[the phantom]

I, too, will stop replying after this final post.

quality of a person's reading cannot be observed and objectively assessed

Ever hear of a reading test? I got a nice scholarship partially because the people who made the ACTs objectively assessed my reading level. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

whether one person's reading experience is more or less valuable... by reference to the contribution that it makes to the reader's reading experience... is their experience really more valuable... but resonates with the novel on an emotional level... while the second adores it despite lacking that same understanding

These comments are primarily what has pulled us off topic. My point has never been about "enjoyment", "value", or "experience", my point has been about the reader's ability to recognize character depth (and character depth is what this thread is about).

Note that I've already said that you can't compare this with someone who's reading for pleasure-

Obviously you can't compare two people if one is reading specifically for pleasure and the other for comprehension.

And also note that I've said more than once that I'm referring to reading ability specifically as the reader's ability to recognize character depth-

I'm concerned with whether or not people are able to see character development... some people are better readers when it comes to making logical inferences about book characters

so I'm not sure where the problem is. Once again, my comments have nothing to do with enjoyment or overall reading experience. They have to do with the topic.

I agree that some people will be better at making logical inferences about book characters from textual clues.

This is exactly what my point is, and you say that you agree with me, so why the debate? [img]smilies/eek.gif[/img]

But surely that does not necessarily make them better readers.

It does in that specific aspect of reading, and this specific aspect of reading is all that I have in mind right now (since it is this specific aspect that I thought was relevant to the topic).

(and I'm sure you could beat me at bowling SP, I'm a terrible bowler [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] )

[ 1:50 PM December 02, 2003: Message edited by: the phantom ]