[The Saucepan Man]

Neither is driving your car around town ...

You haven't seen how I drive. [img]smilies/eek.gif[/img] [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

But unlike driving, or basketball, or brick-laying, or javelin-throwing, the quality of a person's reading cannot be observed and objectively assessed. Since (reading aloud aside) reading is a personal experience, "talent" in this area can, to my mind, only be relevant by reference to the contribution that it makes to the reader's reading experience. And how can anyone ever know for sure whether one person's reading experience is more or less valuable than another's?

Right now I'm not terribly concerned with how much people enjoy literature. I'm concerned with whether or not people are able to see character development.

Er, like most people, I read (novels) as a form of entertainment (mostly for enjoyment, but it need not, I suppose, necessarily be a pleasurable experience). So I see an understanding of character development only in terms of how it might influence the reading experience.

You have in mind, I suppose, reading for educational purposes (such as in school or college). That is not, in my view, the primary purpose of novels. Nevertheless, while such readers do tend to be rewarded for their intellectual understanding, is their experience really more valuable than someone someone who passes on the literary analysis but resonates with the novel on an emotional level? I cannot say that it is. Indeed, the first reader may have a very good textual understanding of a book but loathe it, while the second adores it despite lacking that same understanding (and failing their tests on it). Who is the better reader then?

You are better than me at some things and I am better than you at some things.

Unbdoubtedly. Pick a sport, any sport, and you will unquestionably be better at it than me. But there is no way of assessing objectively which one of us is the "better" reader, if indeed there really is such a thing.

Similarly, some people are better readers when it comes to making logical inferences about book characters ...

I agree that some people will be better at making logical inferences about book characters from textual clues. But surely that does not necessarily make them better readers.

Please feel free to reply, phantom. But, since this is heading in a decidedly "off-topic" direction, I am inclined not to respond further myself, save to the extent pertinent to the topic at hand.