indicate  that  it  should  be  increasing." 

Even  that  figure  of  7  to  12  percent  is  shaky  at  best,  for  people 
who  claim  to  be  regular  readers  often  admit,  when  pressed  for 
specifics,  that  they  are  regular  readers  not  of  Saul  Bellow  and  Eu- 
dora  Welty  but  of  Stephen  King  and  Danielle  Steele;  if  we  restrict 
readers  of  literature  to  "those  familliar  with  excellent  but  not  widely 
known  authors,  such  as  poets  Adrienne  Rich  or  James  Merrill,  then 
the  size  of  the  audience  for  contemporary  literature  would  become 
minuscule  indeed."  Not  merely  that  but— as  anyone  keeping  a  close 


Foreword      ix 

eye  on  literary  matters  should  realize— to  a  striking  degree  this 
readership  is  defined  by  sex,  education  and  income: 

. . .  if  we  had  to  put  together  a  picture  of  a  typical  reader 
of  literature  in  the  United  States  today,  the  survey  data 
indicate  that  the  person  would  be  a  middle-aged  white 
female  living  in  the  suburbs  of  a  Western  or  Midwestern 
city.  She  would  have  a  college  education,  and  a  middle- 
to  upper-middle  class  income  that  was  not  derived  from 
her  literary  activities.  She  would  be  an  active  and  involved 
individual,  not  a  passive  or  reclusive  one.  She  would  not 
only  read  books  and  magazines,  and  occasionally  try  her 
hand  at  poetry  or  fiction,  but  also  participate  in  a  varie- 
ty of  indoor,  outdoor  and  community  activities. 

And  authors  wonder  why  they're  sent  to  book-and-author 
luncheons  in  Cleveland  and  Minneapolis!  The  explanation  is  sim- 
ple: That's  where  the  readers  are— not  merely  the  readers  of  Judith 
Krantz  and  Belva  Plain,  but  also  the  readers  of  Laurie  Col  win  and 
Gloria  Naylor.  The  perceived  image  of  the  "literary"  American 
reader  as  a  bearded  male  academic  in  a  tweed  jacket  with  leather 
patches  bears  only  scant  connection  to  reality;  the  reader  who  really 
supports  serious  American  literature,  such  of  it  as  there  still  may 
be,  is  far  more  likely  to  be  an  educated  woman  of  a  certain  age 
who  belongs  to  a  neighborhood  book  club,  buys  her  clothes  through 
the  mail  from  Talbots,  contributes  to  Greenpeace,  and  does  volun- 
teer work  at  the  House  of  Ruth. 

Though  Zill  and  Winglee  do  not  say  so,  there  is  a  reason  to 
believe  that  this  has  been  so  for  a  couple  of  generations.  But  now 
literature  is  beginning  to  catch  up  with  its  readers.  "It  can  be  ar- 
gued," Zill  and  Winglee  claim,  "that  the  kinds  of  works  being  pub- 
lished by  literary  presses  in  the  United  States  today  are  very  much 
a  reflection  of  the  interests  and  concerns  of  this  typical  reader," 
and  they  are  absolutely  right. 

If  a  single  generalization  can  be  made  about  contemporary 
American  literature,  apart  from  its  roots  in  the  creative-writing 
schools,  it  would  be  that  it  is  the  province  of  middle-  and  upper- 
middle-class  women.  If  in  the  past  they  were  the  readers,  now  they 
are  the  writers  as  well.  The  point  has  been  made  before,  but  it 


x      Who  Reads  Literature? 

is  worth  making  again:  While  male  writers  of  serious  literature 
under  the  age  of  40  are  notable  in  the  United  States  largely  for 
their  absence  or  their  lack  of  consequence,  female  writers  of  their 
generation  are  notable  both  for  their  numbers  and  for  the  quality 
of  their  work.  Unquestionably,  Zill  and  Winglee  are  right: 

The  women's  movement  may  be  stimulating  female  in- 
volvement with  literature.  Whenever  norms  and  values 
are  in  flux,  literature  has  a  special  role  to  play.  Litera- 
ture can  explore  new  patterns  of  behavior,  provide  charac- 
ters that  serve  as  role  models,  and  give  voice  to  both  the 
exhilaration  and  the  frustrations  that  pioneers  experience. 
The  drive  for  women's  rights  has  helped  to  draw  atten- 
tion to  outstanding  women  writers  of  the  past  and  pres- 
ent, and  to  open  more  opportunities  for  women  in  the 
publishing  and  promotion  of  literature. 

How  large  those  opportunities  will  be  is  questionable  at  best: 
The  world  of  American  literature  is  small  by  any  standard,  and 
over  the  long  haul  is  most  unlikely  to  grow  larger,  in  real  if  not 
numerical  terms.  But  it's  a  woman's  world  now,  and  if  we  are  to 
have  in  the  next  generation  a  literature  of  any  consequence,  it  will 
be  because  women  make  it  so. 

Jonathan  Yardley 


This  article  originally  appeared  in  The  Washington  Post  on  August  28,  1989. 
It  is  reprinted  with  the  permission  of  the  author  and  The  Washington  Post. 


Introduction 


Because  the  art  of  literature  is  inextricably  linked  to  a  country's 
language  and  history,  it  has  traditionally  played  a  central  role  in 
the  culture  of  most  nations.  It  is  difficult  to  think  of  England  with- 
out thinking  of  Shakespeare  and  Dickens,  or  Russia  without  Push- 
kin, Tolstoy,  Chekhov,  and  Dostoyevsky.  So  it  has  been  in  the  United 
States,  at  least  in  the  past.  The  American  cultural  heritage  includes 
characters,  scenes,  and  phrases  from  the  works  of  such  authors 
as  Washington  Irving,  Edgar  Allan  Poe,  Henry  David  Thoreau, 
Herman  Melville,  Walt  Whitman,  Emily  Dickinson,  Mark  Twain, 
Ernest  Hemingway,  and  Eugene  O'Neill,  among  others. 

Today,  however,  there  is  a  widespread  sense  that  the  reading 
of  literature  does  not  occupy  a  prominent  place  in  the  lives  of  most 
Americans.  Many  observers  feel  that  we  are  no  longer  "a  nation 
of  readers,"  but  a  nation  of  watchers:  watchers  of  movies,  televi- 
sion, videocassettes,  and  computer  displays.  Literary  critic  and 
newspaper  columnist  Jonathan  Yirdley  complains  about  the  "in- 
creasing irrelevance  of  writing,"  and  laments  the  fact  that  contem- 


2       Who  Reads  literature? 

porary  American  poets,  from  the  laureate  on  down,  are  all  but  un- 
known to  the  American  people.1  University  of  Chicago  professor 
Allan  Bloom,  author  of  The  Closing  of  the  American  Mind,  as- 
serts that  "our  students  have  lost  the  practice  of  and  taste  for  read- 
ing. They  have  not  learned  how  to  read,  nor  do  they  have  the 
expectation  of  delight  or  improvement  from  reading."2  Universi- 
ty of  Virginia  professor  E.  D.  Hirsch  sounds  a  similar  theme  in 
his  book  Cultural  Literal  contending  that  writers  and  speakers 
can  no  longer  take  it  for  granted  that  young  readers  and  listeners 
will  be  familiar  with  works,  characters,  and  authors  that  used  to 
be  known  by  all  educated  people.3  There  is  even  a  new  term, 
"aliteracy,"  that  has  been  coined  to  describe  the  phenomenon  of 
people  who  know  how  to  read  but  choose  not  to  do  so.4 

There  is  empirical  evidence  that  seems  to  support  these  con- 
tentions. For  example,  one  national  study  found  that  U.S.  adults 
spend  four  times  as  much  leisure  time  watching  television  or  listen- 
ing to  the  radio  as  they  do  reading  books,  magazines,  or 
newspapers.5  There  are  also  survey  results  showing  the  American 
public  to  be  ignorant  about  basic  literary  matters.  A  1984  Univer- 
sity of  Maryland  survey  found  that  only  one  quarter  of  American 
adults  knew  who  George  Orwell,  the  celebrated  author  of  the  novel 
1984,  was.6  In  1986,  the  Educational  Testing  Service  conducted 
a  national  assessment  of  the  literary  and  historical  knowledge  of 
high  school  juniors.  The  Service  found  that  less  than  30  percent 
of  them  could  identify  Tennessee  Williams  as  the  author  of  A  Street- 
car Named  Desire,  and  less  than  a  quarter  knew  something  about 
the  plot  of  A  Catcher  in  the  Rye.1  Indeed,  it  seems  possible  that 
students  in  the  Soviet  Union,  who  are  known  to  be  avid  readers 
of  American  literature,  would  do  better  at  recognizing  the  works 
of  these  and  other  modern  American  writers  than  students  in  the 
United  States. 

Other  evidence  indicates,  however,  that  for  both  reading  in 
general  and  literature  reading  in  particular  the  situation  may  not 
be  quite  so  bleak.  To  begin  with,  there  are  a  lot  of  books  sold  in 
the  United  States:  more  than  two  billion  each  year  during  the 
mid-1980s,  or  about  nine  books  for  every  person  over  five  years 
of  age.  About  500  million  of  these  are  relatively  inexpensive,  "mass 
market"  paperbacks.8  Many  of  the  paperbacks  contain  works  of 


Introduction       3 

fiction,  even  if  most  of  the  titles  might  not  qualify  as  what  literary 
critics  would  call  literature. 

Furthermore,  the  Educational  Testing  Service's  assessment 
found  that  virtually  all  high  school  students  received  some  train- 
ing in  the  appreciation  of  literature  and  are  made  to  read  at  least 
a  few  classic  works  by  English  and  American  authors.  As  a  con- 
sequence, today's  students  are  still  likely  to  know  something  about 
Shakespeare,  Dickens,  Hawthorne,  and  F.  Scott  Fitzgerald.9  By 
contrast,  relatively  few  receive  formal  training  in  the  visual  arts, 
music,  or  dance,  and  usually  have  only  the  foggiest  of  notions  about 
Jackson  Pollock,  George  Gershwin,  Charlie  Parker,  or  Martha 
Graham.10 

But  do  young  people  go  on  to  read  literature  when  they  leave 
school  and  are  no  longer  required  to  do  so?  Of  all  the  arts,  litera- 
ture should  be  the  one  with  the  widest  following.  Only  a  minority 
of  young  people  learn  to  read  music  or  play  an  instrument,  draw 
or  paint  proficiently,  or  act  or  dance  on  stage.  But  everyone  who 
is  educable  is  expected  to  learn  to  read  and  write.11 

Assessing  the  State  of  Literature  Reading 

We  can  infer  from  bestseller  lists  that  American  adults  read  real 
estate  investment  guides,  personal  computer  manuals,  diet  cook- 
books, and  the  like.  Do  they  also  read  novels,  poetry,  and  plays? 
The  number  of  works  of  fiction  published  in  the  U.S.  each  year— 
about  5,100  new  titles  or  new  editions12— suggests  that  some  peo- 
ple still  read  novels  and  short  stories.  This  inference  is  reinforced 
by  the  large  number  of  fiction  books  sold  each  year— some  400 
million  copies  through  general  retail  outlets  alone.13  To  be  sure, 
many  of  the  fiction  titles  published  and  sold  are  works  of  genre 
fiction— thrillers,  romances,  science  fiction,  and  the  like— most 
of  which  would  not  be  considered  works  of  high  literature. 
Nevertheless,  even  among  the  genre  titles  there  are  works  written 
with  considerable  craft  and  imagination,  and  read  with  enthusiasm 
by  people  who  could  be  spending  their  time  watching  movies  or 
television.  In  addition  to  the  large  output  of  fiction,  there  are  about 
1,000  volumes  of  poetry  and  drama  published  each  year,  and  nearly 
2,000  books  of  literary  criticism  and  literary  commentary.14 


4       Who  Reads  Literature? 

Clearly,  the  writing  and  reading  of  literature  are  not  yet  defunct. 

But  we  need  more  than  publication  and  sales  figures  to  form 
an  accurate  picture  of  how  much  literature  reading  is  going  on  in 
the  United  States.  A  person  can  buy  a  book  without  ever  getting 
around  to  reading  it,  or  read  a  book  that  has  not  been  bought,  but 
borrowed  from  a  friend  or  a  library.  And  literature  is  published 
in  periodicals  as  well  as  books.  Thus  we  need  information  about 
the  reading  habits  of  representative  samples  of  American  citizens, 
including  specifics  about  the  kinds  of  books  they  read.  Several  large 
surveys  on  participation  in  the  arts  or  on  book  reading  were  car- 
ried out  in  the  United  States  during  the  1980s  for  exactly  this 
purpose. 

One  of  the  most  notable  of  these  is  the  Survey  of  Public  Par- 
ticipation in  the  Arts  (SPPA),  which  was  a  nationwide  survey, 
designed  and  sponsored  by  the  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts 
and  conducted  in  1982  and  1985  by  the  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Cen- 
sus. Issues  not  covered  in  the  SPPA  are  examined  in  data  drawn 
from  book  industry  publication  and  sales  statistics,  and  from  two 
other  national  surveys:  the  Arts-Related  Trend  Study  (ARTS)  car- 
ried out  in  1983-1984  by  the  Survey  Research  Center  at  the  Univer- 
sity of  Maryland,  and  the  Consumer  Research  Study  on  Reading 
and  Book  Purchasing  done  in  1983  for  the  Book  Industry  Study 
Group  (BISG).15 

There  are,  of  course,  problems  in  using  survey  data  to  study 
literature  reading.  Some  of  these  problems  are  common  to  all  sur- 
veys that  ask  people  to  report  on  their  own  behavior,  while  others 
are  unique  to  studies  of  reading.  British  sociologist  Peter  Mann 
points  out  that  there  are  problems  associated  with  research  into 
reading  "which  arise  from  the  difficulty  in  determining  what  is 
meant  by  'reading'  and  what  constitutes  a  'book'.  "16  Research  on 
the  reading  of  literature  is  even  more  problematic  because  of  dis- 
agreements among  experts  on  what  should  be  included  under  the 
rubric  of  "literature"  and  the  difficulty  of  framing  general  and  easily 
understood  questions  about  such  reading. 

Here,  the  reading  of  literature  or  what  we  will  simply  call 
"reading"  means  the  reading  of  novels,  short  stories,  poetry,  and 
plays.  As  usually  defined,  literature  also  subsumes  such  high-quality, 
non-fiction  writing  as  essays,  literary  criticism,  literary  commen- 


Introduction       5 

tary,  "belles  lettres,"  biographies,  and  the  so-called  "non-fiction 
novel."  However,  these  forms  of  literature  were  not  explicitly  co- 
vered in  the  surveys  discussed  here.  In  addition,  distinctions  be- 
tween art  and  entertainment,  based  on  the  quality  or  seriousness 
of  the  written  work,  are  very  important.  Unfortunately,  most  of 
these  surveys  do  not  include  information  that  permits  one  to  say 
something  about  the  quality  of  the  books  and  magazine  pieces  that 
American  adults  are  reading.  This  kind  of  information  was  col- 
lected in  two  of  the  other  surveys  described,  but,  even  with  these 
data,  drawing  the  line  between  literature  and  mere  amusement  is 
no  simple  matter. 

Because  of  the  great  expense  and  practical  difficulties  involved 
in  trying  to  observe  directly  the  reading  habits  of  large  numbers 
of  Americans,  the  survey  results  presented  here  rely  on  people's 
reports  about  the  kinds  of  works  they  have  read  or  not  read  within 
broad  intervals  of  time  (the  last  12  months  or  the  last  6  months). 
These  reports  are  subject  to  both  systematic  bias  and  random  er- 
ror. To  the  extent  that  reading  literature  is  perceived  as  something 
that  one  "ought"  to  be  doing,  people  will  tend  to  say  they  have 
read  a  novel  or  short  story  when,  in  fact,  they  have  not.  They  may 
also  "telescope"  events  that  happened  in  the  past,  such  as  reading 
a  book  more  than  a  year  ago,  and  remember  them  as  having  oc- 
curred within  the  reference  period  in  question.  On  the  other  hand, 
people  tend  to  forget  about  things  they  did  more  than  a  few  weeks 
ago,  especially  if  the  event  was  not  very  important  to  them,  and 
this  could  result  in  underreporting.  Accurate  reporting  also  depends 
on  the  respondent's  understanding  of  what  is  meant  by  terms  such 
as  "novel"  and  "short  story,"  which  may  pose  problems  for  less 
educated  individuals. 

Two  of  the  surveys  described  here  attempted  to  get  a  sense 
of  the  seriousness  of  some  of  these  problems  by  asking  respon- 
dents follow-up  questions.  The  answers  to  these  questions  provide 
both  further  information  about  the  works  the  survey  respondents 
have  read,  and  a  basis  for  adjusting  estimates  of  the  size  of  the 
literature  audience. 

The  survey  situation  does,  however,  have  certain  advantageous 
aspects  that  are  rarely  encountered  in  everyday  life:  the  respon- 
dent is  offered  anonymity;  honest  reporting  is  explicitly  encouraged; 


6       Who  Reads  I  ileralure? 

and  there  is  no  overt  praise  or  criticism  for  saying  that  one  has 
or  has  not  done  something.  Moreover,  a  survey  that  uses  scientif- 
ic sampling  procedures  and  achieves  a  high  response  rate  provides 
a  picture  of  a  real  cross-section  of  the  population,  not  just  of  a 
limited  and  self-selected  subset  of  people. 

Even  when  there  is  an  overall  bias  in  survey  reporting  on  an 
activity,  surveys  can  still  provide  an  accurate  reading  of  the  com- 
parative commonness  of  different  forms  of  the  activity,  or  of  the 
relative  frequency  of  the  activity  among  different  groups,  or  of 
changes  in  the  frequency  of  the  activity  over  time.  It  is  known, 
for  example,  that  people  tend  to  overreport  voting  in  local  or  na- 
tional elections:  there  are  more  people  who  say  they  voted  than 
the  total  number  of  ballots  cast.  Yet  surveys  of  voting  behavior  still 
give  a  good  sense  of  the  relative  voting  rates  of  different  age,  sex, 
educational,  ethnic,  and  residential  groups,  and  show  how  these 
patterns  have  changed  over  the  last  several  decades. 

In  any  event,  self-report  surveys,  with  all  their  limitations,  are 
the  best  source  of  information  on  literature  reading  that  we  have. 
They  will  remain  so  until  government  or  private  groups  invest  in 
studies  that  use  direct  observations  of  reading  or  ask  for  self-reports 
that  cover  shorter  time  intervals  and  include  more  people  in  the 
sample,  and  that  elicit  more  extensive  follow-up  information  on 
the  specific  titles  read. 


Chapter  1 

Readers  of  Fiction, 
Poetry,  and  Drama: 
How  Many  and 
Who  Are  They? 


The  1982  and  1985  rounds  of  the  Survey  of  Public  Participation 
in  the  Arts  (SPPA)  took  national  probability  samples  of  adults  aged 
18  and  over  living  in  households  in  the  United  States.  These  arts 
surveys  were  done  as  supplements  to  larger  survey  programs  in- 
volving panels  of  respondents  who  were  interviewed  every  six 
months  over  a  three-year  period.  In  1982,  the  SPPA  interviewed 
17,254  people,  or  89  percent  of  the  target  sample.  The  sample  was 
about  20  percent  smaller  in  1985,  when  13,675  people  were  inter- 
viewed, or  85  percent  of  the  target  sample.  Three  quarters  of  the 
interviews  were  done  in  person  and  the  remainder  by  telephone.17 
The  SPPA  interviews  focused  on  attendance  at  arts  exhibitions 
and  performances,  including  art  museum  shows,  classical  music 
concerts,  opera,  jazz,  plays,  and  musicals,  and  on  other  forms  of 
arts  participation,  including  reading  literature.  In  addition  to  a  core 
set  of  questions  that  were  asked  of  all  respondents,  subsamples  were 
asked  about  training  in  the  arts,  mass  media  usage,  and  other  forms 
of  leisure  activity.  A  basic  question  on  the  reading  of  novels,  short 


8      Who  Reads  Literature? 

stories,  poetry,  and  plays  was  put  to  the  entire  sample  in  both  sur- 
veys, but  questions  on  other  forms  of  literature  participation  and 
socialization  were  asked  only  of  subsamples  of  about  4,200  to  5,500 
respondents  in  1982,  and  about  2,300  respondents  in  1985. 

In  1985,  the  SPPA  found  that  56  percent  of  a  national  sample 
of  adults  aged  18  and  over,  representing  95.2  million  people,  report- 
ed that  they  had  read  novels,  short  stories,  poetry,  or  plays  during 
the  last  12  months.  The  estimated  number  of  readers  was  up  by 
nearly  three  million  from  the  number  in  the  1982  SPPA.  Howev- 
er, this  increase  was  the  result  of  population  growth  only.  The 
proportion  of  adults  who  said  they  read  literature  was  about  the 
same  in  both  years. 

The  1985  survey  also  asked  whether  respondents  had  read  any 
kind  of  book  or  magazine  during  the  previous  12  months.  Eighty- 
six  percent— representing  some  146  million  adults— said  that  they 
had.  If  we  divide  the  number  of  people  who  reported  reading  liter- 
ature by  the  number  who  reported  reading  any  kind  of  book  or 
magazine,  we  have  an  estimate  of  literature  readers  as  a  fraction 
of  all  readers.  In  1985,  65  percent  of  all  adult  readers  in  the  U.S. 
read  some  fiction,  poetry,  or  drama  in  the  course  of  a  year.18  This 
was  slightly  lower  than  the  67  percent  found  in  the  1982  survey, 
but  the  difference  was  within  the  margin  of  sampling  error. 

The  SPPA  collected  additional  information  on  public  partici- 
pation in  one  particular  form  of  literature— poetry.  In  the  1985  sur- 
vey, 19  percent  of  the  respondents— representing  32  million 
adults— reported  that  they  had  read  or  listened  to  a  reading  of  po- 
etry during  the  previous  12  months.  For  the  1982  survey,  these 
figures  were  20  percent  and  30  million,  respectively.  Again,  the 
differences  were  not  statistically  significant. 

In  addition  to  questions  about  reading  literature,  the  SPPA  asked 
respondents  if  they  had  worked  on  "any  creative  writings,  such 
as  stories,  poems,  plays,  and  the  like"  during  the  last  12  months. 
There  was  no  requirement  that  the  writing  had  been  published, 
and  the  results  of  an  independent  follow-up  study  indicate  that  most 
of  it  probably  was  not.  In  the  1985  survey,  6  percent  of  the 
respondents — representing  10.6  million  adults — said  that  they  had 
tried  to  do  some  creative  writing.  This  was  about  the  same  as  the 
1982  results,  when  7  percent— representing  10.7  million  adults— 


Readers  of  Fiction,  Poetry,  and  Drama       9 

answered  the  question  affirmatively.  The  apparent  decline  in  the 
proportion  of  writers  was  not  statistically  significant. 

Comparing  SPPA  Results  with  Other  Surveys  and  Sales  Figures 
The  levels  of  reading  reported  in  the  SPPA  are  in  at  least  ap- 
proximate agreement  with  the  results  of  other  nationwide  surveys. 
For  example,  the  Consumer  Research  Study  on  Reading  and  Book 
Purchasing  conducted  in  1983  for  the  Book  Industry  Study  Group 
(BISG)  found  that  39  percent  of  all  adult  respondents  had  read  a 
book  of  fiction  in  the  last  six  months  and  half  had  read  a  book 
of  some  sort;  and  92  percent  had  read  magazines,  periodicals,  or 
newspapers  over  the  same  period.19  Similar  results  have  been  ob- 
tained in  other  countries.  In  Britain,  for  instance,  a  number  of  na- 
tional studies  done  in  the  late  1970s  and  early  1980s  found  that, 
as  in  the  U.S.,  roughly  half  the  adult  population  reported  reading 
books  of  one  sort  or  another.  In  a  1981  Euromonitor  survey  of  about 
2,000  people  aged  16  and  over,  45  percent  said  they  were  reading 
a  book  (any  book)  at  the  time  of  the  survey  and  about  30  percent 
said  they  were  reading  a  work  of  fiction.20 

Despite  the  general  agreement  among  readership  studies,  their 
estimates  are  typically  met  with  incredulity  by  those  involved  with 
the  writing,  publishing,  or  support  of  contemporary  literature.  What 
literary  people  point  out  is  that  it  is  not  uncommon  for  a  work  of 
serious  fiction  to  sell  fewer  than  5,000  copies  nowadays.  Likewise, 
the  circulation  of  most  poetry  magazines  is  counted  in  the  low  thou- 
sands or  even  hundreds.  In  1987,  the  Los  Angeles  Times  Book  Re- 
view announced  that  it  would  no  longer  be  reviewing  new  volumes 
of  poetry  because  there  was  so  little  reader  interest  in  them.  Even 
the  most  widely  read  magazines  that  publish  first-rate  fiction  and 
poetry— magazines  like  The  New  Yorker  and  The  Atlantic— have 
circulations  in  only  the  400,000-600,000  range.21 

John  P.  Dessauer,  a  leading  expert  on  book  industry  sales 
trends,  has  estimated  that  a  total  of  3.2  million  copies  of  contem- 
porary literary  fiction  and  poetry  books  were  sold  through  gener- 
al retailers  in  1985,  representing  just  0.3  percent  of  all  books  sold 
through  these  outlets.  Sales  of  classic  works  of  literature  made  up 
another  9.1  million  units,  or  0.9  percent  of  books  sold.  Thus,  con- 
temporary and  classic  literature  together  constituted  little  more  than 


10      Who  Reads  Literature? 

one  percent  of  bookstore  sales.22  If  there  are  so  many  readers  of 
literature  out  there,  why  do  the  literary  books  and  magazines  not 
sell  better? 

Of  course,  people  get  reading  material  from  friends  and  rela- 
tives, from  public  libraries,  in  doctors'  and  dentists'  offices,  and 
from  their  own  stock  of  books  acquired  over  the  years.  When  fic- 
tion readers  surveyed  in  the  BISG  study  were  asked  where  they 
had  obtained  the  last  book  they  had  read,  less  than  half— 45 
percent— said  they  had  purchased  it  themselves.  More  than  a  quarter 
said  they  borrowed  the  book  from  a  friend  or  relative  or  traded 
it  for  another  book.  Another  fifth  had  borrowed  the  book  from 
a  library,  and  5  percent  had  received  it  as  a  gift.23  However,  even 
doubling  or  tripling  the  estimated  number  of  literature  books  sold 
to  account  for  books  borrowed  and  exchanged  would  not  bring  the 
total  close  to  the  95  million  readers  that  the  SPPA  found. 

What  does  bring  the  survey  and  book  sales  figures  into  line 
with  one  another  is  incorporating  the  large  numbers  of  copies  of 
romances,  thrillers,  science  fiction  novels,  and  other  works  of  popu- 
lar or  genre  fiction  that  are  sold  each  year.  John  Dessauer  esti- 
mates that  total  sales  of  "popular  fiction"  books  through  general 
retail  outlets  amounted  to  more  than  322  million  copies  in  1985. 
And  that  does  not  include  nearly  124  million  in  "bestseller"  sales. 
(Assuming  that  about  two-thirds  of  the  bestsellers  were  fiction  would 
bring  the  total  number  of  popular  fiction  books  sold  through  general 
retail  outlets  to  about  400  million.)24 

Thus,  what  most  of  the  survey  respondents  seem  to  be  talking 
about  when  they  report  that  they  have  read  novels  or  short  stories 
are  works  of  relatively  light,  genre  fiction.  Inasmuch  as  many  of 
these  works  would  not  qualify  as  literature  in  the  eyes  of  most  liter- 
ary critics,  the  implication  is  that  the  adult  audience  for  serious 
contemporary  literature  is  probably  a  good  deal  smaller  than  the 
56  percent  found  in  the  SPPA.  These  impressions  are  strengthened 
by  survey  information  on  the  specific  titles  or  the  kinds  of  works 
to  which  people  are  referring  when  they  report  that  they  have  read 
fiction,  poetry,  or  drama.  Information  on  works  read  was  not  col- 
lected in  the  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  but  rele- 
vant data  are  available  from  the  Arts-Related  Trend  Study  (ARTS) 
conducted  by  the  University  of  Maryland  and  the  Consumer  Re- 


Readers  of  Fiction,  Poetry,  and  Drama       1 1 

search  Study  on  Reading  and  Book  Purchasing  done  for  the  Book 
Industry  Study  Group.  These  data  are  examined  later. 

What  Kinds  of  People  Read  Literature? 

Demographic  Characteristics 

People  who  report  reading  fiction,  poetry,  and  drama  are  a 
diverse  group.  They  are  found  in  every  segment  of  the  U.S.  popu- 
lation, except  those  subgroups  who  do  not  read  at  all.  However, 
some  segments  of  the  population  are  overrepresented  among  readers 
(and  writers)  of  literature: 

•  those  who  have  at  least  some  college  education  (who  make 
up  49  percent  of  literature  readers,  as  opposed  to  36  per- 
cent of  the  general  population); 

•  those  with  incomes  of  $25,000  and  over  (who  comprise 
48  percent  of  literature  readers,  but  40  percent  of  the  general 
population); 

•  females  (59  percent  of  literature  readers,  but  53  percent 
of  the  general  population); 

•  the  middle-aged  (40  percent  of  literature  readers,  but  36 
percent  of  the  general  adult  population); 

•  whites  (85  percent  of  literature  readers,  but  81  percent  of 
the  general  population). 

Conversely,  groups  that  are  underrepresented  among  litera- 
ture readers  include  the  following: 

•  those  with  less  than  a  high-school  education  (who  com- 
prise 14  percent  of  literature  readers,  but  25  percent  of  the 
general  population); 

•  those  with  incomes  under  $10,000  (16  percent  of  literature 
readers,  21  percent  of  the  general  population); 

•  males  (41  percent  of  literature  readers,  47  percent  of  the 
adult  population); 

•  those  aged  50  and  older  (32  percent  of  literature  readers, 
35  percent  of  the  general  adult  population); 


1 2       Who  Reads  Li terature? 


• 


Blacks  and  Hispanics  (13  percent  of  literature  readers,  17 
percent  of  the  general  population). 

As  one  goes  from  the  overall  population,  to  those  who  read 
books  and  magazines,  to  those  who  read  literature,  to  those  who 
read  or  listen  to  poetry,  and  to  those  who  try  to  produce  creative 
writing,  the  groups  become  progressively  more  college-educated, 
more  female,  and  more  middle-income.  (Table  1.)  Thus,  of  the  self- 
described  writers  in  the  1985  SPPA,  69  percent  were  college- 
educated,  63  percent  were  female,  and  51  percent  had  incomes  of 
$25,000  or  more.  (Given  that  most  of  the  writing  reported  in  the 
SPPA  was  probably  unpublished,  and  that  even  when  published, 
writing  is  usually  not  handsomely  rewarded,  we  can  be  confident 
that  the  income  of  these  creative  writers  came  primarily  from 
sources  other  than  their  writings.) 

