A few months back, a study came out saying over half of US adults don't read anymore. They don't read books. Of course, people read things. There are magazines and tabloids and newspapers. But mostly, these are just pictures and headlines. Not that there isn't substantive information around those pictures and headlines, but most don't actually delve into it so much. There are days when I glance through the paper, only reading the headlines, Boondocks and TV listings to see if there's a baseball game or good movie on TCM. Those days I'm not reading either.

The study did make me think about my own reading habits--which ebb and flow with my mood and all the other activities going on in my life. But in the last few months, I've been tearing through books and novels at a pretty good pace. I tend to read books mostly at night before I go to bed. This can be anywhere from fifteen minutes to an hour and a half.

Recently, on a day off from work, I finished one book and then started another. I spent at least four hours of the day with my face in a book.

So am I just trying to prove the study wrong or make myself look like some literate genius? Pat me on the back, I read about Kurt Cobain and then started another book about drug dealers on a hidden island. Obviously, I'm not being a high culture snob with my reading selections. I read a lot of pop culture stuff. I read a lot of "edgy" and "hot" writers, maybe because I think I could be one of those guys one day--of course, by the time I do, I don't think I'll be "hot" anymore. But I mean, if I'm going to write something someday, I should read what's out there.

Does that make me better than the person who reads the Enquirer and is up to date on all the reasons Justin and Cameron broke up? I mean, these people have to read a little bit to get this info, right?

Maybe it's the length. If you get through a whole novel, you've been able to hold together your thoughts enough to finish a long story. A longer story than can be told in one setting. Maybe that's the point. When you read a novel, it's like history. It takes place over a long period of time (maybe not time in the novel, but time it takes to read it).

So maybe that's what novels and non-fiction books do for people. It gives them a sense of timing and history. Which is nice. I sometimes think people forget what it was like five years ago--which is pretty recent history for anyone over ten years old.

Vocabulary is always a good thing to bring up. Words and letters are symbols for sounds and meanings. At the same time, a corporate logo with no words or letters also represents a sound and a meaning. If someone grows up only knowing non-language logos and what they stand for, their vocabulary is much smaller than someone who knows how to read. And since most sources of information are not made up of corporate logos, I'd say it's probably good to know how to read.

You don't get much information from a corporate logo. The message is, look for this logo when you want this (whatever it is they sell), and you will be free or not thirsty or hungry or whatever. The message is deliberately deceptive and inclusive. It serves nothing but itself. Words, however, serve everyone. The same person can say the same thing as someone else and mean something totally different.

Both candidates for President say they are strong on defense and will work to help the jobless become employed. However, within these statements are different meanings about how these things will happen--and also the implication that the other guy isn't going to do this. The only way you can find out the differences is to read. Read into what they are saying. Read more than what they are saying. Read and your mind will find itself in places you never thought you could be.

So I'll leave this with a simple message: read as much as you can and don't believe everything you read. Reading gives you information, but thinking puts that information to work. Being an informed person is not a bad thing--of course, it might put you in the minority.

Matt Worley seems to be in the minority a lot of the time.