The  relationships  between  literary  participation  and  personal 
characteristics,  such  as  education,  income,  age,  sex,  and  race,  as 
well  as  the  reasons  behind  the  observed  relationships,  are  exam- 
ined in  greater  detail  later. 

Geographic  Distribution 

The  writing,  publishing,  and  reading  of  literature  are  often 
thought  of  as  Northeastern,  big-city  enterprises.  But  the  arts  sur- 
vey data  show  that  these  readers  and  writers  are  spread  through- 
out the  four  major  regions  of  the  country,  pretty  much  in  line  with 
the  distribution  of  the  total  adult  population.  (Table  1.)  If  any  re- 
gion was  overrepresented,  it  was  the  West.  In  1985,  for  example, 
the  West  contained  19  percent  of  the  overall  adult  population,  but 
had  22  percent  of  the  readers  and  33  percent  of  the  writers  of  liter- 
ature. The  Midwest,  with  25  percent  of  the  adult  population,  had 
26  percent  of  readers  and  30  percent  of  writers.  The  South  tended 
to  be  underrepresented  in  this  regard.  But,  being  the  largest  re- 
gion in  terms  of  overall  population,  the  South  contained  nearly  a 
third  of  all  readers  and  almost  a  quarter  of  all  writers. 

The  majority  of  readers  and  writers  do  live  in  the  large 
metropolitan  areas  of  the  country.  But,  like  the  rest  of  the  more 
educated  and  affluent  population,  most  of  them  live  in  the  suburbs, 
not  the  central  cities.  In  1985,  the  suburbs  held  41  percent  of  the 


Readers  of  Fiction,  Poetry,  and  Drama       13 


TABLE  I.  Size  and  Composition  of  U.S.  Population  of 
Writers  of  Literature,  by  Age,  Gender,  Ethnic  Group, 
Region,  and  Metropolitan  Residence,  U.S.  Adults  Aged 


Adult  Readers  and 
Education,  Income, 
18  and  Over,  1985. 


Total 

Creative 

Adult 

All 

Literature 

Poetry 

Literature 

Population 

Readers 

Readers 

Readers 

Writers 

No.  in  population 

(in  millions) 

170.6 

146.0 

95.2 

31.8 

10.6 

%  of  Adult  Pop. 

100% 

86% 

56% 

19% 

6% 

%  of  All  Readers 

— 

100% 

65% 

22% 

7% 

TOTAL 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

Percent  Distribution 

AGE 

Young  (18-29) 

28% 

29% 

29% 

30% 

39% 

Middle  (30-49) 

36% 

38% 

40% 

38% 

44% 

Older  (50  +) 

35% 

33% 

32% 

32% 

17% 

GENDER 

Female 

53% 

54% 

59% 

60% 

63% 

Male 

47% 

46% 

41% 

40% 

37% 

ETHNIC  GROUP 

White 

81% 

85% 

85% 

86% 

87% 

Black 

11% 

8% 

8% 

8% 

8% 

Hispanic 

7% 

5% 

5% 

5% 

4% 

Asian,  Other 

2% 

2% 

2% 

2% 

1% 

EDUCATION 

Some  College 

36% 

42% 

49% 

56% 

69% 

High  School  Grad 

39% 

38% 

37% 

30% 

23% 

Less  than  HS 

25% 

20% 

14% 

15% 

8% 

INCOME 

$25K  &  over 

40% 

45% 

48% 

47% 

51% 

$I0-25K 

39% 

38% 

36% 

39% 

39% 

Under  $  1  OK 

21% 

17% 

16% 

15% 

10% 

REGION 

Northeast 

21% 

19% 

21% 

17% 

13% 

Midwest 

25% 

27% 

26% 

32% 

30% 

South 

34% 

32% 

31% 

33% 

24% 

West 

19% 

23% 

22% 

19% 

33% 

RESIDENCE 

Central  City 

27% 

25% 

27% 

26% 

32% 

Suburbs 

41% 

45% 

45% 

45% 

53% 

Non-Metro 

32% 

30% 

28% 

29% 

15% 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabulations  by  N. 
Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


1 4      Who  Reads  Literature? 

general  adult  population,  but  45  percent  of  the  readers  and  53  per- 
cent of  the  writers.  The  comparable  figures  for  the  central  cities, 
with  27  percent  of  the  population,  are  27  and  32  percent,  respec- 
tively. People  living  outside  of  metropolitan  areas  were  under- 
represented:  these  areas  contained  32  percent  of  the  adult  population 
in  1985,  but  only  28  percent  of  the  literature  readers  and  just  15 
percent  of  the  writers. 

Leisure  Activity  Profile 

In  the  report  on  the  1983  Book  Industry  Study  Group  (BISG) 
survey  of  book  reading  habits,  the  following  note  was  made: 

Book  readers  are  often  portrayed  in  literature,  films,  or 
on  stage  as  solitary,  somewhat  aloof,  self-absorbed  per- 
sonalities whose  devotion  to  their  books  seems  to  take 
the  place  of  interaction  with  the  rest  of  the  world.  This 
study,  however,  proves  the  stereotype  to  be  nothing  more 
than  a  myth.  Far  from  being  introverted  or  social  out- 
casts, book  readers  emerge  as  well-rounded  individuals 
active  in  a  wide  range  of  social  and  cultural  activities.25 

The  BISG  study  found  that  book  readers  were  more  active  than 
non-book  readers  in  many  areas,  including  that  of  socializing  with 
others. 

The  SPPA  obtained  a  very  similar  result.  In  addition  to  infor- 
mation about  literature  reading  and  arts  attendance,  the  SPPA  col- 
lected data  on  participation  in  a  variety  of  other  leisure  activities 
during  the  12  months  prior  to  the  survey.  When  the  reports  on 
recreational  activities  were  cross-tabulated  with  the  measures  of 
literary  participation,  it  was  found  that  people  who  had  read  fic- 
tion, poetry,  and  drama  in  the  last  year  were  more  active  in  virtu- 
ally all  areas  than  people  who  had  done  reading,  but  not  of  literature. 
The  latter  group  was  more  active,  in  turn,  than  those  who  had  not 
read  any  books  or  magazines  at  all.  (Table  2.) 

Literature  readers  were  not  only  more  active  in  areas  where 
one  might  expect  them  to  be  (e.g. ,  visiting  arts  fairs,  historic  sites, 
and  museums;  doing  gardening  or  gourmet  cooking;  or  taking  part 
in  arts  and  crafts  activities),  they  were  also  more  active  in  going 
to  less  refined  amusement  events:  playing  games  and  sports;  tak- 


Readers  of  Fiction,  Poetry,  and  Drama       15 


TABLE  2.  Leisure  Activity  Profile  of  Total  Adult  Population,  Literature  Read- 
ers, Non-Literature  Readers,  and  Non-Readers,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over, 
1982. 


READERSHIP  GROUPS 

Total 

Readers, 

Adult 

Literature 

But  Not  of 

Non- 

Population 

Readers 

Literature 

Readers 

Proportion  of  Group 

That  Has  Done 

LEISURE  ACTIVITIES 

Activity  in  Last  12  Months 

Amusements 

Play  card,  board  games 

65% 

77% 

62% 

27% 

Attend  movies 

63% 

75% 

59% 

25% 

Visit  amusement  park 

49% 

57% 

49% 

19% 

Attend  sports  events 

48% 

59% 

43% 

17% 

Exercise,  Sports 

Jog,  exercise 

52% 

65% 

43% 

18% 

Play  sports 

39% 

48% 

36% 

14% 

Camping,  hiking 

37% 

43% 

34% 

14% 

Home-Based  Activities 

Repair  home,  car 

60% 

66% 

60% 

28% 

Gardening 

61% 

69% 

53% 

34% 

Gourmet  cooking 

29% 

38% 

22% 

8% 

Collect  stamps,  coins 

15% 

20% 

10% 

3% 

Charitable  Activities 

Volunteer,  charity  work 

28% 

36% 

21% 

9% 

Cultural  Attendance 

Visit  art/crafts  fairs 

39% 

54% 

28% 

10% 

Visit  historic  sites 

37% 

50% 

28% 

8% 

Go  to  zoo 

32% 

41% 

25% 

11% 

Visit  science,  natural 

history  museums 

23% 

32% 

15% 

4% 

Art  &  Crafts  Activities 

Weaving,  needlework 

33% 

42% 

29% 

18% 

Pottery,  ceramics 

13% 

17% 

9% 

3% 

Photography,  video 

10% 

14% 

6% 

2% 

Painting,  drawing, 

sculpture,  printmaking 

10% 

14% 

6% 

2% 

Backstage  theatre  help 

3% 

4% 

1% 

0% 

READERSHIP  GROUP  SIZE 

%  of  Adult  Population  100% 


57% 


26% 


5% 


SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1982  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabulations  by  N. 
Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


1 6       Who  Reads  Literature? 

ing  part  in  outdoor  activities;  doing  home  and  car  repairs;  and  con- 
tributing their  time  to  charity.  For  example,  three  quarters  of  the 
literature  readers  had  gone  to  the  movies  in  the  last  year,  whereas 
less  than  60  percent  of  the  non-literature  readers  and  only  a  quar- 
ter of  the  non-readers  had  done  so.  Two  thirds  of  the  literature  read- 
ers had  done  jogging  or  other  similar  exercise,  whereas  less  than 
half  of  the  non-literature  readers,  and  less  than  a  fifth  of  the  non- 
readers,  had  participated  in  some  form  of  exercise  program.  More 
than  a  third  of  the  literature  readers  had  done  volunteer  or  charity 
work,  compared  with  a  fifth  of  the  non-literature  readers  and  a 
tenth  of  the  non-readers. 

The  higher  activity  levels  of  the  literature  readers  were  partly 
a  function  of  their  being  better  educated,  more  affluent,  and  youn- 
ger, on  the  average,  than  their  counterparts.  There  may  also  have 
been  an  element  of  shared  reporting  bias  in  the  associations,  in 
the  sense  that  respondents  who  were  more  likely  to  remember  and 
report  one  kind  of  activity  were  more  apt  to  remember  and  report 
other  kinds  as  well.  Nonetheless,  there  does  seem  to  be  a  genuine 
link  between  literature  reading  and  other  cultural  and  recreational 
activities. 

It  is  not  that  reading  literature  caused  the  other  activities,  or 
vice  versa.  Rather,  individuals  seem  to  differ  in  their  overall  curi- 
osity and  activity  levels,  and  those  who  have  the  interests  and  energy 
to  do  one  kind  of  cultural  or  recreational  activity  are  more  likely 
to  do  others  also.  In  some  cases,  there  is  a  common  thread  linking 
literature  reading  with  other  activities,  as  when  an  individual  has 
an  interest  in  the  Civil  War,  and  reads  historical  novels  about  that 
period,  visits  Civil  War  battle  sites,  and  goes  to  military  muse- 
ums. Even  lacking  a  common  interest,  however,  the  operative  prin- 
ciple seems  to  be  the  more,  the  more,  rather  than  one  activity  versus 
the  other.26 

Thumbnail  Sketch  of  the  Literature  Reader 

In  sum,  if  we  had  to  put  together  a  picture  of  a  typical  reader 
of  literature  in  the  United  States  today,  the  survey  data  indicate  that 
the  person  would  be  a  middle-aged  white  female  living  in  the 
suburbs  of  a  Western  or  Midwestern  city.  She  would  have  a  col- 
lege education,  and  a  middle-  to  upper-middle  class  income  that 


Readers  of  Fiction,  Poetry,  and  Drama      17 

was  not  derived  from  her  literary  activities.  She  would  be  an  ac- 
tive and  involved  individual,  not  a  passive  or  reclusive  one.  She 
would  not  only  read  books  and  magazines,  and  occasionally  try 
her  hand  at  poetry  or  fiction,  but  also  participate  in  a  variety  of 
indoor,  outdoor,  and  community  activities. 

Obviously,  there  are  many  readers  and  creative  writers  who 
do  not  conform  to  this  stereotype.  Indeed,  one  of  the  heartening 
aspects  of  the  contemporary  literary  scene  is  its  ethnic  and  cultur- 
al diversity.  Nonetheless,  it  can  be  argued  that  the  kinds  of  works 
that  are  being  published  by  literary  presses  in  the  U.S.  today  are 
very  much  a  reflection  of  the  interests  and  concerns  of  this  typical 
reader. 

Is  Literature  Reading  Growing  or  Diminishing? 

There  are  a  number  of  reasons  for  believing  that  the  audience  for 
literature  should  be  growing.  As  the  U.S.  population  gradually 
changes,  older  cohorts  are  being  replaced  by  those  whose  parents 
had  more  education  and  were  more  apt  to  have  encouraged  their 
children  to  read.  The  younger  cohorts  have  also  had  more  years 
of  schooling  and  are  more  likely  to  have  been  exposed  to  creative 
writing  courses.  As  shown  later,  all  of  these  factors  are  positively 
associated  with  literature  reading  as  an  adult.  Thus,  while  we  could 
expect  that  there  should  be  more  literature  reading  occurring  in 
the  future,  it  is  not  clear  that  this  growth  will  really  take  place. 
Taken  together,  the  1982  and  1985  rounds  of  the  SPPA  indicate 
that  the  proportion  of  literature  readers  is  holding  steady,  while 
the  number  of  readers  is  growing  with  the  overall  population.  How- 
ever, because  the  two  rounds  of  the  survey  are  separated  by  just 
three  years,  we  can  glean  only  a  limited  picture  of  the  longer-range 
changes  that  may  be  taking  place.  It  should  be  possible  to  get  a 
clearer  view  of  long-term  trends  by  viewing  the  SPPA  findings  in 
conjunction  with  the  results  of  other  surveys  and  book  sales  data 
from  the  publishing  industry. 

Book  Reading:  Past  Growth,  Recent  Decline 

It  does  seem  to  be  the  case  that  a  greater  proportion  of  the 
public  reads  books  now  than  did  so  several  decades  ago.  Data  from 


18      Who  Reads  Literature? 

Gallup  polls  conducted  in  1955  and  1984  show  a  50  percent  in- 
crease over  that  period  in  the  proportion  of  respondents  who  report- 
ed that  they  had  read  a  book  (other  than  the  Bible)  "yesterday." 
The  proportion  grew  from  14  to  21  percent,  with  much  of  the  in- 
crease attributable  to  the  expansion  in  the  portion  of  the  popula- 
tion that  was  college  educated.27  Data  from  the  SPPA  also  show 
that  middle-aged  adults  do  more  general  reading  and  more  litera- 
ture reading  than  older  adults.  (Table  3.)  As  demonstrated  later, 
these  differences  seem  to  represent  an  historical  increase  in  read- 
ing over  successive  generations  rather  than  a  decline  in  reading 
with  age.  But  is  the  increase  continuing?  Although  reading  in  gener- 
al still  seems  to  be  growing,  there  is  evidence  to  indicate  that  book 
and  literature  reading  are  not.  Indeed,  among  young  adults  these 
forms  of  reading  may  actually  be  on  the  decline. 

Evidence  of  a  recent  decline  in  book  reading  comes  from  two 
national  surveys  sponsored  by  the  Book  Industry  Study  Group 
(BISG) .  The  surveys  were  conducted  in  1978  and  1983.  Whereas 
overall  reading  (including  newspapers  and  magazines)  was  stable 
over  that  period,  there  was  a  5  percentage  point  reduction  in  the 
proportion  of  adults  who  had  read  books  in  the  previous  six  months. 
More  ominously,  the  proportion  of  book  readers  among  young 
adults  (ages  16-20)  dropped  by  13  points,  from  75  to  62  percent.28 

Trends  in  Book  Sales 

Indications  that  literature  reading  represents  a  diminishing  share 
of  all  book  reading  can  be  found  in  sales  figures  from  the  publish- 
ing industry.  Whereas  the  total  number  of  books  sold  each  year 
in  the  U.S.  grew  from  1.5  billion  copies  in  the  mid-1970s  to  more 
than  2  billion  in  the  mid-1980s,  unit  sales  of  mass  market  paper- 
backs remained  fairly  stationary,  at  about  500  million  copies  an- 
nually29 Mass-market  paperbound  books  are,  of  course,  the  form 
in  which  much  popular  fiction  is  published  or  reprinted.  Although 
sales  of  higher-priced  "trade"  paperbounds*  have  grown,  trade  books 
in  general  are  capturing  a  decreasing  share  of  the  U.S.  book  mar- 
ket. Technical,  scientific,  professional,  and  reference  works  are 


*As  used  here,  the  term  "trade  books"  includes  fiction  and  general-interest  non- 
fiction  in  hard  cover  and  higher-priced  paperbound  editions,  juvenile  books,  and 
mass  market  paperbacks. 


Readers  of  Fiction,  Poetry,  and  Drama       19 

capturing  an  increasing  share  of  the  market.  While  total  annual 
book  sales  in  the  U.S.  grew  from  $2.3  billion  in  1968  to  a  project- 
ed $12.8  billion  in  1988,  the  trade  book  segment  of  the  market 
declined  from  30  to  23  percent  over  the  same  period.30 

Declining  Reading  by  Young  Adults 

Figures  from  the  two  SPPA  studies  indicated  constancy,  rath- 
er than  decreases,  in  the  overall  proportion  of  literature  readers 
in  the  population.  (Table  3.)  Their  data  suggested  declines  in  po- 
etry and  writing,  but  the  observed  changes  may  be  due  to  sam- 
pling fluctuations.  Among  those  under  30,  however,  there  were 
statistically  significant  changes  between  the  two  surveys:  literature 
reading  dropped  from  61  to  57  percent;  poetry  reading  fell  from 
24  to  20  percent;  and  overall  reading  declined  from  89  to  87  per- 
cent. Although  these  differences  may  seem  small,  they  would  be- 
come considerable  if  the  same  rates  of  decrease  were  to  continue 
over  a  longer  period. 

The  data  from  the  SPPA  and  BISG  findings  reported  above 
are  not  the  only  signs  of  less  frequent  reading  among  young  adults. 
Data  from  an  annual,  school-based  survey  of  high  school  seniors 
called  Monitoring  the  Future  shows  a  gradual  diminution  in  the 
proportion  who  report  reading  books,  magazines,  or  newspapers 
"almost  every  day,"  from  62  percent  in  1977  to  46  percent  in 
1988.31  Thus,  evidence  from  three  different  survey  programs 
points  to  the  conclusion  that  a  decline  in  reading  is  occurring  among 
successive  cohorts  of  young  adults  in  the  United  States. 

A  Fluid  Situation 

Why  is  literature  reading  remaining  stagnant  or  even  declin- 
ing, when  various  demographic  factors  indicate  that  it  should  be 
increasing?  Reasons  for  the  lack  of  growth  are  examined  at  the  con- 
clusion of  this  monograph.  We  note  here,  though,  that  the  situa- 
tion is  a  fluid  one,  especially  as  far  as  sales  of  literature  are 
concerned.  With  so  many  potential  readers  in  the  population,  and 
such  a  small  fraction  of  them  needed  to  make  a  bestseller,  there 
could  be  short-term  increases  in  literature  sales  even  while  a  long- 
term  decline  in  literature  reading  was  in  progress.  Book  sales  also 
depend  on  economic  conditions,  the  popularity  of  the  current  crop 


20      Who  Reads  Literature? 


TABLE  3.  Change  in  Proportion  of  Adult  Population  and  Population  Subgroups 
That  Have  Read  Literature,  Read  Books  or  Magazines,  Read  Poetry,  and  Done 
Creative  Writing  in  the  Last  12  Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,  1982 
to  1985. 


Literature  Readers 

All  Readers 

Differ- 

Differ- 

All Adults  (18+) 

1985 

1982 

ence 

1985 

1982 

ence 

No.  in  population 

(in  millions) 

95.2 

92.5 

2.7 

146.0 

138.0 

8.0 

%  of  Adult  Pop. 

56.0% 

56.4% 

-0.4% 

85.6% 

84. 1  % 

1 .4% 

%  of  All  Readers 

65.2% 

67.0% 

-1.8% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

— 

Population  Subgroups 

AGE 

Young  (18-29) 

56.8% 

60.9% 

-4. 1  % 

87.0% 

89.4% 

-2.4% 

Middle  (30-49) 

60.8% 

59.7% 

1.1% 

88.6% 

87.4% 

1 .2% 

Older  (50  +) 

50.3% 

49.6% 

0.7% 

81.5% 

75.9% 

5.6% 

GENDER 

Female 

63.0% 

63.0% 

0.0% 

88.3% 

85.6% 

2.7% 

Male 

48. 1  % 

49. 1  % 

-1.0% 

82.7% 

81.8% 

0.9% 

ETHNIC  GROUP 

White 

59.0% 

59.8% 

-0.8% 

89.9% 

86.4% 

3.5% 

Black 

43.0% 

42.3% 

0.7% 

66.3% 

71.3% 

-5.0% 

Hispanic 

41.5% 

36.4% 

5. 1  % 

66.0% 

72.2% 

-6.2% 

Asian,  Other 

51.9% 

50.2% 

1.7% 

85.3% 

80.2% 

5. 1  % 

EDUCATION 

Some  College 

75.4% 

77.7% 

-2.3% 

97.2% 

96.6% 

0.6% 

High  School  Grad 

53.4% 

55.4% 

-2.0% 

85.9% 

88.0% 

-2. 1  % 

Less  than  HS 

32.6% 

31.2% 

1 .4% 

68.4% 

63.7% 

4.7% 

INCOME 

$25K  &  over 

66.5% 

69. 1  % 

-2.6% 

92.3% 

94.2% 

-1.9% 

SI0-25K 

51.8% 

55.0% 

-3.2% 

85.3% 

85.4% 

-0. 1  % 

Under  $  1  OK 

43.6% 

43.2% 

0.4% 

72.3% 

69.6% 

2.7% 

REGION 

Northeast 

57.0% 

58.3% 

-1.3% 

86.4% 

84. 1  % 

2.3% 

Midwest 

56.7% 

58.4% 

-1.7% 

90.3% 

88.8% 

1.5% 

South 

50.4% 

49.0% 

1.4% 

80.6% 

76.6% 

4.0% 

West 

63.7% 

63.9% 

-0.2% 

87.2% 

89.0% 

-1.8% 

RESIDENCE 

Central  City 

56.5% 

56.5% 

0.0% 

85.5% 

83.4% 

2. 1  % 

Suburbs 

61.0% 

60.2% 

0.8% 

91.2% 

88.5% 

2.7% 

Non-Metro 

48.9% 

51.7% 

-2.8% 

78.4% 

78.5% 

-0. 1  % 

(continued) 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1982  and  1985  Surveys  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabula- 
tions by  N.  Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


Readers  of  Fiction,  Poetry,  and  Drama      21 


TABLE  3.  (Continued)  Change  in  Proportion  of  Adult  Population  and  Popula- 
tion Subgroups  That  Have  Read  Literature,  Read  Books  or  Magazines,  Read 
Poetry,  and  Done  Creative  Writing  in  the  Last  1 2  Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged 
18  and  Over,  1982  to  1985. 


Poetry  Readers 

Creative  Writers 

Differ- 

Differ- 

All Adults  (18+) 

1985 

1982 

ence 

1985 

1982 

ence 

No.  in  population 

(in  millions) 

31.8 

32.5 

-0.7 

10.6 

10.7 

-0.1 

%  of  Adult  Pop. 

18.6% 

19.8% 

-1.2% 

6.2% 

6.5% 

-0.3% 

%  of  All  Readers 

21.8% 

23.6% 

-1.8% 

7.3% 

7.8% 

-0.5% 

Population  Subgroups 

AGE 

Young  (18-29) 

19.7% 

24.0% 

-4.3% 

8.5% 

10.5% 

-2.0% 

Middle  (30-49) 

20. 1  % 

21.1% 

-1.0% 

7.6% 

6.6% 

1 .0% 

Older  (50  +  ) 

17.4% 

15.2% 

2.2% 

3.0% 

3.1% 

-0. 1  % 

GENDER 

Female 

21.5% 

23.0% 

-1.5% 

7.4% 

8.1% 

-0.7% 

Male 

16.2% 

16.2% 

0.0% 

4.9% 

4.7% 

0.2% 

ETHNIC  GROUP 

White 

20.0% 

20.5% 

-0.5% 

6.7% 

6.6% 

0. 1  % 

Black 

13.8% 

15.1% 

-1.3% 

4.5% 

5.7% 

-1.2% 

Hispanic 

14.8% 

16.9% 

-2. 1  % 

4.0% 

7.0% 

-3.0% 

Asian,  Other 

16.0% 

23.1% 

-7. 1  % 

2.4% 

6. 1  % 

-3.7% 

EDUCATION 

Some  College 

28. 1  % 

3 1 .0% 

-2.9% 

1  1.5% 

1  1.6% 

-0. 1  % 

High  School  Grad 

14.6% 

17.9% 

-3.3% 

3.8% 

4.7% 

-0.9% 

Less  than  HS 

12.1% 

8.0% 

4. 1  % 

2.0% 

2.6% 

-0.6% 

INCOME 

$25K  &  over 

22.6% 

24. 1  % 

-1.5% 

8.0% 

7.4% 

0.6% 

$I0-25K 

19.6% 

18.8% 

0.8% 

6.4% 

6.0% 

0.4% 

Under  $  1  OK 

14.1% 

16.6% 

-2.5% 

3.2% 

5.5% 

-2.3% 

REGION 

Northeast 

17.1% 

19.5% 

-2.4% 

4.6% 

6.5% 

-1.9% 

Midwest 

21.0% 

20.7% 

0.3% 

6.6% 

5.5% 

1.1% 

South 

18.5% 

17.0% 

1.5% 

4.6% 

5.6% 

-1.0% 

West 

17.0% 

23.3% 

-6.3% 

10.0% 

9.4% 

0.6% 

RESIDENCE 

Central  City 

18.5% 

20.7% 

-2.2% 

7.5% 

8.4% 

-0.9% 

Suburbs 

21.2% 

20.0% 

1.2% 

8.2% 

6.6% 

1.6% 

Non-Metro 

16.7% 

18.9% 

-2.2% 

2.8% 

4.9% 

-2. 1  % 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1982  and  1985  Surveys  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabula- 
tions by  N.  Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


22      Who  Reads  Literature? 

of  authors  and  titles,  and  promotional  and  marketing  factors.  Partly 
because  of  the  positive  demographic  omens  mentioned  above,  the 
U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  is  forecasting  healthy  growth  in 
the  book  publishing  industry  through  the  early  1990s.32 

The  prospects  for  literature  readership  depend  on  whether  the 
observed  declines  in  reading  among  young  adults  continue,  and 
on  the  balance  between  the  older  portion  of  the  population  (where 
literature  reading  seems  to  be  growing)  and  the  younger  portion 
(where  it  seems  to  be  declining).  The  current  middle-aged  popu- 
lation (who  were  products  of  the  post-war  "baby  boom")  is  rela- 
tively large,  and  the  young  adult  population  (who  were  products 
of  the  "birth  dearth"  years)  relatively  small.  Thus,  although  there 
is  cause  for  concern  about  the  long-term  future  of  literature,  there 
is  reason  for  guarded  optimism  in  the  short  run. 


Chapter  2 

What  the  Readers  Are  Reading 


Two  studies  gathered  information  not  only  on  whether  people  had 
read  fiction,  poetry,  or  drama,  but  also  on  the  specific  kinds  of 
works  they  read.  The  Arts-Related  Trend  Study  asked  respondents 
for  specific  examples  of  works  they  had  read,  and  classified  these 
according  to  their  literary  quality,  and  how  appropriate  and  con- 
temporary they  were.  The  other  study,  a  survey  done  for  the  Book 
Industry  Study  Group,  did  not  ask  for  specific  titles,  but  inquired 
whether  the  respondent's  reading  included  various  forms  and  genres 
of  fiction,  such  as  mysteries,  romances,  science  fiction,  etc.  These 
studies  give  a  more  detailed  picture  of  the  kinds  of  reading  Ameri- 
cans are  doing,  and  they  permit  us  to  make  a  rough  estimate  of 
the  size  of  the  audience  for  serious,  as  opposed  to  popular,  literature. 

Asking  for  Titles 

The  Arts-Related  Trend  Study  (ARTS),  a  nationwide  telephone 
survey  on  arts  knowledge  and  participation,  was  conducted  by  the 
Survey  Research  Center  at  the  University  of  Maryland  in  June  1983 


24       Who  Reads  Literature? 

and  January  1984. 33  The  sample  interviewed  for  this  study  (1,077 
adults)  was  considerably  smaller  than  the  samples  surveyed  in  the 
1982  and  1985  rounds  of  the  SPPA,  and  its  completion  rate  (70 
percent)  was  lower.  But  the  study  collected  illuminating  follow-up 
information  on  the  kinds  of  arts-related  activities  reported  by  the 
SPPA  respondents,  including  the  titles  and  authors  of  some  of  the 
works  of  literature  that  each  respondent  had  read  during  the  previ- 
ous 12  months.  When  categorized  and  tabulated,  this  sample  of 
works  read  begins  to  give  us  a  picture  of  what  people  mean  when 
they  report  that  they  have  read  literature  recently. 

The  proportion  of  respondents  reporting  that  they  had  read  one 
or  more  works  of  fiction,  poetry,  or  drama  during  the  previous 
12  months  was  similar  to  that  found  in  the  1982  SPPA,  although 
about  4  percentage  points  lower.  In  addition  to  the  combined  ques- 
tion about  reading  novels,  short  stories,  poetry,  or  plays,  the  Univer- 
sity of  Maryland  surveys  asked  separately  about  each  of  these 
categories  of  literature. 

Novel  Reading 

Forty  percent  of  the  respondents  reported  that  they  had  read 
one  or  more  novels  during  the  last  12  months.  When  asked  to  give 
some  examples  of  novels  they  had  read,  however,  nearly  a  quarter 
of  the  self-described  readers  could  not  come  up  with  the  name  of 
a  specific  book  or  author,  or  gave  the  name  of  a  work  that  was 
not  a  novel,  but  a  biography,  self-help  book,  or  other  non-fiction 
title.  Another  30  percent  named  only  works  of  light,  popular  fic- 
tion, such  as  a  "blockbuster"  by  Judith  Krantz  or  Sidney  Shel- 
don, a  horror  story  by  Stephen  King,  a  romance  by  Victoria  Holt, 
a  western  by  Louis  L' Amour,  a  novelization  of  one  of  the  "Star 
Wars"  films,  etc.  Ten  percent  of  the  novel  readers  named  a  classic 
work,  such  as  a  novel  by  Dickens,  Tolstoy,  Henry  James,  Mark 
Twain,  or  Hemingway.  Seventeen  percent  reported  reading  a  con- 
temporary work  of  some  literary  merit,  such  as  William  Styron's 
Sophie's  Choice,  Norman  Mailer's  Ancient  Evenings ,  Alice  Walk- 
er's The  Color  Purple,  or  John  Updike's  Couples. 

In  terms  of  overall  percentages,  30  percent  of  all  U.S.  adults 
reported  reading  novels  in  the  last  12  months  and  could  give  at 
least  one  name  that  qualified  as  a  title  or  author  of  an  actual  nov- 


What  the  Readers  are  Reading      25 

el.  Only  about  11  percent  of  all  adults  seemed  to  have  read  a  work 
of  some  literary  distinction  *  however,  and  only  7  percent  had  read 
a  meritorious  contemporary  work.  The  latter  figure  is  remarkably 
close  to  a  figure  reported  by  Peter  Mann,  namely,  that  6  percent 
of  British  adults  who  were  found  to  be  reading  "modern  novels" 
in  the  1981  Euromonitor  readership  survey  in  Great  Britain.34 

Short  Story  Reading 

Twenty-eight  percent  of  the  respondents  to  the  ARTS  survey 
reported  reading  short  stories  during  the  previous  twelve  months. 
However,  when  asked  to  recall  the  authors  or  titles  of  some  of  these 
stories,  or  the  name  of  the  magazine  or  book  in  which  the  stories 
appeared,  many  had  difficulty.  More  than  a  quarter  of  the  ostensi- 
ble story  readers  could  not  provide  any  descriptive  information 
about  the  stories,  or  gave  the  titles  of  inappropriate  works.  Anoth- 
er 10  percent  gave  responses  that  could  not  be  classified.  Nearly 
45  percent  more  gave  only  the  name  of  the  magazine  in  which  the 
story  appeared,  and  many  of  these  magazines  were  ones  which  con- 
tained non-fiction  as  well  as  fiction  (e.g.,  Reader's  Digest,  Red- 
book,  Family  Circle),  or  non-fiction  feature  stories  only  (Newsweek, 
National  Geographic).  Thus,  there  seemed  to  be  confusion  in  some 
respondents'  minds  as  to  what  the  term  "short  story"  signified. 
Less  than  20  percent  of  the  story  readers  named  authors,  stories, 
or  anthologies  of  stories  that  could  be  classified  as  "serious"  liter- 
ature; only  5  percent  named  contemporary  writers  or  stories  of 
literary  merit. 

In  terms  of  overall  percentages,  20  percent  of  all  U.S.  adults 
reported  reading  short  stories  and  could  give  some  descriptive  in- 
formation about  the  stories.  But  only  5  percent  of  all  adults  had 
read  stories  that  could  be  ascertained  to  be  of  literary  quality,  and 
less  than  two  percent  had  read  contemporary  short  stories  of  liter- 
ary value. 

Judgments  about  the  literary  merit  of  various  works  are  arguable,  of  course. 
The  categorizations  reported  here  are  those  made  by  the  staff  of  the  Maryland 
Survey  Research  Center,  presumably  after  some  consultation  with  faculty  experts 
on  literature.  For  the  most  part,  these  categorizations  seem  reasonable,  although 
a  perusal  of  the  actual  responses,  which  are  listed  in  an  appendix  to  the  survey 
report,  reveals  some  anomalous  classifications  and  a  few  coding  errors. 


26       Who  Reads  Literature? 

Poetry  Reading 

Fifteen  percent  of  the  adults  surveyed  in  the  Arts-Related  Trends 
Study  reported  reading  poetry  during  the  past  12  months.  This  was 
5  percentage  points  lower  than  the  proportion  reported  in  the  1982 
SPPA  *  When  asked  to  provide  the  names  of  poets  or  poems  read, 
or  the  title  of  the  magazine  or  book  in  which  the  poems  were  found, 
nearly  70  percent  of  the  poetry  readers  were  able  to  provide  some 
corroborative  detail.  But  almost  a  quarter  gave  only  the  name  of 
a  mass-circulation  magazine  such  as  Parade  or  Reader's  Digest, 
or  named  examples  of  less  serious  forms  of  verse,  such  as  "Gross 
Limericks,"  popular  song  lyrics,  or  poems  written  for  children. 
On  the  other  hand,  close  to  40  percent  of  the  poetry  readers  named 
poets,  poems,  and/or  poetry  anthologies  of  literary  distinction,  in- 
cluding works  by  T.S.  Eliot,  Robert  Frost,  Emily  Dickinson,  Carl 
Sandburg,  Ezra  Pound,  Edgar  Allan  Poe,  Robert  W.  Service,  Henry 
Wadsworth  Longfellow,  and  William  Carlos  Williams.  Very  few 
of  the  names  or  poems  mentioned  were  those  of  serious  living  poets, 
however. 

As  a  proportion  of  the  total  population,  10  percent  of  U.S.  adults 
reported  reading  poetry  and  could  provide  some  information  on 
what  or  where  poems  were  read.  Six  percent  had  read  poems  of 
clear  literary  merit,  mostly  modern  or  traditional  classics.  One  per- 
cent or  less  had  read  serious  contemporary  poetry. 

Play  Reading 

Although  only  5  percent  of  the  adults  surveyed  in  the  ARTS 
reported  reading  a  play  during  the  previous  12  months,  91  percent 
of  them  could  name  a  specific  play  or  dramatist,  or  both.  More- 
over, 80  percent  of  the  authors  and  works  mentioned  seemed  to 
have  literary  merit,  although  less  than  10  percent  of  them  were  works 
of  living  playwrights.  Examples  of  names  or  plays  mentioned  in- 
clude those  of  Shakespeare,  Shaw,  Tennessee  Williams,  Brecht, 
Lillian  Hellman,  Tom  Stoppard,  and  Ntozake  Shange.  In  terms  of 
the  total  adult  population,  5  percent  reported  reading  plays  and  could 


*The  difference  suggests  that  follow-up  questions  may  have  had  a  suppressing 
effect  on  the  reporting  of  literary  participation.  Because  this  kind  of  effect  is  com- 
mon in  survey  research,  it  is  good  practice  to  ask  all  screening  questions  before 
asking  any  follow-up  questions.  This  was  not  done  in  the  ARTS  survey. 


What  the  Readers  are  Reading      27 

give  the  name  of  a  specific  play  or  playwright  read.  Four  percent 
had  read  drama  of  literary  merit,  but  less  than  one  percent  had 
read  serious  contemporary  dramas. 

Table  4  summarizes  the  ARTS  findings  on  novel,  short  story, 
poetry,  and  play  reading.  Unfortunately,  the  published  results  do 
not  indicate  how  much  overlap  there  was  across  these  types  of  read- 
ing, so  estimates  of  the  total  size  of  the  audience  for  works  of  literary 
merit  can  only  be  approximate.  Depending  on  the  degree  of  over- 
lap assumed,  the  total  proportion  of  people  reading  works  of  mer- 
it could  range  from  a  little  more  than  10  percent  up  to  25  percent 
or  more,  whereas  the  proportion  reading  contemporary  works  of 
merit  could  range  from  7  to  about  10  percent. 

Creative  Writing 

The  ARTS  survey  also  asked  more  detailed  questions  than  the 
SPPA  about  creative  writing  activity.  The  initial  question  was,  "In 
the  last  12  months,  have  you  taken  any  lessons  in  creative  writing 
or  done  any  creative  writing  for  your  own  pleasure"?  If  the  respon- 
dents indicated  that  they  had,  they  were  asked  what  types  of  work 
they  had  tried  to  write  (stories,  novels,  poetry,  or  plays)  and  whether 
they  had  written  anything  that  had  been  published.  All  ARTS 
respondents  were  also  asked  if  they  felt  they  were  able  to  do  crea- 
tive writing. 

Nine  percent  of  the  arts  respondents  said  they  had  written  or 
taken  writing  lessons  in  the  last  12  months.  This  was  higher  than 
the  7  percent  who  reported  doing  creative  writing  in  the  1982  SPPA, 
but  the  comparable  SPPA  question  did  not  include  writing  lessons. 
Poetry  writing  was  the  most  common  form  mentioned;  it  was  at- 
tempted by  6  percent  of  adults  (or  62  percent  of  those  who  did 
some  writing).  Work  on  stories  or  novels  was  reported  by  4  per- 
cent of  adults  (or  38  percent  of  the  writers).  Play  writing,  which 
was  reported  by  one  percent  of  the  adults  (or  9  percent  of  the 
writers),  was  least  common. 

Only  about  a  quarter  of  the  writers,  or  2  percent  of  all  respon- 
dents, said  they  had  had  something  published.  This  included  pub- 
lication in  relatively  informal  outlets  such  as  school  magazines, 
organizational  newsletters,  etc.  More  than  a  fifth  of  all  the  ARTS 


28       Who  Reads  Literature? 


TABLE  4.  Proportions  of  U.S.  Adult  Population  That  Report  Reading  Various 
Forms  of  Literature  in  Last  12  Months,  and  Proportions  Reading  Works  of 
Literary  Merit,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,   1983-84. 


Have  Read 

Works  in  This 

Can  Provide 

Mention 

Mention  Con- 

Form in 

Information 

Work  or 

temporary 

Last  12 

About 

Author  of 

Work  of 

Literary  Form 

Months 

Works  Read 
30% 

Literary  Merit 
1  1% 

Merit 

Novels 

40% 

7% 

Short  Stories 

28% 

20% 

5% 

1% 

Poetry 

15% 

10% 

6% 

1% 

Plays 

5% 

5% 

4% 

>l% 

SOURCE:  Developed  from  data  in:  Robinson,  John  R.  et  at.,  Americans'  Par- 
ticipation In  The  Arts:  A  1983-84  Arts-Related  Trend  Study.  Final 
Report,  College  Park,  MD:  University  of  Maryland  Survey  Research 
Center,   1986. 


What  the  Readers  are  Reading      29 

respondents— 22  percent— felt  that  they  had  the  ability  to  do  crea- 
tive writing. 

Varieties  of  Fiction 

Information  about  the  kinds  of  works  that  are  read  by  literature 
readers  was  also  collected  in  the  1983  Consumer  Research  Study 
on  Reading  and  Book  Purchasing  conducted  for  the  Book  Indus- 
try Study  Group.35  Instead  of  asking  for  specific  titles  and 
authors,  the  BISG  survey  inquired  about  categories  of  fiction  read, 
covering  various  genres  of  novels,  as  well  as  short  stories,  poetry, 
and  drama  under  the  fiction  rubric.  There  was  no  attempt  to  evaluate 
the  literary  quality  of  the  works.  The  survey  used  a  six-month 
reporting  period,  as  opposed  to  the  12-month  period  used  in  the 
SPPA  or  ARTS  questionnaires.  The  BISG  questions  about  the  types 
of  fiction  read  were  only  asked  of  those  who  reported  reading  at 
least  one  fiction  book  during  the  reference  period. 

Genre  Fiction 

The  BISG  survey  found  that  the  novel  was  the  most  widely 
read  form  of  fiction.  However,  much  of  the  novel  reading  was  spread 
across  a  variety  of  popular  genres  that  are  not  usually  thought  of 
as  "literary,"  though  they  occasionally  produce  individual  works 
or  authors  of  enduring  quality.  Each  genre  accounted  for  between 
10  and  40  percent  of  all  fiction  readers,  or  about  4  to  15  percent 
of  all  adults.  As  indicated  in  Table  5,  many  readers  had  read  works 
in  more  than  one  genre  during  the  previous  six  months. 

Classics,  Historical,  and  Modern  Novels 

The  survey  also  asked  about  the  reading  of  classic  works  of 
fiction,  "historical  novels,"  and  "modern  dramatic  novels"  that 
did  not  fall  into  one  of  the  genre  categories.  Classics  had  been  read 
by  19  percent  of  fiction  readers,  or  about  7  percent  of  all  adults. 
Comparable  figures  for  historical  novels  were  35  percent  of  fic- 
tion readers,  or  14  percent  of  adults,  and  for  modern  dramatic  nov- 
els, 31  percent  of  fiction  readers,  or  12  percent  of  adults.  Of  course, 
the  latter  two  categories  encompass  commercial  bestsellers  as  well 
as  works  with  serious  literary  intentions. 


30      Who  Reads  Literature? 


TABLE  5.  Proportions  of  U.S.  Adult  Population  That  Report  Reading  Various 
Forms  or  Genres  of  Fiction  Books  in  Last  Six  Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  16 
and  Over,  1983. 


Have  Read  Books  of  This  Form  or 

Genre  in  the 

Last  Six  Months 

Percent  of  All 

Percent  of  All 

Literary  Form 

Fiction  Readers 

Adults  (16+) 

All  Forms/Genres 

100% 

39% 

Novels 

Action/Adventure 

37% 

14% 

Mystery/Detective 

35% 

14% 

Historical 

35% 

14% 

Modern  Dramatic 

31% 

12% 

Romance  (Traditional) 

28% 

11% 

Science  Fiction 

21% 

8% 

Spy/lnternat.  Intrigue 

19% 

7% 

Classics 

19% 

7% 

Fantasy 

17% 

7% 

Romance  (Sexy) 

13% 

5% 

Romance  (Gothic/Hist.) 

13% 

5% 

Occult/Supernatural 

12% 

5% 

Westerns 

10% 

4% 

War  Books 

10% 

4% 

Juvenile/Children's 

26% 

10% 

Short  Stories 

22% 

9% 

Humor/Satire 

20% 

8% 

Poetry 

11% 

4% 

Plays 

8% 

3% 

SOURCE:  Market  Facts,  Inc.  &  Research  &  Forecasts,  Inc.  1983  Consumer  Re- 
search Study  On  Reading  And  Book  Purchasing.  Vol.  I:  Focus  On 
Adults.  New  York:  Book  Industry  Study  Group,  Inc.,   1984. 


What  the  Readers  are  Reading      31 

Poetry,  Short  Stories,  Drama 

The  BISG  study  found  that  22  percent  of  fiction  readers  had 
read  a  book  of  short  stories  in  the  previous  six  months.  Eleven 
percent  had  read  one  or  more  poetry  books  and  8  percent,  one 
or  more  books  of  plays.  As  a  fraction  of  all  respondents,  the  propor- 
tions were  about  9  percent  for  short  stories,  4  percent  for  poetry, 
and  3  percent  for  drama.  The  latter  percentages  are  in  reasonably 
good  agreement  with  those  found  in  the  ARTS  survey  to  have  read 
works  of  literary  merit,  especially  if  the  difference  in  reference 
periods  is  taken  into  account. 

Audience  Size  Reconsidered 

The  results  summarized  above  indicate  that  literature  experts  are 
correct  when  they  say  that  the  proportion  of  people  who  read  fine 
literature  is  far  smaller  than  the  56  percent  who  report  reading  fic- 
tion, poetry,  or  drama  in  the  course  of  a  year.  If  the  SPPA  esti- 
mate of  the  number  of  literature  readers  were  taken  at  face  value, 
it  would  mean  that  literature  had  a  substantially  larger  audience 
than  most  of  the  other  arts.  For  example,  the  SPPA  estimated  that 
some  95  million  people  read  literature  in  1985.  This  was  over  two- 
and-a-half  times  more  than  the  number  projected  to  have  visited 
art  museums  (37  million),  and  over  four  times  more  than  the  esti- 
mated number  of  people  who  attended  classical  music  performances 
(22  million).  Indeed,  the  ostensible  number  of  literature  readers 
was  nearly  as  great  as  the  101  million  who  reported  attending  mo- 
vies within  a  year.  (Interestingly,  the  combined  number  of  adult 
trade  books  and  mass  market  paperbacks  sold  yearly  in  the  U.S.— 
some  1.1  billion  in  1985 — is  about  the  same  as  the  total  number 
of  movie  tickets  sold  annually.)36 

What  the  ARTS  and  BISG  findings  show,  however,  is  that  many 
of  the  professed  literature  readers  read  only  genre  fiction  or  sen- 
timental verse,  the  literary  equivalents  of  TV  "shoot-em-ups"  and 
sitcoms,  or  "Top  40"  popular  music.  The  proportion  who  read 
serious  contemporary  literature  of  all  forms  in  the  course  of  a  year 
seems  to  be  about  7  to  12  percent  of  the  adult  population  (the  12 
percent  figure  coming  from  the  proportion  who  reported  they  had 
read  "modern  dramatic  novels"  in  the  BISG  survey).  This  would 


32       Who  Reads  Literature? 

still  make  the  audience  for  literature  comparable  to  that  for  some 
of  the  other  arts,  roughly  the  equivalent  of  the  16  million  people 
who  attend  jazz  performances  or  the  20  million  who  see  live  dra- 
ma each  year. 

At  the  same  time,  the  size  of  the  audience  for  literature  could 
be  two-to-three  times  larger,  depending  on  where  one  draws  the 
line  between  "entertainment"  and  "art."  If  one  is  prepared  to  take 
seriously  popular  authors,  such  as  horror-story  writer  Stephen  King, 
poet-illustrator  Shel  Silverstein,  humorist  Garrison  Keillor,  or  mys- 
tery writer  John  D.  MacDonald,  as  at  least  some  critics  are,  then 
the  public  for  literature  might  be  more  like  a  fifth  to  a  quarter, 
rather  than  a  tenth,  of  the  adult  population.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
one  restricted  the  approved  following  to  those  familiar  with  excel- 
lent but  not  widely  known  authors,  such  as  poets  Adrienne  Rich 
or  James  Merrill,  then  the  size  of  the  audience  for  contemporary 
literature  would  become  minuscule  indeed. 

A  few  points  should  be  made  here.  First,  it  is  difficult  to  make 
a  precise  estimate  of  the  overall  size  of  the  literary  audience  from 
the  ARTS  and  BISG  studies,  because  their  published  reports  do 
not  contain  necessary  summary  tabulations,  and  because  of  am- 
biguities and  flaws  in  the  coding  and  tabulation  procedures  used 
in  the  studies.  It  would  certainly  be  desirable  to  conduct  a  survey 
that  made  more  careful  use  of  the  follow-up  questions  developed 
in  these  studies,  with  a  larger  sample  and  expert  advice  on  the  cod- 
ing of  various  works  and  authors.  Such  a  study,  however,  would 
not  resolve  arguments  over  what  is  art  and  what  is  mere  enter- 
tainment. 

Second,  in  attempting  to  gauge  the  size  of  the  audience  for 
literature,  it  does  not  seem  appropriate  to  limit  the  audience  to  those 
who  read  serious  contemporary  works,  any  more  than  one  would 
wish  to  limit  one's  definition  of  the  audience  for  classical  music 
to  those  who  attend  Steve  Reich  or  Milton  Babbitt  concerts,  or  the 
audience  for  visual  art  to  those  who  come  out  for  the  latest  exhibit 
at  the  Hirshhorn  or  Guggenheim.  In  each  of  these  publics,  there 
is  a  substantial  segment  of  followers  who  stick  with  time-honored 
works  and  are  not  terribly  receptive  to  the  new  and  challenging. 
It  hardly  seems  fair  or  wise  to  exclude  these  individuals  from  the 
audience  counts.  Their  skeptical  judgments  about  the  worth  of  con- 


What  the  Readers  are  Reading      33 

temporary  writers,  composers,  and  painters  will,  if  past  experience 
is  any  guide,  be  supported  in  many  instances  by  art  historians  of 
the  future.  In  other  cases,  of  course,  the  new  and  sometimes  diffi- 
cult works  of  today  will  become  part  of  tomorrow's  established 
canon. 

Third,  in  estimating  the  size  of  the  audience  for  poetry,  the 
distinction  between  those  who  read  classic  works  only  and  those 
who  read  contemporary  as  well  as  classic  literature  makes  a  sub- 
stantial difference.  If  one  includes  those  who  read  well-established 
poetry,  then  the  ARTS  and  BISG  surveys  indicate  that  the  audience 
for  serious  poetry  is  about  six  percent  of  the  adult  population.  This 
is  larger  than  the  sizes  of  the  audiences  for  ballet  or  opera.  On 
the  other  hand,  if  one  restricts  the  audience  to  those  who  read  con- 
temporary ''literary"  poetry,  then,  as  noted  above,  the  poetry  au- 
dience amounts  to  one  percent  or  less  of  the  population. 

Finally,  looking  at  the  empty  rather  than  the  full  portion  of 
the  glass,  it  is  striking  how  many  adults  there  are  in  the  American 
public  who  can  read,  are  reasonably  educated,  and  have  been  ex- 
posed to  at  least  some  literature  in  the  course  of  their  schooling, 
but  who  read  nothing  or  virtually  nothing  in  the  way  of  fiction, 
poetry,  or  drama  on  even  an  occasional  basis.  The  1985  SPPA  found 
that  at  least  44  percent  of  the  adult  population  had  not  read  a  sin- 
gle literary  work  in  the  course  of  a  year.  The  majority  of  these 
people— 62  percent— were  high  school  graduates,  and  one  in  five 
had  some  college  education.  Similarly,  the  BISG  study  found  that 
42  percent  of  the  adult  population  were  non-book  readers,  in  the 
sense  that  they  had  read  newspapers  or  magazines,  but  not  a  sin- 
gle fiction  or  non-fiction  book  during  the  previous  six  months.  Un- 
fortunately, as  noted  earlier,  the  non-book-reading  segment  of  the 
population  appears  to  be  growing. 


Chapter  3 

Factors  That  Affect 

Literary  Participation 


There  are,  from  the  start,  a  number  of  demographic  characteris- 
tics that  affect  a  person's  level  of  participation  in  the  literary  arts. 

Education 

In  the  1985  SPPA  data,  if  someone  had  not  completed  high 
school,  the  odds  were  about  two-to-one  that  he  or  she  had  not  read 
a  novel,  short  story,  poem,  or  play  in  the  last  12  months.  If  the 
person  had  a  high  school  diploma,  then  the  chances  became  slightly 
better  than  fifty-fifty.  But  if  the  person  had  completed  one  or  more 
years  of  college,  the  odds  were  three-to-one  in  favor  of  him  or  her 
being  a  literature  reader. 

Obviously,  education  was  not  a  perfect  predictor  of  literary 
participation.  Some  people  with  relatively  little  education  were  regu- 
lar readers  of  fiction,  poetry,  or  drama,  whereas  a  significant 
minority  of  those  with  college  training  did  not  ordinarily  read  any 
works  of  literature.  Nevertheless,  of  the  basic  background  varia- 
bles, education  was  the  one  most  closely  correlated  with  literature 
reading. 


36       Who  Reads  Literature? 

Education  was  also  associated  with  poetry  reading  and  crea- 
tive writing,  but  not  as  strongly.  (Table  6.)  The  proportion  of  peo- 
ple who  had  read  or  listened  to  poetry  was  more  than  twice  as  large 
among  the  college  educated  as  among  those  with  less  than  a  high 
school  education.  And  the  proportion  who  had  tried  to  do  crea- 
tive writing  was  five  times  greater.  But  even  among  those  with 
graduate  degrees,  only  a  minority  had  read  any  poetry,  and  an  even 
smaller  minority  had  done  any  creative  writing  in  the  last  12  months. 

A  person's  educational  attainment  tends  to  be  associated  with 
other  social  characteristics,  such  as  his  or  her  income  level  and 
ethnic  background.  Thus,  when  education  was  combined  with  these 
and  other  factors  in  an  equation,  the  unique  contribution  of  edu- 
cation to  the  prediction  of  literary  participation  was  somewhat 
diminished*  But  education  still  remained  the  premier  predictor,  sur- 
passing income  and  race,  as  well  as  age,  sex,  and  residence.  It 
was  also  the  leading  predictor  of  poetry  reading  and  creative  writing. 

There  are  a  number  of  reasons  why  education  should  be  a  good 
predictor  of  literary  participation.  The  more  years  of  education  a 
person  has  had,  the  more  likely  it  is  that  he  or  she  has  been  ex- 
posed to  literature  in  school  and  has  had  instruction  in  its  ap- 
preciation. 

In  addition,  years  of  educational  attainment  could  be  used  as 
a  proxy  measure  for  intelligence.  More  intelligent  individuals  are 
more  likely  to  be  avid  and  adept  readers,  to  recognize  and  enjoy 
good  writing,  and  to  share  the  interests  and  concerns  of  those  who 
write  literature.  Educated  persons  are  also  more  likely  to  be  ex- 
posed to  reviews,  magazine  and  newspaper  articles,  public  televi- 
sion and  radio  programs,  and  the  recommendations  of  friends. 
Finally,  more  educated  persons  may  feel  social  pressure  to  read 
works  of  literature  in  order  to  be  able  to  converse  knowledgeably 
about  them  with  colleagues  and  friends. 

As  noted  earlier,  the  association  between  educational  attain- 
ment and  literature  reading,  and  the  rising  levels  of  general  edu- 
cation in  the  United  States,  would  lead  one  to  expect  that  the  amount 
of  literature  reading  is  increasing.  But  other  influences  can  over- 


*Results  of  the  predictive  equations,  which  made  use  of  a  technique  called  logis- 
tic regression  analysis,  are  shown  in  greater  detail  in  the  Technical  Appendix. 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation       37 


TABLE  6.  Relationship  Between  Education  and  Income  Levels  and  Literature 
Reading,  Poetry  Reading,  Creative  Writing,  and  Book  or  Magazine  Reading 
in  Last  12  Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,  1985. 


Proportion  of  Popu 

lation  Group 

Who .  .  . 

Did 

Read 

Read 

Read 

Creative 

Books, 

Literature 

Poetry 

Writing 

Magazines 

ALL  ADULTS 

56.0% 

18.6% 

6.2% 

85.6% 

EDUCATION  GROUPS 

Some  College 

75.4% 

28.1% 

1  1 .5% 

97.2% 

High  School  Grad 

53.4% 

14.6% 

3.8% 

85.9% 

Less  than  HS 

32.6% 

12.1% 

2.0% 

68.4% 

INCOME  GROUPS 

$25K  &  over 

66.5% 

22.6% 

8.0% 

92.3% 

$10— 25K 

51.8% 

19.6% 

6.4% 

85.3% 

Under  $  1  OK 

43.6% 

1 4. 1  % 

3.2% 

72.3% 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabulations  by  N. 
Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


38       Who  Reads  Literature? 

ride  the  effects  of  education  on  social  behavior  and  produce  trends 
that  are  different  from  the  expected  ones.  Voting  is  a  good  exam- 
ple of  this.  As  with  the  propensity  to  read  literature,  the  propensi- 
ty to  vote  is  positively  correlated  with  educational  attainment.  But 
rising  education  levels  have  not  resulted  in  increased  levels  of  vot- 
er turnout,  at  least  not  in  recent  decades.  Moreover,  as  critics  of 
the  educational  system  are  quick  to  point  out,  the  rise  in  general 
education  levels  has  been  accompanied  by  some  decay  in  educa- 
tional quality.  A  high  school  diploma  does  not  necessarily  mean 
as  much  as  it  once  did  in  terms  of  skills  mastered  and  knowledge 
gained. 

Income 

Like  education,  an  individual's  income  level  is  significantly 
associated  with  literary  participation.  Among  persons  in  the  1985 
SPPA  who  had  annual  incomes  of  $25,000  or  more,  the  odds  were 
about  two-to-one  that  they  had  read  a  work  of  fiction,  poetry,  or 
drama  in  the  previous  twelve  months.  For  those  with  incomes  be- 
tween $10,000  and  $25,000,  the  odds  dropped  to  just  over  fifty- 
fifty.  And  among  those  with  incomes  below  $10,000,  the  chances 
were  about  six-to-four  against  their  being  literature  readers. 

Income  level  was  also  correlated  with  the  general  reading  of 
books  and  magazines,  and  with  the  reading  of  poetry  and  creative 
writing.  (Table  6.)  However,  the  relationships  between  income  and 
poetry  reading,  and  income  and  creative  writing,  were  considera- 
bly weaker  than  the  relationship  with  overall  literature  reading.  For 
example,  those  with  incomes  of  $25,000  and  over  were  only  about 
one-and-a-half  times  more  likely  to  have  read  poetry  than  those 
with  incomes  below  $10,000. 

A  person's  income  is  associated  with  his  or  her  education  level 
and  ethnic  group,  so  some  of  the  correlation  between  income  and 
literary  participation  could  be  due  to  these  factors,  rather  than  to 
income  per  se.  When  income  was  combined  with  the  other  demo- 
graphic factors  in  a  logistic  regression  equation  *  the  amount  of 
predictive  power  contributed  by  income,  over  and  above  that  provid- 


*This  equation  allows  a  "better  fit"  of  the  data  by  fitting  them  into  a  curve  rather 
than  a  straight  line. 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation       39 

ed  by  education,  turned  out  to  be  slight.  Income  was  still  a  sig- 
nificant, though  weak,  predictor  of  overall  literature  reading,  but 
not  of  poetry  reading  or  creative  writing. 

Thus,  those  with  higher  incomes  are  more  likely  to  be  litera- 
ture readers  than  those  with  lower  incomes,  primarily  because  the 
former  tend  to  be  more  educated  than  the  latter.  The  fact  that  they 
also  have  more  money  to  buy  books  and  more  leisure  time  to  en- 
joy them  may  also  play  a  role,  but  apparently  not  a  major  one. 

Gender 

Another  basic  characteristic  that  has  a  bearing  on  literary  par- 
ticipation is  a  person's  gender.  If  a  respondent  in  the  1985  SPPA 
was  a  woman,  the  odds  were  nearly  two-to-one  that  she  had  read 
a  novel,  short  story,  poem,  or  play  in  the  previous  12  months.  For 
men,  by  contrast,  the  odds  were  less  than  fifty-fifty.  Women  were 
also  more  likely  to  have  read  books  and  magazines  in  general,  to 
have  read  poetry,  and  to  have  done  creative  writing,  though  all  of 
these  relationships  were  considerably  weaker  than  the  association 
with  literature  reading.  (Table  7.) 

When  the  demographic  variables  were  combined  in  predic- 
tive equations,  gender  proved  to  be  the  second-strongest  factor  (after 
education)  in  separating  literature  readers  and  poetry  readers  from 
non-readers.  It  was  the  fourth-strongest  factor  (after  education,  age, 
and  non-metropolitan  residence)  in  differentiating  creative  writers 
from  non-writers. 

In  the  BISG  survey  on  reading,  women  were  found  to  be  much 
more  likely  than  men  to  be  frequent  book  readers.  Gender  was 
also  associated  with  the  amount  of  reading  done:  women  were  more 
likely  to  be  readers  of  fiction,  and  men  of  non-fiction.  Men  were 
more  apt  to  be  readers  of  newspapers  and  magazines,  but  not  books. 
As  might  be  expected,  certain  genres  of  fiction,  such  as  romances, 
had  a  largely  female  following,  whereas  other  genres,  such  as  ac- 
tion/adventure stories  and  science  fiction,  had  readerships  that  were 
predominantly  male.37 

It  would  seem  that  both  cultural  and  biological  factors  are  at 
work  in  accounting  for  the  gender  differences  in  literary  partici- 
pation. As  discussed  later,  there  is  evidence  that  girls  get  more 
encouragement  to  read  from  their  parents.  But  there  is  also  evi- 


40      Who  Reads  Literature? 


TABLE  7.  Relationship  Between  Gender  and  Age/Year  of  Birth  and  Litera- 
ture Reading,  Poetry  Reading,  Creative  Writing,  and  Book  or  Magazine  Reading 
in  Last  12  Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,  1985. 


Proportion  of  Popu 

lation  Group 

Who .  .  . 

Did 

Read 

Read 

Read 

Creative 

Books, 

Literature 

Poetry 

Writing 

Magazines 

ALL  ADULTS 

56.0% 

18.6% 

6.2% 

85.6% 

GENDER 

Female 

63.0% 

21.5% 

7.4% 

88.3% 

Male 

48.1% 

16.2% 

4.9% 

82.7% 

AGE/BIRTH  YEAR 

Young  (18-29) 

56.8% 

19.7% 

8.5% 

87.0% 

Middle  (30-49) 

60.8% 

20. 1  % 

7.6% 

88.6% 

Older  (50  +) 

50.3% 

17.4% 

3.0% 

81.5% 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 

1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabulations  by  N. 
Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation       41 

dence  of  innate  differences  between  the  sexes  in  the  development 
of  reading  skills  and  interests.  Studies  of  standardized  reading  tests 
given  to  elementary- school  children  have  found  that,  on  the  aver- 
age, girls  read  earlier,  better,  and  more  than  boys  do.  Girls  do  not 
surpass  boys  in  all  verbal  areas:  boys  do  as  well  or  even  slightly 
better  on  vocabulary  tests.  But  girls  excel  on  tests  of  reading  profi- 
ciency, and  fewer  girls  encounter  difficulties  in  learning  to  read.38 
Girls  also  write  letters  earlier  and  express  more  positive  attitudes 
toward  reading  stories.39 

For  reasons  that  are  not  well  understood,  women  lose  much 
of  their  advantage  over  men  on  reading  tests  by  late  adolescence 
and  young  adulthood.40  Among  college-bound  high  school  stu- 
dents, for  example,  men  score  slightly  higher  than  women  on  the 
verbal  portion  of  the  Scholastic  Aptitude  Test  (SAT),  including  the 
reading  comprehension  subtest.  On  the  other  hand,  women  do 
slightly  better  on  the  Test  of  Standard  Written  English  that  is  giv- 
en as  part  of  the  SAT,  as  well  as  on  the  English  Composition 
Achievement  Test.  Young  women  in  high  school  and  college  con- 
tinue to  do  more  reading  than  men,  especially  reading  for  pleas- 
ure, and  to  know  more  about  literature.  Thus,  nearly  twice  as  many 
women  as  men  take  the  College  Board  Achievement  Test  in  Liter- 
ature, and  the  mean  score  attained  by  women  is  significantly  higher 
than  that  for  men.41 

It  might  also  be  argued  that  women  may  be  drawn  to  litera- 
ture because  of  a  greater  interest  in  human  character  development 
and  social  interaction  patterns.  In  the  past,  women  were  raised  in 
a  manner  that  called  for  sensitivity  to  other  people's  feelings  and 
motivations,  and  for  getting  one's  way  through  persuasion  rather 
than  assertiveness.  Obviously,  much  of  literature  is  concerned 
with  how  people  behave  in  various  situations  and  why  they  act  as 
they  do. 

It  is  interesting  to  speculate  about  what  effects  the  women's 
movement  has  had  and  will  have  on  female  involvement  with  liter- 
ature. Certainly,  the  drive  for  women's  rights  has  helped  to  draw 
attention  to  outstanding  women  writers,  and  to  open  more  oppor- 
tunities for  women  in  the  publication  and  promotion  of  literature. 
One  would  also  think,  given  the  changes  that  women  as  a  group 
have  been  undergoing,  that  many  would  want  to  read  or  write  about 


42      Who  Reads  Literature? 

their  experiences  and  feelings  in  fictional,  poetic,  or  dramatic  forms. 

Whenever  norms  and  values  are  in  flux,  literature  has  a  spe- 
cial role  to  play.  Literature  can  be  a  vehicle  for  exploring  new  pat- 
terns of  behavior  and  interaction.  It  can  provide  fictional  characters 
that  serve  as  role  models  to  real  people  going  through  similar  strug- 
gles. And  it  can  give  voice  to  both  the  exhilaration  and  the  frus- 
trations that  many  pioneers  experience.  Although  many  of  the 
best-known  feminist  authors,  such  as  Betty  Friedan  and  Germaine 
Greer,  are  non-fiction  writers,  feminist  issues  and  themes  appear 
in  a  broad  range  of  contemporary  fiction,  including  the  works  of 
writers  as  disparate  as  Mary  Gordon,  Erica  Jong,  and  Francine 
du  Pies  six  Gray. 

Even  the  emergence  of  a  new  type  of  popular  romance  novels 
with  a  more  overtly  sexual  content  can  be  at  least  partly  attributed 
to  the  women's  movement,  in  the  sense  that  the  movement  has  made 
it  easier  for  women  to  be  open  about  their  sexuality.  However,  as 
more  women  become  involved  in  traditionally  male  career  paths, 
one  wonders  whether  their  reading  patterns  will  become  more  like 
the  instrumental,  non-fiction  oriented  reading  of  men. 

Age 

The  year  in  which  a  person  was  born  has  relevance  to  literary 
participation,  both  because  it  represents  where  the  individual  is 
in  his  or  her  life  cycle  and  because  it  indicates  the  historical  peri- 
od in  which  the  person  was  raised.  If  literary  participation  pat- 
terns are  changing  over  time,  the  change  should  be  reflected  in 
differences  between  age  groups.  The  problem  is  in  disentangling 
historical  change  from  aging  effects.  This  is  not  completely  possi- 
ble with  data  from  a  single  point  in  time,  or  even  from  two  closely 
spaced  surveys.  Some  reasonable  inferences  can  usually  be  drawn 
about  what  is  occurring,  however,  depending  on  the  pattern  of 
change  actually  observed. 

The  wide  range  of  birth  years  represented  in  the  1985  SPPA 
was  broken  down  into  three  broad  groups:  young  adults  (ages  18-29, 
or  birth  years  1956-1967);  middle-aged  adults  (ages  30-49,  or  birth 
years  1936-1955);  and  older  adults  (ages  50  and  older,  or  birth  years 
1935  and  earlier).  When  this  division  was  made,  a  relatively  weak 
relationship  was  found  between  age  and  literary  participation:  par- 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation      43 

ticipation  declined  from  the  middle  to  the  older  years.  The  propor- 
tion reading  literature,  for  example,  decreased  from  61  percent  in 
the  middle  years  to  50  percent  in  the  older  years.  Similar  declines 
were  observed  in  creative  writing,  general  reading,  and  poetry  read- 
ing, although  the  last  difference  was  very  slight.  (Table  7.)  Differ- 
ences between  the  middle-aged  and  younger  groups  were  so  small 
as  not  to  be  statistically  significant,  but  were  generally  in  the  direc- 
tion of  the  middle-aged  reading  more  than  young  adults.  Creative 
writing  was  an  exception,  being  higher  in  the  young  group,  but 
by  very  little. 

Because  education  levels  have  been  rising  over  time,  age  and 
year  of  birth  are  correlated  with  educational  attainment.  Older 
groups  have  lower  education  levels,  on  the  average,  than  younger 
age  groups.  Age  and  birth  year  are  also  somewhat  correlated  with 
income  levels  (because  middle-aged  individuals  tend  to  earn  more 
money  than  younger  or  older  people)  and  with  the  sexual  compo- 
sition of  the  group  (because  women  tend  to  live  longer  than  men). 
When  education  and  other  demographic  variables  were  entered  into 
predictive  equations  along  with  age  (which  was  treated  as  a  con- 
tinuous variable  in  the  equations),  the  unique  contribution  of  age 
to  the  process  of  differentiating  readers  from  non-readers  was  es- 
sentially eliminated. 

Thus,  the  decline  in  literature  reading  with  age  can  be  explained 
by  the  correlation  between  birth  year  and  education  level.  Older 
people  read  less  than  younger  ones,  not  because  they  are  older  (and 
hence  more  infirm,  or  less  energetic,  or  some  such),  but  primari- 
ly because  they  are  less  educated.  This  rinding  has  an  important 
implication  for  future  consumption.  Future  cohorts  of  older  Ameri- 
cans, being  more  educated  than  the  senior  citizens  of  today,  will 
presumably  be  reading  more  literature.  It  may  also  be  that  the  to- 
tal volume  of  literature  reading  will  increase,  although  the  increase 
in  reading  among  the  elderly  may  be  offset  by  declines  in  reading 
among  young  adults. 

The  apparent  negative  effect  of  age  on  literary  participation 
was  not  eliminated  in  the  equation  that  differentiated  creative  writers 
from  non-writers.  Although  the  effect  of  age  was  still  quite  weak, 
it  was  the  second-best  predictor  in  the  equation,  after  education. 
This  suggests  that  age  as  such  has  some  debilitating  or  discourag- 


44       Who  Reads  Literature? 

ing  effect  on  the  production  of  imaginative  writing.  In  her  book 
The  Coming  of  Age,  Simone  de  Beauvoir  concludes  that  great  age 
is  generally  not  conducive  to  literary  creation,  especially  to  the 
writing  of  novels.  She  attributes  this  to  the  waning  with  age  of  the 
"alacrity"  and  strength  that  imaginative  writing  requires.  But  de 
Beauvoir  also  mentions  notable  exceptions  to  the  rule,  famous 
authors  like  Sophocles,  Cervantes,  Voltaire,  Victor  Hugo,  and  Henry 
James,  who  created  some  of  their  finest  works  in  later  life.42 

The  decline  in  amateur  writing  with  age  seems  unfortunate 
because  older  individuals,  having  experienced  more,  should  have 
more  to  write  about.  Once  retired,  they  also  have  more  time  to 
practice  the  craft  of  writing.  Perhaps,  as  attitudes  about  what  is 
possible  and  appropriate  for  older  people  to  do  change,  the  de- 
cline in  writing  associated  with  increased  age  will  change  as  well. 

Race/Ethnicity 

Blacks  and  Hispanics  are  less  likely  to  have  read  literature  than 
whites.  The  1985  SPPA  data  show  that  the  odds  on  someone  who 
was  Black  or  Hispanic  having  read  a  novel,  short  story,  poem,  or 
play  in  the  previous  12  months  were  about  40-60  against.  For  non- 
minority  whites,  on  the  other  hand,  the  odds  were  nearly  60-40 
in  favor.  In  addition,  whites  were  about  50  percent  more  likely  than 
Blacks  or  Hispanics  to  have  read  poetry  or  done  some  creative  writ- 
ing. (Table  8.)  The  rates  for  individuals  from  other  minority  groups 
(predominantly  Asians)  generally  fell  between  those  of  whites  and 
Blacks  and  Hispanics. 

Educational  Handicaps.  Especially  among  older  adults, 
minority  ethnic  status  is  associated  with  lower  educational  attain- 
ment and  income  levels  in  our  society,  despite  the  dramatic  im- 
provement in  educational  and  employment  opportunities  for 
minorities  in  the  last  three  decades.  Substantial  fractions  of  Black 
and  Hispanic  adults  are  either  illiterate  or  "aliterate."  Many 
Hispanic-Americans  and  some  Asian-Americans  are  literate  in  their 
native  languages,  but  not  in  English.  A  finding  from  the  1985  SPPA 
illustrates  these  problems:  one  third  of  Blacks  and  Hispanics  had 
not  read  any  kind  of  book  or  magazine  in  the  last  year.  The  com- 
parable proportion  among  white  adults  was  one  tenth. 

But  when  education,  income,  and  other  demographic  factors 


Factors  That  Affect  literary  Participation      45 


TABLE  8.  Relationship  Between  Ethnic  Group  Membership  and  Literature 
Reading,  Poetry  Reading,  Creative  Writing,  and  Book  or  Magazine  Reading 
in  Last  12  Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,  1985. 


Proportion 

of  Populate 

Dn  Group 

Who .  .  . 

Did 

Read 

Read 

Read 

Creative 

Books, 

Literature 

Poetry 

Writing 

Magazines 

ALL  ADULTS 

56.0% 

18.6% 

6.2% 

85.6% 

ETHNIC  GROUPS 

Whites 

59.0% 

20.0% 

6.7% 

89.9% 

Blacks 

43.0% 

13.8% 

4.5% 

66.3% 

Hispanics 

41.5% 

14.8% 

4.0% 

66.0% 

Asians,  Others 

51.9% 

16.0% 

2.4% 

85.3% 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabulations  by  N. 
Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


46       Who  Reads  Literature? 

were  entered  along  with  race  into  equations  predicting  literary  par- 
ticipation, the  predictive  power  of  race  was  considerably  reduced. 
(Because  of  the  relatively  small  size  of  the  Hispanic  and  Asian  sub- 
samples,  only  a  variable  differentiating  Black  from  non-Black 
respondents  was  entered  into  the  predictive  equations.)  In  the  equa- 
tions differentiating  poetry  readers  from  non-readers,  and  crea- 
tive writers  from  non-writers,  race  added  nothing  to  the  prediction. 
In  the  equation  predicting  overall  literature  reading,  race  remained 
a  significant,  though  weak,  predictor.  Similar  results  were  obtained 
in  analyses  with  the  data  from  the  1982  SPPA. 

Socialization  and  skill  differences.  Minority  individuals  are 
less  likely  to  have  been  exposed  to  literature  as  children.  Educa- 
tional research  studies  have  found  that  minority  children,  espe- 
cially Hispanics,  tend  to  have  fewer  reading  materials  in  their  homes 
than  non-minority  youngsters,  and  are  less  apt  to  have  been  read 
to  by  their  parents.43  Consistent  with  this,  Hispanic  adults  in  the 
SPPA  reported  that  their  parents  generally  had  not  encouraged  them 
to  read  books  that  were  not  required  for  school.  In  addition,  the 
quality  of  the  formal  education  many  minority  individuals  receive 
is  inferior  to  that  received  by  the  typical  non-minority  individual. 
Thus,  in  the  SPPA,  fewer  Black  and  Hispanic  respondents  report- 
ed that  they  had  been  exposed  to  lessons  in  creative  writing. 

Furthermore,  even  though  the  basic  reading  skills  and  educa- 
tional attainment  levels  of  minority  young  people  have  risen  sub- 
stantially since  the  1960s,  standardized  tests  still  show  that  the 
reading  proficiency  of  both  Black  and  Hispanic  youths  lags  behind 
that  of  non-minority  youths  with  equivalent  years  of  education.  In 
1988,  for  example,  the  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Pro- 
gress found  that  only  about  one-quarter  of  Black  or  Hispanic 
17-year-olds  could  read  on  an  adept  level,  whereas  nearly  half  of 
the  white  17-year-olds  were  adept  readers.44 

Availability  of  minority  literature.  In  addition  to  these  educa- 
tional barriers,  there  is  the  question  of  the  availability  of  fiction, 
poetry,  and  drama  that  is  of  interest  to  minority  adults  and  reflects 
their  concerns  and  cultural  traditions.  The  works  of  a  few  con- 
temporary Black  writers,  such  as  Alex  Haley,  Toni  Morrison, 
Ntozake  Shange,  Alice  Walker,  and  August  Wilson,  have  received 
widespread  public  attention  in  recent  years.  And  some  older  Black 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation      47 

writers  like  Langston  Hughes,  James  Baldwin,  Ralph  Ellison, 
Richard  Wright,  and  Lorraine  Hansberry,  have  received  recogni- 
tion because  of  the  enduring  value  of  their  work,  and  as  a  result 
of  "Black  History  Month"  and  other  efforts  to  raise  public  con- 
sciousness about  the  contributions  of  Blacks  to  American  culture. 
The  sad  truth,  though,  is  that  many  Black  young  people  are  ig- 
norant of  these  authors  and  their  works.  Moreover,  although  the 
situation  is  far  better  than  it  was  in  the  past,  it  could  hardly  be 
said  that  there  is  as  yet  an  extensive  body  of  literary  works  by  and 
for  Black  Americans. 

The  situation  is  worse  for  Hispanic  Americans.  For  one  thing, 
the  Hispanic  community  is  not  a  unified  whole.  It  is  divided  into 
Mexican-Americans,  Puerto  Ricans,  Cuban-Americans,  those  from 
Spain,  and  those  from  the  different  Central  or  South  American 
countries.  Each  of  these  groups  has  somewhat  different  traditions 
and  concerns.  Most  Hispanic-American  authors  are  not  well  known 
within  their  own  communities  and  are  virtually  unknown  to  a  broad- 
er audience.  Although  there  has  been  a  surge  of  interest  in  Latin 
American  writers  of  late,  this  has  had  little  carryover  to  Hispanic 
authors  writing  in  the  U.S.  Many  of  the  latter  continue  to  have  dif- 
ficulty getting  their  works  published  and  disseminated  to  appropriate 
audiences. 

Residence 

There  is  significant  variation  in  literary  participation  across 
different  regions  of  the  country  and  from  urban  to  rural  commu- 
nities. These  differences,  however,  are  relatively  modest  and  are 
probably  due  mostly  to  differences  in  average  educational  level 
across  areas,  or  to  the  likely  tendency  of  people  who  have  literary 
inclinations  to  prefer  living  in  some  areas  over  others. 

Regional  variations.  In  the  data  from  the  1985  SPPA,  the  odds 
that  someone  who  lived  in  the  West  had  read  a  novel,  short  story, 
poem,  or  play  in  the  last  12  months  were  almost  two-to-one.  By 
contrast,  the  odds  that  someone  from  the  South  had  done  so  were 
only  about  50-50.  The  odds  for  residents  of  the  Northeast  and  Mid- 
west were  just  slightly  better  than  those  for  the  nation  as  a  whole. 
(Table  9.)  A  similar  pattern  of  regional  variation  was  visible  in  the 
data  from  the  1982  SPPA.  Poetry  reading  and  creative  writing 


48      Who  Reads  Literature? 


TABLE  9.  Relationship  Between  Region  and  Metropolitan  Residence  and  Liter- 
ature Reading,  Poetry  Reading,  Creative  Writing,  and  Book  or  Magazine  Read- 
ing in  Last  12  Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,  1985. 


Proportion 

of  Popu 

lation  Group 

Who .  .  . 

Did 

Read 

Read 

Read 

Creative 

Books, 

Literature 

Poetry 

Writing 

Magazines 

ALL  ADULTS 

56.0% 

18.6% 

6.2% 

85.6% 

REGION 

Northeast 

57.0% 

17.1% 

4.6% 

86.4% 

Midwest 

56.7% 

21.0% 

6.6% 

90.3% 

South 

50.4% 

18.5% 

4.6% 

80.6% 

West 

63.7% 

17.0% 

10.0% 

87.2% 

RESIDENCE 

Central  City 

56.5% 

18.5% 

7.5% 

85.5% 

Suburbs 

61.0% 

21.2% 

8.2% 

91.2% 

Non-Metro 

48.9% 

16.7% 

2.8% 

78.4% 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabulations  by  N. 
Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation      49 

showed  weaker  and  somewhat  different  patterns  of  regional  varia- 
tion, although  the  West  was  still  the  leading  region  as  far  as  the 
proportion  doing  creative  writing  was  concerned.  It  was  not  pos- 
sible to  evaluate  the  predictive  power  of  region  after  other  factors 
were  controlled  because  the  Census  Bureau  does  not  release  both 
geographic  identifiers  and  household  socioeconomic  data  in  the 
same  public  use  files. 

Urban-rural  variations.  The  1985  SPPA  data  showed  that  the 
odds  were  about  60-40  that  someone  living  in  the  suburbs  of  the 
major  metropolitan  areas  had  read  a  work  of  literature  in  the  previ- 
ous 12  months.  By  contrast,  the  odds  for  a  person  living  outside 
of  the  metropolitan  areas  were  less  than  50-50.  Residents  of  non- 
metropolitan  areas  were  also  below  average  in  rates  of  general  read- 
ing, creative  writing,  and  poetry  reading,  although  the  differences 
with  respect  to  poetry  were  relatively  slight.  Residents  of  the  cen- 
tral cities  of  metropolitan  areas  were  close  to  the  national  average 
on  each  of  the  participation  variables.  Similar  patterns  of  urban- 
rural  variation  were  found  in  the  data  from  the  1982  SPPA. 

The  metropolitan  residential  factor  was  entered  into  predic- 
tive equations  by  means  of  two  variables,  one  identifying  those  who 
lived  in  central  cities,  and  the  other,  those  who  lived  in  non- 
metropolitan  areas.  Only  the  latter  added  significantly  to  the  predic- 
tions. When  education,  income,  age,  and  other  demographic  vari- 
ables were  taken  into  account,  the  contribution  of  non-metropolitan 
residence  was  considerably  reduced.  Residence  was,  however,  the 
third-strongest  predictor  of  creative  writing  (after  education  and 
age).  It  was  also  a  significant  though  weak  predictor  of  overall  liter- 
ature reading.  Thus,  most  of  the  negative  effect  of  non-metropolitan 
residence  on  literary  participation  is  due  to  other  characteristics 
of  the  residents,  such  as  their  education  levels  and  ages.  There  is, 
however,  some  residual  effect  or  correlate  of  residence  that  is  not 
accounted  for  by  the  demographic  characteristics  of  the  residents. 

Predicting  Participation  from  Demographics 

In  sum,  the  likelihood  that  a  person  will  or  will  not  be  a  read- 
er of  literature  is  significantly  related  to  a  number  of  basic  back- 
ground characteristics,  the  foremost  being  his  or  her  education  level. 
While  gender,  age,  ethnic  background,  income  level,  and  place 


SO      Who  Reads  Literature? 

of  residence  are  also  related,  they  tell  only  a  limited  amount  about 
the  person's  propensity  to  read.  Other,  more  specific  factors  in  the 
individual's  history  and  current  life  situation,  such  as  parental  en- 
couragement to  read,  also  come  into  play,  and  are  examined  in  the 
next  section.  But  first,  it  is  useful  to  see  how  well  literary  partici- 
pation can  be  predicted  when  the  basic  background  characteris- 
tics are  combined  into  predictive  equations. 

Literature  reading.  Five  variables  were  entered  into  the  equa- 
tion for  discriminating  literature  readers  from  non-readers.  (In  this 
case,  as  in  each  of  the  later  equations,  differing  numbers  of  varia- 
bles were  relevant  and  entered  into  the  equation.)  For  the  1985 
SPPA,  education  and  gender  were  the  predominant  predictors,  with 
income,  race,  and  non-metropolitan  residence  adding  tiny  but 
statistically  significant  increments  of  predictive  power.  The  equa- 
tion was  able  to  classify  68  percent  of  the  survey  respondents  cor- 
rectly. (Bear  in  mind  that  one  would  get  about  a  50  percent  correct 
classification  by  simply  alternating  between  predictions  of  "read- 
er" and  "non-reader,"  and  56  percent  correct  by  predicting  that 
everyone  was  a  literature  reader.)  There  was  also  a  moderately  good 
correlation  between  the  predicted  probability  of  being  a  reader  and 
the  actual  response.  The  model  did  somewhat  better  at  identifying 
those  who  were  readers  (71  percent  correct)  than  those  who  were 
not  (63  percent  correct).  An  almost  identical  equation  and  similar 
predictive  results  were  obtained  with  the  data  from  the  1982  SPPA. 

Poetry  reading.  Only  two  variables — education  and  gender — 
were  entered  into  the  equation  for  differentiating  poetry  readers 
from  non-readers.  The  equation  classified  75  percent  of  the  respon- 
dents correctly,  but  given  the  relatively  small  proportion  of  poetry 
readers  in  the  survey,  one  would  get  about  80  percent  correct  by 
predicting  that  no  one  had  read  a  poem.  Of  course,  the  latter  strategy 
would  lead  to  a  complete  misidentification  of  those  who  actually 
did  read  poetry  (a  zero  "hit  rate").  On  the  other  hand,  the  equa- 
tion correctly  identified  35  percent  of  those  who  had  read  poetry 
and  83  percent  of  those  who  had  not.  The  rank-order  correlation 
between  predicted  probability  and  response  (r  =  .32)  was  moder- 
ate, but  weaker  than  that  obtained  with  the  literature  reading  equa- 
tion. The  equation  and  predictive  accuracy  obtained  with  the  1982 
data  were  similar,  although  the  additional  (but  weak)  predictors 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation       SI 

of  age  and  non-metropolitan  residence  figured  into  the  1982 
equation. 

Creative  writing.  Four  variables  were  entered  into  the  equa- 
tion for  discriminating  creative  writers  from  non-writers.  Once 
again,  education  was  the  leading  predictor,  but  this  time  age  was 
the  second-best  predictor.  Non-metropolitan  residence  and  gen- 
der also  figured  into  the  equation.  The  equation  classified  92  per- 
cent of  the  respondents  correctly,  about  the  same  overall  proportion 
correct  that  one  would  get  by  predicting  that  no  one  had  done  any 
creative  writing  in  the  last  12  months.  However,  the  equation  was 
able  to  identify  correctly  21  percent  of  the  actual  writers,  as  well 
as  95  percent  of  the  non-writers.  The  rank-order  correlation  be- 
tween predicted  probability  and  actual  response  (r  =  .54)  was 
moderately  good.  The  predictive  accuracy  obtained  with  the  1982 
SPPA  data  was  nearly  identical,  and  the  equation  similar,  although 
central  city  residence  (rather  than  non-metropolitan  residence)  and 
income  figured  into  the  1982  equation. 

Socialization  and  Training 

Early  Encouragement  of  Reading 

One  factor  that  markedly  increases  an  adult's  chances  of  be- 
ing a  regular  reader  of  literature  is  having  grown  up  in  a  family 
where  reading  was  practiced  and  encouraged.  Studies  of  academ- 
ic achievement  in  children  consistently  find  that  the  parents'  edu- 
cation level  and  the  academic  orientation  of  the  home  are  among 
the  best  predictors  of  how  well  a  child  will  do  in  school.45 
Aspects  of  the  home  environment  that  correlate  with  achievement 
include  the  number  of  books  and  other  reading  materials  in  the 
home,  whether  the  child  was  read  to  regularly,  and  whether  the 
parents  encouraged  the  child  to  read  books  not  required  for  school. 
Similarly,  the  SPPA  has  found  that  one's  participation  in  the  arts 
as  an  adult  is  correlated  with  the  education  level  of  one's  parents 
and  with  recollections  of  having  been  exposed  to  the  arts  by  one's 
parents  when  one  was  a  child.46  Of  the  various  relationships  be- 
tween childhood  socialization  indicators  and  measures  of  adult  arts 
participation  that  are  covered  in  the  survey,  those  involving  par- 
ticipation in  literature  are  among  the  strongest. 


32       Who  Reads  Literature? 

Parents '  education  level.  The  SPPA  asked  respondents  to  re- 
port the  highest  grade  or  year  of  regular  school  their  fathers  and 
mothers  had  completed  according  to  six  categories  ranging  from 
"7th  grade  or  less"  to  "completed  college  (4+  years)."  Although 
17  percent  of  the  respondents  in  the  1985  survey  could  not  recall 
their  father's  education  level  and  13  percent  could  not  recall  their 
mother's,  most  were  able  to  come  up  with  at  least  an  approxima- 
tion. For  the  purpose  of  the  analyses  reported  here,  the  higher  of 
the  two  education  levels  was  used;  if  only  one  parent's  education 
level  was  known,  it  was  used.  The  proportion  of  respondents  whose 
parents  attained  each  education  level  is  shown  in  Table  10. 

Respondents  with  college-educated  parents  were  considerably 
more  likely  to  be  literature  readers  than  those  whose  parents  had 
less  than  a  high  school  education.  If  the  respondent's  parents  were 
college  graduates,  the  odds  on  the  person  having  read  literature 
in  the  past  12  months  were  about  four- to-one.  However,  if  the  par- 
ents had  only  an  elementary  school  education,  the  odds  were 
reduced  to  less  than  50-50.  Parent  education  was  also  related  to 
the  chances  of  having  read  poetry  or  done  creative  writing,  though 
not  as  strongly. 

As  might  be  expected,  the  relationships  between  the  literary  par- 
ticipation measures  and  parent's  education  were  not  as  strong  as 
those  with  the  respondent's  own  educational  attainment.  This  is 
partly  because  there  is  less  recall  error  in  the  measure  of  the  respon- 
dent's own  education.  But  it  is  mainly  because  the  respondent's 
education  is  a  better  indicator  of  his  or  her  intelligence  and  educa- 
tional experiences.  Of  course,  parent's  education  and  own  educa- 
tion are  significantly  correlated.  Parent's  education  was  also  related 
to  the  respondent's  year  of  birth  (with  respondents  born  in  more 
recent  years  having  better  educated  parents)  and  ethnic  group  (with 
Black  and  Hispanic  respondents  having  less  educated  parents  than 
non-minority  respondents). 

Parental  encouragement  of  reading.  SPPA  participants  were 
asked:  "Did  your  parents — or  other  adult  members  of  the 
household— encourage  you  to  read  books  which  were  not  required 
for  school  or  religious  studies:  often,  occasionally,  or  never?"  Of 
those  in  the  1985  SPPA,  37  percent  reported  that  their  parents  en- 
couraged them  to  read  often;  29  percent  were  encouraged  occa- 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation       S3 


TABLE  10.  Relationship  Between  Parent  Education  Level  and  Literature  Read- 
ing, Poetry  Reading,  Creative  Writing,  and  Book  or  Magazine  Reading  in  Last 
12  Months,  and  Proportion  of  Adults  with  Parents  at  Each  Education  Level, 
U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,  1982  and  1985. 


Proportion 

of  Populati 

on  Group  Who.  .  . 

Did 

Read 

Read 

Read 

Creative 

Books, 

Literature 

Poetry 

Writing 

Magazines 

1 982  Data 

ALL  ADULTS 

56.4% 

19.8% 

6.5% 

84. 1  % 

PARENT'S  EDUCATION 

College  grad  plus 

81.0% 

35.9% 

13.0% 

97.9% 

Some  college 

76.0% 

33.4% 

12.0% 

96.8% 

High  school  grad. 

64.9% 

22.0% 

9. 1  % 

91.1% 

Some  high  school 

56.9% 

20.0% 

4.6% 

82. 1  % 

Grade  school  only 

43.1% 

14.4% 

2.6% 
Proportior 

71.5% 
l  of  Adults 

with  Parents  at  Each 

1985  Data 
56.0% 

Education  Level 

ALL  ADULTS 

1985 

1982 

PARENT'S  EDUCATION 

College  grad  plus 

78.3% 

15.4% 

15.0% 

Some  college 

78.3% 

12.2% 

9.4% 

High  school  grad. 

61.7% 

35.2% 

34.2% 

Some  high  school 

50.8% 

10.4% 

1  1.7% 

Grade    school    only 

42.9% 

26.7% 
100.0% 

29.7% 
100.0% 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1982  and  1985  Surveys  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabula- 
tions by  N.  Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


54      Who  Reads  Literature? 

sionally;  and  34  percent,  never. 

The  relationship  between  parental  encouragement  to  read  and 
adult  literature  reading  was  quite  strong,  stronger  even  than  the 
relationship  between  the  respondent's  education  level  and  litera- 
ture reading.  For  persons  who  were  frequently  encouraged  to  read 
as  children,  the  odds  were  nearly  four-to-one  that  they  had  read 
a  novel,  short  story,  poem,  or  play  in  the  last  12  months.  For  those 
who  were  never  encouraged  to  read,  on  the  other  hand,  the  odds 
were  more  than  two-to-one  against  them  having  read  literature  in 
the  last  year.  Parental  encouragement  was  also  related  to  the  chances 
of  having  done  other  types  of  reading  or  creative  writing,  though 
not  as  strongly.  (Table  11.) 

As  would  be  expected,  reports  that  the  parents  encouraged  the 
respondent  to  read  were  related  to  the  parents'  education  level.  If 
the  parents  were  college  graduates,  61  percent  of  the  respondents 
said  they  were  often  encouraged  to  read.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the 
parents  had  an  elementary  education,  only  25  percent  were  often 
encouraged  to  read,  and  more  than  half  were  never  encouraged. 
Parental  encouragement  also  varied  across  ethnic  groups.  It  was 
less  common  among  Hispanics  than  among  Blacks,  whites,  or  Asi- 
ans. Only  20  percent  of  Hispanic  respondents  reported  that  they 
were  often  encouraged  to  read,  and  54  percent  said  they  were  never 
encouraged.  (Table  12.) 

Women  were  more  likely  than  men  to  report  that  they  had  been 
encouraged  to  read  as  children  (42  percent  of  the  women,  as  op- 
posed to  32  percent  of  the  men).  Parental  encouragement  also  varied 
by  year  of  birth,  with  those  born  more  recently  being  considera- 
bly more  apt  to  have  been  encouraged  as  children.  Only  26  per- 
cent of  those  born  in  1910  or  earlier  reported  that  they  had  often 
been  encouraged  to  read,  and  less  than  half  had  been  encouraged 
even  occasionally.  By  contrast,  40  percent  or  more  of  those  born 
since  World  War  II  were  given  frequent  encouragement,  and  70 
percent  or  more  received  at  least  occasional  encouragement. 

Limitations  of  the  evidence  of  socialization  effects.  The  data 
just  reported  seem  to  provide  evidence  that  the  encouragement  of 
reading  in  childhood  helps  to  form  an  abiding  habit  of  reading  for 
pleasure  and  enlightenment.  The  differences  across  groups  in  paren- 
tal encouragement  are  also  generally  consistent  with  the  group 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation       55 


TABLE  1 1 .  Relationship  Between  Socialization  Factors  (Parental  Encourage- 
ment of  Reading,  Respondent's  Exposure  to  Creative  Writing  Lessons)  and 
Literature  Reading,  Poetry  Reading,  Creative  Writing,  and  Book  or  Magazine 
Reading  in  Last  12  Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,  1982  and  1985. 


Proportion  of  Popul. 

ation  Group 

Who .  .  . 

Did 

Read 

Read 

Read 

Creative 

Books, 

Literature 

Poetry 

Writing 

Magazines 

1985 

1  Q°? 

1  7UZ 

ALL  ADULTS                        56.0% 

19.8% 

6.5% 

84. 1  % 

PARENTS  ENCOURAGED  READING 

Often                                   79.0% 

32.8% 

10.4% 

94.6% 

Occasionally                        57.0% 

17.1% 

6.0% 

87.6% 

Never                               32.0% 

9. 1  % 

2.8% 

64.8% 

R  HAD  CREATIVE  WRITING  LESSONS 

•  * 

Yes                                       88.2% 

46.8% 

25.2% 

98.5% 

No                                       49.6% 

15.2% 

2.7% 

79.9% 

*R  denotes  respondent. 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts,  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1982  and  1985  Surveys  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabula- 
tions by  N.  Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


56      Who  Reads  Literature? 


TABLE  12.  Frequency  with  Which  Parents  Encouraged  Reading  by  Parent  Edu- 
cation Level,  Year  of  Respondent's  Birth,  Ethnic  Group,  and  Gender,  U.S.  Adults 
Aged  18  and  Over,  1985. 


Parents  Encourag 

;ed  Reading. 

Often 

Occasionally 

Never 

Total 

Percent  Distributions 

ALL  ADULTS 

37.3% 

29.0% 

33.7% 

100.0% 

PARENT'S  EDUCATION 

College  graduate 

60.5% 

28.0% 

1  1 .5% 

100.0% 

Some  college 

52.7% 

30.4% 

16.8% 

99.9% 

High  school  grad. 

40.7% 

36. 1  % 

23.2% 

100.0% 

Some  high  school 

35.4% 

32.8% 

31.8% 

100.0% 

Grade  school  only 

24.9% 

23.6% 

5 1 .4% 

99.9% 

YEAR  OF  R'S  BIRTH' 

1956-1967 

40. 1  % 

32.3% 

27.6% 

100.0% 

1936-1955 

38.6% 

32.8% 

28.6% 

100.0% 

1935  or  earlier 

33.6% 

22.4% 

44.0% 

100.0% 

ETHNIC  GROUP 

White 

38.8% 

29.7% 

31.5% 

100.0% 

Black 

37.9% 

27.1% 

34.9% 

99.9% 

Hispanic 

20.2% 

25.5% 

54.3% 

100.0% 

Asian,  other 

43.6% 

22.9% 

33.5% 

100.0% 

GENDER 

Female 

42.3% 

26.9% 

30.8% 

100.0% 

Male 

31.7% 

31.3% 

37.0% 

100.0% 

*R  denotes  respondent. 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabulations  by  N. 
Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation      57 

differences  in  literary  participation  that  were  reported  earlier.  A 
few  caveats  are  in  order,  however.  To  begin  with,  the  evidence  on 
socialization  effects  is  based  on  retrospective  recall  of  parental  edu- 
cation levels  and  encouragement,  rather  than  on  observations  or 
reports  made  at  the  time.  With  such  distant  recall,  there  is  the  pos- 
sibility that  memory  is  distorting  the  past  to  make  it  consistent  with 
present  behavior,  or  that  reports  of  literature  reading  and  parental 
encouragement  are  related  because  of  common  response  bias.  Thus, 
to  be  properly  cautious,  the  evidence  should  really  be  seen  as  sug- 
gestive rather  than  definitive. 

Furthermore,  even  if  the  relationships  between  parental  charac- 
teristics and  adult  literary  participation  prove  to  be  genuine,  the 
mechanism  involved  might  be  at  least  partly  genetic,  rather  than 
wholly  environmental.  The  same  criticism  applies  here  as  has  been 
applied  to  studies  of  family  influences  on  children's  school  achieve- 
ment.47 High  parental  education  levels  and  encouragement  of 
reading  could  be  seen  as  markers  of  high  IQ,  or  of  literary  talent 
and  interest,  which  may  be  passed  on  to  the  child  as  much  or  more 
through  shared  genes  as  through  a  nurturing  home  environment. 
It  should  also  be  noted  that  while  growing  up  in  a  home  where 
parents  read  a  lot  and  reading  materials  are  readily  available  is  con- 
ducive to  later  literary  participation,  it  is  not  essential.  In  the  past, 
when  educational  opportunities  were  more  limited,  many  individu- 
als who  became  well-read  adults  were  raised  by  parents  who  could 
not  or  did  not  read  themselves.  It  does  seem  possible  for  schools 
and  libraries  to  make  up  for  what  the  home  does  not  provide.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  findings  on  parental  encouragement  of  reading 
suggest  that,  in  trying  to  teach  young  people  to  develop  a  lifelong 
appreciation  for  literature,  the  emotional  context  in  which  the  learn- 
ing occurs  is  important. 

Creative  Writing  Classes 

In  addition  to  family  influences,  adult  reading  habits  are  shaped 
by  the  formal  training  a  person  has  received.  The  SPPA  found  that 
adults  who  had  taken  lessons  in  music,  art,  acting,  ballet,  or  classes 
in  music  or  art  appreciation,  were  more  likely  to  attend  or  take 
part  in  related  artistic  activities  than  people  who  had  not  taken  les- 
sons or  classes.48  As  described  below,  a  similar  relationship  was 


58      Who  Reads  Literature? 

obtained  between  creative  writing  classes  and  literary  participa- 
tion. Here  again,  the  issue  arises  of  whether  having  taken  a  class 
is  a  cause  of  later  participation  or  merely  an  indicator  that  the  person 
has  a  predilection  for  the  subject.  Probably  both  mechanisms  con- 
tribute to  the  observed  relationships. 

Respondents  in  the  arts  surveys  were  asked  whether  they  had 
ever  taken  lessons  or  a  class  in  creative  writing.  Those  who  said 
they  had  were  asked  to  specify  in  which  of  four  age  ranges  (elemen- 
tary school,  secondary  school,  college,  later  adulthood)  the  class- 
es were  taken.  In  the  1985  SPPA,  18  percent  of  all  adults  said  they 
had  taken  creative  writing  lessons  or  classes  at  some  point.  Most 
had  received  such  instruction  when  they  were  of  high  school  or 
college  age.  (Table  13.)  Only  3  percent  had  taken  writing  classes 
when  they  were  25  or  older.  Practically  identical  proportions  were 
obtained  in  the  1982  SPPA. 

Creative  writing  lessons  were  less  common  than  music  les- 
sons (which  had  been  taken  by  nearly  half  of  all  adults),  crafts  les- 
sons (about  a  third  had  received  these  at  some  point),  or  visual 
arts  lessons  (one  quarter  had  taken  these).  They  were  about  as  fre- 
quent as  music  appreciation  or  art  appreciation  classes,  and  more 
common  than  acting  or  ballet  lessons  (each  of  which  had  been  taken 
by  about  one  tenth  of  all  respondents). 

If  the  person  had  taken  a  lesson  or  class  in  creative  writing, 
the  odds  were  nearly  nine-to-one  that  he  or  she  had  read  a  novel, 
short  story,  poem,  or  play  in  the  last  12  months.  For  those  who 
had  not  taken  such  a  class,  the  odds  were  about  50-50.  Adults  who 
had  taken  writing  classes  were  also  more  likely  to  have  read  po- 
etry and  books  and  magazines  in  general.  (Table  11.)  As  might  be 
expected,  there  was  a  moderately  strong  relationship  between  tak- 
ing writing  classes  and  doing  creative  writing.  Although  only  a 
quarter  of  those  who  had  ever  taken  a  class  in  creative  writing  had 
done  such  writing  within  the  last  year,  this  rate  was  eight  times 
higher  than  that  for  adults  who  had  not  taken  such  courses. 

Significant  correlations  between  writing  instruction  and  liter- 
ary participation  were  found  no  matter  at  what  ages  the  writing 
classes  had  been  taken.  However,  courses  taken  in  the  college  years 
(18-24)  seemed  to  make  slightly  more  of  a  difference  than  those 
at  other  ages. 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation       59 


TABLE  13.  Number  and  Proportion  of  Adults  Who  Had  Creative  Writing 
Lessons  at  Various  Ages,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,  1982  and  1985. 


Nurr 

iber 

Pre 

iportion 

1985 

1982 

1985 

1982 

Age  at  Which 
Lessons  Were  Taken 

ALL  AGES 

30.6  mil. 

29.7  mil. 

18% 

18% 

Less  than  12  yrs. 

1.6 

1.3 

1% 

1% 

12-17  years 

14.6 

12.7 

9% 

8% 

18-24  years 

16.5 

16.6 

10% 

10% 

25  yrs.  or  more 

5.0 

5.0 

3% 

3% 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1982  and  1985  Surveys  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabula- 
tions from  public  use  data  files. 


60       Who  Reads  Literature? 

The  more  education  a  person  had,  the  more  likely  he  or  she 
was  to  have  taken  a  course  in  creative  writing.  Nearly  40  percent 
of  those  with  some  college  education  had  done  so,  as  contrasted 
to  about  10  percent  of  those  who  stopped  at  high  school,  and  only 
3  percent  of  those  who  did  not  complete  high  school.  Writing  train- 
ing was  also  more  common  among  those  with  more  educated  par- 
ents and  parents  who  had  encouraged  reading.  (Table  14.)  The 
chances  of  having  had  formal  training  in  creative  writing  as  part 
of  one's  education  have  increased  markedly  in  this  century.  Only 
3  percent  of  those  born  in  1910  or  earlier  received  such  instruc- 
tion, as  opposed  to  about  15  percent  of  those  born  in  the  late  1930s 
or  early  1940s,  and  nearly  30  percent  of  those  born  since  the 
mid-1950s.  Non-Hispanic  white  respondents  were  twice  as  likely 
to  have  received  some  creative  writing  training  as  Black  or  Asian 
respondents,  and  five  times  more  likely  than  Hispanic  respondents. 
Women  were  slightly  more  likely  than  men  to  have  taken  such  a 
course. 

Current  Life  Style 

It  seems  plausible  that  people's  literature  reading  habits  are  in- 
fluenced by  major  aspects  of  their  daily  lives,  such  as  their  jobs, 
marital  situations,  and  family  responsibilities.  What  people  do  for 
a  living  shapes  their  interest,  affects  the  amount  of  time  and  mon- 
ey they  have  for  reading  and  book  purchasing,  and  exposes  them 
to  other  people  who  may  encourage  or  discourage  certain  types 
of  reading.  Similarly,  a  person's  marital  status  and  family  situa- 
tion have  effects  on  interests,  discretionary  time  and  money,  and 
exposure  to  different  types  of  people.  Job,  marital,  and  family  cir- 
cumstances also  have  a  good  deal  to  do  with  a  person's  need  for 
stimulation,  solace,  or  escape. 

As  shown  below,  there  were  indeed  associations  in  the  arts 
survey  data  between  literature  reading  and  aspects  of  daily  life. 
The  associations  proved  to  be  weaker  than  one  might  expect,  how- 
ever, especially  after  controlling  for  related  factors  such  as  educa- 
tion, income,  age,  and  gender.  These  findings  suggest  that  literature 
reading  is  a  fairly  robust  habit  that  can  persist  in  the  face  of  time 
pressures  and  competition  from  other  activities.  The  other  side  of 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation       61 


TABLE  14.  Proportion  of  Adults  Who  Have  Ever  Taken  Creative  Writing  Les- 
sons by  Respondent's  Education  Level,  Year  of  Birth,  Ethnic  Group,  Gender, 
Parent's  Education  Level,  and  Parental  Encouragement  of  Reading,  U.S.  Adults 
Aged  18  and  Over,  1985. 


ALL  ADULTS 
EDUCATION  LEVEL 


Have  Had  Lessons  In  Creative  Writing: 


Yes 


8.0% 


No 


Percent  Distributions 
82.0%  I 


Total 


00.0% 


Some  college 

38.7% 

61.3% 

100.0% 

High  school  graduate 

10.6% 

89.4% 

100.0% 

Less  than  high  school 

2.6% 

97.4% 

100.0% 

YEAR  OF  R'S  BIRTH 

1 956- 1 967 

28.4% 

71.6% 

100.0% 

1936-1955 

20. 1  % 

79.9% 

100.0% 

1935  or  earlier 

7.5% 

92.5% 

100.0% 

ETHNIC  GROUP 

White 

20.4% 

79.6% 

100.0% 

Black 

12.1% 

87.9% 

100.0% 

Hispanic 

4. 1  % 

95.9% 

100.0% 

Asian,  other 

9.0% 

91.0% 

100.0% 

GENDER 

Female 

19.0% 

81.0% 

100.0% 

Male 

16.9% 

83.1% 

100.0% 

PARENT'S  EDUCATION 

College  graduate 

40.9% 

59. 1  % 

100.0% 

Some  college 

36.2% 

63.8% 

100.0% 

High  school  graduate 

19.7% 

80.3% 

100.0% 

Some  high  school 

1  1.3% 

88.7% 

100.0% 

Grade  school  only 

5.1% 

94.9% 

100.0% 

PARENTS  ENCOURAGED  READING 

Often 

32.7% 

67.3% 

100.0% 

Occasionally 

14.4% 

85.6% 

100.0% 

Never 

5.7% 

94.3% 

100.0% 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabulations  by 
N.  Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


62       Who  Reads  Literature? 

this  coin  is  that  those  who  are  non-readers  of  literature  do  not  sud- 
denly take  it  up  when  placed  in  circumstances  that  would  seem 
to  give  them  the  opportunity  to  do  so. 

Employment  and  Student  Status 

The  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts  collected  in- 
formation about  whether  the  respondent  was  currently  employed, 
and,  if  so,  at  what  job  and  for  how  many  hours  per  week.  The 
respondent's  current  employment  status  was  significantly  related 
to  all  types  of  reading  surveyed,  as  well  as  to  creative  writing.  (Table 
15.) 

In  general,  those  in  the  labor  force  (i.e. ,  those  working  or  look- 
ing for  paid  work)  were  more  likely  than  those  not  in  the  labor 
force  to  have  read  literature.  Students  were  a  notable  exception  to 
this  rule.  They  showed  the  highest  rates  of  literary  participation 
of  all  the  employment  groups.  For  students  in  the  1985  SPPA,  for 
example,  the  odds  were  about  three-to-one  that  they  had  read  fic- 
tion, poetry,  or  drama  in  the  last  12  months.  More  than  a  third 
had  read  poems  and  nearly  a  fifth  had  done  some  creative  writing 
in  that  period. 

Of  course,  the  high  participation  rates  of  students  are  partly 
due  to  their  being  required  to  read  works  of  literature  for  courses 
they  are  taking.  In  addition,  students  tend  to  be  immersed  in  the 
world  of  books  and  to  associate  with  others  who  read,  recommend, 
and  talk  about  books.  What  many  will  find  remarkable  about  the 
SPPA  findings,  however,  is  not  that  students'  reading  rates  are  so 
high,  but  that  they  are  not  higher. 

Of  men  and  women  in  the  labor  force,  those  who  worked  part- 
time  had  somewhat  higher  rates  of  literary  participation  than  those 
who  worked  full-time.  Those  who  had  a  job  but  were  not  at  work 
(because  of  illness,  maternity  leave,  a  labor  dispute,  etc.)  also  had 
above-average  rates  of  literature  reading,  but  not  of  poetry  reading 
or  writing.  These  differences  support  the  notion  that  having  more 
non-work  time  available  results  in  more  reading  of  literature.  How- 
ever, people  who  work  part-time  are  more  likely  to  be  female  and 
younger  than  those  who  work  full-time.  Thus,  the  factors  of  gen- 
der and  age  contribute  to  the  observed  differences  as  well. 

In  contrast,  those  who  were  unemployed  (i.e.,  without  jobs 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation      63 


TABLE  15.  Relationship  Between  Current  Employment  Status  and  Literature 
Reading,  Poetry  Reading,  Creative  Writing,  and  Book  or  Magazine  Reading 
in  Last  12  Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,  1985. 


Proportion  of  Popu 

lation  Group 

Who .  .  . 

Did 

Read 

Read 

Read 

Creative 

Books, 

Literature 

Poetry 

Writing 

Magazines 

ALL  ADULTS 

56.0% 

18.6% 

6.2% 

85.6% 

CURRENT  EMPLOYMENT  STATUS 

In  Labor  Force 

Working  full  time 

56.0% 

17.8% 

7.0% 

88.5% 

Working  part  time 

61.0% 

29.2% 

10.1% 

90.0% 

With  job,  not  at  work 

64.5% 

19.2% 

4.8% 

88.2% 

Unemployed 

50.5% 

13.3% 

3.9% 

76.7% 

Not  In  Labor  Force 

Student 

74.5% 

35.3% 

19.2% 

93.6% 

Keeping  house 

55.4% 

16.4% 

3.2% 

83.5% 

Retired,  other 

49. 1  % 

17.5% 

2.5% 

76.5% 

Disabled 

33.7% 

14.4% 

0.0% 

67.2% 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabulations  by  N. 
Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


64       Who  Reads  Literature? 

and/or  looking  for  work)  showed  below-average  levels  of  literary 
participation  and  reading  in  general.  In  this  case,  the  factor  of  time 
available  to  read  was  apparently  negated  by  the  generally  lower 
education  and  income  levels,  and  higher  concentrations  of  ethnic 
minorities  among  the  unemployed.  Lower  education  levels  were 
also  the  dominant  factor  in  the  below-average  reading  and  writing 
rates  shown  by  those  who  had  retired  from  the  labor  force. 

Those  who  were  full-time  homemakers  had  average  rates  of 
literature  reading,  about  the  same  as  those  who  worked  full-time 
at  paid  jobs.  Given  that  most  of  the  homemakers  were  women, 
however,  the  literary  participation  rates  were  lower  than  would  be 
expected.  The  demands  of  homemaking  and  childrearing  may  have 
played  a  role  here. 

The  small  group  that  was  not  in  the  labor  force  because  they 
were  disabled  showed  the  lowest  rates  of  literary  participation.  This 
group  had  high  proportions  of  older  members  with  little  educa- 
tion and  members  of  minority  ethnic  groups.  In  addition,  some 
of  the  people  in  this  group  had  disabilities  that  made  it  difficult 
or  impossible  for  them  to  read. 

Occupational  Group 

The  type  of  occupation  at  which  a  person  worked  showed  a 
moderately  strong  relationship  with  literature  reading.  White  col- 
lar workers  were  generally  above  average  in  their  reading  habits, 
whereas  blue  collar  workers  were  below  average.  For  those  in 
professional  occupations,  such  as  medicine,  law,  and  college  teach- 
ing, for  example,  the  odds  were  about  three-to-one  that  they  had 
read  a  work  of  literature  in  the  past  12  months.  For  sales  and  cler- 
ical workers,  the  odds  were  about  two-to-one.  On  the  other  hand, 
for  those  in  the  skilled  crafts,  such  as  electricians,  machinists, 
mechanics,  and  tool  and  die  makers,  the  odds  were  about  six-to- 
four  against  their  having  read  literature.  And  for  laborers,  the  odds 
were  two-to-one  against.  Service  workers,  such  as  waiters,  barbers, 
dental  assistants,  and  flight  attendants,  were  intermediate.  The  odds 
that  they  had  read  some  literature  were  slightly  better  than  50-50, 
about  the  same  as  the  national  average.  Similar  relationships  were 
found  with  poetry  reading  and  creative  writing.  (Table  16.) 

Of  course,  a  person's  occupation  is  closely  related  to  his  or 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation       63 


TABLE  16.  Relationship  Between  Occupational  Class  and  Literature  Reading, 
Poetry  Reading,  Creative  Writing,  and  Book  or  Magazine  Reading  in  Last  12 
Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,   1985. 


Proportion  of  Population  Group  Who 


Did 

Read 

Read 

Read 

Creative 

Books, 

Literature 

Poetry 

Writing 

Magazines 

ALL  ADULTS 


56% 


19% 


6% 


86% 


Observed  Proportions 


OCCUPATIONAL  CLASS 

Professional 

76% 

34% 

19% 

98% 

Managerial 

71% 

22% 

1  1% 

93% 

Sales,  Clerical 

67% 

22% 

5% 

94% 

Service  Workers 

54% 

21% 

1  1% 

86% 

Craftsmen 

42% 

13% 

3% 

86% 

Operatives 

37% 

9% 

2% 

68% 

Laborers 

36% 

7% 
Adjusted  Propo 

0% 
rtions 

81% 

OCCUPATIONAL  CLASS 

Professional 

60% 

26% 

14% 

90% 

Managerial 

62% 

16% 

8% 

87% 

Sales,  Clerical 

60% 

18% 

3% 

90% 

Service  Workers 

57% 

20% 

10% 

90% 

Craftsmen 

53% 

18% 

5% 

90% 

Operatives 

48% 

13% 

4% 

76% 

Laborers 

48% 

1  1% 

2% 

88% 

Note:  Adjusted  proportions  derived  through  multiple  classification  analysis. 
Proportions  adjusted  to  compensate  for  variations  across  groups  in  age,  sex, 
education,  income,  ethnic  composition,  and  other  background  characteristics. 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts.  MCA  analysis  results 
derived  from:  Robinson,  John  P.,  et  al.,  Public  Participation  in  the 
Arts:  Final  Report  on  the  1985  Survey,  College  Park,  MD:  Universi- 
ty of  Maryland  Survey  Research  Center,  December  1986,  Tables  3.3, 
3.4,  5.3a  &  b,  and  5.4a  &  b. 


66       Who  Reads  Literature? 

her  educational  attainment  and  income  level.  Thus,  much  of  the 
variation  in  reading  habits  across  occupational  classes  could  be 
attributed  to  these  factors,  rather  than  to  occupation  per  se.  When 
education,  income,  and  other  background  factors  were  taken  into 
account,  the  differences  among  occupational  classes  were  consider- 
ably reduced.  Some  significant  variation  remained,  though.  The 
adjusted  odds  were  about  six-to-four  in  favor  of  a  person  having 
read  literature  if  he  or  she  were  a  professional,  manager,  or  cleri- 
cal employee,  whereas  they  were  slightly  less  than  50-50  if  the 
person  were  an  operative  (such  as  a  truck  driver)  or  a  laborer. 

Marital  Status 

At  first  glance,  there  seemed  to  be  only  a  weak  and  some- 
what inconsistent  relationship  between  a  person's  marital  situation 
and  his  or  her  literature  reading  habits.  Marital  categories  that  con- 
tained a  predominance  of  younger  persons,  namely  the  never  mar- 
ried and  separated,  were  slightly  higher  in  literary  participation, 
whereas  the  widowed,  a  group  comprising  mostly  older  persons, 
showed  relatively  low  rates  of  reading  and  writing.  The  observed 
differences,  however,  appeared  to  be  more  a  matter  of  age  and  edu- 
cation than  of  nuptial  status.  (Table  17.)  After  controlling  for  age, 
education,  and  race,  a  small  but  interesting  difference  emerged: 
people  who  were  separated  (but  not  those  who  were  divorced)  had 
slightly  higher  rates  of  literature  reading,  poetry  reading,  and  crea- 
tive writing,  than  people  in  the  other  marital  categories.  These  find- 
ings suggest  that  people  tend  to  turn  to  literature  to  help  deal  with 
the  personal  crisis  of  marital  separation. 

Presence  of  Children 

Taking  care  of  children  can  be  time  consuming.  Time  use  sur- 
veys have  shown  that  parents  of  young  children,  especially  mothers, 
spend  less  time  in  eating,  sleeping,  and  non-child-related  recrea- 
tional activities  than  adults  without  children.49  In  the  1985  SPPA 
data,  however,  there  seemed  to  be  little  difference  between  the  liter- 
ature reading  habits  of  adults  with  children  and  those  of  adults  with- 
out children.  After  controlling  for  education,  age,  and  other 
demographic  factors,  a  small  but  significant  difference  did  emerge, 
with  parents  of  children  under  6  years  of  age  showing  slightly  lower 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation       67 


TABLE  17.  Relationship  Between  Marital  Status  and  Literature  Reading,  Po- 
etry Reading,  Creative  Writing,  and  Book  or  Magazine  Reading  in  Last  12 
Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,  1985. 


Proportion  of  Popu 

lation  Group 

Who .  .  . 

Did 

Read 

Read 

Read 

Creative 

Books, 

Literature 

Poetry 

Writing 

Magazines 

ALL  ADULTS 

56% 

19% 

6% 

86% 

Observed  Proportions 

MARITAL  STATUS 

Never  Married 

57% 

22% 

1  1% 

86% 

Married 

56% 

18% 

5% 

87% 

Separated 

55% 

27% 

10% 

84% 

Divorced 

57% 

13% 

6% 

87% 

Widowed 

49% 

15% 
Adjusted 

0% 
Proportions 

80% 

MARITAL  STATUS 

Never  Married 

55% 

19% 

9% 

83% 

Married 

56% 

19% 

6% 

86% 

Separated 

60% 

29% 

10% 

89% 

Divorced 

56% 

14% 

6% 

89% 

Widowed 

57% 

19% 

4% 

87% 

Note:  Adjusted  proportions  derived  through  multiple  classification  analysis. 
Proportions  adjusted  to  compensate  for  variations  across  groups  in  age,  sex, 
education,  income,  ethnic  composition,  and  other  background  characteristics. 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts,  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts.  MCA  analysis  results 
derived  from:  Robinson,  John  P,  et  al.,  Public  Participation  in  the 
Arts:  Final  Report  on  the  1985  Survey,  College  Park,  MD:  Universi- 
ty of  Maryland  Survey  Research  Center,  December  1986,  Tables  3.3, 
3.4,  5.3a  &  b,  and  5.4a  &  b 


68      Who  Reads  Literature? 


TABLE  18.  Relationship  Between  Parental  Status  and  Literature  Reading,  Po- 
etry Reading,  Creative  Writing,  and  Book  or  Magazine  Reading  in  Last  12 
Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,   1985. 

Proportion  of  Population  Group  Who.  .  . 

Did  Read 

Read  Read  Creative         Books, 

Literature  Poetry  Writing       Magazines 

ALL  ADULTS  56%  19%  6%  86% 

PRESENCE  AND  Observed  Proportions 

AGE  OF  CHILDREN 
No  children  at  home 
One  child  under  6 
Two  children  under  6 
One  child  6-1  I 
Two  children  6- 1  I 

PRESENCE  AND 

AGE  OF  CHILDREN 
No  children  at  home 
One  child  under  6 
Two  children  under  6 
One  child  6- 1  I 
Two  children  6- 1  I 

Note:  Adjusted  proportions  derived  through  multiple  classification  analysis. 
Proportions  adjusted  to  compensate  for  variations  across  groups  in  age,  sex, 
education,  income,  ethnic  composition,  and  other  background  characteristics. 
For  simplicity,  groups  with  older  children  have  been  omitted. 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts.  MCA  analysis  results 
derived  from:  Robinson,  John  P,  et  al.,  Public  Participation  in  the 
Arts:  Final  Report  on  the  1985  Survey,  College  Park,  MD:  Universi- 
ty of  Maryland  Survey  Research  Center,  December  1986,  Tables  3.3, 
3.4,  5.3a  &  b,  and  5.4a  &  b. 


56% 

19% 

6% 

85% 

53% 

15% 

7% 

90% 

54% 

18% 

5% 

87% 

57% 

17% 

8% 

84% 

61% 

20% 

9% 

92% 

Adjusted 

Proportions 

57% 

20% 

6% 

85% 

50% 

13% 

5% 

88% 

51% 

18% 

5% 

83% 

55% 

17% 

8% 

84% 

57% 

19% 

10% 

89% 

Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation      69 

rates  of  literature  and  poetry  reading  than  parents  of  children  6 
and  older,  or  non-parents.  (Table  18.)  The  differences  might  have 
been  greater  if  the  survey  had  measured  the  number  of  books  read, 
rather  than  just  the  fact  of  having  read  literature  or  not. 

Of  course,  for  some  adults,  having  children  serves  to  bring 
them  back  into  contact  with  literature  or  to  increase  their  reading, 
at  least  of  children's  and  youth-oriented  books.  In  the  BISG  sur- 
vey of  book  reading,  more  than  a  quarter  of  all  adult  fiction 
readers— or  10  percent  of  all  adults— had  read  a  juvenile  or  chil- 
dren's book  in  the  last  six  months.  Presumably  much  of  this  was 
parents  reading  to  young  children  or  reading  aloud  with  older  chil- 
dren. Reading  to  a  child  was  also  the  third  leading  reason  (after 
reading  for  pleasure  and  general  knowledge)  that  fiction  readers 
gave  for  reading.  This  reason  was  cited  by  29  percent  of  the  fic- 
tion readers.50 

The  Role  of  Television 

Television  watching  is  often  cited  as  an  activity  that  competes 
with  reading  and  as  a  major  reason  why  people  do  not  read  more 
literature.  Yet  television  can  be  a  spur  to  purchasing  books  and 
reading,  as  when  an  author  appears  on  a  talk  show,  a  book  is  made 
into  a  television  program  or  movie,  or  is  advertised  on  television 
or  mentioned  or  reviewed  on  a  cultural  program.  In  the  BISG  sur- 
vey on  book  reading,  respondents  were  asked  to  rate  the  impor- 
tance of  various  factors  in  selecting  books  to  read  and  purchase. 
"Seeing  a  movie  or  TV  show  based  on  the  book"  was  among  the 
top  eight  reasons  for  selecting  a  book,  rated  as  "very  important" 
by  more  than  a  quarter  of  the  readers,  and  at  least  "somewhat  im- 
portant" by  60  percent  of  them.51 

Adults  interviewed  in  the  SPPA  were  asked  to  report  the  number 
of  hours  they  watched  television  on  an  average  day.  In  the  1985 
survey,  close  to  30  percent  of  all  respondents  reported  that  they 
watched  4  or  more  hours  per  day,  which  is  here  categorized  as  a 
"heavy"  viewing  pattern.  About  a  quarter  said  they  watched  less 
than  2  hours  per  day  ("light"  viewing).  The  remainder,  about  45 
percent,  watched  between  2  and  4  hours  ("moderate"  viewing). 
A  similar  viewing  breakdown  was  obtained  in  the  1982  SPPA.  (Table 
19.) 


70       Who  Reads  Literature? 


TABLE  19.  Amounts  of  Daily  Television  Viewing  Reported  by  U.S.  Adults  Aged 
18  and  Over,   1982  and  1985. 


Percent  Distribution 


Estimated  Number  of 
Viewers  in  Population 


1985 

1982 

1985 

1982 

TELEVISION  VIEWING 

Light  (<2  Hrs/Day) 

25.6% 

24.0% 

43.5  mil. 

39.3  mil. 

Moderate  (2-3  Hrs) 

45.9% 

44.8% 

78.1 

73.3 

Heavy  (4  Hrs  plus) 

28.5% 

3  1 .2% 

48.5 

51.1 

Total 

100.0% 

100.0% 

170.1  mil. 

163.7  mil. 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1982  and  1985  Surveys  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabula- 
tions by  N.  Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


TABLE  20.  Relationship  Between  Television  Viewing  and  Literature  Reading, 
Poetry  Reading,  Creative  Writing,  and  Book  or  Magazine  Reading  in  Last  12 
Months,  U.S.  Adults  Aged  18  and  Over,   1982  and  1985. 

Proportion  of  Population  Group  Who.  .  . 

Did  Read 

Read  Read  Creative         Books, 

Literature  Poetry  Writing       Magazines 


1 982  Data 

ALL  ADULTS 

56.4% 

19.8% 

6.5% 

84. 1  % 

TELEVISION  VIEWING 

Light  (<2  Hrs/Day) 

61.9% 

28.8% 

9.5% 

81.2% 

Moderate  (2-3  Hrs) 

58.8% 

21.1% 

6.7% 

86.5% 

Heavy  (4  Hrs  plus) 

49.9% 

14.6% 

4.8% 

79.3% 

1985  Data 

ALL  ADULTS 

56.0% 

TELEVISION  VIEWING 

Light  (<2  Hrs/Day) 

59.6% 

Moderate  (2-3  Hrs) 

56.4% 

n.a. 

n.a. 

n.a. 

Heavy  (4  Hrs  plus) 

52.9% 

SOURCE:  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
1982  and  1985  Surveys  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  tabula- 
tions by  N.  Zill  and  M.  Winglee  from  public  use  data  files. 


Factors  That  Affect  Literary  Participation       71 

When  the  reports  of  TV  watching  were  cross-tabulated  with 
reports  of  literature  reading,  a  negative  but  relatively  weak  rela- 
tionship between  reading  and  viewing  emerged.  In  the  1985  data, 
the  odds  that  "light"  TV  viewers  had  read  a  work  of  literature  in 
the  last  12  months  were  slightly  better  than  average,  about  six-to- 
four.  For  "heavy"  viewers,  on  the  other  hand,  the  odds  were  slightly 
below  average,  about  50-50.  "Moderate"  television  viewers  were 
about  average  in  their  literature  reading  propensity. 

A  similar  but  slightly  stronger  relationship  was  obtained  with 
the  1982  survey  data.  (Table  20.)  These  data  also  permitted  an  anal- 
ysis of  the  association  between  TV  viewing  and  the  other  literary 
participation  measures,  which  was  not  possible  with  the  1985  sur- 
vey. Both  poetry  reading  and  creative  writing  showed  negative  rela- 
tionships with  time  watching  television,  with  the  relationship  for 
poetry  being  slightly  stronger.  Light  TV  viewers  were  twice  as  likely 
to  have  read  poetry  or  done  some  creative  writing  as  heavy  view- 
ers. Interestingly,  the  relationship  between  TV  viewing  and  the  read- 
ing of  books  and  magazines  was  curvilinear,  with  the  moderate 
viewing  group  showing  a  slightly  higher  proportion  of  readers  than 
either  the  light  or  heavy  viewing  groups.  This  could  be  because 
poorly  educated  non-readers  are  apt  to  be  either  heavy  viewers  of 
television  or  non-viewers. 

Countervailing  tendencies.  It  may  be  that  the  overall  associa- 
tion between  TV  viewing  and  literature  reading  is  not  stronger  be- 
cause there  are  opposing  tendencies  at  work.  As  noted  earlier,  those 
who  are  active  in  one  type  of  leisure  activity  tend  to  be  active  in 
other  types  as  well.  Some  people  simply  do  more  than  others,  even 
though  everyone  is  constrained  by  the  number  of  hours  in  the  day. 
This  phenomenon  is  recognized  in  the  saying,  "If  you  want  some- 
thing done,  ask  the  busy  person  to  do  it."  We  also  know  that  there 
are  large  individual  differences  in  reading  speed.  Moreover,  time- 
use  studies  tell  us  that  television  watching  is  often  done  as  a  secon- 
dary activity;  i.e.,  something  that  goes  on  while  other  activities 
are  occurring.52 

At  some  level,  however,  there  must  be  a  trade-off  between  one 
form  of  media  participation  and  other  forms.  It  seems  likely  that 
the  trade-off  between  television  and  literature  reading  would  be 
more  visible  if  additional  information  about  the  types  and  quanti- 


72       Who  Reads  Literature? 

ty  of  reading  done  were  available  in  the  survey,  or  if  the  television 
viewers  were  further  subdivided,  into  selective  and  non-selective 
viewers,  for  example. 


Chapter  4 

Expanding  the  Audience. 

What  Can  Be  Done? 


The  State  of  Literature  Reading 

The  survey  results  reported  here  contain  both  good  and  bad  news 
for  those  who  would  like  to  see  literature  in  America  not  only  sur- 
vive but  flourish.  The  major  piece  of  good  news  is  that  despite 
concerns  about  illiteracy  and  aliteracy  in  the  United  States,  more 
than  half  of  all  American  adults  report  that  they  have  read  some 
fiction,  poetry,  or  drama  within  the  last  year.  Levels  of  reading 
in  the  U.S.  seem  to  be  comparable  to  those  in  Great  Britain  and, 
as  far  as  can  be  determined,  other  industrialized  countries.  In  ad- 
dition, general  education  levels  have  risen,  recent  generations  of 
adults  are  more  likely  than  older  generations  to  have  been  en- 
couraged to  read  as  children,  and  growing  numbers  of  people  have 
been  exposed  to  creative  writing  classes. 

The  surveys  indicate  that  older  adults  are  less  likely  to  be  read- 
ers of  literature  than  middle-aged  or  young  adults.  However,  the 
differences  in  reading  propensities  appear  to  be  more  a  function 
of  older  citizens'  lower  education  levels  than  of  age  per  se,  imply- 


74       Who  Reads  Literature? 

ing  that  literature  reading  levels  among  the  elderly  should  go  up 
in  the  future  as  the  current  cohorts  of  elders  are  replaced  by  the 
more  educated  senior  citizens  of  tomorrow. 

Other  aspects  of  the  survey  results  are  less  heartening.  Follow- 
up  questions  asking  what  people  meant  when  they  said  they  had 
read  novels  or  short  stories  revealed  that  some  of  the  reports  were 
erroneous  and  most  involved  the  reading  of  lightweight,  genre  fic- 
tion (thrillers,  romances,  science  fiction,  horror  stories,  etc.)  as 
opposed  to  more  significant  and  enduring  works.  Of  the  56  per- 
cent of  adults  who  reported  reading  fiction,  poetry,  or  drama  within 
a  12-month  period,  less  than  half  had  read  works  of  literary  merit, 
comprising  between  a  tenth  and  a  quarter  of  the  adult  population. 
Moreover,  the  audience  for  meritorious  contemporary  works  ap- 
peared to  be  smaller  still,  constituting  something  like  7  to  12  per- 
cent of  all  adults.  Thus,  although  most  Americans  can  and  do  read, 
followers  of  serious  literature  are  distinctly  in  the  minority. 

Another  discouraging  finding  is  that  while  literature  reading 
is  likely  to  increase  among  older  Americans,  it  seems  to  be  decreas- 
ing among  young  adults.  Data  from  several  surveys  point  to  a  de- 
cline during  the  1970s  and  1980s  in  the  frequency  of  reading  among 
those  under  the  age  of  30.  Literature  has  also  become  an  art  that 
is  neglected  by  men  and  dominated  by  women.  As  of  the  mid-1980s, 
women  made  up  nearly  60  percent  of  the  readers,  and  almost  two- 
thirds  of  the  would-be  writers  of  literature. 

Whereas  women  are  overrepresented,  ethnic  minorities  con- 
tinue to  be  underrepresented  in  the  audience  for  literature.  Despite 
the  growing  visibility  and  influence  of  Black  and  Hispanic  writers, 
less  than  45  percent  of  Black  or  Hispanic  adults  reported  reading 
fiction,  poetry,  or  drama.  Their  lower  reading  rates  are  largely  at- 
tributable to  their  lower  average  education  levels.  But  even  when 
they  have  equivalent  years  of  schooling,  national  testing  programs 
have  found  that  Black  and  Hispanic  youths  are  less  adept  readers 
than  non-minority  young  people.  Blacks  and  Hispanic  adults  have 
had  less  exposure  to  creative  writing  classes  than  white  adults,  and, 
as  children,  Hispanics  were  less  apt  to  have  been  encouraged  to 
read  by  their  parents. 

The  survey  finding  that  may  be  most  disappointing,  however, 
is  the  simple  fact  that  large  numbers  of  American  adults— 44 


Expanding  the  Audience:  What  Can  Be  Done?      75 

percent— do  not  read  literature  at  all.  Most  of  the  non-readers  of 
literature  know  how  to  read.  They  have  completed  high  school  and 
been  exposed  to  at  least  some  instruction  in  literature  apprecia- 
tion. Yet  they  read  nothing  in  the  way  of  fiction,  poetry,  or  drama. 
Why  is  it  that  literature  in  general  and  quality  literature  in  particu- 
lar are  not  read  more  widely?  What  can  be  done  to  encourage  such 
reading? 

Why  Quality  Literature  Is  Not  Read  More  Widely 

Three  broad  explanations  can  be  suggested  for  why  literature  of 
merit  is  not  read  more  widely:  a  shortage  of  readers  who  appreci- 
ate good  literature,  a  dearth  of  writers  who  can  communicate  to 
a  mass  audience  while  maintaining  high  literary  standards,  and  a 
need  for  more  resources  and  knowledge  to  be  applied  to  the  pro- 
motion of  literary  works.  Much  attention  has  been  paid  of  late  to 
developments  relevant  to  the  first  category;  i.e. ,  to  changes  in  our 
educational  system  and  broader  society  that  may  be  producing  fewer 
citizens  who  appreciate  good  literature  and  fine  art.  These  develop- 
ments are  of  legitimate  concern  to  all  who  value  the  arts  and  hu- 
manities. When  it  comes  to  recommending  steps  to  increase  the 
audience  for  literature,  however,  the  suggestions  that  seem  most 
feasible  to  carry  out  fall  mainly  in  the  third  category. 

Readers  Who  Don 't  Appreciate 

Is  American  society  turning  out  fewer  adults  nowadays  who 
have  the  skills  and  inclination  to  appreciate  serious  literature?  Com- 
mentators on  the  U.S.  cultural  scene  have  pointed  to  a  number  of 
social  trends  that  may  be  having  stultifying  effects  on  the  enjoy- 
ment of  literature,  and  on  the  appreciation  of  other  arts  and  hu- 
manities as  well. 

Educational  deterioration.  Many  critics  claim  that  the  U.S. 
educational  system  has  deteriorated,  and  that  high  schools  and  col- 
leges are  doing  a  poor  job  of  transmitting  the  Western  cultural  her- 
itage to  students.  The  schools  have  been  accused  of  not  teaching 
the  skills  required  to  appreciate  great  literature  and  art,  not  giving 
students  a  solid  grounding  in  the  classics,  not  nurturing  a  love  for 
language,  not  requiring  memorization  of  great  poetry  and  prose, 


76      Who  Reads  Literature? 

allowing  students  to  get  away  with  careless  writing,  and  other  fail- 
ings.53 Research  findings  lend  some  support  to  these  criticisms, 
but  the  picture  is  more  complex  than  usually  portrayed. 

As  is  now  well  known,  the  College  Entrance  Examination 
Board's  Scholastic  Aptitude  Tests  and  other  nationwide  testing  pro- 
grams gave  evidence  of  significant  deterioration  in  student  knowl- 
edge and  proficiency  during  the  late  1960s  and  1970s.  Not  only 
did  average  test  scores  go  down  but  also  fewer  students  displayed 
high  levels  of  achievement  in  either  verbal  or  quantitative  skills. 
Test  scores  have  recovered  somewhat  during  the  1980s,  but  the 
achievement  levels  of  today's  college-bound  students  are  still  sig- 
nificantly lower  than  those  of  comparable  students  in  the  early 
1960s.54 

The  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Progress  (NAEP)  has 
found  that  today's  high  school  students  know  relatively  little  about 
modern  American  literature,  even  though  most  have  received  in- 
struction in  literature  appreciation.55  Earlier  assessments  showed 
that  student  attitudes  about  reading  literature  become  progressively 
more  negative  as  one  goes  from  elementary  school  to  junior  high 
to  high  school  students.56  In  1985,  NAEP  assessed  the  literacy 
skills  of  young  adults  (ages  21-25)  and  found  that  95  percent  could 
read  and  understand  the  printed  word,  but  only  a  small  percentage 
could  understand  complex  material.  For  example,  only  9  percent 
of  the  young  adults  could  understand  an  unfamiliar  and  rather  subtle 
short  poem  by  Emily  Dickinson  well  enough  to  explain  what  the 
poet  was  trying  to  express.57 

There  is  other  research  evidence,  however,  that  casts  litera- 
ture instruction  in  U.S.  schools  in  a  more  favorable  light.  For  one 
thing,  U.S.  schools  are  now  at  least  trying  to  educate  minority  stu- 
dents who  were  written  off  in  the  past  and  are  still  relatively  neglect- 
ed by  educational  systems  in  other  nations.  NAEP  and  other  testing 
programs  have  shown  that  significant  progress  has  been  made  during 
the  last  two  decades  in  raising  the  basic  reading  and  writing  skills 
of  Black  and  Hispanic  students.58  In  an  international  comparison 
of  literature  education  in  ten  countries,  Alan  Purves  and  his  col- 
leagues found  that  "The  United  States  brings  a  higher  proportion 
of  its  age  cohort  farther  along  in  reading  than  any  other  country 
in  the  sample  without  the  best  students  suffering."59  Overall,  U.S. 


Expanding  the  Audience:  What  Can  Be  Done?      77 

students  did  not  fare  badly  in  international  tests  of  literature  achieve- 
ment, although  their  achievement  was  not  quite  as  good  as  that 
of  British  students  in  some  areas  and  the  U.S.  students  displayed 
more  negative  attitudes  toward  literature  than  students  in  other  coun- 
tries. Analyses  of  the  international  test  results  showed  that  home 
background  was  at  least  as  important  as  school  factors  in  account- 
ing for  individual  differences  in  literature  achievement.  The  ana- 
lyses also  called  into  question  some  of  the  prescriptions  that  have 
been  made  for  improving  literature  instruction.  It  was  found,  for 
example,  that  students  who  did  not  frequently  have  to  recite  litera- 
ture from  memory  performed  better  than  those  who  did.60 

Evidence  from  the  College  Board  Achievement  Testing  Pro- 
gram indicates  that  the  study  of  literature  may  be  growing  more 
popular,  and  U.S.  high  schools  seem  to  be  holding  their  own  in 
teaching  literature  appreciation  to  the  best  students.  The  number 
of  students  who  took  the  Literature  Achievement  Test  increased 
by  nearly  50  percent  between  1980-1981  and  1985-1986  (going  from 
15,556  to  22,955  students),  and  the  mean  score  on  the  test  increased 
slightly  (from  516  to  524)  over  the  same  interval*  However,  only 
a  small  and  rather  select  fraction  of  college  bound  students  take 
the  Literature  Test.  (In  1985-1986  there  were  more  than  1.6  mil- 
lion who  took  the  Scholastic  Aptitude  Test,  191  thousand,  the  Eng- 
lish Composition  Test,  and  more  than  40  thousand,  the  American 
History  Test.)61 

Technological  change  and  cultural  decay.  In  contrast  to  those 
who  blame  our  educational  system  for  failing  to  maintain  interest 
in  literature,  other  observers  point  to  profound  cultural  and  tech- 
nological changes  that  have  occurred  in  our  society  and  say  it  is 
unfair  to  expect  the  schools  to  overcome  the  negative  effects  of  these 
developments.62  Among  the  trends  that  may  be  working  to  the 
detriment  of  literature  appreciation  are: 

•  the  increased  availability  of  alternative  forms  of  entertain- 
ment, not  only  television  and  movies,  but  also  newspapers 
with  a  variety  of  feature  articles,  specialty  magazines,  elec- 
tronic games  and  personal  computers,  music  videos,  etc. ; 


*Changes  in  test  composition  make  it  inadvisable  to  compare  mean  scores  from 
the  1980s  with  those  from  Literature  Achievement  Tests  given  in  earlier  years. 


78       Who  Reads  Literature? 

•  the  explosion  of  scientific  and  technical  knowledge,  which 
has  caused  jargon  to  proliferate  and  compels  the  citizen 
who  wants  to  be  reasonably  well-informed  to  spend  more 
time  reading  factual  material  rather  than  literature; 

•  the  breakdown  of  generally-accepted  standards  of  artistic 
quality  and  taste  in  the  face  of  challenges  by  avant-garde 
writers  and  artists,  civil  libertarians,  ethnic  minorities, 
feminists,  and  others;63 

•  the  emergence  of  a  youth-oriented  entertainment  industry 
that  is  blatantly  vulgar  and  anti-intellectual,  and  that 
produces  and  promotes  rock  music,  movies,  and  television 
shows  aimed  explicitly  at  the  teenage  and  young  adult  au- 
dience;64 

•  the  advent  of  a  so-called  "lite  era,"  in  which  the  mass  me- 
dia and  commercial  advertising  have  trained  viewers  and 
readers  of  all  ages  to  be  impatient  with  any  work  that  re- 
quires serious  and  sustained  attention. 

Although  it  certainly  seems  plausible  that  some  or  all  of  these 
developments  could  have  an  effect  on  the  reading  and  apprecia- 
tion of  literature,  there  has  been  no  systematic  research  demon- 
strating connections  between  these  trends  and  changes  in  literary 
participation. 

The  influence  of  television.  Aside  from  the  deterioration  of  the 
educational  system,  the  emergence  of  television  as  the  dominant 
medium  of  U.S.  mass  communication  is  most  often  cited  as  hav- 
ing a  degrading  influence  on  American  civilization.  Television 
programming  has  been  described  as  addictive  fare  that  is  designed 
primarily  to  keep  viewers  watching  through  the  commercials,  thus 
taking  up  time  that  might  otherwise  be  spent  in  reading  or  other 
more  constructive  pursuits.  Television  has  also  been  accused  of 
satiating  the  public  appetite  for  narrative  with  "empty  calories" 
instead  of  intellectual  substance,  of  reducing  public  taste  to  the 
lowest  common  denominator,  and  of  failing  to  challenge,  inspire, 
or  enlighten  the  viewer.  It  could  be  argued  as  well  that  television 
has  lured  writers  who  might  produce  works  of  broad  and  endur- 
ing appeal  away  from  serious  writing  and  into  more  lucrative  but 
ephemeral  projects,  such  as  scripts  for  soap  operas,  situation  come- 


Expanding  the  Audience:  What  Can  Be  Done?      79 

dies,  and  made-for-TV  movies. 

Only  a  weak  negative  association  was  found  in  the  SPPA  data 
between  television  viewing  and  literature  reading,  but  there  is  lit- 
tle doubt  that  the  advent  of  television  has  had  profound  effects  on 
our  cultural  life.65  Again,  however,  research  that  convincingly 
demonstrates  links  between  television  and  trends  in  literary  par- 
ticipation remains  to  be  done. 

Writers  Who  Don't  Communicate 

Some  have  argued  that  at  least  part  of  the  blame  for  the  rela- 
tively small  audiences  that  contemporary  literature  and  art  com- 
mand must  be  laid  at  the  feet  of  the  writers  and  artists  themselves. 
The  popular  appeal  of  literature  and  the  other  arts  has  certainly 
been  affected  by  the  separation  of  the  serious  writer,  painter,  or 
composer  from  any  sort  of  integral  role  in  the  operation  or 
ceremonial  life  of  the  society. 

Just  how  far  artistic  alienation  has  come  is  illustrated  by  a  re- 
cent incident  in  which  the  late  Robert  Penn  Warren,  who  was  then 
serving  as  poet  laureate  of  the  United  States,  expressed  indigna- 
tion at  the  suggestion  that  he  might  produce  a  poem  or  two  on  na- 
tional or  patriotic  themes  during  his  tenure  as  laureate.66  Instead 
of  feeling  honored  that  he  was  being  called  on  to  be  the  poetic  voice 
of  the  nation,  he  apparently  felt  affronted  by  the  notion.  Warren 
is  certainly  not  alone  in  rejecting  the  role  of  people's  spokesman. 
Many  contemporary  writers  and  artists  feel  no  obligation  to  deal 
with  themes  that  might  be  of  concern  and  interest  to  large  num- 
bers of  their  fellow  citizens,  or  to  make  their  work  understanda- 
ble, let  alone  entertaining,  to  any  but  the  cognoscenti.  It  is  scarcely 
surprising  then,  that  the  public  chooses  to  stay  away  in  droves  from 
the  work  of  these  writers  and  artists. 

The  current  situation  was  eloquently  summarized  by  publish- 
er Dan  Lacy  in  a  1980  talk  at  the  Center  for  the  Book  in  the  Li- 
brary of  Congress.  Lacy  observed  that: 

The  achievement  of  that  communion  between  author  and 
reader,  artist  and  viewer,  composer  and  audience  by  which 
creation  is  consummated  depends  on  the  possession  of 
a  common  vocabulary  of  words  and  forms  and  structures 


80      Who  Reads  U terature? 

of  meaning.  Over  the  years  this  common  coin  grows  worn 
with  use  so  that  the  freshness  and  force  of  communica- 
tion is  blurred  and  dimmed.  Young  writers  and  painters 
and  composers  yearn  to  shatter  them  for  new  forms  that, 
they  feel,  will  better  express  their  meaning.  Better  ex- 
press indeed,  but  not  better  convey  that  meaning  if  the 
new-minted  forms  are  not  part  of  the  audience's  curren- 
cy. Communion  fails,  full  creation  is  aborted,  and  the  ar- 
tist's work  in  whatever  field  becomes  a  solipsism,  to  which 
he  retreats  with  a  greater  willingness  because  of  his  grow- 
ing contempt  for  and  alienation  from  society. 

One  senses  today  how  few  are  the  artists  in  any  field, 
at  any  adequate  level  of  competence,  who  feel  the  strong 
central  currents  of  society  surge  through  them  to  shape 
their  work— in  the  sense  that  Shakespeare  and  Haydn  and 
da  Vinci  felt  at  one  with  their  times.  In  another  day  even 
those  creators  and  thinkers  who  felt  most  alienated  and 
hostile  to  the  dominant  forces  of  their  times— such  as  Karl 
Marx,  Zola,  or  Brecht— yet  felt  society  itself  important — 
quite  literally  terribly  important— and  themselves  and  their 
work  important  in  challenging  it.  They  were  therefore 
called  forth  to  their  utmost  not  only  to  express  but  to  con- 
vey their  meanings,  to  reach  minds,  to  engage  themselves 
to  the  fullest  with  the  life  of  their  time— whether  as  its 
voice  or  its  foe.  I  do  not  find  it  so  today.67 

Publishers  Who  Don 't  Promote 

In  addition  to  the  large-scale  social  changes  described  above, 
there  are  more  mundane  reasons  why  contemporary  literature  is 
not  more  widely  read.  These  reasons  have  to  do  with  a  lack  of 
resources  devoted  to  the  promotion  of  literary  books  and  deficien- 
cies in  their  packaging,  advertising,  and  distribution.  In  these  areas, 
there  are  actions  available  to  private  firms  and  public  organiza- 
tions that  might  help  to  boost  the  sales  and  readership  of  contem- 
porary works  of  merit. 

As  things  now  stand,  relatively  little  money  or  effort  is  spent 
on  publishing  literary  books,  especially  in  comparison  to  the  large 
amounts  spent  promoting  television  programs,  movies,  popular 


Expanding  the  Audience:  What  Can  Be  Done?      81 

magazines,  and  other  mass  media  products  that  compete  with  books 
for  the  reader's  attention.  The  modest  resources  that  are  invested 
in  promotion  tend  to  be  spent  in  standard  ways:  sending  the  au- 
thor on  a  book  tour,  distributing  free  copies  to  reviewers  and  promi- 
nent individuals  who  might  provide  testimonials,  placing 
advertisements  in  literary  magazines  or  the  book  review  sections 
of  newspapers,  etc.  Most  of  these  methods  consist  largely  of  preach- 
ing to  the  converted  rather  than  trying  to  make  new  disciples  from 
among  those  who  read  only  popular  fiction,  those  who  do  not  read 
literature  at  all,  or  those  from  ethnic  minorities  and  other  social 
groups  who  are  underrepresented  in  the  literary  audience. 

There  is,  to  be  sure,  a  good  commercial  reason  why  more  pro- 
motion is  not  done:  the  money  to  support  it  is  not  there.  As  men- 
tioned earlier,  most  volumes  of  serious  fiction,  poetry,  and  drama 
do  not  sell  many  copies,  even  if  they  have  received  excellent  reviews. 
Publishing  these  works  is  typically  a  losing  or  marginally  profita- 
ble proposition.  More  promotion  might  lead  to  more  sales,  but  in 
most  cases  the  risks  involved  seem  to  be  too  great  or  the  projected 
sales  too  small  to  warrant  the  investment  of  additional  resources. 
Efforts  to  publicize  literary  works  more  widely  could,  of  course,  be 
subsidized  by  the  profits  (if  any)  that  publishers  make  on  their  more 
successful  books,  or  through  promotional  campaigns  conducted 
by  libraries  and  booksellers,  by  cash  and  in-kind  contributions  from 
corporations,  and  by  grants  from  private  foundations  or  public  agen- 
cies* All  of  these  forms  of  subsidy  are  now  customary  in  the  per- 
forming arts,  and  there  seems  little  reason  why  they  should  not 
be  applied  more  widely  to  the  art  of  literature.  In  addition  to  the 
need  for  more  resources  devoted  to  promotion,  however,  promo- 
tional efforts  should  be  better  informed  by  knowledge  about  why 
people  read  and  how  they  go  about  selecting  the  particular  books 
they  do. 

Applying  Research  to  Encourage  Literature  Reading 

A  number  of  steps  could  be  taken  to  apply  research  findings  to 
the  process  of  disseminating  information  about  new  and  classic 

*The  NEA's  Literature  Program  does  provide  a  small  amount  of  support,  on  an 
annual  basis  through  matching  grants,  for  "audience  development  projects".  These 
include  literary  promotion  projects,  small  press  bookfairs,  radio  programs,  etc. 


82       Who  Reads  Literature? 

books.  Illustrative  suggestions  are  offered  in  the  following  para- 
graphs. 

Paying  attention  to  subject  matter.  One  research  result  that  has 
received  insufficient  attention  from  those  who  sell  and  lend  books 
is  that  one  of  the  main  reasons  people  choose  to  read  the  books 
they  do  is  because  they  are  interested  in  the  subject  matter  dealt 
with  in  the  books  and  are  seeking  to  expand  their  general  infor- 
mation about  the  time,  place,  people,  or  events  in  question.68  This 
finding  applies  to  the  reading  of  both  fiction  and  non-fiction.  Yet 
most  bookstores  and  libraries  are  organized  as  if  the  reasons  for 
reading  fiction  were  entirely  separate  and  distinct  from  those  for 
reading  non-fiction.  Fiction  and  non-fiction  works  are  kept  in  differ- 
ent areas  and  there  is  no  easy  way  for  someone  who  is  interested 
in,  say,  browsing  through  novels  about  the  U.S.  Civil  War  to  do 
so.  A  display  or  shelving  system  that  brought  together  fiction  and 
non-fiction  books  on  given  topics  might  well  tempt  the  person  who 
is  interested  in  a  subject,  but  who  does  not  ordinarily  read  fiction, 
to  buy  or  borrow  a  novel  that  deals  with  the  subject.  Likewise, 
in  advertising  a  new  work  of  fiction  that  deals  with  a  given  sub- 
ject or  period,  publishers  could  make  use  of  special  interest  peri- 
odicals and  mailing  lists  that  would  reach  those  with  a  proven 
interest  in  the  subject  or  period.  At  present,  this  is  rarely  done. 

Guiding  readers  to  books  they  are  likely  to  enjoy.  Book  re- 
search has  shown  that  fiction  readers  could  use  more  information 
to  help  guide  their  selection  of  books  to  read.  For  example,  a  study 
by  Nicholas  Spenceley  and  Peter  Mann  found  that  it  was  not  un- 
common for  library  patrons  to  borrow  a  novel  just  because  it  looked 
interesting  on  the  shelf,  without  prior  knowledge  of  the  author  or 
title.  When  they  did  this,  however,  they  wound  up  having  a  posi- 
tive reaction  to  the  book  only  40  percent  of  the  time.69  This  was 
well  below  the  satisfaction  levels  of  readers  who  had  more  speci- 
fic information  about  the  title  or  author  prior  to  borrowing  a  book. 
This  suggests  that  in  order  to  increase  the  chances  of  reader  satis- 
faction, which  would,  in  turn,  lead  to  more  reading  of  contem- 
porary literature,  librarians,  publishers,  and  literature  programs 
should  be  providing  potential  readers  with  more  guidance  of  the 
following  sort:  "If  you  enjoyed  (Book  A),  you're  likely  to  enjoy 
(Books  B,  C,  and  D)."  Moreover,  it  would  be  preferable  if  this  gui- 


Expanding  the  Audience:  What  Can  Be  Done?      83 

dance  were  based  on  actual  surveys  of  reader  satisfaction,  rather 
than  on  the  judgment  of  individual  experts  or  the  desires  of  pub- 
lishers to  plug  particular  titles  in  their  catalogs. 

Getting  genre  fans  to  read  quality  fiction.  It  would  appear  that 
more  could  be  done  to  encourage  the  readers  of  genre  fiction  to 
explore  more  serious  literary  works.  One  way  of  doing  this  is  to 
establish,  through  research,  which  works  of  quality  literature  are 
apt  to  appeal  to  readers  of  a  particular  genre,  and  then  to  publicize 
those  works  through  advertisements  and  outlets  that  are  likely  to 
reach  the  genre  readers.  Other  steps  that  might  be  taken  are  to  give 
public  recognition  to  those  writers  of  thrillers,  romances,  science 
fiction,  etc.,  whose  novels  or  short  stories  evince  superior  literary 
qualities,  and  to  encourage  good  writers  who  are  not  widely  read 
to  attempt  some  genre  or  genre-like  writing  in  order  to  build  a  bigger 
following  for  their  work. 

Using  newspapers  to  reach  non-readers  of  literature.  Surveys 
show  that  one  way  to  reach  people  who  read  but  do  not  read  liter- 
ature is  through  newspapers  and  news  magazines,  suggesting  that 
more  should  be  done  to  publicize  new  books  and  promote  litera- 
ture reading  in  general  through  newspapers*  Books  could  also  be 
advertised  more  extensively  in  newspapers,  and  not  just  in  the  book 
review  sections.  As  is  done  for  the  performing  arts,  newspapers 
might  be  persuaded  to  run  a  regular  literary  "billboard"  that  com- 
bined small  advertisements  for  a  number  of  different  books  in  one 
section,  with  the  advertising  space  being  sold  at  reduced  rates.  Liter- 
ature programs  could  also  encourage  newspapers  to  run  more  fea- 
ture articles  about  books  and  authors,  to  bring  back  the  serialization 
of  quality  fiction  in  their  pages,  and  to  print  more  poems,  particu- 
larly ones  that  are  relatively  accessible  to  readers  who  have  not 
been  steeped  in  Ezra  Pound  and  Wallace  Stevens. 

Employing  television  more  effectively.  Increasing  the  amount 
of  television  publicity  for  serious  literature  does  not  mean  simply 
getting  more  authors  on  talk  shows,  for  authors'  appearances  do 
not  always  enhance  book  sales.  Valuable  principles  can  be  learn- 
ed, though,  from  programs  that  have  been  successful  at  encourag- 


*One  attempt  to  do  this  is  the  PEN  Syndicated  Fiction  Project,  which  has  placed 
short  stories  in  major  newspapers  across  the  country  since  1978. 


84       Who  Reads  Literature? 

ing  reading  and  stimulating  book  sales.  These  include  the  children's 
reading  series  Cover  to  Cover  and  Reading  Rainbow,  and  the  adult- 
oriented  book  review  program,  Bookmark.  Among  the  lessons  these 
shows  teach  are  to  select  the  books  to  be  featured  carefully,  choos- 
ing ones  that  have  both  high  quality  and  wide  appeal,  to  present 
excerpts  from  the  books'  stories  on  the  show,  with  illustrations  or 
dramatizations  that  help  to  involve  the  viewer,  and  to  ensure  that 
the  viewer  can  obtain  the  books  without  great  difficulty.  (The  last 
point  includes  making  certain  that  the  book  is  still  in  print.) 

Supporting  promising  developments  in  book  marketing.  Liter- 
ature support  programs  should  also  be  making  efforts  to  identify, 
encourage,  and  disseminate  information  about  promising  innova- 
tions in  the  marketing  and  distribution  of  literary  books.  Two  re- 
cent examples  of  developments  that  may  make  a  difference  in  the 
sales  and  readership  of  today's  literature  are  the  proliferation  of 
book  discussion  groups  and  the  emergence  of  the  trade  paperback 
series. 

Book  discussion  groups  are  small  gatherings  of  adults  who 
assign  themselves  a  series  of  common  readings  and  get  together 
regularly  to  discuss  the  books  and  socialize.  These  groups,  which 
have  apparently  become  fairly  popular  in  a  number  of  metropoli- 
tan areas,  are  a  perfect  mechanism  for  expanding  the  range  of  people 
who  read  modern  literature  as  well  as  the  number  of  books  read. 
Libraries  and  publishers  could  help  to  suggest  and  supply  reading 
matter  for  these  groups  and  stimulate  the  formation  of  more  such 
groups. 

Trade  paperback  series,  such  as  Vintage  Contemporaries, 
Scribners  Signature  Editions,  and  Penguin  Contemporary  Ameri- 
can Fiction,  are  a  group  of  original  or  reprinted  novels  by  differ- 
ent contemporary  authors  that  are  published  in  higher-priced 
paperbound  editions  with  an  imprint  name  and  a  uniform  cover 
format.  Books  in  the  series  also  appear  together  in  special  book- 
store displays,  and  these  displays  are  often  prominently  exhibited 
in  both  local  literary  bookstores  and  in  chain  stores.  Novels  pub- 
lished in  these  series  have  sold  10-to-20  times  as  many  copies  as 
the  typical  literary  novel  that  comes  out  in  an  individual  hard-cover 
edition.  Although  some  critics  have  qualms  about  books  being 
bought  and  sold  by  "brand  name"  rather  than  on  their  individual 


Expanding  the  Audience:  What  Can  Be  Done?      85 

merits,  this  marketing  innovation  seems  to  have  given  a  number 
of  serious  authors  a  substantial  boost  in  readership.70 

Promoting  both  established  and  developing  authors.  It  might 
seem  logical  to  focus  publicity  efforts  for  contemporary  literature 
on  authors  whose  works  have  artistic  distinction  but  little  hope  of 
commercial  success.  Promotional  efforts  for  writers  like  John  Barth, 
Joan  Didion,  Joseph  Heller,  Anne  Tyler,  John  Updike,  Gore  Vi- 
dal,  or  Tom  Wolfe  seem  unnecessary  because  their  names  are  widely 
known  in  literary  circles  and  their  books  usually  sell  quite  well 
in  comparison  with  most  works  of  serious  fiction.  Yet,  if  the  goal 
is  to  expand  the  audience  for  contemporary  literature  beyond  its 
current  bounds,  promoting  established  as  well  as  struggling  authors 
might  well  be  in  order.  It  is  likely  that  the  aforementioned  writers 
and  their  works  are  not  familiar  to  most  members  of  the  public 
at  large,  as  demonstrated  by  the  1984  poll  showing  that  most  Ameri- 
cans did  not  recognize  the  name  George  Orwell.  Moreover,  the 
number  of  people  who  buy  or  borrow  even  a  best-selling  book  by 
one  of  these  authors  is  small  in  comparison  with  the  number  of 
college-educated  adults  in  the  U.S.  or  the  number  of  people  who 
watch  a  prime-time  television  show.  Thus,  the  notion  of  including 
such  prominent  authors  in  literature  promotion  campaigns  is  far 
from  ridiculous.  Indeed,  their  inclusion  would  seem  to  be  a  sensi- 
ble way  to  get  more  people  reading  quality  literature. 


In  conclusion,  it  seems  possible  that  the  readership  of  con- 
temporary fiction,  poetry,  and  drama  could  be  greatly  increased 
if  more  private  and  public  resources  were  devoted  to  the  encourage- 
ment of  literature  reading  and  if  promotional  efforts  made  better 
use  of  research  knowledge  about  why  people  read  and  how  they 
select  the  books  that  they  do.  Ways  in  which  research  findings  could 
be  applied  include  paying  more  attention  to  the  importance  of  sub- 
ject matter  in  people's  selections  of  books  to  read,  providing  poten- 
tial buyers  and  borrowers  with  guidance  about  books  they  are  likely 
to  enjoy,  encouraging  fans  of  genre  fiction  to  explore  more  seri- 
ous literary  works,  using  newspapers  to  reach  a  wide  array  of  readers 
(including  those  who  do  not  currently  read  literature),  employing 
television  more  effectively  to  promote  books,  supporting  such 


86      Who  Reads  Literature? 

promising  new  developments  as  book  discussion  groups  and  trade 
paperback  series,  and  promoting  works  by  established  as  well  as 
developing  authors. 

The  actions  suggested  above  will  not  work  wonders.  In  the 
long  run,  the  viability  and  reach  of  the  literary  enterprise  depends 
less  on  marketing  techniques  than  on  how  well  our  society  can  cul- 
tivate readers  with  the  skills  and  sensibilities  to  appreciate  great 
literature  and  writers  with  the  craft  and  imagination  to  entertain, 
challenge,  and  enlighten  large  numbers  of  their  compatriots.  Giv- 
en the  current  situation,  however,  with  many  potential  readers  in 
the  population  but  few  reading  serious  works  on  any  but  an  occa- 
sional basis,  it  does  seem  that  increased  investment  in  promotion- 
al efforts  would  produce  a  notable  and  much  needed  expansion  in 
the  audience  for  literature. 


TECHNICAL  APPENDIX 


How  well  can  we  predict  whether  a  person  will  be  a  literature  reader, 
knowing  basic  facts  about  him  or  her  such  as  age,  sex,  race,  edu- 
cation, income,  and  place  of  residence?  The  statistical  method  used 
to  answer  this  question  was  logistic  regression  analysis. !  Like  lin- 
ear discriminant  analysis,  logistic  regression  finds  a  weighted  com- 
bination of  characteristics  that  best  accounts  for  the  observed 
distribution  of  people  into  two  mutually  exclusive  classes  (in  this 
case,  readers  and  non-readers).  Unlike  linear  models,  however, 
logistic  regression  fits  the  data  to  a  curve  or,  in  multiple  dimen- 
sions, a  curved  solid,  rather  than  a  straight  line  or  rectilinear 
solid.2 

Specifically,  let  the  dependent  variable,  Y,  be  equal  to  one  if 
the  person  is  a  reader,  and  zero  if  he  or  she  is  not.  Then  the  prob- 
ability, pi,  that  the  ith  individual  is  a  reader,  is  represented  by  the 
equation: 

Pi  =  1/{1  +  e*-« -**»•«>]} 

where  e  is  the  base  of  the  natural  logarithms,  alpha  is  the  intercept 
term,  and  jSj  is  the  regression  weight  for  the  jth  predictor  varia- 


88      Who  Reads  Literature? 

ble.  The  optimal  values  of  the  a  and  /3  weights  are  derived  using 
the  modified  Gauss-Newton  method  of  maximum-likelihood  esti- 
mation. (The  LOGIST  computer  program  in  the  SAS  statistical 
software  package  was  used  to  develop  the  models.)3 

Logistic  regression  has  several  advantages  over  linear  regres- 
sion for  predicting  dichotomous  outcomes  like  literature  reading. 
First,  the  logistic  model  is  inherently  interactive  in  its  depiction 
of  the  relationships  among  the  predictor  and  criterion  variable  and, 
as  such,  is  probably  closer  to  the  underlying  reality  than  is  the 
simple  additive  model  of  linear  regression.4  Second,  it  is  often 
more  difficult  to  achieve  an  increase  in  the  probability  of  occur- 
rence of  an  outcome  at  the  extremes  of  its  probability  distribution 
(i.e.,  when  the  probability  is  very  low  or  very  high).  The  logistic 
model  is  able  to  accomodate  such  "floor  and  ceiling"  effects.  Linear 
regression,  by  contrast,  assumes  that  a  unit  change  in  the  value 
of  the  predictor  variable  will  produce  a  constant  level  of  change 
regardless  of  where  one  is  on  the  probability  distribution  of  the 
dependent  variable.5 

Third,  logistic  regression  always  yields  predicted  probabili- 
ties between  0  and  1.  Linear  regression,  on  the  other  hand,  can 
produce  predicted  values  beyond  0  and  1,  in  effect  predicting  prob- 
abilities below  zero  and  in  excess  of  100  percent.  Finally,  the  logistic 
model  makes  fewer  assumptions  about  the  underlying  distributions 
of  variables  (e.g. ,  no  multivariate  normality  assumption  for  covar- 
iates).  When  distributional  assumptions  are  violated,  logistic  regres- 
sion still  yields  unbiased  estimates  of  the  standard  errors  of 
coefficients,  whereas  ordinary  least  squares  regression  may  not. 

Appendix  Table  I  summarizes  the  results  of  multiple  logistic 
regressions  performed  on  data  from  the  1982  and  1985  Survey  of 
Public  Participation  in  the  Arts.  The  dependent  variable  was  whether 
or  not  the  respondent  reported  reading  literature  during  the  previ- 
ous twelve  months.  The  independent  variables  were  the  respon- 
dent's age  (in  single  years),  sex  (coded  "1"  if  female,  "0"  if  male), 
race  (coded  "1"  if  black,  "0"  if  non-black),  educational  attain- 
ment (years  of  regular  school  completed),  income  (total  dollars, 
broken  down  into  14  categories),  central  city  residence  (coded  "1" 
if  the  respondent  lived  in  the  central  city  of  a  metropolitan  area, 
"0"  otherwise),  and  non-metropolitan  residence  (coded  "1"  if  the 


Technical  Appendix      89 

respondent  lived  outside  any  metropolitan  area,  "0"  if  inside  the 
suburbs  or  central  city  of  a  metropolitan  area).  Independent  models 
were  developed  for  the  1982  and  1985  surveys. 

The  top  panel  of  the  table  shows  the  contribution  of  each  demo- 
graphic characteristic  to  the  prediction  of  literature  reading.  The 
middle  panel  gives  the  computed  regression  coefficients  and  their 
standard  errors.  The  bottom  panel  presents  several  measures  of  the 
predictive  accuracy  of  the  model. 

A  chi-square  test  was  performed  to  assess  whether  the  logistic- 
regression  model  gave  a  discernibly  better  prediction  than  a  mod- 
el based  on  the  presumption  of  no  association  between  the  predic- 
tors and  the  criterion.  A  statistic  called  R,  derived  from  the  model 
chi-square,  is  one  measure  of  the  overall  predictive  ability  of  the 
model.  The  R  statistic  is  similar  to  the  multiple  correlation  coeffi- 
cient in  the  normal  setting,  and  incorporates  a  correction  for  the 
number  of  parameters  being  estimated. 

Individual  r  statistics  ("partial  rs")  were  computed  for  each 
predictor  variable.  Ranging  in  value  from  —1  to  +1,  the  partial 
r  provides  a  measure  of  the  contribution  of  each  variable  to  the 
prediction,  net  of  the  effects  of  the  other  predictors.  In  the  top  panel 
of  Appendix  Table  I,  the  independent  variables  are  listed  in  rank 
order,  based  on  the  relative  sizes  of  their  partial  correlation  coeffi- 
cients. Rank  correlation  coefficients  showing  the  unadjusted  rela- 
tionship between  each  predictor  and  the  criterion  are  presented  for 
comparison. 

Once  the  best-fitting  logistic  model  has  been  determined,  the 
observed  cases  can  be  classsified  as  readers  or  non-readers  based 
on  the  model.  A  case  is  predicted  to  be  1  on  the  dependent  varia- 
ble if  the  estimated  probability  for  that  case  is  greater  than  a  cho- 
sen value.  The  proportion  of  cases  correctly  classified  is  another 
measure  of  the  predictive  ability  of  the  model  presented  in  Table 
I,  as  are  the  false  positive  rate  and  the  false  negative  rate.  The 
former  is  the  proportion  of  predicted  positives  (readers)  who  were 
actually  negatives  (non-readers).  The  latter  is  the  proportion  of 
predicted  negatives  (non-readers)  who  were  actually  positives 
(readers). 

Because  the  predicted  probabilities  are  continuous,  the  point 
at  which  they  are  divided  into  positives  and  negatives  is  somewhat 


90      Who  Reads  Literature? 

arbitrary.  An  alternative  way  of  assessing  the  predictive  ability  of 
the  model,  one  which  is  independent  of  a  specific  cut-point,  is  to 
calculate  an  index  of  rank-order  correlation  between  the  predicted 
probabilities  and  the  dependent  variable.  This  measure  is  also  shown 
for  each  model. 

Appendix  Table  II  summarizes  the  results  of  multiple-logistic 
regressions  in  which  the  dependent  variable  was  whether  the  respon- 
dent had  read  poetry  or  attended  a  poetry  reading  during  the  previ- 
ous 12  months,  as  reported  in  the  1982  and  1985  SPPA.  The 
predictor  variables  were  the  same  as  those  in  Table  I.  Appendix 
Table  HI  summarizes  regression  models  in  which  the  criterion  was 
whether  the  respondent  reported  doing  any  creative  writing  dur- 
ing the  previous  12  months,  and  the  predictor  variables  were  again 
the  same. 

Substantive  conclusions  derived  from  these  regression  analyses 
are  described  at  appropriate  points  in  the  main  text. 


NOTES 

1.  S.H.  Walker  and  D.B.  Duncan,  "Estimation  of  the  Probability  of 
an  Event  as  a  Function  of  Several  Independent  Variables,"  Biometrika, 
54  (1967):  167-179. 

2.  S.J.  Press  and  S.  Wilson,  "Choosing  Between  Logistic  Regression 
and  Discriminant  Analysis,"  Journal  of  the  American  Statistical  As- 
sociation, 73  (1978):  699-705. 

3.  Frank  E.  Harrell,  Jr.,  "The  LOGIST  Procedure,"  in  SUGI  Sup- 
plemental Library  User's  Guide,  1983  Edition,  (Cary,  North  Caro- 
lina: SAS  Institute,  Inc.,  1983),  181-202. 

4.  Alfred  DeMaris,  "Interpreting  Logistic  Regression  Results:  A  Crit- 
ical Commentary,"  Journal  of  Marriage  and  the  Family,  52  (Febru- 
ary 1990):  271-277. 

5.  S.  Philip  Morgan  and  Jay  D.  Teachman,  "Logistic  Regression: 
Description,  Examples,  and  Comparisons,"  Journal  of  Marriage  and 
the  Family,  50  (November  1988):  929-936. 


TABLES  TO  THE  APPENDIX 


92       Who  Reads  Literature? 


TABLE  I.  Multiple  Logistic  Models  Predicting  Whether  Adults  Have  Read  Liter- 
ature in  Last  Year,  Based  on  their  Demographic  Characteristics  (Age,  Sex, 
Race,  Education,  Income,  and  Metropolitan  Residence),  U.S.  Adults  18  and 
Over,  1982  and  1985. 


Contribution  of  Indivi 

dual  Predictors 

1982 

1 

985 

Variable 

Rank       Obs.  r     Adj.  r 

Rank       Adj.  r 

Education 

1 

.39 

.27** 

1 

.26** 

Gender 

2 

.14 

i  /  *  * 

.  1  o 

2 

.16** 

Income 

3 

.20 

.05** 

3 

.06** 

Race 

4 

-.10 

.05** 

4 

-.05** 

Age 

5 

-.11 

.02** 

— 

.00 

Non-Metro  Residence 

6 

-.07 

.01* 

5 

-.03* 

Central  City  Residence 

— 

.00 

.00 

— 

.00 

Regression  Coefficients 

1982 

1985 

Standard 

Standard 

Variable 

Beta 

Error 

Beta 

Error 

Intercept 

-2.48 

.109 

-2.33 

.105 

Education 

(years  attained) 

.13 

.003 

.12 

.004 

Sex  (Male  =  0, 

Female  =    1) 

.87 

.037 

.86 

.041 

Income 

.05 

.007 

.04 

.006 

Race  (Non-Black  =  0, 

Black  =    1) 

-    .45 

.063 

-   .46 

.069 

Age  (in  years) 

-    .003 

.001 

.000 

.001 

Non-Metro  Residence 

(=   1,  else  =  0) 

-    .09 

.043 

-   .18 

.049 

Central  City  Residence 

(=   1,  else  =  0) 

.02 

.046 

.003 

.050 

Predictive  Accuracy 


Index 

1982 

1985 

Proportion  of  Cases 

Correctly  Classified 

69% 

68% 

False  Positive  Rate 

26% 

27% 

False  Negative  Rate 

37% 

38% 

Multiple  Correlation  Coefficient  (R) 

.38** 

.36** 

Rank  Correlation  Between  Predicted 

Probability  and  Response 

.49** 

.48** 

Number  of  Cases                               1 

5,667 

12,361 

Technical  Appendix      93 


**  p  < 

.01 

*p< 

.05 

+  p  < 

.10 

Obs.  r  : 

=  c 

Observed  correlation  between  predictor  and  criterion. 

Adj.  r  =  Partial  correlation  between  predictor  and  criterion,  net  of  effects 
of  other  predictors  in  model. 

Source:  N.  Zill  and  M.  Winglee,  analysis  of  public  use  tapes  from  1982  and 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  National  Endowment 
for  the  Arts,  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census,   1987. 


94       Who  Reads  Literature? 


TABLE  II.  Multiple  Logistic  Models  Predicting  Whether  Adults  Have  Read  Po- 
etry in  Last  Year,  Based  on  their  Demographic  Characteristics  (Age,  Gender, 
Race,  Education,  Income,  and  Metropolitan  Residence),  U.S.  Adults  18  and 
Over,   1982  and  1985. 


Contr 

bution  of  Indiv 

dual  Predictors 

l 

982 

1985 

Variable 

Rank       Obs.  r     Adj.  r 

Rank 

Adj.  r 

Education 

1 

27 

.24** 

1 

.18** 

Gender 

2 

08 

,i  r* 

2 

.09** 

Age 

3 

- 

1  1 

.05** 

— 

.00 

Non-Metro  Residence 

4 

- 

02 

.03* 

— 

.00 

Central  City  Residence 

5 

01 

.02  + 

— 

.00 

Income 

6 

07 

.02  + 

— 

.00 

Race 

— 

- 

04 

.01 

3 

-.03  + 

Regression  Coefficients 

19 

82 

1985 

Standard 

Standard 

Variable 

Beta 

Error 

Beta 

Error 

Intercept 

-3.02 

.248 

-2.89 

.305 

Education 

(years  attained) 

.1  1 

.007 

.08 

.009 

Gender  (Male  =  0, 

Female  =    1) 

.59 

.088 

.49 

.1  15 

Age  (in  years) 

- 

.009 

.003 

-   .001 

.003 

Non-Metro    Residence 

(=     1,    else    =    0) 

.21 

.103 

-   .09 

.137 

Central  City  Residence 

(=    |,  else  =  0) 

.18 

.106 

-   .09 

.139 

Income 

- 

.03 

.015 

.009 

.017 

Race  (Non-Black  =  0, 

Black  =    1) 

- 

.23 

.156 

-    .41 

.216 

Predictive  Accuracy 

Index 

1982 

1985 

Proportion  of  Cases 

Correctly  Classified 

76% 

75% 

False  Positive  Rate 

68% 

71% 

False  Negative  Rate 

13% 

14% 

Multiple  Correlation  Coefficienl 

:(R) 

29** 

.21** 

Rank  Correlation  Between  Predicted 

Probability  and  Response 

41** 

.32** 

Number  of  Cases 

3 

,849 

2,132 

Technical  Appendix       95 


*•  p  <  .01 

*  p  <  .05 
+  p  <  .10 

Obs.  r  =   Observed  correlation  between  predictor  and  criterion. 

Adj.  r  =  Partial  correlation  between  predictor  and  criterion,  net  of  effects 
of  other  predictors  in  model. 

Source:  N.  Zill  and  M.  Winglee,  analysis  of  public  use  tapes  from  1982  and 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  National  Endowment 
for  the  Arts,  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census,   1987. 


96       Who  Reads  Literature? 


TABLE  III.  Multiple  Logistic  Models  Predicting  Whether  Adults  Have  Done 
Creative  Writing  in  Last  Year,  Based  on  their  Demographic  Characteristics 
(Age,  Gender,  Race,  Education,  Income,  and  Metropolitan  Residence),  U.S. 
Adults  18  and  Over,  1982  and  1985. 


Contribution  of  Indivi 

dual  Predictors 

1982 

1985 

Variable 

Rank       < 

Dbs.  r     Adj.  r 

Rank 

Adj.  r 

Education 

1 

.17 

-J-)** 

1 

-J-}** 

Age 

2 

-.14 

1  A** 

2 

-.12** 

Gender 

3 

.06 

.10** 

4 

.08** 

Central  City  Residence 

4 

.04 

.05* 

— 

.00 

Income 

5 

.03 

.03  + 

— 

.00 

Non-Metro  Residence 

— 

-.04 

.00 

3 

-.09** 

Race 

— 

-.01 

.00 

— 

.00 

Regression  Coefficients 

1982 

1985 

Standard 

Standard 

Variable 

Beta 

Error 

Beta 

Error 

Intercept 

-3.54 

.400 

-3.93 

.523 

Education 

(years  attained) 

.12 

.012 

.12 

.017 

Age  (in  years) 

-   .03 

.005 

-   .03 

.007 

Gender  (Male  =  0, 

Female  =    1) 

.65 

.144 

.55 

.189 

Central  City  Residence 

(=    1,  else  =  0) 

.41 

.164 

-   .03 

.208 

Income 

-    .05 

.024 

.003 

.028 

Non-Metro  Residence 

(=    1,  else  =  0) 

-    .07 

.179 

-   .84 

.273 

Race  (Non-Black  =  0, 

Black  =    1) 

-    .30 

.253 

-   .31 

.346 

Predictive  Accuracy 

Index 

1982 

1985 

Proportion  of  Cases 

Correctly  Classified 

92% 

92% 

False  Positive  Rate 

88% 

87% 

False  Negative  Rate 

3% 

3% 

Multiple  Correlation  Coefficient  (R) 

-y~\  *  * 

.32** 

Rank  Correlation  Between  Predicted 

Probability  and  Response 

.51** 

.54** 

Number  of  Cases 

3,848 

2,137 

Technical  Appendix       97 


**  p  < 

.01 

*p< 

.05 

+  p  < 

.10 

Obs.  r  = 

=  C 

Observed  correlation  between  predictor  and  criterion. 

Adj.  r  =  Partial  correlation  between  predictor  and  criterion,  net  of  effects 
of  other  predictors  in  model. 

Source:  N.  Zill  and  M.  Winglee,  analysis  of  public  use  tapes  from  1982  and 
1985  Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts,  National  Endowment 
for  the  Arts,  and  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census,   1987. 


Notes 


1.  Jonathan  Yardley,  "The  Increasing  Irrelevance  of  Writing,"  The  Washing- 
ton Post  (Monday,  December  8,  1986),  D2.  Idem,  "Blanking  Verse  in 
the  L.A.  Times,"  The  Washington  Post  (Monday,  May  11,  1987),  B2. 

2.  Allan  Bloom,  The  Closing  of  the  American  Mind  (New  York:  Simon 
and  Schuster,  1987),  62. 

3.  E.D.  Hirsch,  Jr. ,  Cultural  Literacy:  What  Every  American  Needs  To  Know 
(Boston,  Houghton  Mifflin,  1987). 

4.  Nick  Thimmesch,  (Ed.),  Aliteracy:  People  Who  Can  Read  But  Won't 
(Washington,  DC:  The  American  Enterprise  Institute,  1984). 

5.  Martha  S.  Hill,  "Patterns  of  Time  Use,"  in:  Time,  Goods,  and  Well- 
Being,  F.  Thomas  Juster  and  Frank  P.  Stafford,  Eds.  (Ann  Arbor,  MI: 
Institute  for  Social  Research,  University  of  Michigan,  1985),  138. 

6.  John  P.  Robinson,  et  al. ,  Americans '  Participation  in  the  Arts:  A 1983-84 
Arts-Related  Trend  Study,  Final  Report  (College  Park,  MD:  University 
of  Maryland  Survey  Research  Center,  1986),  86-87. 

7.  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Progress,  Literature  and  U.S.  His- 
tory: The  Instructional  Experience  and  Factual  Knowledge  of  High 


1 00      Who  Reads  Literature? 

School  Juniors ,  by  A.N.  Applebee,  J.  A.  Langner,  and  Ina  VS.  Mullis 
(Princeton,  NJ:  Educational  Testing  Service,  October  1987),  10-13.  See 
also:  Lynne  V.  Cheney,  American  Memory:  A  Report  on  the  Humani- 
ties in  the  Nation 's  Public  Schools,  National  Endowment  for  the  Hu- 
manities Report  No.  NEH-636  (Washington,  DC:  U.S.  Government 
Printing  Office,  1987).  Diane  Ravitch  and  Chester  E.  Finn,  Jr.,  What 
Do  Our  17-Year  Olds  Know?  A  Report  on  the  First  National  Assessment 
of  History  and  Literature  (New  York:  Harper  &  Row,  1987). 

8.  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census,  Statistical  Abstract  of  the  United  States:  1987 
(107th  edition),  Table  No.  368,  "Quantity  of  Books  Sold  and  Value  of 
U.S.  Domestic  Consumer  Expenditures,  by  Type  of  Publication  and  Mar- 
ket Area:  1974  to  1985."  (Washington,  DC:  U.S.  Government  Printing 
Office,  1986). 

9.  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Progress,  Literature  and  U.S.  His- 
tory. Lynne  V.  Cheney,  American  Memory:  A  Report  on  the  Humani- 
ties in  the  Nation's  Public  Schools.  Diane  Ravitch  and  Chester  E.  Finn, 
Jr.,  What  Do  Our  17-Year  Olds  Know? 

10.  J. P.  Robinson,  C.  A.  Keegan,  T.  Hanford,  and  T.  A.  Triplett,  Public  Par- 
ticipation in  the  Arts:  Final  Report  on  the  1982  Survey,  prepared  under 
Grant  No.  12-4050-003  from  the  National  Endowment  for  the  Arts  (Col- 
lege Park,  MD:  University  of  Maryland  Survey  Research  Center,  Oc- 
tober 1985),  Chapter  7.  See  also  R.J.  Orend,  Socialization  And 
Participation  in  the  Arts,  (National  Endowment  for  the  Arts,  1989). 

11.  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Progress,  Music  1971-79:  Results 
from  the  Second  National  Music  Assessment,  Report  No.  10-Mu-01  (Den- 
ver, CO:  Education  Commission  of  the  States,  November  1981).  Idem, 
Art  and  Young  Americans,  1974-79:  Results  from  the  Second  National 
Art  Assessment,  Report  No.  10-A-01  (Denver,  CO:  Education  Commis- 
sion of  the  States,  December  1981). 

12.  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census,  Statistical  Abstract  of  the  United  States:  1987 
(107th  edition),  Table  No.  370,  "New  Books  and  New  Editions  Published 
by  Subject,  1970  to  1985, . . . ,"  (Washington,  DC:  U.S.  Government  Print- 
ing Office,  1986). 

13.  John  P.  Dessauer,  "U.S.  Retail  Book  Sales  by  Subject:  A  First  Estimate," 
Book  Research  Quarterly,  Vol.  2,  No.  4,  Winter  1986-1987,  15-17. 

14.  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census,  Statistical  Abstract  of  the  United  States:  1987 
(107th  edition),  Table  No.  370,  "New  Books  and  New  Editions  Published 
by  Subject,  1970  to  1985, .  . .". 

15.  For  methodology  of  the  SPPA  studies  see  Robinson  et  al.,  Public  Par- 
ticipation in  the  Arts:  Final  Report  on  the  1982  Survey.  John  P.  Robin- 


Motes       101 

son,  Carol  A.  Keegan,  Marcia  Karth  and  Timothy  A.  Triplett,  Public 
Participation  in  the  Arts:  Final  Report  on  the  1985  Survey  (College  Park, 
MD:  University  of  Maryland  Survey  Research  Center,  December  1986), 
Chapter  2  and  Appendix  A.  For  methodology  of  the  ARTS  survey  see 
John  P.  Robinson  et  al. ,  Americans '  Participation  in  the  Arts:  A  1983-84 
Arts-Related  Trend  Study.  For  methodology  of  the  BISG  study  see  Market 
Facts,  Inc.and  Research  &  Forecasts,  Inc. ,  1983  Consumer  Research 
Study  on  Reading  and  Book  Purchasing.  Vol.1:  Focus  on  Adults  (New 
York:  Book  Industry  Study  Group,  Inc.,  1984),  219. 

16.  Peter  Mann,  From  Author  to  Reader:  A  Social  Study  of  Books  (London: 
Routledge  &  Kegan  Paul,  1982),  147. 

17.  See  Robinson  et  al. ,  Final  Report  on  the  1982  Survey,  Final  Report  on 
the  1985  Survey. 

18.  The  65-percent  figure  represents  the  projected  number  of  readers  of  liter- 
ature divided  by  the  projected  number  of  readers  of  books  and  maga- 
zines. When  the  two  survey  items  were  actually  cross-tabulated  against 
one  another,  a  small  percentage  of  respondents  were  found  to  have  giv- 
en inconsistent  responses.  That  is,  they  said  that  they  read  literature  in 
the  previous  12  months,  but  did  not  read  books  or  magazines.  Thus, 
the  proportion  derived  from  cross-tabulation  is  slightly  lower  than  the 
figure  cited. 

19.  The  BISG  figures  on  fiction  book  readership  (39  percent)  and  overall 
book  readership  (50  percent)  were  lower  than  the  SPPA  figure  on  liter- 
ature readership  (56  percent).  This  is  probably  because  the  BISG  used 
a  6-month  reference  period,  and  the  SPPA,  a  12-month  reference  peri- 
od. Also,  the  BISG  questions  referred  only  to  books,  whereas  the  SPPA 
question  included  fiction,  poetry,  and  plays  in  magazines  as  well  as  in 
books.  The  BISG  figure  on  overall  readership  (92  percent)  was  higher 
than  the  SPPA  figure  (86  percent),  probably  because  the  BISG  ques- 
tion included  newspapers,  which  were  not  mentioned  by  the  SPPA. 

20.  Mann,  From  Author  to  Reader:  A  Social  Study  of  Books,  pp.  147-148. 
Idem,  "The  Novel  in  British  Society,"  Poetics,  Vol.  12,  435-448,  1983, 
442). 

21.  Kay  Gill  and  Donald  P.  Boyden,  (Eds.),  Gale  Directory  of  Publications, 
120th  Edition  (Detroit:  Gale  Research  Company,  1988).  The  Standard 
Periodical  Directory,  Tenth  Edition  (New  York:  Oxbridge  Communica- 
tions, 1987).  Yardley,  "Blanking  Verse  in  the  L.A.  Times." 

22.  Dessauer,  "U.S.  Retail  Book  Sales  by  Subject." 

23.  Market  Facts,  Inc.,  1983  Consumer  Research  Study,  1:  167-168. 

24.  Dessauer,  "U.S.  Retail  Book  Sales  by  Subject." 


1 02       Who  Reads  Li  terature? 

25.  Market  Facts,  Inc.,  1983  Consumer  Research  Study,  1:  71. 

26.  Robinson  et  al.,  Final  Report  on  the  1982  Survey,  Chapter  3. 

27.  L.A.  Wood,  "Demographics  of  Mass  Market  Consumers,"  Book  Re- 
search Quarterly,  Vol.  3,  No.  1,  Spring  1987,  31-39. 

28.  Market  Facts,  Inc.,  1983  Consumer  Research  Study,  1:  64-68. 

29.  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census,  Statistical  Abstract  of  the  United  States:  1987 
(107th  edition),  Table  No.  368,  "Quantity  of  Books  Sold  and  Value  of 
U.S.  Domestic  Consumer  Expenditures,  by  Type  of  Publication  and  Mar- 
ket Area:  1974  to  1985." 

30.  William  S.  Lofquist,  "Book  Publishing,"  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce, 
U.S.  Industrial  Outlook  —  1988,  1988,  29-9. 

31.  J.G.  Bachman,  L.D.  Johnston,  and  P.M.  O'Malley,  Monitoring  the  Fu- 
ture (Ann  Arbor,  MI:  University  of  Michigan,  Institute  for  Social  Re- 
search, annual  volumes,  1975-1986).  See  also:  "Daily  Activity  Patterns 
of  High  School  Seniors,"  Select  Committee  on  Children,  Youth,  and 
Families,  U.S.  House  of  Representatives,  U.S.  Children  and  Their  Fam- 
ilies: Current  Conditions  and  Recent  Trends,  1989  (Washington,  DC: 
U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  September  1989J;  226-227. 

32.  Lofquist,  "Book  Publishing,"  29-7—29-11. 

33.  Robinson  et  al.,  Americans'  Participation  in  the  Arts. 

34.  Mann,  "The  Novel  in  British  Society,"  443. 

35.  Market  Facts,  Inc.,  1983  Consumer  Research  Study,  1:  passim. 

36.  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census,  Statistical  Abstract  of  the  United  States:  1987 
(107th  edition),  Table  No.  368,  "Quantity  of  Books  Sold  and  Value  of 
U.S.  Domestic  Consumer  Expenditures,  by  Type  of  Publication  and  Mar- 
ket Area:  1974  to  1985;"  and  Table  No.  376,  "Selected  Recreational  Ac- 
tivities: 1970  to  1985." 

37.  Market  Facts,  Inc.,  1983  Consumer  Research  Study,  1:  passim. 

38.  Eleanor  E.  Maccoby  and  Carol  N.  Jacklin,  The  Psychology  of  Sex  Differ- 
ences (Stanford,  CA:  Stanford  University  Press,  1974),  83-87.  National 
Center  for  Health  Statistics,  K.W.  Schaie  and  J.  Roberts,  "School 
Achievement  of  Children  6-11  Years,  as  Measured  by  the  Reading  and 
Arithmetic  Subtests  of  the  Wide  Range  Achievement  Test,  United  States," 
Vital  and  Health  Statistics,  Series  11,  No.  103,  Public  Health  Service 
(Washington,  DC:  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  June  1970).  Idem, 
"School  Achievement  of  Children  by  Demographic  and  Socioeconom- 
ic Factors,  United  States,"  Vital  and  Health  Statistics,  Series  11,  No. 
109,  DHEW  Publication  No.  (HSM)  72-1011,  Public  Health  Service 


Notes       103 

(Washington,  DC:  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  November  1971). 
National  Center  for  Health  Statistics,  J.  Roberts,  "Intellectual  Develop- 
ment of  Children  as  Measured  by  the  Wechsler  Intelligence  Scale  for 
Children,  United  States,"  Vital  and  Health  Statistics,  Series  11,  No.  107, 
DHEW  Publication  No.  (HSM)  72-1004,  Public  Health  Service 
(Washington,  DC:  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  August  1971).  Idem, 
"Intellectual  Development  of  Children  by  Demographic  and  Socioeco- 
nomic Factors,  United  States,"  Vital  and  Health  Statistics,  Series  11, 
No.  110,  DHEW  Publication  No.  (HSM)  72-1012,  Public  Health  Serv- 
ice (Washington,  DC:  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  December  1971). 
National  Center  for  Health  Statistics,  D.K.  Vogt,  "Literacy  Among 
Youths  12-17  Years,  United  States,"  Vital  and  Health  Statistics,  Series 
11,  No.  131,  DHEW  Publication  No.  (HRA)  74-1613,  Public  Health  Serv- 
ice (Washington,  DC:  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  December 
1973).  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Progress,  "Males  Dominate 
in  Educational  Success,"  Spotlight:  NAEP  Newsletter,  Vol.  VIII,  No. 
5,  October  1975  (Denver,  CO:  Education  Commission  of  the  States). 
Alan  Feingold,  "Cognitive  Gender  Differences  Are  Disappearing," 
American  Psychologist,  Vol.  43,  No.  2,  February  1988,  95-103. 

39.  Nicholas  Zill  and  James  L.  Peterson,  "Learning  to  Do  Things  Without 
Help,"  in  Luis  M.  Laosa  &  Irving  E.  Sigel  (Eds.),  Families  As  Learn- 
ing Environments  for  Children  (New  York:  Plenum  Publishing,  1982), 
343-374. 

40.  National  Center  for  Health  Statistics,  D.C.  Hitchcock  and  G.D.  Pinder, 
"Reading  and  Arithmetic  Achievement  Among  Youths  12-17  Years,  as 
Measured  by  the  Wide  Range  Achievement  Test,  United  States,"  Vital 
and  Health  Statistics,  Series  11,  No.  136,  DHEW  Publication  No.  (HRA) 
74-1618,  Public  Health  Service  (Washington,  DC:  U.S.  Government  Print- 
ing Office,  February  1974). 

41.  L.  Ramist  and  S.  Arbeiter,  Profiles,  College-Bound  Seniors,  1985  (New 
York:  College  Entrance  Examination  Board,  1986),  12-13,  22-23,  102, 
and  14,  24. 

42.  de  Beauvoir,  Simone,  The  Coming  of  Age,  (translation  by  Patrick  O'Brian 
of  La  Vieillesse),  (New  York:  G.P.  Putnam's  Sons,  1972),  398-404. 

"Writing  is. .  .a  complex  activity:  it  means  a  simultaneous  prefer- 
ence for  the  imaginary  and  a  desire  to  communicate. .  .The  pro- 
ject of  writing  therefore  implies  a  tension  between  a  refusal  of 
the  world  in  which  men  live  and  a  certain  appeal  to  men  them- 
selves: the  writer  is  both  for  and  against  them.  This  is  a  difficult 
position:  it  implies  very  lively  passions;  and  to  be  maintained  for 
a  considerable  length  of  time  it  calls  for  strength. 

"Old  age  reduces  strength;  it  deadens  emotion.  .  .The  ten- 


1 04       Who  Reads  Li ter a t lire? 

sion  born  of  the  reconciliation  of  two  projects  that  are  if  not  con- 
tradictory then  at  least  divergent,  slackens.  The  elderly  writer  finds 
himself  deprived  of  that  quality  which  Flaubert  called  alacrite." 
(pp.  400-401) 

43.  Edward  C.  Bryant,  Ezra  Glaser,  Morris  H.  Hansen,  and  Arthur  Kirsch, 
Associations  Between  Educational  Outcomes  and  Background  Variables: 
A  Review  of  Selected  Literature,  Contract  Report  by  Westat,  Inc.,  A 
Monograph  of  the  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Progress  (Den- 
ver, CO:  Education  Commission  of  the  States,  1974). 

44.  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Progress,  The  Reading  Report  Card, 
1971-88:  Trends  from  the  Nation's  Report  Card,  by  Ina  V.S.  Mullis  and 
Lynn  B.  Jenkins,  Report  No.  19-R-01,  (Princeton,  NJ:  Educational  Test- 
ing Service,  January  1990),  64. 

45.  Edward  C.  Bryant,  Ezra  Glaser,  Morris  H.  Hansen,  and  Arthur  Kirsch, 
Associations  Between  Educational  Outcomes  and  Background  Variables: 
A  Review  of  Selected  Literature.  Alison  Clarke-Stewart,  Child  Care  in 
the  Family:  A  Review  of  Research  and  Some  Propositions  for  Policy  (New 
York:  Academic  Press,  1977).  Lee  Willerman,  "Effects  of  Families  on 
Intellectual  Development,"  American  Psychologist,  Vol.  34,  No.  10,  Oc- 
tober 1979,  923-929. 

46.  Robinson  et  al.,  Final  Report  on  the  1982  Survey,  Chapter  7.  Orend, 
Socialization  and  Participation  In  The  Arts. 

47.  Lee  Willerman,  "Effects  of  Families  on  Intellectual  Development." 

48.  Robinson  et  al.,  Final  Report  on  the  1982  Survey,  Chapter  7.  Orend, 
Socialization  and  Participation  In  The  Arts. 

49.  Susan  G.  Timmer,  Jacquelynne  Eccles,  and  Keith  O'Brien,  "How  Chil- 
dren Use  Time;"  and  Martha  S.  Hill,  "Patterns  of  Time  Use,"  in  F.  Tho- 
mas Juster  and  Frank  P.  Stafford  (Eds.),  Time,  Goods,  and  Well-Being 
(Ann  Arbor,  MI:  Institute  for  Social  Research,  University  of  Michigan, 
1985).  John  P.  Robinson,  How  Americans  Use  Time:  A  Social- 
Psychological  Analysis  of  Everyday  Behavior  (New  York:  Praeger,  1977). 

50.  Market  Facts,  Inc.,  1983  Consumer  Research  Study,  143-145. 

51.  Ibid.,  pp.  133-137. 

52.  Hill,  "Patterns  of  Time  Use,"  Table  7.1,  141. 

53.  William  J.  Bennett,  American  Education:  Making  It  Work  (Washington, 
DC:  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  April  1988).  Bloom,  Closing 
of  the  American  Mind,  Cheney,  American  Memory,  Hirsch,  Cultural 
Literacy.  Elizabeth  Castor,  "The  Day  of  the  Laureate:  Warren  Assumes 
His  Mantle  &  Braves  the  Press,  for  Love  of  Poetry,"  The  Washington 


Hotes      105 

Post,  October  7,  1986,  Dl.  Ravitch,  Finn,  What  Do  Our  17-Year-Olds 
Know?;  The  National  Commission  on  Excellence  in  Education,  A  Na- 
tion at  Risk:  The  Imperative  for  Educational  Reform  (Washington,  DC: 
U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  April  1983). 

54.  Bennett,  American  Education,  8-14.  Congressional  Budget  Office,  1987, 
Educational  Achievement:  Explanations  and  Implications  of  Recent 
Trends  (Washington,  DC:  Congressional  Budget  Office,  1987).  Nicho- 
las Zill  and  C.C.  Rogers,  "Recent  Trends  in  the  Well-Being  of  Children 
in  the  United  States  and  their  Implications  for  Public  Policy,"  in  An- 
drew Cherlin  (Ed.),  Family  Change  and  Public  Policy  (Washington,  DC: 
The  Urban  Institute  Press,  1988),  Chapter  2. 

55.  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Progress,  Literature  and  U.S. 
History. 

56.  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Progress,  Reading,  Thinking,  and 
Writing:  Results  from  the  1979-80  National  Assessment  of  Reading  and 
Literature  (Denver,  CO:  Education  Commission  of  the  States,  October 
1981). 

57.  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Progress,  Literacy:  Profiles  of 
America 's  Young  Adults,  by  Irwin  S.  Kirsch  and  Ann  Jungeblut,  Report 
No.  16-PL-02  (Princeton,  NJ:  Educational  Testing  Service,  1986). 

58.  National  Assessment  of  Educational  Progress,  The  Reading  Report  Card, 
1971-88:  Trends  from  the  Nation's  Report  Card,  by  Ina  V.S.  Mullis  and 
Lynn  B.  Jenkins,  Report  No.  19-R-01,  (Princeton,  NJ:  Educational  Test- 
ing Service,  January  1990).  Idem.,  The  Writing  Report  Card,  1984-88, 
by  Arthur  N.  Applebee,  Judith  A.  Langer,  Ina  V.S.  Mullis,  and  Lynn 
B.  Jenkins,  Report  No.  19-W-01,  (Princeton,  NJ:  Educational  Testing 
Service,  January  1990). 

59.  Alan  C.  Purves  et  al.,  Reading  and  Literature:  American  Achievement 
in  International  Perspective,  NCTE  Research  Report  No.  20  (Urbana, 
IL:  National  Council  of  Teachers  of  English,  1981). 

60.  Alan  C.  Purves,  Literature  Education  in  Ten  Countries,  International 
Association  for  the  Evaluation  of  Educational  Achievement,  International 
Studies  in  Evaluation  II  (Stockholm:  Almquist  &  Wiksell;  New  York: 
John  Wiley,  1973). 

61.  College  Board  Admissions  Testing  Program,  Statistical  Summaries  for 
Academic  Years  1980-1981  through  1985-1986,  unpublished  tabulations 
supplied  by  Alicia  Schmitt,  Educational  Testing  Service,  (Princeton, 
NJ,  February  1987). 

62.  Yardley,  "The  Increasing  Irrelevance  of  Writing." 


1 06       Who  Reads  literature? 

63.  Hilton  Kramer,  The  New  Criterion  Reader:  The  First  Five  Years  (New 
York:  The  Free  Press,  1988).  Jonathan  Yardley,  "Paradise  Tossed:  The 
Fall  of  Literary  Standards,"  The  Washington  Post,  January  11,  1988,  B2. 

64.  Robert  Pattison,  The  Triumph  of  Vulgarity:  Rock  Music  in  the  Mirror 
of  Romanticism  (New  York:  Oxford  University  Press,  1987). 

65.  Rubenstein,  E.A.,  G.A.  Comstock,  and  J.P.  Murray  (Eds.),  Television 
and  Social  Behavior,  (Vol.  4):  Television  in  Day-to-Day  Life:  Patterns 
of  Use,  (Washington,  DC:  US  Government  Printing  Office,  1972). 
Schramm,  Wilbur,  Big  Media,  Little  Media:  Tools  and  Technologies  for 
Instruction,  (Beverly  Hills,  CA:  Sage,  1977). 

66.  Heard,  Alex,  "Out  There:  Versed  Things  First,"  The  Washington  Post 
Magazine,  April  17,  1988,  9-10. 

67.  Dan  Lacy,  "Publishing  Enters  the  Eighties,"  in  The  State  of  the  Book 
World,  1980,  The  Center  for  the  Book  Viewpoint  Series,  No.  4  (Washing- 
ton, DC:  The  Library  of  Congress,  1980)  11-25;  23. 

68.  Market  Facts,  Inc.,  1983  Consumer  Research  Study,  133-136;  145. 

69.  Nicholas  Spenceley,  "The  Readership  of  Literary  Fiction:  A  Survey  of 
Library  Users  in  the  Sheffield  Area,"  M.A.  Dissertation,  Postgraduate 
School  of  Librarianship,  Sheffield  University,  1980.  As  described  in  Peter 
H.  Mann,  "The  Novel  in  British  Society." 

70.  Jonathan  Yardley,  "The  Soft-Cover  Salvation  of  Modern  Fiction,"  The 
Washington  Post,  February  16,  1987,  D2. 


Index 


Index 


A 

Ancient  Evenings,  24 

age,  as  a  factor  determining  reading  habits,  42-44 

Atlantic,  The,  9 

Arts-Related  Trend  Study  (ARTS),  4,  10,  23,  25 

B 

Bellow,  Saul,  viii 

Bestseller  lists,  3 

Bloom,  Allan,  2 

Book  Industry  Study  Group  (BISG),  4,  9,  10,  14,  18,  19 

book  sales,  trends,  18 

Brecht,  Bertol,  26 

C 

Chekhov,  Anton,  1 

Children,  as  a  factor  determining  reading  habits,  66,  68 

Catcher  in  the  Rye,  2 

Color  Purple,  The,  24 

Colwin,  Laurie,  ix 

Couples,  24 

Closing  of  the  American  Mind,  The,  2 

creating  writing,  27,  61 

Cultural  Literacy,  2 

D 

demographic  characteristics  of  readers,  11;  predicting  participation 

based  on  demographics,  49 
Dessauer,  John  P.,  9,  10 
Dickens,  Charles,  1,  3,  24 
Dickinson,  Emily,  1,  26 
Dostoyevsky,  1 
drama,  3 


E 

Eliot,  T.S.,  26 

education,  as  a  factor  determining  reading  habits,  35-37,  52,  53; 

deterioration,  75-77 
Educational  Testing  Service,  3 
employment,  as  a  factor  determining  reading  habits,  62-66 

F 

Family  Circle,  25 

fiction,  see  also  novels,  short  stories,  29 

Fitzgerald,  F.  Scott,  3 

Frost,  Robert,  26 

G 

gender,  as  a  factor  determining  reading  habits,  39-42 
geography,  distribution  of  readers,  12;  variation  in  literary  participa- 
tion, 47-49 
Gershwin,  George,  3 
Graham,  Martha,  3 

H 

Hawthorne,  Nathianel,  3 
Hellman,  Lillian,  26 
Hemingway,  Ernest,  1,  24 
Hirsch,  E.D.,  2 
Holt,  Victoria,  24 

I 

income,  as  a  factor  determining  reading  habits,  38 

Irvine,  Washington,  1 

J 

James,  Henry,  24 

K 

Keillor,  Garrison,  32 
King,  Stephen,  viii,  24,  32 
Krantz,  Judith,  ix,  24 

L 

L'Amour,  Louis,  24 

leisure  activities  of  readers,  14,  60 

literature  reading,  past  growth  17;  decline  18;  literary  criticism,  3 


Longfellow,  Henry  Wadsworth,  26 
Los  Angeles  Times  Book  Review,  9 

M 

MacDonald,  John  D.,  32 

Mann,  Peter,  25 

Mailer,  Norman,  24 

marital  status,  as  a  factor  determining  reading  habits,  66-67 

mass  market  books,  31 

Melville,  Herman,  1 

Merrill,  James,  viii,  32 

minority  writers,  74 

movies,  31 

N 

nation  of  readers,  1 

National  Geographic,  25 

Naylor,  Gloria,  ix 

New  Yorker,  The,  9 

Newsweek,  25 

novels,  reading,  24,  28;  classical,  historical,  and  modern,  29 

O 

O'Neil,  Eugene,  1 
Orwell,  George,  2 

P 

Parade,  26 

Parker,  Charlie,  3 

Percy,  Walker,  vii 

Plain,  Belva,  ix 

plays,  reading  of,  26,  28,  31 

Poe,  Edgar  Allan,  1,  26 

Pound,  Ezra,  26 

poetry,  3,  9;  sale  of,  9;  reading  of,  26,  28,  30 

Pollock,  Jackson,  3 

publishers,  promotion,  80-81 

Pushkin,  Alexander,  1 

R 

race/ethnicity,  as  a  factor  determining  reading  habits,  44-47;  see  also 

minority  writers 
radio,  see  television 
reader,  typical  profiled,  1,  6 


Reader's  Digest,  25,  25 
reading,  encouraging,  81-86 
Redbook,  25 
Rich,  Adrienne,  viii,  32 

S 

Sandburg,  Carl,  26 

Service,  Robert  \Y.,  26 

Shakespeare,  William,  1,  3,  26 

Shange,  Ntozake,  26 

Shaw,  Bernard,  26 

Sheldon,  Sidney,  24 

short  story,  25,  28 

Silverstein,  Shel,  32 

Sophie's  Choice,  24 

Soviet  Union,  2 

Steele,  Danielle,  viii 

Streetcar  Samed  Desire,  2 

Stoppars,  Tom,  26 

Styron,  William,  24 

Survey  of  Public  Participation  in  the  Arts  (SPPA),  4,  7-22 

T 

television  and  radio,  2;  role  of,  69-72;  influence  of,  78-79 
technological  change,  77 
Thoreau,  Henry  David,  1 
Tolstoy,  Alexei,l,  24 
Twain,  Mark,  1,  24 

U 

Updike,  John,  24 

United  Kingdom,  25 

W 

Walker,  Alice,  24 
Whitman,  Walt,  1 
Welty,  Eudora,  viii 
Williams,  Tennessee,  2,  26 
Williams,  William  Carlos,  26 
women's  movement,  x 

Y 

Yardley,  Jonathan,  1 

young  adults,  reading  habits,  19 


$9.95 


"A  BOOK  THAT  SHOULD  BE  OF  INTEREST  TO 
ANYONE  IN  THE  LITERARY  BUSINESS." 

— Booklist 


Nicholas  Zill  and  Marianne  Winglee  present  a  revealing  portrait  of  the  nation's 
reading  habits.  In  addition  to  the  well-publicized  discovery  that  a  frightening 
number  of  Americans  can't  read,  it  turns  out  that  many  who  can — don't. 

Focusing  on  who  reads  serious  modern  American  literature— works  by  such 
writers  as  Ann  Beattie,  Gloria  Naylor,  David  Mamet  and  Saul  Bellow — the 
authors  draw  on  extensive  demographic  information  to  report  that  the  reading 
of  contemporary  works  is  the  pastime  of  a  distinct  minority.  According  to  Who 
Reads  Literature,  the  proportion  of  Americans  who  read  serious  literature  is 
between  10  and  25  percent;  contemporary  fiction,  poetry,  and  drama  attracts 
at  best  between  7  and  12 
percent  of  adults. 

"The  typical  reader  of 
literature  in  the  United 
States  today. .  .is  a  middle 
aged,  white  woman,  living 
in  the  midwestern  suburbs," 
say  the  authors.  And  they 
are  more  involved  than  non- 
readers  in  activities  that 
traditionally  are  not 
thought  of  as  "cultural" 
pursuits — watching  tele- 
vision, going  to  the  movies, 
playing  sports,  and  doing 
volunteer  or  activist  work. 

In  addition  to  pinpointing 
just  who  is  and  isn't  reading   ^"i^^^^^™^^^™""^^^""^^™^ 
Adrienne  Rich,  Eudora  Welty,  and  John  Updike,  Zill  and  Winglee  suggest  ways 
in  which  publishers,  booksellers,  and  libraries  might  reach  a  wider  audience  by 
changing  their  marketing  and  promotion  strategies. 

Who  Reads  Literature  raises  important  questions  about  the  vitality  of  our 
culture  and  education  system.  It  tells  us  more  about  the  United  States  as  a 
nation  of  readers  than  simply  what  we  have  stacked  up  on  our  bedside  table. 


"The  perceived  image  of  the  literary' 
American  reader  as  a  bearded  male 
academic  in  a  tweed  jacket  with  leather 
patches  bears  only  scant  connection 
to  reality.  .  .  .  It's  a  woman's  world 
now,  and  if  we  are  to  have  in  the  next 
generation  a  literature  of  any  con- 
sequence, it  will  be  because  women 

make  it  so." 

^From  the  foreword 

by  Jonathan  Yardley* 

*  Adapted  from  Yardley's  column  "Readership  Down"  published 
in  The  Washington  Post  8/20/90.  Used  by  permission. 


NICHOLAS  ZILL  is  a  social  psychologist  and 
executive  director  of  Child  Trends,  a  non-profit 
research  organization  in  Washington,  D.C. 

MARIANNE  WINGLEE  is  a  senior  statistical  analyst 
at  Decision  Resource  .Corporation  in  Washington,  D.C.